Intellivision Amico’s trademark changed to ‘abandoned’

[MrBeefy]

28 minutes ago, jerseystyle said:

Y’all see in those documents how TT listed himself as a hall of famer with the Yankees?  You know, between that, his YouTube army, and the Ferrari parking signs, I’m starting to suspect that maybe the (former) CEO wasn’t really a good choice to run this project…

I think with the exit strategy it is likely they never intended to make the console.

 

Let me be more clear. They never intended to be the ones to make the console. Gameplan was to come up with this idea. Pump it up. Tell a bigger company. "Hey look at all this interest in this project! We haven't even spent one penny in marketing towards our demographic. Think what (insert company name) could do with your added money to push it.

 

AA was important to IE because it made them seem legitimate, and why he was so eager to squash anyone and anything that didn't say, "OMG ITS THE BEST THING EVER NOW MY FAMILY WILL WANT TO PLAY GAMES WITH ME. GUSH GUSH GUSH."

 

It would also explain why their sole focus wasn't on customers. All those videos they made were to try and entice a buyer. I wouldn't be surprised to find out that the J Allard hire was a way to hopefully have an "in" at Microsoft, and to ask them if they want to buy out.

 

There were a lot of earlier employees who have since disappeared who had connections to many of those companies listed as exit strategies.

 

I think they don't want to make the console because they know it's a bad idea. They want to sell the lemon to someone else and let them deal with the shifty fallout of making a DOA product. They really could have produced by now if they wanted to. So why not? Because they know they will lose more money at this point than just dying a slow death hoping for a stupid buyer to make this bad idea disappear off their plate.

 

Nick R even alluded to this in the interview with TonyTGD. The plan was hype, astroturf, fluff it up enough to show they have something, and then sell it and let the buyer figure out the games and manufacturing.

 

?

[Rev]

49 minutes ago, 5-11under said:

Moms love NFTs.

 

And Grandparents and 3-7 year olds, you know….the target consumers.  

[rayik]

3 hours ago, mr_me said:

NFT could be useful if it provides a way for users to trade/sell their games independent of the publisher.  It still remains to be seen how Amico implements it and how useful it is.

 

Who cares?

 

Games were supposed to be a maximum of $10.  Ability for end users to trade / sell games is useless for IE and the game owners.  Does anyone really think there is going to be a used market or demand to trade between the few people who end up owning an Amico.

 

It was a sales pitch point without any thought about how to implement it, how it would work and how if people actually used it, would cannibalize sales of games they are already hardly making any money from.

[Rev]

46 minutes ago, MrBeefy said:

I think with the exit strategy it is likely they never intended to make the console.

 

Let me be more clear. They never intended to be the ones to make the console. Gameplan was to come up with this idea. Pump it up. Tell a bigger company. "Hey look at all this interest in this project! We haven't even spent one penny in marketing towards our demographic. Think what (insert company name) could do with your added money to push it.

 

AA was important to IE because it made them seem legitimate, and why he was so eager to squash anyone and anything that didn't say, "OMG ITS THE BEST THING EVER NOW MY FAMILY WILL WANT TO PLAY GAMES WITH ME. GUSH GUSH GUSH."

 

It would also explain why their sole focus wasn't on customers. All those videos they made were to try and entice a buyer. I wouldn't be surprised to find out that the J Allard hire was a way to hopefully have an "in" at Microsoft, and to ask them if they want to buy out.

 

There were a lot of earlier employees who have since disappeared who had connections to many of those companies listed as exit strategies.

 

I think they don't want to make the console because they know it's a bad idea. They want to sell the lemon to someone else and let them deal with the shifty fallout of making a DOA product. They really could have produced by now if they wanted to. So why not? Because they know they will lose more money at this point than just dying a slow death hoping for a stupid buyer to make this bad idea disappear off their plate.

 

Nick R even alluded to this in the interview with TonyTGD. The plan was hype, astroturf, fluff it up enough to show they have something, and then sell it and let the buyer figure out the games and manufacturing.

 

?

Yep, build up and sell off. It was an easy 3 step plan that just never really took off. If it wasnt for them darn two drunken podcasters that messed up step 2. 
 

1. Invent Amico console

2. ????

3. Rake in hundreds of millions in profits!

[Rev]

2 minutes ago, rayik said:

Who cares?

 

Games were supposed to be a maximum of $10.  Ability for end users to trade / sell games is useless for IE and the game owners.  Does anyone really think there is going to be a used market or demand to trade between the few people who end up owning an Amico.

 

It was a sales pitch point without any thought about how to implement it, how it would work and how if people actually used it, would cannibalize sales of games they are already hardly making any money from.

