11–20 of 36 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Its understandable that you don't like zynga but this post isn't constructive. In general terms rant != cool.
Also, as far as I can tell the license is MIT so he can pretty much do whatever the hell he wants with it. Open source goes both ways.
Sure, ZNGA went down 6% yesterday, to about the same price it was on Wednesday, which is still 15% more than it was a couple weeks earlier. Not sure about Zynga as a company, but it's easy to overreact to the market's reaction to this news.
-They don't have to use FB credits -They don't have to use anything FB on Zynga.com -They got a guarantee if their is real-money gaming on FB.com, they have to be allowed in
So what if FB can now make their own games? They aren't going to.
good fuck you zynga. My first taste of their shitty ways, was just the other week. lidgren - is the best open networking library available for indie gamers and this fuck, goes and duplicates the code base, re-releasing it on a separate source control site. THEN he mails the group, including the author, asking for permission. After hearing about this, the author understandably is concerned about splitting the dev hub…
It's worth noting that Zynga has diversified revenue streams other than the games themselves: they have a pending Draw Something TV show [1] and physical merchandise [2]. That probably won't be enough to save the company, though. It wouldn't surprise me if Zynga pivots into a Rovio. [1] http://www.tvguide.com/News/CBS-Draw-Something-Pilot-1048932... [2] http://i.imgur.com/OZSZb.jpg
if zynga wants me to consider this going fwd they need to throw potential investors a bone. such "revenue streams" with no quantitative backup is plain speculation, water cooler chitchat.
We should all short Zynga. Zynga has nothing special, no competitive advantage, no intellectual capital, no special sauce to maintain their market share.. and what OTHER social platforms are there for games? Twitter? Google+? "Oh, our plan is to launch poker in the UK!" Um.. ok, and compete with 10000 other companies that had a decade head start and know all about the online poker business. Good luck with that.
I think your reasoning is perfectly logical and yet, it sounds similar to all the VCs who turned down google back in the day because hey all these other guys had been doing search for years so how can you compete with em? You may argue that Google actually had a plan to compete with them to which I'd ask you in how much depth you have researched Zynga's poker plans before reaching the conclusions in your post.
It's worth noting that Zynga has diversified revenue streams other than the games themselves: they have a pending Draw Something TV show [1] and physical merchandise [2]. That probably won't be enough to save the company, though. It wouldn't surprise me if Zynga pivots into a Rovio. [1] http://www.tvguide.com/News/CBS-Draw-Something-Pilot-1048932... [2] http://i.imgur.com/OZSZb.jpg
can you point me to the estimated revenue numbers? if zynga wants me to consider this going fwd they need to throw potential investors a bone. such "revenue streams" with no quantitative backup is plain speculation, water cooler chitchat.
Sure, ZNGA went down 6% yesterday, to about the same price it was on Wednesday, which is still 15% more than it was a couple weeks earlier. Not sure about Zynga as a company, but it's easy to overreact to the market's reaction to this news.
While I don't think Zynga is a great company to invest in, its stock price is very volatile, which probably makes for good frequent attention grabbing headlines. Sure, this news was part of the reason the stock price was down, but apparently market price setters still think the company is 13% more valuable than it was 30 days ago.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Also, as far as I can tell the license is MIT so he can pretty much do whatever the hell he wants with it. Open source goes both ways.
the point of the rant is that he was a dick
Sure, ZNGA went down 6% yesterday, to about the same price it was on Wednesday, which is still 15% more than it was a couple weeks earlier. Not sure about Zynga as a company, but it's easy to overreact to the market's reaction to this news.
Zynga was in a very special place at a very special time. Social gaming had an amazing stretch of months, but that time seems to have passed, at least in terms of being on fire. Zynga's relationship with Facebook is really the only thing that set them apart. Innovative games? They took the same game and kept reskinning it. When that fizzled out, they began copying other games wholesale. (lol at a title of theirs I saw recently: "Scramble with Friends") They're not a gaming company, but did a pretty good job of looking like one and getting paid in the process.
However, going public was dumb. They should have piled up cash and kept it all to themselves. Going public is meant for companies that are capable of being in it for the long haul. Not for companies that have figured out how to be successful in an industry that didn't even exists two years prior.
Zynga can probably transition into other areas, like mobile games, online gambling, etc. However, they are just one of many in that space. They have no secret sauce or magic. They can probably turn a profit, but nothing that can bring their stock price back to where it was.
The only ones who care how Zynga does are the crazy ones that hold ZNGA. Otherwise, they're just another gaming company right? If you do hold ZNGA, well, that sucks. Not a "sad set of circumstances" suck. More like "I blew my money on a Vegas weekend" suck.