How much is PA worth? really!

[Aedolaws]

truce? everybody!
-----------------

A. If you were a millionaire, how much would you be willing to pay for PA? (To buy all the rights, intellectual & any other incidental property.)

B. Why?

C. If PA were to be incorporated and divided into 1 million common shares, would you buy any? how many (how much)?

D. Why would you want to become an owner? or not...

E. If you became an owner, would you be willing to work for PA?

F. What would you expect in return? (i.e. dividends, credits, nothing, etc)

[sayonara]

A. I would pay up to £5,000 (USD$10,000).

B. Because while it's fun, it has all the hallmarks of a mediocre product with limited appeal. I'm not confident I could multiply my returns that easily.

C. Well at my buying price each share would be worth a cent, so it'd be worth people investing (assuming I did something progressive with the game, instead of making all the CSS classes pink and letting the site rot as the code becomes outdated). But if someone else put in a much more generous offer for (A), then incorporated, I would be choosing between PA shares and confectionery.

D. The entertainment value on GD.

E. I assume you mean "to make it better". I would have to if I expected to recoup my costs.

F. In return? I'm the owner. By owner do you mean some kind of manager or admin type?

[Aedolaws]

yes, work to make it better. And better means anything that ensures further development and ideally dividends.

by "owner willing to work" I mean a person who buys shares and thus becomes a shareholder of PA, an owner of PA. And following basic corporate structure, each share is a vote to elect BoD, BoD elects/supervises executive officers, which in turn manage the employees of the company, who would be the ones maintaining/developing/playing the game. Would you work in any of those capacities?

[now, just to clarify, I don't think incorporating PA is viable, by my estimations (baseless I admit), legal costs would eat the profit of the next 10 years (assuming current #s remain). I just used the corporate image to give u a sense of what it may really be worth]

[sayonara]

Ah I see what you mean, shareholder of course. In return for buying shares I would expect Team PA to pull their fingers out and increase the value of the shares, like any other company. But dividends would be nice too

[Mistwraith]

if pa gets 2000 planets 1/2 of which pay for their planet over 3 rounds a year + 1 free one .

£11,000 income a year straight off the bat, allowing for server running costs, expenses and hosting but not wages !

[sayonara]

Originally Posted by Mistwraith

if pa gets 2000 planets 1/2 of which pay for their planet over 3 rounds a year + 1 free one .
£11,000 income a year straight off the bat, allowing for server running costs, expenses and hosting but not wages !

That's only the value of potential income though. The actual saleable value of the game can only be the most anyone is prepared to pay for it.

Realistically that is going to be lower, unless the buyer has to bid over the income potential. But they'll only do this in the face of sufficient competition, IF they don't mind running at a loss when they acquire the product.

[Aedolaws]

Mist, I am ignorant, I cannot understand what u said. Can u please elaborate?

[Mistwraith]

Originally Posted by Mistwraith

if pa gets 2000 planets 1/2 of which pay for their planet over 3 rounds a year + 1 free one .

£11,000 income a year straight off the bat, allowing for server running costs, expenses and hosting but not wages !
__________________

Originally Posted by Aedolaws

Mist, I am ignorant, I cannot understand what u said. Can u please elaborate?

my point was that no company would sell anything under its projected yearly income, to do so unless the seller knew something you dont would be giving money away, and no company does that.

[Aedolaws]

I guess the value of the shares would depend, in large part, on whatever decision the community makes. This would be not a publicly traded company, but a tight (dildos like of nowadays) market. A new market. An unknown market. This is brand new territory in internet law. PA has been revolutionary in many senses, perhaps it is time to keep the tradition up!
(I admit, however, I am drunk, and I have no clue what I am talking about)

[Phil^]

A: £1000 tops
B: Its a game which is a terminal decline imho. A smart investor never invests in something that will lose money in the long run, so 1000 should be sufficiently small to be covered in a single rounds income followed by as much profit that can be extracted where income > expenses.
C: No
D: See B, in addition to a caustic and abrasive community.
E: to break even

