Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Company News IPLY.OB in free fall

Talorc

Liturgist
Joined
May 5, 2004
Messages
125
mmm... I dont think Orange County has all its decisions searchable..

I think it would be New York anyway, as Atari disclosed this in their latest Quarterly:

On September 19, 2003, Interplay, commenced a wrongful termination and breach of contract action (the “Action”) in New York State Supreme Court, New York County in which it named Atari Interactive and the Company as defendants, seeking, among other things, a judgment declaring that a computer game license agreement between Interplay and Atari Interactive continues to be in full force and effect. On September 23, 2003, Interplay obtained a preliminary injunction that prevents termination of the computer game license agreement. On October 9, 2003, Atari Interactive answered the complaint, denying all claims, asserting several affirmative defenses and counterclaims for breach of contract and one counterclaim for a judgment declaring the computer game license agreement terminated. Atari Interactive’s answer also asserted that the Company was incorrectly named as the defendant in this Action. Both sides sought damages in an amount to be determined at trial. The Company, Atari Interactive and Interplay reached an agreement with respect to the scope and terms of the computer game license agreement and accordingly, filed with the court a Stipulation of Dismissal, dated December 22, 2003. The court ordered dismissal of the matter on January 6, 2004.

Ive had a poke around the New Yourk Supreme Courrt website, but no luck as yet. (One of their sites is giving a database error at the moment)

I think this little passage is refering to IPLY giving up the PC rights to D&D in exchange for keeping the Console rights
 

Country_Gravy

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Mar 24, 2004
Messages
3,407
Location
Up Yours
Wasteland 2
Did IPLY just go up to 60 cents a share? Maybe those investors were not so stupid if it did. Is that some sort of error, or is this just designed to piss me off. I was really enjoying watching all those investors squirm.

Bummer.
 

Country_Gravy

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Mar 24, 2004
Messages
3,407
Location
Up Yours
Wasteland 2
Thank God that it didn't skyrocket and I am just stupid. That freaked me out. I hope they fall off the face of the earth soon.
 

Malraz Alizar

Novice
Joined
Jul 2, 2003
Messages
36
Most influential RPG ever? Final Fantasy 8

Spazmo said:
Anyways, why didn't FS fans like FS2? Is it because of the unfinished story or did they feel that like our Fallout 2, there was lots of stuff that didn't fit?

I don't actually listen to them, I just malign them. I imagine they disliked it because the system requirements were too high for their small computers and penises or something equally rediculous. That's the kind of blind stupidity you come to expect from "hard-core" fans of computer games.
 

Nightjed

Liturgist
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
675
Location
Wasteland
Country_Gravy said:
Thank God that it didn't skyrocket and I am just stupid. That freaked me out. I hope they fall off the face of the earth soon.

now its at 7 cent i wonder why ppl are buying stock from a doomed company, i guess it was so dirty cheap that they just had to
 

Vault Dweller

Commissar, Red Star Studio
Developer
Joined
Jan 7, 2003
Messages
28,044
http://ragingbull.lycos.com/mboard/boar ... Y&read=895
This is too funny

Investor dude said:
Interplay did not LOSE the rights to BGDA2, D&D games

All these clueless people on NMA and rpgcodex are posting that Interplay lost the rights to BGDA2 and their backlog of D&D titles. Most people on those message boards have no idea about the stock market. There is no way the company would be able to lose these rights so easily. Atari would have to take Interplay to court for these royalty payments, and only through a settlement would Atari be able to take away all of Interplay's D&D games and BGDA2. This process would take a long time-- not a couple of months.

Everyone needs to think to themselves-- how did Interplay come up with the money to pay their employees? How will Interplay have enough money to pay their employees for the next couple of months? ....They sold their backlog catalog rights for all of their D&D properties to another company (probably Atari) for $$$$. They also probably sold the BGDA2 rights to another company (Vivendi/Atari). I am not sure whether they sold the Dark Alliance trademark though.
 

