aaronscientiae

Fig investing - what's going on with that side?

Recommended Posts

I signed up to hear more info about the investor side as a non-accredited investor and last email I got said 4-6 weeks from Jan 25. Anyone hear back and I didn't make the cut or still pending?

I hope it works out in either case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm under an NDA, but I can say that I know this is actively being worked on at the moment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My DNA allows me to suspect things will be worked out soon.

Smiles

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

News from Fig in a public blog post. Apparently the SEC filing didn't go through and they're now submitting an amendment (which I assume will again take several months?). It's interesting that they're now going to work with developer milestones, whereas I believe Justin Bailey has previously stated in interviews that they wanted to give developers the complete sum in advance in order to give them a lot of freedom.

For Psychonauts 2, the accredited investment has apparently already been collected. I wonder how large that sum is compared to the pledges from unaccredited investors. I can't help but feel that they've launched the service a bit too prematurely. That Consortium sequel, for instance, got the majority of its funding from investors, but how much of that will actually go through when Fig finally is able to complete the necessary paperwork (hopefully this year)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't see anything in that post that indicates the previous filing did not go through merely that they were amending the filing. Is there anyway for us to actually check the status of these filings?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a matter of concern for me, how many of those unaccredited investments will turn out happening. I see 3 issues

1) the site design during the funding of the game made it very unclear what the final step was in registering investment interest and was impossible to undo, so there could be a lot of pledges which were not really meant

2) the investor interest was explicitly non-binding and so perfectly susceptible to speculative registers of interest from people who will change their minds (I  myself might be in this category). It's also susceptible to trolling from people who understand this

3) a lot of time has passed and we're well out of the initial excitement bubble for the game which I think will increase the number of people in the category of 2)

At the time I commented that if I had to guess perhaps half the people who registered interest will actually invest, and now I wouldn't be shocked if it's significantly less than half. Difficult to estimate as this hasn't been tried before but that's my gut on this and it's often right.

I'm not worried about the development of the game itself. DF have a very firm track record of finding ways to get a game funded and out with only 2 high profile lapses (DF9's obviously premature 1.0 and the redundancies owing to an unexpected publisher cancellation of an unannounced title) and even those two things were actions taken to ensure the long term health of the company.

Rehardless of what happens, you'll start to hear some people predict doom for the game just like they did with Broken Age, and just like that game it'll be fine. It also sounds like they have built a first class team of project leads and I'm excited for what a 'big' game from DF looks like nowadays (I guess Broken Age was big but was different for other reasons)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Noticed a slight difference on Fig with the current campaign for Make Sail: in the funds breakdown, instead of investment it now says Fig Funds, with the explanation that its "the amount that Fig will directly fund the developer for the development of the game, from its working capital funded in part by the investment proceeds. The Fig Funds may increase during the campaign, up to a cap agreed to with the developer".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting new development! Polygon also noticed in their Wasteland 3 announcement that the SEC filings have been updated twice recently:

Quote

Fig announced another round of required filings in June. Since then, SEC records indicate they’ve had two more in quick succession, which could signal that the process is nearing its conclusion. But whether unaccredited investors, who’ve been waiting months to fund projects like Psychonauts 2 and Consortium: The Tower will still be willing to pay up is an open question.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/29/2016 at 11:23 AM, KestrelPi said:

Has this put any of your previously-mentioned concerns to rest, KestrelPi?  
I am a rewards-based-backer, not an investor, but I am still very keen that they get all that investor money.  So needless to say I'm very glad that the approval went through, and hopefully they can access those funds and pour them into Psychonauts 2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Psy2 campaign page now has an Open for Investment banner, and expect a news update to go up today.

EDIT: And it's up! W00t!

Edited by EMarley

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 01/10/2016 at 8:25 PM, Nasubionna said:

Has this put any of your previously-mentioned concerns to rest, KestrelPi?  
I am a rewards-based-backer, not an investor, but I am still very keen that they get all that investor money.  So needless to say I'm very glad that the approval went through, and hopefully they can access those funds and pour them into Psychonauts 2.

It doesn't really change anything with regards to my concerns - I am still worried that not all backers who expressed interest in investing a small amount were extremely serious, and I think enough time has passed for some of the initial interest to have eroded, so I do think that there is a concern that not all investor money will be collected, and a significant amount won't. But keeping the investment open so new investors can join seems like a smart move.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, KestrelPi said:

It doesn't really change anything with regards to my concerns - I am still worried that not all backers who expressed interest in investing a small amount were extremely serious, and I think enough time has passed for some of the initial interest to have eroded, so I do think that there is a concern that not all investor money will be collected, and a significant amount won't. But keeping the investment open so new investors can join seems like a smart move.

Double Fine will nevertheless receive all of the pledged money

. A commenter tried to work out how many copies sold it would take for a $500 investor to break even, and I think it's meant to be 178,571, not 17,850 like they claim. That sound right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apologies! I was reading the wrong article. 

