Paradox, Never Sell Out

[Admiral Howe]

I can sense some Stardock hatred, here. For whatever reason. But I can't believe people seriously believe it would be better to be bought by the company that is known for dumbing down game series, milking their studios and then discarding them when they are no-longer useful. That and cutting out loads of content to later sell as DLC (starting like a month later).

Being bought by EA is the death of their creativity. And that's better than a (hypothetical) merger with Stardock?

That's just insane.

Okay, where to begin, where to begin.

As for mergers, your ability to jump to conclusions on minuscule data remind me of a former D&D player I ran with. Got tons of parties killed by skipping steps B-G and going straight from A to H. But, to help you better understand consider that I'm against any aqcuisition of Paradox. EA buys Paradox = bad. Stardock buys Paradox = bad. Ubisoft buys Paradox = bad. Following basic math: ANYONE buys Paradox = bad.

What I was using was a figure of speech. As for the salacious assertion that "some Stardock hatred" is going on, that's unfair as that would imply my feeling being either unjust or unwarranted. My feelings towards Stardock are genuine and are what they are due to long years of hard work by Stardock. I feel no need to share them nor is anyone entitled to the story, so just accept them as real.

And should I let bygones be bygones and drop the grudge? Probably, I'd be a better person for it. But I'm not there yet.

 

[Dakka]

So let's make a Stellaris mod that does!

The Emperor Protects

 

[Hiiri]

Yes yes, very emotional OP and everything, but in the end money is the only thing that counts. People sell out because it pays the bills.

 

[sethfc]

I agree, I love paradox as an independent and wonderful company.
So I too hope they never get bought out, or sell out for expansion, it's better to have afew high quality and amazing (if slightly niche) games then a deluge of garbage like any company bought out by ubisoft or E.A produces.
But I think they knew this already, so we don't have to worry.

Edit: As to Hiiri's post, I bought 4 copies for friends of Stellaris in addition to my own Nova edition. I don't think they'll have trouble paying the bills as so long as their community continues to buy games and dlc they have an essentially garenteed income.

 

[ikki]

why not go the brewdog way?
they did a pretty interesting punk ipo.

basically buy into the company and gain benefits like 20% off on games... and with big enough (iirc 5k invested) you get samples.. etc.
I mean the company model is to create and peddle infinitely copyworthy binary stuff. So handouts shouldnt be a problem... special investor evenings to try new games etc

Furthermore by discriminating against the institutional buyers (no one can buy over 15000 shares a 10sek), you avert the buyout with the bulk of shares being with dedicated fans. And with being small and a wide base, a buyout isnt just slow as hell but expensive beyond belief.
A poison pill if you like, without gimping the company.

And gaining a fansbase that will market for their own benefit..

 

[Cynical Dreamer]

Paradox will never give us up, will never turn around and desert us.

 

[Held der Arbeit]

Yes yes, very emotional OP and everything, but in the end money is the only thing that counts. People sell out because it pays the bills.

Considering that most companies who are bought eventually go under, I would disagree

It lines the pockets of the big company taking over, chiefly. And maybe that of the CEOs selling the smaller one. The financial situation of the company itself doesnt improve and where it does, that is eaten up by the increased cost of having to develop much larger games for a much larger audience.

 

[Cossack8559]

I remember the days as a kid when seeing EA on a game was a good thing, it meant a good quality game. When i see that logo today my wallet runs and hides under the bed. The way they handled my beloved Command and Conquer series also makes me hope that Paradox never goes the way that so many other studios have these days.

 

[ikki]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_Interactive looks a lot like some kind of punk ipo is being implemented rather than going straight for the institutional investors that will screw you over twice before breakfast. I think i could toss a rough 2000-3000e. If there are decent dividends

 

[ikki]

brewdog had
1. own a part of brewdog. The last investors gained 526% in less than 3 years.
2. epic brewdog bar discounts -5% -10% (max at 475£)
3. Online discounts 10, 15, 20% (max at 285£)
4. beer bucks, every (£10?) of bought shares gives £10 of beerbucks usable at our brewdog bars
5. Birthday beer (free dlc? )
6. invitation to AGM
7. brewing days, come brew and bbq, drink.. vote on new tastes
8. you get to buy our new stuff first (ot entirely applicable)
9. equity for punks card... see birthday beer.. (usable with modifications )
10. participate in governing the company (special site)
11. Invest over £950 for special beerclub membership for a year wherein you get 3 beers from every special batch
12. £1950 you get another year of 11., and 6 extra beers.

 

[Sonereal]

Correction: only if Paradox retains 50+1% of their stock is that not an issue - and even then they can be sued if they put anything ahead of moar profits.

Once you go onto the stock market, your company is not your own.

That said, if Paradox does sell out, their best employees will just leave and form another indie studio and take the Paradox reputation with them. It's what happened to Black Isle and it's happening to Bioware now.

