I take no issue with watchdog groups that track how efficient charities are with their money. No problems there. But it really bugs me when a for-profit business does a charity promotion, and people feel the need to trash them for the % that goes to charity.
Even the way they frame it is lame. They purposefully imply the NFL gets 92% and only 8% goes to charity. When you dig into the article, you find out:
38% goes to the manufacturer. Well… of course.
12.5% goes directly to the NFL, of which 90% goes to the American Cancer Society (ACS)
50% goes to the retailer. This is often the NFL or the individual teams (if you buy directly from them), but it is also sporting goods stores and other retailers.
This means the NFL is donating somewhere between 18-90% of their take to ACS- depending on what part of the 50% retailer portion is direct purchases from the NFL.
The way this article whittled it down all the way to 8% was to also factor in the fact that 71.2% of money received by ACS goes to research. The rest goes to administration. There are certainly charities who do better, but that’s not abusive.
No matter how you slice it, the NFL is donating a pretty decent percentage of their revenue on this merchandise. And the actual amount ends up being about $1 million per year donated to ACS. Not bad.
Attempting to shame the NFL into not donating more is pretty despicable. You can bet that the person who wrote this article probably gives NOTHING, or very little to charity.
It is a good and nice thing when for-profit businesses figure out ways to benefit good causes. Do they benefit from it? Sure. Is that a bad thing? Of course not. The primary benefit is people like their product/service because they are demonstrating positive action. Isn’t that a positive feedback loop?
We experienced something similar when we ran a charity promotion for Tower of Elements. We donated a meal for a family with every game sold. This worked out to about $1 per game sold. We were selling the game for $9.99 and about $8.25 was our take after processing fees. This means we were donating about 12% of gross revenue (not profit!). I actually had a few people - some in the gaming media - criticize us for not giving a bigger chunk to charity.
Seriously?
How much did Rockstar donate to charity from the sales of GTAV? Probably nothing, and certainly less than $120 million (12% of their first weekend sales). Not that they should feel compelled to do so. An important part of the concept of charity is that it is a personal choice. You can’t be shamed or guilted into being charitable.
This is just another example of a very sad phenomenon all too common in our culture. I am paraphrasing something extremely wise that my wife said a few days ago:
We demand such perfection from other people, and yet expect so very little of ourselves.
There are a lot of reasons why people make video games. I am sure there are some who do it just for the money. But I think those types are the extreme minority. I think most people work in this industry because they love creating something that brings joy and happiness to others. Then again, maybe I’m just projecting, because it is definitely the #1 reason I make video games. It is the biggest reason why I ended my career as a lawyer very early on so I could found the video game studio, Frogdice.
In the process of making video games and running a studio, there are countless setbacks and reasons to get discouraged. Bugs. Timelines. Having to cut features you love. Systems not working how you expected/hoped. Long hours. Extreme difficulty getting publicity for your game. Tremendous struggles getting onto the sales platforms you desperately need (like Steam). Selling enough copies of your game to make the next one. Stressing over these things even when you aren’t supposedly “working."
But every now and then there are moments that remind you why you are doing this. Moments that remind you why you love your career and your industry. I am about to share a few of those moments with you here.
And no, it won’t be some hockey stick sales chart showing a couple hundred thousand units sold. As awesome as that would be, that isn’t ultimately what gives me a warm and fuzzy feeling (though it does help keep the lights on). What I am going to share with you are some comments made by an independent Twitch.tv streamer who played our game for his community this past weekend. He had intended to play for about 2 hours, but instead played for 6. Here are some of the comments he made about the game:
"I am going to be casting this game for quite a lot of time. I am having a lot of fun. This game is great.”
“This game is addicting. This game is too awesome.”
“If you haven’t figured it out yet, this game is amazing.”
“I could see playing this game for hours trying to craft everything.”
“I don’t want to stop. I’m really enjoying this game. It’s better than Skyrim.”
“The bestiary is one of those little things that puts this game over the edge.”