I know i heard that it said by Amico management that EVERY game was an NFT, did i remember that right?  
 

Of course if it was stated in a forum or youtube it may as well never been uttered.

[Cebus Capucinis]

I just don't get the NFT stuff. If I buy an Amico game does that mean my game comes with a JPG of a monkey?

[Razzie.P]

10 minutes ago, Cebus Capucinis said:

I just don't get the NFT stuff. If I buy an Amico game does that mean my game comes with a JPG of a monkey?

Yep.  That's really why everything's taking so long.  When 110% of the world's population gonna buy 1, there's just not enough unique monkey pics to go around.

[mr_me]

1 hour ago, 5-11under said:

Moms love NFTs.

 

If it's done right it could be transparent, end users don't even have to know NFT technology is being used, they would just get the benefits. 

 

I don't have high expectations with their implementation but we'll see what happens.

 

47 minutes ago, rayik said:

Who cares?

 

Games were supposed to be a maximum of $10.  Ability for end users to trade / sell games is useless for IE and the game owners.  Does anyone really think there is going to be a used market or demand to trade between the few people who end up owning an Amico.

 

...

Some people just want control of their games beyond the company that produced them.  Someone asked for a use case and I gave one.  I'm not saying their implementation is a good idea or not.

 

50 minutes ago, Rev said:

Yep, build up and sell off. It was an easy 3 step plan that just never really took off. If it wasnt for them darn two drunken podcasters that messed up step 2. 
 

1. Invent Amico console

2. ????

3. Rake in hundreds of millions in profits!

If they want to make serious profits they'll have to see it through and sell millions.  People aren't going to pay much for a company that has yet to sell one unit. 

 

Investors like to see an exit strategy, it's how they get a return on their investment. It doesn't mean the company isn't serious about releasing a product.

 

50 minutes ago, Rev said:

I know i heard that it said by Amico management that EVERY game was an NFT, did i remember that right?  
 

Of course if it was stated in a forum or youtube it may as well never been uttered.

Yes you are remembering right, and it makes more sense for the games bought electronically in the Amico store.

[MrBeefy]

1 hour ago, Rev said:

And Grandparents and 3-7 year olds, you know….the target consumers.  

My toddler is always talking NFTs.

58 minutes ago, Cebus Capucinis said:

I just don't get the NFT stuff. If I buy an Amico game does that mean my game comes with a JPG of a monkey?

The FEs are suppose to have a monkey's signature on them. Is that the same?

40 minutes ago, mr_me said:

If they want to make serious profits they'll have to see it through and sell millions.  People aren't going to pay much for a company that has yet to sell one unit. 

 

Investors like to see an exit strategy, it's how they get a return on their investment. It doesn't mean the company isn't serious about releasing a product.

You missed the part where I said they wanted the buyer to make the console. Think of all the dumb TT talking points early on. We sold out in hours, happened with "no marketing", look at all the 'pre-sold' numbers.

 

The reason it isn't profitable now is because they were never able to sucker a buyer, and they never actually took the steps to finalize the process. They never made plans on what to do if no one bought them out.

 

IE - "Hey buyer, look at all our offices, we have international offices, we have so many games currently in the works, we have all these preorders and purchase orders. Unfortunately we are too small and we want this to be a big release and we know you can take this to the next step! We have $25 million in pre-sales and we haven't even marketed to the 3 billion casuals we are targeting. Look a how much hype there is at this classic gaming forum, and all these positive YouTubers talking about us! Think about the numbers you could rake in by just using a fraction of you PR money?"

 

^^This goes with in line with the whole idea they were cosplaying being a big company, when in reality they should have been working in a garage until ready for launch, AND THEN add offices and employees. It was a cosplay, smoke and mirrors, to convince a buyer that IE was "turn-key ready" to take off after big company (insert company here) bought them out. They wanted the console to be made, but they didn't want to be the ones to do it.

 

The reason "it doesn't make sense now" is because they screwed up and couldn't find a buyer. It would also explain why they never took actual steps in getting it completed. Covid was probably a godsend for them because it gave them a reasonable excuse for the time. However, that time is gone and they've shown they had zero plans to actually work towards getting it made.

 

They had 2020, 2021, and over half of 2022 to make a plan and get it done. Yet they can't give a plan. They know if they make the product they are going to put themselves more in debt and know that there is no benefit to actually launch. It launching would only show it isn't a viable product and then there would be even less reason for someone to buy it.

 

No, it is better for them to kick the can down the road. Those who are in are going to hold onto their order no matter what they tell them. 

