View Single Post
  #114  
Old 11-11-2022, 09:46 PM
G1911 G1911 is online now
Gr.eg McCl.@y
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 6,669
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tabe View Post
They took $75,000,000 from Rhode Island and filed bankruptcy a year later. They moved to RI in April 2011 and were already bouncing checks in May of 2012. Those in charge of the funding were found to have committed fraud and the company, Schilling included, knew they couldn't deliver what they had promised for that $75m. That's theft. Plain and simple.

They received the investment loan in 2010, May 2012 is the collapse. That they ran out of money is not unusual. They didn't make it. Most businesses fail. Is there any evidence that they could not have created the 450 jobs if they had succeeded? That doesn't seem like overkill for a studio that succeeds. There's a very good argument the government should not engage in this kind of speculative investment, which I agree with.

It was reported in 2014 that some unnamed executives knew that the loan was not enough to cover all their expenses and finish the game (which was finished though). I am not clear whether there was some promise in the contract that the investment would be the only money needed by the company. That would be highly unusual. The SEC charged Rhode Island Commerce Corporation and Wells Fargo with fraud for not disclosing relevant information to bond holders. The Rhode Island police were also unable to find anything to charge Schilling or 38 with. Schilling and the company eventually had to pay $61 million in civil suits and costs, eating up most of Schilling's net worth, apparently.

Citation for theft charge, and the claim that Schilling knew the company would not succeed and could not deliver? They came close, their game got very good reviews and sold over a million copies in the first 90 days, it's not like they were selling a phantom product they never made.

As far as I can tell, the government made poor choices, the company got some big names in that world and put together a good product, but it failed as the majority do, and so the company went under and it's backers, Schilling primary among them, lost money.

I see zero relevance to the Hall of Fame. I can't find any evidence Schilling did anything wrong here. Maybe I'm missing a piece. While I disagree with many of his public comments, I don't see the problem with a business not succeeding.
Reply With Quote