Interplay lost Baldur's Gate?
- Thread starter Brother None
- Start date
Saint_Proverbius said:
Got a point there. By the way, Saint, catch this one, had me laughing out loud:
I think Herve has a plan...
and I think he is executing as we speak. We may be fine, and I think he is looking for a buyout. That is why he bought the shares, to make a quick profit before we get bought out. Makes sense!
And I think we are going to get our .20 price!!!
Saint_Proverbius
Vault Senior Citizen
Kharn said:
Yeah, I did a little dance on all of that guy's posts from Raging Bull on RPG Codex's comment thread on the same subject. I just can't imagine anyone thinking that Interplay losing the license behind a bunch of their most profitable games is going to raise the stock to three times what it is now.
I told someone on IRC that IPLY losing their D&D games is like Westinghouse losing the right to make lightbulbs.
What's funny is that frymuchan guy is on there with this:
- It would make total sense for Interplay to sell Atari all their past library of D&D games and also to sell them the Dark Alliance name. Both companies would be happy. Atari would have a monopoly on D&D games, and Interplay would get a nice injection of cash (hopefully, they would get a reasonable amount of cash from Atari). The Dark Alliance name really means nothing without the D&D license, so all along, Interplay may have been thinking about selling the Dark Alliance trademark and all rights to previous D&D games when they reached their settlement with Atari. If this scenario is confirmed, looks like Interplay is going to become the Fallout company and try to ride that franchise to success. I think that could work for them if they go for both computer and console gamers. Since they own the rights to Fallout, they do not have to worry about paying royalties.
I hope this is what is happening versus something more dire. If it is happening, I'll be buying back all of the shares that I recently sold.
It would make total sense for IPLY to give up their newest game that might make some money? When they were counting on an advance from Vivendi for further distribution of it?
Atari has the monopoly on D&D. They don't have to buy SHIT from Interplay to get that. They can make BG games and D&D games until the cows come home without Interplay being able to do anything about it, because those are WotC properties, and Atari owns them. The only thing Interplay owns are the rights to the characters and story to the games they published.
It would be like, say, Interplay considering the sale and termination of assets of the company, no matter how much it reduces their ability as a developer, as profit.
Yes, that idiot is a typical Interplay invester. For him to sell, that assumes there's people that are more stupid than they are. While I am quite misanthropic about the human race because of the idiots, that fellow's stretching expectations.
Yes, that idiot is a typical Interplay invester. For him to sell, that assumes there's people that are more stupid than they are. While I am quite misanthropic about the human race because of the idiots, that fellow's stretching expectations.
Saint_Proverbius
Vault Senior Citizen
Ole Frymuchan got a reply from his good buddy and deluded partner, stockman20054:
I just wonder if these two aren't Herve and Molitor. No one could be this stupid.
stockman20054 said:
I just wonder if these two aren't Herve and Molitor. No one could be this stupid.
Saint_Proverbius
Vault Senior Citizen
Smile, guys! The investors know we're mocking them.
Since they might be looking, I would like to just ask this question:
How good could HERVE'S MYSTERIOUS PLAN be if he's in charge of three companies and all three of them are failing miserably?
That's what shareholders should be asking themselves. They're counting on Herve to pull off a smart move, when the man has a long history of idiotic moves.
Why would Atari buy up Interplay's D&D games when Atari already outright owns the D&D license because they own Wizards of the Coast? Why would Interplay sell it when they still rely on the sales of the BG/IWD bundle sets trickling in money, not to mention that they're hoping for another advance on BG: Dark Alliance 2 from Vivendi? If Atari now owns these things outright, why is Interplay still hosting the patches for these games, wasting their personal bandwidth, when that would be Atari's duty?
If Interplay sold these things off, where's the press release? Certainly Interplay, a company that's on the ropes financially right now, would want to shout it out to everyone that, yes, they got some more money, right? Surely Herve wouldn't order the titles pulled before he got the money to pull them, if that's the case. After all, Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance 2 is the only game they've released recently that's making money!
But, the most important thing to remember are Herve's own words from the 10-K about the D&D license and Atari:
I bold faced the important bits. Mr. Caen even said that if they lose the D&D distribution rights, it would be a very, very bad thing for IPLY's future.
Now, let's look at some other things, shall we?
