|
On March 06 2013 00:28 chaos021 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 05 2013 17:34 MrRicewife wrote:
By the way, The decision must not be obvious because you're wrong. If you knew what capitalism was about, you would have to agree building a trusting relationship with your customers is just as important as expanding and growing. The two go hand in hand. So yes, sometimes you have to suffer in the interest of the future relationship you create with your customers. In this case, IPL took the ez way out, and now is left with a lot of disappointed customers.
If you care to disagree, Microsoft is an example:
Slowly but surely, they have been ignoring the demands of what people want. They have been failing to listen, and in turn, gave up what was essentially (and legally at one point) a monopoly to Apple. Which is a company that one man worked at who could understand just how important it was to please their customer, or at the very least convince them that they care. LOL. You're nuts. I wouldn't bleed a crapload of money just to keep a bunch of people happy. You're basically saying they should bleed their backers' money even though they know they won't break even. Would you bleed money if you knew a potato farm you invested in was going under regardless? I love some french fries man. You should show me some love. Also, if you think Steve Jobs gave a flying shit what anyone else thought, you have an amazing talent at revising history.
Actually he isn't wrong. The majority of businesses make their money not from first or one time customers but repeat business. His example of Microsoft is a good one as is companies like McDonald's or Walmart. They make money because people keep coming back and they keep coming back because they've built a relationship with those people where they get what they want and know what to expect from the company. People who regularly shop at Walmart know how much they can expect to spend on groceries there each week with only minor variations and know what kind of quality to expect in the products they purchase.
Walmart sometimes has to take losses in order to keep the customer happy because they know, long term, that they will make far more money if they replace the returned item than if they piss off the customer who never returns to purchase another one. Now from what I understand, IGN isn't going out of business but the IPL which is simply a part of them is. Backing out on their customers does far more damage than simply the cost of that or those customers. IGN is forever associated with the IPL. Therefore when IPL makes a customer angry, IGN has to deal with it. They have to bite the cost. These people talk. If you go to Walmart to buy some new clothes and while you are there you see an irate customer complaining because they sold him a bad TV then shut down their electronics department and don't make it right, you will probably think twice about giving your business to them. If they don't care about one customer, all the rest are just as unimportant and normally bankruptcy is just around the corner. Nobody shops at a store that doesn't follow the saying, "the customer is always right."
|
Damn. I loved watching the IPL events. Guess all we have left in the US is MLG.
|
Damn IPL had not such a brilliant marketing plan with venture capital only 
|
On March 06 2013 01:01 Magic_Mike wrote:Show nested quote +On March 06 2013 00:28 chaos021 wrote:On March 05 2013 17:34 MrRicewife wrote:
By the way, The decision must not be obvious because you're wrong. If you knew what capitalism was about, you would have to agree building a trusting relationship with your customers is just as important as expanding and growing. The two go hand in hand. So yes, sometimes you have to suffer in the interest of the future relationship you create with your customers. In this case, IPL took the ez way out, and now is left with a lot of disappointed customers.
If you care to disagree, Microsoft is an example:
Slowly but surely, they have been ignoring the demands of what people want. They have been failing to listen, and in turn, gave up what was essentially (and legally at one point) a monopoly to Apple. Which is a company that one man worked at who could understand just how important it was to please their customer, or at the very least convince them that they care. LOL. You're nuts. I wouldn't bleed a crapload of money just to keep a bunch of people happy. You're basically saying they should bleed their backers' money even though they know they won't break even. Would you bleed money if you knew a potato farm you invested in was going under regardless? I love some french fries man. You should show me some love. Also, if you think Steve Jobs gave a flying shit what anyone else thought, you have an amazing talent at revising history. Actually he isn't wrong. The majority of businesses make their money not from first or one time customers but repeat business. His example of Microsoft is a good one as is companies like McDonald's or Walmart. They make money because people keep coming back and they keep coming back because they've built a relationship with those people where they get what they want and know what to expect from the company. People who regularly shop at Walmart know how much they can expect to spend on groceries there each week with only minor variations and know what kind of quality to expect in the products they purchase. Walmart sometimes has to take losses in order to keep the customer happy because they know, long term, that they will make far more money if they replace the returned item than if they piss off the customer who never returns to purchase another one. Now from what I understand, IGN isn't going out of business but the IPL which is simply a part of them is. Backing out on their customers does far more damage than simply the cost of that or those customers. IGN is forever associated with the IPL. Therefore when IPL makes a customer angry, IGN has to deal with it. They have to bite the cost. These people talk. If you go to Walmart to buy some new clothes and while you are there you see an irate customer complaining because they sold him a bad TV then shut down their electronics department and don't make it right, you will probably think twice about giving your business to them. If they don't care about one customer, all the rest are just as unimportant and normally bankruptcy is just around the corner. Nobody shops at a store that doesn't follow the saying, "the customer is always right."
