游戏邦在:
杂志专栏:
gamerboom.com订阅到鲜果订阅到抓虾google reader订阅到有道订阅到QQ邮箱订阅到帮看

业内人士解析中小型开发公司并购情况

发布时间:2011-06-08 18:46:03 Tags:,,,

游戏邦注:本文作者为Josh Constine,本文主要讲述1月份Inside Social Apps InFocus 2011的座谈会情况,这次会议主要讨论中小型开发商的并购情况。座谈会成员包括Zynga企业发展主管Terence Fung、Facebook游戏合作业务主管Sean Ryan(前新闻集团高级副总裁和游戏业务总经理)、ThinkEquity Equity Research–Games副总裁Atul Bagga和Playdom创意设计副总裁Raph Koster(前Metaplace总裁)。

Raph Koster from blogspot.com

Raph Koster from blogspot.com

EE:如果你是游戏开发者,你会怎么做?是否会选择并购?

RK(Raph Koster):我希望开发者能够深入业务当中,因为他们拥有娱乐用户的热情。开发者成立公司并不是为了进行并购或出售。他们的价值体现在他们是很好的娱乐者。这是个由激情推动的创造性业务。

EE:为什么你会选择出售?

RK:这取决于当时的环境。你是否实现自己的目标?你是否厌倦当前的活动?你是否出现资金短缺?公司选择出售的原因很多。这个问题完全取决个人情况,因此很难给出笼统答案。

EE:你们为什么选择出售给Playdom?

我们之前花了3年时间全心创造UGC虚拟世界,随后转投社交游戏领域,从中我们一天接触的用户比投身虚拟世界3年要多得多。Playdom表示,“你们能够接触更多用户,我们可以提供帮助。”因为我们能够接触到更多用户,这是娱乐行业的活跃时期。

SR(Sean Ryan):掌机游戏的标准周期是7年。我们认为,对公司而言,这不过是社交生态系统的开端。

我们减少病毒式传播,但我们今年打算扩展生态系统。问题是你是否有从处于发展阶段的领域取得成就?我们打算发展游戏业务,苹果和谷歌也打算创建自己的游戏业务。将创造性最大化的最佳方式是什么?对投资者而言价值何在?而你自己本身又获得什么价值?之前市场步伐有所减缓,但成果显著。如今大家正在观望市场是否真的放慢脚步。此外,中型开发商开始出现增长势头。

你所在的生态系统是否处于增长趋势?能否融得资金?是否能够快速创收?是否能够发展,若不能,则应该出售公司,若可以,应该进行投资。

Facebook现已推出更多新计划和新功能。

AB(Atul Bagga):我们发现社交游戏领域(游戏邦注:包括角色扮演游戏)还有很大发展空间。手机领域才刚刚开始起步,虚拟交易只占1%或2%,市场还留有很多机会。这个领域会不断发展,未来5年其市场估值有望增至120亿美元。

EE:Zynga自创建以来,已收购众多公司,从《FarmVille》制作团队到RPG游戏开发公司。下步计划是什么?

TF(Terence Fung):我们拥有很多机会,瞄准很多游戏工作室。我们支持所有有意和我们合作的应用、技术和产品公司。我们相信协同效应。他们看起来也许并不适合Zynga,但我们还是以战略视角看待我们未来6个月的前进方向。

EE:你想同RK等人说些什么?

我们应该以这样的方式看待问题。我们建议其他人士考虑加入Zynga,或负责网络运营、分析工作,或分担招聘任务。作为公司经理,你得思考工资问题,但如果你想要制作大型游戏,能力才是关键。来和杰出精英们共事吧,加入Zynga吧。

EE:我们发现有些有些工具条效果显著,游戏能够相互分享流量。现在有没有其他富有潜力的平台服务供应商或非游戏公司?

TF:市场存在很多错位现象。大家希望呈现稳定市场态势。Applifier就是市场分裂的典型例子。长期以来,开发商们大多瞄准实力雄厚的网络。我们试图创造一个小狗驱动的网络,当你通过Facebook或手机看见小狗(游戏邦注:Zynga吉祥物)时,就能从中获得乐趣。我们目前正和独立开发商合作,将创造性元素带入业务当中。

game center from flytrapgames.com

game center from flytrapgames.com

SR:公司一旦展开收购,就能引入新功能。就像谷歌收购Social Gold,当时大家都屏住呼吸静候其产生的影响。苹果推出Game Center,这对OpenFeint而言意味着什么?你要嘛加快脚步,要嘛选择被收购,抑或者走差异化路线。市场存在很多创造价值的机会。如果公司推出的产品同平台关系密切,他们通常会选择推出自己的平台。但尽管出现Game Center,但OpenFeint依旧长盛不衰。

EE:是否所有收购都成绩显著?

