Digital licensing laws need to be updated

[Rayder]

I always figured it should work like this......

Anything legally made during the Bally/Williams license period by Farsight should forever be able to be sold by Farsight, even after the license expired, but they would still have to pay the royalties. It's just that since the license expired, they aren't allowed to re-create any NEW Bally/Williams tables. Now, I know it doesn't work like that, but it should. It certainly sounds fair and reasonable to me. But then, I'm not some greedy corporate suit holding a license to anything, so what do I know.

 

[msilcommand]

I always figured it should work like this......

Anything legally made during the Bally/Williams license period by Farsight should forever be able to be sold by Farsight, even after the license expired, but they would still have to pay the royalties. It's just that since the license expired, they aren't allowed to re-create any NEW Bally/Williams tables. Now, I know it doesn't work like that, but it should. It certainly sounds fair and reasonable to me. But then, I'm not some greedy corporate suit holding a license to anything, so what do I know.

Exactly!

 

[Gord Lacey]

Guys, I nixed a bunch of posts in the thread. I’d really like to keep this forum free of politics. There’s more than enough of that elsewhere; it doesn’t need to be here.

msilcommand, you really don’t understand much about copyright law, or licensing, as has been repeatedly pointed out here.

Someone in the thread mentioned Shout! Factory releasing WKRP on dvd with nearly all the music intact. That’s a good example of licensing in many ways. Fox released the first season on DVD, but with most of the music replaced. The music was too costly for them to license for the DVD. Well, how did Shout! Factory, a much smaller company, afford it? They afforded it because their license for the music was much narrower. When Fox (along with most of the large studios) negotiates music now, they’re licensing the music for all formats, in all territories, in perpetuity. They don’t want to be hit with another bill for music on WKRP ever again. That means they’re paying a lot of money for the music. When Shout! Factory licenses music, they’re licensing it for a specific term (the term of their contract with Fox for the series), I believe it was 5 years, but I may be wrong with that, and they’re only licensing it for Region 1 (North America), because that’s the only place they release their titles. This is why they’re able to afford the music; it’s for a short period of time, a certain geographic region, and on a single form of media.

The Shout!/WKRP situation is similar to the licensing of pinball tables. Had FarSight negotiated a non-exclusive contract for the tables, it would have been for less money, as there’s a chance they’d face competition on the same tables from another company. They had an exclusive contract, and when that contract expired, they could no longer sell the product, just as Shout! Factory will no longer produce WKRP discs once their contract with Fox runs out (though there still may be some in stores to purchase).

 

[shutyertrap]

But all of Farsight's mistakes still come back to the main point of this thread: licensing practices need to change. Farsight sucked it up because they had exclusivity and no competition. If Farsight and Zen and whomever else all were licensed to compete, we'd be looking at a totally different digital pin world right now.

Why any of you in digitalpinballfans would support and argue for the licensing laws that are stunting the pastime you supposedly love...is an enigma. Unless you're just shills for one of the companies involved in this trash, and you think you're fighting to protect the racket that pays your bills?

Because without licensing as is, we would have never even gotten The Pinball Arcade because the only way anyone would get use of any license would be by purchasing it outright. Scientific Games bought the Williams license for 1.2 billion dollars. A few months later they bought the Bally license for a number similarly large. FarSight and Zen could have pooled their capital together and would still been nowhere close to securing that. If you had chosen to argue over exclusivity rights, there might be some meat on the bone. Instead your adherence to rights "in perpetuity" is where everything falls apart immediately.

I have given detailed explanations of real world situations, both in physical and digital realms. I have addressed how competition is very present even when one party has exclusivity rights. I have shown that controlling one's own library of content is a major asset in determining a company's worth. I have also shown how these license laws are beneficial to the company seeking to use the license. The counter response has been akin to saying "nuh uh" and then yelling "corporate greed!" before ducking for cover. Until you can address this topic from any other standpoint than that of a consumer, until you can show any sensible reason why a license owner would lease out those rights to a company for life, there's no point in further argument.

