CGL Speculation #9, Please review ToS before posting Options

[sirdoom]

QUOTE (sirdoom @ Jun 24 2010, 04:22 AM) *
But there is a direct relationship between Eisner and Topps:

Yes. That wasn't what I was correcting.

I know, but I needed a hook for the Tormante/Eisner/Topps info (IMG:style_emoticons/default/cool.gif)

[Ancient History]

Considering some of the stuff that's come rolling downhill from that direction? It wouldn't hurt. The Time of the Three Assistant-Developers comes to mind, when Randall was pretty much in direct control of the line (as I recall); and the original draft of the Corruption master plot arc, which I believe was handed down from Loren.

Keep in mind I cannot speak with any authority on that end of the business, I was only a lowly freelancer and it was a rare day when I even got an e-mail from Randall or anyone above the SR line developer.

[Adam]

Would Randall Bills need to know anything about Shadowrun?

Yes, and he does. Randall's job included managing the SR line developer, and he's involved in product conception and development. He doesn't have to know all the details but he needs a pretty decent idea of the big picture. Randall was typically very good at saying "I don't know everything about this, not enough to help make the right decision: can you give me the background on this and why it's like that?"

[Demonseed Elite]

I will say that in my entire time writing for Shadowrun, I was not aware of any animosity between the BT and SR writers or developers. I had little contact with the BT writers, but I didn't write for that game, so that made sense. If any of the BT writers did SR writing while I was working on Shadowrun, I knew them as Shadowrun writers.

This whole idea of bad blood between those two camps is something I've only heard of recently. Personally, I'm not convinced it's as prevalent or deep as it is portrayed here, and what does exist is probably the result of tough choices writers on both sides of that fence have had to make recently because of a situation outside their control.

[Demonseed Elite]

And I will back AH up that I also saw some really ridiculous SR plot concepts come rolling down from somewhere up in management. But I treated those like I treated every other proposal for SR; if I was interested in the idea, I pitched to write for it. If I wasn't interested in the idea, I said my piece about why I didn't think it was a good idea to the devs and writers and then I avoided it. If it ends up in print anyway, then the fans will react to it. And they may totally disagree with my feelings, that's life.

As a writer, I felt that I only attached my name to something that I wanted to work on. Even if that has had hits and misses (my name is on Year of the Comet, after all (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif) ).

[Kid Chameleon]

This whole idea of bad blood between those two camps is something I've only heard of recently. Personally, I'm not convinced it's as prevalent or deep as it is portrayed here, and what does exist is probably the result of tough choices writers on both sides of that fence have had to make recently because of a situation outside their control.

I agree, which, having dealt with writers and developers on all sides, made me think of a sibling rivalry more than a dislike or worse. Three years ago, it was more "SR guys? The guys with the weird hair who aren't Ken'." when you talked to a BT guy.

[emouse]

Do they have a contractual obligation to anyone such that actions that fail to bring the greatest company gain violate due diligence?

What you're thinking of is a publicly traded company, where CEOs are usually or at least supposedly beholden to maximizing the return to the stock holders. A private company is under no such restriction, other than whatever agreements might exist between partners.

In the case of a multi-partner LLC, there is supposed to be an agreement between the partners about how money can be drawn from the company by the partners. Very likely LLC (the person) was in violation of that agreement. Since it's a private contract, the other people who are a part of the contract would be the ones to make the decision of how to handle the situation.

In terms of law, I believe the federal law that came closest to this, the 'denial of honest work' statute, was struck down today by SCOTUS as being too vague of a law.

They would have legal issues with partners that they had contracts with, though it sounds like in the case of Posthuman, both sides have managed to terminate the existing contract to mutual satisfaction. In the case of WildFire there seems to be a bit more friction, though there had been some indication that an agreement was reached prior to the bankruptcy lawsuit. The exact timing of the bankruptcy filing and the agreement is unclear to us, the public, whether the work on the filing took place before the supposed agreement, or after. Apparently Catalyst contends that an agreement was reached which left both parties satisfied, which could invalidate that part of the bankruptcy claim. We'll see.

There could well be other state laws like Tiger Eyes cited. Without knowing the details of that particular law, and since this is a speculation thread, it could well be the case that IMR has chosen the wording and actions that they have to avoid potential fines that would be directed at the company, not at the problem owner.

