Tuesday, Sep 15, 2009
It's weird to start an editorial off sounding like He-Man, but every now and then we need a reminder that we, as consumers, hold the ultimate power in the gaming industry.
It's no secret that Activision has become the new devil in our play. In the gaming world - on forums, on YouTube, on blogs, and in person - the hate has been flowing towards the biggest, and purportedly "most evil", company in gaming. A lot of the hatred comes down to remarks coming from this man
Bob Kotick.
-
I must confess to being just as angry as the next guy at some of Kotick's comments. To paraphrase "$60 isn't enough for Modern Warfare" and "we turn a $50 purchase into a $500 purchase"... comments that are more than just PR snafus. From $150 Modern Warfare collector's editions, to expensive music games, to $50 Starcraft II expansions, Kotick has a list of "sins" on his head in our world.
-
But there's a catch to all of this - a loophole, if you will - Kotick can't make you buy his games - he can't swipe your credit card, or take the cash from your wallet - that's something you do. Activision doesn't have the power to force you to buy their products.
-
We, as consumers, have the ultimate power to decide what stays and goes in the gaming industry. As much as Activision touts their large size and stable of games, it's up to us to keep them in business. And as much fun as it may be to whine about the pricing, it's what we do with our wallets that really makes the decision.
-
We don't have to buy Modern Warfare 2. We don't have to buy Guitar Hero 5. We don't have to buy Starcraft II. These are popular games - but they are only three games in a year filled with hundreds of titles. If we don't like what Activision is doing, why not support another developer? Why not buy one of the dozens of other FPS, RTS, or music games? Change comes from us - from our demands - and no matter how big the company, it's up to gamers to decide what stays, and what goes.
-
Companies go from products we don't want...
to products they hope we'll like...
based on our demands.
-
Sure, it's easy to whine: it takes no effort to complain, but what we do as consumers, with our software purchases, makes the ultimate decision. If we're okay with paying more for Activision titles, if they really are providing the high-quality product that we want, then why can't they charge more? If Activision is failing to deliver, if we're tired of paying a premium for their products, then why continue to buy? We, as individual consumers, decide what's right for us, and we, as individual consumers, hold sway over the entire gaming industry.
-
It may be a quaint point to make in a forum so often given to emotional outbursts and bouts of anti-business sentiments - but every now and then, we all need a reminder that we decide what games go in our systems, not the publishing companies.
Comments
Posted Sep 15, 2009 8:48 pm PT
You're wrong about one thing and one thing only. I have to buy modern warfare 2.
Posted Sep 15, 2009 8:53 pm PT
I love your pictures. You are completely right. There's a reason why there's so many Pokemon games or inferior Spider-Man games. Its because people keep buying them. Simple point but one that a lot of people ignore in favor of complaining. Even though people complain about the money its costs to buy games they still buy them, even with out "crappy economy" or our high gas prices people still find the money to buy $60 games and live comfortably. ~Sigh~ my grandpa was right, the world IS ruled by kids and their parents pocket-books. Especially the gaming world.
Posted Sep 15, 2009 8:59 pm PT
Uhh...yeah. Part of the blame should go to vicarious visions and red octane for all the insane number of guitar hero games given in the time span that we've been getting them. Yet for some reason everyone blames it entirely on the publisher and the developers get along home free.
Anyways, back to playing Guitar Hero 5 now.
Anyways, back to playing Guitar Hero 5 now.
Posted Sep 15, 2009 9:09 pm PT
Subrosian, great blog as always
We will continue to see him until Activision starts to lose money or if he decides to step down.
We will continue to see him until Activision starts to lose money or if he decides to step down.
Posted Sep 15, 2009 9:14 pm PT
Kotick's only mistake has been vocalizing what every CEO of every successful corporation on earth wishes they could say but lack the ***** to... As long as the products they (Activision) purvey are good, then I say more power to him... consumers can be so absurd sometimes...
Posted Sep 15, 2009 9:16 pm PT
@GreenNinjaN
It's the oldest story on the gaming forums: "I'm going to boycott this company, right after I buy ________". While I get just as upset as anyone at the "greedy publishers" out there, I can't blame a company for charging when people so willingly hand over their money.
It's the oldest story on the gaming forums: "I'm going to boycott this company, right after I buy ________". While I get just as upset as anyone at the "greedy publishers" out there, I can't blame a company for charging when people so willingly hand over their money.