 

[msilcommand]

Guys, I nixed a bunch of posts in the thread. I’d really like to keep this forum free of politics. There’s more than enough of that elsewhere; it doesn’t need to be here.

msilcommand, you really don’t understand much about copyright law, or licensing, as has been repeatedly pointed out here.

Someone in the thread mentioned Shout! Factory releasing WKRP on dvd with nearly all the music intact. That’s a good example of licensing in many ways. Fox released the first season on DVD, but with most of the music replaced. The music was too costly for them to license for the DVD. Well, how did Shout! Factory, a much smaller company, afford it? They afforded it because their license for the music was much narrower. When Fox (along with most of the large studios) negotiates music now, they’re licensing the music for all formats, in all territories, in perpetuity. They don’t want to be hit with another bill for music on WKRP ever again. That means they’re paying a lot of money for the music. When Shout! Factory licenses music, they’re licensing it for a specific term (the term of their contract with Fox for the series), I believe it was 5 years, but I may be wrong with that, and they’re only licensing it for Region 1 (North America), because that’s the only place they release their titles. This is why they’re able to afford the music; it’s for a short period of time, a certain geographic region, and on a single form of media.

The Shout!/WKRP situation is similar to the licensing of pinball tables. Had FarSight negotiated a non-exclusive contract for the tables, it would have been for less money, as there’s a chance they’d face competition on the same tables from another company. They had an exclusive contract, and when that contract expired, they could no longer sell the product, just as Shout! Factory will no longer produce WKRP discs once their contract with Fox runs out (though there still may be some in stores to purchase).

Yes, I definitely agree that Farsight signed a bad contract, although that may have been the only contract they were offered/allowed to sign by the license-holding masters. If they willingly chose exclusivity, then their current straights are 100% their own fault.

I do understand the basics of copyright law and licensing, although I'm admittedly a novice. That said, the point is still solid: exclusivity licenses kill competition. Once licensed for sales on a specific a platform and game, that license should be perpetual on that specific platform and game, but only if it's non-exclusive. That's just common sense and good ethical business behavior, because lots of money is invested by the licensee, and that should be respected.

 

[msilcommand]

Because without licensing as is, we would have never even gotten The Pinball Arcade because the only way anyone would get use of any license would be by purchasing it outright. Scientific Games bought the Williams license for 1.2 billion dollars. A few months later they bought the Bally license for a number similarly large. FarSight and Zen could have pooled their capital together and would still been nowhere close to securing that. If you had chosen to argue over exclusivity rights, there might be some meat on the bone. Instead your adherence to rights "in perpetuity" is where everything falls apart immediately.

I have given detailed explanations of real world situations, both in physical and digital realms. I have addressed how competition is very present even when one party has exclusivity rights. I have shown that controlling one's own library of content is a major asset in determining a company's worth. I have also shown how these license laws are beneficial to the company seeking to use the license. The counter response has been akin to saying "nuh uh" and then yelling "corporate greed!" before ducking for cover. Until you can address this topic from any other standpoint than that of a consumer, until you can show any sensible reason why a license owner would lease out those rights to a company for life, there's no point in further argument.

Right, I completely understand your license-owner standpoint, but I am also asking you why you and others in your position feel this current way is the right way?

Lack of competition stifles innovation and progress, so by giving exclusive licenses, you are stifling the potential of your license's value to grow. To remedy that risk, you retain the rights to revoke or non-renew licenses, but what does that accomplish in the long run? Nothing. Many people came back to licensed pinball, or discovered it because of TPA, and TPA had no competition, and they stagnated years ago. That scenario didn't help your license value grow. Had Farsight and Zen and any number of digital pinball companies been competing and innovating all these years, interest and popularity would have likely grown much more, and thus the value of your license would follow. If companies can trust that getting licensed to sell means they can invest in building their product without threat of having the license pulled on that specific product, you build their confidence and thus their drive and innovation over time. This current approach is anti competition, anti growth and innovation, and makes licensees live in fear of investing in their game, because their license could be non-renewed or pulled.