Saint_Proverbius

Administrator
Staff Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2002
Messages
14,051
Location
Behind you.
Yeah, it's up to 7 cents and holding. That's still down about 2 cents for the five day, and half a cent since the open yesterday.

I'm not sure why people are buying at this point. Every day brings them a little closer to death, and they gave up a huge earning potential as well as a steady earning source this weekend. Like I've said before, they have nothing announced yet and nothing due to be released any time in the near future. Certainly nothing that can be released within the next month and a half, which is when Herve said they'd run out of cash.

Herve bought his shares on the 17th. That's when he thought he could get a sale of the company. However, that was over two weeks ago. I'd say that the loss of BG:DA2 as well as all the D&D game distribution rights will weigh heavily on the minds of any potential buyer. The sale of Fallout Enforcer certainly will, as will Lionheart and possibly IWD2. BG:DA2 is probably the only game they've released in the last two years that stands to make a profit. Most of their titles have lost money.
 

Saint_Proverbius

Administrator
Staff Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2002
Messages
14,051
Location
Behind you.
http://ragingbull.lycos.com/mboard/boar ... Y&read=895

stanstan0 said:
Interplay did not LOSE the rights to BGDA2, D&D games

All these clueless people on NMA and rpgcodex are posting that Interplay lost the rights to BGDA2 and their backlog of D&D titles. Most people on those message boards have no idea about the stock market. There is no way the company would be able to lose these rights so easily. Atari would have to take Interplay to court for these royalty payments, and only through a settlement would Atari be able to take away all of Interplay's D&D games and BGDA2. This process would take a long time-- not a couple of months.

Everyone needs to think to themselves-- how did Interplay come up with the money to pay their employees? How will Interplay have enough money to pay their employees for the next couple of months? ....They sold their backlog catalog rights for all of their D&D properties to another company (probably Atari) for $$$$. They also probably sold the BGDA2 rights to another company (Vivendi/Atari). I am not sure whether they sold the Dark Alliance trademark though.

The above is a complete moron. Yes, it is that easy. In fact, the CEO of Interplay even said, specifically, that it is possible they lose their entire D&D distribution rights if they can't resolve that issue with Atari because they didn't pay the royalties on Febuary 15th. The English is pretty damned clear about this in the 10-K.

He's also completely ignorant of what's going on in the company. The reason they have money to pay their employees now and for the "next two months" is because they set up a distribution deal for Run Like Hell through Avalon to distribute it in countries it never was distributed in because it was such a huge flop. This is a deal they never would have gotten if it weren't for the fact that Herve and Eric Caen also own Avalon.

Even then, that "next two months" thing was contingent on a few things, including being able to continue to distribute BG: DA2.

But to the funny part of the whole thing.. If they sold those game rights to Atari, WHY THE BLOODY FUCK AREN'T THEY ON ATARI'S SITE? Here's a link to all Atari's PC line up:

http://us.atari.com/games/pc.asp

Anyone see IWD? BG? BG2? IWD2? PS:T? Any of the expansions? Bundle sets? Eh? NO!

http://us.atari.com/games/playstation2.asp
http://us.atari.com/games/xbox.asp

Anyone see BG :DA or BG: DA2 on their PS2 or XBox sections? No? Gee, ponder on that for a bit.. Maybe it's because IPLY didn't sell them to Atari!

You can't say it's because they haven't had time to update these sites either, because the games they just announced for the pre-E3 events have been put up in the last few days.
 

Smiffus

Novice
Joined
Apr 15, 2004
Messages
35
Even if he is right and IPLY did sell the rights for some quick dollars, in a couple of months those dollars will be gone and then what? IPLY will have lost a source of income, if not their only source and in a couple of months they will not be able to pump out a game which will replace that.

IPLY will only have bought a couple of months in which they can look for buyers for either IPLY itself or for their other licenses.

In the end IPLY will go down.
 

JJ86

Liturgist
Joined
Dec 5, 2002
Messages
206
Smiffus said:
Even if he is right and IPLY did sell the rights for some quick dollars, in a couple of months those dollars will be gone and then what? IPLY will have lost a source of income, if not their only source and in a couple of months they will not be able to pump out a game which will replace that.