 

"Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to release a console and remove all doubt." <- Intellivision Entertainment gameplan

 

[Flojomojo]

@MrBeefy so how many should I buy? 

[roots.genoa]

2 hours ago, Cebus Capucinis said:

I just don't get the NFT stuff. If I buy an Amico game does that mean my game comes with a JPG of a monkey?

Please don't make fun of Tommy's race. ? A digital signed picture of him is a wonderful gift and adds great value to every Amico game. The only thing that could top that would be the complete collection of his music in 128kbps mp3. Wouldn't that be something?™️

[MrBeefy]

37 minutes ago, Flojomojo said:

@MrBeefy so how many should I buy? 

If it comes with found president, CCO, who is former CEO, I would ask for them to pay me to take it off their hands.

[1980gamer]

5 hours ago, mr_me said:

I did watch it, most of it.  He talked about how he has been able to support his familiy, single income with six kids, as an independent developer.  He did his Amico games in 2019 and 2020, and they were small projects compared to others.  The project he mentioned where funding was pulled was very recent to the recording of the video, June/July 2022.  The Amico, coming from a new company, is a risk for developers too.  It's why the company offers payment in advance.  In this case, his game being a packin, it might not even have any royalties.  I know developers want to see people enjoying their work, so that must be frustrating.  But saying he didn't get money or developers are getting screwed isn't correct.

Even if you get paid by IE.  The fact that no one is seeing his game studio logo may hurt future earnings.  Of course if the game isn't very good... 

 

I would agree with you, they seemed to pay upfront for external development.

[1980gamer]

3 hours ago, rayik said:

Who cares?

 

Games were supposed to be a maximum of $10.  Ability for end users to trade / sell games is useless for IE and the game owners.  Does anyone really think there is going to be a used market or demand to trade between the few people who end up owning an Amico.

 

It was a sales pitch point without any thought about how to implement it, how it would work and how if people actually used it, would cannibalize sales of games they are already hardly making any money from.

I do think the ability to buy/sell/trade is something consumers want.  I think this was a technology play.  Once it is out in the wild, the big N or MS or both may want to copy/buy/license.

 

WHY would NFT get in the way of game use?  This should be completely seamless to the user.  Just added benefit of a digital ownership history.

 

This already happens all over the place.  Every buy something, not register it and get a recall notice?

[mr_me]

1 hour ago, MrBeefy said:

...

You missed the part where I said they wanted the buyer to make the console. Think of all the dumb TT talking points early on. We sold out in hours, happened with "no marketing", look at all the 'pre-sold' numbers.

 

The reason it isn't profitable now is because they were never able to sucker a buyer, and they never actually took the steps to finalize the process. They never made plans on what to do if no one bought them out.

...

Retailer purchase orders do mean something to investors, preorders mean something too, but sales revenue means more.  Atariage means very little to investors, and it was Allard that contacted the former CEO, his joining looked spontaneous.  They aren't profitable, they can't be without revenue.  They have to ship Amicos to have revenue and eventually be profitable.

 

Looks like they had a manufacturer, even gave them at least $1.35 million dollars.  They wouldn't do that if they didn't want to make Amicos.

Edited August 6, 2022 by mr_me

[gaterooze_ink]

41 minutes ago, 1980gamer said:

WHY would NFT get in the way of game use?  This should be completely seamless to the user.  Just added benefit of a digital ownership history.

 

Wouldn't you need to create a blockchain wallet first?

[Cebus Capucinis]

They never said so.™️ This has already been discussed.™️

[Matt_B]

6 hours ago, mr_me said:

There's no reason software distribution or backups can't be independent of the publisher.  It would't run without a valid license which can also be traded independent of the publisher.  I'm not saying they are doing that but it's certainly possible.

In which case, they're looking at something entirely different to NFTs  because they're not independently tradable licenses that you can use to unlock software downloaded from peer to peer networks.

 

Rather, they're just records in a publicly accessible database that can only be transacted upon by the holder of a private key. As was pointed out back when NFTs of tweets were changing hands for stupid money, you don't own the tweet, just the NFT; rather, the ownership of tweets is centralized with, you've guessed it, Twitter.

Also, the idea that Intellivision have somehow become god tier experts on software security seems particularly laughable given their incompetence at everything else. Most likely, the console wouldn't be hacked within a few weeks of becoming available to the public rendering all this pointless.

[Matt_B]

1 hour ago, gaterooze_ink said:

Wouldn't you need to create a blockchain wallet first?

Yep. "Not your keys, not your crypto" so the saying goes.

