 friends live on welfare and still scrape money together to buy lottery tickets every week (and seriously expe
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think that it's a requirement, but I do think that it is a major contributing factor. With so much at risk, I think that optimism is definitely a prerequisite for entrepeneurship, since the knowledge necessary to cover all the myriad risks and turn it into a "sure thing" is tough to come by, and possibly impossible to have before plunging in and learning the business first hand.
The vast majority of new businesses fail within the first 4 years. A lot of people go in with less knowledge of the busines
Re: (Score:2)
He is "ruined" in a fashion that many people would envy. He will have pensions from his sporting career that will make him wealthier than most Americans.
Re: (Score:1)
The "nice thing" in this case, was trying to get as rich as Bill Gates with the first thing he tried.
Re: (Score:1)
The world and the people in it are not black or white
Except for Republicans where 'you are either with us or against us'.
Re:So what's the purpose of this story again? (Score:5, Interesting)
Although the story doesn't mention it, unlike others, I'm guessing it's one more subtle jab to the fact that.
Had Schilling really wanted to make Copernicus a reality, there were plenty of other alternative steps he and the management at 38 Studios could have taken. One option would have been to scrap the development of an MMO, something that, as the article noted, resulted in a number of years without revenue, and instead focused on an excellent single-player game from the get-go, so as to build up brand recognition before branching out. (While they, in a half-hearted attempt, did this with Kingdoms of Amalur, it really wasn't a good enough effort, which is evident in just about every facet of the game.)
Re: (Score.
Furthermore:
Schilling apparently regrets the decision to bet the company on an MMO game, but otherwise seems to accept little blame for the demise.
So, it seems, like many executives, Schilling is acutely aware that success of a business depends on the whole team's effort. Blame is distributed and diluted. While the company operated, Schilling (and all the employees) drew salaries off the government teat under a program specifically designed to foster entrepreneurship by reducing individual risk. Schilling's successes, though, are down to his personal leadership, ability to inspire his team members, and his own personal skills.
It's a ver
Re:So what's the purpose of this story again? (Score:5, Insightful)
[Curt Schilling] is vehemently opposed to government financial bailouts and stimulus funds, yet didn't bother to eschew a tax-payer backed state loan
Which is why I don't blame Curt. Liberals love to jump on people like Schilling for being opposed subsidies and then taking advantage of the ones that exist. They are the first to say "we're all in this together" and suddenly forget that sentiment as soon as it applies to anyone who disagrees. Tough, we live in a society. That means people like Schilling, if they had their way would not get subsidies and neither would anyone else. They don't make the rules though and neither do I. I vote all the time to end this crap but It does not happen, in the mean time people like Schilling and I pay the same taxes to support it as everyone else; just be cause we don't think its a good idea does not mean we are any less entitled when society collectively decides to create an entitlement.
So what we really have here is a case where Government was gambling with public monies making loans. That is not the governments job, or it should not be. Capital risk belongs in the private market. There are two really important reasons for that. The first is that when things don't work out bankruptcy can destroy private debts, sovereign debts on the other hang around and drag on the economy forever. The second is that private financing means the people making the call and taking the risk have their own skin in the game. That tends to put the breaks on ideas where the risk is outsized compared to the potential reward; money gets allocated better.
People keep saying 38 Studios should have take a less aggressive path. They probably could not have raised 75M in the private markets and would have been forced to do just that. That would have put them on the path to grow by doing some number of less ambitious but likely more successful in ROI terms projects first. Who knows if government had not dumped a bunch of overly cheap money on them they might exist today.
Re:So what's the purpose of this story again? (Score:4, Insightful)
So you're saying it's the government's fault for making the money available, and the person who took the money has no responsibility?
Isn't that akin to blaming the person who left his car unlocked when it gets stolen?
Re:So what's the purpose of this story again? (Score:5, Insightful)
So you're saying it's the government's fault for making the money available, and the person who took the money has no responsibility?
-Yes and No-
He has responsibility for the business failing yes. He has no responsibility to public for the loss of the 75 million, that is what a loan grantee does after all. I also really do think that when government intercedes in the market place and makes money overly cheap, either via loan grantees or direct lending, it does lead otherwise savvy business people to make poorer decisions. It also enables unproven decision makers like these folks access to capital that nobody would give them otherwise. The outcome seems to be often calamity.
This is an example of someone who had they been forced by nature to swim in a smaller pond for a time, might have learned, grown, and installed a team around him of proven people. What that 75Million loan did is effective let him skip from the high school team and jump directly to majors. Things might have gone better with some time in AAA
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not sure how any of this vindicates Curt Schilling's ethics, which is the matter in question here. Nobody forced him to do anything, of course he was desperate to keep his company going, but a lot of people have been desperate in the last 4 years to keep themselves fed, let alone their software companies in the black. Being ethical requires more than simply doing the cheapest and most effective thing for you at this moment.
Re: (Score:2)
Utterly neglecting the FACT that Curt is a LOUSY businessman
Curt ACTIVELY SOUGHT OUT THE MONEY. It was NOT handed to him on a platter.
Can you BE MORE OBTUSE IF YOU TRY???
Re: (Score:2)
Oh please. Someone is vehemently opposed to subsidies, yet takes full advantage of them only because they're currently legal. That's like someone being vehemently opposed to abortion, but having one every six months because they're legal. Last time I looked, part of opposing something meant you didn't partake in it yourself because you are *opposed* to it.
Re: (Score:2)
Which is why I don't blame Curt. Liberals love to jump on people like Schilling for being opposed subsidies and then taking advantage of the ones that exist.
Nah, we love to jump on Cunt Schilling because he's a racist douchebag.
Re: (Score:2)
Which is why I don't blame Curt. Liberals love to jump on people like Schilling for being opposed subsidies and then taking advantage of the ones that exist.
Most people consider hypocrisy unacceptable.?
Yes, of course he did it as a selfless act of political theatre. Of course he did.
Re: (Score:2)
Didn't say it was selfless. Just said the end results were not really bad.
Something does not have to be selfless to be good. That's why the phrase "win-win" exists.
Re: (Score:2)
2) He created a business venture that hired people in technical, well-paying jobs. Yea, they went under, but about half of new companies fail within 5 years. Without risk-takers and visionaries, we'd all be sitting around the stone circle talking about how Thag caught that scary squirrel with his bare hands
Re: (Score:2)
- He put hundreds of people onto Rhode Island's unemployment rolls
- Certainly he hired those people but several of them are holding the bag on mortgages after 38 relocated them and then failed to sell their house
- "risk takers and visionaries" THIS IS VIDEO GAMES!!! WHAT SORT OF BENEFIT IS HE PROVIDING THAT EXCUSES THE LOSSES???
All you are showing is that you are unable to use the things that matter when you draw conclusions about what is going on. When those involved in the situation see misery and bankr
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And you're most likely not going to make an engineer a CEO(the vast vast majority of the time you're not). That's a business executive position, who are supposed to m
Congratulation (Score:3, Insightful)
After reading the article, I can only say one thing.
Congratulations