Star Citizen General BS

[Motto]

That's not what I mean. You can be personally responsible overhere, if you have a so called one-man business (or 2-man partnership). You are responsible for the business then even with your house, personal belongings etc. etc.

But what I meant is that if your company (the corporate kind) goes bankrupt, the bankruptcy has to be handled by a court appointed lawyer and they have to investigate if the bankruptcy wasn't a fraud. So moving 1 mil. from the company to your private account and then filing for bankruptcy won't work. That 1 mil. will go back into the company. The other thing is that as a manager, you will be tested to see if you have conducted yourself in a proper business way. In the case of CIG, having all that backers money but spending it on a abnormal salary for yourself, buying stuff that has nothing to do with the business (say, CR bought a yacht in Monaco) and that sort of thing will make you accountable for the bankruptcy. In short, spending all the money and then claiming "sorry, I'm apparently a bad businessman with no talent for the trade" doesn't fly here.

Would this apply to CIG, one could argue that the top-salaries where way above normal and the abnormal part should therefore be paid back to CIG. If CR doesn't have that money anymore, he can sell all his assets and if that still isn't enough, the remaining debt will remain open to be paid later. So living a luxury live now on the backers money and then filing for bankruptcy because the funds dried up, no way he could pull that off.

[Narrenbart]

Like many other things in the surroundings of this game ... this is something that won't happen.
Please turn on your brain before writing.

[Motto]

Well argumented. Care to elaborate further?

[nightfire]

You can be personally responsible overhere, if you have a so called one-man business (or 2-man partnership). You are responsible for the business then even with your house, personal belongings etc. etc.

None of which applies to CIG's current type of incorporation, as you are surely aware.

The other thing is that as a manager, you will be tested to see if you have conducted yourself in a proper business way. In the case of CIG, having all that backers money but spending it on a abnormal salary for yourself
…
Would this apply to CIG, one could argue that the top-salaries where way above normal and the abnormal part should therefore be paid back to CIG.

I doubt that any notion that CR's salary, and even the bonuses, being "abnormal" would hold up without any challenge in court. Define "abnormal"… in relation to which "norm"? If you compare his salary (whatever the amount) with that of peers in the industry (e.g. entrepreneurs and owners of certain other software companies), I'm sure you would find lots of executives who pay themselves less, and some superstars of the business who earn significantly more – like, say, in the world of fund managers, musicians and lawyers. Prosecutors would choose the first peer group as reference, CR will no doubt argue that he belongs to the latter (and that his genius work merits no less than a salary comparable with Bill Gates or the Rolling Stones), and the outcome of the ensuing argument would be anyone's guess IMO.

buying stuff that has nothing to do with the business (say, CR bought a yacht in Monaco) and that sort of thing will make you accountable for the bankruptcy.

Unless his salary and bonus payments are indeed determined to be inappropriate (see above), whatever he does with his personal earnings is his own business and has nothing to do with company affairs.

In short, spending all the money and then claiming "sorry, I'm apparently a bad businessman with no talent for the trade" doesn't fly here.

I'm not so sure. In hindsight, we all know better. Therefore, the litmus test applied in many jurisdictions focuses on whether the business decision was plausible at the time it was made, not whether it makes sense from a future point of view. It will be interesting to see what the court thinks about stuff like bank loans, forex transactions, money movement between shell companies and the setting up of such etc., but I don't see CR's spending personal funds on vacations in Monaco or wherever being relevant in this context as long as he has not been found guilty of siphoning said funds out of the company by illegal means.

In short: in my opinion, it will probably take 8 years of court trials and $155m+ in legal fees to establish any actual bad intent or wrongful conduct, no matter how delusional or evil his current business practices seem to be for us.

[Narrenbart]

Star citizen became a machine to milk players out of money with smoke and mirrors.
CIG has 14 shell companies and is shifting money around the world.

If CIG has a liability to their customers, they have to refund their backers cause various reasons.
But if the money runs out the backers get nothing, especially not from CR private money.

If there is something illegal going on the state will fine the responsible persons but the backers will get nothing more out of it if the CIG money is gone.

Your fantasies are on par with "climbing out of a crate and rape other players" like this your stuff is not happening and not worth discussing.