 

It could only be seamless if Intellivision themselves were to manage all the keys, in which case the NFTs are not independently tradable and it's all rather pointless.

 

Ah, if only there was the technology to create a physical product that could hold both the game and the license to play it, while being sufficiently difficult to clone that hardly anyone would bother...

[mr_me]

59 minutes ago, Matt_B said:

In which case, they're looking at something entirely different to NFTs  because they're not independently tradable licenses that you can use to unlock software downloaded from peer to peer networks.

 

Rather, they're just records in a publicly accessible database that can only be transacted upon by the holder of a private key. As was pointed out back when NFTs of tweets were changing hands for stupid money, you don't own the tweet, just the NFT; rather, the ownership of tweets is centralized with, you've guessed it, Twitter.

Also, the idea that Intellivision have somehow become god tier experts on software security seems particularly laughable given their incompetence at everything else. Most likely, the console wouldn't be hacked within a few weeks of becoming available to the public rendering all this pointless.

Blockchain transactions identify the owner, that's the thing.  Using NFT for video games in this way is not a concept that IE came up with.  Check out Robot Cache.

[Matt_B]

16 minutes ago, mr_me said:

Blockchain transactions identify the owner, that's the thing.  Using NFT for video games in this way is not a concept that IE came up with.  Check out Robot Cache.

RobotCache has exactly the same problems I identified above. Their site holds both the keys and the games and, although you can trade the NFTs around to your heart's content, you've still got to go through them to trade and download.

 

That they're doing it via NFTs is just window dressing for what's essentially a centralized service. When it withers away and dies, like most Steam competitors invariably do, you'll just end up with nothing.

[MrBeefy]

3 hours ago, mr_me said:

Retailer purchase orders do mean something to investors, preorders mean something too, but sales revenue means more.  Atariage means very little to investors, and it was Allard that contacted the former CEO, his joining looked spontaneous.  They aren't profitable, they can't be without revenue.  They have to ship Amicos to have revenue and eventually be profitable.

 

Looks like they had a manufacturer, even gave them at least $1.35 million dollars.  They wouldn't do that if they didn't want to make Amicos.

You're talking investors, I'm talking buyers.

 

The idea was to sell out and they use to throw out how much in millions they have presold.

 

TT - "Hey Jay I need a favor. Can you talk to Microsoft about buying us out?"

 

J - "Sure."

 

(Later)

 

J - "I talked to them and they said it wasn't a good fit for Microsoft to buy Intellivision."

 

TT - "Really? Did you tell them I would be willing to stay on as the spokesman?"

 

J - "I did at which point they said, oh HELL no. No sale period."

 

TT - "Hey guys J said this isn't going to be a good fit for him, but he said we could call if we need help. Bye J, and don't let the door hit you too hard on the way out."

(mutters to self),"Jealous gatekeeping."

Edited August 7, 2022 by MrBeefy

[Pink]

Not that I read or look at a lot of investor pitches myself, but it seems kind of silly and ridiculous to have an entire page (the 2ng page, no less) of an investor pitch puffing up the CEO and some of their accomplishments & accolades, especially with most of them being completely irrelevant & unrelated to the company & product that they're pitching. I'm (almost) surprised that he didn't also add in the world's largest collection of Spider-Man crap and balsamic vinegar as well!

 

[1980gamer]

20 minutes ago, Pink said:

Not that I read or look at a lot of investor pitches myself, but it seems kind of silly and ridiculous to have an entire page (the 2ng page, no less) of an investor pitch puffing up the CEO and some of their accomplishments & accolades, especially with most of them being completely irrelevant & unrelated to the company & product that they're pitching. I'm (almost) surprised that he didn't also add in the world's largest collection of Spider-Man crap and balsamic vinegar as well!

 

So, which bullet point is not related to the project?

30+ years in the industry?

A VIDEO GAME show?

MAYBE...  Video Games Live,  But still somewhat related.

Worked on most Video Games?

Lifetime Achievement Award?  I am thinking for working the industry?

 

Okay, you win.  None of this is related to the project.

[jerseystyle]

40 minutes ago, Pink said:

Not that I read or look at a lot of investor pitches myself, but it seems kind of silly and ridiculous to have an entire page (the 2ng page, no less) of an investor pitch puffing up the CEO and some of their accomplishments & accolades, especially with most of them being completely irrelevant & unrelated to the company & product that they're pitching. I'm (almost) surprised that he didn't also add in the world's largest collection of Spider-Man crap and balsamic vinegar as well!

 

It’s more relevant than his Hall of Fame baseball career with the Yankees. Seriously I’ve been laughing at that all day.