Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Willie the Duck" data-source="post: 9426677" data-attributes="member: 6799660">Regarding Buck Rogers and self-dealing -- I generally agree that there's nothing capital-w "Wrong" with it in a closely-held corporation situation. And yes, she was certainly not the only one to do it*. However, it is significantly risky in that it incentivizes you to see these other things you own as more valuable to the company than it really might be*. Sure, there's nothing saying that Buck Rogers couldn't have been a role-playing win, somehow**, but after two or three products, perhaps it would have been a good idea to reassess and hold back on repeated investment****. No, it did not singlehandedly bankrupt the company, but it was an avoidable misstep (to which financially incentivized loyalty to that specific IP played a part). *although the counterpoint of multiple wrongs not making a right are also valid**all those worthless Blume relatives, as another example***I tend to think of it as something that really petered out by then, but that I suppose is looking at it in retrospect****mind you, this was not the only case of TSR not really knowing what their market wanted, so this is more of a company-wide problem. Here I will say that, while this is true, it seems a reasonable misstep given the times. I remember being a tech-involved adult in the early 90s -- no one really knew what to do with this wild west of online reality.  How do you make money? How do you protect your business (particularly an IP-based one)? It was a time of both excitement and fear, and a lot of people made a lot of mistakes before we settled into a (semi-) consistent internet culture.</blockquote>

Verification