2013 Raving's Table Games Conference: who is going?

Quote: Paigowdan

Look.

Let me repost this deeper in the thread to tell you how selling your New Game may actually work.

-------------------------------------
A Monster hit proprietary game may earn $500 to $1,800 per table, per month, for several hundred installs, and that'll be at 20% plus percentage if a really good game. And don't listen to EvenBob unless - YOU expect him to sell your game.

400 tables times $1,800 per month, or 800 tables at $900 a month makes $720,000 a month, or $8.6 Million a year.

A distributor will take the $6 million a year at 70%, leaving $216,00 a month - or $2 Million-six for the inventor to live on. I know three guys in this category, and it's no one who posts here. And BOTH parties - inventor and manufacturer will agree to this deal. Three Card Poker earns $900 to $1,500 a month, times a thousand games. Derek Webb lives well, and he deserves it, God Bless Him. But it would take a real manufacturer with a real sales force to accomplish this type of dominance, so you sign.

Now, a Mickey-Mouse BJ side bet may make $90 a month for 20 installs, for $1,800 a month, with the inventor making $270 a month at 15%, or about $3,200 a year - then why even bother for any party involved here. You can rent a used car in the course of a year for that, or barely pay for some utility bills with that.

I know a fine man who has a good BJ side bet that makes $200 per table month times 80 installs, - with NO distributor - that's $16,000 a month by himself FOR himself. He could only afford to get the game approved in a few jurisdictions - like Nevada and New Jersey, just two states, but that's enough. So when I said, "Sell it yourself," I was serious. On his way to $180,000 a year, he wore out thousands in terms of shoes and tires and gas, but he made it by himself.

Now, if less than a 15% split is being considered for a marginal game, particularly a side bet, then a small cash buyout for the game's rights may be offered on a "take it or leave it" basis. If you have a "pull my chain" type of side bet for BJ - that you spent $250 for your own provision patent, spent a month on it, and did your own excel math on, then you might take $5,000 cash buyout versus a snowball's chance in hell zero-dollar result otherwise. You're up-to-date on your rent, you paid for a used car, and you're on your way to the next game, or just happy to catch up on bills.

The point I'm trying to make is that with a game design:
1. You can make $2M a year ("Like you got a shot; Go Play MegaBucks");
2. You can make $120,00 a year (Also a long shot - "you have a rough road," but possible);
3. you can make $270 a month, which will be offered to you as one-time $5,000 check, sign over the patent and pay your bills;
4. you make jack squat.

You think it's worth $2M a year. You think your daughter is Miss America or Angela.

You get offered a $5,000 check for nothing, or a 20% deal on a real game with a real distributor, you may wanna consider it, just to get a game out in real world action.

Take it or blow your chance. Your goal is to get established.

Is this a true story or a urban legend?

Quote: AceCrAAckers

Quote: Paigowdan

Look.

Let me repost this deeper in the thread to tell you how selling your New Game may actually work.

-------------------------------------
A Monster hit proprietary game may earn $500 to $1,800 per table, per month, for several hundred installs, and that'll be at 20% plus percentage if a really good game. And don't listen to EvenBob unless - YOU expect him to sell your game.

400 tables times $1,800 per month, or 800 tables at $900 a month makes $720,000 a month, or $8.6 Million a year.

A distributor will take the $6 million a year at 70%, leaving $216,00 a month - or $2 Million-six for the inventor to live on. I know three guys in this category, and it's no one who posts here. And BOTH parties - inventor and manufacturer will agree to this deal. Three Card Poker earns $900 to $1,500 a month, times a thousand games. Derek Webb lives well, and he deserves it, God Bless Him. But it would take a real manufacturer with a real sales force to accomplish this type of dominance, so you sign.

Now, a Mickey-Mouse BJ side bet may make $90 a month for 20 installs, for $1,800 a month, with the inventor making $270 a month at 15%, or about $3,200 a year - then why even bother for any party involved here. You can rent a used car in the course of a year for that, or barely pay for some utility bills with that.

I know a fine man who has a good BJ side bet that makes $200 per table month times 80 installs, - with NO distributor - that's $16,000 a month by himself FOR himself. He could only afford to get the game approved in a few jurisdictions - like Nevada and New Jersey, just two states, but that's enough. So when I said, "Sell it yourself," I was serious. On his way to $180,000 a year, he wore out thousands in terms of shoes and tires and gas, but he made it by himself.

Now, if less than a 15% split is being considered for a marginal game, particularly a side bet, then a small cash buyout for the game's rights may be offered on a "take it or leave it" basis. If you have a "pull my chain" type of side bet for BJ - that you spent $250 for your own provision patent, spent a month on it, and did your own excel math on, then you might take $5,000 cash buyout versus a snowball's chance in hell zero-dollar result otherwise. You're up-to-date on your rent, you paid for a used car, and you're on your way to the next game, or just happy to catch up on bills.

The point I'm trying to make is that with a game design:
1. You can make $2M a year ("Like you got a shot; Go Play MegaBucks");
2. You can make $120,00 a year (Also a long shot - "you have a rough road," but possible);
3. you can make $270 a month, which will be offered to you as one-time $5,000 check, sign over the patent and pay your bills;
4. you make jack squat.

