An open letter to James and Alexander

[Hagi]

Ryan,
Thank you for your very kind note.

I actually have had several meetings with my staff about getting people paid. Last week was actually one of our most successful weeks ever in terms of getting our accounts payable cleared up - a lot of people got sent checks, James included. But this was due to some cash from our investors, not due to improving economics.

In general, since the recession began, we have reduced our in-house team by 40%, reduced our freelance expenses by 50%, reduced the rent on our office by 50%, and reduced our bandwidth bill by 30%. Our current office is in a basement with no windows. There is a limit to how much we can cut before there's only bone left.

The reason for the harsh circumstances is that we largely depend on videogame publishers buying ads. Unfortunately, the sales of core videogames are at a 5 year low right now. See, for example, this article: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/entertainmentnewsbuzz/2011/06/may-2011-video-game-sales-lowest-since-october-2006-npd.html

Lower sales means smaller ad budgets. Smaller ad budgets mean that the publishers place their ads on the largest sites exclusively where they get maximum reach. The problem is worsened by the recent trend towards making games that cater to "mainstream" rather than "core" audiences. Not surprisingly, you guys are considered a core audience, and therefore less desirable to advertisers than non-core gamers, I guess. The result is that we get even fewer ad dollars. Finally, Google, Facebook, and so on, keep adding more and more ad options, and search ads swallow even more dollars. This is why so many sites, like NY Times and The Onion, are switching to paygates. Nobody's making any money on online ads.

So from where we stand, our options seem to be:
1) Migrate to being a mobile and iPad content company, and hope revenue trends there stay strong
2) Switch to pay-gates for revenue, infuriating many loyal customers who can't afford to pay
3) Change our content to be more mainstream to attract ads, and lose our old core-gamer focus
4) Stop paying for content and be like HuffPost, losing the quality of our content producers
5) Something I haven't thought of

What would you do in my shoes?

That's probably more business discussion than you cared to hear, but I figure that since this situation has shined a spotlight on our business, more transparency is always better.

Hey Alexander,

Might I suggest a more extensive version of this be published as a sort of article here on the Escapist?

Publishing a clear and factual summary of the Escapist's financial state, how it got to be there and where you're planning to go from there (whilst please refraining from commenting on the EC situation, that should be resolved between you and James. With the help of a judge if no agreement can be reached).

I think this would go some ways in restoring faith with the community that while the current situation was not handled competently it was a singular bad judgement call and not a persistent flaw in management.

Your responsiveness and communication in these matters also inspires faith, although I will hold my judgement until more information is available. It is still a promising sign and if suitable action follows this can hopefully be considered a lesson learned and be put behind us.

Cheers,

Hagi.

 

[Yeager942]

Alexander, are you incompetent or just too inexperienced to handle this role? The Escapist didn't fail here, you failed. And you failed horribly. As CEO your job is to ensure that your company fulfils all it's contracts and that all these contracts are certain and complete. The fact that this situation arose in the first place means you failed disastrously, not only did you fail to uphold your contracts towards your employees by not paying them on time you also failed to ensure that whatever contract you had with EC about the donation money was certain and complete.

You should have made a formal agreement with EC in regards to the overflow donation money. If you failed to do this then you've got no rights whatsoever to any of this money, that's the price of a failure as fucking big as yours. Now I suggest you review whatever agreements you have with the EC crew and uphold these even if it ends up costing you. You don't screw others over because of your own incompetency, even if they're nice enough to bend over for you. If you're incapable of doing even that I suggest you find another job because seeing this mess here you're not even close to being competent enough to handle this.

Your sincerely,

Hagi.

Hagi,
You are right that I should have made a formal agreement with EC in regards to the overflow donation money. Because I did not, the result is the situation at hand. That was a huge error on my part. I don't think either party expected that overflow would even be an issue, so we both had different expectations as to what would happen when overflow did develop. As I have said repeatedly, we retracted our request that they use the overflow money on Extra Credits weeks ago when the sharp difference of opinion on this matter became clear. I do not understand why it is being brought up now other than as a straw man.

As for my inexperience, I've never disguised that I founded the company when I was 25 and have run it since. It was literally my first job out of school. Every day that we experience growth is the first day of my life running a company of this size. So, yes, I remain inexperienced in many matters. Hopefully I have done more good than harm overall in serving in my role at The Escapist, but that is ultimately for others to judge.