TF:是的。我不是开玩笑。

EE:即便呈现人员急速流失?

TF:所有的收购产生的影响都是积极的。我们的建议是任何有意加入我们团队的公司,先同其他已加入公司了解其中利弊,当然不利因素不会太多,然后留心仔细观察。

EE:你过去有没有受到任何收购活动的冲击?

TF:收购垂死挣扎的游戏开发公司是个好策略还是个坏策略?我们发现很多开发公司都是处在垂死边缘。这是个富有挑战性的市场,没有挑战性也就没有精英团队和创始人。我们瞄准勇于正视错误的公司,并且敢于表示,“这就是我们的失误所在。我们之前推出某个功能,但它并没有真正带来DAU。”但我们不会不分好坏全盘否定。

EE:如果让你成立新公司,你会瞄准Facebook、手机、iOS还是Android平台?

SR:如果公司着眼社交作品,为何不依托这个势头良好的全球最大的社交网络(游戏邦注:即指Facebook)。但并非所有的游戏都具有社交性。比如《愤怒的小鸟》入驻Facebook就行不通。关键是你开发的是什么类型的游戏?适合平台最重要。

AB:如果你发现游戏正逐步转变成持续体验,玩家每次就体验2、3分钟,那么你就会希望玩家能够同跨平台体验伙伴保持密切联系。这更多采用多渠道模式,而非单一渠道。

EE:腾讯和其他中国开发商曾尝试开拓美国市场,但他们什么时候会收购某些美国大工作室?

SR:2010年游戏市场发展势头开始出现放缓趋势,所以各大公司都开始探索加快发展步伐的办法。很多中国游戏人士在游戏运营方面知识雄厚。我们通过Facebook平台创建了庞大免费游戏用户群。这当中大概有10%的玩家口味不断加重,他们希望体验更具硬核性质的游戏,而非仅是模拟游戏。中国公司也会不断挖掘设计人才。有些措施在美国行得通,在中国未必可行。唯一成功的非中国游戏是《魔兽世界》。我们并不熟悉美国游戏的故事,所以他们看重的是内容,是专业知识。

EE:这家中国公司主要依靠自身内部力量,还是通过收购中小型开发公司?

AB:他们资金充沛,所以未来1年该公司完全可能开展收购活动。Take 2和EA是他们挖掘设计人才的地方。

EE:我们发现大型公司频频出招。

RK:有些公司不断推出新举措。最典型的例子就是育碧。他们曾尝试推出5、6款游戏,但很多都未取得成功,但他们依然不断尝试。这是任何大规模行业转型存在的问题,那就是元老公司很难适应全新形势。我们谈论的是不涉足数字推广领域的公司。他们需要学习的是如何更加融入社交游戏公司当中。这是并购的终极目标,从而重新塑造公司,填充各个方面的知识。

EE:对新开发公司有没有什么特别的建议?

RK:育碧的策略是正确的,他们通过尝试、学习、再尝试,持有足够的耐心。你要嘛选择自主创建,要嘛选择收购。如果你选择收购,那么你需要给予收购公司足够自由空间,从中尽可能地学习。这家公司陆续收购多家工作室,但其收购活动并不尽如人意。这需要足够的耐心,你没法转瞬就变成具有一定规模的公司。

SR:任职新闻集团期间,我们收购Making Fun,目的是加快公司发展步伐。主打实体包装产品的游戏公司足以收购20人工作室。

Making Fun from pcgames.com

Making Fun from pcgames.com

就像DeNA收购NGMOCO,迪斯尼收购其他公司一样,他们都希望能够有所作为,取出突出成绩。我认为这家中国公司应该会选择收购小型公司。让我们拭目以待,看看该公司能否取得突出成就,并且像DeNA对待NGMOCO一般,表示“你拥有主导权”。

EE:你们瞄准不同市场。你们取得哪些突出成就?

