There USA pod cast on Pinside with Roger Sharpe.
Roger has said :
UNIVERSAL knew about expo, NYC party-no problem with it
UNIVERSAL has not got a problem and licence is far from in trouble with not intention of pulling it.
I suggest all pre orderers have a listen!
Two episodes of relevance have just been uploaded.
#126 - What I thought after the NYC Modern Pinball Party and then speaking with Phil
http://www.podcastgarden.com/episod...cated-case-maude-or-just-my-opinion-man_33980
#127 - Roger Sharpe joins us to talk TBL and licensing.
http://www.podcastgarden.com/episode/episode-127-a-timely-evening-with-roger-sharpe_33981
http://www.coast2coastpinball.com
Dave Bishop
On 17 Dec 2014, at 08:36, Lee Buck cubeel@hotmail.com [ukpinball] <ukpinball@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
This is clear, but such a deposit needs only be about 500quid or something... a 'significant deposit' such as DP have asked for is more useful (and clear) to help cash-flow, and not just to get a number for the interested parties...
To: ukpinball@yahoogroups.com
From: ukpinball@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2014 08:22:17 +0000
Subject: RE: [ukpinball] DP refunds
One reason for taking deposits is a tool to help test what the demand for a game might be.
This is especially useful for a new company who don’t have a distributor network where they can show sample games to get orders from established customers.
ukpinball@yahoogroups.com[mailto:ukpinball@yahoogroups.com]
Sent: 17 December 2014 08:12
To: ukpinball@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [ukpinball] DP refunds
The thing is that the deposits were always going to be used to fund the building of the games. Those that paid deposits had to realise that. If not then why take significant deposits? There would be no point holding a load of cash in US that couldn't be used to build the games.
BoP kits should be funded out of BoP deposits however DP may have pooled BoP and TBL deposits to fund development of both. Potentially risky but if managed correctly sorts out cashflow.
David
From: Ewan Meadows ewan.meadows@gmail.com [ukpinball]
Sent: 17/12/2014 03:19
To: ukpinball
Subject: Re: [ukpinball] DP refunds
I think he was just explaining the situation, ie he wasn't comfortable using DP USA funds to pay for bop kits, which dp Holland should have used their own funds to buy.
The "theft" was dp Holland using funds from dp USA. From what I gather, the big problem with this approach is that dp Holland can drain dp USA dry and have no responsibility to provide anything to anyone who ordered through dp USA.
It's similar to what happen with woz/bumper. Pull all the money out of one company and put it into another which has no obligation.
This is why I find it interesting that there is now also two Heighway Pinball companies. Heighway Pinball and Heighway pinball sales
On 16 Dec 2014 23:01, "Martin Ayub yahoo@martinayub.com [ukpinball]" <ukpinball@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
It was stated from the start that they wouldn't be able to use the Kahlua branding and that it would change to something like 'Coffee Liqueur' in the production version.
I believe John Goodman can be used in the game, but only in the approved imagery from the style guide, such as the backglass composition.
Cheers,
Martin.
On 16 December 2014 at 11:51, Ewan Meadows ewan.meadows@gmail.com [ukpinball] <ukpinball@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
Well, Phil is being quite 'unprofessional' but my take on is that he
is only trying to make sure that his family don't get stung after he
passes on, hence why he's doing his dirty laundry in public rather
than using expensive lawyers.
Interesting to see that Roger Sharpe is now on board to handle
licensing, I guess that makes people feel easier but doesn't change
the fact that the prototype will have quite a bit in it (Kahlua, John
Goodman, various sound bites) that won't be in the production
versions
Roger has said :
UNIVERSAL knew about expo, NYC party-no problem with it
UNIVERSAL has not got a problem and licence is far from in trouble with not intention of pulling it.
I suggest all pre orderers have a listen!
Two episodes of relevance have just been uploaded.
#126 - What I thought after the NYC Modern Pinball Party and then speaking with Phil
http://www.podcastgarden.com/episod...cated-case-maude-or-just-my-opinion-man_33980
#127 - Roger Sharpe joins us to talk TBL and licensing.
http://www.podcastgarden.com/episode/episode-127-a-timely-evening-with-roger-sharpe_33981
http://www.coast2coastpinball.com
Dave Bishop
On 17 Dec 2014, at 08:36, Lee Buck cubeel@hotmail.com [ukpinball] <ukpinball@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
This is clear, but such a deposit needs only be about 500quid or something... a 'significant deposit' such as DP have asked for is more useful (and clear) to help cash-flow, and not just to get a number for the interested parties...
To: ukpinball@yahoogroups.com
From: ukpinball@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2014 08:22:17 +0000
Subject: RE: [ukpinball] DP refunds
One reason for taking deposits is a tool to help test what the demand for a game might be.
This is especially useful for a new company who don’t have a distributor network where they can show sample games to get orders from established customers.
ukpinball@yahoogroups.com[mailto:ukpinball@yahoogroups.com]
Sent: 17 December 2014 08:12
To: ukpinball@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [ukpinball] DP refunds
The thing is that the deposits were always going to be used to fund the building of the games. Those that paid deposits had to realise that. If not then why take significant deposits? There would be no point holding a load of cash in US that couldn't be used to build the games.
BoP kits should be funded out of BoP deposits however DP may have pooled BoP and TBL deposits to fund development of both. Potentially risky but if managed correctly sorts out cashflow.
David
From: Ewan Meadows ewan.meadows@gmail.com [ukpinball]
Sent: 17/12/2014 03:19
To: ukpinball
Subject: Re: [ukpinball] DP refunds
I think he was just explaining the situation, ie he wasn't comfortable using DP USA funds to pay for bop kits, which dp Holland should have used their own funds to buy.
The "theft" was dp Holland using funds from dp USA. From what I gather, the big problem with this approach is that dp Holland can drain dp USA dry and have no responsibility to provide anything to anyone who ordered through dp USA.
It's similar to what happen with woz/bumper. Pull all the money out of one company and put it into another which has no obligation.
This is why I find it interesting that there is now also two Heighway Pinball companies. Heighway Pinball and Heighway pinball sales
On 16 Dec 2014 23:01, "Martin Ayub yahoo@martinayub.com [ukpinball]" <ukpinball@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
It was stated from the start that they wouldn't be able to use the Kahlua branding and that it would change to something like 'Coffee Liqueur' in the production version.
I believe John Goodman can be used in the game, but only in the approved imagery from the style guide, such as the backglass composition.
Cheers,
Martin.
On 16 December 2014 at 11:51, Ewan Meadows ewan.meadows@gmail.com [ukpinball] <ukpinball@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
Well, Phil is being quite 'unprofessional' but my take on is that he
is only trying to make sure that his family don't get stung after he
passes on, hence why he's doing his dirty laundry in public rather
than using expensive lawyers.
Interesting to see that Roger Sharpe is now on board to handle
licensing, I guess that makes people feel easier but doesn't change
the fact that the prototype will have quite a bit in it (Kahlua, John
Goodman, various sound bites) that won't be in the production
versions