Thanks for attempting an even-handed response.

Regards,
Alexander Macris

Well played, Mr. Macris. Well played.



I don't know, for all of James's wished to not do Escapist harm, why come out with this situation if not to turn the community against the Escapist?

P.S. /neutral shield.

 

[Dr. wonderful]

PS. Escapist community, stop acting like a bunch of morally outraged teenagers. We don't know anything about what's going on due to the large amount of pretty looking bullshit these two idiots are throwing our way. The only thing we need right now is real information, the only demand is access to the e-mails detailing all the conversations between both parties.

*AHEM*

I am a teenager!

But you're right, I'm normally calm.

CEO-LEVEL SNIP

and YOU.

...

I'm sorry for getting angry over something I have no idea over and jumping down the escapist throat with this post.

Spoiler

...You gotta be kidding me escapist.


YOU GO TO BE KIDDING ME! I mean, jesus christ, you guys could of gave her the goddamn money, she needed it! Hell, she could of work it off! I swear this is just...

ARRGH!

So, I'll just wait and see how this pans out.

 

[HentMas]

Snip

Dear Archon:

I am a business man my self, and I just wanted to tell you that at the end of the day James goal seems to open his... "Indie" thing and leave, the whole conversations, as you have demonstrated, points towards an approach in that direction, the "announcement" of the decision in Twitter even before things had become... sketchy or well, convoluted is a very giving fact.

I am but a fan of your site and would love to give you some insight due to my experience, i may be wrong my branch of business is not in publishing or advertising, but he is going to leave, there is going to be some "attempt" at re conciliating just to "make it clear" that he is not the "Bad Guy" and will leave at the sight of first trouble, and if you don´t give him any trouble he will find it, the main reason that someone starts the "process" by announcing it to the world is because they want everyone to know that they have already being wronged before and now they can just say "HE HIT ME WITH A STICK" and leave, even if its not true.

CUT YOUR LOSSES and SAVAGE as much as you can, don´t let yourself owe them one more cent, they will have you by the balls in this one, they have proven that their fan-base can leave with them the moment they choose to move to their "Indie" project, it might be tempting to try and bring back the show, because well, it IS popular... but as I have heard the IP belongs to you, DON´T LOOSE IT, its the only card you´ve got.

hope I helped you think with a more... Machiavellic point of view, never underestimate your business partners and always think the worse of them, and ALWAYS make them sign a "non disclosure" contract because your site lives out of REPUTATION.

 

[Archon]

Mr. Marcis,

"I am not sure where I'm double speaking."

Allow me to assist you then:

"we are not making any claim on any Rocket Hub money;"
|
|
V
"we said he should use $9,500 to create more episodes of the show that the money was supposed to be used to save."

Ah, OK. Let me clarify. I wasn't trying to double speak, but I think I was chronologically unclear.

1) Our initial position was that the money should be used as follows: (a) subtract the cost of Allison's surgery; (b) subtract the cost of the merchandise; and (c) allocate 75% of the remainder towards Extra Credits production.
2) James felt that the remainder (c) should be used for his indie game publishing effort. While I disagreed, ultimately we didn't feel it was something worth contesting with James about. That left the only open question as the cost of the merchandise. James didn't like the amount it would cost do it with our Split Reason vendor ($16/shirt for production, shipping, and handling x 2000+ shirts), so he asked to do it on his own, and we said OK.
3) At that point, there was no longer any debate about the the Rocket Hub money.

That sure looks like making a claim on the money to me. Now, I expect that you view that quote as a suggestion or a preference but not a "claim" in the sense that "we control this money" or any other such legal issue. Still, the fact remains that you (and James to a lesser extent) are jumping in between legal terms and a more casual tone which creates a lot of confusion.

I apologize for any confusion and hope I have clarified things for you.

It's quite refreshing to see that you have dropped your request for a portion of the RocketHub money, though I still look forward to reviewing your e-mail correspondence. My main issue with you was much less about the missing payments, which is not uncommon in your industry, but rather that you wanted to pay the EC crew with proceeds from their independent charity project. However, in another example of the confusion your explanations have caused, you originally called the RocketHub initiative a "joint-effort," a claim that has subsequently been undercut by other statements you've made, the T-shirt issue being the most obvious one. It would've been more accurate to say you simply offered up your assistance instead of making sound like you were a partner.