[Motto]

Thank you both for elaborating. However, I'd like to ask Narrenbart to stop treating me like I'm stupid. There are some remarks there that were not necessary. Not everyone is born and raised in the USA or a native English speaker (as my grammar probably already showed). I'm trying to discuss something here, nothing more.

I'm trying to find out if is really possible that CR and friends are really getting away with this fiasco. So mismanaging this project for half of mil. salary a year and after a couple of years just filing for bankruptcy and that's that. So long and thanks for the fish.

For one, there are 2 companies in Europe. When CIG collapses, both the UK and D local (fiscal) authorities will look into that. So being the GM in the UK makes you accountable for what happens in the UK. That the mother company is in the USA doesn't mean a thing. Secondly, I find it hard to believe that whatever CIG/CR is playing right now, has been setup in a way that makes them intouchable. A lot of money has been spend on paying wages, rent etc. so that's gone with fair reason. But inappropiatly spend money (I meant CR buying a yacht with company money btw, not his private money) could play a factor.

There is nothing wrong with spending the company money the way you see fit. Even our IRS thinks so (with some exceptions of course). However, this only applies as long as you are making a profit. If you go bankrupt, everything will be scrutinized to take care of the bankruptcy (and that can take years) and yes, hindsight will be applied then. And even the conduct of the topmanagers, board of directors etc. will be checked and even they can be held (personally) responsible. These rules here are made so that one doesn't go around like in the Wild Wild West and then taking off with the money. I know in the USA things are easier. Of course, that doesn't make it better  :)

The other thing is that there might be legal things that are attached to the Kickstarter or pledging fundraising. If they violated laws the bankruptcy won't save them from that. So, maybe there is another angle.

When CIG collapses, (most of) the money will be gone. But I hate to think that CR and friends have had a luxery live for a couple a years and took out a lot of money and now can live happily ever after. I'd like to see that go to trial. But, as said by nightfire, it'll probably take years and end without a just outcome. And yes, it makes a difference if you fly to Monaco and rent a boat there from company money or your private money. However, usually these things are paid for with company money. I'm hoping they did.

I'm missing the thoughts and views of our Big Leader here, the man that has so much more background information he cannot share at the moment. You know, the one that was right. So Derek, jump in here would you please  :)

[dsmart]

That's not what I mean. You can be personally responsible overhere, if you have a so called one-man business (or 2-man partnership). You are responsible for the business then even with your house, personal belongings etc. etc.

But what I meant is that if your company (the corporate kind) goes bankrupt, the bankruptcy has to be handled by a court appointed lawyer and they have to investigate if the bankruptcy wasn't a fraud. So moving 1 mil. from the company to your private account and then filing for bankruptcy won't work. That 1 mil. will go back into the company. The other thing is that as a manager, you will be tested to see if you have conducted yourself in a proper business way. In the case of CIG, having all that backers money but spending it on a abnormal salary for yourself, buying stuff that has nothing to do with the business (say, CR bought a yacht in Monaco) and that sort of thing will make you accountable for the bankruptcy. In short, spending all the money and then claiming "sorry, I'm apparently a bad businessman with no talent for the trade" doesn't fly here.

Would this apply to CIG, one could argue that the top-salaries where way above normal and the abnormal part should therefore be paid back to CIG. If CR doesn't have that money anymore, he can sell all his assets and if that still isn't enough, the remaining debt will remain open to be paid later. So living a luxury live now on the backers money and then filing for bankruptcy because the funds dried up, no way he could pull that off.

Correct. And that's where things like "piercing the corporate veil" to get to the individuals personally, comes into play.

As I've said before, I don't envision ANY scenario whereby this tanks and they get away with it. It's too big, too notorious, and there is a LOT at stake.

Once investigators (private, State, Fed) get involved, all they have to do is follow the money. That's ALWAYS where things tend to fall apart quickly.

Look at the recent Fyre festival fiasco. That one didn't even take in half of what Star Citizen has, and barely a month after it collapsed, the Feds were involved, and the CEO arrested for fraud and a bunch of other things.

