The Times digs into 38 Studios:
"It seemed like the digital economy, or biotech, or whatever. But then it turned out that it wasn't the new digital economy. It was some 13-year-old's medieval fantasy."
Many seems to bash Schilling, but I feel sympathetic. I judge more by the game he created, which was a pretty decent game, than the other factors people judge him by. A basic guideline (in the artistic lens not business lens) of gaming is to just make a good game - and he did.
On top of that, while he was/is bashed on the level of a typical CEO goon. Unlike them, he lost his shirt (and sock). Typical douche CEOs who fails tend to pass on the all damage to everyone else. What I understand, he put his own personal fortune and was at stake as everyone else.**
It is interesting reading the article. It shows a cultural/generation gap. It looks so awkward to me to have to explain the concept of a console game. To a person like me, it looks like common knowledge. On top that, the article kept referring as a thing only for children ("aren't parents likely to stop buying video games" - though a substantial market remains there), which also shows the generation gap that continues there.
**To note: I'm also aware of the stories like hiding the real status of the company and suddenly dropping all the employees. Obviously a dick move. The reason why I still find it sympathetic despite of that action is because I can still sympathize why he did that. A competent business man would be able to disengage from his business and correctly assess instead of trying to hold everything together which part of the holding requires to not tell the employees or lose the very loans keeping the company alive until it just dried up. He wasn't a business man. He had the vision of a indie developer, but access of a major developer but with none of the knowledge or experience in handling that type of resources. An interesting thought, he Schilling never had baseball money and went to try to make a video game probably indie style, he might made an decent game without all the excess that brought him down.
On top of that, while he was/is bashed on the level of a typical CEO goon. Unlike them, he lost his shirt (and sock). Typical douche CEOs who fails tend to pass on the all damage to everyone else.
When you say "pass on the damage," you mean like the entire state of Rhode Island is now on the hook for $75 million in bonds as part of the fallout from the 38 Special, right?
Schilling deserves every bit of the bashing he's receiving, and then some, regardless of whether or not he 'lost his shirt.' He screwed us.
We'll all come and lose our asses at Twin River's new table games because we can't seem to get a casino built without a bunch of (expletive) nonsense in Massachusetts.
At least the douche CEOs have some business cred and some modicum of success behind them. Schilling is an egomaniac who traded on his (completely unrelated to game development) celebrity to write checks he couldn't cash. He CHOSE to put his own money behind his venture into a business he clearly didn't understand; unfortunately the people of Rhode Island have to clean up the mess he can't cover.
No one forced Rhode Island to give Schilling money. If Rhode Island gave you 10 million dollars to move there for a year, hire 5 people to try and build a better mousetrap, you would do it (well, I know I would). What passes for leadership in this country is a joke. This is just another example of the connected and Rich (Schilling was part of the 1%) getting taxpayer money.
The people should be angry at the government, not Schilling.
The politicians give out money because we want them to. Unemployment rises and we scream at government "what are you doing to create jobs" even though it's business that creates jobs, not government.
While the idea of seed money from government isn't a bad idea, giving all that seed money to one company was the start of the problem.
I'm with the anon on this - the politicians screwed up big time.
All Schilling did was ask for money. People and companies do it all the time. It's up to the judgement of lenders and/or politicians to make the right decisions.
Whether this was the right decision (without the benefit of hindsight) or not is up for debate. I would think that an investment in the gaming business would be pretty risky, especially in a brand new company making it's first game. The fact that they offered the company so much ($75 mil line of credit) seems way out of line.
I don't care how much you might hate Schilling, the politicians screwed up.
Carcieri had nothing to lose, and no consituents to appease.
I'm not done reading it yet, but I'm suprised at the kid gloves the Times has for Carcieri so far. Poor guy! “He had a bad economy and time running out on his term, he had to do something!”
No. No one in their right mind gives away 75% of their economic development fund to one guy. This was cronyism at it’s worst, and that the times is trying to make excuses is indefensible.
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Copyright by Adam Gaffin and by content posters.Advertise | About Universal Hub | Contact | Privacy