Hmmm. From our point of view, we *were* acting like a partner. We suggested RocketHub in the first place, assigned a person from our marketing team to help promote it, then gave it an ad push, and then lined up the merchandise production at cost from Split Reason. In any event, if we're reduced to arguing over whether we were "partners" or "assistants" I think we're splitting hairs.

 

[gabrieldevue]

As many other posters, I am probably not qualified to say anything. I just heard of a show that got cancelled due to low popularity. It was planned for 6 seasons, 2 seasons were done and the IP-owner refused to try other solutions. The creator of the show had other possibilities in mind and now - we, the public, are sufferers... Because we will never see what amazing storylines would have happened, because the IP lies in some drawer.
Who knows if EC would habe been as popular, if it would have been restricted to youtube. But... EC _IS_ the writer James and the Narrator Dan.
I love this site so much and thanked the Escapist with glorious enthusiasm for bringing us shows like ZP and EC and Moviebob on a regular basis. But these shows are hard work for their creators and if they cannot concentrate on doing them but have to worry about earning money first? It might demage a show.

I hate this public fight. When I heard that EC would probably leave the Escapist I really wanted to know why. And I am glad that there are statements from both sides. But since they contradict each other I am no smarter than before.

A very, very sad gab.

 

[Archon]

Hey Alexander,

Might I suggest a more extensive version of this be published as a sort of article here on the Escapist?

Publishing a clear and factual summary of the Escapist's financial state, how it got to be there and where you're planning to go from there (whilst please refraining from commenting on the EC situation, that should be resolved between you and James. With the help of a judge if no agreement can be reached).

I think this would go some ways in restoring faith with the community that while the current situation was not handled competently it was a singular bad judgement call and not a persistent flaw in management.

Your responsiveness and communication in these matters also inspires faith, although I will hold my judgement until more information is available. It is still a promising sign and if suitable action follows this can hopefully be considered a lesson learned and be put behind us.

Cheers,

Hagi.

Hagi, thanks again for your kind words. I will talk to Russ and crew about your idea. It may be the case that a detailed explanation would go far. Thanks again.

 

[krellen]

Hmmm. From our point of view, we *were* acting like a partner. We suggested RocketHub in the first place, assigned a person from our marketing team to help promote it, then gave it an ad push, and then lined up the merchandise production at cost from Split Reason.

Sounds like you were a partner, but you were just unaware of how charity usually works. Corporate partners in charities donate their time and resources to the charity - that is their contribution to the charity effort. They are not compensated for this (though they can write-off the donation as such.)

It wasn't unreasonable for you to expect the charity to pay for the merchandise, and it sounds like this is happening now, so you're okay on that front. In regards to the Publisher's Club memberships, however - that, along with your marketing time, would serve as The Escapist's contribution to the charity. It would not typically be repaid. It sounds like you've dropped this as well, so that's another good step.

At this point, I think what remains is bad blood and a lack of faith on EC's part in your ability to uphold your deals in the future (and possibly on your part towards EC's commitment to making The Escapist better). As both the larger party and the one who made the initial mis-steps (even if you have since backed off them), it (perhaps unfortunately) falls to you to take the first steps. Paying James is a good step on that, presuming the "check is [indeed] in the mail".

 

[Archon]

It wasn't unreasonable for you to expect the charity to pay for the merchandise, and it sounds like this is happening now, so you're okay on that front. In regards to the Publisher's Club memberships, however - that, along with your marketing time, would serve as The Escapist's contribution to the charity. It would not typically be repaid. It sounds like you've dropped this as well, so that's another good step.

At this point, I think what remains is bad blood and a lack of faith on EC's part in your ability to uphold your deals in the future (and possibly on your part towards EC's commitment to making The Escapist better). As both the larger party and the one who made the initial mis-steps (even if you have since backed off them), it (perhaps unfortunately) falls to you to take the first steps. Paying James is a good step on that, presuming the "check is [indeed] in the mail".

Krellen, thanks for your reply. I agree with you that it fell to us to take the first steps. That is why two weeks ago we said the first step would be to get James fully paid up, and that's why we have now paid James in full. I wish I'd been able to get him paid faster, but I wasn't able to.