[helimoth]

https://robertsspaceindustries.com/about-the-game/spaceflight

From the mind of Chris Roberts, acclaimed creator of Wing Commander and Freelancer, comes STAR CITIZEN. 100% crowd funded, Star Citizen aims to create a living, breathing science fiction universe with unparalleled immersion… and you’re invited to follow every step of development.

Blatantly untrue.

[Serendipity]

That's not what I mean. You can be personally responsible overhere, if you have a so called one-man business (or 2-man partnership). You are responsible for the business then even with your house, personal belongings etc. etc.

But what I meant is that if your company (the corporate kind) goes bankrupt, the bankruptcy has to be handled by a court appointed lawyer and they have to investigate if the bankruptcy wasn't a fraud. So moving 1 mil. from the company to your private account and then filing for bankruptcy won't work. That 1 mil. will go back into the company. The other thing is that as a manager, you will be tested to see if you have conducted yourself in a proper business way. In the case of CIG, having all that backers money but spending it on a abnormal salary for yourself, buying stuff that has nothing to do with the business (say, CR bought a yacht in Monaco) and that sort of thing will make you accountable for the bankruptcy. In short, spending all the money and then claiming "sorry, I'm apparently a bad businessman with no talent for the trade" doesn't fly here.

Would this apply to CIG, one could argue that the top-salaries where way above normal and the abnormal part should therefore be paid back to CIG. If CR doesn't have that money anymore, he can sell all his assets and if that still isn't enough, the remaining debt will remain open to be paid later. So living a luxury live now on the backers money and then filing for bankruptcy because the funds dried up, no way he could pull that off.

Correct. And that's where things like "piercing the corporate veil" to get to the individuals personally, comes into play.

As I've said before, I don't envision ANY scenario whereby this tanks and they get away with it. It's too big, too notorious, and there is a LOT at stake.

Once investigators (private, State, Fed) get involved, all they have to do is follow the money. That's ALWAYS where things tend to fall apart quickly.

Look at the recent Fyre festival fiasco. That one didn't even take in half of what Star Citizen has, and barely a month after it collapsed, the Feds were involved, and the CEO arrested for fraud and a bunch of other things.

Literally putting people's lives at stake whilst trapping them on an island with no food, water or other basic amenities isn't comparable with failing to create a video game to the extent you hoped. Come on now.

I also find your assumption of inevitability as disingenuous. There isn't a case to answer unless development stops. This hasn't and isn't going to happen, as they will cut staff, should the need actually arise, and get something out of the door.

You've been mentioning feds and government buildings for quite a long time now, as long as you've spouted their having no money left, have we passed the two year anniversary by now? How much longer can they continue under this intense federal investigation and having no money do you think?

How can they manage to run a company burning through 'x' million dollars a month with no money left for two years?

Your assertions are non sensical. Proven via time.

[helimoth]

You've been mentioning feds and government buildings for quite a long time now, as long as you've spouted their having no money left, have we passed the two year anniversary by now? How much longer can they continue under this intense federal investigation and having no money do you think?

How can they manage to run a company burning through 'x' million dollars a month with no money left for two years?

Your assertions are non sensical. Proven via time.

You realize they have just leveraged all of their asserts on a relatively small loan? Hardly the actions of a company flush with cash. They have unlimited troughs of cash you'd like us to believe - so why take out loans secured against everything they have?

It's been established time and time again; through warbonds, loans, non-stop ship sales and failure to meet any large deadline that CIG are cash-starved and have no way to survive their next 10 years (10 years is absolute minimum they will need) of development. It's clear, it's been established and right now you're operating on a trash-tier shill model to even argue against any of it.

[Serendipity]

You've been mentioning feds and government buildings for quite a long time now, as long as you've spouted their having no money left, have we passed the two year anniversary by now? How much longer can they continue under this intense federal investigation and having no money do you think?

How can they manage to run a company burning through 'x' million dollars a month with no money left for two years?

Your assertions are non sensical. Proven via time.

You realize they have just leveraged all of their asserts on a relatively small loan? Hardly the actions of a company flush with cash. They have unlimited troughs of cash you'd like us to believe - so why take out loans secured against everything they have?