So you're saying IPL shouldn't go out of business because it pisses off their customers? What if they don't have the money to go on and don't expect to become profitable? Businesses that don't make money can't exist FYI. The purpose of a business is to make money, not to donate charity to a cause they're passionate about. I can't believe you need this explained to you lol.
|
|
|
I always knew this kind of thing could eventually disappear. IPL started out with ZERO BUDGET and was basically a pet project of IGN. Eventually the man upstairs would stop funding this endeavor and poof its gone.
|
On March 06 2013 01:11 Butterednuts wrote:
Damn. I loved watching the IPL events. Guess all we have left in the US is MLG.
Meh, don't forget NASL. But yes MLG will likely continue to dominate the scene as far as frequency of events and *crosses fingers* holding a live offline open bracket sans Dallas.
|
DANGG one of the few foreign tournaments i liked T_T
|
On March 06 2013 02:20 asdfOu wrote:
DANGG one of the few foreign tournaments i liked T_T
Starcraft in Vegas doesn't happen enough! T_T I'm hoping we won't have to wait long for it to make its return.
|
On March 05 2013 09:52 IGNProLeague wrote:
and we hope you will stay with us for the next exciting chapter.
Can somebody please explain what they are talking about? Do they mean those "partner tournaments"?
|
Bisutopia19230 Posts
I think the problem is they didn't spend enough money on Booth Girls. IPL definitely needed more booth girls.
|
On March 06 2013 01:23 Doodsmack wrote:Show nested quote +On March 06 2013 01:01 Magic_Mike wrote:On March 06 2013 00:28 chaos021 wrote:On March 05 2013 17:34 MrRicewife wrote:
By the way, The decision must not be obvious because you're wrong. If you knew what capitalism was about, you would have to agree building a trusting relationship with your customers is just as important as expanding and growing. The two go hand in hand. So yes, sometimes you have to suffer in the interest of the future relationship you create with your customers. In this case, IPL took the ez way out, and now is left with a lot of disappointed customers.
If you care to disagree, Microsoft is an example:
Slowly but surely, they have been ignoring the demands of what people want. They have been failing to listen, and in turn, gave up what was essentially (and legally at one point) a monopoly to Apple. Which is a company that one man worked at who could understand just how important it was to please their customer, or at the very least convince them that they care. LOL. You're nuts. I wouldn't bleed a crapload of money just to keep a bunch of people happy. You're basically saying they should bleed their backers' money even though they know they won't break even. Would you bleed money if you knew a potato farm you invested in was going under regardless? I love some french fries man. You should show me some love. Also, if you think Steve Jobs gave a flying shit what anyone else thought, you have an amazing talent at revising history. Actually he isn't wrong. The majority of businesses make their money not from first or one time customers but repeat business. His example of Microsoft is a good one as is companies like McDonald's or Walmart. They make money because people keep coming back and they keep coming back because they've built a relationship with those people where they get what they want and know what to expect from the company. People who regularly shop at Walmart know how much they can expect to spend on groceries there each week with only minor variations and know what kind of quality to expect in the products they purchase. Walmart sometimes has to take losses in order to keep the customer happy because they know, long term, that they will make far more money if they replace the returned item than if they piss off the customer who never returns to purchase another one. Now from what I understand, IGN isn't going out of business but the IPL which is simply a part of them is. Backing out on their customers does far more damage than simply the cost of that or those customers. IGN is forever associated with the IPL. Therefore when IPL makes a customer angry, IGN has to deal with it. They have to bite the cost. These people talk. If you go to Walmart to buy some new clothes and while you are there you see an irate customer complaining because they sold him a bad TV then shut down their electronics department and don't make it right, you will probably think twice about giving your business to them. If they don't care about one customer, all the rest are just as unimportant and normally bankruptcy is just around the corner. Nobody shops at a store that doesn't follow the saying, "the customer is always right." So you're saying IPL shouldn't go out of business because it pisses off their customers? What if they don't have the money to go on and don't expect to become profitable? Businesses that don't make money can't exist FYI. The purpose of a business is to make money, not to donate charity to a cause they're passionate about. I can't believe you need this explained to you lol.
Nope, he's saying it's fine if they go out of business, but to handle this as ass backwards as they did pretty much burned a lot of bridges for people.
|
On March 06 2013 00:28 chaos021 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 05 2013 17:34 MrRicewife wrote:
By the way, The decision must not be obvious because you're wrong. If you knew what capitalism was about, you would have to agree building a trusting relationship with your customers is just as important as expanding and growing. The two go hand in hand. So yes, sometimes you have to suffer in the interest of the future relationship you create with your customers. In this case, IPL took the ez way out, and now is left with a lot of disappointed customers.
If you care to disagree, Microsoft is an example:
Slowly but surely, they have been ignoring the demands of what people want. They have been failing to listen, and in turn, gave up what was essentially (and legally at one point) a monopoly to Apple. Which is a company that one man worked at who could understand just how important it was to please their customer, or at the very least convince them that they care. LOL. You're nuts. I wouldn't bleed a crapload of money just to keep a bunch of people happy. You're basically saying they should bleed their backers' money even though they know they won't break even. Would you bleed money if you knew a potato farm you invested in was going under regardless? I love some french fries man. You should show me some love. Also, if you think Steve Jobs gave a flying shit what anyone else thought, you have an amazing talent at revising history.
Again, with these personal attacks, why can't anyone just debate properly anymore? Anyway...
I won't bother explaining why you're wrong, simply because Magic_Mike made it quite clear why you are. I will answer your question though. Your potato example is kind of a poor example of what we are talking about, but I know what you were trying to say. If said potato farm (my farm) promised a lot of regular customers that they were going to hold a potato convention (in hopes to make money from selling potatoes to them, potato merchandise, etc), and because my staff is so incompetent that last minute we realized it would be a flop, YES, I would still run the convention. 100% without even thinking.
Why? Because I'm not a stupid idiot who can't vision the future. Who realizes that a dollar is valuable, but customer appreciation and relationship is invaluable a word that most people in this thread seem to be lacking in their vocab.
Now, I must correct you about your Steve Jobs comment. It's very clear to me that you didn't read his autobiography, written by a respectable, trusting author, someone who doesn't stretch facts to make the story better, but someone who paints a picture black and white without anything hidden in the wood works; Walter Isaacson. Just that book alone should have shown you that Steve Jobs did in fact, as you immaturely put, "gave a flying shit". I'm not even going to get into his motivations of why he created apple, and why he left, why he came back, why he innovated entire industries etc etc. I just want to make it clear, that that man did care about what everyone else thought. And that is exactly, and in large, why Apple was successful. A true visionary is invaluable, and the rewards are endless, as proven by said company, and many others, as Magic_Mike so kindly pointed out. In other words, read a book before you say something, because that's just silly, and it makes you look ignorant.
On March 06 2013 00:51 nimdil wrote:Show nested quote +On March 05 2013 17:34 MrRicewife wrote:
By the way, The decision must not be obvious because you're wrong. If you knew what capitalism was about, you would have to agree building a trusting relationship with your customers is just as important as expanding and growing. The two go hand in hand. So yes, sometimes you have to suffer in the interest of the future relationship you create with your customers. In this case, IPL took the ez way out, and now is left with a lot of disappointed customers.
If you care to disagree, Microsoft is an example:
Slowly but surely, they have been ignoring the demands of what people want. They have been failing to listen, and in turn, gave up what was essentially (and legally at one point) a monopoly to Apple. Which is a company that one man worked at who could understand just how important it was to please their customer, or at the very least convince them that they care. Wow, that's complete nonsense plus Apple evangelism in one. On a side note - Microsoft is still king in office environment and in gaming world. And that's where are people really loyal to them.
Oh, sorry. I am so glad you took the time to elaborate and explain why it is non-sense. I can see clearly now, and I digress. Thank you for pointing out how nonsensical everything I said was, I feel so foolish now.... :/
On a side note - Microsoft is not king, lol. I'm very happy you decided to provide evidence on your claim though. I'll just post a little something, because oddly enough, it conflicts to your hardcore evidence: http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2012/12/13/microsofts-market-share-drops-from-97-to-20-in-just-over-a-decade/
In case you don't feel like taking that long journey by clicking on another link and, gasp, reading... I'll summarize for you: Microsoft, in a decade, has lost market share from 97% to 20% in a decade or so. How you define market share, is really up to you, but how I define it as, is the Lion's share in certain industries. And when you total them all up, OS sales, Phones, Gaming, Tablets, Subscriptions, Music, etc... Microsoft was at the very top with an impressive monopoly, and crashed and burned because they simply just weren't listening to us. They were pumping out shit products, and gave the worst response : you can have any color you want, as long as it's black. Well, that just gives a huge opportunity for a hungry businessman to come in and eat you alive, which is what has happened the last 15 years to Microsoft. Failure after failure, and now look at Microsoft... struggling in comparison to their competition. Almost a riches to rags.
This was all because they just couldn't understand that consumers aren't stupid, or if we are, at least we know what we want. So listen to us. And if you don't want to do that, at the very least, trick us into thinking it's what we want, kind of like what Apple has done. Granted the products they produce are still very good, just extremely controlled, which in turn, is costing them a lot of business to Google. A company which really stands alone at listening to what the consumer wants and actually gives them what they want. Let's see here... hmm... yup, google is still rich, and expanding. Kind of the opposite of the king, Microsoft x.x
One thing that you said was slightly correct, yes, I'm somewhat of an Apple fanboy as you will. Do I own any apple products? No actually. Have I? Yes, but I sold those products and moved on to a company who treats me right and listens to me. But I do appreciate a good company, Apple, so in turn you will see me evangelize that company, sure.
On March 06 2013 01:01 Magic_Mike wrote:Show nested quote +On March 06 2013 00:28 chaos021 wrote:On March 05 2013 17:34 MrRicewife wrote:
By the way, The decision must not be obvious because you're wrong. If you knew what capitalism was about, you would have to agree building a trusting relationship with your customers is just as important as expanding and growing. The two go hand in hand. So yes, sometimes you have to suffer in the interest of the future relationship you create with your customers. In this case, IPL took the ez way out, and now is left with a lot of disappointed customers.
If you care to disagree, Microsoft is an example:
Slowly but surely, they have been ignoring the demands of what people want. They have been failing to listen, and in turn, gave up what was essentially (and legally at one point) a monopoly to Apple. Which is a company that one man worked at who could understand just how important it was to please their customer, or at the very least convince them that they care. LOL. You're nuts. I wouldn't bleed a crapload of money just to keep a bunch of people happy. You're basically saying they should bleed their backers' money even though they know they won't break even. Would you bleed money if you knew a potato farm you invested in was going under regardless? I love some french fries man. You should show me some love. Also, if you think Steve Jobs gave a flying shit what anyone else thought, you have an amazing talent at revising history. Actually he isn't wrong. The majority of businesses make their money not from first or one time customers but repeat business. His example of Microsoft is a good one as is companies like McDonald's or Walmart. They make money because people keep coming back and they keep coming back because they've built a relationship with those people where they get what they want and know what to expect from the company. People who regularly shop at Walmart know how much they can expect to spend on groceries there each week with only minor variations and know what kind of quality to expect in the products they purchase. Walmart sometimes has to take losses in order to keep the customer happy because they know, long term, that they will make far more money if they replace the returned item than if they piss off the customer who never returns to purchase another one. Now from what I understand, IGN isn't going out of business but the IPL which is simply a part of them is. Backing out on their customers does far more damage than simply the cost of that or those customers. IGN is forever associated with the IPL. Therefore when IPL makes a customer angry, IGN has to deal with it. They have to bite the cost. These people talk. If you go to Walmart to buy some new clothes and while you are there you see an irate customer complaining because they sold him a bad TV then shut down their electronics department and don't make it right, you will probably think twice about giving your business to them. If they don't care about one customer, all the rest are just as unimportant and normally bankruptcy is just around the corner. Nobody shops at a store that doesn't follow the saying, "the customer is always right."
On March 06 2013 01:23 Doodsmack wrote:Show nested quote +On March 06 2013 01:01 Magic_Mike wrote:On March 06 2013 00:28 chaos021 wrote:On March 05 2013 17:34 MrRicewife wrote:
By the way, The decision must not be obvious because you're wrong. If you knew what capitalism was about, you would have to agree building a trusting relationship with your customers is just as important as expanding and growing. The two go hand in hand. So yes, sometimes you have to suffer in the interest of the future relationship you create with your customers. In this case, IPL took the ez way out, and now is left with a lot of disappointed customers.
If you care to disagree, Microsoft is an example:
Slowly but surely, they have been ignoring the demands of what people want. They have been failing to listen, and in turn, gave up what was essentially (and legally at one point) a monopoly to Apple. Which is a company that one man worked at who could understand just how important it was to please their customer, or at the very least convince them that they care. LOL. You're nuts. I wouldn't bleed a crapload of money just to keep a bunch of people happy. You're basically saying they should bleed their backers' money even though they know they won't break even. Would you bleed money if you knew a potato farm you invested in was going under regardless? I love some french fries man. You should show me some love. Also, if you think Steve Jobs gave a flying shit what anyone else thought, you have an amazing talent at revising history. Actually he isn't wrong. The majority of businesses make their money not from first or one time customers but repeat business. His example of Microsoft is a good one as is companies like McDonald's or Walmart. They make money because people keep coming back and they keep coming back because they've built a relationship with those people where they get what they want and know what to expect from the company. People who regularly shop at Walmart know how much they can expect to spend on groceries there each week with only minor variations and know what kind of quality to expect in the products they purchase. Walmart sometimes has to take losses in order to keep the customer happy because they know, long term, that they will make far more money if they replace the returned item than if they piss off the customer who never returns to purchase another one. Now from what I understand, IGN isn't going out of business but the IPL which is simply a part of them is. Backing out on their customers does far more damage than simply the cost of that or those customers. IGN is forever associated with the IPL. Therefore when IPL makes a customer angry, IGN has to deal with it. They have to bite the cost. These people talk. If you go to Walmart to buy some new clothes and while you are there you see an irate customer complaining because they sold him a bad TV then shut down their electronics department and don't make it right, you will probably think twice about giving your business to them. If they don't care about one customer, all the rest are just as unimportant and normally bankruptcy is just around the corner. Nobody shops at a store that doesn't follow the saying, "the customer is always right." So you're saying IPL shouldn't go out of business because it pisses off their customers? What if they don't have the money to go on and don't expect to become profitable? Businesses that don't make money can't exist FYI. The purpose of a business is to make money, not to donate charity to a cause they're passionate about. I can't believe you need this explained to you lol.
What aren't you getting here? He obviously doesn't need to be explained that. And in part, you are wrong. There are non-profit businesses, there are businesses driven by other things other than profit. If you mean typically, yes, a business is meant to generate profit by any means. But what you aren't grasping is if you want the biggest profit of all, you build a relationship with your customer. READ what he is saying, don't just get emotional and respond with some smart-ass response like that.
I will provide an example: if you rip off your customer one time, yes, you will make a huge profit. But when that money dries up, and you go out to rip off another customer, people talk, and they won't be fooled again. Trust is broken, and the cost of building broken trust is ten fold to any profit.
When I went to high school, grade 10, I worked for McDonald's. The best job I've ever had. They taught me so many things, I was blown away. I came to that job thinking I was going to be a burger flipper, but I left a businessman. In their hiring package it actually states, "bend down and speak with children eye to eye, they are the most important customer out of any customer Mcdonald's has, simply because they are the future." Those children who don't have a dime to their name, will feed the Mcdonald's corporation someday. If you instill a wonderful, fun, enjoyable environment to children, it becomes part of their childhood. And in turn, you don't need to even worry about those people anymore, as they are now lifetime customers. Not some one trick pony operation like IGN/IPL. Like I said before, they lost a customer for HOTS. Do you see how cannibalistic it is to abuse your customers? Now they lost someone forever when a brand new expansion is coming out, simply because they are immoral and couldn't man up. Or hell, maybe they couldn't have, maybe they were so flat broke, but then they just provide us with some BP oil spill bullshit. "sorry".
Give me a break. Why defend these guys anyway? I'm not going to let them slap my face and then turn my cheek for another one (no, i'm not christian so don't bother lol).
User was warned for this post
|
On March 05 2013 11:52 Defacer wrote:Show nested quote +On March 05 2013 11:44 MVega wrote:I knew, I just knew some people would somehow try to blame this on StarCraft. Blaming this on LoL is equally ridiculous though. Plain and simply this was a business decision. They couldn't justify the cost of the event and somehow figured that it would be cheaper to cancel the event this close to it than to go through with it. Honestly I don't blame them. Viewership for both LoL and StarCraft would likely have been at much lower levels than they'd have liked. LoL because of a competing event, and StarCraft because weeks after HotS launch very few people are going to want to watch the WoL portions of the event. I don't like how IGN handled this situation at all. That said it's a lose-lose for them, and they took the smaller loss. On March 05 2013 10:55 Defacer wrote:On March 05 2013 10:33 Arceus wrote:
So they basically find out that this event could not yield returns and back the fuck out last minute.
I mean, really? Did they do any market research and shit or just pour money in and cancel whenever it doesnt seem ok? Step back for a moment and put yourself in there shoes. a) Run an expensive videogame tournament and hemorrhage money because you said you would. b) Piss off the fan base of a market that's shrinking anyways. It sucks ass, but the decision in this case in obvious. A majority of HOTS' features caters strictly to increasingly diehard fans. They should have pulled the cord earlier, but hey, firing and downsizing an entire team is a tough pill to swallow for any company. So you haven't been paying attention to HotS at all then? Most of the HotS features cater to the casual players. The stuff for the hardcore fans is already solid. You mean XP? Earning skins? Non-ladder 1v1? I mean, that's all fine and dandy, but trust me — the philosophy of balancing for pro players is really, really holding back what the game designers can do creatively. For example: Lurkers. Everyone loves lurkers. Everyone wants lurkers. They already have models of them, for crying out loud. But they can't just give players lurkers without affecting game balance. Imagine if there was a totally separate ladder — let's call it Wood league — where players earn (or buy!) XP, and can unlock lurkers, or Massive Queens, and Science Vessels, or Odins. You can have island maps, giant maps, all-gold maps or maps with all the destructible and collapsible imba BS you want. It would be an entirely broken, ridiculous ladder separate from the real 'pro' ladder ... but it would also be a lot of fun, with a lot of incentive for complete newbs to grind away and earn skins, spells or entire units.
Re-reading through the older posts now and I have to say, something that's not necessarily meant to be broken, but just meant to be FUN would be great for SC2. The only reason why I can't consistently play SC2 is because I don't want to play with the mindset of "I have to get better or I'll keep losing". That's simply because in SC2, I feel like the only fun comes from winning. At my level, I just can't make creative strategies work because I am lacking in mechanics, and I would be too far behind my opponent.
In LoL, I can do whatever stupid shit I want, laugh about with friends - I can talk about team games another time - and probably still win because the game is so much easier mechanically, and as long as I can keep my basic mechanics (last hitting) up, I'll probably still win despite having an awful item build.
That said, if something like what the quoted poster proposed was introduced, and I could enjoy it in 1v1 as well as with friends in customs or team ladders, then I would probably play SC2 just a bit more. But on top of that, you should still be able to "earn" something in these joke ladders. Achievements simply aren't enough anymore. Introduce an in-game currency that the casual players have an equal shot of earning, and make the incentives something that you could enjoy showing off to others (e.g. radioactive skin for my banelings, ice shards for the spines my lurkers fire, etc.).
|
This statement really should have been made earlier. If I was going to a tournament like this, I definitely would book the tickets at least a month in advance. I imagine many people got screwed over because of the statement being made so late.
Oh about the statement itself... Game organizers hosting their own tournaments is referring to Riot and Valve, I guess? Or did Blizzard start hosting one?
I imagine prize pools could be cut somewhat if the tournaments aren't profitable... I'd imagine there to be many things that would reduce costs if you optimize it :/
Relatively unfortunate but this was seen coming a while ago.
|
To everyone that purchased airfare that is over 21:
At least this is a good time to go to Las Vegas and enjoy. Maybe you can win some money with the money you were going to spend on the IPL ticket and amenities.
Back on subject, this is really sad that one of the larger North American tournaments is seemingly going up in flames. I really hope that they can reestablish IPL.
|
smart move, better end it before you start losing more money.
|
Ricewife - what's the reasoning behind your assumption that the cancellation is the result of IPL employees realizing at the last minute that the event would be a flop? Please explain why we should discount the possibility that they needed the financial backing of IGN (now ZD) in order to run the event.
|
I can't say I'm not surprised, after the multiple $100k tournaments for random games. Why would you host a $100k tournament for a game that had less than a total of 20k players, hasn't had any viewer numbers in the past history, was in beta, made by a totally unknown company?
Well, I guess that's a good, but expensive, lesson to learn. Pro Tip: Do some research before wasting $100k then ending up only getting a peak of 2k viewers during the grand finals.
|
On March 06 2013 04:11 SamanthaRain wrote:
I can't say I'm not surprised, after the multiple $100k tournaments for random games. Why would you host a $100k tournament for a game that had less than a total of 20k players, hasn't had any viewer numbers in the past history, was in beta, made by a totally unknown company?
Well, I guess that's a good, but expensive, lesson to learn. Pro Tip: Do some research before wasting $100k then ending up only getting a peak of 2k viewers during the grand finals.
Which game was this?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
