Palladium renames itself...

Mcrow · October 13, 2006, 11:13:35 AM

Quote from: GabrielHe has also classified losses which would be personal in nature (theft of his privately owned collectibles and such) as losses to the company in his various announcements.

sorry, but no.

He listed those as losses as personal items in those threads and said they were losses beyond those of Palldium's.

Lawbag · October 13, 2006, 11:17:24 AM

But isnt KS abusing his position and fame to have fans give him money? Its not like the average guy in the street is able to pull off this kind of stunt?

Balbinus · October 13, 2006, 11:19:24 AM

More precisely, he initially claimed that $850,000 to $1.3 million had been embezzled.

A cash settlement for $47,000 was then accepted.

Kevin claimed proving the full losses would cost $100,000, which I note would still leave between a further $700,000 to $1.2 million potentially recoverable. More importantly though, it evidenced that he did not have accounts showing the loss, which raises queries as to how he came to his initial figure.

I note that Kevin only revealed the amount of the settlement after it had already been leaked on rpg.net, which also IMO does not shed a positive light on him. I think generally when one is appealing to fans for cash one should share with them such information as one has.

Balbinus · October 13, 2006, 11:22:07 AM

Quote from: LawbagI think the intention was gullible Palladium fans, not that all Palladium fans are gullible.

Correct, I own Recon, think Valley of the Pharoahs is much underrated and plan at some point to buy Palladium Fantasy 1e. I wouldn't call myself a fan, but nor am I hostile to the product.

Palladium has tons of fans, Kevin is I think trying to extract money from a subset of those fans who he thinks he can get to give him cash for essentially meaningless returns.

Settembrini · October 13, 2006, 11:22:33 AM

QuoteWhile I didn't buy a print, I did choose to buy more of their books to support them. If you are not a Palladium fan, I truely don't understand why you care.

My emphasis added.
Gimme books, I`ll buy.
Stop whining and write those Kevinocity Awesomefests that your books are!

Mcrow · October 13, 2006, 11:27:32 AM

Quote from: BalbinusMore precisely, he initially claimed that $850,000 to $1.3 million had been embezzled.

A cash settlement for $47,000 was then accepted.

Kevin claimed proving the full losses would cost $100,000, which I note would still leave between a further $700,000 to $1.2 million potentially recoverable. More importantly though, it evidenced that he did not have accounts showing the loss, which raises queries as to how he came to his initial figure.

I note that Kevin only revealed the amount of the settlement after it had already been leaked on rpg.net, which also IMO does not shed a positive light on him. I think generally when one is appealing to fans for cash one should share with them such information as one has.

no, offence , but you obviously don't know how settlements work if you think that $47k was the actual amount stolen. Many times settlements are 10th or less of what the actual damages are. He could have strechted it out more and got a bigger settlement but the cost of lawyers and the fact that it is not likely the thief had the money to pay it back anyway lead to the 47k settlement. The position PB was in they needed money quick and took what they could get.

Mcrow · October 13, 2006, 11:28:25 AM

Quote from: SettembriniMy emphasis added.
Gimme books, I`ll buy.
Stop whining and write those Kevinocity Awesomefests that your books are!

That I can agree with. Gimme more books!

Gabriel · October 13, 2006, 11:30:20 AM

Quote from: Mcrowsorry, but no.

sorry, but yes.

As Balbinus notes, Kevin initially posted some really large figures for what the losses to Palladiumbooks allegedly were. A big chunk of those figures were thefts from Kevin's personal collectibles, not the company, but Kevin characterized them as thefts from the company.

Balbinus · October 13, 2006, 11:32:58 AM

Quote from: Mcrowno, offence , but you obviously don't know how settlements work if you think that $47k was the actual amount stolen. Many times settlements are 10th or less of what the actual damages are. He could have strechted it out more and got a bigger settlement but the cost of lawyers and the fact that it is not likely the thief had the money to pay it back anyway lead to the 47k settlement. The position PB was in they needed money quick and took what they could get.

I'm familiar enough with settlements to know that nobody settles a $1.3 million claim for under $50k. Not, of course, that a claim for $1.3 million was ever brought, what was brought was a criminal claim for a theft of over 20k (which is the threshold for that offence, the 20k would I understand be pled regardless of level of loss).

The key point though is that he had no way of proving his loss, he quoted a loss to fans in order to extract cash from them but was unable to provide evidence that the loss had ever occurred. I find it odd he lacked evidence of the loss but was able still to estimate it well enough to take money from fans.

Balbinus · October 13, 2006, 11:33:43 AM

Quote from: Gabrielsorry, but yes.

As Balbinus notes, Kevin initially posted some really large figures for what the losses to Palladiumbooks allegedly were. A big chunk of those figures were thefts from Kevin's personal collectibles, not the company, but Kevin characterized them as thefts from the company.

And I think one could reasonably ask some tough questions at how he reached those valuations.

Mcrow · October 13, 2006, 11:33:57 AM

Quote from: Gabrielsorry, but yes.

As Balbinus notes, Kevin initially posted some really large figures for what the losses to Palladiumbooks allegedly were. A big chunk of those figures were thefts from Kevin's personal collectibles, not the company, but Kevin characterized them as thefts from the company.

hmmm....I must have missed that thread then.

If the personal items were stolen from the company offices they can still be leagally considered part of the companies assets. Maybe thats why they were included. Not sure.

Balbinus · October 13, 2006, 11:36:04 AM

Oh, to be clear, I in no way see it as gullible to choose to buy more books that you might well have bought anyway to support the company, I think that is different to buying essentially valueless items or simply contributing cash blind.

Buying more books is a sensible way to help out, and incentivises the company to produce more books which is ultimately the only thing that will get them moving forward. Palladium seems increasingly not to be focussing much on the books.

Lawbag · October 13, 2006, 11:36:59 AM

Quote from: Mcrowhmmm....I must have missed that thread then.

If the personal items were stolen from the company offices they can still be leagally considered part of the companies assets. Maybe thats why they were included. Not sure.

considered part of the company's assets?

Id like to see them on the "company's" balance sheet then!!!!!!!!!!!

Gabriel · October 13, 2006, 11:40:18 AM

Quote from: McrowThat I can agree with. Gimme more books!

Yes. More books. Less reprints and a return to quality.

When this announcement broke, I took advantage of Stiggybaby's 40% off sale on Palladium stuff. I got a mix of stuff I was curious about.

But the whole Crisis of Treachery line of products and promotion has made me ashamed of that action.

edit: added italics. Can't have it without italics.

Mcrow · October 13, 2006, 11:40:51 AM

Quote from: Lawbagconsidered part of the company's assets?

Id like to see them on the "company's" balance sheet then!!!!!!!!!!!

Yes, if something personal and compnay property are stolen from company property it is considered one theft for purposes of leagal action. Not one claim for company property and one for personal.