"I-Kore Bought back by Old Guard" Topic
76 Posts
All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.
Remember that you can Stifle members so that you don't have to read their posts.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to the Consumer Affairs Message Board
Areas of InterestGeneral
Featured Hobby News Article
Featured Link
Featured Ruleset
Featured Showcase ArticleA cheap way to pick up on the latest fad and get your own dice cup for wargaming?
Featured Profile ArticleThanks to the generosity of TMP readers, there has been much progress in building a new home for our staff editor and her family, evicted from their home.
Current Poll
|
Pages: 1 2
Scrivener | 11 Mar 2004 8:40 a.m. PST |
Vonbloodbath: you're mixing apples and oranges in your rebuttal. I used to be heavily invested in GW products because they offered good value for money. That is no longer the case. GW gets a lot of criticism because people who used to like their games can't afford to keep playing them and don't like the new version. That is enormously different from hating GW simply because you think Rick Priestly is a jerk or dislike the CEO. That being said, it's a free market, so you don't have to buy anything you don't want. Understand, however, that most of us don't know or care about who runs i-kore, we simply like the games they produce and want to see them continue their operations. I just introduced my friends to VOID via the shiny new boxed set. My friends loved it and we were poised to set up demos in our local stores and get them to carry the product as well. Now all of that is in limbo. Blame whichever John you want to, we don't care, and even if we did, there's nothing we can do about it anyway. We simply want to hear if our games are going to be there next month. From what is out there so far, they will, and that's good enough for us. |
Black Rommel | 11 Mar 2004 9:36 a.m. PST |
I am just happy that I can pick up all the VOID and Celtos mini's I want for dirt cheap now :). Its never a good thing when a company goes under (Enron and the like excluded, but it hurts the person making $8 an hour more than the CEO with a zillion dollars), and I never wish anyone would/will go under. But when the same 3-4 people show a trend of Starting a company, running it till bankrupt, Starting a new company, running it till bankrupt, Starting a company.... It gets old the third or fourth time around. |
Vonbloodbath | 11 Mar 2004 10:38 a.m. PST |
Sorry, the GW thing was directed at one guy in particular who I know... You're absolutely right that if you don't mind who runs i-kore, it's not a factor for you, but for others it is. The example I've used a lot is Nestle...does your desire for a Kit-kat override your distaste for the firm. Same principle applies; it's a value judgement. For you, the quality of the game is more important, and that's fine. For me, and others, the history of the people running the company is significant, and relevant, and will influence whether we will or wont support the company. Neither is right, or wrong, just different. |
sirlancelot | 11 Mar 2004 11:17 a.m. PST |
[I am also sure that this will only cause confusion with customers] Gosh, it already has. I *thought* I had already heard the name somewhere. I hadn't. Thanks for clearing it up. |
ttauri | 11 Mar 2004 12:25 p.m. PST |
[I know that compared to I-Kore, Mammoth Miniatures is small fry but I am also sure that this will only cause confusion with customers.] I thought it was you since the mammoth had stuck in my head. (Horrible image there) |
Jakar Nilson | 11 Mar 2004 6:19 p.m. PST |
Before this burst, I couldn't name a single non-sculptor staff member of I-Kore. And that didn't seem to matter. And now to learn that they were there with this and that company that went bust before. They had great products. Why mess it up? Why must the CEOs make way more money? In gaming, they don't sculpt, cast, design, illustrate, etc. In telecom, they don't design, research, assemble, assist the customer, install, etc. They aren't the most valuable person there, they aren't the people whom people see when they see these companies. With all that's happening, I don't even think that CEOs should make minimum wage. |
sagunt | 11 Mar 2004 10:11 p.m. PST |
once again, i agree with jakar. |
Snowballs Chance | 12 Mar 2004 12:22 a.m. PST |
