Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.sys.sinclair > #1845 > unrolled thread

Atari in receivership.

Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.sinclair

Contents

  Atari in receivership. "Brian Gaff" <Briang1@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2013-01-29 18:41 +0000
    Re: Atari in receivership. deKay <andyk@lofi-gaming.org.uk.invalid> - 2013-01-29 20:41 +0000
      Re: Atari in receivership. Duncan Snowden <duncan_s@talktalk.net> - 2013-01-29 22:30 +0000
        Re: Atari in receivership. Duncan Snowden <duncan_s@talktalk.net> - 2013-01-29 22:38 +0000
        Re: Atari in receivership. "Paul E Collins" <equi+web@cl4.invalid> - 2013-01-29 23:25 +0000
          Re: Atari in receivership. Duncan Snowden <duncan_s@talktalk.net> - 2013-01-30 02:17 +0000
        Re: Atari in receivership. "Brian Gaff" <Briang1@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2013-01-30 05:25 +0000
      Re: Atari in receivership. Andrew Owen <aowen10@mail.bbk.ac.uk> - 2013-01-31 12:30 +0000
        Re: Atari in receivership. Duncan Snowden <duncan_s@talktalk.net> - 2013-02-01 00:25 +0000

#1845 — Atari in receivership.

Did anyone notice this, it was on the news over the weekend.

Brian

-- 
From the Sofa of Brian Gaff Reply address is  active 

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1846

On Tue, 29 Jan 2013, Brian Gaff wrote:

It's not Atari in anything other than name though. I don't even think it 
was Infogrammes any more either.

> Did anyone notice this, it was on the news over the weekend.
>
> Brian
>
>


deKay
-- 
  Lofi Gaming - http://lofi-gaming.org.uk
  Gaming Diary - http://lofi-gaming.org.uk/diary
  Blog - http://lofi-gaming.org.uk/blog
  My computer runs at 3.5MHz and I'm proud of that

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1849

Atari Corp. (Tramiel's computer company, formed out of the Atari
Consumer division of Warner Bros.) was bought by JTS storage in 1996,
which sold the name and assets to Hasbro during its death throes.
Meanwhile, Atari Games (the former Atari Coin division) had been bought
by Midway. When Hasbro decided to start publishing games under the
Atari name, Midway sensibly decided to rename its Atari division
“Midway Games West”, but even that was ultimately closed in 2003.
Hasbro sold its Atari IP on to Infogrames, which changed its name to
Atari SA.

So the company Nolan Bushnell founded died in stages between 1996 and
2003, and Atari is now Infogrames (or vice-versa). But it's not the
French part that's in trouble (at least, not yet, as far as anyone
knows).

What's in Chap. 11 right now is, to all intents and purposes, what used
to be GT Interactive, which was bought by Infogrames in 1999 and
renamed Infogrames, Inc.. I think this might be where you're getting
confused, deKay (and I don't blame you; it's a quagmire): Infogrames,
Inc., now Atari, Inc. (still with me?), wasn't the Infogrames that
produced all those weird Speccy games, but Atari SA is.

On Tue, 29 Jan 2013 20:41:48 +0000
deKay <andyk@lofi-gaming.org.uk.invalid> wrote:

> On Tue, 29 Jan 2013, Brian Gaff wrote:
> 
> It's not Atari in anything other than name though. I don't even think
> it was Infogrammes any more either.
> 
> > Did anyone notice this, it was on the news over the weekend.
> >
> > Brian
> >
> >
> 
> 
> deKay

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1850

Bah! Told you it was complicated. Atari SA (Infogrames) is under
bankruptcy protection in France as well.

On Tue, 29 Jan 2013 22:30:21 +0000
Duncan Snowden <duncan_s@talktalk.net> wrote:

[some stuff]

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1853

On Tue, 29 Jan 2013 22:30:21 -0000, Duncan Snowden <duncan_s@talktalk.net>  
wrote:

> Atari Corp. (Tramiel's computer company, formed out of the Atari
> Consumer division of Warner Bros.) was bought by JTS storage in 1996,
> which sold the name and assets to Hasbro during its death throes.
> [...]
> Atari, Inc. (still with me?), wasn't the Infogrames that
> produced all those weird Speccy games, but Atari SA is.

Although the new, in-name-only Atari did release the excellent puzzle game  
"Ballance".

I suppose they thought that having such a well-known old logo (what's the  
Atari logo supposed to be anyway? the Isle of Man flag when it's stopped  
sprawling on the floor and decided to get up?) would make people trust the  
quality of the games, but given some of their history -- crappy Atari 2600  
contributions to the games crash, etc. -- and the fact that most  
games-players want "state of the art", not retro, it was apparently not a  
very good decision.

Disclaimer: I know cack all about the games industry. Though I would have  
a chance on Mastermind doing "Spectrum games 1984-1994", which is not much  
more obscure than some of the topics they used to accept.

Dunno if Mastermind still exists.

etc.

Eq.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1856

On Tue, 29 Jan 2013 23:25:58 -0000
"Paul E Collins" <equi+web@cl4.invalid> wrote:

> what's the Atari logo supposed to be anyway?