[Monroe]

When technology companies are valued typically the evaluation is somewhere between 7 and 10 times the annual income minus liabilities (debts). As far as I know PA has no debt so the actual valuation of the game is probably somewhere between $100k-$200k. I know that sounds insane but it's probably true. I know many will mock that number saying the game is terminally ill (see phil above) but I don't believe it is so, it has simply been very poorly managed (no fault of the PA Team) ever since Spinner left. With the right investment into the game and proper management the game could be turned around, the basic appeal of the game is sound. Its business model needs a rethink, but that's not the topic of this thread.

To answer the topic:
A. I've actually thought of buying PA (I'm not a millionaire, at least not yet) I figured if I could buy it for about $20k and put about $30k into it I could make the game profitable.

B. Because I understand what terms like "business plan" and "development path" mean and how to use them to make money.

C. It entirely depends on the management team of PA, with the current trend (the new owners are still an unknown, so I don't factor them in) I would say no.

D. Until someone puts forward a good business plan and dev plan I wouldn't be interested.

E.I work for PA as a non owner, so yes.

F. Currently I get credits, if I was to do serious work I would expect either stock or money just like any real technology company.

[Gate]

A) If I was a millionaire & was bored enough I'd probably go up to £50k with £50k for investment into the game. That's right now.

B) Because with mobile browsing and web 2.0 I think there's a market that can easily be tapped, given investment and sensible improvement

C) Not on my own as I can't afford it. If there was an investment fund that shared my ideas about the game and could buy enough to impact on the game's future path, then yes.

D) To affect how teh game changes.

E) Depends on how much I own. With some decision making power, yes.

F) Dividends & a better game.

[sayonara]

Monroe, what definition of "technology company" are you using?

I am pretty sure that spending your combined $50k on writing a new game from scratch would be a much wiser investment, never mind the $100-200k value that you projected.

[sayonara]

Monroe, what definition of "technology company" are you using?

I am pretty sure that spending your combined $50k on writing a new game from scratch would be a much wiser investment, never mind the $100-200k value that you projected.

[Monroe]

Originally Posted by sayonara

Monroe, what definition of "technology company" are you using?

The one that says software (whether a game or other app) is considered technology.

Originally Posted by sayonara

I am pretty sure that spending your combined $50k on writing a new game from scratch would be a much wiser investment, never mind the $100-200k value that you projected.

Not necessarily, one of the things you have to remember is even if I can produce a game that is 5 times better then PA for $50k I still have to market it, build a player base, build up the brand, and many other things that PA already intrinsically has. PA has all the fundamental pieces to being a very popular game in certain circles, any game I could come up with and code (assuming I was a great programmer which I'm not) would still need a lot of things to be successful that PA already has.

Now whether it would make sense to invest $200k into PA is an entirely different story, it would take a lot of work and further investment to make it really worth the effort. But a clever business plan coupled with good product development could at least in theory produce a good product that is very popular.

[GReaper]

Some of these large numbers are seriously overvaluing it in my opinion.

There is very little chance of ever recouping the cost of £50k. The playerbase is slowly declining and not increasing! If you buy it and try to change the game so much with improvements which are so badly needed you're still unlikely to please the majority of existing players.

As mentioned by others in this thread, you could probably create a clone within a few months of dedicated work. You'd be better off creating a new game from scratch and taking advantage of more modern aspects of the Internet which could make your game an absolute success if you knew how to market it. Social networking to new games is todays equivalent of Quakenet to Planetarion.

[Gate]

Originally Posted by GReaper

There is very little chance of ever recouping the cost of £50k.

Let's say £50k to buy and £50k investment.

There is still interest in browser games: Astro Empires has over 10k participants and Warbook has several tens of thousands iirc. Developed nations are seeing an explosion in mobile browsing (an explosion from ~60m to ~110m in 3G European users from '07 to '08), which is a similar level of technology to when PA's popularity exploded.

