Annual report MA

They did go from 57 employees to 74. That's a big increase in expenses.

As there is a few discussions on employees etc. then I thought I'd take some numbers from the report...

Payouts to suppliers and employees: 2009: -74 093 535 SEK 2008: -67 862 671 SEK
This is for the whole concern(Mindark PE AB) which includes FPC etc.

So yea the numbers are up!
 
In the report at the end it states:


Not sure what that means. Does it mean in last years AGM they were given approval to issue more shares but to date they have not exercised that right? If so that's a good sign right ?

If they issued more shares? what does that mean in terms of value?

Yes, thats correcly. Well, it could be both good and bad. Maybe no one would buy the shares so they did not issue any, or they felt they didn't need to do it. Hard to tell.
 
Yes, thats correcly. Well, it could be both good and bad. Maybe no one would buy the shares so they did not issue any, or they felt they didn't need to do it. Hard to tell.

Maybe no one wanted to sell at current state?
I looked for shares available publicly the other day but there was nothing to find...
 
Yes, thats correcly. Well, it could be both good and bad. Maybe no one would buy the shares so they did not issue any, or they felt they didn't need to do it. Hard to tell.

No what I wanted to know was If a company issues shares and they are bought does this mean the share value goes down?

Issuing shares would generate more cash right? so by not doing this it shows they can manage without extra cash.

Also by issuing shares do they loose part of the "owenership" due to number of shares issued?

I'm not really familiar with the technical names for share dealing/accounting so I hope you understand what I mean.
 
No what I wanted to know was If a company issues shares and they are bought does this mean the share value goes down?

Issuing shares would generate more cash right? so by not doing this it shows they can manage without extra cash.

Also by issuing shares do they loose part of the "owenership" due to number of shares issued?

I'm not really familiar with the technical names for share dealing/accounting so I hope you understand what I mean.

Yes, the value of the shares often goes down after new shares are issued, but it depends on how much the "buyers" pay for the new shares and the share value before.
 
Normally they need the cash for a reason (paying off debt, buying other companies). So for the profitability it should be good -> price of share increases.

But yeah you loose ownership and often price goes down too, but it shouldn't always be that way.
 
Yes, thats correcly. Well, it could be both good and bad. Maybe no one would buy the shares so they did not issue any, or they felt they didn't need to do it. Hard to tell.

Maybe no one wanted to sell at current state?
I looked for shares available publicly the other day but there was nothing to find...

MindArk (or FPC, cant remember) stated last year that they would postpone going public with the shares due to the current economical situation in the world, after advice from their economy advicer :)
 
Depending who the buyer is of FPC, this could be exactly what many have wished for a long time. If Calypso ends up in the right company that has a good vision and respects its playerbase, along with a very good marketing plan, this could very well be the start of something even better. And if planet partners bring their own new playerbase, which I think is necessary for them to be successful, we may actually get a very large and stable playerbase, which is what everyone has wished for for a long time.

Of course, that is a hopeful scenario. There always is a chance the ship may be going down, but I'd like to think this could be very good news.

Issuing of new shares is typically done for getting more capital. More shares dilutes the previous shareholder's value, thus making the price/share go down because there are more shares, at least initially. If the new capital raised will result in higher revenues and profits, then you will see the price/share increase again as the company grows its revenues.

So, as said, it could be a good thing that new shares weren't issued because it shows they don't need capital for regular funding and debt payments, but it could also mean that they are not planning on growing the company or increase marketing. They likely did not issue more shares since they are selling FPC.

There still quite a few unknowns still out there, mainly who is buying the FPC?
 
7 pages and im surprised noone has remarked about the report being released in Swedish for the first time in... well forever?

i havent read it yet and not really in the mood to, is there anyone who understands these things enlighten if the the lower cashflow is the result of reduced sales or investment? and given the global economic backdrop how does it compare?
 