[Saint Sithney]

This may be a hollow line of inquiry, but what's the deal with Lady Macbet- ..er Coleman?
I remember her as being one of the majority owners along with L. L.

Is she a full-on silent partner? Is she the type to ignore or encourage the kind of cash-grab money antics we've seen evidenced?

[SkepticInc]

(my name is on Year of the Comet, after all (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif) ).

I liked YotC.

What you're thinking of is a publicly traded company, where CEOs are usually or at least supposedly beholden to maximizing the return to the stock holders. A private company is under no such restriction, other than whatever agreements might exist between partners.

In the case of a multi-partner LLC, there is supposed to be an agreement between the partners about how money can be drawn from the company by the partners. Very likely LLC (the person) was in violation of that agreement. Since it's a private contract, the other people who are a part of the contract would be the ones to make the decision of how to handle the situation.

In terms of law, I believe the federal law that came closest to this, the 'denial of honest work' statute, was struck down today by SCOTUS as being too vague of a law.

They would have legal issues with partners that they had contracts with, though it sounds like in the case of Posthuman, both sides have managed to terminate the existing contract to mutual satisfaction. In the case of WildFire there seems to be a bit more friction, though there had been some indication that an agreement was reached prior to the bankruptcy lawsuit. The exact timing of the bankruptcy filing and the agreement is unclear to us, the public, whether the work on the filing took place before the supposed agreement, or after. Apparently Catalyst contends that an agreement was reached which left both parties satisfied, which could invalidate that part of the bankruptcy claim. We'll see.

There could well be other state laws like Tiger Eyes cited. Without knowing the details of that particular law, and since this is a speculation thread, it could well be the case that IMR has chosen the wording and actions that they have to avoid potential fines that would be directed at the company, not at the problem owner.

If the outcome is that IMR/CGL folds, then Topps has to find a studio again, and if they don't fold Shadowrun can get back to schedule? But if they don't lose their lawsuits then the actual writers are getting screwed, and if they do then the writers have no idea who might be managing it next or when it will be being published?

[Jaid]

If the outcome is that IMR/CGL folds, then Topps has to find a studio again, and if they don't fold Shadowrun can get back to schedule? But if they don't lose their lawsuits then the actual writers are getting screwed, and if they do then the writers have no idea who might be managing it next or when it will be being published?

well, even if CGL wins (which they could apparently have done just by paying off the debtor with the lowest amount, which was something like 2-3 grand iirc), that doesn't mean they don't owe their debtors money anymore, it just means that they don't have to liquidate the company to pay their debts immediately.

and also, i don't recall if the third debtor in the suit was a writer offhand, but i know for sure two of them were not (one was sandstorm, one was one of CGL's employee's dad or something like that...)

and in any case, the writers are screwed if and only if CGL either goes bankrupt and other organisations get first dibs (which is likely to happen if CGL does go bankrupt), or does not go bankrupt and still doesn't pay their writers (which could happen, though recent events have included at least some of the writers getting paid for their work; ideally, this wouldn't even be a concern, but obviously it was happening before, so it would in fact be unreasonable to rule out the possibility of it happening again)

one other thing, if it isn't published yet, the stuff that has already written may or may not be published by the new company. once it's published, it becomes part of the shadowrun property, but until then, it would be bound only by a contract between the writer and CGL (if CGL ceases to exist, i presume the contract would be dissolved. if CGL loses the two licenses but continues to exist, it might be a grey area... but probably if it can be shown that CGL has no intent to ever pay the writers for their work, which would be the case for something that CGL has no ability to publish, it would revert back to the writers. or at least, i would hope that's how it works. IANAL, however. in the extremely unlikely case that CGL pays the writers for their work before publishing, and then loses the license, then hell will probably have frozen over and all kinds of crazy stuff will happen.

[Demonseed Elite]

and also, i don't recall if the third debtor in the suit was a writer offhand, but i know for sure two of them were not (one was sandstorm, one was one of CGL's employee's dad or something like that...)

You mean WildFire there, not Sandstorm.

[emouse]

The three debtors in the bankruptcy case are WildFire, creators of C-tech; a former employee's father who had set up a line of credit for IMR, but his son has left IMR and started up Sandstorm; and an individual who most likely was involved in setting up the Catalyst web store, based on the area of expertise indicated by his resume.