You think it's worth $2M a year. You think your daughter is Miss America or Angela.

You get offered a $5,000 check for nothing, or a 20% deal on a real game with a real distributor, you may wanna consider it, just to get a game out in real world action.

Take it or blow your chance. Your goal is to get established.

Is this a true story or a urban legend?

True story told by an exec about designers who tried to play the exec to his best advantage, - and in the process lost a fine opportunity. Accept what your game is reasonably worth as accurately as possible if given a reasonable offer, and be glad for the installs. Know your game's market category, and the shot it has, and accept what its worth.

Quote: EvenBob

Reasonable? Meaning small. If it was large, there
would be more games that make it, and the quote
from Roger and Dan is '1 in 100'. That's an 'ice
cubes chance in hell' odds. Notice that everybody
in the business is enthusiastic, yet always has
qualifiers like 'it's easier said than done'.

Bob, you are spot-on regarding the chances of success in the table games development industry. This applies, IMO, to all sectors of business where creativity is a main component. If you dissect these other areas of industry then you would get a similar pattern:-

A very small % (maybe just a handful) are extremely successful.
A larger %, although still small, enjoy success.
A further % (again, small) receive moderate success.

Some of these other professions include:-

i) Writing books (how many 1000's are aiming to be the next Stephen King or J. K. Rowling ?)
ii) Designing app's
iii) Becoming an actor or actress
iv) Painting or sculpting and selling your works of art
v) Becoming a musician or joining a band

Even contestants that enter shows such as 'X Factor' or 'America's got talent' are hoping to be in that top echelon reserved for the extreme minority. In the UK, 'X Factor' receives hundreds of thousands of hopefuls and yet there is just one winner, but the long odds do not deter those who enter.

Of course we have to be optimistic, or positive, about the games we create. If our excitement for the game rubs off onto a casino manager then this gives us the best chance of a future installation. Can you imagine what your chances of an installation would be like if the conversation went something like:-

Inventor: "Hello, is that the Director of Table Games?"
DTG: "Yes"
Inventor: "I''d like to get an opportunity to show you a new table game that I've recently developed"
DTG: "How does it work?"
Inventor: "Well, it's a variation of Blackjack. It's not as good as Blackjack but I can't be expected to compete with that game"
DTG: "Doesn't sound very promising"
Inventor: "It's not that bad. I played it for at least 20 minutes before I got bored of it and I reckon there will be 1 or 2 other players that will last longer. Just think how many players walk through your door. I think that I will eventually come up with a better game than this in the future but this will do for now. Anyway, you're not one of the top 'Strip' casinos so I figured you'd be happy to try something that's maybe not the top game. We can't all be top."
DTG: <click>
Inventor: "Hello, hello ? Hmm, maybe he's rushed off to contact his purchasing department"

Don't get me wrong. Over optimism and failure to heed other peoples advice, due to being so blinkered, is a bad quality in this industry. You need to have a balanced quota of optimism and expectation mixed in with an iota of thick skin at times. Roger Snow is a veteran when it comes to these qualities - however, the relative newcomers who are likely to succeed, such as Paradigm and Lucky, also display these properties when I've met them in the past. They listen to advice, take it away with them, and use it to adapt, or modify, their current work in progress.

Summing it all up. It's a long-shot. It's hard work. It's frustrating. But the buzz (no pun intended Buzzard) you get when you see players playing your invention makes it all seem so worthwhile. The finances will hopefully follow after that.

Quote: Pacman

... ... ...

I had dinner last year with Geoff Hall and Derek Webb, and I learned more between the salad and the dessert than I could have ever imagined. These men are brilliant.

Quote: Paradigm

I am looking forward to hearing Geoff at Raving,.....he is a very smart guy!

The best thing about these statements is that it comes from 2 people who possess the very qualities that they're complimenting me on.

Switch, Do you mind telling the forum how many games that you have developed before "Blackjack Switch" and "Free Bet Switch" hit the jackpot? how may games are still in your stockpile waiting to be recognized? Just the numbers. Thanks.

Quote: UCivan

Switch, Do you mind telling the forum how many games that you have developed before "Blackjack Switch" and "Free Bet Switch" hit the jackpot? how may games are still in your stockpile waiting to be recognized? Just the numbers. Thanks.

'Blackjack Switch' was the first game that I developed.

I went on to develop 'Power Blackjack', 'Burn 20 Blackjack' and 'Neverbust Blackjack'. All 3 games are still installed in at least 1 casino in Vegas. The development of 'Free Bet Blackjack' led to me focusing my attention more to that game rather than the others. I cannibalized my own Blackjack games and believe that I have ended up marketing my strongest 2; 'Switch' and 'Free Bet'. I also developed 'Blackjack Press' which didn't work as well as I wanted but at some point in the future I will re-visit that game and see if it can be tweaked.

I have one more Blackjack variation that is complete but I'll hold off marketing that until 'Free Bet' has been fully exposed. I've already got a Vegas field trial set up for the new game when the time comes. In fairness, the basic concept of this game was suggested to me rather than me fully developing it by myself.