MindArk (or FPC, cant remember) stated last year that they would postpone going public with the shares due to the current economical situation in the world, after advice from their economy advicer :)

What you are referring to is the introduction of the Mindark share onto a international stock exchange. Atm the shares are only available on the private market.
It is also in this annual report:

Som meddelats i tidigare årsredovisningar planerade MindArk att genomföra en notering av sin
aktie vid en internationell börs under 2008 och träffade avtal med Credit Suisse för
genomförandet av detta projekt. Den globala finanskrisen innebar att detta projekt fick skjutas
upp till ett senare tillfälle.
MindArk och Credit Suisse var överens om att återuppta processen med en börsnotering när
MindArk färdigställt den tredimensionella plattformen i Entropia Universe och etablerat minst tre
självständiga planeter som genererar tillväxt och kassaflöde för koncernen.
As announced in earlier annual reports Mindark planed to make its share listed on a international stock exchange during 2008 and met an agreement with Credit Suisse for the realisation of this project. The global finance crisis led to the postponement of this project to a later date.
Mindark and Credit Suisse agreed to resume the process with a stock exchange listing once Mindark completes the three dimensional platform in EU and establish at least three independent planets that generates growth and income for the concern (Mindark PE AB).

This is quite interesting as the goal is to have more then 3planets available later this year, then we should see a stock exchange listing finally take place :)
 
7 pages and im surprised noone has remarked about the report being released in Swedish for the first time in... well forever?

i havent read it yet and not really in the mood to, is there anyone who understands these things enlighten if the the lower cashflow is the result of reduced sales or investment? and given the global economic backdrop how does it compare?

I did wonder why but then we've been wondering why they haven't released quarterly reports, generally they give us a condensed version rather than a fuller one such as this.
 
I did wonder why but then we've been wondering why they haven't released quarterly reports, generally they give us a condensed version rather than a fuller one such as this.

Guess this is one reason, this report is more detailed then we usually see...
They might release something later on? Probably not though :p
 
Depending who the buyer is of FPC, this could be exactly what many have wished for a long time. If Calypso ends up in the right company that has a good vision and respects its playerbase, along with a very good marketing plan, this could very well be the start of something even better. And if planet partners bring their own new playerbase, which I think is necessary for them to be successful, we may actually get a very large and stable playerbase, which is what everyone has wished for for a long time.

MA will still be in controll of the platform and the balancing. So in other words we will still be betatesters on a live server and the balancing will suck :)
 
In the report at the end it states:


Not sure what that means. Does it mean in last years AGM they were given approval to issue more shares but to date they have not exercised that right? If so that's a good sign right ?

If they issued more shares? what does that mean in terms of value?

Its good because Im guessing they dont feel the need to raise money.... but shares dont mean much unless they are dividend paying shares.... or unless they sell more then 51% out....

Shares are simply an investment tool.... they are sold out to people originally by a company to get money... value of shares is generally tied to the vale of the company... after that... shares are valued by investors... people buy and sell them predicting price increase or decrease in the company and therefore will increase or decrease the value of the share....


Let me also add... by issueing new shares... old share value goes down... if say you had 100% of the company in shares worth $400 with 400 shares... and they sold out another 100.... your new value for shares would be 4/5 of the previous.... therefore your new share value is 80% * $400 = $320, while the new shares will be worth $80.
 
Last edited:
Since FPC will sell calypso, what will Hanne and the rest of the crew do? Will they still work with Calypso? cos they are doing a great job :)

FPC is the one being sold. Who knows?
 
'The Coyote' weighs in on this.

This is going to be my comentary and I've decided to look at this from a number of perspectives.

So let's cut to the chase, and get started on this issue

and believe me, it's going to be a long one...

First off...

Yep, that is pretty much how I interpreted it too...
However, soon we will see the anti-MA-machines (you know, those who have no life at all, so they sit around at a forum complaining about a game they dont even play anymore) sizing it up to a "giant loss", "the sky is falling" and "MA going down, EU will stop existing"....
My response to those who are complaining about the game would be, “Well first off why aren’t you doing something to fix the game? Like sending in complaints or comments at the website? After all to be honest MA/FPC doesn’t read these forums, or they hardly read them at all. However by folks sending in a comment or complaint directly using the website’s support service do they fix the problem.. Other than that they’re just whining about a problem they don’t want to fix.
Now if they haven’t played the game and are complaining, then your point definitely makes sense, and in fact the question would be, “Why are they even on EF Forums. Frankly, EF Forums is for commentary about the game, and if you have NEVER played the game, then why complain about it, Again referring back to my comment in the last paragraph (if you’re not going to help, then get out of the way, and let others do their job by sending in support cases.
I think that those who haven’t played the game hasn’t even bothered to try the game. And without their support, then what’s the point of being here in the first place?
Well, the good thing is that the depositing from the players are pretty much at the same level as in 2008, i was a bit worried it could have gone more.
And here’s where I’m in agreement. After all I’ve noted some of my old friends who left the game in 2008-2009, actually returning to the game to see how it’s improved or even changed. And frankly these people are having to literally ‘re-learn’ the game over. After all this goes back to a famous scientists comment about ‘evolution’ (Namely Charles Darwin). Those who learn to adapt to the game will survive, those who don’t, won’t survive and will be forced to adapt or die.
I think this about sums up that point.
Vice versa really - FPC was created so it can be sold off and MA will be just the platform developer.

