During the live chat, I asked Jason that very question, and in particular whether all sales had to cease with the cessation of the licence at the end of May.

Jason announced that as far as he was aware, the licence extends through to mid June.

So I guess we won't see any official action, barring some big announcement from Catalyst, for the next two weeks or so.

I think that is jumping the gun. While I would love to know the answer by tomorrow, I think its likely that we may not hear immediately one way or another. Topps is under no requirement to award the license by June 1 and they may decide to hold off on a final decision until well past that date. Even if the license has been granted, whoever was awarded it may want to get some if its internal ducks in a row before making an announcement.

Well, today's is a national holiday in the US, most folks are out BBQing.

I'm of the opinion that in heated debates, one of the moderators that isn't a participant should be doing any required moderation and ones that are actively arguing for one side should leave off moderation duties for that thread. Thus all moderators can have opinions and participate, and no mod needs to be put in the position of assessing the behaviour of someone they are currently having an argument with. That's fairly straight forward to me and a good principle.

Anyway, I believe I have made my point. Whether you value it or not has nothing further to do with it needing greater explanation, so I'm done with this tangent (I hope).

K.

I honestly can't see any good reason why CGL would hold back from announcing a renewal of the licence and I can see several good reasons why they would announce it. For a start it would help with engaging freelancers for work. I would expect they would want to let creditors know as it would be a way of saying "hold off - we're good if you just give us a few months". Distributors would need to know. Even if they don't make an announcement here (and I imagine Jason Hardy would let off a sigh of relief if he could make such an announcement), then I would expect it to leak here pretty quickly. In the thread over at the Gamer's Den (or whatever it is called), FrankTrollman believes one of the posters is actually LLC under a pseudonym and if so, we'd probably see some comment about it there.

So for the above reasons, I think that if we don't here anything from CGL, it more likely means they don't have the licence than that they do. Unless anyone can think of any reasons to do with the bankrupcy case / other legal proceedings why they would want to keep it under wraps.

K.

Well, my RC bears a "Core Character Rulebook" on the cover.

Catalyst's official opinion on "Core book" was "Core books get published as hardcovers."

Mr. T says: "I pity the fool that actually uses Runner's Companion as a core rulebook. That book should be thrown hella far."

Good work on the ED3 however.

Which is shitty because it leaves out Running Wild.

I know I'm the Mad Lurker what Lurks at Midnight, but there are some here that may remember me. I've been a fan of SR since SR1, and I've been a member of Shadowland, ShadowRN, and dumpshock. I may not get to play anymore, but I do enjoy reading the books. I think that the biggest problem with CGL keeping the licence is that they will have to train a whole new crew of writers. They have pissed off just about everyone on their freelance staff, and most of the people that really grok what Shadowrun is all about. Just look at this forum, I mean Dumpshock is a sort of SuperFan haven. Many, if not most, of the writers over the past decade have come from here or other Shadowrun forums, and thats the way it should be, but now CGL has a very negitive reputation here, and just about anywhere on the internet. Who is going to want to start working at a company that has this negitive rep with their current freelancers? And, with the true fans of the game shying away from writing, what sort of quality will we get out of not fans? This is what worries me. I really don't want people that do not LOVE this game writing for it. I don't want people who do not PLAY writing. I have seen too many people I gained respect for leave CGL to still respect them: Adam, DE, Pistons, and AH to name a few. As a SuperFan I hope that CGL does not get the licence, because I feel that they can not handle it. I would love to see SR in the hands of Jay and Bobby.

Eggy

Holy shit, Eggbert, long time no see!

You kind of missed my point. Topps might not hand down the decision as of June 1, one way or the other.

Seriously! I think he surfaces once every few years around here.

Heya CE!

Doc, did you build a shrine to your Runner's Companion?

Not exactly. I was participating in a photo competition. The guideline was to combine "RPG", "one pair" and "Christmas".

It's Memorial Day, and thus highly unlikely that there is anyone working at Topps or CGL.