I have a couple of non-Blackjack games and my next game that I'm aiming to market in Vegas will likely be one of those called 'Picture Perfect'. The other game, '1 3 3' still needs to be modified before it can be considered marketable.

I also have a few side-bets but it's a crowded market and I would rather focus on gaining more momentum with my current full games rather than working with the side-bets.

In total, I have around 15 games and side-bets that are either completed or 'work in progress'.

Thanks. You have achieved 2/15 = 13.33% super super hot, 3/15 = 20% warming up!!! a total of 1 in 3, very very impressive.

Quote: Switch

Summing it all up. It's a long-shot. It's hard work. It's frustrating. But the buzz (no pun intended Buzzard) you get when you see players playing your invention makes it all seem so worthwhile. The finances will hopefully follow after that.

That IS the mindset of a game inventor, and can only be understood fully after that first experience of seeing players crowding around and enjoying playing 'your' creation. I've only experienced it once, and only for a brief period, but that rush and reward is what drives the inventor/developer. We know the odds are long that a significant return on investment (development time, money, etc.), if any, will be achieved on a particular concept. But that 'balanced mindset' that Switch so well described makes the 'bet' worthwhile.

Quote: Switch

[similar long-shot endeavors...]
i) Writing books (how many 1000's are aiming to be the next Stephen King or J. K. Rowling ?)
ii) Designing app's
iii) Becoming an actor or actress
iv) Painting or sculpting and selling your works of art
v) Becoming a musician or joining a band

Even contestants that enter shows such as 'X Factor' or 'America's got talent' are hoping to be in that top echelon reserved for the extreme minority. In the UK, 'X Factor' receives hundreds of thousands of hopefuls and yet there is just one winner, but the long odds do not deter those who enter.

....
Summing it all up. It's a long-shot. It's hard work. It's frustrating. But the buzz (no pun intended Buzzard) you get when you see players playing your invention makes it all seem so worthwhile. The finances will hopefully follow after that.

There is nothing like seeing your first game design go live. I actually dealt EZ Pai Gow before I ever played it, first install in Nevada at the Fiesta Henderson. Shift manager had a field day with this. I told a player he can't use the "Pai Gow push" feature when he banked. So he said to me, "You're just a freakin' dealer, did ya think you invented this game? I know the inventor, and right now, he's in Thailand living it up, - and you're just pushing cards here, @sshole!" Burn. (He had me confused with Robin of EZ Baccarat, apparently.) I just stood there are looked at him while the shift manager laughed his ass off.
Then they put me on Fortune right next to it - which I actually pitched, to get good action! (I hate dead games, and I LIKED dealing PGP!) The dealers on EZ Pai Gow used to prod me every time they gave up a Royal and dumped the game - "Look, Danny, it's DUMPING!!! EZ Pai Gow is giving it up!" More Burn, freakin' dealers, what can I tell you. I will say that the Fiesta Henderson was a friendly and fun place to work, not an uptight pit, people just having fun (sometimes at my expense. Nightly prostate exams at times, no strutting here...)

Anyway, I have some beliefs on this - if you're serious:
1. If you initially do game design with the pure intent of making money, you won't. It has to be fun and creative. If you do it because you're driven, compelled, called, "can't see yourself not doing it," then you're more likely to find that elusive game mechanism or "lost chord" that'll make money - and stick with it! To paraphrase Napolean Hill, "Effort releases its full reward only after you refuse to quit [because of proper passion for it.]" At the start, your enthusiasm is above having full professional skill without being sloppy, especially on game procedures and basic math. In the same breath, if a game idea avenue doesn't seem to work, and seems to be closed, - go another route. Go back to that later.

2. Simply put, the game has to have some "juice" and elegance. One Golden mechanism in a game beats adding a thousand gimmicks for the player. A game design is extremely easily crushed under its own weight." Less is more. You can explain the game in 20 seconds with three rules. Side bet Pay tables has 4 to 6 pay lines, not 16, etc.

3. Take input because you're designing it for the gambler, dealer, and casino house. In that regard, it is really the gambler who is the CEO of SHFL, Galaxy, and DEQ - and your little operation, too! - because he can buy in on some other table and kill the game. If someone else is sharp enough to isolate a problem or issue on your game, and they tell you to lose a daffy game name, or simply the procedures, whatever, - consider it and use your creative juices to streamline it, or develop something better, for the gambler that'll be on your game. When you prepare your daughter for the beauty pageant, you won't be the judge.

4. Get IP (patent) work done. Crafty thieves abound in this business. [And I am not being specific, I'm being Global.] Even if Bilsky is a stumbling block now, you have a bona-fide time-stamped paper trail. In other businesses where no royalties are involved, you have to ram a good idea down others' throats. In this business, you have to ram good ideas down others' throats [gently], AND THEN also worry about maintaining ownership and control.

5. Don't look a gift horse in the mouth. Sign a good offer when you know they're serious about getting your game out. If you self-distribute, (NV, WA?), cut breaks and provide service.

6. If you undertake this endeavor, have passion tempered with realism, but not obsession. I get pitched 20-year old games out of suitcases from guys that had one install that bombed at a casino long since imploded. Follow a living dream. Know the difference between a temporary road block in a good car, versus having a non-running car.