Posted Sep 15, 2009 9:17 pm PT
@samissleman17 - Do as you will, this blog is more to those are boycotting Activision, in which is pointless since the consumer (which is you and me) can control our money to what we want. Enjoy the game and I hope you made the right investment.
@wiifan001 - The decision for all those Guitar Hero games would be more of Activision since the title sells. If more people buy more GH games, then it makes more sense to Activision to keep making more GH games not the developer. Also Activision wanted Tim Schafer's Brutal Legends to be a GH game before the project went to EA.
@wiifan001 - The decision for all those Guitar Hero games would be more of Activision since the title sells. If more people buy more GH games, then it makes more sense to Activision to keep making more GH games not the developer. Also Activision wanted Tim Schafer's Brutal Legends to be a GH game before the project went to EA.
Posted Sep 15, 2009 9:21 pm PT
@FireEmblem_Man I am truly against activision and I hate that guy he looks like Ronald McDonald without the makeup but MW2 is made by infinityward, and I'll still get it even though Activision made it.
Posted Sep 15, 2009 9:26 pm PT
@samissleman17
It's odd to be "truly against Activision" yet buy their products - it proves FireEmblem_Man and GreenNinjaN's argument.
-
@67gt500
I'm not sure why Kotick decided to vocalize such crass points - it seems foolhardy. Prior to his comments, 99% of the gaming world was oblivious to his existence.
It's odd to be "truly against Activision" yet buy their products - it proves FireEmblem_Man and GreenNinjaN's argument.
-
@67gt500
I'm not sure why Kotick decided to vocalize such crass points - it seems foolhardy. Prior to his comments, 99% of the gaming world was oblivious to his existence.
Posted Sep 15, 2009 9:30 pm PT
Absolutely right! We as consumers have the power to downl.... err buy the games we choose 
Posted Sep 15, 2009 9:30 pm PT
@FireEmblem_Man
Correct, boycotting Activision is pointless. We don't need to boycott Activision, we simply need to only buy the products we feel deliver the right value for the cost. People, in their anger, seem to forget that Activision can't make you spend $500 on their games. If they could, believe me they would have already - the $500 price sticker would be there on the Modern Warfare 2 preorder.
-
There's no magic trick or secret here - consumers hold the power, and as long as we're buying the products we feel give us the best value, those will be the products that sell, and which there will be more of.
Correct, boycotting Activision is pointless. We don't need to boycott Activision, we simply need to only buy the products we feel deliver the right value for the cost. People, in their anger, seem to forget that Activision can't make you spend $500 on their games. If they could, believe me they would have already - the $500 price sticker would be there on the Modern Warfare 2 preorder.
-
There's no magic trick or secret here - consumers hold the power, and as long as we're buying the products we feel give us the best value, those will be the products that sell, and which there will be more of.
Posted Sep 15, 2009 9:35 pm PT
This is nothing new. People always get mad about prices, but refuse to do anything until things get so out of hand that they just CANNOT afford it any more. Lets look at cars. Ford and GM made cars that pissed people off for 10 years before their downfall. It took that long for the cars to be so overpriced that people simply couldn't afford them anymore. People rarely choose to change their spending patterns... they are just forced to change from time to time.
Posted Sep 15, 2009 9:38 pm PT
@ subrosian
I know - but the animosity toward him is creepy... and misguided... it's as if people expect him to be like Willy Wonka or something and he's not. The funniest part is that no-one can refute that what he says is true - for some reason people just don't want to hear it, and I find that kind of mentality profoundly frightening...
I know - but the animosity toward him is creepy... and misguided... it's as if people expect him to be like Willy Wonka or something and he's not. The funniest part is that no-one can refute that what he says is true - for some reason people just don't want to hear it, and I find that kind of mentality profoundly frightening...
Posted Sep 15, 2009 9:40 pm PT
great read ya I can't believe activision its just arrogance really but your right on the money we don't NEED those games we only want them and I think we should send them a clear message on what we want
Posted Sep 15, 2009 9:42 pm PT
@ payne6705
believe me, on MW2's launch day, we will send a message to Activision and it will be loud and clear... when the launch of this product officially becomes the biggest product launch in the history of the entertainment business we will all collectively prove Bobby's point...
believe me, on MW2's launch day, we will send a message to Activision and it will be loud and clear... when the launch of this product officially becomes the biggest product launch in the history of the entertainment business we will all collectively prove Bobby's point...
Posted Sep 15, 2009 9:45 pm PT
Agreed. Activision gets away with the tactics they use b/c there's tons of demand for their products, and you can force change by reducing demand. But I'll be honest: I'm going to play Modern Warfare 2 and Starcraft II, no matter how many ridiculous quotes Kotick gives to reporters.
Posted Sep 15, 2009 9:47 pm PT
Thumbs-down me if you will, but in my opinion modern warfare was really just an overrated and blatantly propagandic shooter with a shallow plot. I'm expecting as much from the sequel, and so won't be playing it. As for guitar hero, people are starting to realize that they're shelling out $60 for the same game every iteration. You make a good point with this post, though. But I must say that Kotick is a real poo-face.
Posted Sep 15, 2009 9:58 pm PT
Kotick makes people mad for the same reason that T.O. makes most people mad. He tells you he(Activision) is the best. No one would have a problem with Activision just quietly going about their business making rad games. It's the fact that he rubs your nose in it when he is done. But just like all the people that say they hate T.O., they still watch his reality show. They still tune into sportscenter to see what he's going to say, and you know what? I bet most of you that actually disdain actiblizz for what kotick says will still want to get your grubby paws all over MW2.
Posted Sep 15, 2009 10:05 pm PT
@jazilla Are you ready for me to derail your whole analogy? Are you? Wait for it............................................
T.O.'s show is getting canceled in the next few episodes because nobody is watching it. Execs are just giving it a few weeks to bounce back before the ax falls.
T.O.'s show is getting canceled in the next few episodes because nobody is watching it. Execs are just giving it a few weeks to bounce back before the ax falls.
Posted Sep 15, 2009 10:16 pm PT
Am I the only person who doesn't really care one way or the other? Maybe it's because I've never really been into Activision titles and so don't exactly affect his pocket anyhow, but the fact remains that this guy's absurd ambitions will never come to fruition. There is no way the entire gaming industry will follow such ideals; either Kotick will have to accept reality or he'll drive Activision into the ground. No matter how good a title is, nobody is going to pay $500 for a game when there's half-decent $50 alternatives. I, for one, would rather receive silver every three months than a diamond every five years.
Posted Sep 15, 2009 10:21 pm PT
Good point there. And it doesn't just apply to Activision alone, it applies to every game from every developer / publisher out there. Eventually it is we who have the right to make a choice. They may hype their games as much as they want but at the end, it is we, the consumers, who choose to accept a game or reject it. And this power becomes all the more apparent when instead of just one single consumer choosing to accept / reject a game, several of these choose to do so collectively. Now that is indeed true power !!!
Posted Sep 15, 2009 10:22 pm PT
@KrazzyDJ
Yes indeed, it is true power, which is why while Kotick annoys me, I find the outrage over his comments to be a bit absurd. No game company has ever held the power to force consumers to buy their products. People will buy Starcraft II and Modern Warfare 2 because they believe they will be good games, not because they care about Activision.
-
As soon as Activision stops producing good games, or people grow tired of those franchises - as Bob Dylan said - the times will be a-changin', and whatever company holds the next big thing will get their moment of financial glory.
Yes indeed, it is true power, which is why while Kotick annoys me, I find the outrage over his comments to be a bit absurd. No game company has ever held the power to force consumers to buy their products. People will buy Starcraft II and Modern Warfare 2 because they believe they will be good games, not because they care about Activision.
-
As soon as Activision stops producing good games, or people grow tired of those franchises - as Bob Dylan said - the times will be a-changin', and whatever company holds the next big thing will get their moment of financial glory.
Posted Sep 15, 2009 10:44 pm PT
Why do they have to make some of the best games out there, it makes it hard to say no
Posted Sep 15, 2009 10:57 pm PT
I know Kotick is a powerful CEO of a powerful and successful company, and they do make genuinely good games, but...god damn, that guy pisses me off! I just wanna punch his smug face in. I mean seriously, "$60 isn't enough for MW2"? Just imagine if this guy had even more power, like as the CEO of a console company or even worse, got to regulate the prices of games. He'd raise the cost of games to $200 and your firstborn child if he could get away with it.
Whatever, other than Starcraft 2 (which probably won't be released for another year, and hopefully by then, Kotick will have been involved in a horribly crippling "accident") there aren't any Activision games I'm really that interested in. Just a damn shame they had to buy Blizzard.
Seriously though, it's like there's some unspoken law that no matter what, there has to be at least one gaming company that's the equivalent of the devil. As soon as EA became a beacon of innovation and creativity, Activision gladly took its place.
Whatever, other than Starcraft 2 (which probably won't be released for another year, and hopefully by then, Kotick will have been involved in a horribly crippling "accident") there aren't any Activision games I'm really that interested in. Just a damn shame they had to buy Blizzard.
Seriously though, it's like there's some unspoken law that no matter what, there has to be at least one gaming company that's the equivalent of the devil. As soon as EA became a beacon of innovation and creativity, Activision gladly took its place.
Posted Sep 15, 2009 11:51 pm PT
Right on! I think we should all remind ourselves of this more often.
Posted Sep 15, 2009 11:54 pm PT
Nice article, but funny you chose Sega of all companies to say 'products we dont want...' I mean theres a long, long list of crap they've made. Plus the game 'we want' hasn't even had a screenshot released so don't go into hyperbole so fast. Finally one thing about Activision, don't think for one second they're the only company to think like this... they just have the plastic face man who cant keep his mouth shut.
Posted Sep 16, 2009 12:20 am PT
@jackariah102
It was a joke - but even SEGA isn't all bad. Overworks (owned & published by SEGA) produced two of my all-time favorite games: Skies of Arcadia, and Valkyria Chronicles.
-
And to be honest, SEGA has been dredging 2D Sonic heavily to fill their coffers, 2D and 2.5D Sonic titles on the DS, PSP, and XBLA, plus the usual compilations and re-releases.
It was a joke - but even SEGA isn't all bad. Overworks (owned & published by SEGA) produced two of my all-time favorite games: Skies of Arcadia, and Valkyria Chronicles.
-
And to be honest, SEGA has been dredging 2D Sonic heavily to fill their coffers, 2D and 2.5D Sonic titles on the DS, PSP, and XBLA, plus the usual compilations and re-releases.
Posted Sep 16, 2009 12:29 am PT
@subrosian
I actually like sega... call it blind nostalgia i guess. I just found it funny how everyone thinks this needlemouse will be great. Remember this is still the same sonic-team thats been working on the crappy 3d ones... and honestly how sad is it that in 2009, that we're vastly more excited about a 2d sonic game than any of the 3d ones. Imagine hearing that back in 1999.
I actually like sega... call it blind nostalgia i guess. I just found it funny how everyone thinks this needlemouse will be great. Remember this is still the same sonic-team thats been working on the crappy 3d ones... and honestly how sad is it that in 2009, that we're vastly more excited about a 2d sonic game than any of the 3d ones. Imagine hearing that back in 1999.
Posted Sep 16, 2009 12:39 am PT
Subrosian, in my country there are still people so ignorant they'll still buy the game anyway, thanks to the "Modern Warfare 2" title. But of course, that doesn't mean I will.
Posted Sep 16, 2009 12:42 am PT
Good post.
Like I said before, you can bash Activision until you're blue in the face, but at the end of the day it's your money that does the talking.
The problem is though, millions of people will continue to buy GH and COD games. I find it really sad how people still buy these shallow, button mashing music games.
Like I said before, you can bash Activision until you're blue in the face, but at the end of the day it's your money that does the talking.
The problem is though, millions of people will continue to buy GH and COD games. I find it really sad how people still buy these shallow, button mashing music games.
Posted Sep 16, 2009 1:24 am PT
"We don't have to buy Starcraft II."
When Activision and Vivendi games (Blizzard parent company) merged, they didn't restructure into a single company, Vivendi games turned into "Activision-Blizzard", which is just a holdings company for Activision and Blizzard. And thusly, there are no direct ties between Blizzard and Activision, they're just both owned by "Vivendi SA", which (and I'm not kidding) is a 156 year old french company that owns half the whole damn entertainment industry of earth.
Activision gets to pretend (in commercials etc) that Blizzard titles belong to them, but none of Blizzard's income never actually helps Activision. It helps AB (largely separate from Activision itself) and Vivendi SA. That's it.
TL;DR: BLIZZARD IS NOT OWNED BY ACTIVISION!!! They are just owned by the same company.
Besides, anything short of the apocalypse couldn't prevent me from getting SC2...
When Activision and Vivendi games (Blizzard parent company) merged, they didn't restructure into a single company, Vivendi games turned into "Activision-Blizzard", which is just a holdings company for Activision and Blizzard. And thusly, there are no direct ties between Blizzard and Activision, they're just both owned by "Vivendi SA", which (and I'm not kidding) is a 156 year old french company that owns half the whole damn entertainment industry of earth.
Activision gets to pretend (in commercials etc) that Blizzard titles belong to them, but none of Blizzard's income never actually helps Activision. It helps AB (largely separate from Activision itself) and Vivendi SA. That's it.
TL;DR: BLIZZARD IS NOT OWNED BY ACTIVISION!!! They are just owned by the same company.
Besides, anything short of the apocalypse couldn't prevent me from getting SC2...
Posted Sep 16, 2009 1:47 am PT
Kotick and Activision have been around a long time. There's pretty good reasons he feels he can get away with these price increases.
Posted Sep 16, 2009 2:05 am PT
ACTIVISION STRIKE!!!...... No one buy activision games...ahahaa that will teach them..and that devil beast as shown in this article.
Posted Sep 16, 2009 2:13 am PT
@jackariah102
I think you'll find I have *not once* stated that Project Needlemouse will be good - I've only stated that SEGA is giving people what they want.
-
The original Sonic games were fun because of their strong focus on path-finding, not their focus on blind speed, but with half the gaming world yelling about "speed", "blazing fast" and "2D like Shadow Complex", it was the obvious choice for Sonic Team to make.
-
Will it be a good game? We can only guess - but it is what people have been demanding.
I think you'll find I have *not once* stated that Project Needlemouse will be good - I've only stated that SEGA is giving people what they want.
-
The original Sonic games were fun because of their strong focus on path-finding, not their focus on blind speed, but with half the gaming world yelling about "speed", "blazing fast" and "2D like Shadow Complex", it was the obvious choice for Sonic Team to make.
-
Will it be a good game? We can only guess - but it is what people have been demanding.
Posted Sep 16, 2009 2:19 am PT
I hate Kotick.
Posted Sep 16, 2009 3:59 am PT
he does
Posted Sep 16, 2009 4:24 am PT
i dont hate activision, i just hate kotick
Posted Sep 16, 2009 4:25 am PT
people have been waiting for Starcraft 2 and Diablo 3 for years. They will buy them no matter the price. It takes a certain amount of loyalty to Blizzard. The guitar queero games are probably the worst failure in the history of activision though.
Posted Sep 16, 2009 4:38 am PT
I agree with you on most of this except the starcraft part, activision isnt putting bets on starcraft 2 itself its putting bets on the expansions so aslong as we dont buy the expansions we are scot free.
Posted Sep 16, 2009 4:49 am PT
good read. the basic economic principle of supply and demand is off. i completely agree with you, not just about individual game companies, but in a lot of them involving money. i still think that $60 for a new game is ridiculous to pay. thats why i very rarely buy a new game
Posted Sep 16, 2009 4:57 am PT
Agreed! there's just too money hungry schemes right now.
For now i'm not buying any activision games... till i see where this is going.
For now i'm not buying any activision games... till i see where this is going.
Posted Sep 16, 2009 4:58 am PT
"By the power of Greyskull!"
Look, i don't like Kotick either, but in all honestly, isn't everyone in the gaming industry, no, the industry in general trying to constantly up their prices for their products? If you look at 99% of all company goals on short to mid term basis, there's allmost allways a profit increase or a cost reduction target in there.
You are right though, we as consumers largely do determin whether a product fails by chosing to buy or not to buy a certain product.
Look, i don't like Kotick either, but in all honestly, isn't everyone in the gaming industry, no, the industry in general trying to constantly up their prices for their products? If you look at 99% of all company goals on short to mid term basis, there's allmost allways a profit increase or a cost reduction target in there.
You are right though, we as consumers largely do determin whether a product fails by chosing to buy or not to buy a certain product.
Posted Sep 16, 2009 5:13 am PT
YES. This has needed to be said for awhile. I'm with you on this one, and I'm not buying (or even pirating) MW2, SC2, or GH5. I'm not saying that other people shouldn't, but I for one am putting my wallet where my mouth is.
wasting your hard-earned cash on these games will be fun in the short-term, but in the long run you could be one of those responsible for a sharp downturn in the industry.
I have plenty more to say, but I realize that at this point I may be starting to sound a bit hysterical, so I'll cut myself off.
wasting your hard-earned cash on these games will be fun in the short-term, but in the long run you could be one of those responsible for a sharp downturn in the industry.
I have plenty more to say, but I realize that at this point I may be starting to sound a bit hysterical, so I'll cut myself off.
Posted Sep 16, 2009 6:29 am PT
Nothing is going to stop me from buying all 3 versions of MW2
Posted Sep 16, 2009 6:44 am PT
well the only problem is yeah some of us core gamers may boycott activison, but in the long run average joe that maybe only plays video games about 3 or 4 hours a week will never have a clue that he is buying his game and supporting someone like kotick and there are a whole lot more of those joes than us. What we really should do is to exspose him for what he really is we need to wake up the casual gameing gaint and allow them to see what this guy is about because nobody no matter how much they play wants to potentilay pay more for less fun games .
Posted Sep 16, 2009 6:45 am PT
Ah, Kotick is just a face for the "evil" in the industry.
Companies like Activision and EA are the reason most of the games I buy now are from places like GoG.com. Admittedly, EA are not so bad at the minute, (I think they come off better because there's a greater evil) but they are still determined to push towards games needing online connections too often, even persistant, as well as microtransactions on top of a game paid for full-price upfront.
I also wouldn't boycott either of them entirely. For example I hadn't bought alot of Ubisoft games over a while because if the DRM. Then they released Prince of Persia without it. So I bought it. Then, they basically said "Here's the real ending- But you'll have to pay, and only on consoles" and I'm back to not buying their games. I will buy a game if I agree with how it's released, regardless of who releases it.
But meh, Kotick will always be a prat to me. But, so will most buisnessmen. I just like my ethics more than money, unlike investors who only see the $$$.
As it is, I won't be buying CoD. I was going to get it as a birthday present for my brother but now I'll find something else instead. He'll hate me for it though, heh.
Companies like Activision and EA are the reason most of the games I buy now are from places like GoG.com. Admittedly, EA are not so bad at the minute, (I think they come off better because there's a greater evil) but they are still determined to push towards games needing online connections too often, even persistant, as well as microtransactions on top of a game paid for full-price upfront.
I also wouldn't boycott either of them entirely. For example I hadn't bought alot of Ubisoft games over a while because if the DRM. Then they released Prince of Persia without it. So I bought it. Then, they basically said "Here's the real ending- But you'll have to pay, and only on consoles" and I'm back to not buying their games. I will buy a game if I agree with how it's released, regardless of who releases it.
But meh, Kotick will always be a prat to me. But, so will most buisnessmen. I just like my ethics more than money, unlike investors who only see the $$$.
As it is, I won't be buying CoD. I was going to get it as a birthday present for my brother but now I'll find something else instead. He'll hate me for it though, heh.
Posted Sep 16, 2009 7:22 am PT
@FireEmblem Man:
A publisher doesn't do anything until the first copy is completed. Activision doesn't make the Guitar Hero games or the give the command to developers to make more. They take the finished copy of what Red octane / vicarious visions have created and copies them in the mass millions. Yes, Activision is a big part of the Guitar Hero franchise, but what I'm CONSTANTLY seeing from user comments and the opinions of people here is that they give 100% of the blame to purely Activision, and Activision shouldn't get all the credit, depending on whether you view them positively or negatively.
A publisher doesn't do anything until the first copy is completed. Activision doesn't make the Guitar Hero games or the give the command to developers to make more. They take the finished copy of what Red octane / vicarious visions have created and copies them in the mass millions. Yes, Activision is a big part of the Guitar Hero franchise, but what I'm CONSTANTLY seeing from user comments and the opinions of people here is that they give 100% of the blame to purely Activision, and Activision shouldn't get all the credit, depending on whether you view them positively or negatively.
Posted Sep 16, 2009 8:16 am PT
Thank you for pointing this out. Complaining in forums just makes the video game industry laugh. I'm sure that no significant change comes from high execs reading community forums. They look at profits and expected financial projections. Make an impact on their financial paperwork and they will react. Let's turn the tables and have them lower their prices.
Posted Sep 16, 2009 8:22 am PT
Friends
My Friends
ShockG707