 

So yes, that puts my mind at ease with regard to this project for SURE, but on the other hand... I do worry about about the long term prospects of fig. I hope they can keep it together long enough for the crowd investing thing to start showing results, and I wouldn't bet against Justin when it comes to raising money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, EMarley said:

 

. A commenter tried to work out how many copies sold it would take for a $500 investor to break even, and I think it's meant to be 178,571, not 17,850 like they claim. That sound right?

I think it's more than any of that, there was a calculation estimate and I remember the figure being pretty high. Not impossibly so, but high. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm. Unfortunately things have changed since I marked my initial interest (not least sodding Brexit, which has completely devalued the GBP), but I'm still interested... except I cannot find that calculator they originally created to help investors get an idea of what sort of return they might get. Does anyone know where it is now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, ThunderPeel said:

Hmm. Unfortunately things have changed since I marked my initial interest (not least sodding Brexit, which has completely devalued the GBP), but I'm still interested... except I cannot find that calculator they originally created to help investors get an idea of what sort of return they might get. Does anyone know where it is now?

Actually I think a bit of clarification on that front would be in order. There's some stuff going around at the moment about how the investment rules have changed since the initial interest, (which is to be expected as the business went through quite a restructuring as part of the SEC filing process), and that a read of the investment docs would now suggest that there's a much higher break even point now - some suggesting that 2 million $60 sales is now the break even point.

The problem is, the people who are saying that are making their own calculations based on what the documents say, which means they might be missing stuff, failing to take things into account, so it's all just rumour and confusion until someone steps in to clarify. 

I think that something like the old sliding scale estimate based on the way the business works today would help clarify some of this as the last thing Fig and Double Fine needs is another round of people picking up a thread and running with it.

Personally I don't care what the break even point is estimated to be, but it needs to be clear as it can be, that's all. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Justin from Fig posted in this Neogaf thread to explain as much as he was able about that. Doesn't necessarily clear things up, but you can sort of read between the lines to see why the figures seem different...

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1294935&page=5

 

Quote

I can tell you that the 30% is a minimum that's there to give investor confidence that we intend to pay at least that amount, and we're not limited to that, we can pay more. I can't be more detailed than that because it then needs to go through the process, filed with the SEC, etc. I can tell you that we have been actively evaluating how to communicate/illustrate this more concisely, and that solution could potentially include altering the minimum for other games, since we have to use the minimum in all our illustrations, and that seems to be causing a lot of confusion on this point.
 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Spaff. I'll be honest, I don't really follow it.

To everyone: Does being an investor give you any other perks? Once you've signed an NDA, are you able to see more than a regular backer gets to see/know about it?

Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 28/10/2016 at 7:11 AM, Spaff said:

Justin from Fig posted in this Neogaf thread to explain as much as he was able about that. Doesn't necessarily clear things up, but you can sort of read between the lines to see why the figures seem different...

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1294935&page=5

 

 

Good comment from Justin. Financial markets professional here - 90% of the rest of the comments in that thread are waffle written by people who don't understand investing, stock options or SEC regulations.

The problem FIG faces seems to me to be a similar problem that banks face when selling fancy investment options to mums and dads (nonvanilla warrants, bonds with index-linked barriers...) - by and large, your target market doesn't understand exactly what you're trying to sell to them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/1/2016 at 3:54 AM, person said:

Good comment from Justin. Financial markets professional here - 90% of the rest of the comments in that thread are waffle written by people who don't understand investing, stock options or SEC regulations.

The problem FIG faces seems to me to be a similar problem that banks face when selling fancy investment options to mums and dads (nonvanilla warrants, bonds with index-linked barriers...) - by and large, your target market doesn't understand exactly what you're trying to sell to them.

I'll take two for a dollar. Please and thank you.

 

Smiles

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 01/11/2016 at 10:54 AM, person said:

Good comment from Justin. Financial markets professional here - 90% of the rest of the comments in that thread are waffle written by people who don't understand investing, stock options or SEC regulations.

The problem FIG faces seems to me to be a similar problem that banks face when selling fancy investment options to mums and dads (nonvanilla warrants, bonds with index-linked barriers...) - by and large, your target market doesn't understand exactly what you're trying to sell to them.

I can easily believe that :-/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 04/11/2016 at 6:11 AM, Smiles said:

I'll take two for a dollar. Please and thank you.

 

Smiles

Oh, Zoidberg, at last you're becoming a crafty consumer!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like indiegogo is tryin' to steal Fig's equity crowdfunding thunder. How dare!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems like the higher the dividend means a sooner breakeven. The graph shows the breakeven for 70% being around 700,000 copies sold. If the dividend were to go up to 100% it shows the breakeven being around 300,000 copies sold. When the PSY2 circular first came out with a 30% dividend the breakeven was at around 2,000,000 copies sold.

This assumes all game copies are sold at $60 retail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now