In Flanders fields the poppies blow
Between the crosses, row on row...

Because Topps may not have made a decision yet? I'm not arguing whether CGL should get the license or not. Simply that it's a good reason why there would be no announcement. Do we even have any kind of confirmation that Topps needs to actually make a decision by the time existing license expires (perhaps mid-June per the information from the chat)? Who's to say they may not take more time (for making a decision, for reviewing CGL's management/finances, whatever) and simply put things in limbo for a week, two...a month. I certainly hope it isn't the case, but do we actually have anything to indicate that June is when we'll actually hear about it? Now, a good reason why CGL would hold back after a decision has been made? No clue.

Yeah - that's Knassers point.

The only reason CGL won't annouce they have the license is because they don't have it yet.

Exactly (and thank you). As to mid-June, I don't know, but I'd say it's pretty harsh business practice to let a company know whether or not they're going to retain the licence on the day it expires. Can someone confirm when the licence actually expires? Because I'd expect CGL to know before that actual day. I mean what would they do otherwise? Race round their distributors telling them to stop selling asap? Rush across the office and yank the plug out of the Battleshop computer? You can't plan a business around that sort of last second decision making. If the licence actually expires mid-June, then there's a fair chance they already know whether they've got it or not, though given the unusual nature of all this, it might go a bit closer to the deadline before a decision is made than you'd see otherwise, e.g. to give CGL a chance to finalise cashflow plans. But licence uncertainty isn't in Topps interests once they're past the bidding stage, because uncertainty translates into poor product release schedules.

K.

Well, just going by the prior post and what I saw in the chat transcript, I can offer this up.

Yeah, that's kind of my thinking. I really don't expect to hear anything (from Topps or CGL or whoever) until much closer to the end of June. Also, in regards to poor product release schedules, I thought we already had that? That's not convincing me that Topps couldn't just sit on it for a while.

Spoiler tags since it concerns future (meta)plots:

Well . . with the DOTA, wasn't that more or less to be expected?

Yeah, I'd suggest that the longer CGL hasn't made the annoucement, the less likely that CGL has got it. It's no skin of Topps nose if CGL has to pulp a bunch of books - particularly if they are giving the license to someone else. However, if Topps wants to continue with CGL they need to resolve this issue early so CGL doesn't fold in the transition.

Also, the longer the audit takes the more likely it will turn up an adverse finding, because if the auditors don't find any irregularities, they will stop. If they find stuff that warrants further investigation, they can justify more billable hours.

Overall, for CGL, the longer this takes to resolve the more likely they are to lose the license and collapse - due to Coleman's bad management practices and fraud.

Really??? Did anyone tell the powers that be that the storyline was bad? If so what was the reaction?

While, me? I would personally be inclined to believe the opposite. The longer CGL goes without an announcement,
and the line developers are talking about product they are working on, the more likely CGL is to get the license,
since the line developers would not continue working on stuff if they knew they were wasting their effort.

But, then again, I am not much of a pessimist. Oh, and I do not believe that Kennedy was shot by his driver
to stop him from making a public reveal of the U.S. secret treaties with UFOs(Instead, he was shot by the
more reasonable gunman on the Grassy Knoll as part of a Coup orchestrated by Johnson).

If nothing is wrong, why are the auditors still turning rocks over at CGL? Surely they would have said 'oh, that's a comprehensive set of books, and Tiger Eyes allegations of fraud are not true as print quantities match amounts with royalties reported + verified unsold stock' by now. I work for a big 4, it doesn't take the auditors that long to return 'all clear' with much larger businesses than IMR with more stock, employees and turnovers. It makes it quite likely the books are shot - but Tiger Eyes produced books and Coleman had books, so whats wrong with the books?

It makes a lot of sense for IMR to crank out product now - as royalties accrue only went the printed work is delivered, if you go bust and never print, then you never have to pay those royalties.

