It’s been a little while since I have written anything for the blog, so I decided it was time to put finger to keyboard and churn out some more wisdom. For those who don’t know, I have recently cycled the entire length of the country. I started at Land’s end on the 26th April and finished at John O Groates on the 4th May. When asked my I attempted such a crazy endeavour, I thrust my chest forward and proudly announce that it was for cancer research (http://www.justgiving.com/lEJOG2007Mark), but the reality is that (like all the best decisions) it was made as I stepped out of the pub around 11pm on a bleak January night.
So having swapped the saddle for a Aeron (company-killer) chair, I am currently sat in the new Introversion office and I’m thinking about growth. I recently met a very interesting investor who explained to me the theory of company growth. You can break company growth into four phases. Initially a company raises money via the three Fs (friends, family and fools). Most business collapse, but some get a little bigger and get some capital from banks other companies etc. After this you look for external investment and finally you float on the stock exchange.
Now Introversion sits in phase 2 at the moment. We can probably get capital if we need it, we have an office and we are doing well – but how do we move into the next stage? Well according to this particular fellow, we need to separate ‘ourselves’ from the business in order to move into the next phase of operations. I don’t think I agree with this analysis. How can you possibly remove yourselves from the business? Introversion is simply a sum of the personalities of the directors and employees and it is the hopes, fears and motivation of each person that makes the company what it is.
I know that Introversion will continue to grow. We will release bigger, more ambitious games in more countries and on more platforms. We will continue to (slowly) expand the team so we have all the people we need – we may even more into a bigger office (tower) one day. Despite all that, I can’t see either myself or anyone else in the team divorcing themselves from the belief in Introversion or the games we make. In hindsight, I think the investor was a bit of a prat.
Growing your thighs and growing your business
"Growing your thighs and growing your business"
Um, NeoThermic, I think this is spam. Any chance you could lock and ban? :P
Seriously, though, biking across the country is a great achievement. Congratulations. I am currently working toward a goal of biking 2,400 miles in the year. I am a bit behind at the moment, as I injured my ankle a couple of weeks ago, but I am making good progress.
As to the growth of the business, that is very exciting. I would wish you good luck in the future, but you guys don't need it -- you create great products. I would take talent and tenacity over luck any day of the week.
xander
Um, NeoThermic, I think this is spam. Any chance you could lock and ban? :P
Seriously, though, biking across the country is a great achievement. Congratulations. I am currently working toward a goal of biking 2,400 miles in the year. I am a bit behind at the moment, as I injured my ankle a couple of weeks ago, but I am making good progress.
As to the growth of the business, that is very exciting. I would wish you good luck in the future, but you guys don't need it -- you create great products. I would take talent and tenacity over luck any day of the week.
xander
-
shinygerbil
- level5
- Posts: 4667
- Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 10:14 pm
- Location: Out, finding my own food. Also, doing the shinyBonsai Manoeuvre(tm)
- Contact:
Congratulations on the bike ride! 
Glad to see you still haven't lost sight of your beliefs and values, which are what make your games (and you as people, and you as a company) great. I look forward to seeing Introversion rise to new heights in the future.
Don't let investors f*ck with your company.
Glad to see you still haven't lost sight of your beliefs and values, which are what make your games (and you as people, and you as a company) great. I look forward to seeing Introversion rise to new heights in the future.
Don't let investors f*ck with your company.
Here is my signature. Make of it what you will.
well, I must admit I haven't actually been on a bike for years, fell off on like my second ride ever and that was that.
And I think that "divorcing yourselves from the business" would be a great way to become a micro EA ><
And I think that "divorcing yourselves from the business" would be a great way to become a micro EA ><
GENERATION 22:The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment.
-
shinygerbil
- level5
- Posts: 4667
- Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 10:14 pm
- Location: Out, finding my own food. Also, doing the shinyBonsai Manoeuvre(tm)
- Contact:
Congratulations Mark, that is quite an achievement on the cycling the length of the island.
As for seperating yourself from the business, that would be the death knell for Introversion. It is as you said, built on your personalities, and that is what keeps it great, and will push you forward into the future.
Us fools will be there to watch and help as we can also.
As for seperating yourself from the business, that would be the death knell for Introversion. It is as you said, built on your personalities, and that is what keeps it great, and will push you forward into the future.
Us fools will be there to watch and help as we can also.
Uplink help: Read the FAQ
Re: Growing your thighs and growing your business
Mark wrote:....edit..... I recently met a very interesting investor who explained to me the theory of company growth. You can break company growth into four phases. Initially a company raises money via the three Fs (friends, family and fools). Most business collapse, but some get a little bigger and get some capital from banks other companies etc. After this you look for external investment and finally you float on the stock exchange.
.........edit....How can you possibly remove yourselves from the business? Introversion is simply a sum of the personalities of the directors and employees and it is the hopes, fears and motivation of each person that makes the company what it is.
I know that Introversion will continue to grow. We will release bigger, more ambitious games in more countries and on more platforms. We will continue to (slowly) expand the team so we have all the people we need – we may even more into a bigger office (tower) one day. Despite all that, I can’t see either myself or anyone else in the team divorcing themselves from the belief in Introversion or the games we make.
First up I know that theory of "get rich quick" can apply to the tech sector in many situations, I'm not sure that the guy you spoke to really understood your business though. If you were just another faceless software development company with a specialization then yes you could follow this model to the T.