AB:成功的定义各不相同。短期看,收购也许并不成功(游戏邦注:如迪斯尼收购Playfish并未推动年净收入的增长,但这是着眼长远目标)。

回过头来看,掌机游戏市场在网络萧条时期仍旧增长35%,当整个游戏市场下滑5%时,该市场依然增长30%。但如今该市场每年下滑10%。各个公司应该跳过掌机领域,瞄准新发展方向。如今社交平台突破游戏,成为品牌公司的营收媒介。

EE:实体宣传机会如今遍布各个角落。Zynga未来的发展目标是着眼既有作品吗?

TF:Zynga正使出浑身解数,着眼品牌投资,如Farmers Insurance, State Farm,帮助宣传电影作品,但我们认为我们无需依靠推出《Tron》游戏续作,因为我们完全有能力推出全新成功作品。

观众问题:和其他公司一样,我们也需要投资和支持。在游戏开发过程中,游戏理念是够需要吸引Zynga或者天使投资的注意吗?

SR:发行领域又开始受到瞩目。你需要投资人,你需要专业人士加盟。开发商本身也需要更大合作伙伴的帮助,即使他们本身就是个大型工作室。他们需要致力制作丰富的游戏,让其他人负责游戏制作以外的工作。很多诸如Zynga和新闻集团之类的公司是这样看待游戏的:看看游戏是否符合他们的投资组合。制作、投资或者发行项目的选择机会很多。

RK:这是围绕开发问题,是个实用建议。如果这是你的首款游戏,那些不要制作你的理想作品。把首款游戏当作学习过程。刚开始就先着眼富有趣味性的作品。尽可能缩短发行周期。学习如何快速帮助自己获得较大市场份额。当我们无视自身无知时,很容易着眼某些雄心勃勃的项目。或许这个项目并非你所期望的,但先从相对简单的着手。这并不表示游戏无法取得显著成果。作品发行后,接着推出续作,从中学习经验,这可以帮助你迈向成功之路,开始你的理想项目。公司都希望获悉,他们是否具备足够游戏内容?这些内容是否切实可行(游戏邦注:这通常都是关键所在),是否具有有趣的想法,续作想法是否可行,这些内容是否能为分不清PHP和Perl、位图和向量图形的人所理解。

我个人偏好UNITY或flash免费版,我首先推出的是《Blitz Basic》第1部。在融资过程中,我发现蓝点元素开始融入MMO领域。接着我表示,“我要制作这类游戏”,然后我就赢得投资。

Blitz Basic from blitzbasic.de

Blitz Basic from blitzbasic.de

观众问题:我们需先加入Zynga,积累经验,然后再制作自己的游戏吗?

TF:我们需对没有相关开发经验的人士改观。有些杰出游戏设计师并未涉足社交游戏领域,我想他们加入Zynga定有无限潜力。

EE:你怎么看待购买小型传统游戏工作室?

TF:这很难,因为我们的更新速度很快。我们拥有即时战略游戏团队。当然也有传统游戏开发商涉猎社交和手机领域。

观众问题:如果你将来打算进军社交领域,你会选择创建自己的作品,还是受雇他人?

RK:如果你认为你可以自己积累经验,那么你就可以,如果你具备足够的意志和原则,我们没有理由不亲自体验一番,除非你想和行业某位设计大师共事。之前在GDC大会,社交游戏设计师曾遭遇阵阵嘘声。社交游戏曾被称作基于参数的无灵魂体验。我们可以从参数中学到很多,但参数不过是快速测试的途径。

我们很难融入对社交游戏持有既定看法的公司,因为其中含有很多文化冲突。如果他们以传统设计师角度理解你的观点,那将会是完美组合。

观众问题:如今取得成功的游戏类型大同小异。那么那些别具一格的游戏类型呢?你们追求的是什么?

SR:我们尽可能瞄准多元化平台(游戏邦注:如PvP游戏和电子游戏),这样所有玩家才能各取所需。运动类型游戏在Facebook反响很好,营收也颇为可观。DAU排名前5的游戏都是些毫无灵魂的体验。优质游戏大多出自小型工作室,他们十分注重核心理念和独特元素。

观众问题:作为一家年轻开发工作室,我们需要注意哪些问题?