Quote: Lucky

That IS the mindset of a game inventor, and can only be understood fully after that first experience of seeing players crowding around and enjoying playing 'your' creation. I've only experienced it once, and only for a brief period, but that rush and reward is what drives the inventor/developer. We know the odds are long that a significant return on investment (development time, money, etc.), if any, will be achieved on a particular concept. But that 'balanced mindset' that Switch so well described makes the 'bet' worthwhile.

The rush is absolutely true. As far as the mindset, one must think of himself as being the best there is. In terms of sports, he must think of himself as Ruth, Jordan, Gretzky all rolled into one and yet be grounded to think of himself as being able to strike out, miss the game winning shot or not score a single point in a game.

More than anything, one must be willing to accept what the players think about your game. If they do not play it, than you have a dud. No excuses, period. The only thing you can control is knocking on door until you get a field trial. You better expect to knock on doors until your knuckles get bloody and when it does use your other hand till it gets bloody.

For the few who are named Roger, Robert, Francois who can call up the DTG and get placement, they have a easier time getting a trial but have the same uphill battle with the players. They have more resources with the graphic department, marketing department, math department etc... but when they get a new game in front of the public we all are on equal playing field.

Quote: AceCrAAckers

More than anything, one must be willing to accept what the players think about your game.

... but when they [the major players] get a new game in front of the public we all are on equal playing field.

Spot on. In the end, it is the market that will determine a game's fate, regardless of the promotion and hype.

And now for a different viewpoint. How much of the growth in table games is directly linked to the growth of casinos ? I mean slots continue to be more efficient. TITO was truly ground breaking. Bye-bye change girls, bye-bye hard count. No more carrying coin buckets from machine to machine or standing in line to cash out. Every time a casino gets a new manager, the dealers start looking over their shoulders. And for good reason. I can only relate to Blackhawk, but I am sure it is similar to a lot of other markets.

In almost every existing casino, table game space has been reduced and/or eliminated. When Penn National took over Bullwhackers about 10 years ago, it pulled all table games. Including the biggest and best poker room at the time. I believe it is a Racino mindset, as i will explain later. Bullwhackers bought Bronco Billy building next to it and re-opened the Silver Hawk at the rear parking lot. Today the Bullpen ( Bronco Billy's ) is now leased from Penn national as SASQUASH , the Silver Hawk is once again closed, and Bullwhackers
was most empty of customers my last two visits there. So there is something to be said for having tables games to have a solid
customer base.

Which bring me to Saratoga, which until months ago was Fitzgerald and doing pretty good. First thing I noticed last visit was the party pit was gone. It had been 8 tables, 4 with Buffalo Bonus side bet. In it's place were a pod of SHFL i games, e games, whatever they are called. Signage was not up yet, wrong rack cards, and confusing buttons. Can't wait to get back. I assume they will still be there, but curious to see if anyone is playing them.

Seems to me a very very long time and these dealer less games have not made any real progress. In 1990 I worked at Eureka Casino and had a 6 player BIG blackjack dealing machine. Took up a corner and 6 feet down each wall. And I was the only one who played it. $1 on first 5 hands, $5 on the fifth LOL I have seen IGT multiple game machines installed

with BJ as a choice but within 6 months or so, BJ disappears. Keno machine are well keno machines.


I know some poker and BJ E games have install at racinos or cruise ships. But talk about a captive audience. My grandkids are all into tablets, ipads and all that stuff. And I do see a young crowd around E craps and especially e Roulette, sharing minimum bets.
But also see Golden Baccarat never played right next to e Roulette. I mean if you can not bend the cards, why play I guess.

So my question is will e or i tables ever catch on ? Must a physical dealer have to be there as in Digital 21. Saw early version, bugs and all at the aisle in 2000, even corresponded with Digideals and had a few suggestions taken seriously. But does Digideal have any installations other than captive audiences. Do know Digideal told a forum member they liked his game but would need 30 or 40K from him for software development ! WTF ?

Perhaps Dan or Roger can commit on future of e or i games without disclosing future plans ?

I am now done. Saner minds can once again prevail.

Will any i or e table games be displayed at Raving ?

Quote: Buzzard

And now for a different viewpoint. How much of the growth in table games is directly linked to the growth of casinos ?

A lot! It WOULD be just about a zero sum game otherwise. The Real Estate is finite.

Quote: Buzzard

Perhaps Dan or Roger can commit on future of e or i games without disclosing future plans ?

I pass on this.

Quote: Buzzard

I am now done. Saner minds can once again prevail.

Not Likely! :)
All who are not on the suspension list are equal participants in that area.

Now, let's detour to an advanced subject: I was told (haha) that one distributor claims to be an asset based company, meaning it is interested in buying, controlling and using the IP, while another distributor would agree to just "distribute" a new game and getting a cut. May be Dan or Roger could commend on the pros and cons of these two arrangements to game developers. Is it zero-sum (developer and distributor)? It's time to let distributors be distributors.

Quote: Lucky

In the end, it is the market that will determine a game's fate, regardless of the promotion and hype.

The whole 'new game' industry can be whittled down
to that statement from Lucky. Yet it's the one
thing that's discussed the least. Every game inventor
thinks he has the next Rubik's Cube of the casino
industry and can't fathom why the public won't like
it.

