MLG raises $11.3m in additional funding - Page 5

On March 14 2012 05:38 0kz wrote:
can anyone explain this with easy english to a person that doesn't know much about economy :D?

On March 14 2012 04:51 Sub40APM wrote:

VC's will shovel money at anything, as long as you call yourself "Web 2.0" They know that all it takes is one good initial public offering to make it all back and then some.

The real question is, as VC's continue to eat up portions of MLG how much operational control are they going to start to exert onto MLG, because even a dumb VC that primarily destroys its investors capital at it chases the next youtube/facebook/zynga eventually is going to want to see where its money is going.

So to answer your question, if MLG suddenly announces that they have a new Chief Operating Officer or some other VC watchdog who is directly on the staff, its bad news.

On March 14 2012 05:40 bonifaceviii wrote:

Rich people are giving MLG more money with the hope that MLG will eventually be able to make money for them.

On March 14 2012 05:39 zul wrote:
more debt. Dunno if this is a good move. : /

On March 14 2012 04:38 legaton wrote:
Sundance must sell a hell of a pitch, because it is hard to believe he's still able to secure more money for MLG. Since 2006, they have secured 67,6 millions in just 6 years!

2012-03-12 - equity + options - 11 300 698 dollars
2011-11-23 - debt + option -2 500 000 dollars
2011-08-12 - debt + option - 3 083 328
2010-12-30 - equity - 3 333 353 dollars
2009-08-31 - equity - 3 499 995 dollars
2008-12-31 - equity + option - 7 500 000 dollars
2007-06-18 - equity - 1 400 000 dollars
2006-11-20 - equity - 25 000 000 dollars
2006-07-31 - equity - 10 000 000 dollars

They have invested 11 millions per year for a generated revenue of what, 5 to 25 millions dollars?

As Sundance said, ‘something came along a little bit quicker than planned.’ I take this as the need to prove to investors that MLG is a viable business, or that the company just needed to raise sooner than they expected. This led to the company needing to prove that its core idea ‘had wings.’ I take Sundance to mean by that statement: ‘will people pay for what we are providing?’ So, the company went ‘all in,’ to see what would happen.

That they transformed their own office into a studio for the event was likely no accident. I would bet that MLG was looking to run the event at the highest level it could, at the lowest cost possible. Therefore, by shaving some some expense by hosting the event themselves, they could provide the same value for viewers, and show a profit, which it could take to investors as proof that competitive gaming is no fantasy.

On March 14 2012 03:38 Lumi wrote:
I'd like to buy Sundance a drink

On March 14 2012 05:48 legaton wrote:


They have actually sold very little debt based assets, like 4 millions? Most of their money come from private equity, aka they sell a part of the property of MLG to new investors.

On March 14 2012 06:00 SupLilSon wrote:
So Sundance claims they have to sell their services for ludicrously high prices because of a lack of money and investors in the scene and then turns around with 11 million in funding? Can someone with an education in business or finance explain to me how they manage to lose all this money?