How do we know the auditors ARE still turning over rocks at CGL? For all we know, the audit has been completed,
and the reason nothing is being said is that Topps and CGL are still haggling over finer details in the renewal contract.

Probably not.

Then again, for all we know, that is the story that got scrapped by Hardy.
How does Trollman even know what is being worked on? Sorry, but, seriously,
people: the guy no longer works for CGL, has not worked for them for some years.
We do not know who his source is. For all we know, the source fed Trollman just enough
stuff so people would believe the source, and is now feeding trollman bad info mixed with
good for their own nefarious ends. Until Trollman's source identifies themselves(which they
are to cowardly to do), one should not take Trollman's info as "Fact."

no. because no.

Let me just jump in here to say that the speculation about Spy Games is off base. Frank heard about one possible plot element, and somehow decided that was the only plot element the book was going to have. That was not the case.

Jason H.

EDIT: Oh, and I should add that I'm not commenting on his "Corruption Master" stuff because I've never seen or heard about such a proposal. Doesn't mean it doesn't exist, but it's never made its way to me.

I think you mean free lancers rather than the (singular) line developer. And no they wouldn't keep working on something once they were told that their work would be scrapped. But as we have seen, CGL has not placed a high priority on paying people for their efforts. If CGL does not wish it to be known that they're going to lose the licence (which they might not for a number of reasons listed elsewhere), it's demonstrated that they're willing to let people keep working for nothing for their own benefit. No, I think the reasons for no news = no licence are more supportable.



"Pessimist" for you, maybe as you wish CGL to retain the licence. Personally, I regard with horror any people in charge of Shadowrun that even contemplate the horrors that Frank has been talking about. Worse than the Lone Star Unicorn division! My hope is for whatever outcome results in the people who created SR4 being re-employed, because I know their work is of high quality and in accord with the setting.

As to your trying to liken reasoned argument to UFO conspiracy, are you really trying to discredit arguments with this sort of hyperbole?

K.

Without revealing anything game-breaking, I'd like to reiterate that the original plot for Dawn of the Artifacts and its follow-up were...very bad. This is going back to the time when Peter Taylor was linedev, way before Jason. The original kernel, as I was told, came about from a meeting with Loren and Randall, and involved a novel tie-in among other things. There was considerable negative feedback on the part of Synner, myself, and pretty much everyone else that saw it. Syn worked very hard through multiple drafts to reduce it to the point of least possible stupidity, which eventually became the basic plot of the DotA series. The follow-up campaign wasn't fixed very well after that, during the Time of Three Co-Devs. I finally took it upon myself to draft a new proposal to tie off the DotA plot during John Dunn's brief tenure - that took a couple drafts too, but it tied into a few things Jen Harding and I wanted to do and set the stage for a later development of some importance. We (Jen Harding, Stephen McQuillian and I) had finished first drafts when I left.

Of course, you have to understand there were a lot of plots thrown around, some with more support from some people than others, and plots rarely survived the passing of a linedev intact.

Yes, yes we did. I was not a big fan of that proposal.

To be honest, I didn't know where that proposal came from, I just saw it pitched and I didn't like it. Also, I have no idea what the current status of that proposal is and if Jason says he doesn't know about it, then I imagine it's dead.

Sometimes proposals are thrown out there that are weak or silly or crazy. If we're doing our jobs as writers, developers, and editors, the proposals that can't stand up on their own don't make it into books, or at least they are modified so that they make sense and are interesting. I don't put too much stock in a proposal, because I've thrown a few out there that were not initially strong, I'm generally more concerned about what makes it to the end of the process.

Oh, and while I'm in the thread, I should say this--once Catalyst has definitive information about the license, we will announce it. In my conversations with management, no one has presented any reason to sit on such information.

Jason H.

Well, CGL as a whole has multiple line developers for their multiple lines. Two of which are licensed through Topps.

See, there is a problem with that Knasser....I am paying attention to both Shadowrun and Battletech(No, I will not say who I am on the Battletech forums.)
The stuff I see from Herb and Ben, on their respective NON CGL Twitters, as well as the stuff being seen from them on the forums(though Ben is less of
a masochist then Herb, so does not post as much), they are working on alot of stuff. I am sorry, though, Knasser, that you think Battletech does not count.

I don't think Battletech counts. Not in any way that should effect Shadowrun's health and development. If IMR can't do both as well as they deserve they need to let one go. If they can't handle even one of them they need to go under and let someone else carry the torch(es). Topps might see them as a package, I hope not. I know a lot of people do, but that's just because of the history and the overlap in the communities.

After reading through these threads I would love to see the two split up. To be blunt I really don't care what happens in the future with Battletech anymore than I care what happens in the future with GURPS. I don't play either, I'm not interested in either. We're talking about two communities of players and developers here with different visions and cultures. The last several pages of this thread has been shot through with finger pointing because both games are published by the same company that can't get it's shit together.

Not looking to dredge up old drek, but briefly...

We've seen moderators post on both sides of the debate, so no one can say there is widespread favoritism. And, as Adam pointed out, mods should be involved in important debates. My suggestion is the mods should treat threads like the Supreme Court treats cases: if a mod has a strong opinion on a topic he should recuse himself from mod duties for that thread. In other words, if you have an opinion, great! I want to hear it! I just don't want you to also mod that thread.




@ audit length of time discussion:

Given what's been reported here about the company filing system (consists of papers thrown in LLC's back seat and eventually thrown out, stored on personal computer of former employee, bad contact info for contractors, no record of contracts or NDAs, umpteen email addresses for a single function eventually consolidated to a non-company domain gmail, etc., etc., etc.) I don't think the length of the audit really confirms or denies anything.

I think we can assume the auditors have a very difficult job to do with high stakes for the individuals involved and are (hopefully) doing their best.

Well, in reality the two are very linked to the economic health of CGL. If for some odd reason Topps decided to renew one and not the other, there would be impact.

All the more reason I'd like to see them in the hands of two different companies, preferably neither being CGL, but if they end up with BT it won't really matter to me all that much.

Because there has been no post stating that. As CGl would love an audit saying that they are squeaky clean, they'd annouce it. So the only options are

A) The audit is ongoing

B) The audit has made adverse findings.

I was being generous in assuming that we hadn't got to the 'Topps has confirmed that Coleman defrauded to them' stage, and thus the audit is still ongoing.

From CGL's website today but it looks like Dumpshock has been down most of the day

Quote:

PSI TO ACT AS EXCLUSIVE SALES AND FULFILLMENT AGENT FOR CATALYST GAME LABS

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Catalyst Game Labs and Publisher Services Inc. (PSI) are pleased to announce they’ve entered into a new agreement. Starting in June, PSI will be the exclusive sales and fulfillment agent for Catalyst Game Labs.

“While we’ll miss the great people we’ve worked with at Alliance—Gabe, Danny, Tom and others—we’re excited to be working with PSI more closely,” said Randall N. Bills, Managing Developer for Catalyst Game Labs. “We’ve had a long partnership with PSI already. They’ve handled our sales into the large chain bookstores for years and in early 2009 they took over all foreign fulfillment. It made sense to move all of our sales and fulfillment under a single company. We’re confident this will enable us to serve our game communities better than ever.”

Publisher Services Inc. (PSI) is a leading North American sales and fulfillment service organization enabling greater sales for small to medium-sized publishers to mass market, book trade, and specialty retail channels. PSI objectives are to work with their publishing partners to optimize their presence in the broad marketplace and offer the highest quality products to PSI retail customers.

As a full-service, “turn-key” sales and fulfillment operation, PSI works as a sales force, in-channel marketing consultant, warehouse facility, shipper, and collections agent… allowing publishers to focus mainly on product creation.