And thus we’re talking about FPC (one of the planet partners) that is being sold off (and it’s content) to whoever will buy it, and thus the new owner will develop the content. (Thus in a way, Calypso could possibly change for the better, as the new owner could infact improve on the ideas (plus, if they work with other planet partners, and learn what they’ve done, Calypso might go from being just a second rate world, to a quality world). But again I stress the issue that goes back to my original point.. if People don’t send in support cases then how will the new owners know what to fix?
As for MA (The Platform Developer) they will keep going, and offer the platform to whomever wants to use it. Because we’ve seen that the platform does work (within reason), and that with proper guidance and things only get better. And this is in part because MA can allow the developers to make changes within the platform guide lines, in order for the developer to succeed.
That could just be FPC buying themselves out.
A loss is still a loss but it does show that they're not making a game that the existing playerbase want to deposit as much into anymore.
That’s another possibility. After all maybe FPC Is doing this so that they can in a way get more developers into their group and thus allow them to develop the game more to their liking. A good analogy might be that MA is the landlord, and FPC is the tenant, and maybe FPC wants to develop the game their own way, (or make improvements), but the landlord has the final say in the matter.
So we could see a split here which could lead to FPC trying to develop the game in a different way.
i see the same as masta due to world wide crisis a small dip in the business model but the sky isnt falling
we just have to ride it out
Yep, and in fact, Skull, the issue of challenge here is basically two fold.. It’s like I said earlier, it’s a case of ‘adapt, or die’ scenario. Those who learn to adapt to the game, will do so, those who fail to do so will leave. (and in the end, they’re really the losers here because of the fact that they failed to ask questions about the system, or even failed to make comments to the proper channels.
As for myself, I’m going to ride this little bump out. Because that’s what I see it as, a bit of a bump, nothing more nothing less.
Unless the loss actually is because their expenses has gone up rather than that their income has gone down?
I still think that the biggest problem (for player retention) is that loot is so unbalanced (need fewer ATHs and HoFs, less big-loss hunts, more stable returns)
I would rather get 80% back 3 times in a row than getting 60% back once, 120% back next time, then 60% again... (as an example)
Agreed, after all a lot of people who have quit (initially) are coming back, (with better computers to play the game), and thus are in fact trying to re-learn the game. (and frankly it’s going to be the ones who’ve adapted, who are going to be the ones teaching the old players who left, how to learn to adapt.
As for the loot returns, I feel that MA should be a bit more consistent and balanced when it comes to the loot (and the rewards) earned by the players. Currently the mission rewards are I feel are unbalanced, and thus this is why some people are disgusted with the game at the moment.
But if MA were to rebalance the loot, and thus give folks a fair shake for earning their rewards, would there be a retention, and maybe even a chance for this game to grow into something that is enjoyable for a larger variety of people.
Is this the new sky is falling thread with the usual cast of characters with inaccurate and/or misleading information?
More than likely. But then they’re ignorant of what is going on, and in fact those who usually who scream “The Sky is Falling” have never played the game in their life.
It’s funny, cause in reality, if they’ve played the game, and had learned to adapt to new situations, would they be able to understand that this is nothing more than ‘change’ in the development in a game.
Other than that, yep you’re right, “The Usual Suspects” who complain, and who do nothing to fix the issues. ‘Nuff daid.
But is natural when a company invest they lose money the first year.
Which is very true. Most companies (Be it gaming or not), usually have their growing pains in the first year of business. And FPC is no exception to the rule here.
Because FPC was initially to be a separate entity from MA, and thus it’s really up to them to survive or be bought out. It’s really up to FPC to decide what to do. MA really I feel has no real say in the matter, other than maybe telling FPC to either improve their system or be sold to someone else, or be liquidated.
So at this point, the ball is in FPC’s court as to what they’re going to do.
yep, alot got spent in the last year for sure.
Actually, considering the world financial situation over the year or two, it's not as bad as I feared it might be. Hopefully if they manage to get it all back by the end of the year, things will pick up again.
Well simply put things are a bit better than they were a year or even 18 months ago. The entire world (not just the US), was in a slump, a recession as it is being called, and things were indeed weaker than they are now.
But in the last 18 months, I think the world has gotten their act in order, and thus things are indeed getting better.
MA will still be in controll of the platform and the balancing. So in other words we will still be betatesters on a live server and the balancing will suck :)

