Star Citizen Lies, Ramblings, Jpegs, and Bullshit

[Slapmeandcallmegurl]

If only they said why there might be a discrepancy in counter to accounts...

Due to exchange rate differences and small items that do not feed into our website counter, it does not represent our total revenue received. 

[Motto]

The financials given out by CIG show that they have spend more money than they generated according to the tracker (and loans we know of). So CIG has had other - undisclosed - sources of income. So the funding tracker is bullshit in that regard. Since CIG did not disclose - with actual standard accounting reports - how much money was coming in and going out, there is no way of telling that the numbers shown on the funding chart are actually true. However, based on all available information, it is highly unlikely that CIG has gotten over 200 million from backers. So, the conclusion pretty much is that the funding chart is Bullshit.

But keep on trolling :-)

[Slapmeandcallmegurl]

The financials given out by CIG show that they have spend more money than they generated according to the tracker (and loans we know of). So CIG has had other - undisclosed - sources of income. So the funding tracker is bullshit in that regard. Since CIG did not disclose - with actual standard accounting reports - how much money was coming in and going out, there is no way of telling that the numbers shown on the funding chart are actually true. However, based on all available information, it is highly unlikely that CIG has gotten over 200 million from backers. So, the conclusion pretty much is that the funding chart is Bullshit.

But keep on trolling :-)

The report quite clearly says that the counter doesn't count subscriptions, partnerships, sponsorships, small items and investments. It also doesn't accurately account for currency conversion. It doesn't mean it's bullshit, just not comprehensive. It could easily be a totally accurate representation of the crowd funding total, which is the only thing claimed. Less bullshit, more not all encompassing.

[Aya Reiko]

And why are the lot of you still feeding this obvious and desperate troll?

[Resin]

The report quite clearly says that the counter doesn't count subscriptions, partnerships, sponsorships, small items and investments. It also doesn't accurately account for currency conversion. It doesn't mean it's bullshit, just not comprehensive. It could easily be a totally accurate representation of the crowd funding total, which is the only thing claimed. Less bullshit, more not all encompassing.

Are refunded pledges still logically part of crowd funding total?

[Slapmeandcallmegurl]

And why are the lot of you still feeding this obvious and desperate troll?

It's amazingly humerous to me that you are displaying all the exact same characteristics that you find abhorrent in Spectrum's, alleged, inability to have dissenting discussions without resorting to those voices being called trolls.

Are refunded pledges still logically part of crowd funding total?

Pretty sure refunds aren't counted but I doubt refunds are a significant amount. Do you think they've refunded a million dollars? Less than 0.5% of the total?

[Judge_dolly_OG]

It's amazingly humerous to me that you are displaying all the exact same characteristics that you find abhorrent in Spectrum's, alleged, inability to have dissenting discussions without resorting to those voices being called trolls.

Pretty sure refunds aren't counted but I doubt refunds are a significant amount. Do you think they've refunded a million dollars? Less than 0.5% of the total?

If the refunds were such an insignificant amount, why were they so eager to change the TOCs to remove them?

Surely they aren't willing to burn goodwill for no reason?

Oh no, wait, it's CIG maybe they are.

[Resin]

Pretty sure refunds aren't counted but I doubt refunds are a significant amount. Do you think they've refunded a million dollars? Less than 0.5% of the total?

Based on what you can be so sure? Opennes and proved honesty of CIG?

I for one can’t know if the amount is considerable or insignificant. But if it would be insignificant, why did they stop handing out refunds last year? (Out of initial cancel period)

[Slapmeandcallmegurl]

If the refunds were such an insignificant amount, why were they so eager to change the TOCs to remove them?

Surely they aren't willing to burn goodwill for no reason?

Oh no, wait, it's CIG maybe they are.

The ToS has always had a no refunds clause. At least, it always has since I first backed.

Based on what you can be so sure? Opennes and proved honesty of CIG?

I for one can’t know if the amount is considerable or insignificant. But if it would be insignificant, why did they stop handing out refunds last year? (Out of initial cancel period)

I'm not sure about the amount or significance of refunds, no way to be.

The ToS has always had a no refunds clause, at least since I first backed. Stopping issuing refunds seems logical if you don't have to and you start spending more than you're taking in. It is a business after all.

[dsmart]

The financials given out by CIG show that they have spend more money than they generated according to the tracker (and loans we know of). So CIG has had other - undisclosed - sources of income. So the funding tracker is bullshit in that regard. Since CIG did not disclose - with actual standard accounting reports - how much money was coming in and going out, there is no way of telling that the numbers shown on the funding chart are actually true. However, based on all available information, it is highly unlikely that CIG has gotten over 200 million from backers. So, the conclusion pretty much is that the funding chart is Bullshit.

But keep on trolling :-)

I am just scrolling through his responses because I can't be bothered tbh.

I like how he pulled the disclaimer from the financials, but that disclaimer has never appeared on the funding chart page itself

Forget about the discrepancy for now. Just look at the chart image which I posted.

PLEDGES		$175.5M
SUBS		$20.9M
OTHER		$11.1M
		----------
TOTAL		$207.5M

Everything adds up - like magic. Forget about refunds, forex etc. Somehow, the funding chart is a 1:1 match to their financials (which takes forex into account).

If the funding chart wasn't pure bs, it would not only take forex and refunds into account; but it would also have taken subs (which are part of the pledge btw) into account. At least now we know (according to CIG) that it doesn't even take subs into account. Because, you know, that's not real money - it's Monopoly money.

This is similar to and reeks of "Creative Accounting"

[Slapmeandcallmegurl]

It also reeks of, 'being able to add numbers together to create a financial statement'.

Fucking weird...

[dsmart]

The ToS has always had a no refunds clause. At least, it always has since I first backed.

That's patently false.

http://dereksmart.com/forums/topic/star-citizen-tos/

[Slapmeandcallmegurl]

That's patently false.

http://dereksmart.com/forums/topic/star-citizen-tos/

I remember reading this part, (or very similar), when I first backed, so no, it's not.

The Pledge shall be earned by RSI and become non-refundable to the extent that it is used for the Pledge Item Cost and/or the Game Cost, with your Pledge being applied as follows: first to the Pledge Item Cost, and then on a pro rata pari passu basis with all other contributors whose deposits have been deducted by the relevant Pledge Item Cost, to the Game Cost. 

[Judge_dolly_OG]

I remember reading this part, (or very similar), when I first backed, so no, it's not.

But you acknowledge they did change the TOCs to deny refunds?

[dsmart]

But you acknowledge they did change the TOCs to deny refunds?

https://imgur.com/a/Ov1Tt