FYI the entire RocketHub effort has never been a charity legally - RocketHub expressly forbids charities on its site, and all the backers aren't entitled to a deduction for a charitable donation. Legally the backers are getting their t-shirts and rewards in exchange for their money, and that's that. The Escapist isn't going to be able to deduct any of the advertising or Pub Club memberships as charitable deductions, either. I serve on the board of directors of two not-for-profits and do charitable work for Cystic Fibrosis Foundation, St. Judes Children's Hosptials, and a few other groups, and the guidelines there are very precise. RocketHub is not that - it's an essentially unregulated crowdfunding tool. I don't know that it matters per se, but you seem to be detail oriented and I think it's worth noting the details.

 

[krellen]

FYI the entire RocketHub effort has never been a charity legally - RocketHub expressly forbids charities on its site, and all the backers aren't entitled to a deduction for a charitable donation.

In that case, RocketHub was probably a bad choice in the first place. Perhaps something to chalk up to experience the next time (assuming the site survives for there to be a next time) something like this happens.

 

[intheweeds]

With all due respect(and i do respect you for what you have achieved with the Escapist), if James and crew have been paid all monies due for services (as you state in your Facebook note) and you have relinquished any claim on the surplus donation money as well, then why is there still a problem at all? You write that there is a problem on Facebook.

Thanks for your thoughts.

I can't speak for James, and contract negotiations are legally confidential, so all I can say is that: (a) as of yesterday, before his dialogue on Facebook, we had sent full payment; (b) we are not making any claim on any Rocket Hub money; and (c) we'd like Extra Credits to stay on the Escapist.

Here is the main problem that I am having. You have as I understand it an agreement to pay Extra Credits a certain amount of money for a new show each week. Regardless of the late payment thing(forget it exists, it's irrelevant), you pay a fee for a show. They deliver a show. Production costs are on them and have always been on them. Imagine instead that the product you were buying was a bathroom renovation. You pay company X for a new bathroom and company X delivers a bathroom. How much it costs them to buy supplies and pay their workers are costs that have nothing to do with you. They are 'production costs'. What if they did use the money for production costs? - It doesn't affect you. If they don't? - Again, it doesn't affect you. I don't understand why you care.

Without discussing James' contract in general due to privacy, our agreements over the last 5 years have generally been of two sorts. When we own the IP, then content creators get (a) a flat fee to cover production costs; (b) a bonus payment for every video stream their show delivers, regardless of any ads or not; and (c) a royalty on any other revenue the show makes from any source.

The idea is that we cover production cost, give them a bonus incentive to make good shows that will have great traffic, and work together to find additional revenue sources. In general this is a good relationship and a successful show can allow its creator to do quite well.

Unfortunately, due to the recession, we have fallen into problems when we fall behind on (a). As a result, many of our most recent deals we have structured such that we leave the IP rights with the content creator, and we only pay the traffic bonus (b) and affiliate revenue (c), with more generous royalties. The content creator is now covering their own production costs so they have more control and more upside.

So cost of production does affect us, at least on some of our contracts. The cost of producing shows probably represents 50% of The Escapist's costs every month, in fact. (The rest is overhead, bandwidth, servers, ad hosting, sales team, tech team, art team, editorial team).

then in point 7 you write:
" I then emailed James and his business development manager to explain that I wanted to get them paid as quickly as possible so that the back debt was not a sticking point in negotiations."

The only negotiation I see that you could possibly be talking about is how much wholesale Tshirts cost. Any other negotiations would imply that you disagree that you owe back payments or that you do in fact have a claim pending on the surplus donations. Anything they decide to do with surplus funds is between them and the people who donated money.

No. We already came to agreement on the t-shirt costs. We have an exclusive deal with Split Reason as our t-shirt provider. James and crew didn't like the cost of Split Reason shirts so they decided to do them on their own. We couldn't use a different vendor, but they were free to do so, and that's already been agreed on.

The negotiations I was referring to, and the only outstanding legal disagreement that I am aware of at this time, have nothing to do with payment or the RocketHub overflow. They have to do with whether or not Extra Credits will stay on the Escapist. We'd like it to.

While I agree that James has not handled this well and I will not be leaving the Escapist, you have a very double-speak quality to your replies here and on Facebook. This is a situation where you have made a mistake and now you need to take your hit and back off.

I am not sure where I'm double speaking. Hopefully what I've said above is helpful.

