 |
Quote: |
 |
|
|
 |
Originally Posted by Gridiron |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I don't get why you keep posting sales numbers? Everybody knows what those games sold.
About this DrJones cat. Okay, he worked for EA, so have thousands of other people. Doesn't mean he knows any more about the deal terms than anybody else. Gotta know his real name and the position he held before any weight can be put on that, man. Sorry, that's just nothing.
I mean, because a dude worked at Wal-Mart, that doesn't mean he had anything to do with their contract with AND1. EA is a big company, and only so many high rankers would have full knowledge of something like that, like their lawyers, CEO, Executive level dudes. I don't think any of them were hanging out on OS back then or even now, for real.
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Just to be clear, I'm not saying it's impossible. It could very well be true that it was a per unit deal. They're very common. However, I can't see how that would've benefited the NFL at the time, as many of these franchises that had an NFL license didn't sell well at all. I could however see a possibility where they base the terms on the companies size/market reach which is also very common, and it's a way to allow smaller companies an opportunity. I believe they currently do this with the mobile market.
What it all boils down to is proof. All I can go by is what has been proven. Before I can accept an internet post as fact, I have to know more about the background of the person posting. Even sometimes being close to something doesn't necessarily mean you know the ins and outs. I recall Donovan McNabb not being aware that games could end in a tie.
I recall an EA/Tiburon developer once arguing at another board about what constitutes an engine and he was a high-ranking dev inside the inner-workings of AAA game development. He was also very wrong.
I just need to see proof.