All three of these debtors appear to be connected by the former employee, which is possibly the reason that those are the three companies involved in the filing. No other debtors have joined in the lawsuit yet.

[Cabral]

So, three debtors, all connected to a founder of Sandstorm, are trying to dissolve IMR, current license holder of SR and BT and former licensee or distributoe (?) of licenses now with Sandstorm. With no official statement to my knowledge that they are NOT bidding on the licenses, a successful case would poise them to replace IMR.

Perfect SR corporate intrigue ...

[emouse]

But if they don't lose their lawsuits then the actual writers are getting screwed, and if they do then the writers have no idea who might be managing it next or when it will be being published?

This isn't quite accurate. If they win their lawsuit it doesn't exempt them from any debts, even the ones claimed by the people filing the suit against them, unless they manage to prove that one or more of those debtors don't have a valid claim. Changes in how IMR handles the company finances and oversight from Topps are presumably there to make sure that the money IMR has or makes goes to the production of new product and paying off debts owed. So even if IMR wins the bankruptcy suit, the freelancers and other people they might owe money to should be getting de-screwed.

If they lose the bankruptcy filing, then presumably IMR's assets will be frozen and liquidated to pay off as many debts as possible, which may or may not cover what they owe. What happened with the license after that would be up to Topps. They could take it in-house, and hire former IMR people to continue things much like they were. There was also speculation that Sandstorm may have been bidding to get the licenses. Those seem like the two strongest possibilities at the moment, but there might have been other parties interested. The time frame would be unknown. Topps does seem to be deliberate in their decision making on this sort of thing.

[emouse]

So, three debtors, all connected to a founder of Sandstorm, are trying to dissolve IMR, current license holder of SR and BT and former licensee or distributoe (?) of licenses now with Sandstorm. With no official statement to my knowledge that they are NOT bidding on the licenses, a successful case would poise them to replace IMR.

Perfect SR corporate intrigue ...

Personally, I think it's more likely that it's a matter of "hey, I want to get my money out of IMR and I have the phone number of these people who IMR also owes money".

There are some who believe there was a deeper conspiracy, but in this case, coincidence and mismanagement on IMR's side also explain the situation and events quite well.

The filing was also originally timed so that it could potentially result in a court decision prior to the renewal of the BT/SR license, indicating some belief that the renewal might not happen, which would have pretty much shut the company down.

[Cabral]

That was more run inspiration than conspiracy theory

[emouse]

That was more run inspiration than conspiracy theory

Oh yeah, you could definitely turn it into some sort of Shadowrun adventure or campaign. Get the runners stuck between three companies each of which has its own devious plan that involves screwing one or both of the others.

[Jaid]

You mean WildFire there, not Sandstorm.

right. even when you've read all the threads, it still gets confusing due to sheer mass of information sometimes =S

[SkepticInc]

This isn't quite accurate. If they win their lawsuit it doesn't exempt them from any debts, even the ones claimed by the people filing the suit against them, unless they manage to prove that one or more of those debtors don't have a valid claim. Changes in how IMR handles the company finances and oversight from Topps are presumably there to make sure that the money IMR has or makes goes to the production of new product and paying off debts owed. So even if IMR wins the bankruptcy suit, the freelancers and other people they might owe money to should be getting de-screwed.

If they lose the bankruptcy filing, then presumably IMR's assets will be frozen and liquidated to pay off as many debts as possible, which may or may not cover what they owe. What happened with the license after that would be up to Topps. They could take it in-house, and hire former IMR people to continue things much like they were. There was also speculation that Sandstorm may have been bidding to get the licenses. Those seem like the two strongest possibilities at the moment, but there might have been other parties interested. The time frame would be unknown. Topps does seem to be deliberate in their decision making on this sort of thing.

So the damage to the writers is more of a problem with cash flows for those with published materials that haven't been paid, and worry that their work won't be published (and therefore not paid) due to the chaos of ownership? But no writers are worried about their Intellectual Properties managing to wander off in the legal gray zones and no longer being theirs while still not getting paid?

[otakusensei]

Here's some new meat to chew on:

Catalyst Game Labs Secures License Extension For Shadowrun And BattleTech
http://catalystgamelabs.com/2010/06/25/cat...and-battletech/

So now we know that the announcement was about a short term extension, and not the long term renewal. Someone is sure to spin this even harder than IMR already has, but it's clear that Topps isn't ready to hand over the licenses for another three years.