I have already admitted I made a mistake in not making things clear. As I said, neither side anticipated an overflow. We retracted any request for any share of the overflow weeks ago, in writing, when we realized how far apart our views on this situation were from James'. I stand by my *personal opinion* that the overflow money from fans of Extra Credits given to "save Extra Credits" should have been used on Extra Credits and not on a start-up publishing business, but a personal opinion is just that, and it's ultimately going to be up to the backers to decide.

Fair enough, thank you for you response to my thoughts. As I said, I hold no ill will towards the Escapist and will not be leaving. I appreciate that even with the best of intentions, business matters can get uglier than one expects.

As far as your IP agreements, maybe it makes better business sense to treat content contributors as sub-contractors and sign them to short term (yearly? this could vary) exclusivity deals. You may end up paying a higher fee for each episode, but by allowing production costs to be someone else's problem, it might be cheaper and safer legally in the long run. By allowing content providers to own their IP's you would gain quite a bit of goodwill in both the content provider and Escapist community while maintaining the ability to 'cancel' shows that aren't doing well easily. This is just my armchair opinion though, of course. Ouch, my capitalism is showing.

 

[Archon]

Fair enough, thank you for you response to my thoughts. As I said, I hold no ill will towards the Escapist and will not be leaving. I appreciate that even with the best of intentions, business matters can get uglier than one expects.

As far as your IP agreements, maybe it makes better business sense to treat content contributors as sub-contractors and sign them to short term (yearly? this could vary) exclusivity deals. You may end up paying a higher fee for each episode, but by allowing production costs to be someone else's problem, it might be cheaper and safer legally in the long run. By allowing content providers to own their IP's you would gain quite a bit of goodwill in both the content provider and Escapist community while maintaining the ability to 'cancel' shows that aren't doing well easily. This is just my armchair opinion though, of course. Ouch, my capitalism is showing.

Your armchair opinion makes good sense to me...

 

[deth2munkies]

While I do think that this started off as several naive business decisions followed by miscommunications followed by legal and business related talk that always sounds worse than it actually is, I can't place blame equally on both parties.

I would ask you, Escapist, how is it a viable business model to not pay your employees? This event acted as a catalyst for most of the other contributors to come forward about not being payed for extended periods, that's just not good business practice no matter who you are or what field you're in.

I don't see how the site will sustain itself without the numerous contributors that have made it so special over the years, and if they're not getting paid, sooner or later we'll stop having this content, and I don't want that. Not just for myself, but for the Escapist (because I love what they've been doing over the years), for the contributors (so they can hopefully have a PAYING job), and for all of us, the members who enjoy the content.

 

[zephae]

Ah, OK. Let me clarify. I wasn't trying to double speak, but I think I was chronologically unclear.

1) Our initial position was that the money should be used as follows: (a) subtract the cost of Allison's surgery; (b) subtract the cost of the merchandise; and (c) allocate 75% of the remainder towards Extra Credits production.
2) James felt that the remainder (c) should be used for his indie game publishing effort. While I disagreed, ultimately we didn't feel it was something worth contesting with James about. That left the only open question as the cost of the merchandise. James didn't like the amount it would cost do it with our Split Reason vendor ($16/shirt for production, shipping, and handling x 2000+ shirts), so he asked to do it on his own, and we said OK.
3) At that point, there was no longer any debate about the the Rocket Hub money.

You're right, nothing of what you said is actually doublespeak, but I have to say it does sound more than a little bit facetious that a businessman such as yourself doesn't know the power of a declarative sentence. To be honest, it seems to me that you've intentionally allowed this confusion to fester as a way to have these forums do the damage control for you (since we're all ignorant of this argument), but I'd expect that from anyone in your position so my response is "well played, sir." (By the way, this isn't an insult, it's just my cynicism playing out)

1) Let me suggest why this was a shady move on your part. First of all, you've all but outright claimed that you intended to use the spill-over to kill two birds with one stone and (probably) used the wording of your contract with EC as your starting point for discussion. Normally, that wouldn't be so unreasonable except that you were already in breach of contract and you were suggesting that money that was donated for a charity cause should be used to fund a for-profit deal (an EXISTING for-profit deal, no less), thus eliminating your contractual problems. And that's AFTER your lack of payment set up this whole fiasco in the first place. That's a pretty screwed up way to try and do business if it's not stated up front and looks like you're trying to take advantage of people's empathy, which would've been borderline fraud had you gone that route. You might say James's idea is on shaky ground as well for not being spelled out beforehand, but at least it's also a charity cause rather than a business deal.