It's been established time and time again; through warbonds, loans, non-stop ship sales and failure to meet any large deadline that CIG are cash-starved and have no way to survive their next 10 years (10 years is absolute minimum they will need) of development. It's clear, it's been established and right now you're operating on a trash-tier shill model to even argue against any of it.

They used the company assets to leverage the best possible interest rate, in fact that was how and why it makes sense to do it. They got a fraction above Bank of England base rates so the lender makes money and CIG get a net save. It's not rocket science. The larger and safer the collateral, the lower the rate the bank charges, less risk of not getting their money back. It's the same reason why those with a poor credit rating get bad interest rates on lending. It's more risky.

Those things you mentioned prove no such thing. Any company needs cash flow for reasons other than being about to collapse. Getting contracts for renting premises, for example, is impossible without demonstrable income streams.

I remember when it was 'guaranteed' CIG wouldn't last 2 to 3 months and that was well over 18 months ago. It was also claimed there wouldn't be any more citizencons after last year but there's one coming up quite soon. It's recently been claimed this will be their last Gamescom. I'm sensing a pattern. One of made up scaremongering.

How many more times will Derek claim they're out of money before you realise he doesn't have a damn clue how much money they have? He's been doing it for years. They're still going. Inferring your own reasons for business practices just shows your confirmation bias.

[nightfire]

I'm sensing a pattern. One of made up scaremongering.

How many more times will Derek claim they're out of money before you realise he doesn't have a damn clue how much money they have? He's been doing it for years. They're still going. Inferring your own reasons for business practices just shows your confirmation bias.

Scaremongering? Why would anyone be interested in scaremongering here? It's not like CIG is traded on the stock market and we're all sitting on huge short positions and are hell-bent on talking the stock down in order to rake in a pile of cash. It's quite the opposite: if CIG goes down, we all lose – either we lose pledged money, or a great game to buy and play, or both.

So I don't see who profits from scaremongering here. Ok, Derek's got a book to write which he can't publish if the game gets released and becomes a hit. But since that final release won't happen anytime soon (and I'm sure we all can agree on that), he'll either turn out to be right, or he'll have another decade or two of time to think about an alternative source of income until the game actually gets released. So I'm sure he's not too stressed out either.

As far as your "crying wolf for years" part of the argument goes, we see all the time how difficult it for experts and amateurs alike to forecast the precise timing of chaotic events like stock market crashes, elections, the weather and so on, even as all fundamentals and facts seem to point towards a particular development. Just because Derek may not succeed in predicting the exact year, month and day of CIG's demise either, that doesn't necessarily imply that his underlying research and reasoning is wrong.

Regarding "inferring your own reasons for business practices", you're guilty of the same crime. One side of the argument goes that CIG is cash-strapped and taking out the loan against huge collateral is a sign of desperation. But your own inference, that this is "business as usual" and merely an efficient move to save a buck or two in interest, is equally unproven at this point in time.

[StanTheMan]

You've been mentioning feds and government buildings for quite a long time now, as long as you've spouted their having no money left, have we passed the two year anniversary by now? How much longer can they continue under this intense federal investigation and having no money do you think?

How can they manage to run a company burning through 'x' million dollars a month with no money left for two years?

Your assertions are non sensical. Proven via time.

You realize they have just leveraged all of their asserts on a relatively small loan? Hardly the actions of a company flush with cash. They have unlimited troughs of cash you'd like us to believe - so why take out loans secured against everything they have?

It's been established time and time again; through warbonds, loans, non-stop ship sales and failure to meet any large deadline that CIG are cash-starved and have no way to survive their next 10 years (10 years is absolute minimum they will need) of development. It's clear, it's been established and right now you're operating on a trash-tier shill model to even argue against any of it.

They used the company assets to leverage the best possible interest rate, in fact that was how and why it makes sense to do it. They got a fraction above Bank of England base rates so the lender makes money and CIG get a net save. It's not rocket science. The larger and safer the collateral, the lower the rate the bank charges, less risk of not getting their money back. It's the same reason why those with a poor credit rating get bad interest rates on lending. It's more risky.

Those things you mentioned prove no such thing. Any company needs cash flow for reasons other than being about to collapse. Getting contracts for renting premises, for example, is impossible without demonstrable income streams.