Jakar, just for the record the two main directors of ikore DO design so that is not a valid comparison as for going bust? well the last company was target and, according to the folk at ikore, target went bust because the finance was pulled from under them by the head company in stokholm. true? i don't know. but then i don't know that the other version of the story is either the only comments i have heard about how "the johns" make everything go bust are from ex-employees or certain representatives (paid or unpaid) of excelsior. everyone else who doesn't know one way or the other (as your commets have proven) seem to be happy jumping on the band wagon and no one has taken the time to even think whether it is true let alone try and find out i don't know what the real story is but we have parties who have a vested interest in them doing badly saying that they are the devil and themselves saying it wasn't them at all there are two sides to every story |
Ironmammoth | 12 Mar 2004 1:34 a.m. PST |
Although I feel that the "Johns" are getting a reputation for jinxing companies it is a bit unfair. With Target the rug was definately pulled out from under them. And now of course if the claims of fraud perpetrated by one of the directors are true (I have to state it that way as nothing has been proven in court yet) then this also amounts to the rug being pulled from under them. I know at least one of the people involved in the new incarnation of I-Kore/Urban Mammoth is insisting that the details of the fraud are passed on to the relevant authorities so there must be some basis of truth in it. In an industry with so many small companies coming and going all the time it is not surprising that even some of the bigger ones disappear as well. I think you can admire the "Johns" persistance for sticking with it. Also they must do something right or otherwise people would not invest with them in the first place. |
Mike of White Dog | 12 Mar 2004 5:53 a.m. PST |
Hi Here in the UK wargames manufacturing sector we seem to have a very small number of companies who over-extend themselves, take on financial commitments which they can not meet and then go bust. A friend acting as a frontman steps in a buys the company assets thus clearing the debts. After a respectable period, the company changes hands again, back to the original owner. One can be forgiven for looking at the I-Kore situation and feeling, particularly with a past history, that they too fit this pattern. Now, we seem to have lost sight of the losers in this - the people and companies and banks owed money. They either now go bust or recoup their losses by increasing prices - and that means we all pay! I-Kore and before them Target and before them Grendal/Kryomek have produced some great stuff, I have a lot in my personal gaming collection and it has given me a lot of pleasure, but if the end result is my bank charges increase due to bad debt, then these guys are better off out of the hobby. Why should my piddling little company pay for John's Merc, 4wheeled drive or whatever? Cheers Mike |
groatnargle | 12 Mar 2004 6:51 a.m. PST |
Dear Mike, I know both of the I-kore Johns. One does not have a car, the other has a beatup hatchback. All the best John |
Scrivener | 12 Mar 2004 8:15 a.m. PST |
Indeed, there is another side to things as well: running a small business is hard work. Ex-employees often have axes to grind and without knowing the full story, it's hard for me to work up much animosity toward anyone on the design team. I've never heard of anyone who went into gaming for the money. The money sucks, particularly for start-ups. It may well be that one or both Johns are lousy managers/CEOs, but if they are willing to do the work, they're better than most gamers who just *talk* about making a game. If the problems are chronic, then I would expect the backers know this and may insist on some additional say. But the games are great, and that's what counts for me. And yes, Kit-Kats are yummy, as are Nestle Crunches. |
Mike of White Dog | 12 Mar 2004 10:25 a.m. PST |
My point was that in situations like this there are losers and directly or indirectly we all pay. The car thing was a silly comment. Like I said I have had a lot of fun out of these guys over the years. Cheers Mike
|
Wulfen | 12 Mar 2004 11:16 a.m. PST |
From everything I've heard, I doubt I'll be supporting this new 'venture'. I really don't care what anyone else says, but my opinion of a company and how it's run/managed has alot to do with my supporting their product. I think there's something amiss here, and I won't support people who I perceive as dishonest. |
Vonbloodbath | 12 Mar 2004 1:02 p.m. PST |