TF:首先就是埋头新项目,苦干两年,却没学会从失败中吸取教训。

SR:这需要针对公司收购目的而言。创建另一款城市游戏如今显然行不通。。如果你推出的是PvP游戏,然后表示,“这是作品成功的原因,数据为证”。这或许无法帮你获得1亿名玩家,但可以帮助你成为收购目标,或者获得融资。

TF:Zynga并没有瞄准特定游戏类型。我们采用所有能为公司所用的创意信息。如果作品能够转移至其他IP当中,创新I定会成绩斐然,。我们已创建自己的用户网络,我们希望他们能够从中获得乐趣。

面临股票期权危机的公司接受收购时需注意哪些问题?

RK:聘请好律师。

SR:有部电影叫做《Social Network》……

RK:文章很多。我尽可能多阅读。我的建议是向有过类似经历的且值得信赖的公司讨教。独自学习将会十分艰难。但不要高估顾问意见的价值。

SR:征求多次处理类似情况律师的意见,他们会告诉你需要特别注意什么事项。(本文为游戏邦/gamerboom.com编译,如需转载请联系:游戏邦

ISA 2011: Live-Blogging the Mergers and Acquisitions Landscape for Small and Mid-Size Developers

By Josh Constine

In the last panel of Inside Social Apps InFocus 2011, we’re examining the merger and acquisition landscape for small and mid-size developers.

The panelists:

Terence Fung, Head of Corporate Development, Zynga

Sean Ryan, Director Games Partnerships, Facebook (former EVP and GM Games, News Corp)

Atul Bagga, VP Equity Research – Games, ThinkEquity

Raph Koster, VP Creative Design, Playdom (former
President, Metaplace)

EE: What do you do if you’e a game developer and you’re considering merger and acqusition options?

RK: I hope you get into the business because you have a passion for entertaining people. Hopefully you’re not here just to merge and acquire and sell. What makes you valuable is being good at being an entertainer. It’s a creative business that’s driven by passion.

EE: Why did you sell?

RK: It’s so dependent on the circumstances. Are you reaching your goals? Are you bored with what you were doing? Were you running out of money? There are plenty of reasons someone would want to sell. It’s far too personal a question to give a blanket answer.

EE: Why did you sell to Playdom?

We had pivoted from doing a UGC virtual world we’d been working on for three years, then we pivoted to doing social games and got to touch more users in one day than in three years as a virtual good. Playdom said, “you can touch even more, we can help you.”  It was the opportunity to touch a lot of people and it was an exciting time in entertainment.

SR: The standard console cycle is 7 years long. We believe as a company that this is only the beginning of what the social ecosystem is.

We cut back on virality, but we’re going to be expanding the ecoystytem this year.  The question is ‘are you making something in an area that’s growing?’ We’re gonna grow the game business, Apple and Google are going to build their games businesses. What the best way to maximaize creativity? Value to investors?  To your self?  [The market] slowed down a bit, had some very big outcomes. Now people are looking to see if it is slowing down. There’s growth amongst the mid-size developers.

Is the ecosystem you’re in growing? Can I raise money? Can I get profitable quickly? Can I grow, if not you should sell, if you can, you should invest in your business.

[Facebook] has more plans and features coming.

AB: What we’re seeing in the social gaming industry – there are RPGs, there’s a lot of space to explore. Mobile is just getting going, monetization has only been 1 or 2% – a huge opportunity. The space is going to evolve – we estimate to be a 12 billion dollar market over the next 5 years.

EE: Zynga’s been buying a lot of comapnies since launch – from the guys who did FarmVille to people making RPGs. What’s next?

TF: We manage a large pipeline of opportunities. We look at lots of games studios. We encourage anyone witha an app, technology, or product that’s intersting to come to us. We believe there are synergies. You might not seem like they fit with Zynga, but we have a tactical view of where we’re going in the next 6 months.

EE: What do you tell people like RK?

That’s exactly how you should look at it. We tell people thinking about joining Zynga that we have network operations, analytics, recruiting. As a manger of a company you would be thinking about payroll, but if you’re about making a big game, that’s an ability we can integrate. Come work with really smart talented people, come join Zynga.

EE: We’ve seen toolbars do well, where games can share traffic with each other. Are there other platform service providers or non-gaming companies that have a lot of potential right now?

TF – There’s a lot of dislocation in the market. People are trying to get a steady feel for the market. Applifier is a good example of the disruption in the market. Overtime, developers gravitate towards a network with signifcant power behind it. We’re trying to create a Dog-powered network – when you see the dog (Zynga’s mascot) on Facebook or mobile, you equaite it with fun. We’re working with independent developers to bring innovative things into our business.

SR: [Upon acquisition}, there's a tendency to pull features. When google bought social gold, people held their breath to see what that meant. When Apple released Game Center - what did it meant to OpenFeint? You need to move either faster or get bought or just be differenet enough. Lots of ways value creation opportunites. The things that a are closer to a platform tend to have the platform (replicate) them. But OpenFeint have continued to thrive, despite Game center.

EE: Were all those [acquisitions] worth it?

TF: Yes, I’m dead serious.

EE: Even with people leaving quickly?

TF: All of the acquisitions were very positive. What we encourage is for any acquisition target who considers us to speak with other people who’ve joined about the good, bad, and hopefully not too much ugly, and come in with eyes wide open.

EE: Do you feel burned by some acquisitions in the past?

TF: Is buying struggling games makers a good or bad strategy? We see that there’s a large pipepline of struggling developers. It is a challenging market, not that there aren’t talented teams and founders. We look for people who’ve looked at their mistakes, say “this is how I messed up. We wanted to focus on a feature and it didn’t really produce DAUs.” But we don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater.

EE: If you’re starting a new gaming company, do you start on Facebook, Mobile, iOS, Android?

SR: If you’re building something social, why not build on the biggest social network that’s still growing like crazy. But not all games are social. Angry birds on Facebook wouldn’t make a lot of sense. What’s the type of game you’re building? Fit it into a platform that makes sense.

AB: If you believe games are moving to persistent games that you can only play 2 or 3 at a time, then you want to allow users to stay in contact with the people they play with across devices. It is going to be more about a multi-channel aporach and less about one channel.

EE: TenCent and other Chinese developers have done experiments in the US, but when are they going to come to the U.S. and buy someone big?

SR: 2010 was first time growth has slowed, so people are looking for how to grow. The Chinese have some of the best expertise on running games. On Facebook we’ve created this huge army of users for free to play games.  There might be 10% with the gamer instinct, and they’ve greaduated and want to play something more hadcore than a simulation. The Chinese will be looking for designer talents. What works in the U.S. may or may not work in China. The only non-Chinese games that is successful is World of Warcraft. In the U.S. we’re not familiar with their stories, so they’ll be looking for content, for expertise.

EE: Do you see the Chinese focusing internally or buying small or mid-size developers.

AB: They are sitting on a big cash balance so I wouldn’t be surprised to see people making a big acquisition in the next 12 months. Take 2, Electronic Arts could be places they could look for designer talent.

EE: You see big gaming companies making moves.

RK: There are some making moves. The story that’s most interesting is Ubisoft. They tried a half-dozen games and a lot didn’t hit and they just kept trying. It’s symptomatic of any large indutry shift that old companies will have trouble adjusting to a new landscape, and this is a very new landscape. We’re talking about companies who’ve hardly gotten into digital distribution. They have a lot to learn about how to weave their DNA into a [social] company. That’s the ultimate goal of M&A, to reshape the DnA of your company to bring new expertise into every level.

EE:Any psecific advice for new developers?

RK: Ubisoft did the right thing by trying, learning, trying again, and being willing to be patient. You either build or you buy. If you buy it, you need to leave it alone and learn as much as you can from it. There’s a history of acquiring and not using the acquisition very well. It takes patience , you can’t turn an organization of that size on a dime.

SR: When I was at NewsCorp we started a games unit, acquired Making Fun to get up to speed. Packaged game companies [could] buy a 20-peson company.

As DeNA did with NGMOCO, or Disney – they wanted to make a big play, take a big swing. I think the Chinese will tend to buy smll. We’ll see if they play something big and say  ”now you’re in charge” like DeNA dd with NGMOCO.

EE: You track a lot of markets. What would you do different?

AB: Success is open to definition. In a short-term view, acquisitions may not be successful. Disney acquiring Playfish wasn’t about driving the net year revenue, but a longer term view.

Just to step back, the console gaming market was up 35% during the dot come bust, up 30% when the whole economy was down 5%. Now it is down 10% a year. Businesses need to leapfrog the conslole and get into the next level. Social flows beyond games into monetizing media across your brand.

EE: Physical promotions opportunities are all over the place. Are you looking to long established intellectual property lines for how you’re going to build Zynga in the future?