I remember when it was 'guaranteed' CIG wouldn't last 2 to 3 months and that was well over 18 months ago. It was also claimed there wouldn't be any more citizencons after last year but there's one coming up quite soon. It's recently been claimed this will be their last Gamescom. I'm sensing a pattern. One of made up scaremongering.

How many more times will Derek claim they're out of money before you realise he doesn't have a damn clue how much money they have? He's been doing it for years. They're still going. Inferring your own reasons for business practices just shows your confirmation bias.

What do you think about the analysis of OldSchoolCmdr ?

https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen/comments/68neg4/potential_backer_with_questions/dh8ww71/

[Motto]

A couple of years ago I worked for a company that in the end went bankrupt. I have seen all the tricks the big boss pulled to keep the company running by getting money. From somewhere, anywhere. Even grabbing 10K here to pay part of the debt overthere, just to make it another month. With every month running 500K through the company. Every month the tricks got more desperate and the results less. Now everything you see happing at CIG shows the same behaviour and desperation. The bankloan in the UK and the "cash only" jpg sales are good examples. There's nothing wise and prudent with those decisions, it's another desperate attempt to get cash.

But, CIG claims to have (had) 150 mil. The moment the money is (mostly) gone, CR can do 2 things:

- He can downsize (a lot). However, this would mean that development would slow down even further. So, he'd have to come up with some pretty good excuses to justify those 2 major things (no money and the slowdown). He'd prefer this route because it'll keep him on the right side of the promises made.
- He can let it all collapse and file for bankruptcy.

There are no other options. For what he now has got to show for, with all that money in all those years, nobody will invest another dime in CIG. My guess is that starting with major downsizing will be enough to make the income stream dry up pretty quick.

[dsmart]

That's not what I mean. You can be personally responsible overhere, if you have a so called one-man business (or 2-man partnership). You are responsible for the business then even with your house, personal belongings etc. etc.

But what I meant is that if your company (the corporate kind) goes bankrupt, the bankruptcy has to be handled by a court appointed lawyer and they have to investigate if the bankruptcy wasn't a fraud. So moving 1 mil. from the company to your private account and then filing for bankruptcy won't work. That 1 mil. will go back into the company. The other thing is that as a manager, you will be tested to see if you have conducted yourself in a proper business way. In the case of CIG, having all that backers money but spending it on a abnormal salary for yourself, buying stuff that has nothing to do with the business (say, CR bought a yacht in Monaco) and that sort of thing will make you accountable for the bankruptcy. In short, spending all the money and then claiming "sorry, I'm apparently a bad businessman with no talent for the trade" doesn't fly here.

Would this apply to CIG, one could argue that the top-salaries where way above normal and the abnormal part should therefore be paid back to CIG. If CR doesn't have that money anymore, he can sell all his assets and if that still isn't enough, the remaining debt will remain open to be paid later. So living a luxury live now on the backers money and then filing for bankruptcy because the funds dried up, no way he could pull that off.

Correct. And that's where things like "piercing the corporate veil" to get to the individuals personally, comes into play.

As I've said before, I don't envision ANY scenario whereby this tanks and they get away with it. It's too big, too notorious, and there is a LOT at stake.

Once investigators (private, State, Fed) get involved, all they have to do is follow the money. That's ALWAYS where things tend to fall apart quickly.

Look at the recent Fyre festival fiasco. That one didn't even take in half of what Star Citizen has, and barely a month after it collapsed, the Feds were involved, and the CEO arrested for fraud and a bunch of other things.

Literally putting people's lives at stake whilst trapping them on an island with no food, water or other basic amenities isn't comparable with failing to create a video game to the extent you hoped. Come on now.

I also find your assumption of inevitability as disingenuous. There isn't a case to answer unless development stops. This hasn't and isn't going to happen, as they will cut staff, should the need actually arise, and get something out of the door.

You've been mentioning feds and government buildings for quite a long time now, as long as you've spouted their having no money left, have we passed the two year anniversary by now? How much longer can they continue under this intense federal investigation and having no money do you think?

How can they manage to run a company burning through 'x' million dollars a month with no money left for two years?

Your assertions are non sensical. Proven via time.

Just going to quote this for preservation purposes only. I have no further comment.