But as you say quite rightly, Introversion is different in that what you are IS the combination of yourselves and the 'art' you want to create(gaming is an art form right? though that is often lost in translation these days imho). Take yourselves out of the Introversion and it will cease to be - your games are you.
So i don't think this is an approach that would work for you if you want to carry on producing games and expanding that aspect of your business.
The way i see it, and I'm in a similar situation to yourselves(just an earlier step in the process of making games the homegrown way), is that as a small independent games company you have two clear choices on how to develop your company:
1. Keep it small, grow it slow and keep 100% control
2. Approach a larger company/publisher and sell yourself to them(you lose control)
I've decided to go with choice 1, as the games I want to create would be unlikely to get approval within a big mainstream publisher. The downside of this is very much a monetary one in that when your not working on the design of a game you are always trying to find ways to make money to get by; and this can become a serious issue as you know very well yourselves.
Still I've found Introversions journey very inspirational to my own situation and what it does show is that even today it is possible for a small bunch of mates to make games and compete with the heavyweights that now control gaming. In this situation the key is to keep faith with the things you do that are unique - stuff that the big heavyweights won't touch or can't compete with you on. As smaller independents we have this advantage, we are not constrained by the same issues a big games publisher has to deal with.
If you do this well you will always be able to put food on the table so to speak, and you may get lucky and hit the jackpot by coming up with a very successful game.
Choice 2 has the advantage of better short-term gains, you will probably get a decent salary and a more secure one. You also then have the advantage of being part of the mainstream games producing family, the celebrity parties, the glitz of award ceremonies and peer approval and congratulations - so a stronger sense of achievement in some respects.
The downside is that you are not your own masters anymore, a 'bad game' and you could find yourselves back where you started or sold off to another company and the games you want to make can go by the wayside.
I suppose there could be a third option - find that generous benefactor that understands your mission and will give you the financial backing while not wanting to take control........I'm still looking for mine!!!
- Zak
PS congrats on the cycle ride - saddle soar is probably a term that only goes half way to describe it!
Growing your business
Hey Mark,
I didn't like the idea at first either, but separating personalities from the company is covered exhaustively in the Built to Last. The basic idea is that the most successful companies are the ones that outlive any particular person and fully ingrain the "spirit" of the company into the company's infrastructure, policies and practices. The authors refer to this as "clock-building" instead of "time-telling". It's definitely an amazing concept and I'd highly recommend the book (even if only so you know specifically why you don't want to embrace this strategy).
That said, I think that company growth for the sake of growth doesn't make sense. Ie, not all companies need to be made to grow (your average little restaurant or corner store wants only to provide for its owners).
-Charlie
I didn't like the idea at first either, but separating personalities from the company is covered exhaustively in the Built to Last. The basic idea is that the most successful companies are the ones that outlive any particular person and fully ingrain the "spirit" of the company into the company's infrastructure, policies and practices. The authors refer to this as "clock-building" instead of "time-telling". It's definitely an amazing concept and I'd highly recommend the book (even if only so you know specifically why you don't want to embrace this strategy).
That said, I think that company growth for the sake of growth doesn't make sense. Ie, not all companies need to be made to grow (your average little restaurant or corner store wants only to provide for its owners).
-Charlie
There are a few notable companies that DIDNT go that route but maintained thier independance. Guys like Scott Miller and George Broussard, the guys at ID etc.
The main thing I hear from them, is that in order to work with publishers, you have to be in the position of power. That is, YOU have to be able to dictate terms or walk away from a deal.
Most devs simply arent in that state and as such they get screwed or lose control.
I dont think that the route your on is bad, but it does kind of suggest there is an upper limit on the size you can maintain without bigger partners etc. I guess you already know this by working with valve.
So, question is, what partners are you prepared to work with, what deal terms and what would make you walk away.
I guess it really depends on wether you have an exit strategy in mind, or some kind of sustainable larger business. Or just greater profitability?
From what I've heard from independant devs who sold out but stayed in post. It almost always turns out not what they expected. So I'd definitely be wary of anything like takeovers. What would be interesting though, is a relationship like ID had with Raven, or 3DRealms have with Remedy. Remember that remedy started off doing small games like Death Rally.
It seems to me, that a mutually beneficial arrangement CAN be made. But I guess its so rare that maybe its not worth looking for.
The main thing I hear from them, is that in order to work with publishers, you have to be in the position of power. That is, YOU have to be able to dictate terms or walk away from a deal.
Most devs simply arent in that state and as such they get screwed or lose control.
I dont think that the route your on is bad, but it does kind of suggest there is an upper limit on the size you can maintain without bigger partners etc. I guess you already know this by working with valve.
So, question is, what partners are you prepared to work with, what deal terms and what would make you walk away.
I guess it really depends on wether you have an exit strategy in mind, or some kind of sustainable larger business. Or just greater profitability?
From what I've heard from independant devs who sold out but stayed in post. It almost always turns out not what they expected. So I'd definitely be wary of anything like takeovers. What would be interesting though, is a relationship like ID had with Raven, or 3DRealms have with Remedy. Remember that remedy started off doing small games like Death Rally.
It seems to me, that a mutually beneficial arrangement CAN be made. But I guess its so rare that maybe its not worth looking for.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests