I have a success story for you, /biz/.
I had a family of websites, basically the same game with slight alterations, had decent growth over 3 years.
Recently I received an offer to sell these websites to a larger competitor. They offered $120k for me to sell them the user database and shut down my websites, I bargained and ended up on $150k. However, that's not the beauty of it.
The contract says I have to shut down the websites and not create any new websites in the same niche for 2 years. I also can't mass email my userbase. But, and this is the beautiful part, I never mentioned to the buyer that we had been working on an Android/iOS app for the games and should be ready to roll it out within a month.
The reason we are making the app in the first place is because a massive portion of our userbase requested it.
So what I'm going to do is finish the app, roll it out and spend like $10-$15k marketing it, both to existing users through community sites and forums I know they frequent, and to new users through social media etc.
So I am going to end up with about $135k minus tax, a new app, a good portion of my old users, and a good number of new users.
Have I done well, /biz/?
The contract specifically says I can't
a) create websites in the same niche
b) keep the same websites going
c) mass mail the users
It doesn't go any broader than that, therefore their legal team fucked up and the mobile market is wide open.
There are lots of niche websites, forums and social media that I can pay for marketing on.
The way the games work, people create private games for their friends, so if I can reach even 10% of my old userbase through the methods above, it will ripple out quite quickly.
Did you not read any of this thread?
As the other guy said, I hope you have checked in with your attorney.
That sounds like negotiation in bad faith. UK and some former commonwealth countries are probably the only few places where you wouldn't get rekt in court for pulling a stunt like that. Does the contract contain a jurisdiction or governing law clause?
>That sounds like negotiation in bad faith.
Without even determining if it's legal, it seems like bad business. If the intention is to screw them, go for it. I wouldn't want this in my reputation.
Eh, I'm a wageslave. I have an artistic mind and wanted to go into fiction writing/game design, but I could read the writing on the wall and didn't want to be poor so now in my mid 20s I'm a Build Release Engineer making ~80k. Not a huge success, but better than 80% of folks.
Started working on a novel and tabletop game recently so we'll see how shit I am at my passion.
1) everyone has a reputation
2) my reputation is irrelevant, but the tacit assumption is that OP doesn't want the reputation of being a bad businessman
Feel free to post any other retarded rejoinders though
As a legalbro I honestly don't see the problem.
I'd even argue they intentionally left the mobile market open. If they also wanted to cover the mobile app market they should have offered more otherwise he would never even have signed the contract.
>Have I done well, /biz/?
You came here to gloat, not to ask if you've done well when you know for certain that you've done better than 98% of this board already.
You should have been upfront and gloated properly by calling us all coinjerking poorfags who don't know shit about business.
But I wouldn't let myself be responsible for my business activities. Your business should have had it's own legal personality in the first place. And a holding where the money recides. So people can sue your business all they want.
My website isn't on my name either.
Idk if this is success but I've been making most of my money as a scientist for 3 years after graduating, and I've somehow convinced 4 different supervisors that I have been working full time despite almost never being in more than 5-6 hours, and usually only working 4 of them per day.