NanoTech Entertainment (NTEK) Partners With VirtuaPin Cabinets

[sleepy]

Thoughts?

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/nanotech-entertainment-ntek-partners-virtuapin-150500332.html

http://nanotech-investors.s3.amazon...12-03-09-Finanical-Information-06-30-2011.pdf

Results of Operations
We generated revenues from operations of $46,521 since July 1, 2009 and have incurred $1,792,815 in expenses through June 30, 2010, as well
as $16,861 of costs of goods sold.

The following table provides selected financial data about our company for the current fiscal year ended June 30, 2010 and period of July 1,
2008 through June 30, 2009, the prior fiscal year

Balance Sheet Data June 30, 2010 June 30, 2009

Cash $ 2,803 $ 35,536

Total Current Assets $ 55,345 $ 86,782

Total Assets $ 55,839 $ 88,263

Total Liabilities $ 1,957,096 $ 1,473,344

Stockholders' Deficit $ 1,901,257 $ 1,385,081


--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Item 11. Executive Compensation

(a) A majority of the Intellectual Property was acquired by the Company in the form of an employment agreement whereby one of the original founders, David R. Foley, assigned the rights to his substantial intellectual property po4rtfolio in return for the compensation outlined in his employment agreement. To date, Mr. Foley has not been compensated under the terms of his agreement. The Company intends on offering stock in lieu of the past due compensation, and paying the compensation moving forward. There is currently accrued compensation due as of June 30, 2011 totaling $1,553,376.

(b) There are no annuity, pension, or retirement benefits proposed to be paid to officers, directors, or employees of the Corporation in the event of retirement at normal retirement date pursuant to any presently existing plan provided or contributed to by the Corporation.

(c) The currently are employment agreements with one of the founders of the Company. The terms of these employment agreements are as follows:

• David R. Foley’s current compensation through calendar year-end
2011 is $550,000 USD per annum with a decrease to $210,000 USD
for the second half of the calendar year 2011. Currently, Mr. Foley’s
salary is accruing on a monthly basis.

Director Compensation
The Directors of the Company do not receive compensation at this time.

http://nanotech-investors.s3.amazonaws.com/financials/March-31-2012-Q.pdf

NanoTech Entertainment, Inc.
(A Development Stage Company)
Balance Sheet
March 31,
2012
(unaudited)
ASSETS
Current assets:
Cash $ 152
Inventory 11,924
Prepaid expenses -
Prepaid royalties 40,000
Total current assets 52,077
Property and equipment (Note B) 2,961
Less: accumulated depreciation (2,961)
Net property and equipment 0
Total assets $ 52,077


LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ DEFICIT
LIABILITIES
Current liabilities:
Accounts payable and Accrued Expenses $ 391,120
Cash drawn in excess of bank balance -
Accounts Payable Related Parties 501, 515
Accrued Salaries 73,206
Notes Payable 33,144
Notes Payable – Related Parties 101,563
Convertible Notes Payable 605,975
Convertible Notes Payable – Related Parties 48,700
Discount on Convertible Debt (203,055)
Total liabilities 1,552,168

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Item 11. Executive Compensation (Page 15)

(a) A majority of the Intellectual Property was acquired by the Company in the form of an employment agreement whereby one of the original founders, David R. Foley, assigned the rights to his substantial intellectual property po4rtfolio in return for the compensation outlined in his employment agreement. To date, Mr. Foley has not been compensated under the terms of his agreement. The Company intends on offering stock
in lieu of the past due compensation, and paying the compensation moving forward. There is currently accrued compensation due as of March 31, 2012 totaling $613,137.

(b) There are no annuity, pension, or retirement benefits proposed to be paid to officers, directors, or employees of the Corporation in the event of retirement at normal retirement date pursuant to any presently existing plan provided or contributed to by the Corporation.

(c) The currently are employment agreements with one of the founders of the Company. The terms of these employment agreements are as follows:
David R. Foley’s current compensation through calendar year-end 2012
is $210,000 USD per annum.

Currently, Mr. Foley’s salary is accruing on a monthly basis.

Director Compensation
The Directors of the Company do not receive compensation at this time.

 

[StevOz]

I'd say they are as good as dead in the water, given their deficit there is no way they can repay that amount with future sales of their current lines.

I can't imagine Foley accepting a stock offer of basically worthless stock or imagine any investor foolish enough to throw away several million dollars on a company that has no way of recouping that amount.

The shares are worth less then 1 cent...

http://finance.yahoo.com/q;_ylt=Ajj...GNhdANuZXdzBHB0A3N0b3J5cGFnZQ--;_ylv=3?s=ntek

Any trading partners would continue to trade with them no doubt as it is in their own interests to do so and await the collapse of the company, then consider buying the IP at a fire sale price.