That's why.

 

[shutyertrap]

I'm going to point you in the direction of this article I wrote:

https://www.thisweekinpinball.com/guest-post-speculation-on-what-happened-with-the-williams-bally-digital-license/

Now then, and I'm not gonna speak in generalities this time for the sake of clarity but this can apply to many different companies, you ask why Williams would have allowed FarSight to sign an exclusivity agreement when that wouldn't help the brand grow? The flip side is why would FarSight sign a non exclusivity license? I'll take the first one first.

Various companies had licensed Williams tables before for video games. I have no numbers to quantify their success, but I don't think they were ever popular enough to warrant multiple companies seeking it at the same time. The advantage to Williams of letting FarSight sign an exclusivity agreement is that they could charge a lot more money for that. The contract length was for 2 years, if more companies are clamoring for it, then they could either do a bidding war, remove exclusivity, or not let anyone license it. FarSight clearly sees exclusivity as advantages because they'll have sole market share for 2 years, in which during that time they can build the game unfettered by direct competition of the exact same product. Without that, FarSight might not have been so bold in the money they were even willing to invest in the product. FarSight also pretty much figured they were only going to be doing that initial run of tables.

As mentioned in the article, the next time the contract was up Williams was being bought by Scientific Games so it is highly unlikely that anyone was looking at what FarSight was doing and asking how it was for the brand. FarSight was actually showing growth with the game; they came out with dynamic lighting, they did flipper physics, they bought better scanning equipment, so despite the lack of direct competition they were still innovating. As far as a license holder sees it, and indeed with how popular TPA was becoming, both sides were benefiting. Once Scientific Games was fully in control of the license, they took a look at FarSight's indirect competition, Zen. They approached them to see if they wanted a crack at it, but I have no information that would says whether they were offering a shared license or exclusive.

Zen turned them down, because of reasons I'm not at liberty to say. Let's say though that what was offered WAS only for a shared license. Well TPA had such a head start, around 40 tables at that point with a large swathe of the AAA titles already done, that Zen would struggle to gain any of that market share. Were they supposed to just hope that showing they could build a better version would be enough? Too risky. When Zen was approached again, who knows who it was that put exclusivity on the table, but I guarantee SG got a lot of money for it, more than they would have gotten with shared licensing, and now Zen is cranking out tables fast to get as much value out of the license as they can during the time they have it. Again, we don't know how long this contract is for, but you have to believe SG is happy with what Zen has done with it so far.

I said this before, once Zen has their own stable of Williams tables, a shared license would no longer be so dicey. FarSight could flip the switch and start selling their back catalog once more and Zen could continue making new tables. At that point though, would FarSight bother? They'd have to update their engine, redo graphics, and certainly eliminate every bug that has plagued them before day one of sales. If they were currently pumping out Stern and Gottlieb tables, I could see this happening but instead it's as if they've given up on pinball entirely.

Zen and FarSight are not strangers to having licenses pulled and no longer being able to sell that product. Stern had the Pirates of the Caribbean license, they made their run of tables, that was it. Now JJP has it and is making their run. From a competition point of view, JJP one has to assume is trying to make a better table. They did the same thing with the Hobbit (but is it better than LotR? I don't really think so). Were both making them at the same time, Disney would have to be worried of the potential of one company making a terrible machine which in turn would tarnish the other by association. The general public doesn't pay attention to the manufacturer, they just know it as "the good Indiana Jones table" and "that other Indiana Jones" table. Some don't even realize there's two different machines.

Timed licenses ensure the license holder that if they are in any way unhappy with the licensee, they can end it. Exclusivity ensures the licensee will be able to make and sell in the timed window they have to the fullest profit possible. Both sides see benefit in these arrangements. As a consumer, if when SG pulled the WMS license from FarSight all the tables I had got pulled too, then yes I'd be ticked. That's not how it worked though, I have my tables still. If FarSight turns off their servers, thus rendering the game unplayable, I'll be ticked. Zen doesn't demand online access connectivity for their tables, so this won't ever be a concern.