According to AtariAge, it's two Pong players separated by a playfield
line. Hmm.

http://www.atariage.com/trivia_list.php
(No direct link, but search for "logo": it's the only entry to date.)

I always wondered if it was designed by Saul Bass, he of the
distinctive film posters and title sequences, who used a variations on a
similar theme for Rockwell International (almost identical, in a
circle, but without the middle bar) and Continental Airlines (a
horizontal version with four bars). But apparently not.

-- 
Duncan Snowden.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1857

erm, well, it always worries me what a mess people can make of a simple 
company name.
 I'm reminded of Kenwood and others. And who runs Marntz these days?

Brian

-- 
Brian Gaff....Note, this account does not accept Bcc: email.
 graphics are great, but the blind can't hear them
Email: briang1@blueyonder.co.uk
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________


"Duncan Snowden" <duncan_s@talktalk.net> wrote in message 
news:20130129223021.47d07642@talktalk.net...
Atari Corp. (Tramiel's computer company, formed out of the Atari
Consumer division of Warner Bros.) was bought by JTS storage in 1996,
which sold the name and assets to Hasbro during its death throes.
Meanwhile, Atari Games (the former Atari Coin division) had been bought
by Midway. When Hasbro decided to start publishing games under the
Atari name, Midway sensibly decided to rename its Atari division
"Midway Games West", but even that was ultimately closed in 2003.
Hasbro sold its Atari IP on to Infogrames, which changed its name to
Atari SA.

So the company Nolan Bushnell founded died in stages between 1996 and
2003, and Atari is now Infogrames (or vice-versa). But it's not the
French part that's in trouble (at least, not yet, as far as anyone
knows).

What's in Chap. 11 right now is, to all intents and purposes, what used
to be GT Interactive, which was bought by Infogrames in 1999 and
renamed Infogrames, Inc.. I think this might be where you're getting
confused, deKay (and I don't blame you; it's a quagmire): Infogrames,
Inc., now Atari, Inc. (still with me?), wasn't the Infogrames that
produced all those weird Speccy games, but Atari SA is.

On Tue, 29 Jan 2013 20:41:48 +0000
deKay <andyk@lofi-gaming.org.uk.invalid> wrote:

> On Tue, 29 Jan 2013, Brian Gaff wrote:
>
> It's not Atari in anything other than name though. I don't even think
> it was Infogrammes any more either.
>
> > Did anyone notice this, it was on the news over the weekend.
> >
> > Brian
> >
> >
>
>
> deKay

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1880

On 29/01/2013 20:41, deKay wrote:
> It's not Atari in anything other than name though. I don't even think it
> was Infogrammes any more either.

The entity that is now in recievership holds all of the Atari IP that 
was previously owned by the arcade group and the computer division. In 
that respect, this is the real Atari that is going down the pan.

Admittedly Infogrammes bought the rights because Atari had much better 
brand recognition, but they also put Nolan Bushnell back on the board. 
Also they haven't gone bust, they've filed for bankruptcy protection. GM 
did the same thing and the US government bailed them out. Unfortunately 
for Atari apparently the French government hasn't got any money to bail 
them out with.

For Speccy users it will be interesting to see who acquires the rights, 
because among them are the IP of many the major developers for the 
Speccy including Ocean, Imagine, Gremlin and a host of others. If 
Activision buys Atari then the WoS archive is going to shrink considerably.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1888

On Thu, 31 Jan 2013 12:30:42 +0000
Andrew Owen <aowen10@mail.bbk.ac.uk> wrote:

 
> Admittedly Infogrammes bought the rights because Atari had much
> better brand recognition, but they also put Nolan Bushnell back on
> the board.

I'd forgotten that. He also tried to buy Atari Games at one point
(either from Midway or when Warners sold it to them; I can't remember).
 
> Also they haven't gone bust, they've filed for bankruptcy protection.
> GM did the same thing and the US government bailed them out.
> Unfortunately for Atari apparently the French government hasn't got
> any money to bail them out with.

True, but then administration doesn't always mean the end even without
a taxpayer bailout. If a buyer, or new investment, can be found by the
administrator, or if he can sell off loss-making parts of the business
while retaining something profitable (or all three), there may still be
a future. Attempting to save a business in trouble is what
administration's *for*, after all.

Vaguely on-topic, think of GAME Group: battered and bruised, but still
around. For the moment.

> For Speccy users it will be interesting to see who acquires the
> rights, because among them are the IP of many the major developers
> for the Speccy including Ocean, Imagine, Gremlin and a host of
> others. If Activision buys Atari then the WoS archive is going to
> shrink considerably.

Also true. But one of the things the administrator might do to raise
cash is sell that dormant IP. I can't imagine Activision being too
interested in Ocean, etc. in and of themselves; they'd surely only get
their hands on them “by accident” through buying the whole thing. It'd
be nice to see one of the few remaining British independents -
Rebellion, maybe? - pick one or more of these names up for a song. Hey,
we can dream...

-- 
Duncan Snowden.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.sinclair

csiph-web