"Microsoft Sells License to FS Franchise" Part 2

[Flyer10 31]

Read the first couple of pages of posts in this very interesting thread and if no one commercial entity in the hobby could go it alone and the franchise has been bought by a sole licensee then whatever comes of this it is not going to be for us. It is going to be for the masses! It going to be for gamers. The assumption is that it is a business investment. i.e. the buyer expects to make a profit. If even a group of the biggest 3PD's getting together couldn't afford to buy it what does that say about the Profitability of a serious home entertainment flight simulator for hobbyist or enthusiast? It says it stinks. There is no mass market for the likes of PMDG 737 or 777 or A2A's 172 or Cherokee or a whole earth covered in FTX and there never will be. Whoever bought this bought it to make money. The end product at best will be FS11 with no backwards compatibility at all with FSX addons. We are fortunate that LM take the interest of the hobbyist seriously enough to allow us to tag along. They get a lot of good testers in return for that. Whatever this ends up being, the serious hobbyist is staying with P3D or X-Plane 10. This is a whole bunch of fuss about nothing:-)

[fppilot 4,335]

I am LMAO here reading all of this speculation.  Few if any seem to understand licensing.  Question: under what arrangement did Microsoft convey FSX to LM?  Was that not a license?  If MS sold FS outright to LM then MS would have given up all rights to license it to others.  Based on this news that does not seem to be the case.  

 

What MS can continue to do with FS is based on any and all agreements they have already entered into, LM and othewise.  And what MS can do after this reported license agreement will likely be based on the terms and conditions of the aggregate license agreements.  Humm.  Wonder if that is why LM continues to assert publicly that they are NOT marketing to the recreational market???????  So perhaps this reported new licensee might do just that?  Who knows?  

 

Here is another interesting question.  Does MS "own" FS?  Or did MS "license" FS from subLogic for the PC market (as opposed to other OS platforms).  When I read that MS may have sold "the" license, rather than sold "a" license, it begs all sorts of questions.  Questions about the arrangement, and also questions about the context of the report.  Is "the" accurate?  Or is is "a" license accurate?  Huge difference between those two.

 

In the industries I worked in before retirement companies would license their products in virtually every country in the world where there was demand and where capable producers and developers existed.  Look at it like a strip shopping center.  If I buy into a name brand pizza franchise agreement, then sign a lease in a strip center, then if I have done my due diligence then my franchise agreement will give me exclusive rights to a geographic market, and my lease agreement will provide me exclusive presence in the strip center so that the center does not lease another storefront to a competitive pizza outlet.  And if I am the pizza franchiser or the strip center developer/management, then I must adhere to the agreements as written.

 

If Microsoft owns all of the rights to FS without restriction, then they could sell the whole ball of wax, including the sale therein of any license agreements they have entered into, but I doubt seriously that would be stated as the sale of "the license".  

[CrownCityMisfits 58]

I tend to agree with those that think this has nothing to do with flight simulation whatsoever, especially since it has been stated that the buyer is not a "logical candidate" and that they are familiar with "simulation", but not specifically "flight simulation."

 

Train Simulator would be my guess. Doubtful it would be an auto racing developer. Goat Simulator seems to popular, so I can't rule that out either, I suppose.

 

Next best guess would be EA eyeballing a worldwide MMORPG Facebook app  :rolleyes:

[Alan_A 1,650]

 

 

Does MS "own" FS?  Or did MS "license" FS from subLogic for the PC market (as opposed to other OS platforms).  

 

It was a little more tangled than that.  Microsoft also marketed MS Flight Simulator for the Apple Macintosh... and around the same time (c. 1986) was able to force SubLogic to drop the Flight Simulator name from their new product (Flight Simulator ATP became Flight Assignment: ATP - the early boxes were stickered with the word "Assignment" covering "Simulator").  

 

That was shortly before Bruce Artwick parted ways with SubLogic and formed the Bruce Artwick Organization to create some of the first payware add-ons for MSFS.

 

So it's possible the license terms include the mortal remains of SubLogic, BAO and who knows who else?

 

Maybe the mystery benefactor is Laemming Wheeler - he must have gotten rich off the Hungwell Gypsy...   B)

 

Seriously - you make good points and it's bound to be more complicated than we think.

[N2056 33]

 

 

Goat Simulator seems to popular, so I can't rule that out either, I suppose.

 

I'm still waiting for 7-11 Simulator :ph34r:

[fppilot 4,335]

Seriously - you make good points and it's bound to be more complicated than we think.

 

Thanks.  And what ever may be taking place is highly likely to be more restrictive as well than what I read in all of the speculation.  