Per the 10-K, Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel shipped 300,000 units. Since it's release, it's sold less than 20,000 of those units. That means there's a little over 280,000 units still out there that haven't sold and most likely won't sell. The end result of that is IPLY will never make any more money from this title.
IPLY is currently living on money for a distribution deal with Avalon, a company that the Caen brothers own, for Run Like Hell to be released in countries it hasn't been released in yet. Run Like Hell is not only a two year old game, but it was also a very, very poor seller. The only reason Avalon agreed to distribute it is because Herve Caen owns them. This is a one shot deal as well, because the creditors currently lapping up any profits from Avalon are not going to be happy about this deal because Avalon is going to lose money from it.
So, without DA2 to sell, with Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel already tapped out, and that deal with Avalon only being a one time thing, where is Interplay going to get money to keep operating while Herve finds someone to buy them?
Given all the problems Interplay has, who would buy them? Why would they buy them? For Fallout? With the latest Fallout game selling so poorly, it's not that much of an incentive. For continued distribution of Baldur's Gate games? They lost that. For Descent? Descent 3 didn't do so well.
Basically, Interplay does have some good licenses, but Interplay's treated them so poorly, they are now worth less than they might have been if it weren't for Herve's mishandling of the company. Most buyers would probably consider these risky. They might want one, maybe two of the licenses, but not all of them.
On top of that, they would inherit a lot of Interplay's problems, like IPLY's debt, legal problems, contractual obligations, and so on. So, again, why?
It's just better for these companies to wait for Interplay to file for bankrupcy and get the licenses they want from creditor auctions.
Since they might be looking, I would like to just ask this question:
How good could HERVE'S MYSTERIOUS PLAN be if he's in charge of three companies and all three of them are failing miserably?
That's what shareholders should be asking themselves. They're counting on Herve to pull off a smart move, when the man has a long history of idiotic moves.
Why would Atari buy up Interplay's D&D games when Atari already outright owns the D&D license because they own Wizards of the Coast? Why would Interplay sell it when they still rely on the sales of the BG/IWD bundle sets trickling in money, not to mention that they're hoping for another advance on BG: Dark Alliance 2 from Vivendi? If Atari now owns these things outright, why is Interplay still hosting the patches for these games, wasting their personal bandwidth, when that would be Atari's duty?
If Interplay sold these things off, where's the press release? Certainly Interplay, a company that's on the ropes financially right now, would want to shout it out to everyone that, yes, they got some more money, right? Surely Herve wouldn't order the titles pulled before he got the money to pull them, if that's the case. After all, Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance 2 is the only game they've released recently that's making money!
But, the most important thing to remember are Herve's own words from the 10-K about the D&D license and Atari:
Herve Caen from the 10-K said:
I bold faced the important bits. Mr. Caen even said that if they lose the D&D distribution rights, it would be a very, very bad thing for IPLY's future.
Now, let's look at some other things, shall we?
Per the 10-K, Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel shipped 300,000 units. Since it's release, it's sold less than 20,000 of those units. That means there's a little over 280,000 units still out there that haven't sold and most likely won't sell. The end result of that is IPLY will never make any more money from this title.
IPLY is currently living on money for a distribution deal with Avalon, a company that the Caen brothers own, for Run Like Hell to be released in countries it hasn't been released in yet. Run Like Hell is not only a two year old game, but it was also a very, very poor seller. The only reason Avalon agreed to distribute it is because Herve Caen owns them. This is a one shot deal as well, because the creditors currently lapping up any profits from Avalon are not going to be happy about this deal because Avalon is going to lose money from it.
So, without DA2 to sell, with Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel already tapped out, and that deal with Avalon only being a one time thing, where is Interplay going to get money to keep operating while Herve finds someone to buy them?
Given all the problems Interplay has, who would buy them? Why would they buy them? For Fallout? With the latest Fallout game selling so poorly, it's not that much of an incentive. For continued distribution of Baldur's Gate games? They lost that. For Descent? Descent 3 didn't do so well.
Basically, Interplay does have some good licenses, but Interplay's treated them so poorly, they are now worth less than they might have been if it weren't for Herve's mishandling of the company. Most buyers would probably consider these risky. They might want one, maybe two of the licenses, but not all of them.
On top of that, they would inherit a lot of Interplay's problems, like IPLY's debt, legal problems, contractual obligations, and so on. So, again, why?
It's just better for these companies to wait for Interplay to file for bankrupcy and get the licenses they want from creditor auctions.