Herve always can sell his ass on the mean streets of LA.
 

Saint_Proverbius

Administrator
Staff Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2002
Messages
14,051
Location
Behind you.
Smiffus said:
Even if he is right and IPLY did sell the rights for some quick dollars, in a couple of months those dollars will be gone and then what? IPLY will have lost a source of income, if not their only source and in a couple of months they will not be able to pump out a game which will replace that.

IPLY will only have bought a couple of months in which they can look for buyers for either IPLY itself or for their other licenses.

In the end IPLY will go down.

Pretty much. Interplay doesn't really have a hell of lot of developers there right now. Right now, they have no console licenses that are certain to make money. Given all the money they've lost on things like Run Like Hell, Galleon, Fallout Enforcer, and so forth, they're certainly in a high risk situation even if they do manage to scrape out enough cash from whatever to develop anything new.

The development route for Interplay is a very, very high risk gamble. Even hiring new developers or contracting development is a gamble for them if they could afford it, because the Interplay brand name is so utterly devalued at this point.

This is basically a situation a lot of us have been predicting for a while. Interplay has basically given up it's ability to develop on it's own. They've sold licenses, screwed over small developers who they would contract with, laid a huge amount of their talent off or had them leave because of piss poor management.

There isn't much in the way of long term for this company. I can see why day traders would like Interplay, but anyone keeping the stock around at this point because they think that one day it'll be in the twenties or thirties is deluding themselves.

And these problems also translate in to problems finding a buyer. Anyone that buys Interplay is going to have to do a lot of investing in the company if they want Interplay to get back in the swing of developing. The only reason there would be to buy Interplay at this point is for their intellectual properties, and I doubt taking on the problems of the company is worth that.

Selling off licenses one at a time just buys time for Interplay, but since they don't stand much chance at normal development right now, why bother devaluing the company for this? Titus needs all the money they can get from Interplay's sale if they manage to get a buyer, and selling off a license or two just means Interplay will keep slowly dying, sucking up most of the money for that sale just to look like there's still work going on there.
 

JJ86

Liturgist
Joined
Dec 5, 2002
Messages
206
At the very least, Interplay could outsource to India and pay the developers in company stock. For a complete game, an Indian programmer would get 100 shares of Interplay stock?
 

Country_Gravy

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Mar 24, 2004
Messages
3,407
Location
Up Yours
Wasteland 2
I think that there is almost nothing they can do right now to turn things around. What IP do they have? Fallout? They already screwed themselves on that one by canceling FO3 and getting rid of Black Isle. Since they lost the D&D thing, do they have anything else? What do they have that someone would want to buy? If they have no money, and no assets, the company can't be worth anything, can it?

stanstan0 said:
Interplay did not LOSE the rights to BGDA2, D&D games

All these clueless people on NMA and rpgcodex are posting that Interplay lost the rights to BGDA2 and their backlog of D&D titles. Most people on those message boards have no idea about the stock market. There is no way the company would be able to lose these rights so easily. Atari would have to take Interplay to court for these royalty payments, and only through a settlement would Atari be able to take away all of Interplay's D&D games and BGDA2. This process would take a long time-- not a couple of months.

Everyone needs to think to themselves-- how did Interplay come up with the money to pay their employees? How will Interplay have enough money to pay their employees for the next couple of months? ....They sold their backlog catalog rights for all of their D&D properties to another company (probably Atari) for $$$$. They also probably sold the BGDA2 rights to another company (Vivendi/Atari). I am not sure whether they sold the Dark Alliance trademark though.

At least this guy has the sense to check these forums to see what reasonably intelligent people have to say about IPLY, instead of listing to the people at raging bull"shit".

Too bad he is too stupid to listen to reason.