 

[sleepy]

Were you able to find the annual revenue information? I'm wondering if the money owed Foley is due to reasonable royalties based on actual sales of tangible goods, or is it strictly an up-front royalty without a rational source of business revenue?

The information that I posted suggests that, because the compensation owed Foley is accrued annually, that it is owed by default due to the contract and not based on the sale of any tangible goods.

If that is the case, then expect that if and when Nanotech fails, that Foley will be suing the holdings company and anyone who is responsible for the product in order to recover the default royalties, if that is the way the contract is written, and that at that point he will also be taking back the license and assets for his properties.

This reminds me. Does Foley still own the commercial rights to Visual Pinball and Future Pinball? I think so, but I'm not sure.

And hmmm, several million dollars? One thousand dollars would buy a million shares. There are 75 million shares of the company out there, non-preferred shares.

If I remember my business law class, non-preferred stocks are at the end of the line should the company fail. A preferred stock is near the front of the settlements line in the event the company goes belly up.

 

[LeeVanCleef]

Nanotech stock sounds like the bargain of a lifetime! I know where my life savings is going!

 

[Itchigo]

Does Foley still own the commercial rights to Visual Pinball and Future Pinball? I think so, but I'm not sure.

If it were true, what would it mean? That he could shut things down and make vp a commercial product i.e, no more freeware?

 

[Shockman]

Those things are unrelated.

If it is true, he could make a commercial product out of it, but not shut down the freeware.

I can't think of another example such as this. It's not like two businesses. Open source puts VP in the public domain.

 

[sleepy]

As has been stated before, I believe by the Shockman, is that because the consideration is commercial, that there is no incentive to improve VP other than what is necessary to encourage more free tables to the benefit of commercial sales, cabs, etc.

 

[sleepy]

Hey you know, I would invest in virtuapin before I would consider buying a million non-preferred shares of Nanotech for a thousand dollars...

 

[Shockman]

I never put it quite like that.

I don't believe that which is called VP is an improvement of VP, but an offshoot of it. It is in fact something produced from it for a specific commercial use.

I don't think the current devs are holding back. I believe them when they say that they are incompetent, and that something like attaching code that exists to a keystroke is too complicated for them.

Either it will happen or not, but if it does, a resurrection of pinball on a mainstream PC in terms of design capability will not have anything to do with VP. Something would have to go forward in every respect to be taken seriously. VP is now a joke.

 

[destruk]

Thanks Phil!
Where is your offshoot of VP you said you would write years ago? If you know of any competent coders out there who could lift a finger or two and peck-type in some letters into a computer that would make VP any better, please let us know, because we are just as blind as we are stupid.

 

[Shockman]

I did not say it would be too difficult. You did. At this point, I am merely agreeing.

I was willing to assist, but I was told that no other code would be allowed to be posted or even linked to so I decided it would be pointless.

I did work one build of VP9 and got nudging to work as it did, but I'm pretty sure that it broke the niche hardware support and could not convince Paul that 100% usability would be a good thing even if it took two builds to get it. When he said two builds would be too confusing I knew that a PC build was taboo at this point. I knew that because one build that would not work for everyone would prove to be at least as confusing, as it has.

I did create a Bagatelle version which replaced the flippers with nails, but no fix to the nudging was included with that.

You can not have it both ways Brian. You can not reject help out of hand and then complain about not having help.

 

[destruk]

You're right. What are you going to do next?

 

[unclewilly]

Well that saves me a lot of time uploading the rest of my tables here.
Since vp is such a joke i guess its not necessary.

Maybe the devs aught to consider changing the name of the forum to knock off mame games nirvanna.

Because honeztly who has any interest in a pinball program that has lost so much functionality its not even worth playing

 

[StevOz]

Well that saves me a lot of time uploading the rest of my tables here.
Since vp is such a joke i guess its not necessary.

Maybe the devs aught to consider changing the name of the forum to knock off mame games nirvanna.

Because honeztly who has any interest in a pinball program that has lost so much functionality its not even worth playing

Eh and what kind of post is that, you do yourself no favours basing your ideology on one poster on these forums who in no way represents these forums. That's some crazy stuff UW and not spelt to well I might ad.

 

[unclewilly]

I failed to realize i was posting at grammer/spelling nirvana.

As the most outspoken of the five or six members who regularly post here,
I do base my decision to waste my time uploading tables here, on the demand for the tables.
They have all been uploaded at the other forum. And anyone can freely grab them there.

I guess im more tired of reading the same tired argument about how vp9 isnt vp8.