Ever see a show called 'Pitchmen' when it was on a
few years ago? Inventors would show their products
to infomercial pitchmen and try to test the market for
them. 99.9% of them were miserable failures. But
every inventor has an ego the size of Mt Rushmore,
so hearing them whine was the entertainment part
of the show. Even the few that were chosen didn't
do all that well. Some did, but they had to interview
hundreds just to find that one.

Nobody knows what the public will accept, not Roger or
Dan or Dick Tracy. Roger has even admitted that a lot
of the 75 games on his page got no installs at all this
year. And every one of those inventors was signed into
a contract, and thought they had the world by the tail,
and was told they had something worthwhile.

Nobody knows what the gambling public will want next.
But I can tell you what they want emotionally. The thrill
of winning big, of betting 10 and winning 300. Of going
from -75 one minute to +250 the next. That's why they
gamble, the emotional roller coaster of it. I don't understand
all these games that offer 1/1 payouts, what's the fun
of that. Ever see somebody bet $5 on a number in roulette
and watch their face as the dealer slides $175 in chips in
front of them? They're ecstatic, their eyes sparkle and they
pat people on the back. That's why they gamble, for that
moment. Give people what THEY want instead of what YOU
want and you might have a winning game.

Quote: UCivan

Now, let's detour to an advanced subject: I was told (haha) that one distributor claims to be an asset based company, meaning it is interested in buying, controlling and using the IP, while another distributor would agree to just "distribute" a new game and getting a cut. May be Dan or Roger could commend on the pros and cons of these two arrangements to game developers. Is it zero-sum (developer and distributor)? It's time to let distributors be distributors.

I will say this about a distributor/manufacturer fully owning a game's IP:
1. No Game Developer personalities to (in all honesty) assuage; in this regard, I'm thinking of my earlier self vis-à-vis "an earlier" DEQ.
2. 100% of the game's income.
3. Renewing a contract on a hit game? Distributor may take a hit on percentage.
4. Game developer may resist or argue giving up "artistic control" to the more experienced distributor, just as a publishing company edits manuscripts and produces artwork for publication.
5. Most Manufacturers/Distributors have an in-house game developer or designer who can produce some worthwhile stuff and fine-tune/edit games submitted.
There is something to be said for this.

However, manufacturers must also sign good games, because getting 70% of a hit game beats the 0% of NOT having it.

And ignore Bob's screed. We have a decent idea of what the public wants, and we prove it year after year by being in business year after year. Simple fact of the matter.

Very Interesting :

Quote: Buzzard
Perhaps Dan or Roger can commit on future of e or i games without disclosing future plans ?


I pass on this.


Yet Dan deemed it necessary to post that fact. Can Galaxy be unveiling a new product line soon ?

Sometimes no answer is an answer. LOL

" However, manufacturers must also sign good games, because getting 70% of a hit game beats the 0% of NOT having it."

And it might not be a BJ tables that a new game replaces, but said manufacturer's game.

Sooner or later,it will be carnival games replacing carnival games, and just not poor ole BJ tables.

It's already carnival game replacing carnival game in Colorado. Bye Bye Switch, Hello Free Bet or House Money.

Quote: Buzzard

Very Interesting :

Quote: Buzzard
Perhaps Dan or Roger can commit on future of e or i games without disclosing future plans ?


[Dan]I pass on this.

Don't read anything into it. Kind of like saying, "don't know, not interested, whatever" to which someone here responds "Na-HA! So you admit to being Darth Vader! I KNEW it. It's a conspiracy, I tell ya!"

Quote: Buzzard

" However, manufacturers must also sign good games, because getting 70% of a hit game beats the 0% of NOT having it."

And it might not be a BJ tables that a new game replaces, but said manufacturer's game.

Kind of like a Ford Focus stealing sales from Ford Fiestas.
Out with the old, in with the new.
God forbid we should have multiple titles from multiple sources.

" Don't read anything into it. Kind of like saying, "don't know, not interested, whatever" to which someone here responds "Na-HA! So you admit to being Darth Vader! I KNEW it. It's a conspiracy, I tell ya!"

I was born at night, but it was not last night. I am supposed to believe the go to guy at Galaxy for tables games has no opinion whatsoever on i table games. REALLY ?

Quote: Buzzard

" Don't read anything into it. Kind of like saying, "don't know, not interested, whatever" to which someone here responds "Na-HA! So you admit to being Darth Vader! I KNEW it. It's a conspiracy, I tell ya!"

I was born at night, but it was not last night. I am supposed to believe the go to guy at Galaxy for tables games has no opinion whatsoever on i table games. REALLY ?

No.
1. But I might not care, or care to discuss. I care about the game designs, - others decide the platforms. One can see our very fine TableMAX products here.
2. We might not wish to report our business to you. I'll give opinions/advice on some game designs, and the general process of getting a game out, etc., but that other stuff you can get from Fantini Research.

Thanks for the link Dan. It's just that my game World Domination Poker is played best on a digital platform. I will schedule an appointment later.

I am not much for playing games. Someone sent me an email from buzzparr ? Not very original. Anyway it contained this link.

http://trademarks.justia.com/860/99/one-for-the-86099775.html

Hey Babs darling, it's there for anybody to Google.