Developing nations with a large base of English speakers are growing too; India, for example saw 41% home internet growth in 2006, to 76million. Kenya has grown at an average 200k users per year.


10,000 players at £2 per round, 5 rounds/year = £100k income p/a. If the marginal cost to PA of new players is negligible and operating costs are £20k pa (approx current income?). After 3 years, that's the equivalent of 22% compound annual interest. With an economic profit taken to be 6% annual growth, you'd still have a buffer of £40k/year for extra investment into PA.

These numbers are plausible, though not properly checked.

[GReaper]

Originally Posted by Gate

These numbers are plausible, though not properly checked.

Are you seriously expecting a tenfold increase in the number of subscribers of such an old game?

My guess is that you'd have to change the game dramatically to convince people that this is an interesting game which they can play regardless of their situation, I hardly think the game as it currently stands qualifies.

[Membrivio]

Originally Posted by GReaper

Some of these large numbers are seriously overvaluing it in my opinion.
There is very little chance of ever recouping the cost of £50k. The playerbase is slowly declining and not increasing! If you buy it and try to change the game so much with improvements which are so badly needed you're still unlikely to please the majority of existing players.

Investment decisions are about looking forward into the prospect of a product. It is not about the current decline in players nor about pleasing the existing players. It is about making it a product attractive to a new group of players.
Monroe was right about the intrinsic value that PA has, hence it could be an interesting investment.
And I think that we all agree that PA needs an overhaul. So that isn't an issue imo.
Answer to the questions posed:

A. I would pay the market value, whatever it is.
B. To offer a good game to nice people, BUT with the decent structure behind it that it needs.
C. If I would buy, it would all be mine... Mine... MINE!
D. For my ego.
E. Yes, the management side would be mine
F. I would go for break-even.

[sayonara]

Originally Posted by Monroe

The one that says software (whether a game or other app) is considered technology.

Ha, good answer. That's a sufficiently broad definition to let PA qualify

Not necessarily, one of the things you have to remember is even if I can produce a game that is 5 times better then PA for $50k I still have to market it, build a player base, build up the brand, and many other things that PA already intrinsically has. PA has all the fundamental pieces to being a very popular game in certain circles, any game I could come up with and code (assuming I was a great programmer which I'm not) would still need a lot of things to be successful that PA already has.

Yes, this is all true. But let's not simply assume that shoring up PA's decaying form is going to be less effort and less cost. You very rightly highlighted the importance of business plans and development paths, and part of that implementation would be making jolly well sure that we are investing our $50k outlay and $50k playing about money in the right strategy.
I have programmed entire applications before and I can honestly say that writing a new specification is much easier than inheriting a mess like PA and having to figure out what is wrong before you can start thinking about the fixes or developments. On the other hand, the advertising and building of a player base would be - as you suggest - a lot of work.

Now whether it would make sense to invest $200k into PA is an entirely different story, it would take a lot of work and further investment to make it really worth the effort. But a clever business plan coupled with good product development could at least in theory produce a good product that is very popular.

The way I see it is that if you are starting a new project from scratch, you are not limited by the legacy of PA. IOW, you are investing 200k into a product with a bigger potential audience.

[Monroe]

Originally Posted by sayonara

The way I see it is that if you are starting a new project from scratch, you are not limited by the legacy of PA. IOW, you are investing 200k into a product with a bigger potential audience.

Well your assuming that if I bought PA and was going to improve it I would necessarily be buying the game for the game code. I would be buying PA for the brand far more then for the code. It would be conceivable that after having "my programmer" look at the existing code we would determine that it isn't worth salvaging and would build a new game from the ground up like has already been done once in PA (r10) and has been talked about being done again several times. The value of PA is the brand far more then it is the code or even the player base, and in the world of mobile gaming, especially on phones, there is huge potential for older browser based games to have significant appeal as several others have already pointed out.