Zen is certainly competing to gain control of the digital pinball market, they are innovating with all the visual enhancements as well as new Williams physics, and everything they do is even influencing Magic Pixel and how they are handling the Zaccaria license. Are you equally concerned about them? Do you wish FarSight could do those tables? Because even Magic Pixel has gone through and revamped the Zacc collection once already just to keep up with the digital landscape.

 

[trash80]

Right, I completely understand your license-owner standpoint, but I am also asking you why you and others in your position feel this current way is the right way?

Lack of competition stifles innovation and progress, so by giving exclusive licenses, you are stifling the potential of your license's value to grow. To remedy that risk, you retain the rights to revoke or non-renew licenses, but what does that accomplish in the long run? Nothing. Many people came back to licensed pinball, or discovered it because of TPA, and TPA had no competition, and they stagnated years ago. That scenario didn't help your license value grow. Had Farsight and Zen and any number of digital pinball companies been competing and innovating all these years, interest and popularity would have likely grown much more, and thus the value of your license would follow. If companies can trust that getting licensed to sell means they can invest in building their product without threat of having the license pulled on that specific product, you build their confidence and thus their drive and innovation over time. This current approach is anti competition, anti growth and innovation, and makes licensees live in fear of investing in their game, because their license could be non-renewed or pulled.
That's why.

I don't think you understand (perspective) what IP value actually is, and what metrics are used when determining 'value.' In the case of SGI, they may be thinking about maximizing the vaulted IP value to shareholders, but this doesn't just become free money when they license the IP use out in a partnership vertical, there are huge management costs and other issues that can render even the most seemingly "no brainer" deal into a purgatory of no returns or worse.

Anyway... So you as a developer would be open to sharing a license for the exact same vertical space? What if you as an independent had to compete with the other guy that also has the license for the identical property and they choose to pursue not innovation, but a timed storefront exclusivity to push you out of the market long enough for them to gain a foothold? Who do you blame then?

I could go on, but business isn't fair (like life), so as long as you under promise and over deliver to a license partner, you'll likely find yourself in a position where you have IP owners looking for you as opposed to the other way around.

edit: Great post shutyertrap

 

[wolfson]

did anyone stop to think , the owners of Williams had seen what Zen had done with there pinball and thought you know what , let`s give Zen a go . I look at things in a simple way . a footballer gets signed let`s say to a 3 year contract , when it comes near the end of the contract , either the club renews the players contract or let`s them go . as far as I`m concerned our Williams and Bally tables are in the right home . as much as I love what TPA has done , Zen has taken our pinball to another bloody level , way better . I`m also happy because now I have my Zen and the Williams and Bally tables in one place . when you have a 4K tv and an XBOX1X , Zen pinball looks just beautiful , oops and on my PS4 Pro as well .

 

[msilcommand]

I don't think you understand (perspective) what IP value actually is, and what metrics are used when determining 'value.' In the case of SGI, they may be thinking about maximizing the vaulted IP value to shareholders, but this doesn't just become free money when they license the IP use out in a partnership vertical, there are huge management costs and other issues that can render even the most seemingly "no brainer" deal into a purgatory of no returns or worse.

Anyway... So you as a developer would be open to sharing a license for the exact same vertical space? What if you as an independent had to compete with the other guy that also has the license for the identical property and they choose to pursue not innovation, but a timed storefront exclusivity to push you out of the market long enough for them to gain a foothold? Who do you blame then?

