Star Citizen - Chris Roberts, lots of spaceship porn, lots of promises

[dsmart]

Yep, page 18 clearly, clearly in the definitions section of the document. It being defined means nothing in and of itself unless the term ‘excluded collateral’ is used in the meat of the document somewhere, which I have not been able to locate (oh for a non-pdf version!).

Not really.

But hold on! I got this.

I had already ran OCR on the document, converted it from PDF to TXT to JPEG. And I uploaded an online album of all 29 JPEG pages.

“Collateral”, which references “Excluded Collateral”, is defined in Schedule 1 (Definitions) on p18 (p22 of PDF) of the filing

Collateral means the Chargor’s right, title and interest in and to (i) the property charged
pursuant to Clauses 4.1 and 4.2 hereof and (ii) the property assigned pursuant to Clause
5 hereof; excluding in all cases the Excluded Collateral;

“Excluded Collateral” is then clearly defined at the bottom of the same p18, and continued to p19.

Excluded Collateral means (i) the assets that have been charged pursuant to the Nat
West Security Agreement; and (ii) all Intellectual Property Rights and all exploitation and distribution and other rights and all title, interest and materials with respect to the video game provisionally entitled “Star Citizen”;

So, the Excluded Collateral is defined, and referenced correctly.

The ambiguity (to those who don’t know software development, or that Squadron 42 is built from Star Citizen code, engine, assets etc) is in whether or not Star Citizen is really excluded in toto from the secured assets. It is, but only in name. Which is why, unlike Section 4 (“Charges”) which spans PDF p7-9, everything related to the “Game” (we assumed to be Squadron 42) is covered.

Note that Section 4.2.2 & 4.2.5 (p3 of filing, p7 of PDF) “digital material” is blanket coverage of everything digital, which includes source code and all that.

4.2.2 the Game Assets and the Distribution Rights
4.2.5 all digital material and sound and visual material made or to be made incorporating or reproducing all or any part of the Game; and

This how all Star Citizen tech and assets came to be inadvertently secured in this Charge. Of course if they don’t default on the loan, none of this matters because then there won’t be any dispute as to what is Squadron 42 and what is Star Citizen.

[Timex]

This how all Star Citizen tech and assets came to be inadvertently secured in this Charge.

So you do not believe that such things would fall under the umbrella of:

all Intellectual Property Rights and all exploitation and distribution and other rights and all title, interest and materials with respect to the video game provisionally entitled “Star Citizen”

Out of genuine curiosity, why would you consider such things to not be covered under “all intellectual property” related to Star Citizen?

[meeper]

Well, assuming the data is true, then it only makes things even weirder. If CIG has the same monthly revenue as last year, why would they need a loan now?

I’m not speaking to the need for this sort of thing, but here’s how I’ve used these sorts of loans are rebates previously (assuming a 30% credit):

You spend 1M in eligible expenses and get a rebate for 300k. Assuming your overhead and other expenses are sufficiently high (this generally isn’t an issue), then the next year you can scale your budget up to 1.3M in expenses because you have shown that receiving the 300k is a given. Now, if you don’t have that 300k in your bank account to scale up, you take a short-term 300k loan to bridge you until the credit is received.

It’s not sexy, but it’s how I’ve used loans to handle situations like this.

[dsmart]

Out of genuine curiosity, why would you consider such things to not be covered under “all intellectual property” related to Star Citizen?

Maybe because I know what “Intellectual Property” means?

[dsmart]

Either way, whatever. Seems like another “red flag” which was supposed to put CIG out of business last year… and the year before that. I’ll continue to look forward for the upcoming 3.0 release, which looks pretty sweet. I think that stuff is slated for the PTU next month.

There are very few dumb people left in this discourse, who actually believe that if backers had stopped giving them money, they would still be around. The game was fully funded at $65m. Completely over-scoped.

They never delivered it.

They kept getting money, amid all kinds of Red flags.

At $153m raised, according to the Star Citizen Tracker, they are still not even 20% of the way on Star Citizen

And nobody knows what stage Squadron 42, which relies on the Star Citizen engine tech, is currently at because it hasn’t been seen since Q4/15. In Q4/16, when they were raising money during GamesCom and CitizenCon, they didn’t divulge that SQ42 wasn’t even in the cards. They said it was “close”, but they couldn’t quite make it. Then, now seven months since then, nobody has seen this “close” vertical slice or demo. Instead, they released a video showing how they failed to make it.

But you already knew all of this.

[dsmart]

Of course, if the data is not true, that would explain a lot of the weirdness.

It’s pure and utter bollocks. We’ve proven this time and time again. For one thing, it doesn’t track refunds, subscriptions, loans, investor amounts etc. All we have is CIG’s word that what we see in the chart, is actually dollars. The only way the truth is ever going to come to light, is if there is a lawsuit or Fed involvement.

[dsmart]

Well, the current development status looks like they’re on track with the thing going to the Evocati PTU in a few weeks, and the PTU later in the month. The set of stuff which is either complete or feature complete seems pretty solid at this point.

No, it doesn’t show that at all. Stop it.

It has been updated numerous times, and is now +32 days overdue. And this Friday’s update is bound to introduce further delays as the previous updates.

[dsmart]

I’m not speaking to the need for this sort of thing, but here’s how I’ve used these sorts of loans are rebates previously (assuming a 30% credit):

You spend 1M in eligible expenses and get a rebate for 300k. Assuming your overhead and other expenses are sufficiently high (this generally isn’t an issue), then the next year you can scale your budget up to 1.3M in expenses because you have shown that receiving the 300k is a given. Now, if you don’t have that 300k in your bank account to scale up, you take a short-term 300k loan to bridge you until the credit is received.

It’s not sexy, but it’s how I’ve used loans to handle situations like this.

That’s precisely how it is supposed to be used. But I have yet to hear of anyone having to pledge the assets of two companies in order to get a loan against tax credits. Which leads me to believe that this loan was not just for tax credits.

[meeper]

Yeah, I can’t say I’ve ever encountered that. I’ve had to pledge some first borns and periodically some physical assets, but never everything my company owns.

[dsmart]

Yeah, I can’t say I’ve ever encountered that. I’ve had to pledge some first borns and periodically some physical assets, but never everything my company owns.

Oh this one is worse. It secures present AND future assets. It’s hilarious.

[Quaro]

Is the current version you can play now any fun? I backed the original Kickstarter at the lowest level of like 30 bucks or whatever so I think I can theoretically play something now?

[Timex]

Maybe because I know what “Intellectual Property” means?

You don’t believe that intellectual property includes software?

[dsmart]

Is the current version you can play now any fun? I backed the original Kickstarter at the lowest level of like 30 bucks or whatever so I think I can theoretically play something now?

We’re gamers, so “fun” is subjective. If you have a free package, you should check it out yourself.

Last time we ran metrics, engagement was in the crapper, like less than .5% of the accounts were playing any version or module (Arena Commander, Star Marine, Persistent Universe) of the game. Even the streamers have moved on.

It’s pre-Alpha, littered with bugs, performance issues, glitches etc. And it’s a freaking performance hog. And no Delta patcher yet. So each build, you are literally downloading the WHOLE FREAKING game.

[dsmart]

You don’t believe that intellectual property includes software?

You’re trying too hard. I know that circular arguments are your favorite, but as people here who know my posting patterns from decades ago will tell you, I just ignore those.

My commentary is clear. I’m not here to educate you, nor defend their merits. You debate them all you want, it is largely irrelevant and inconsequential to me.

[Timex]

Just so you know, given your reputation, and out of respect to Tom, my inquiry was not intended to be antagonistic. But I’m ok with not engaging you directly if you prefer.

[dsmart]

Just so you know, given your reputation, and out of respect to Tom, my inquiry was not intended to be antagonistic. But I’m ok with not engaging you directly if you prefer.

The fact that you need a qualifier to not be antagonistic, is evidence that you can’t be trusted.

I never said you couldn’t engage me. You made a comment. I responded. But then, you went sideways with something that wasn’t even part of the narrative. I took it as a circular argument - and thus, a waste of my time. I don’t engage in discourse to “win”, I never did - and it’s not my style.

If you want to have a proper dialog with the likes of me, here’s a tip: scroll up and read the comments that I actually respond to. You should spot a pattern. And if you do, formulate a comment and I will respond as-needed.

[Timex]

As I said, I did not mean to antagonize you. I apologize for it. When you are here, you are just another user like everyone else, and Tom lays out rules against bringing in baggage from outside. Those rules generally work pretty well, and it’s Tom’s house.

I’m not looking for a personal fight, I meant the inquiry as nothing more than what it was. It’s totally cool move on as though I never asked it.

[dsmart]

As I said, I did not mean to antagonize you. I apologize for it. When you are here, you are just another user like everyone else, and Tom lays out rules against bringing in baggage from outside. Those rules generally work pretty well, and it’s Tom’s house.

I’m not looking for a personal fight, I meant the inquiry as nothing more than what it was. It’s totally cool move on as though I never asked it.

OK, understood. No harm, no foul.

[kedaha]

Why would intellectual property include software? Software can create intellectual property, but software in and of itself is not.

How often has a company bought the rights to a name without the rights to the software (or hardware) that created the products that gave rise to the IP?

[Timex]

Why would intellectual property include software? Software can create intellectual property, but software in and of itself is not.

Source and object code are generally always protected as intellectual property.