Yes, there are two sides to every story. Yes, as a former employee I have "issues" (although I don't think I have an axe to grind, per se). You're right to be sceptical concerning what I, and others, say. But equally you should be sceptical concerning what people who have a vested interest in the company (i.e. current employees, directors etc.) have to say. I can't speak for anyone else, but I believe that it is clear from my posts, what is opinion, and what is fact, to the extent that anything can be 100% certain. It is a fact that there is a long history there of running companies which go bust. The conclusions you draw from that, or choose not to, are you're own concern. I know things which John has said and done, which others do not. In my opinion, they show John in an altogether unflattering light. But that's my opnion, and I don't expect everyone to agree, or to accept that I am telling the truth. All I hope is that people are, at least, aware of this history, and make their decision to support, or not support, the new venture in an informed manner. |
Scrivener | 12 Mar 2004 2:56 p.m. PST |
You know, one of the nastiest smears you can use is "If you only knew the truth." It's right up there with "I can tell you stories..." If the guy did things that were nasty, spill. I'm sick of people who hint at foul behavior, but then act like they are taking some sort of moral high ground by not backing up their hints and allegations. That's exactly how your emails read. I've been smeared by people doing the same thing and I think it's pretty low. If you hate John Robertson, fine. Maybe he kicked your dog to death or stole your girlfriend, I don't care. The fact that companies go under often has nothing to do with who runs them. I know a lot of small businessmen that have gone under only to start over and make a better go if it the next time. What you're doing is trying to kill them off before they even have a shot at making a comeback. It's pretty clear that you want them to fail because of a personal vendetta. That's swell, hate John or the Johns all you want. Write them a nasty note, key their car or whatever. But you have no right to ruin the fun of gamers - and the lives of people who might get a job at their old company back. I don't often go off like that, but I'm tired of all the non-specific charges. |
Snowballs Chance | 12 Mar 2004 3:36 p.m. PST |
vonbloodbath, you are quite correct and i am very sure that those with a vested interest in the company would also have a bias in what they say but, for exmaple, "having a long history of running companies that went bust" whe the penultimate one they did not run, that was apparently controlled in sweden i believe, the previous one had more than enough left for bob ferguson to take over and the initial venture was, allegedly, an small time operation that they ran out of a garden shed i appreciate there are issues here on both sides, but they hardly strike me as miniature moguls of an evil empire, but that is just my personal opinion and you are perfectly entitled to yours. i think this is the stage where we both agree to disagree |
Mark Brendan | 12 Mar 2004 6:22 p.m. PST |
Hi There, Ive watched with intest the furore over i-Kore both here and on the Miniforums, the main i-Kore fan site. I've been debating whether or not throw in my tuppence worth, so here goes. I've worked in the past at both Target and i-Kore as a game designer, so thats mainly what I'd like to talk about. John Grant is without any equivocation the best designer I know--and that includes Jervis Johnstone and Rick Priestley (no offence if you're reading this, it's a personal opinion).There's more to game design than having cool ideas and a modicum of writing talent, and it was John who trained me in the methods and schema of design. This not only have enabled me design games tolerably well, but also to write colour text and fiction (I hate the term 'fluff', you don't call good artwork 'doodles') in a better and more structured way. As for John Robertson, he is also a man I'd count as a friend and he invested a great deal of himself and made many sacrifices to make i-Kore a goer. I for one am very sorry that this has happened and I wish them the best of luck with keeping the IP going, even if there is a selfish element given my involvement with the two games. Peace Out. |
christian | 13 Mar 2004 3:24 a.m. PST |
I have worked with John Robertson for about 2 years now, and think he is a very good guy. I know that he has put much work and time into I-Kore and always tried to do the best with I-Kore. |
Hasslefriesian | 13 Mar 2004 3:43 a.m. PST |