1. Can a company be sued for putting "anything ahead of more profits"? Yes. Will the shareholders win? Very certainly not. There have been a slew of precedent-setting court cases, at least here in the United States, where shareholders tried to sue only to end up losing because the company is given leeway and the benefit of the doubt.

2. Treasury stock doesn't have voting rights. Paradox could own 99.99% of their own stock for some bizarre reason and still would have zero voting rights unless that stock belonged to individuals within Paradox as opposed to Paradox itself. Then again, maybe it works differently across the pond.

No, Paradox, please don't sell too much of your company at first! You know what it leads to; first it's just people making money and getting rich and fans getting rich from investments too, but then soon you're just going to be doing whatever your shareholders want and cutting corners and making mobile games and games for the lowest common denominator!

That isn't how any of this works.

If this actually happened in the real world with the frequency you seem to think it does, every company should have already have been reduced to the "lowest common denominator". But you can't buy tacos at McDonalds, and that five-star restaurant owned by a chain downtown doesn't have a drive-thru.

Yeah happens all the damn time. Keep at least 60% if not 51% of the stock for yourself pls

http://www.investopedia.com/terms/t/treasurystock.asp

A treasury stock (treasury shares) is the portion of shares that a company keeps in their own treasury. Treasury stock may have come from a repurchase or buyback from shareholders; or it may have never been issued to the public in the first place. These shares don't paydividends, have no voting rights, and should not be included in shares outstanding calculations.

To everybody else getting twisted over up about the extremely hilarious idea that EA would buy Paradox, why would they in a million years buy Paradox? For Stellaris? EA couldn't be ass'd to milk Alpha Centauri even after Beyond Earth came out. I doubt they're going to buy Paradox, which is in a country they have no studio in by the way as far as I'm aware, to make that $$$nichegamer$$$ cash.

If there are decent dividends

Growing companies really don't pay dividends, especially if said company would be Paradox. I doubt Paradox just has a problem of too much cash and not enough investment ideas.

 

[ikki]

Growing companies really don't pay dividends, especially if said company would be Paradox. I doubt Paradox just has a problem of too much cash and not enough investment ideas.

In the us with p/e 600 evaluated FANG companies maybe. Nordic shares work a bit different. We understand a dividend stream is a sign of a healthy company regardless of growth ideas.

 

[ashbery76]

The real world does not agree.Fred would sell it.Paradox is too small for the big boys to take notice at the moment.

 

[Sonereal]

In the us with p/e 600 evaluated FANG companies maybe. Nordic shares work a bit different. We understand a dividend stream is a sign of a healthy company regardless of growth ideas.

A dividend stream is not a sign of a healthy company not matter how you slice it. You could argue that it is cultural, but you can't argue that point on the basis of real health.

Dividends and stock buybacks are for companies with more cash than investment opportunities.

I'm not sure how it would be healthy to pay out a dividend to shareholders over invest in a project with a greater return on investment than the cost of equity and debt.

 

[ikki]

interest on debt is superlow all over eurozone, including sweden. Returns are always hypothetical.

And for a company like Paradox with its few hundred workers they can concentrate on x amount of titles. Increase that output and overall base costs (bigger (new?) offices,more workers, more divisions, new overhead management to combine the new with the old... ) go up while nabbing at seemingly less profitable opportunities than the primary 2-3 titles.
And they just did grow quite a lot from being able to do just one title at a time. You should know adjustments take time before the organizational strength exists for a next big leap.

Anyways, frankly, the purpose of growth is more profit. Growth for growth is folly. And with accounting being what it is, dividends are the sole true sign the company is actually making a profit rather than just circlejerking up imaginary profits. like a certain famous company a while ago.

 

[Hertzila]

I doubt they're going to buy Paradox, which is in a country they have no studio in by the way as far as I'm aware, to make that $$$nichegamer$$$ cash.

A correction that has nothing to do with the point discussed: They do have EA DICE in Sweden.

 

[Lexx2503]

As much as I love Warhammer I am a little frightened that the game CA is making is not going to do the franchise justice.

I worry the same thing about the copyright holding company GW. They hand their license out to anyone in recent years for a quick buck.

 

[GothicEmperor]

As much as I love Warhammer I am a little frightened that the game CA is making is not going to do the franchise justice.

Neither is GW, to be fair. I mean, Age of Sigmar?!?

 

[ikki]

Neither is GW, to be fair. I mean, Age of Sigmar?!?

stagnating or shrinking business. Generational shift. The original creators made the company as 20-30yo in 1975... which was 40 years ago.
It invariably tends to shift from a labor of love into a business taken for granted.
Sometimes milked to death by a young generation that takes ferraris for granted.

and then that ever popular sign of dying companies: cease and desist orders vs fans.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Games_Workshop

Sigmar and total war are both genuine attempts at revitalization of a dusty brand and opening up new opportunities aside from plastic models from the IP.
So who knows. Maybe it will survive in a new form, the old one is dying for sure.

 

[prismaticmarcus]

well, i don't actually know what IPO means but i sure hope it isn't bad lol

Initial Public Offering. they're going to sell shares and become a Public Company