2) A wholesale price of $16 a shirt for 2,000+ shirts? I don't know what that deal looks like, but you got hosed on that one. There is no reason for those things to be that expensive.

Hmmm. From our point of view, we *were* acting like a partner. We suggested RocketHub in the first place, assigned a person from our marketing team to help promote it, then gave it an ad push, and then lined up the merchandise production at cost from Split Reason. In any event, if we're reduced to arguing over whether we were "partners" or "assistants" I think we're splitting hairs.

No, we're not splitting hairs at all and I would've expected you to recognize pivotal distinction here. The difference I was getting at was one between a co-founder and a sponsor and the difference in claims to ownership those two groups have. All of this depends on those e-mails you guys are supposedly going to release and see just how much involvement you actually had. However, even crediting you with everything you just said as representative of the kind of input you gave, you still come off more as a sponsor providing resources to help save your product.

 

[XDravond]

What surprises me is it seems the escapist been low on money but I have not seen any increase in ads, the only ads I see (more or less) is the one for escapists own things (merchandise, shows etc) and occasional ads before shows.
Is the "problem" no one wants to put ads or is it that the escapist standards are really high on what content they put up?(ad wise..) or is it your prices.. or a mix of these?

One more thing is in the aftermath of this it might be a good idea to put up an explanation about what has happened and how the financial situation looks like for the escapist. Sometimes openes might not be a good idea (scare new contributors away), but at present it seems to me (as a completely unknowing by-sitter) the escapist would clean the reputation a bit if they did..

And of course since this looks (to me) like it is a bunch of misunderstandings and bad communication I will keep coming back to the site since I still enjoy more than just Extra credits here.

 

[Dastardly]

Regards,
Alexander Macris

I know there are a lot of people demonizing one side or the other, based on the incomplete information to which we are privy. I'm not one of those, I assure you.

This is one of those issues where people want to cram into a hero-villain framework, and it just doesn't work that way in this situation. What I see here, instead, is a situation in which two companies (of different sizes, but that is immaterial here) that were founded out of a love of the subject matter.

That kind of familiarity with the job lends itself to off-handedly making very informal arrangements, the "friendly verbal contract" sort of deal. Both companies have run into problems because of this, and neither is blameless.

For EC's part, I think it's their idealism that (while one of their best features) has stuck them in a corner. When you operate on a self-imposed "non-profit" schedule, or you continually fund a project with your own money, you're just one bad day away from losing money on it. By operating on such a narrow margin, while surrounded by variables, EC may have put them in a position that would have eventually turned desperate. I think it's perhaps that desperation that is causing them to only hear the very worst interpretation of what you're saying.

As for you guys, you're stuck in the unfortunate position of standing between "the fans" and "the shareholders." You got into this business for the fans, and you want to give them things they like (because you like them to). But you're kept in business by the shareholders, and at times like this they can get stingy with money. When they look at some of these productions, they see "fan-made" (unquestionably high quality fan-made stuff, but that's still the context they see). So when money gets tight, they're tempted to skimp there first--after all, they're just doing it for the love (and publicity!) right?

I don't for a second believe that you think that way. But you're the figurehead (or public whipping boy, if you like). That means you've been put in the unfortunate position of answering for decisions that may not have entirely been yours. But we're not all running around thinking you're a money-grubber, or one to back out of a deal.

They say never lend money to friends (and they should also say never borrow from them, either). It creates problems because each friend has certain assumptions about what impact that friendship has on the debt, and it becomes hard to ask for clarification without sounding like a dick--until the issue is already far past resolution.

This industry (electronic entertainment media) is still a young, close-knit industry full of "friends" (the same way the video game industry itself used to be, resulting in a lot of similar debacle).

My suggestion (like you need another)? What you're probably already doing: Find a way to settle up amicably with your current content creators, and then fix it going forward. Open up to the community and tell them what's going on. Formalize arrangements with content creators a bit more, make sure everyone knows the score. Assume nothing. And never loan money to (or borrow money from) friends.

Best wishes at the bargaining table,

Dastardly

EDIT: As for the EC folks -- I love ya'll. Really. But you're putting yourselves into situations that are... well... financially ambiguous. You're allowing the idealism to completely overrule pragmatism. And then, when that ambiguity causes problems, you seem to be playing the old "Because we're the idealists and they're the bean counters, we're right" card.