Hi Mark, I like both John and John too. As you say, John G is a great games developer, he has a flair for simplifying difficult concepts in to rules for gameplay that make things run really smooth. Also, John Robertson is a bit of a visionary. He has great ideas and they seem to pop out from him at random and at great speed. As you say, they have both invested a great deal of time, effort and money in to what was I-Kore, so it is a shame that things have turned out the way they have. I have also invested a lot of myself in to old I-Kore. All of the work I've done in the last four years is in the IP and it's sad to see it be taken away from me (I don't know if anyone will understand that though. I've said elsewhere that the miniatures are my babies and most of the time I gave the impression that I was joking around, but there is an element of me in all of them that makes it very personal). BUT, regardless of that, I am not going to be working for new I-Kore (unless there's a ridiculous ammount of cash to make me overcome my scruples. Every man has his price). With what I know I simply don't trust certain people involved. I will be walking away from the last four years of my professional life because one of the things I was asked to sacrifice for I-Kore is my integrity along with that of the old management. Rightly or wrongly, truth was withheld from the public and cover stories were created when things that had been going wrong for ages caught up with them. An official scapegoat was appointed. I feel that I was lied to in an attempt to "keep me sweet" and it appears that some miniatures I made for I-Kore were given away when it appeared all was lost. The whole affair feels dirty to me and I'm glad that I am not playing any further part in it. I wont go in to why I think I-Kore failed. It's old news and has little relevence here. But maybe what has happened is for the best. Under stricter management the new I-Kore will hopefully avoid the mistakes made in the past. I sincerely wish them all well. I hope everyone involved will prosper, make good miniatures, design good games and give good customer service. Cheers, Kev |
Hasslefriesian | 14 Mar 2004 3:04 p.m. PST |
"Sorry to inject a bit of realism but your thinking is not running straight. Sure Joe Public will go in and buy, but the traders will think long and hard about dealing with an unstable business - track record is certainly important." The thing is their plan (as outlined to me last year, so it may be slightly out of date) is to bypass distributors and retailers where possible and go for direct online sales with a flashy new website and intensive web-based marketing. When there's a proven track record, and people are "hooked" they'll start ofering to stores and distributors because there will be a market that they can show exists. So initially they aren't going to be too bothered with the reactions of distributors and retails who have been burned by the collapse of I-Kore. When things start getting big again they will be able to go in from a position of strength and distributors who wont take the stock will look like they are cutting their noses off to spite their faces. |
darrelr | 14 Mar 2004 4:17 p.m. PST |
I hope they ship purchased product out faster than they did shipping out replacement parts for missing pieces. It took over 3 months for me to get replacement Arms for my missing Junker Exo Suits and 6 months and still waiting for Wings for my Archangels... Sure it's a niggly thing, but still - Models with out the proper parts are pretty much useless... Oh well I hope it works out for them... Cheers Darrel |
Scrivener | 15 Mar 2004 8:32 a.m. PST |
"Sorry to inject a bit of realism but your thinking is not running straight. Sure Joe Public will go in and buy, but the traders will think long and hard about dealing with an unstable business - track record is certainly important." So launching an anonymous campaign of character assassination is okay? If anyone's thinking isn't straight, it's yours. If people want to do business with the company, they will. Whispering vague rumors that someone once did something naughty is just plain despicable. Don't like them? Don't buy their stuff. I do like them, have yet to hear any concrete reasons why anyone affiliated with the company is evil or otherwise undeserving of my cash. The only thing that is certain is that they may have better game design skills than business sense, which is a COMMON trait in this industry. If anything, I respect their persistance. Maybe it's because I know people who have run start-ups, and most have failed. Some have failed several times - often through no fault of their own. But they keep trying. Sorry, but I won't fault that. |
Jakar Nilson | 15 Mar 2004 8:43 a.m. PST |
Sorry, shades of John Roth of Nortel and Michael Copeland of Corel have muddled my view of corporate executives... (lots of layoffs in the Ottawa region, HQ at the time to both companies, and both CEOs give themselves bonuses...) |
Hasslefriesian | 15 Mar 2004 2:57 p.m. PST |
The Johns didn't give themselves bonuses though. |
Pages: 1 2
|