| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Massively, and more

Reader Comments (17)

Posted: Sep 2nd 2010 3:45PM Evin said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Isn't that Kurt Shlling's (?) studio?
Reply

Posted: Sep 2nd 2010 3:48PM Dustin F said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
This isn't a politics board and I don't like to go into politics in places like this, but that is way too few jobs for the money involved, IMO.

It would be more efficient to offer a tax rebate of some kind.

They could even make it tech related. If you hire people for work that meets x,y.z tech job criteria, you get X tax rebate.

Just my take. These special loans really annoy me because not everyone can get them. You have to have the right connections, which I worry leads to campaign contributions or worse and a messy system that isn't geared in the right direction.

I live in Austin. I have seen tons and tons of tech jobs come here from California. Taxation and regulation have a huge impact on that.

I hope the company can make it, without the loan. It's a tough economy, particularly up there. $75 mill is a ton of cash, too. I know some games cost that much to develop, but I think they could make something profitable at a much lower cost, and work their way up. That kind of thing is slower, but it's more stable. Maybe that's a solution to some of the problems we see economically, particularly in the tech sector.
Reply

Posted: Sep 2nd 2010 4:56PM jsx92 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Curt is most certainly in the GOP's pocket, and RI is run by the mafia. It's hard to tell just WTF is going on down there, but giving him this loan is a huge leap of faith given his non-existent game business career.
Reply

Posted: Sep 2nd 2010 5:02PM aristokrat said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Dustin F
We've had this discussion before in the comments. No business investment is a risk-free venture, but would you rather they create more jobs with a lower probability of loan payback? I think it'd be much worse to loan $75m to a bunch of restaurant startups or something, to create 5000 for six months, and lose all the money in the long run (worse case scenario).

The loan should be based on the chance of repayment, not the jobs it creates. If that was your only goal, why not just give that $75m to 10,000 people off that bat, and skip the whole "loan" business altogether.
Reply

Posted: Sep 2nd 2010 5:10PM aristokrat said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@jsx92
Have you seen his balance sheets or business plans, things I'm sure he presented originally in order to seal this deal in the first place? I'm guessing not, so you have no idea how much risk is involved in this investment.

If the state is going to act like a venture capital firm by giving out business loans in the first place, I'm sure they're doing their research. This recent dick-wagging is a pretty blatant vote-grab tactic, and I'm surprised so many people fall for it.
Reply

Posted: Sep 2nd 2010 5:58PM Dustin F said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@aristokrat

"would you rather they create more jobs with a lower probability of loan payback?"

I suppose it depends on how much tax revenue you plan to get from these jobs.

but I prefer your conclusion that the state should get our of the loan business altogether. Banks should give loans, have different interest rates (for investors) depending on how well the loans work out, with some very basic safety net (a solvent FDIC).

In my opinion, jobs are the main reason for this kind of loan, so I would prefer they just be very direct, using a bright line rule for all companies instead of special deals for particular companies that manage to make it to this point. They could also consider, as I said, the policies that have distinguish places with job growth from places with job losses.
Reply

Posted: Sep 2nd 2010 3:52PM LaughingTarget said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
It would be better of the State wasn't playing favorites as to which industries are going to form or not.
Reply

Posted: Sep 2nd 2010 4:07PM Scuffles said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Ok its probably a bad thing when I have to google a game studio to figure out who they are and what if anything they make. I am a bit out of the loop but I'm not that far out of the loop.
Reply

Posted: Sep 2nd 2010 4:13PM PR0F3TA said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
well it is $75 million, you can't blame the treasurer for trying to do his job, he knows the pros and cons of this loan in this economy. He prob just wants to know 110% that this loan will get paid off so the state does not lose any money and the taxpayers (aka the people) wont be stuck paying off the bill.

i dont know 38 studios track record, but its not a company like EA or Activision where you know you will most likely get alot of that money back. Its a HUGE gamble to take out a loan that big. its $75 mill for god sakes.
Reply

Posted: Sep 2nd 2010 4:19PM PR0F3TA said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@PR0F3TA

upon further reading one of the games that will make benifit from this loan is an open world RPG called "Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning"... backed by EA and a whole crew of respected people from Bethesda to Spawn creator Todd McFarlane. They have promised 450 jobs... maybe the state sees the cons out weight the pros.

Teaser Trailer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gZ52mwNMJYI
Reply

Posted: Sep 2nd 2010 5:07PM aristokrat said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@PR0F3TA
It's not that the "state" sees the cons outweight the pros. It's that these gubernatorial candidates have latched onto a "cause." They see a loan for $75m to a small company, and it doesn't matter if that company has figured out a weigh to turn lead into gold, it's a campaign goldmine. "I'm fighting for the little guy by not letting this fatcat loan go through," they'll say, regardless of what due diligence was done by their predecessor to find out the riskiness of the investment.

Also, no loans are risk-free. That's kind of the point of them.

The worst part about this for the people of Rhode Island, though they don't know and no candidate will ever mention this, is that this will chill future development of the game industry in that state because now companies will have reason to doubt any incentive promises made to them by the government. Going against an already finalized agreement is terrible business practice, but unfortunately many politicians will do anything for votes in the short run, regardless of how much it actually hurts their constituencies in the long run.
Reply

Posted: Sep 2nd 2010 4:14PM Haddock said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Has 38 Studios released an actual game? I haven't seen anything from Copernicus and it's been in development for ages.
Reply

Posted: Sep 2nd 2010 4:20PM PR0F3TA said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Haddock

short answer. No.
Reply

Posted: Sep 2nd 2010 4:35PM LaughingTarget said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@PR0F3TA

Long answer:

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
Reply

Posted: Sep 2nd 2010 5:16PM GreenElf said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Fminus Negativity To The Rescue

Oh, Sorry man I left my wallet in my other pants and I've got this recital thing to go to for my second cousins third brothers twins kid.

Gotta run! Ciao!
Reply

Posted: Sep 2nd 2010 6:28PM Controlled Chaos said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
If they were getting cold feet, they should have just not chosen to offer 38 Studios the money in the first place.

To say, "Oh, sure, definitely!" and then to try and block it isn't that fair to the company.
Reply

Posted: Sep 2nd 2010 9:30PM SpongeBobPistolPants said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
i don't know how far along the company is in relocating but if the funding is pulled i hope the game studio has some legal repercussions against the state for pulling it. if they had relocated employees, leased space, and so forth based on this loan they could be facing some huge hurdles to moving forward with any game creating.
Reply
Sorry, you must be logged in to leave a comment.

Featured Stories

Rhythm Heaven Fever review: Crazy into you

Posted on Feb 9th 2012 12:00PM

Remedy not done with Alan Wake

Posted on Feb 9th 2012 10:30AM

Engadget

TUAW

Massively

WoW