But by not commenting to MA (or FPC directly), does this statement hold true, but if no one complains, about how bad the loot is directly to MA or FPC, do they really know how to fix it?0
And therein lies the rub. Because folks are sitting around doing nothing about it, then nothing gets done.. So then the question is.. What are YOU, the Player going to do about it? Just sit around and do nothing and let it go at being sucky? Or will you send in a support case and tell them that the loot sucks, and that it needs to be rebalanced. After all I see a lot of folks saying a lot, but doing nothing to fix it..
As for me? I’m wiring support cases.. After all it’s the squeaky wheel that gets the grease.
FPC is the one being sold. Who knows?
That’s just it, we don’t know. But we do know that in a lot of ways, FPC hasn’t always delivered the goods, and in a way, in a timely manner. But then again will the new company be any better? Again we don’t know. But until we do know, let’s leave it as “Uncertain”

In Closing:

Personally the issue of FPC being sold off, might be a good thing in the long run, cause whoever gets the planet, might take the game to a new level, and might be able to do something with it.. It’s funny I mention this, but about 6 months ago, a player friend of mine, stated that a lot of things in game weren’t in place, and that his decision was that he would ‘wait and see’ what happened to the game.

Now six months later, he likes where the game has gone.

Another gamer friend of mine has been out of game for 2 years now, and just recently he too returned to the game, and he doesn’t like what has happened. He thinks the game sucks. But then had he been here since the onset of VU10, and had the same attitude that the first player did, would he realize that you have to approach these issues with an open mind.

And in the idea of this, I think personally if MA wants to sell off Calypso to another company, then they have the right to do so. And who knows? Maybe Calypso will be a better planet than if it were controlled by FPC. But in the end, FPC laid the foundation for other worlds, like Rocktropia to be developed, and I think ND Studios has a better idea on what works and what doesn’t. All because FPC showed us what not to do when it comes to gamin.

As for the players? I think they need to be supportive of this move. And not see it as a “Sky Is falling” Scenario.
Because in the end, the game developer (FPC) really has been closed minded, and has thus done things the wrong way (in aspect of the players), but conversely the players haven’t helped FPC to know what to do.
So in the end, where does the blame lie? With both the player and FPC equally. After all we’re supposed to be testers and tell Them (the planet partner) what works and what doesn’t. and it’s up to them (The planet partner) to solve the problems.
Because without both parties working together the system will fail, but if we work together then it will be a better game.
And that’s my 2 PED’s worth.

Ben Coyote a.k.a. “The Blind Sniper”
 
So let's cut to the chase, and get started on this issue
Welcome to the long post club! ;)
 
The sky isn't falling, the hills ingame just brought you closer to it :)

Things will recover in time.

MA overshot,
taking too bigger slow steps rather than smaller quicker progressive ones.

At least they acknowledge this in a round about way in the report.

Food for thought:

I wonder how fast things would recover if they went back to P.E style loot and distribution. Smaller fairer sharing & consistency with good items from small to average to high end mobs across the board rather than to a chosen few ?

Angel from feffoids & drones wow that would be nice with odds better than 100,000 kills.

A significant portion of the player base would lose a fair bit but many many more would come back to game making that significant portion insignificant. *hides*
 
Last edited:
Food for thought:

I wonder how fast things would recover if they went back to P.E style loot and distribution. Smaller fairer sharing & consistency with good items from small to average to high end mobs across the board rather than to a chosen few ?

Angel from feffoids & drones wow that would be nice with odds better than 100,000 kills.