I think its time to let it go and be more proactive in working around the shortcomings of the software which was a staple of the community back in the vp8 days. Thats where i get most of my enjoyment, by making the software do things it shouldnt be able to do or fixing what it does wrong

Sorry no spellchecker on my phone. I appologize for any spelling or gramatical mistakes

 

[StevOz]

Fair do's I'm terrible with spelling myself, doesn't really mean much either way. Just a little irked by your post so I felt like pointing it out.

I also tire of those that espouse to let it go and then at the same time see fit to post addressing such issues with veiled threats about not wasting a few minutes to upload tables here because of some ill conceived concept about what this site is about.

The forum is just that a forum of individual views and opinions on various topics and a very minor part of this site.

The sites main purpose is to provide pinball resources/downloads and support to all, you don't need to be registered here to download and there are no limits on what you can download.

 

[StevOz]

Back to the topic,

I've no idea what revenue nanotech received, though considering their product lines, possible profit margins and estimated sales, I'd say it's highly unlikely that revenue covers anything near their current liabilities.

 

[Shockman]

The program was developed to be a tool for creativity. Whether that is true or not, it did at one point excite my creativity, and like you, most of my enjoyment came with the challenge that it gave.

It can be used to create non pinball applications, but it's main component is pinball. It use to have more basic pinball function. It needs this basic function. But I don't think the major problem with VP is in the code but the argument created in suggesting that it's keeping what it has is more important than supporting the niche hardware, and only because it seems that some think one is more important than the other. This is a gap that needs not exist.

The only way to think that this is not a big deal is to think that VP is not a big deal. Either in that it does not matter at all, or in that the niche is all that matters.

 

[LeeVanCleef]

I guess im more tired of reading the same tired argument about how vp9 isnt vp8.

I think its time to let it go and be more proactive in working around the shortcomings of the software which was a staple of the community back in the vp8 days. Thats where i get most of my enjoyment, by making the software do things it shouldnt be able to do or fixing what it does wrong

Maybe it would be a moot point if there was anything actually done to work around those problems. I mean, we're going on, what, three years for VP9? Take your Black Pyramid table; great work, probably the best VP version of it that's been done. But I still have to go into the script and disable tilt, because VP9 has two constant problems; tilting is far too sensitive and there's little to no visual "shaking" that lets you get an idea of how much the player is nudging, unlike the perfectly serviceable nudging that was already present in VP8 . I can tell by the movement of the ball that it's designed more for "top-down" cabinet viewing, and this does little to help PC players. I think there's still room for criticism when the problem hasn't been fixed, especially when it's a problem with such a fundamental part of the program. Frankly, Shocky's idea of a VP9 designed solely for PC use may not be a bad one. Whether there's someone who would actually have the time or talent to do it is a question, but this does seem to be a problem where there is no other work-around. Let me clearly state that I know nothing of programming, but, to a layman, the answer seems simple; VP9 with its superior graphics capability grafted together with VP8 nudging.
BTW, I've noticed a similar thread that pops up every now and again at .org, so it's a little disingenuous to blame this all on us poor Nirvanaites. :)

 

[Shockman]

When VP was redesigned to work with the Ultracade cabinets, the end result was what they needed, and they were in a position to raise money and spend money to turn VP into what they needed. Still the result was not a product that had support for two very different platforms. Neither was this the intent. This VP9 was NEVER intended to replace VP and the original devs of that made that clear at VPF.com stating that some things would have to be taken out and other stuff put back in to make it useful for the general community. It was not created using the latest pre 9 version of VP either. Randy released later versions trying to separate the two, what he called cores, which was a good term if not a true term, as it is merely subroutines that had replaced existing routines and others that commandeered the existing variables. But at the core VP had problems in reintegration.

Randy failed to fully separate the two cores. The author of VP knew that this version was not good enough outside the niche, and the authors of the derivative knew it was not good enough outside the niche. And both either tried and failed, or did not try to make it so. One had no motivation, and the other's work was never completed.

Nudging IS one of the most basic functions of Pinball. It always has been. At the beginning it was THE basic function. To this day, no one is going rank and not use this function. Pinball without nudging is worse than pinball without flippers because there are flipperless tables, but there are none that can be mastered or even scores and playtime improved without it. Flippers are an addition, a revision. Nudging IS THE enduring basic function of pinball.

The ball on the flipper is what we should be talking about. VP should at this point be at a place where it is not wanting of basic function. It should be at this point in time that physics are being discussed and revised. There is less ball through the flipper, but the fix is basically the same in that contact is manipulated. It is in my opinion much more realistic to have a swift flipper than a flipper that does not even make contact with the ball, and this is another problem, like nudging, that is only present in VP9. Nudging better in VP8?, that's not the point. It EXISTS in VP8 and the earliest versions as well.

