Summary of Ian Livingston Interview on CNBC
Stolen from Yahoo, by: skidmo1 (36/M/DC) 259 of 259
Well, in general, IMHO, the interview is unlikely to generate any meaningful interest in Eidos. Mr.
Livingston spent most of the time trying not to give answers to the questions that were asked. I realize
a chairman is unlikely to give specifics mid-quarter, but he wound up looking rather evasive and didn't
exactly seem all too giddy on his own company. I realize that this is because that's his personality, but
to the uninitiated, the interview came off as if he would have rather been doing something else than
talking about his company.
The first question asked was that in light of recent wider than expected losses, when did he see a
return to profitability? His response was that he thought it would be soon. When prompted further as
to when "soon" was, he replied, just soon.
On the good side, while not indicating sales totals, he noted that TR3 is number one in Japan and most
European countries and "hugely successful" in the US. He also noted that Michael Owens World Cup
is performing extremely well in Europe. While he mentioned several of the other upcoming games by
name, his presentation was uninspired and seemed more like he was simply reading a from list of
games that could sell one unit or 100,000. There was no indication that any of them would be
meaningful. Also, he didn't speak at all as to the success of Commandos and Thief, or the potential
success of Warzone 2100.
He was asked pointedly about the level of R&D spending and whether it was too high and what we
could expect in the future. His response was that R&D level was not high and should be in the range
of 20 percent of revenues going foward. He also voluntarily through in the comment that Eidos would
rather can a game than put a poor game on the shelf. The comment seemed out of place and could be
interpreted in various ways, some good, some bad.
When asked about the upcoming movie and the revenues that could flow to Eidos. He indicated that
the revenues would be welcome, but not meaningful. He strongly emphasised that Eidos retained
control over the content and has the right to veto casting decisions. While none of us ever expected
huge revenues from the movie, he certainly could have seemed a little more excited about the potential
new audience for the TR game series from the movie and continued interest in the franchise over a
longer period of time.
When asked about the company's future need for additional capital, he responded, without further
elaboration, that for the short term, there was adequate capital.
That's about it. His answers were short and not very informative. While Eidos didn't come off looking
bad, this was a missed opportunity to reach a wider audience. If anyone else saw the interview, I'd
appreciate their comments.
Posted: Jan 5 1999 9:44AM EST as a reply to: Msg 258 by skidmo1 |