[Kid Chameleon]

Luckily we're now in a pretty good spot, thanks to a lot of folks, including Frank Trollman. It seems that he's been sending in the 'correct numbers' to Topps. Since the numbers he sent in matched with the ones we gave Topps, it only helped our case with them.

[Furluge]

Here's some new meat to chew on:

Catalyst Game Labs Secures License Extension For Shadowrun And BattleTech
http://catalystgamelabs.com/2010/06/25/cat...and-battletech/

So now we know that the announcement was about a short term extension, and not the long term renewal. Someone is sure to spin this even harder than IMR already has, but it's clear that Topps isn't ready to hand over the licenses for another three years.

Wow that got posted while I was catching up since my last post. (Wow, was that 7 pages of crazy or what? I definitely don't want to get back into that unproductive spin cycle again, but I'm glad guys like hermit and cabral, just to name two examples, were able to understand what I was getting at.)

Thanks for bringing that up, but how exactly does this announcement say it's a short term extension? You don't know anything, you're just assuming what you want to hear. Here's what the announcement actually says...

Catalyst Game Labs is pleased to announce it has been granted an extension for the Shadowrun and BattleTech licenses by The Topps Company, Inc. This extension facilitates Catalyst’s long-term goals of continuing to support the BattleTech and Shadowrun brands. Product development continues with every intention to keep a regular publishing schedule into the future and cultivate continued growth of both Intellectual Properties.

“Our ongoing discussions with Topps has created a great sense of partnership surrounding these properties,” states Randall Bills, Managing Developer, “and we’re extremely excited and proud of this development. Our passion, dedication and promotion of the BattleTech and Shadowrun brands have taken them to heights of quality and popularity not seen in well over a decade. It’s on these strengths that Topps has given us a license extension and are discussing a new long-term contract.”

The following are a few of the most notable accomplishments of Catalyst for both brands over the last three years.

<Snip> List of what Catalyst has done here </Snip>

In addition to continuing publication of our high quality books for both BattleTech and Shadowrun, Catalyst Game Labs is already looking to the future to ensure the longevity of these perennial properties. We hope to see all of you there!

That doesn't say anything about how long the license is for. Almost all of it is boiler-plate happy corp speak. All it tells you is that there's an extension of the licenses for an unspecified length of time.

I still doubt it's for a short length of time though given the fact they were running under an operational extension before. Going through negotiations for license extension for a short period when an extension is already in place sounds redundant to me, but I don't know what the contract says, so for all I know it could have been necessary to do that.

Luckily we're now in a pretty good spot, thanks to a lot of folks, including Frank Trollman. It seems that he's been sending in the 'correct numbers' to Topps. Since the numbers he sent in matched with the ones we gave Topps, it only helped our case with them.

Really now? That's a nugget of information that just begs for more to be told. XD

[Cabral]

Luckily we're now in a pretty good spot, thanks to a lot of folks, including Frank Trollman. It seems that he's been sending in the 'correct numbers' to Topps. Since the numbers he sent in matched with the ones we gave Topps, it only helped our case with them.

He must be spinning in the grave he dug for IMR...

[otakusensei]

Thanks for bringing that up, but how exactly does this announcement say it's a short term extension? You don't know anything, you're just assuming what you want to hear.

If they had signed on for three years, don't you think it would have said so? This is basically backing their current situation, operating for a short term beyond the original agreed to period, with a contract. Standard practice. It is not a long term contract, as Randall stated that was still under negotiation.

So the license is still in play. The fact that Topps isn't willing to sign a three year yet is just a stronger sign that IMR's position might not be that great. But a collapsing IMR at the bargaining table is better for Topps than a corpse.

[Kid Chameleon]

Really now? That's a nugget of information that just begs for more to be told. XD

Not a lot more to add. He had someone feeding him the numbers from our books, I would guess he was assuming we'd lie to Topps. When we gave them the straight picture and he gave them the same info, it really helped our rep feel good about us being forthright with what mistakes had been made, where we were and where we are going. Despite what some of the rumors may say, we are operating on a (somewhat) normal production schedule, not some last-minute cash grab. We're in a hole we dug ourselves into, but we are on our way to climbing out. Now go enjoy some of my lovely writing in 6WA. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)