 |
| |
|
|
Velociryx
|
 |
of Candle'Bre
Apr 1999
time: 05:19
|
|
Hey guys! I'm glad to see there's sufficient interest in the topic that it's still drawing comments! Thank you all! 
To questions/comments aimed in my direction, I'll get started there first:
GP: Excellent point about surrendering control (or even some measure of control re: investors....where possible, I DO wanna minimize their impact, and that means playing a highly political game, at least for a while...I hate politics, but would do it for the sake of speed, if necessary. Still, your and Rav's comments later point out that there are strong advantages to remaining fully independent, and that is, in fact, my first choice....but, as a real possibility of an option, I didn't wanna shut that door or burn that bridge....
Rav: I know you said you lurk on the Candle'Bre site, but I guess it just didn't sink in that you'd seen the thread there regarding my past... 's been an interesting 33 years, that's for sure! Ahhh, and I knew you were kiddin' about the whole Lands of Lorraine thing, but you're right...I could just see some investor who also likes fiction givin' it a read and thinking...."Hmmm...and we just gave our money to this guy?" LMAO.....that'd be golden, actually! As to the company itself and just how everything fell together though....it still makes my head spin. I have no idea how we....got here....you know? *chuckling* It's just one of those things that sorta took on a life of it's own....it's really, really cool though, and I'm glad to be in the midst of it....most fun thing I've ever worked on before!
UR: Absolutely rock solid point regarding scratchware and graphics...and yeah...MULE is....unbelievably cool....
Colon: I can honestly tell you that I've never once been in the position to apply the knowledge I've gained regarding real estate markets. It may be the case then, that I've overlooked some key piece of the puzzle, and it'll wind up being much harder than I realize, but I don't think so. Will keep ya posted though....even if I crash and burn, it'll make a good story....
As to the question about being under pressure to drop the unprofitable computer game element of the company....I dunno...that *could* be the case, but it also presupposes that the game will never turn a profit....I believe it will. I think it'll be a solid, innovative, addictive game that'll sell. I believe it enough that I'm ditching my more traditional and largely assured retirement with the bank to try it out....
-=Vel=-
(who promises to have fun, regardless of what happens next!)
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Velociryx
|
|
of Candle'Bre
Apr 1999
time: 05:19
|
|
 Unorthodox is my middle name....heh
But seriously, NYE summed up quite eloquently the crux of the matter. I view real estate as a hobby, and game making as a passion (along with my writing career, which is also thrown less-than-silently into the mix, btw). The synergy exists in combining hobby and passion, not into a single entity necessarily (tho the structure currently allows for that, so there's no real harm in it), but under the same umbrella in a way that one can finance the other. This is actually not so uncommon as it might seem. The 3M company, for example, uses profits from its company to fund a variety of research projects, many of which have little or nothing to do with their core business, and yet, many of the fruits of their research labors show surprising profits, either by them assuming the manufacture OF those new ideas, or simply selling/leasing them to some other company.
So....yes, NYE's synopsis is an excellent one....the success of my hobby finances my passion.
It's not the sort of synergy the business gurus talk about, but it's synergy in its own fashion....
-=Vel=-
Last edited by Velociryx on 26-04-2002 at 11:31
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Velociryx
|
|
of Candle'Bre
Apr 1999
time: 05:19
|
|
It's me...burning the midnight oil...lol....and Rav, you bring up another excellent point that has, in fact, been the topic of discussion between me and the two people on my "business development" team in the Candle'Bre Group.
The phrase "don't put all our eggs in one basket" has come up more than once, and the two people on the Business Dev. Team have been pretty excited about the prospect of acquiring hard assets that produce a recurring income stream for us (rents from Commercial Real Estate holdings) in order to pay the bills.
That (diversification), coupled with a developmental safety net is an important advantage, IMO. Combine that advantage with the fact that we don't have to hawk our game to a publisher until it's polished, ready, and we're happy with it, sets us up the bomb...er...no, sets us up in a position that's perhaps not unique in the industry, but fairly uncommon....at this point, the publisher needs us more than we need them. We don't rely on the sale of the next game for our very survival, so we can pick and choose when it comes to a distribution deal.
I like that very much....
-=Vel=-
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Velociryx
|
|
of Candle'Bre
Apr 1999
time: 05:19
|
|
Hey Scouse Gits! And thank you very much, by the way! I'm not sure I can explain the "no flames" phenomenon, except to say that on the board I've been running for going on three years now, we've had a grand total of two flame wars erupt, and since the inception of the Candle'Bre forums, we've not had the first flame there. Disagreements and differences of opinion, absolutely (especially with regards to the society model--commercial release, and the initial "open source or no" debate we had)...but not the first flame.
I like that. I think it says good things about our chances, and I'm glad to see that the "no flame" thing seems to have followed Candle'Bre back here where it began (also with no flames in the beginning, now that I think on it).
As to testing....here's how we've got it set up:
The code team is currently working on v0.1 of the game. This is a REALLY bare-bones version that is essentially a test of the three-tiered combat system we've put together, movement, the map, and a couple other basic features. This one will remain entirely "in-house" so we can make sure the major components work as advertised, and once we get that nailed down, we'll start adding components sequentially (Fate Card Engine and Research Module will be next, IIRC).
Starting then, we'll begin expanding our circle of testers with that, and each subsequent release. Best way to make sure your name doesn't fall through the cracks is to head to my site (http://www.angelfire.com/sc2/hartpence), click on the "Discussion Forums" link, and then to the "Candle'Bre" section, and make an entry in the "Sign In Thread" as a tester. Just leave me your e-mail addy there, and as soon as we reach that stage in the game, we'll have our testing crew at the ready!