Dean Burnham, President of PSI, said, “PSI is excited to expand our relationship with Catalyst Game Labs and to build on the success they’ve already had with their product lines. While this change allows PSI and Catalyst to work closely on all sales fronts, it won’t change the way in which the retail markets are used to accessing product. Catalyst products will continue to be available through traditional distribution markets.”

Look to www.catalystgamelabs.com for future announcements concerning this exciting development!

Catalyst Game Labs

Catalyst Game Labs is dedicated to producing high quality games and fiction that mesh sophisticated game mechanics with dynamic universes-all presented in a form that allows beginning players and long-time veterans to easily jump into our games and fiction readers to enjoy our stories even if they don’t know the games.

Catalyst Game Labs is an imprint of InMediaRes Productions, LLC, which specializes in electronic publishing of professional fiction. This allows Catalyst to participate in a synergy that melds printed gaming material and fiction with all the benefits of electronic interfaces and online communities, creating a whole-package experience for any type of player or reader.

Publisher Services, Inc.

In 2001, Publisher Services, Inc. (PSI) was born from the growing market demand for quality entertainment products. We recognized a gap in the marketplace between the creators of great products and the fantastic retailers looking to meet the needs of a growing consumer base.

We formed client relationships with a select group of high quality manufacturers of board games, card games, role-playing games and toys. Today, PSI is the exclusive distributor for a selective list of top game, toy and entertainment manufacturers.

PSI developed a unique business model and blossomed by following a carefully managed path to ensure the utmost level of service to its manufacturing partners and retail clients. As a market-focused distributor who offers business and marketing strategy to each of its publishing partners, PSI has a growth strategy that is likewise focused and targeted. This is not a volume-driven business, but a specialty service that analyzes market trends to enable our publishing clients and channel customers to capitalize on market demand.

Catalyst Game Labs Statement re: The Chapter 7 Filing

Due to recent questions and concerns directed toward Catalyst Game Labs regarding the Chapter 7 Filing for Involuntary Bankruptcy, the management team for the company would like to address a few basic points in the hopes of improving public awareness against any misunderstanding or potential misinformation.

Catalyst Games is not operating under any order of bankruptcy. Currently, three separate parties claiming to be owed monies in the total amount of approximately $60,000 have filed a petition in an effort to force the company into bankruptcy. Catalyst questions the accuracy of this amount, and legal counsel for the company is currently researching the viability of their claims. We expect the petition to be ultimately denied.

The overall question, as it has been explained to the management team, is whether or not Catalyst has been working to meet its obligations and can reasonably expect to continue in such a manner. Ongoing and recent payments to two of the three parties involved in this petition, as well as additional payments sent out to numerous freelancers, would seem to argue in the company’s defense despite statements to the contrary.

Catalyst Game Labs remains committed to its policy of responsible dialog through press releases or within appropriate legal channels. It is not the company’s desire or intention to engage any individual in an argument outside of these confines. The company fully expects to prevail against any and all proceedings.

End Quote:

Doesn't seem like it says much to me, any other ideas?
Rojo

I think it says something. IMR/CGL has PSI convinced that they will make money from this deal. If IMR/CGL was about to lose the licenses for SR and BT I don't see this as something that PSI would be as excited about.

I could be wrong, not knowing what else IMR is publishing, but that's just my $0.02 read.

It's also getting a 3rd party involved in the shipment, of books and bookkeeping.

Might be something that Catalyst is putting in place to add some more checks and balances.

And to ensure that books, like the LE, are better processed when they finally are printed.

Also, just something I'd thought of, it could be a sign to Topps of what they are doing to make sure there are less messes moving forward.

That press release is pretty vague. If they're switching for Alliance, is that really any different than just switching distributors?

I'd love a little more explanation there, but that's simply not going to happen.

Sounds to me like a "sign of good faith" situation. Maybe somebody with a working knowledge of RPG distribution (Adam, Synner, Jason, ??) can explain the significance of this development?

Does PSI also do publishing, themselves?