 

Not sure about your observations about ATP.  I was among a group of users on Prodigy in 1991 who formed SunAir, the first VA.  Shortly after we did that another user and I visited subLogic in Champaign and got a very good overview of what had transpired.  1986?  I believe in regard specifically to ATP it all started two or three years later than that, and it all had to do with licensing rights to OS platforms and "forms" of flight simulators.  If issues other than regarding ATP started earlier then I am blind to that.  I would love to see the depositions and interrogatories from that case, but since it settled prior to being heard those docs are sealed.

 

Will be interesting, and I hope rewarding to us as enthusiasts, to see what has developed here, but it both entertains me and concerns me to see so many pee'ing all over themselves here in speculation.  Guess that is the nature of this "game".  

 

I HATE to call it a game!

[pracines 823]

Picture a large conference room with all the top dogs from PMDG, Aerosoft, ORBX, Majestic, Real Air, Carenado, FlyTampa, A2A, Milviz, Eaglesoft, Quality Wings, FlightSimLabs, Flight 1, FSDreamteam, FlightBeam, Sunskyjet, Pete Dowson, HiFi Tech, Opus, etc, etc and of course, Tom Allensworth.

 

Richard Branson walks into the room, pulls a cord and millions of dollars in cash rain down from the false ceiling onto the table.

 

He just smiles and says:

 

"Let's build a flight simulator"

 

Make it trillions of dollars and then we can all be beta testers :-)

[n4gix 4,947]

I am LMAO here reading all of this speculation.  Few if any seem to understand licensing.  Question: under what arrangement did Microsoft convey FSX to LM?  Was that not a license?  If MS sold FS outright to LM then MS would have given up all rights to license it to others.  Based on this news that does not seem to be the case.

LM did not license FS!

 

LM licensed ESP1, which was Microsoft's attempt to enter the commercial/professional market. Largely this was prompted by the U.S. Navy's (mis)use of FS2002/4 in their ab-initio training program for Naval Aviator candidates.

 

For that matter, there have been two others who've licensed ESP1 as well.

[fppilot 4,335]

Thanks Rev Bill.  So that emphasizes my point that licenses are usually more restrictive than the wild speculation here encompasses.

 

 

LM did not license FS!

 

LM licensed ESP1, which was Microsoft's attempt to enter the commercial/professional market. Largely this was prompted by the U.S. Navy's (mis)use of FS2002/4 in their ab-initio training program for Naval Aviator candidates.

 

For that matter, there have been two others who've licensed ESP1 as well.

[Tom Allensworth 1,532]

LM did not license FS!

 

LM licensed ESP1, which was Microsoft's attempt to enter the commercial/professional market. Largely this was prompted by the U.S. Navy's (mis)use of FS2002/4 in their ab-initio training program for Naval Aviator candidates.

 

For that matter, there have been two others who've licensed ESP1 as well.

 

Exactly. My old alma mater, Northrop Grumman, was one of them. And, as I said earlier, anyone with the pockets to do so, can also buy a license for ESP. ESP is not included in the franchise license for obvious (to me) reasons.

[fullmetal02 23]

There is the dark hat model:

 

Purchase the franchise and enforce any copyright right infringements that may go along with the contract. A legal strategy could be very profitable. Of course I'm not lawyer. But a franchise owner does not typically develop. They utilize an existing business model.

 

And a franchisee does not have to develop a new flight sim. Developing a new sim means capital. Some business models need a quick turnaround to work.

[HawkDsl 50]

I guess it comes down to this question;

 

Mr. Allensworth, in your opinion, do you believe the community will like the buyer or not.

[tf51d 284]

My money is still on Dovetail Games, it makes the most sense, and matches all the conditions and hints Tom has posted in the original article, and subsequent posts.  I don't think it was Aerosoft because  Tom's article specifically said it's not someone we would suspect would have knowledge of Flight Sims. Aerosoft obviously does. I do think they may have been one of the contenders which is why Mathis can't comment on this. A earlier post from Tom, in response from a post from @HiFlyer that it was Dovetail may actually confirmed this when he responded

 

"I don't know the answer, but I suspect you are right... I guess we'll see shortly".

 

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/444096-microsoft-sells-license-to-fs-franchise-part-2/?p=3006217

[fppilot 4,335]

 

 

Mr. Allensworth, in your opinion, do you believe the community will like the buyer or not.

 

The key question is "the buyer of what?"  Without that answer the speculation is of no value,

[Manny 1,293]

I sincerely hope the rights that LM currently has is not diluted in any way by this deal and LM continues its part on the P3D.  

 

who ever (other than LM themselves) bought this is behind LM by 2 years at least.