When a transaction is as nebulous as you allowed this one to become, problems will arise with communication. That's what most of this is--a breakdown in honest communication. And you're not innocent of that, guys.

Yet as more details come to light, we're beginning to see a lot of spin coming off of this. We're getting out-of-context claims and more than a little rhetoric aimed at villainizing the "other guys." Recognize this as what it truly was--a mutually ill-advised arrangement.

 

[Mr.Squishy]

Snip!

My suggestion (like you need another)? What you're probably already doing: Find a way to settle up amicably with your current content creators, and then fix it going forward. Open up to the community and tell them what's going on. Formalize arrangements with content creators a bit more, make sure everyone knows the score.

There's one thing I'd like to add to this - Please, do not bring in new contributors while you already have problems paying the ones you're currently employing. I do not mean to lecture, but seeing as Jim Sterling was recently employed...I found it to be a point that may have been best brought to light.

 

[Ophiuchus]

(snip)

I have no interest in taking sides, nor anything by way of advice to add... but I wanted to say thanks for clarifying the couple of things that were confusing me, and much respect for coming out and addressing things in a situation where many other CEOs would've kept their distance.

 

[jthm]

Alexander, are you incompetent or just too inexperienced to handle this role? The Escapist didn't fail here, you failed. And you failed horribly. As CEO your job is to ensure that your company fulfils all it's contracts and that all these contracts are certain and complete. The fact that this situation arose in the first place means you failed disastrously, not only did you fail to uphold your contracts towards your employees by not paying them on time you also failed to ensure that whatever contract you had with EC about the donation money was certain and complete.

You should have made a formal agreement with EC in regards to the overflow donation money. If you failed to do this then you've got no rights whatsoever to any of this money, that's the price of a failure as fucking big as yours. Now I suggest you review whatever agreements you have with the EC crew and uphold these even if it ends up costing you. You don't screw others over because of your own incompetency, even if they're nice enough to bend over for you. If you're incapable of doing even that I suggest you find another job because seeing this mess here you're not even close to being competent enough to handle this.

Your sincerely,

Hagi.

Hagi,
You are right that I should have made a formal agreement with EC in regards to the overflow donation money. Because I did not, the result is the situation at hand. That was a huge error on my part. I don't think either party expected that overflow would even be an issue, so we both had different expectations as to what would happen when overflow did develop. As I have said repeatedly, we retracted our request that they use the overflow money on Extra Credits weeks ago when the sharp difference of opinion on this matter became clear. I do not understand why it is being brought up now other than as a straw man.

As for my inexperience, I've never disguised that I founded the company when I was 25 and have run it since. It was literally my first job out of school. Every day that we experience growth is the first day of my life running a company of this size. So, yes, I remain inexperienced in many matters. Hopefully I have done more good than harm overall in serving in my role at The Escapist, but that is ultimately for others to judge.

Thanks for attempting an even-handed response.

Regards,
Alexander Macris

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.306165-A-call-for-common-sense-Bang-Escapist-and-Credits-heads-together-and-get-it-back-to-normal#12311854

I've been trying to put forward my idea on the matter, Hopefully Alex will agree with me. Rather than quibble over the excess funds, give the money to a 3rd party like Child's Play that helps infirm gamers. Then the money is still spent in a manner consistent with the spirit it was given in and there is nothing left to fight over besides paying the Escapist Contributors. As far as that issue goes, that overflow money was never intended for that and it was wrong to try to use it as such. Another source will have to be found. The same can be said of James wanting to fund an indie game studio. The road to hell is paved with good intentions after all.

 

[Kross]

Whether intentional or not this audience has been weaponized against the Escapist. Even though the guys from EC don't openly encourage people to cease being customers the hate on the forums is immense.

I will say this. I've done years of forum and IRC network moderating. Worked for this company as a GM for several online games. Generally consider myself to have a fairly thick skin against Internet comments.

The amount of hate that has been dug out of many long time fans of our site from people that I've worked hard to keep their content online and running as fast as possible has probably been the most personally hurtful experiences of my time dealing with such Internets.

On the other hand, as the bulk of our community has gotten to read the information at hand, the rational discourse and thirst for all sides of the story before judgement has been amazing to see. Thank you to those who are willing to give us the benefit of the doubt.