Like I said I hate playing games.

Quote: Buzzard

I am not much for playing games. Someone sent me an email from buzzparr ? Not very original. Anyway it contained this link.

http://trademarks.justia.com/860/99/one-for-the-86099775.html

Yup, I got a similar heads up. So that's what happened, SHFL
bought this game. I guess. But why was it pulled from Raving,
that doesn't seem very smart. Even if SHFL has it at Raving, so
what. The competition is what's important.

Did you forget what first prize is , Bob DUH !

Anyone one less for Lucky to beat. Now all he has to sweat is Riverboat Roulette.

Quote: Buzzard

I am not much for playing games. Someone sent me an email from buzzparr ? Not very original. Anyway it contained this link.

http://trademarks.justia.com/860/99/one-for-the-86099775.html

Hey Babs darling, it's there for anybody to Google.

Like I said I hate playing games.

I'm quite proud of that development, actually. I think our game is in great hands. I was asked not to discuss it, so I haven't been, and I'm not. No games involved. OTOH, it would seem someone is using you.

They ain't get a virgin here, darling. My Dad taught me 2 things. " If you don't like me, we're even " . and the best advice ever,
" Never be afraid of anybody who turns their back or goes to sleep. "

Hey SHFL is the 800 lb gorilla in the room. And with an upcoming merger will be even bigger.

That is not necessarily a bad thing. Just means Dan will have to peddle a little faster to keep up.


Congrats Babs. Hopefully we can reduce my alimony payments in the near future ? ? ?

Quote: beachbumbabs

I'm quite proud of that development, actually. I think our game is in great hands. .

You're proud somebody else has trademarked YOUR games name?
That's all that's TM'd is a name. So it's in SHFL's 'hands', they now
own the name and the game?

Quote: Buzzard

Hey SHFL is the 800 lb gorilla in the room.

?

But like Roger hinted last week, probably half of the 75 games
on his page got no installs at all last year. And I guarantee all
of those game owners were giddy with delight when they signed
with the gorilla. Bigger isn't always better, sometimes the smaller
companies work a lot harder for their clients. Ever see 'Jerry
Maguire'?

Anybody know if galaxy has any table max's in Vegas? Dan? I have not seen one yet.

Quote: beachbumbabs

I was asked not to discuss it, so I haven't been, and I'm not. No games involved. .

It's all hush-hush, big secrets and big dealings in the
casino world. Everybody rubs their hands together,
staying up nights thinking up ideas to get the poor
hoopleheads to part with their hard earned money.
Makes me feel warm all over to be an AP.

The big day is almost here; Monday, Nov 18 is the
first day of Raving. One thing is assured, nothing
ever works out as planned. No matter how hard
you try, things go the way they go. Everybody has
the highest hopes for their games, and think they're
the best of the show. I'm pulling for Mulligan 21, of
all the games there it's the only one that shows
promise.

It will go how it goes, lots of hard feelings are assured.
Lots of schadenfreude, and who doesn't like that. Too
bad I can't go, but I hate Vegas this time of year.

Quote: EvenBob

But like Roger hinted last week, probably half of the 75 games
on his page got no installs at all last year. And I guarantee all
of those game owners were giddy with delight when they signed
with the gorilla. Bigger isn't always better, sometimes the smaller
companies work a lot harder for their clients. Ever see 'Jerry
Maguire'?

It's not the size of the company, it's the size of the portfolio and the competency of its salesmen.
You push 75 games, you may get six big hits from it. 50 games, 4 big hits, sign 25 games, 2 big hits, etc.
It's like big film studios: triage, sign, and distribute to generate box office. The box office proceeds tell you which ones are the big hits.

Quote: Paigowdan

You push 75 games, you may get six big hits from it. 50 games, 4 big hits, sign 25 games, 2 big hits, etc.

If you HAVE THE CAPITAL, then you can afford to push 75 games, then you WILL MOST LIKELY GET six big hits from it. 50 games, 4 big hits, sign 25 games, 2 big hits, etc. If "you" get a new game, the first thing you have to think is if this new game will squeeze out your existing games. Give and take 5 minutes, you will decide to tag the new game as 76th game for a while.

Thanks EB for the support, but like you said, none of us really know for sure what is going to resonate with players let alone the DTG's.

I applaud Babs, she has got some sort of arrangement done with the largest distributor in the business and who knows what happens for her or the game going forward. We have to respect her need for confidentiality, this is business and when you make commitments to not talk about something......well, ya just can't talk about it no matter how much you may want to share the story with those that have followed the journey via her posts here.

SHFL has a double booth without any neighbors at the show next week, which means they have spots for at least two and potentially three BJ tables. As of G2E they were considering bringing "Double Down Poker" and one other game to be determined. Hope that other game is "One for the Money" as I am sure that getting the reaction to the game by DTG's was something Babs and her team were looking forward to receiving.

I know that Lucky and I are excited about the getting that feedback on M21......good, bad or indifferent. It is one of the most valuable commodities to a game developer out there and a key to the Focus Groups that SHFL has put on in the past. It still amazes me that more properties/distributors, etc. don't put on these demo type of events for their players/clients and open up the "Judging/feedback" process to the two groups that ultimately decide what goes on the floor and what gets votes via dollars of drop.