[GReaper]

Originally Posted by Monroe

Well your assuming that if I bought PA and was going to improve it I would necessarily be buying the game for the game code. I would be buying PA for the brand far more then for the code. It would be conceivable that after having "my programmer" look at the existing code we would determine that it isn't worth salvaging and would build a new game from the ground up like has already been done once in PA (r10) and has been talked about being done again several times. The value of PA is the brand far more then it is the code or even the player base, and in the world of mobile gaming, especially on phones, there is huge potential for older browser based games to have significant appeal as several others have already pointed out.

How do you value the brand name of Planetarion?

My best guess is that it's only really that worthwhile to either existing players or past players, anyone else is more than likely to say they've never heard of it or they're not that bothered. Current players are obvious, they're most likely to stay with the game. However would any ex-players come back even if the game was improved dramatically? I'm not too sure. Most people may have some fond memories of the game, but they've probably moved on and realise that either real life or other games are better than playing this game.

It's not like it's a Google or anything with a great reputation.

[lokken]

An eminent planetarion player once made an offer for planetarion, but unfortunately it was turned down. Which is a shame, because he'd probably have put some serious effort into trying to resurrect the playerbase.

[Ave]

If I were the owner.

With the p2p money, I would BUY a coder. To ensure the progress.

The money could be enough for some server bills aswell...?

I might invest to some basic google adverts also.

Also I would steal all ideas from the colonies :P

[sayonara]

That is all certainly true. I think where we really differ on this is in how strong we perceive the brand to be.

[rpsmith]

2 cents in U.S. coinage. Unless changes are made to make new players feel like part of the game instead of pawns for the top Alliances.

Unless you can attract paying membership or advertising dollars it has no real incentive to buy into it.

I don't mean totally rework just a few tweaks to allow new players to compete even if it is at their own level. A lone planet player does not have the time to do mass intelligence to figure out any politics. The politics are a bit too secret and hide most of the game. This leaves a lone new player without any feeling of belonging to a community.

It is not needed to totally uncloak the alliances but something to give a new player an indication of what is going on.

OMAC needs to consider all ideas not just those of the elite few (not an insult to those that have made it there). But even the top players should need a challenge of being big fish in a bigger pond. The top players see what has worked but the little guys help keep any game alive.

If I were in charge (rofl) I would work on the basis of 'keep it simple stupid' making some changes that would apply to everyone but cut through some of the fog. I would need to find some way of making the game grow in numbers and have them stick around for a while. This seems to be a mom and pop corner store, it needs something to bring in whatever is needed to expand and be worth purchasing.

[horn]

HCs should ask their members how much they'd be willing to pay.
Then as a collective, make an offer to jolt. Mention that if they don't sell, those players are going to boycott the game.

[Phil^]

Originally Posted by horn

HCs should ask their members how much they'd be willing to pay.
Then as a collective, make an offer to jolt. Mention that if they don't sell, those players are going to boycott the game.

you mean omac...
Not sure how many of those players would follow through on any boycott mind

[Mzyxptlk]

Originally Posted by horn

HCs should ask their members how much they'd be willing to pay.
Then as a collective, make an offer to jolt. Mention that if they don't sell, those players are going to boycott the game.

Collective ownership implies collective decision power. What do we know about group intelligence?

[Monroe]

Originally Posted by Mzyxptlk

Collective ownership implies collective decision power. What do we know about group intelligence?

Never underestimate the idiocy of people in large numbers.

[horn]

i don't know what omac means.
i imagine it wouldn't be too hard to get a significant number to boycott the game if people make it clear to members why it's being done. i.e. for the long term interests of the game they enjoy playing.

[Phil^]

Originally Posted by horn

i don't know what omac means.

They bought jolt.

[Mit]

As a game currently, imo, not a lot.

The 'valuable' bit is the name, and the following it has (the community) - problem is, this is dying fast currently due to the lack of developments with the game and stagnation of things.

[Alezzar]

Well, if i had much money id give 5000 $ or so and take the game, then put a better team to recode make it better, famous and go even more rich...

Ofc, id keep Fiery ;D