This is nothing to get upset about though. Development is not straight forward. But when it does not continue to strive, a limit is imposed. It could be a compromise, it could be a wall at the state of the art, or it could be a knowledge issue. Previous nudging in VP shows that there is no excuse for this.

What is upsetting is reading at VPF.org where the dev is based that (and this has been all over the place) that it does work, that VP8 did not work, that it is not important, that the lack of recoil is realistic, that recoil is substantially less than nudge, that pros can drive the ball, that it needs further complicated with physical and visual impact made to have no relationship, that it is too complicated, that graphics are more important, that it serves the niche, that putting it back might harm the niche, that it should not be considered a basic function, but left to the authors to develop, that defaults should be set to a subset of the base users, that support files that address this as best they can are a bad idea, that a working separate version would be confusing, and on and on. None of which would stand up to any level of logic. This suggests to me that there is probably another reason. One that is logical, has value, is here to stay, and is sick, selfish, and sad.

 

[bob]

What is upsetting is reading at VPF.org where the dev is based that (and this has been all over the place) that it does work, that VP8 did not work, that it is not important, that the lack of recoil is realistic, that recoil is substantially less than nudge, that pros can drive the ball, that it needs further complicated with physical and visual impact made to have no relationship, that it is too complicated, that graphics are more important, that it serves the niche, that putting it back might harm the niche, that it should not be considered a basic function, but left to the authors to develop, that defaults should be set to a subset of the base users, that support files that address this as best they can are a bad idea, that a working separate version would be confusing, and on and on. None of which would stand up to any level of logic. This suggests to me that there is probably another reason. One that is logical, has value, is here to stay, and is sick, selfish, and sad.

VP must work for cabs, cabs are where the money is. VP also must work with the Nanotech controller, no one cares about desktop, there is no money in desktop tables. You can buy the nudge for 299 bucks. Many people buy this and store it in their closet when it doesn't work the way they thought. :)

http://virtuapin.net/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=8&products_id=71

 

[Shockman]

I agree with everything except no one cares about desktop, and that I could possibly spend $299 for something as ugly as the Nanotech controller.

 

[Itchigo]

this may or may not be aff topic, but I take my laptop to work every day and all it can play is vp8, the vp8 tables I have play so nice....., in fact any tables I choose to update are vp8 and already play well so there's no need to change anything.

I have a cab (still building), but there's no way I would spend 4500$ on a cab FROM ANYBODY! In fact, I'll be lucky if I have 500$ in mine when it's done.

 

[unclewilly]

I understand that vp9 is based on a comercial product.
The only people i see benefiting from the cabinet features in vp9 are nanotech and cabinet companies such as virtua pin and the like.
The few devs at vpf arent benefiting from these features. In fact they just submit code freely for things that they know how to do. Toxie, one of the devs who has probably submitted the most revisions in the past year is working on making vp compatible with 3d glasses and monitors.
Not much use for that, but its what he knows how to do.

I would gladly take the implementation of vp8 nudging into vp9 before having 3d support.
That fact is im stuck with what im given. To think that the few devs at vpf.org are the only ones who can develope vp is foolish.
Shockman himself was developing a version, but stopped because they wouldnt allow him to post it at vpf.
Im fairly certain that pinball nirvana would have hosted it.

If the nudging were that easy to fix, im pretty certain shockman would have implemented it in the build he was working on. Maybe im wrong on that.

If i had the knowledge to add the old nudge back into vp9 i would certainly do it, but i dont.

As far as saying the only benefit of the program is in the cabinet support and graphics is way off base.

I think there is a huge improvement in the physics of vp9 as compared to vp8.

But i am no expert on this and as phil says the flipper physics are way off.

Id have to say on a table like big bang bar which i play on a regular basis at the pinball museum, there is no way i could get the flipper physics any where near the real table is vp8. In vp9 they are extremely close to the real machine i play. Let alone the other physics features like friction and gravity which vp8 also doesnt have.

My whole point is rather than bitch and complain about how it is, do something about it.

The reason they have a few devs at vpf is that the set up a dev forum and asked people to help out with what they could.

There is nothing stoping you guys here at pinball nirvana from putting out a call for developers and setting up a dev forum, to try to get some devs on board to try and implement the changes you want.

Who really cares if it is supported at .org or not.

If a version came out that had the old nudge and better physics but still retained the features that i want for my own personal use i would gladly use it instead of the supported version at vpf.org

But it just seems more like bitching about what needs done with the software is the proactive step that you guys are taking.

Maybe im wrong
And this is just my opinion
And opinions are like assholes
And as shocky told me a year ago
I am an asshole

 

[Shockman]

I don't have a build of VP9 with keyboard nudging working 100%

Also, the only build I have with any changes I have made is 9.07