“This game is awesome. It’s addicting. It’s a steal. It’s Dr. Mario, Tetris, and D&D had a baby.”
And as amazing as those sentiments are, it is even better when you can SEE someone’s joy in action. Here is a video of his epic battle vs. the Gigantuar Rat:
In closing, I want to thank everyone who has ever played a game I was a part of. Thank you for buying it, of course. But more than that, thank you for playing it and enjoying it. That is why I love what I do. What could be better that bringing fun and happiness to people’s lives?
Georgia has possibly the worst Strength and Conditioning (S&C) program of any top school. This is why we consistently have major injury problems, and it is also why our 4 and 5 star recruits so often underperform in college and then blossom into superstars in the NFL.
Here is what you will find on the Alabama website under Strength and Conditioning….in fact it is not just contained within the Football Coaching staff page (like us) it has its own link and page:
Alabama Strength and Conditioning Staff
Scott Cochran, Head Strength and Conditioning Coach/Football
Terry Jones, Assistant Head Strength and Conditioning Coach
Rocky Colburn, Assistant Strength and Conditioning Coach
Michelle Martin Diltz, Assistant Strength and Conditioning Coach
Jonathan Farris, Assistant Strength and Conditioning Coach
Jim Hamner, Assistant Strength and Conditioning Coach
Corey Harris, Assistant Strength and Conditioning Coach
Mark Hocke, Assistant Strength and Conditioning Coach
Travis Illian, Assistant Strength and Conditioning Coach
Kindal Moorehead, Assistant Strength and Conditioning Coach
Lou DeNeen, Strength and Conditioning
Phelon Jones, Athletic Intern
Josh Hampton, Athletic Intern
Now here is what you will find on our site:
Georgia Strength and Conditioning Staff
Joe Tereshinski- Director of Strength and Conditioning (***knows NOTHING about S&C***)
John Thomas- Sr. Associate Director of Strength and Conditioning
Sherman Armstrong- Associate Strength and Conditioning Coach
Justin Lovett- Assistant Strength and Conditioning
UPDATE: I re-read this and it comes off harsher than I intended. I apologize for that. I want the OUYA to exceed. I love bold, brave ideas. But OUYA needs to raise its game, fast, and focus more on substance over sizzle.
The OUYA continues to amaze me, but not always in a good way.
This is OUYA’s latest attempt to close the “loopholes” and combat abuse. The new basic details:
Project Minimum: $10k
Match Amount: 100% of your funding goal to a maximum of $250,000.
Minimum # of Backers: For every $10,000 raised on Kickstarter, you have to have a minimum of 100 backers.
Exclusivity: 1 month for every $10k funded by OUYA up to 6 months.
Payment: 50% of the funding at functioning beta. 25% at launch on OUYA. 25% at end of exclusivity period.
How is it that they still don’t get it? The reason there are such glaring loopholes is because OUYA is abdicating responsibility and putting it on Kickstarter and the Kickstarter community to do their curating for them.
I will give Julie Uhrman some free advice. Here is a better “Free the Games” program that won’t continue to embarrass you and is actually far more appropriate:
Developers submit their prototype, demo, playable build, etc. to OUYA.
Depending on the quality of the game and the determination of OUYA staff, a sales advance will be offered to the developers ranging between $10,000 and $250,000.
50-75% is paid in advance, remainder paid upon delivery of a final build that meets OUYA’s approval.
1-3 months OUYA exclusivity. 1 month per $75k.
When/if the developer’s cut of sales exceeds the amount of the advance, the developer begins receiving their royalty payments normally.
Tweak it a bit as needed, but that’s the core of the system you need, Julie. What are the key differences?
==>You’re actually owning up to your responsibility to curate your console’s official content. Is this hard? Of course it is. But if you want to be a platform, this is one the areas where you prove you deserve to be one.
==>6 month exclusivity is absurd. There are giant publishers who don’t even ask for this much. Do you want these indies to go out of business? They need the other platforms to stay afloat and eat. Don’t force people into a draconian exclusivity duration simply because you are hurting for content. You should be bringing in content fast enough that 3 month exclusivity is more than enough.
==>You’re now actually paying when it matters: pre-beta. That’s when developers need money. Once the game is in a playable beta, why do they need you? They could just push to the end and release on bigger platforms that have tens or hundreds of millions of users. Furthermore, holding money beyond the release of the game is outrageous. Lets be honest, you might not even still be in business 6 months from now.
Julie, your minimum # of backers is just as easily gamed. That will accomplish nothing. The only way someone can afford to participate in your system is if they intend to game it.
People will continue to game your system because no legitimate developer will be willing (or able) to develop a game within your outrageous restrictions.
If any publisher came to me tomorrow and offered me your terms, I’d say no. I’m not developing a game for someone’s platform if I don’t get any money until beta, and where 25% of the money is held back for up to 6 months POST-RELEASE.
That is ***** CRAZY *****.
I wouldn’t accept that from publishers whose platforms actually have customers. Why would I accept that from OUYA that has only a couple thousand people actually buying games.
Oh, and before you even give people money, they have to go through the enormous challenge and work of running a Kickstarter campaign. Here’s a little clue: Most campaigns are a helluva lot harder than the one OUYA ran. We don’t all get to be Darlings of Kickstarter that receive mountains of free publicity and promotion.
I don’t expect Julie Uhrman to read this or make the necessary, significant changes to their “system” to make it worthwhile to legit developers.
I also don’t expect OUYA to still be in business a year from now.
All that said, I’m still rooting for them to right the ship.
Look, I want you to have a corgi. More than anything. These strange and incredible dogs will bring so much joy to your life that I feel like everyone should have one. But there are quite a few things you should know first.
I really hope I get to meet someone from Windstream at a Lexington business meeting soon. I have come to the conclusion that they are engaging in grossly anti-competitive and monopolistic behavior. It needs to stop. The quality of internet access is bad enough in Kentucky without Windstream trying to drive away competition.
1) Windstream just upgraded the infrastructure so they can offer ~12-15+ mb DSL to their customers - at no extra cost over the previous 5 mb! Great, right? Not so fast my friend. They are not making this network available to any competing DSL providers like http://www.iglou.com/ of Louisville. Monopolistic behavior. You know darn well that as soon as they drive people like Iglou out of business you’ll be paying double (at least!) for this 12-15 mb access.
2) If you have DSL service from anyone other than Windstream, you lose access every few weeks due to a “cut cable.” Miraculously, these “cut cables” never knock out Windstream DSL customers - even in the same neighborhood! My in-laws live a couple hundred yards from us, and their DSL is never impacted. The level of incompetence it would take to cut a cable every few weeks is even beyond that of Windstream. Furthermore, the technological impossibility of this “coincidence” leads one to conclude these “cut cables” are just a lie to get people to dump their DSL provider and switch to Windstream. The most recent cut cable happened around 1pm yesterday. It is now 10am and it is still not cleared. Seriously? You can’t fix a cut cable faster than that? Shooting for 24 hours?
=> I have been informed that Iglou has lost a ton of Lexington customers because of this. Mission Accomplished, right Windstream?
=> To the Kentucky government and people who care about tech in Kentucky: If you want to host servers in Kentucky, Iglou and QX are basically your two choices. Do we really want one of them driven out of business? Also, do you think LESS competition in the area of internet access providers will improve our infrastructure that is already lagging behind?
Everyone in the business community here knows the low quality of Kentucky internet access is my #1 issue. It is massively holding back our tech sector, and thus it is holding back the economic development of Kentucky.
So the folks who created AdBlock are upping the ante and have created a crowdfunding campaign to spread the word about AdBlock. The slogan is:
7 in 10 Internet users still see ads.
Help us tell the world about AdBlock.
They say this like it is a tragedy that 70% of people see ads. If you use Ad Block, you should be really glad that most people don’t because those 7 in 10 internet users are the ones paying for the content you enjoy on ad-supported web sites.
They talk about using AdBlock as if it is a virtue that needs to be evangelized. Make no mistake: using AdBlock is free riding in the truest sense of the concept. It is certainly not a virtue.
I don’t think it is stealing when people use AdBlock. Everyone has a right to control the way content is being displayed on their web browser and computer. Also, I admit that many (most?) content sites are completely out of control and excessive in the way they display ads. They also took advantage of the pre-AdBlock days by going nuts with tracking cookies, malware, adware, and similar abuses.
But people who use AdBlock need to be intellectually honest with themselves and realize that the sites they visit depend on that ad revenue to exist. By using AdBlock, you are consuming content and not giving anything back. That is your right and option, but you need to be honest with yourself about the costs of your choice.
Fast forward to now: AdBlock is taking things a step further. It is one thing to create a product that denies others their livelihood But profiteering off denying people their livelihood is indefensible
AdBlock makes money through a “pay what you want” system. I have read estimates of $10-15 million since its creation, but honestly, who knows how much they make. Michael Gundlack, creator of AdBlock, and his wife both left their jobs a few years ago and live off AdBlock. They live in the Bay area. That can’t be cheap. If you lower the slider to $0 you get a message that includes this comment which, frankly, insults one’s intelligence:
If you can afford to pay to help us eat, please do.
Millions of dollars is more than helping them eat. I don’t begrudge anyone the right to charge money for their product or service. But don’t act like you’re a starving artist when you aren’t. That’s dishonest. That dishonesty speaks to the integrity and ethics (or lack thereof) of the product and its creator(s).
In the campaign video, Gundlack makes the dubious claim that “We’re not taking a dollar of this campaign for ourselves.” That’s an incredibly murky statement. How do they define “for ourselves.” What if they raise enough for that Times Square Billboard and have to travel to NYC to negotiate terms. Would using funds from the campaign for travel expenses count as taking “dollars for ourselves”, or is that just management costs of the campaign?
Furthermore, if the campaign does indeed increase the number of AdBlock users, a percentage of whom pay for AdBlock, then in a pretty direct way they are still profiting from this campaign.
There is one moment of the video where there is an incredibly vague implication that widespread use of AdBlock would improve the internet. They don’t say how. Perhaps they are so completely self-serving and self-interested that they truly just mean improving the internet for people who use AdBlock.
If they were trying to imply that more people using AdBlock would motivate content sites to improve their business models, then they really should have come right out and say that. That might be the beginning of something worthwhile. And I say a beginning because in the meantime those sites and writers are still deprived of income, and potentially their jobs.
A more interesting campaign would be some effort to promote positive change. What if AdBlock let people opt-in via their donations to a virtual tip jar? AdBlock could divvy up the funds based on how often a site was visited by the people who opted in. That’s just one idea. There are probably much better ones out there proposed by people who think about this issue more seriously than I do.
Niero Gonzalez, creator of the popular (and awesome) gaming web site Destructoid, wrote an article in March of 2013 that revealed: Half of Destructoid’s readers block our ads. Now what? He wasn’t aggressive or accusatory about people’s use of AdBlock, but he was certainly, and rightly, concerned.
The content web sites you read and love probably do need a better business model. I despise the ad based revenue model for more reasons than the annoyance of ads. I hate the way it affects content. I hate that writers have to chase hits, write primarily about what is most popular, and occasionally write “linkbait” articles just to stay alive. Many writers I know feel the same way.
But I don’t think bankrupting these sites is the appropriate way to go about improving and changing things. I think Niero’s article and articles like it start the conversation and are the first step in transitioning towards better business models. I think more sites offering subscriptions that remove ads are a potential solution.
I don’t claim to have the perfect solution. But I certainly don’t think anything good will come out of spreading the use of AdBlock. And the glib, selfish, greedy nature of this latest AdBlock campaign is pretty offensive.
P.S. What is going on with Gundlach starting around 1:15. Is he on drugs or something? It reminds me of the stoned guffaw of Michael Kelso from That 70s Show. Creepy.
19th November 2013
Notes: 1
Reblogged From iamthecorgiking