We're also putting no particular limits on people....I know that a lot of companies don't want testers who can't give at least x hours a week...Bah! Who cares...if you like games, and if ours intrigues you, you're welcome to sign on!
-=Vel=-
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Velociryx
|
|
of Candle'Bre
Apr 1999
time: 05:19
|
|
GP: What you say is true, however, it is clear that internal diversification of companies provides the same protection to a company as it provides an investor who diversifies his stock portfolio.
With a company, a stronger, established division that's making regular profits NOW can be used to help bouy up a new division until it gets its feet under it and becomes well established.
With an individual investor, if you keep all your stocks in small cap tech firms, and the internet bubble bursts suddenly, you find yourself losing most of the value of your portfolio overnight. If you have diversified, your losses in one sector are offset (or at least mitigated) by gains in another.
While it provides no inherent financial value, it often (usually) makes good financial sense. Companies who tie their futures too closely to a particular market or product risk complete obsolesence if conditions change over time. Diversified companies can weather those changes on the basis OF their diversification, because it gives them more time to react to the changing environment.
My goal is not so much to structure the company such that it gains protection from becoming obsolete, as it is to use one "leg" to provide financing for the other. Again, even though there is no natural synergy to be found in the two things I've chosen, there is a certain synergy and symmetry to be found in that I enjoy both, and would have pursued the Real Estate angle even if I hadn't stumbled into making a computer game....
-=Vel=-
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Velociryx
|
|
of Candle'Bre
Apr 1999
time: 05:19
|
|
GP: Believe me, I worry on that as well. In fact, I would say that although our plan spares us (or potentially spares us) from running afoul of some of the more common pitfalls that other companies face when starting up, it opens up some new dangers as well, the one you mentioned being chief among them.
Actually, it's made slightly more complicated than just that, cos as I mentioned, in addition to those two elements and holding down my dayjob, I'm also pursuing my career as an author. Worked for a couple hours on the next book last night, as a matter of fact.
So...juggling a hobby and two passions, trying to take all three to the next level, and doing that while holding down a day-job...yes, it's taxing. No doubt about that. I've been surviving on 3-4 hours a sleep a night for as long as I can remember...lol
There's a possibility that the end result will be a totally burnt out Vel who crashes and burns the whole thing, with nothing getting accomplished for trying to do too much at once.
I can't deny that as a possibility, cos it's out there.
I can say though, that the thing that has kept it from happening so far is that none of this stuff FEELS like work. I'm having a great time, exhausting or no. It's been....fun. I think as long as I'm enjoying myself and the journey, the liklihood of burnout is lessened. Should that change, however, it's time to take a long, hard look at slowing down.
Mostly, I think it's a recepie for a short life...lol...can't keep that pace up long without killin' yourself, which means I'd better hurry. I got no plans on dying just yet....
-=Vel=-
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Velociryx
|
|
of Candle'Bre
Apr 1999
time: 05:19
|
|
Hiya Stoo!
Synergy is a coolio word. The word first came into wide spread use thanks to a man whom I regard as being quite possibly the most brillant mind ever, R. Buckminster Fuller. Some of the ideas he patented in the 30's are ahead of their time even today, and he wrote a pair of books on the mathematical concept of synergy...essentially the notion that the whole of a thing is greater than the sum of its parts. The best physical illustration of this in the body of Buckminster Fuller's own work was the creation (discovery?) of the Geodesic Dome. A dome that can be built of any size by individual pieces you can put together by hand.....the larger it gets, the stronger it gets, it's the most efficient building ever made in terms of ease of environmental control, overall structural integrity, ease of assembly, and encloses the greatest amount of interior space with the least amount of material. A simply amazing piece of design.
In the 80's, the corporate world caught the fever, and turned it into a buzz word, organizing their businesses around the notion that there are certain efficiencies to be had in corporations branching out into related businesses that could share certain resources in common. The best new-economy example I can think of is Wireless Companies. Generally, wireless companies offer a range of services that all use the wireless (satellite based and driven) resource....thus, these companies can branch out into paging, cell phones, and hand held internet devices....three very different services they can market, but they all load-share the common (satellite) resource. Thus, relatively fewer dollars need be spent on infrastructure because the businesses DO have things in common.
A thing to keep in mind is that all businesses, regardless of type, have a certain amount of synergy, simply by being businesses. That is to say, all businesses require an accounting department, and all businesses share a need for a purchasing function, so these two things, if nothing else, can be shared, regardless of any other synergies that exist, however, a corporation that enters into a radically different business than their core business must have a certain level of expertise in the field, and must build the bulk of the infrastructure to support the new area of business from the ground up (or, the alternate plan, which does not really apply in our case, is to buy a smallish, well staffed company (there's your expertise) that's currently in the business you wanna break into.
So...do business units REQUIRE synergy in order to function side by side? Absolutely not. There's nothing stopping a chicken farmer from pouring his profits into creating a computer manufacturing outfit, and if the farmer has good working knowledge of both fields, or hires a good front man for the one he knows little about, he can thrive at it. Having said that though, synergistic business units have some attractive advantages (chief among them being load-sharing of resources in common...resources that the company already has access to and expertise in).
Whew...LOL...okay, THAT was quite the little ramble...sorry 'bout that....BUT....that's the essence of why synergy is a good thing.
Do we need it? Not necessarily, but it's cool when and where you can find it.
-=Vel=-
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:19.
Apolyton Time is 00:19. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
24-04-2002 08:03
|