A significant portion of the player base would lose a fair bit but many many more would come back to game making that significant portion insignificant. *hides*

Actually, increasing the amount of items just a bit in loot (instead of oils, fragments, hides, etc) would improve stuff a lot I think :D

since most of those "tt foods" ARE probably tt'ed anyway :)
 
Insert wall of text :p
7
I sent in supportcases :D

Actually, increasing the amount of items just a bit in loot (instead of oils, fragments, hides, etc) would improve stuff a lot I think :D

since most of those "tt foods" ARE probably tt'ed anyway :)

well both yes and no sort of. More items would lower the markup on them thus we would earn less on selling them, but then again if I loot an item i can use it so i dont have to buy it. so well ye balance... xD
 
:scratch:
Does it actually say, that Calypso will be sold off or FPC?
Could it not be, that they are creating another planet to sell off?
6 Million for Calypso sounds dirtcheap if one only looks at the still undiscovered areas on the map.

Then those outstanding 1,2 Millions from a planet partner...
I never would have guessed that a planet would be that expensive!
Something like Rocktropia maybe 200-300k USD for the infrastructure and a million for development, but almost 5 million just for the planets infrastructure?

Taking the crisis last year into account the number look better than from most other companies.
 
well both yes and no sort of. More items would lower the markup on them thus we would earn less on selling them, but then again if I loot an item i can use it so i dont have to buy it. so well ye balance... xD

Depends on HOW many more items :D and I sure would love to loot items more often, even if only low level ones :yay:
 
:scratch:
Does it actually say, that Calypso will be sold off or FPC?
Could it not be, that they are creating another planet to sell off?
6 Million for Calypso sounds dirtcheap if one only looks at the still undiscovered areas on the map.

Then those outstanding 1,2 Millions from a planet partner...
I never would have guessed that a planet would be that expensive!
Something like Rocktropia maybe 200-300k USD for the infrastructure and a million for development, but almost 5 million just for the planets infrastructure?

Taking the crisis last year into account the number look better than from most other companies.

What i understand it is not FPC that will be sold, but FPC selling the rights to the "planet" to an other company. It could be that the planet itself actualy still will be runned and developed by FPC and the new owners provides the financing and support, and gets half the profit from the planet. I guess we will have to wait and see.
 
What i understand it is not FPC that will be sold, but FPC selling the rights to the "planet" to an other company. It could be that the planet itself actualy still will be runned and developed by FPC and the new owners provides the financing and support, and gets half the profit from the planet. I guess we will have to wait and see.

I cant find that part, could you quote it, please? :)
 
I cant find that part, could you quote it, please? :)

Last on page 6, google translation or read it in Swedish...:)
"Mindarks subsidiary First Planet Company AB June 10 with a
international companies have signed a letter of intent (Letter of Intent) on the sale of
all rights to the planet Calypso for a total purchase price of six million dollars. In
immediately after signing the buyer must deposit a million dollars on a regular
account of the Swedish bank. Before a final agreement on the sale of the rights of First Planet
Company may be signed, the buyer shall conduct a due diligence. This process
expected to be completed by August 15. In connection with the signing of the final
sales contract the buyer release the funds deposited. The remaining purchase price, five million
Dollars, shall be transferred to First Planet Company in four installments, October 15, 2010, and
January 15, April 15 and 15 June 2011th"

"The sale is part of the partner strategy previously adopted by the Board in order to increase
earning power in the Entropia Universe. With more players in the virtual environment can
marketing of the individual planets intensified. The purchase price received for
Calypso has been adjusted so that the buyer's financial commitment to a platform owner
senior role. The parties have agreed on a profit share of 50 percent each. A
revenue stream from the Calypso will therefore remain even after the sale of
Rights completion."
 
this thing with the selling of Calypso is more complex than first appears, or the google translation garbles the detail. can any Swedes translate page 6/7 properly? it seems to talk of companies plural and the parties sharing the revenue 50% each, though this could be FPC and third party. either way it seems an outside cash injection to take over, not a managemnt buyout as i guessed at first.
 
this thing with the selling of Calypso is more complex than first appears, or the google translation garbles the detail. can any Swedes translate page 6/7 properly? it seems to talk of companies plural and the parties sharing the revenue 50% each, though this could be FPC and third party. either way it seems an outside cash injection to take over, not a managemnt buyout as i guessed at first.

yeah that bit is a bit unclear, if they mean that FPC and this third partner will split it 50/50 or if it is MA and the new partner that will split it 50/50.
 
"all rights to the planet Calypso" Surely means only the planet and not FPC.
That could mean, that FPC will create or already is creating another planet. Seeing how Ma really would like to get into the education area, one could suspect like that ESA demo.
 
Back
Top