The funny part is he is thinking that IPLY is actually going to do something other than go down like a cheap whore.
 

taks

Liturgist
Joined
Oct 31, 2003
Messages
753
Saint_Proverbius said:
The above is a complete moron. Yes, it is that easy. In fact, the CEO of Interplay even said, specifically, that it is possible they lose their entire D&D distribution rights if they can't resolve that issue with Atari because they didn't pay the royalties on Febuary 15th. The English is pretty damned clear about this in the 10-K.

sorry SP, but you're wrong on this one. ATARI cannot force interplay to do anything. they have no legal authority to specifically "order" interplay to stop selling anything, period. only the courts can do that. if interplay is actually selling products in breach of contracts (or after failing to pay royalties), then ATARI can sue, but that's it. the english is damn clear in the 10-K, for sure, but that still doesn't give ATARI any enforcement authority. just because interplay loses their distribution rights doesn't mean they'll stop distribution until the courts order them to... or they actually did sell off the rights...

oh, and yes, we do have disclosure rules by the SEC in the states. failure to disclose major information can result in all sorts for problems for a company (even removal of signature authority personnel must be disclosed). interplay is already on the SEC radar by failing to file on time... hence the IPLYE notation...

taks
 

JJ86

Liturgist
Joined
Dec 5, 2002
Messages
206
Who owns D&D?? Methinks it's WOTC not Atari. Therefore Atari couldn't sue Interplay, but WOTC could.
 

Briosafreak

Augur
Joined
Oct 21, 2002
Messages
792
Location
Atomic Portugal
taks why are the three parts debating and Interplay trying to reach an agreement? Does that tell you it reached the courts or is it still on the legal departments hands? There`s a cease and desist order that came from Atari? Or is it in another stage?
 

Briosafreak

Augur
Joined
Oct 21, 2002
Messages
792
Location
Atomic Portugal
JJ86 said:
Who owns D&D?? Methinks it's WOTC not Atari. Therefore Atari couldn't sue Interplay, but WOTC could.

It has to do with the January agreement with Atari JJ, not with WoTC, at least directly.
 

Saint_Proverbius

Administrator
Staff Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2002
Messages
14,051
Location
Behind you.
taks said:
sorry SP, but you're wrong on this one. ATARI cannot force interplay to do anything. they have no legal authority to specifically "order" interplay to stop selling anything, period. only the courts can do that.

Atari lawyers can say that either you stop distributing, or we will take you to court over this. Interplay would lose this, and it would cost Interplay money to go to court over this because Atari could then request back damages for Interplay not paying while these products were being distributed. The distribution royalties are all lumped together, so if Interplay stopped paying, Atari could yank them.

Like I said, if they did sell those rights, there would be press releases on the subject. There's always press releases from both parties on a sale of a license. Considering it's been *six* days since IPLY pulled those products with no release on the subject, I'd say it's something they don't want to brag about.

Also, if they did sell the game rights to Atari, why hasn't the Atari product line been updated with those games?

oh, and yes, we do have disclosure rules by the SEC in the states. failure to disclose major information can result in all sorts for problems for a company (even removal of signature authority personnel must be disclosed). interplay is already on the SEC radar by failing to file on time... hence the IPLYE notation...

Interplay's been on the SEC's radar before the IPLYE thing as well. Investors have complained before that Herve's been funnelling profits from Interplay to bail out Titus, causing an operating loss for Interplay.
 

taks

Liturgist
Joined
Oct 31, 2003
Messages
753
Briosafreak said:
taks why are the three parts debating and Interplay trying to reach an agreement? Does that tell you it reached the courts or is it still on the legal departments hands? There`s a cease and desist order that came from Atari? Or is it in another stage?
i don't know... anything any of us surmise is actually happening is nothing other than conjecture. interplay very well could have agreed to a cease and desist notification from atari, but they aren't required to... at least not until the courts have advised. i would think as many connections as you guys have, we would have heard about a court appearance. i'm curious to know, too... it might just be that there was a "gentlemen's agreement" to bail them out (atari, vivendi, whomever) if they hand over the rights, and a good faith measure was the removal of all sales links and mentions from the website... comments anyone?

oh, and i think atari has sole distribution rights for the electronic D&D products, so WotC is probably out of the loop on this one. they retain content control, however, from what i've read.

taks
 

taks

Liturgist
Joined
Oct 31, 2003
Messages
753
Saint_Proverbius said:
Atari lawyers can say that either you stop distributing, or we will take you to court over this. Interplay would lose this, and it would cost Interplay money to go to court over this because Atari could then request back damages for Interplay not paying while these products were being distributed. The distribution royalties are all lumped together, so if Interplay stopped paying, Atari could yank them.

true to that... they could just be between a rock and a hard place. well, they are between a rock and a hard place, but you get my meaning :)

taks
 

WaltC

Novice
Joined
Mar 7, 2004
Messages
10
Nightjed said:
....

...i wonder why ppl are buying stock from a doomed company, i guess it was so dirty cheap that they just had to

GREED, is the answer. Some people are always looking for a "get rich quick" opportunity and in the process they usually "go broke quick," instead...;) In these cases they think, "I know I'll probably lose this money, BUT WHAT IF a miracle happens and the stock goes to $7? I'll be rich, rich, rich!" Heh...;)

It's the same reason idiots on Ebay send $30K to "Internet escrow companies" to buy cameras and jewelry from people living in Peru. They think...."Hmmmm....This idiot doesn't know that this stuff is worth $190K in the states, and I can buy all of it for $30K! Ooooo-o-o-o, I'll be rich, rich, rich! This deal is too good to ignore." And so they have a bank do a wire transfer of $30K to a bank account in southern Peru which was supplied by the "escrow service" official the eBayer has corresponded with via email, an escrow service conveniently recommended by the seller, an escrow company the eBayer is convinced is authentic because the email correspondence he's had with "officials" there sounded good and was worded properly, and because the escrow service's web page looked professional. The eBayer chats excitedly with the seller via email while the bank funds are enroute, and as soon as they arrive the seller's email address disappears along with the escrow-service website, and the eBaying clod has just lost $30K. (True story.)

They buy this stuff for the same reason a cleaning lady clearing $150 a week will spend $50 of it each week buying lottery tickets instead of groceries, thinking that any day now she'll be living in a mansion surrounded by servants and driving a different car for each day of the week. She doesn't realize that statistically she has a better chance of being struck and killed by lightning, or dying in a car wreck, than she does of winning a lottery jackpot, and so she keeps on buying the tickets every week. It's like the man who pulls out his life savings and hands it over to a stranger talking on the phone he's never met in his life, who robs him of it, just because the guy presented him with a deal too good to be true. It's like the gambler who never understands that for every big winner there are 10,000 losers--same exactly in the stock markets, which many approach like a gambler approaches a card game. Greed is the pure and simple answer.

I actually knew someone who bought $5K of Commodore Stock for 4 cents a share, right before it went to 00.00 and Commodore vanished forever. He might as well have used the money as fireplace kindling, although he did tell me he deliberately used a few of the stock certificates as toilet paper a couple of times, just for sentiment's sake...;)
 

Saint_Proverbius

Administrator
Staff Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2002
Messages
14,051
Location
Behind you.
Just something someone pointed out to me the other day..

Run Like Hell took four to five years to develop, right? It only sold around 25k units, which is disasterous. Galleon was in development for five years before Interplay sold it for $100,000(This is the number I've heard, it's just never been announced), which is 2/3rds of IPLY's monthly rent.

Imagine, just for a second, if Interplay had given that funding and dev time to a bonafide CRPG for the PC. Hell, with a dev time of three years, you could have made *three*, well done PC CRPGs, which would have had a much greater return than those two games did. Lionheart sold over twice the copies that Run Like Hell did, and it was only in development for a little over a year. Imagine if Lionheart had actually been a polished title, it probably would have sold a LOT better.
 

taks

Liturgist
Joined
Oct 31, 2003
Messages
753
given his obvious lack of knowledge of the gaming industry, you'd think even he would have been willing put in place someone "competent" from the get-go. perhaps stupid doesn't know it is stupid?
taks
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom