As Aras said, I doubt you’re going to get one. There’s a reason why almost no company comments on rumours like these ones - it’s because any comment, whether it’s to confirm or deny, can impact both current and future negotiations.
Some troll with the username hlppocoder. Notice the “l” instead of “i”.
1 Like
He is trying to get as many likes as he can. What people do for attention I tell ya lol
1 Like
I’m going to reiterate Aras’s previous point in this thread, we don’t comment on speculation and rumour.
So you are saying your pleading the 5th… lol
I won’t lie, I had to google what that meant, I’m british yo.
4 Likes
e not done many posts everyone but as Ippokratis said it is affecting the way I view my future use of UT so I think it’s worth posting in a hope that UT see it is a concern.
It is making me think twice about any future asset store purchases I am interested in.
I would think that any asset store devs (whose products permit) would give purchasers a promise to allow their product licence to be transferrable to any other development platforms. This would encourage sales to those customers holding off AND continue UTs revenue stream.
I am tending to agree with this, and for what my opinions may or may not be worth I give the following reasons:
I can’t see MS dropping UT in a hurry. Even if things didn’t go as well as planned they would probably build some UT integration into other dev products. They have the money to keep up support.
MS now own UnityVS (Is this a precursor of things to come?). Full Visual Studio pro and express integration as standard would be nice.
MS opening up any other dev tools for use with unity users.
From what I can tell MS whilst being still a vast company is becoming more transparent (I may be totally wrong but get the feeling the other big players have made them have a rethink). See link below as an example:
http://windowssecrets.com/top-story/why-the-u-s-needs-better-privacy-laws-now/
Out of Apple, Google and MS the first two seem most likely to be less flexible on porting due to size of user base, apple history and company policies in particular point to this. I can’t see Microsoft shutting down porting to platforms. This would be madness as they would cull most of there profits from the company in no time by loss of users etc.
I went to one of the unity porting events and the MS guys were excellent (can’t comment on the other companies but this was my experience). I am old enough and cynical enough to not be duped by sales and marketing blurb people. In this case I am confident I was not being manipulated. It was business but open and well done.
I still want to be able to use free tools such as blender, which I can’t see autodesk being happy with.
I don’t want my games to be LOADED with ads to the extent that facebook appear to do with their facebook games - Farmville etc. I like the choice that unity ads allows giving my customers (hopefully many 
) a better experience.
If it did get sold then to whoever buys UT I would urge them to maintain the cross platform model. If they are really desperate to favour their own products then give incentives. For example MS buys UT. MS states that unity devs can have a FULL pro licence and VStudio pro on prevision that the developed game/app is a windows exclusive for x months (maybe with a reduction in months as an exclusive as more products are released). I for one would jump at this as a strapped for cash solo developer. Otherwise stick to standard or similar model.
Lastly do I want UT to sell up? If UT have the money and don’t need to sell I’d say stay as independent as possible. I have spent a fair bit recently for my product in the asset store and don’t want to have to change to other platforms as UT is working for me.
At the end of the day they know their business finances better than any of us. They have employees who probably have families that need feeding and bills to pay like most of us. They are responsible for their wellbeing as well as the customers.
Doc
2 Likes
But you will post a few thousand words about the speculation about some investor market hucksters article that is merely an attempt to up their investor inside knowledge cachet to sell even more useless articles in the future.
2 Likes
UT has every right to refrain from commenting on the speculation and rumors.
I’m sure everyone here would encourage UT to do so.
What are the facts then?
1 Like
Apparently nothing. Everyone else is pulling it out their backside trying to come up with it.
2 Likes
Speculation is different to the type of sales and marketing blurb I mentioned. This is not just a company telling me how good their product is and how great they are and why I should buy into them.
If it was just some sales bumph I wouldn’t be wasting my time.
The point is speculation needs dealing with if it looks like it can get out of hand. Companies can lose value quickly due to speculation if it is not dealt with quickly enough. Creating and exploiting loss of confidence in markets/products is not only a reality but sadly standard business practice for some. Just look at any stock exchange.
I posted because I am enough of a user and supporter of the UT product and culture that I thought this needed comment on. I gave opinions on why I prefer one company over the alternatives mentioned and gave some other suggestions that may be worthwhile to some.
Re the few thousand words comment I didn’t do a word count and am not rainman but doubt it goes over a few hundred.
2 Likes
IMO there must be at least talks, because otherwise wouldn’t they just say it’s not true?
3 Likes
I read financial news daily. The article was pure hucksterism and a piss poor attempt at financial writers cachet and article portfolio extension. It has nothing to do with reality and boots on the ground. They could have written that Warren Buiffet was going to buy McDonalds for it’s real estate holding. That McDonalds has the largest real estate holdings of most any company (except the Queen of England and The Vatican) and Warren Buffet likes real estate and has the cash to make it happen is true. The actual mechanics are just alot of voodoo market fluff looking at some point to divide a fool and their money or disrupt the stock market valuation o some other huckster can make a buy and sell it at some point to profit.
Typically…no… Companies do not say no to rumors. That would keep their PR folks tied up with BS. They just simply do not comment in most case where they have experienced boots on the ground in PR.
2 Likes
Unity is privately held correct?
If they did an IPO could they structure it such that they retain control over it’s “destiny” ? 
Zynga, Pincus + stock class
Side benefit perhaps is UT may then have funds to pay off the Xamarin extortionists.
Would like to keep Unity as our middleware tbh.
Ippdev I like this reply. You are saying that you actually follow the financial markets closer than probably the majority. For people with more knowledge on these things you hold little value in these articles. BUT for customers/consumers who don’t read financial news then these articles can be compelling/worrying/whatever.
I would encourage you (I am not being sarcastic) and others to use any financial insight you may have to give good clear and objective reasons on why these articles are rubbish and post them so that some confidence is injected into these threads and ultimately back into the company.
Well, in the future we are going to have to ask you to provide us with an accurate word count or we will have to lock any thread in which you are participating.
We can’t afford to speculate on the size of your posts!
Thanks for your cooperation.
My wife would have locked all my verbal threads years ago
Very rare I post much anywhere. Good job probably.
1 Like
It was disappointing that the last thread got closed. There was a lot of noise, but there were still people talking about an important subject. Not allowing discussion about it would be worrying.
Unity is a strong product with a large user base and good industry visibility, so it is a prime target. Therefore there are going to be articles about the possibility. I’m sure there have been good offers, but the most likely reason for not selling is that David Helgason and Joachim Ante enjoy running Unity too much. Long may that continue.
The only platform holders likely to be really good for Unity would be one of the Chinese portals. They get to be another platform option, but see the existing platforms as sources of income rather than competitors.
1 Like
/agree
We / they need to control the noise but seeing too many little lock icons on the forums doesn’t inspire confidence imo.