To put it in Dan's terms, get out there with movie "pre-screening" events at properties and their players with four to six "new titles" of games they are considering installing/signing to a distribution deal and see what sticks with the players. There is clearly a piece to that puzzle that I am missing as there are plenty of smarter folks than I running casinos & distributors that haven't pushed that alternative......except for SHFL with 3 of these events over the last 18 months.

Raving is developing a niche in this regard and it can be seen by the number of table games at the event this year. 24 in the competition and additional games on display from SHFL (2 or 3) and Galaxy (quad booth.....they may have 4 games there). That should bring the total to 30 or more....that has to be a record for a Raving Event. Meanwhile G2E had no independent game booths that I saw with the exception of the "conglomerate of independents" booth near Galaxy's....who knows what the arrangement was there.

OK, back to work for me.....lots to get done before Monday!

Quote: Paradigm

I applaud Babs, she has got some sort of arrangement done with the largest distributor in the business and who knows what happens for her or the game going forward.!

What's weird about that is, SHFL trademarked the name
right away. They have games in their stable that aren't
TM'd at all, some that are TM'd by the inventor. It's almost
like SHFL is interested in the name more than the
game. Why was it pulled from the competition? Even if
it's there, as you suggest, it would get far more exposure
being a competitor. Just being seen by the small percentage
of industry people who are there is nothing compared to
taking one of the top prizes.

Don't have answers for you there & not sure if OFTM will even be at Raving.....but based on the filing, I am sure that Roger has a plan & normally they are fairly well thought out :-)

Maybe OFTM gets in at G2E next year in SHFL's booth, that would be pretty cool for Babs.....not too many folks can claim they had a game take up precious real estate at G2E in a major distributor's booth.

Getting picked up by SHFL is not always the best thing for the inventor. Depends on the agreement. I've been in the business for 7 years. I've been dealing with SHFL reps for 5 of those. They don't show you all the games... they can't. They pick the ones they think you might like or that are hot at the minute.

1 of 75 is sometimes tougher to get exposure than 1 in a stable of 25 or 15. I hope it works out for her and whatever deal was worked out. The best hope at this point was some cash up front.


ZCore13

Quote: Paradigm

Maybe OFTM gets in at G2E next year in SHFL's booth, that would be pretty cool for Babs.....not too many folks can claim they had a game take up precious real estate at G2E in a major distributor's booth.

Not so fast.. "No Flop Pineapple Holdem" was in SHFL's G2E , 2010(?), and then killed by SHFL within one year. Now the developer has to go around the country, explaining to TGD why SHFL failed it. The developer had a booth at Raving's 2012.

Quote: Zcore13

The best hope at this point was some cash up front.
ZCore13

Cash up front goes towards all the money you
have invested already, and the time. It takes
years these days to get games in any quantity
onto the casino floors. Ask Dan, he knows first
hand what an ordeal it is.

I feel kinda bad posting about the trademark, but I was sent the link and I mean it's on the net. Plus had been withdrawn from Raving new game contest. Not hard to figure out SHFL or Galaxy. Actually it was a coin toss when I was guessing. Could be SHFL and no use entering for Galaxy first prize. Could be Galaxy with Saint Dan thinking it unfair to enter a game he was about to sign.

Has taken me almost 18 months to build up a 20 minute credit with Pacman. Praying I did not blow that by posting the link.


" Getting picked up by SHFL is not always the best thing for the inventor. " Can't argue with that. Each deal is different, each game has a different potential, each inventor has different priorities " But you could do a lot worse LOL

I am still amazed that Roger let me in a focus group with my sad game and that Dan Lubin is willing to look at any future submission from me.

As for up cash front, I assume that means a lower percentage downstream. Need a crystal ball to know which is bet.

I had inquired last year about Raving entrance fee. Out of my league, but the young lady did ask just what was a
"independent product developer ". I explains just another game inventor but I though that sounded less crazy.

GOOD LUCK LUCKY

Quote: Buzzard

I feel kinda bad posting about the trademark, but I was sent the link and I mean it's on the net. Plus had been withdrawn from Raving new game contest. Not hard to figure out SHFL or Galaxy. Actually it was a coin toss when I was guessing. Could be SHFL and no use entering for Galaxy first prize.

SHFL would enter to take First Prize on a game for the sake of First prize status alone. The assistance is mainly for "independent product producers."

Quote: Buzzard

Could be Galaxy with Saint Dan thinking it unfair to enter a game he was about to sign.

I doubt SHFL would sign a game for the sole process of denying Galaxy that game, just to shelve it; it would screw the game developer who signed, and create bad will among developers. No distributor wants a "sign it to kill it" reputation among the industry. Space and time were limited when she signed, if she signed.

Quote: Buzzard

Has taken me almost 18 months to build up a 20 minute credit with Pacman. Praying I did not blow that by posting the link.

Don't sweat honest opinions.

" I doubt SHFL would sign a game for the sole process of denying Galaxy that game, just to shelve it; it would screw the game developer who signed, and create bad will among developers. No distributor wants a "sign it to kill it" reputation among the industry. Space and time were limited when she signed, if she signed."

UH OH My command of the English language failed me once again. I did not want to imply that SHFL would sign a game just to deny Galaxy. Just why enter a game in a competition where first prize is that game being promoted and handled by Galaxy. I could ask Babs if she signed, but I won't NO WAY !

But like SHFL has trademark, game pulled from competition, now in SHFL booth at Raving.

Don't need Columbo to solve this case. Or to at least make an educated guess.

Quote: Buzzard

I could ask Babs if she signed, but I won't NO WAY !
.

You don't have to ask, she said here yesterday
that her game is in the 'hands' of SHFL. Clearly
she signed with them.

Quote: EvenBob

You don't have to ask, she said here yesterday
that her game is in the 'hands' of SHFL. Clearly
she signed with them.

Clearly, she made a deal with SHFL, the terms of which are confidential and will probably remain so. But since the trademark application is from SHFL (not Babs' company) suggests that SHFL made an outright purchase of the IP, rather than purchase rights via a licensing agreement. And the game name - One for the Money - is a very good one!

Quote: Paigowdan

You push 75 games, you may get six big hits from it.

My point is, all 75 think they have a hit when
they sign. Nobody is told their game sucks,
and no company signs games that they think
will suck. Everybody on both sides thinks they
have a potential hit, and the inventor is all
pumped up on possibilities of incredible riches
which is planted in his mind by the sales pitch.
'If this and 'if that' and 'if only'.

But it's a sad situation for the vast majority of
everybody connected to the gambling side of
the gambling industry. No jackpots, no installs,
no riches, turns out we're not as smart as we
think, your game is a turkey, sorry..

I really want Mulligan 21 to do well, it's a great
game. Look at it twice, look at it three times, you
people who will be there. I have no horse in this
race, sometimes I root for obvious winners. Odd,
huh..

Quote: Lucky

Clearly, she made a deal with SHFL, the terms of which are confidential and will probably remain so. But since the trademark application is from SHFL (not Babs' company) suggests that SHFL made an outright purchase of the IP, rather than purchase rights via a licensing agreement. And the game name - One for the Money - is a very good one!

Harry, this is not always the case. Often, when a distributor leases IP, they still name or approve of the game's name, and then trademark that name. Whenever they don't happen to own the IP, (just lease it), - they can still trademark to own the brand name. I own the IP for EZ Pai Gow, but not DEQ's trade name for it.

Quote: Lucky

Clearly, she made a deal with SHFL

I called Raving yesterday to find what games SHFL
will have in its booth and was told OFTM might be
one of them. But it's not in the competition, that's
where all the attention is. Big mistake pulling it, but
Mulligan 21 is in front anyway so it really doesn't
matter.

Quote: EvenBob

I called Raving yesterday to find what games SHFL
will have in its booth and was told OFTM might be
one of them. But it's not in the competition, that's
where all the attention is. Big mistake pulling it, but
Mulligan 21 is in front anyway so it really doesn't
matter.

EB Farnum is right. How can Shuffle Master possible market a game if it's not in some contest? Those guys don't know what they're doing. Maybe EB will can give up running that hotel in Deadwood and take over for pacman.

Quote: EvenBob

My point is, all 75 think they have a hit when
they sign. Nobody is told their game sucks,
and no company signs games that they think
will suck.

Sure they are told that, and often. Game designer are frequently told "Sorry, not interested, no deal." ("Truthful to a fault," as it is just business.)
The others who sign are told, "We'll give it a go; the sales (box office) will determine its popularity."
The games that are signed on are believed to have the best potential, no guarantees. The public is fickle.

Quote: EvenBob

Everybody on both sides thinks they
have a potential hit, and the inventor is all
pumped up on possibilities of incredible riches
which is planted in his mind by the sales pitch.
'If this and 'if that' and 'if only'.

Manufacturers and Distributors are trying to find a hit; so is the game designer. This is different than assuming it is now a hit upon signing. If the game designer is realistic, he'll say at best "I have a shot," or "here goes nothing." If the game designer is unrealistic, he may say "I made it at this point," which is not the case, ever. If he makes it, he'll see revenue at least year out, if ever.

Quote: EvenBob

But it's a sad situation for the vast majority of
everybody connected to the gambling side of
the gambling industry. No jackpots, no installs,
no riches, turns out we're not as smart as we
think, your game is a turkey, sorry..

No it isn't.
First of all, the only project that guarantees failure is the project not taken. If you do the project, and do it well, and take it seriously, you do have a shot. Look at Geoff, a winner, and he's not the only one.
Secondly, it is time better spent, win or lose. Any time spent on the couch watching re-runs and eating chips is time lost and waistline inches gained.
It is tempting to pontificate on how people should spend their time, what projects they should do, how depressed they should really feel about it, and then declare their snowball's chance of success on their behalf, after picking your winner. Piece of cake.

Quote: EvenBob

I really want Mulligan 21 to do well, it's a great
game. Look at it twice, look at it three times, you
people who will be there. I have no horse in this
race, sometimes I root for obvious winners. Odd,
huh..

Yes it is, but it is good to see you sing a positive note from time to time. :)
Looks like a fine game to me, love the mechanism.