TF: Zynga is firing on all cylinders, identifying brand sponsorships like Farmers Insurance, State Farm, and helping promote some movie releases, but I don’t see the need to make the next Tron game considering our ability to knock out successful new intellectual property.

Audience Question: Like everyone, we’re  looking for funding and support. Where in the game development cycle does an idea need to be to attract someone like Zynga or angel funding?

SR: Publishing is coming back into vogue. You need someone to fund it, someone with expertise. The developer itself needs the help of a larger partner, even if they’re a great studio. They should focus on making a great game, let someone else focus on things that detract from mking a great game. Numerous folks like Zynga and NewsCorp look at the game, see if a game fits into their portfolio. There’s options to own it , fund it, or publish it.

RK: Here’s the dev-centric answer, practical advice. If this is your first game , then don’t build your dream game. Take the first game as a learning opportunity. Start building something that will be fun. Launch as quickly as you can. Learning from that will help you go chase the deals. It is easy starting out to try to build something ambitious when you don’t know what you don’t know yet. Might not be what you want to do, but launch something relatively simple.  Doesn’t meean it can’t be awesome.  Launch it, start building a following, learn the lessons, that gives you the leg up to start swinging for the fences, what you believe in. Companies will want to know,  ”do they know their stuff? Can they execute – that’s always what matters – and do you have something fun and playable for your second idea. Can you show it to someone who doesn’t know the difference beteween PHP and Perl, between bitmap and vector graphics.

I would grab a free edition of UNITY or flash – I did it perosnally – I built the first the first iteration of my game with Blitz Basic (audience applause). While looking for funding, I was able to show blue spots log into an MMO space. Then said, “I think I might just launch this”, and then I got funding.

Audience question: Should people go work at Zygna, or get some experience first before they go try build their own game?

TF: Were not going to take a leap of faith on someone with no experience building games. There are some strong game designers who haven’t stepped into the social game world. I think they have great potential at Zynga

EE: What do you think about buying a smaller traditional game studio?

TF: It’s hard because of how fast we iterate. We have real time strategy game people. There are obviously traditonal game developers dabbling in social and mobile.

Audience question: If you’re thinking about about getting into social, would you build your own thing or look to get hired?

RK: I’ve been bitten by the entrepreneur bug now.  If you think you can get the learning on your own – and you can if you have the will and the discipline -there’s no reason not to try it your self unless you want to work with a specific great designer in the space. Coming at it as a traditional game designer, at GDC, social game designers were booed. They were called a soulless exercise based on metrics. There is a lot to learn from metrics, but metrics are just a fast way to do play testing.

It may be harder to dive into an organization that knows it already because there may be a lot of culture clash. If they understand what you bring as a traditional designer, it can be a great marriage.

Audience question: The game that are successful right now are more of the same. What about games that are really agaisnt the grain, out of left field . What do you look for?  -

SR: Wer’re looking for as diverse a platform [as possible]. PVP, arcade, etc so that all types of gamers will find something that really interests them. Sports games are doing well on Facebook, they’re montetizing really well. Focus on the top 5 DAUs is a soulles excerise. The better games that we’ve seen come from small developers who are really passionate about the core, or things we don’t normally associate with the platform.

Audience question: As a young developer studio, what are the gotchas that we should look out for?

TF: Teams that hav been slamming their heads against the wall for two years on a new product, who haven’t shown abiliy to learn from their mistakes is the #1.

SR: It is very specific to what the company is looking for in an acquisition. Building another city game right now is not going to work well. If you’re a PVP game and saying “this is why it works, here’s the data”. It might not get you to 100 million users, but will help you get acquired or funding.

TF: Zynga isn’t looking for specific game types, we’re looking for intelligence we can integrate into the company. New IP out of the box is great if it can be transferred to other IPs. We have a network of users and we want to get the fun to them.

What are stock option pitfalls companies being acquired should look out for?

RK: Get a good lawyer

SR: There’s this movie called The Social Network…

RK: There’s a lot of blogs. I tried to read as much as I could. My best advice, find people who’ve been through it before who you trust who can guide you. Trying to learn it on your own can be incredibly difficult. You can’t overestimate the value of advisors.

SR: Having a good lawyer who has been through this many times who can tell you what’s typical.(Source:insidesocialgames


上一篇:

下一篇: