I still don't understand...

[EtnaGreen]

Originally Posted by SoccerRyan

VMK was a financial success, that is why Disney kept it open beyond its original promotional timeframe. VMK got people to go to the parks. Disney made agreements with Kellogg's, Apple, and eBay during VMK's existence to make even more money. However, when VMK started to tank (at least, by their estimation), Disney had to decide between making VMK a pay-to-play or shutting it down. Ultimately, they decided that VMK was not making them money and that it did not have the potential to succeed, so they closed it down.

This was the mistake. VMK had potential. But Disney decided to look to their other online games for revenue.

I am a bit confused, so please stay with me. In this post Stitchmad and you both said that Disney closed vmk because it wasn't bringing in money directly to WDIG, but in the recent post that I quoted above you said that vmk stayed open in the beginning because it wasn't bringing in money directly to WDIG. I am a bit lost. If I misinterpreted this, I am sorry and I would appreciate it if you explained.

[SoccerRyan]

Originally Posted by EtnaGreen

I am a bit confused, so please stay with me. In this post Stitchmad and you both said that Disney closed vmk because it wasn't bringing in money directly to WDIG, but in the recent post that I quoted above you said that vmk stayed open in the beginning because it wasn't bringing in money directly to WDIG. I am a bit lost. If I misinterpreted this, I am sorry and I would appreciate it if you explained.

I can see how you would be confused, sorry about that.

WDIG never made money directly from VMK (meaning, they were not receiving x amount of dollars per month from x amount of players), so they had to use VMK as a tool to make money indirectly for themselves. WDIG achieved this through advertising and promoting other companies like the ones I mentioned earlier. It is my belief that WDIG was able to make money off of VMK, but indirectly rather than directly. This is why WDIG continued VMK after the 50th Celebration, because they were making money.

However, before the eventual April 8th announcement, it is my opinion that WDIG began to lose money from VMK. Consequently, they met with Walt Disney Parks and Resorts, who also had made money indirectly from VMK, to discuss VMK's financial potential. In that meeting is where I believe the pay-to-play option was discussed. In the end, they decided to close the game, concluding that VMK did not have financial potential.

I made the statement that WDIG did not make money directly from VMK, but I never solely attributed that to the closing or success of VMK as you said I did. What I did explain in the post that you quoted was that VMK at first succeeded because it did make money indirectly for WDIG, and what I failed to make clear in the post that you linked was that WDIG was losing money indirectly from VMK when Disney closed it.

I hope I am making sense here.

[EtnaGreen]

Okay, I think I understand now. Thank you for clearing that up.

[ThrillJacob]

Originally Posted by SoccerRyan

This seems vague to me. Some sort of clause? Certain events? Please clarify what you are talking about and explain why such a clause would exist.

My guess would be that when they signed the contract, there would have to be some sort of notice for Sulake to pull out of the deal. Disney might have been able to leave whenever, but Sulake probably had to have major financial issues to be able to leave the contract.

I am not sure why they would have waited. I do know that at some point, either Disney, Sulake, or Paramount controlled Sulake, to change a message in the newsletter.

I know many of you are upset that you'll be losing your friends, and we hear you. To that end, we're working on a way for VMK players to be able to recognize other VMK players while visiting on Disney.com and playing in our other virtual communities. Stay with us for news about that in the coming weeks.

It was deleted the next day. Why? Either Yavn wrote it without Disney's approval, Sulake was not willing to turn over the database information necessary to do this, or Paramount wouldn't allow Sulake to turn over the information.

[StitchMad]

In my opinion, when you start digging into things such as Paramount, Sulake and contracts, it gets way too confusing. We are getting to the point where the majority of this is simply speculation, and there is a high chance that the majority of it is false information.

[zephr]

Originally Posted by StitchMad

In my opinion, when you start digging into things such as Paramount, Sulake and contracts, it gets way too confusing. We are getting to the point where the majority of this is simply speculation, and there is a high chance that the majority of it is false information.

And there's a slight chance that something out of it may be the truth. We're all holding out for that slight chance - don't spoil the fun.

[SoccerRyan]

Originally Posted by ThrillJacob

My guess would be that when they signed the contract, there would have to be some sort of notice for Sulake to pull out of the deal. Disney might have been able to leave whenever, but Sulake probably had to have major financial issues to be able to leave the contract.

You said there was a bidding war to decide whether Disney or Paramount would get Sulake. You said Paramount won so they got to keep their agreement with Sulake. You said Disney lost the bidding war so they lost their agreement with Sulake. Now you're changing what you originally said. Now you're saying Sulake needed to give some notice to Disney to pull out. What happened to the bidding war? Inconsistency does nothing to help a theory.

I am not sure why they would have waited. I do know that at some point, either Disney, Sulake, or Paramount controlled Sulake, to change a message in the newsletter.

It was deleted the next day. Why? Either Yavn wrote it without Disney's approval, Sulake was not willing to turn over the database information necessary to do this, or Paramount wouldn't allow Sulake to turn over the information.

I'm sorry, but I think this is ridiculous. Assuming that this deletion occurred, you have no logic to support your reasons why you think it
happened, or at least you haven't provided that logic. How can you expect
anyone to buy this claim when you haven't provided any explanations to how your reasoning is probable?

[ThrillJacob]

Originally Posted by SoccerRyan

You said there was a bidding war to decide whether Disney or Paramount would get Sulake. You said Paramount won so they got to keep their agreement with Sulake. You said Disney lost the bidding war so they lost their agreement with Sulake. Now you're changing what you originally said. Now you're saying Sulake needed to give some notice to Disney to pull out. What happened to the bidding war? Inconsistency does nothing to help a theory.



I'm sorry, but I think this is ridiculous. Assuming that this deletion occurred, you have no logic to support your reasons why you think it
happened, or at least you haven't provided that logic. How can you expect
anyone to buy this claim when you haven't provided any explanations to how your reasoning is probable?

It's all purely speculation, it might be true, it might not. Just a possibility. I don't think I said that Disney would have immediately lost the agreement, but I did say the agreement was unable to be renewed. Maybe not a bidding war either, as Sulake would have rather had two contracts. My assumption is that Paramount paid more than Disney, and asked for an exclusive contract, which Sulake accepted knowing they paid more.

What Yavn said, it was deleted the next day. Either that, or the wiki decided to write in their own paragraph and say it lasted a day. What reasons could it have been deleted for besides Sulake/Paramount refusing to turn over the information, or Yavn posting it without Disney giving the green light, as they were not willing to make this program?

[zephr]

Originally Posted by ThrillJacob

Yavn posting it without Disney giving the green light, as they were not willing to make this program?

......Obviously.

[ThrillJacob]

Here's something I picked up a few minutes ago...
VMK's fate was not decided when the VMK Centrals were closed. After they closed, the Community Leader program went away, and Yavn mentioned a re-tooling of the program was to happen.

This brings some credibility back to a few theories, including the Paramount-Sulake contract bringing VMK to a close, as that was signed after the CL_ program was gone. You can't say "we should have seen it coming, the VMK Centrals closed months before VMK's closing was announced" because in October (I think that was when the CL program ended) VMK was planning to stay open, which, like I said before, happened after VMK Central closed.

Nothing major, just something that can really put a spin on some closing theories.

[StitchMad]

Originally Posted by zephr

And there's a slight chance that something out of it may be the truth. We're all holding out for that slight chance - don't spoil the fun.

The point is that there is a slim chance you will know the full truth unless one of the beancounters holds an official meeting on it - which one year down the line is highly unlikely. Excuse my negativity, but why dig into something so deep when there is just so MANY possiblities to the real reason, and digging further is just making more excuses.

Sadly, we have no idea what any contracts say.. or any agreements.. or even what the two companies said to each other when they first sat down together. Until we do (which I'd love to know), there is no chance of knowing the real reason.

Spoil the fun? Ruining Disney's reputation by continuously complaining about their company (for one game) is spoiling the fun.

[SoccerRyan]

Originally Posted by ThrillJacob

What Yavn said, it was deleted the next day. Either that, or the wiki decided to write in their own paragraph and say it lasted a day. What reasons could it have been deleted for besides Sulake/Paramount refusing to turn over the information, or Yavn posting it without Disney giving the green light, as they were not willing to make this program?

• Disney decided that it cost too much to develop a feature where you could see who else was on.
• Disney decided that such a program would not be safe.
• There were communication problems within Disney that caused the accidental inclusion of that part of the newsletter.

There's three. And notice no other company is involved.

[DocCalvin]

What is it Paramount wanted with Sulake anyway? I'm just curious.

[ThrillJacob]

Originally Posted by DocCalvin

What is it Paramount wanted with Sulake anyway? I'm just curious.

Advertisements in Habbo.

[the_phoenix]

Okay, so I tried to stay as out of this thread as possible....but due to recent posts I've decided to express my opinion.

VMK closed due to reasons that probably ALL of us will never know. Yes, it is sad...and we don't get the WHY of the whole situation. But I think it's time to move on...just leave the speculation to a minimum, while respecting each other's opinions and looking at them not with judgment, or with will to say "Oh, no, you're WAYYY wrong!!" but instead disagree with a more..peaceful and sophisticated way; "I don't agree with you because ______ and _________"

just my two cents..