I could go on, but business isn't fair (like life), so as long as you under promise and over deliver to a license partner, you'll likely find yourself in a position where you have IP owners looking for you as opposed to the other way around.

edit: Great post shutyertrap

Most of real life is direct and indirect competition, be it for money, status, innovation, mates, etc. The only people or businesses NOT competing in the real world are those being protected from competition by laws and contracts. So no, as a developer I am never put off by direct competition. I have faced it many times. I face it every day in every capacity, and it is what has helped me continue to evolve and progress. If my product isn't strong enough to resist being bullied out of a market by some mega corporation directly competing with me, then such is life. I'll try another way. However, the folks in digital pinball all seem of pretty modest means, so I still don't see why fostering competition isn't the goal of digital license holders. Shortsighted bottom line thinking is the myopic land of the salesman, and to paraphrase Jobs, first it is about creating a great product, and innovating, then the saleman take over leadership, because they can move the needle on revenue, and then the product's quality sinks...because the vision and long-term mindset of salespersons is historically very weak.

 

[msilcommand]

did anyone stop to think , the owners of Williams had seen what Zen had done with there pinball and thought you know what , let`s give Zen a go . I look at things in a simple way . a footballer gets signed let`s say to a 3 year contract , when it comes near the end of the contract , either the club renews the players contract or let`s them go . as far as I`m concerned our Williams and Bally tables are in the right home . as much as I love what TPA has done , Zen has taken our pinball to another bloody level , way better . I`m also happy because now I have my Zen and the Williams and Bally tables in one place . when you have a 4K tv and an XBOX1X , Zen pinball looks just beautiful , oops and on my PS4 Pro as well .

I totally agree Zen is better and is doing much more for digital pinball at this point, but I worry about Farsight tanking, and Zen ending up with no real competition. I can totally see SG just liking Zen better now. Makes sense.

Hopefully Farsight takes this as a chance to compete, and use those tables they lost as platforms to make their own tables, and fix their UI and all of that. It just doesn't look that way right now.

 

[msilcommand]

I'm going to point you in the direction of this article I wrote:

https://www.thisweekinpinball.com/guest-post-speculation-on-what-happened-with-the-williams-bally-digital-license/

Now then, and I'm not gonna speak in generalities this time for the sake of clarity but this can apply to many different companies, you ask why Williams would have allowed FarSight to sign an exclusivity agreement when that wouldn't help the brand grow? The flip side is why would FarSight sign a non exclusivity license? I'll take the first one first.

Various companies had licensed Williams tables before for video games. I have no numbers to quantify their success, but I don't think they were ever popular enough to warrant multiple companies seeking it at the same time. The advantage to Williams of letting FarSight sign an exclusivity agreement is that they could charge a lot more money for that. The contract length was for 2 years, if more companies are clamoring for it, then they could either do a bidding war, remove exclusivity, or not let anyone license it. FarSight clearly sees exclusivity as advantages because they'll have sole market share for 2 years, in which during that time they can build the game unfettered by direct competition of the exact same product. Without that, FarSight might not have been so bold in the money they were even willing to invest in the product. FarSight also pretty much figured they were only going to be doing that initial run of tables.

As mentioned in the article, the next time the contract was up Williams was being bought by Scientific Games so it is highly unlikely that anyone was looking at what FarSight was doing and asking how it was for the brand. FarSight was actually showing growth with the game; they came out with dynamic lighting, they did flipper physics, they bought better scanning equipment, so despite the lack of direct competition they were still innovating. As far as a license holder sees it, and indeed with how popular TPA was becoming, both sides were benefiting. Once Scientific Games was fully in control of the license, they took a look at FarSight's indirect competition, Zen. They approached them to see if they wanted a crack at it, but I have no information that would says whether they were offering a shared license or exclusive.

Zen turned them down, because of reasons I'm not at liberty to say. Let's say though that what was offered WAS only for a shared license. Well TPA had such a head start, around 40 tables at that point with a large swathe of the AAA titles already done, that Zen would struggle to gain any of that market share. Were they supposed to just hope that showing they could build a better version would be enough? Too risky. When Zen was approached again, who knows who it was that put exclusivity on the table, but I guarantee SG got a lot of money for it, more than they would have gotten with shared licensing, and now Zen is cranking out tables fast to get as much value out of the license as they can during the time they have it. Again, we don't know how long this contract is for, but you have to believe SG is happy with what Zen has done with it so far.

I said this before, once Zen has their own stable of Williams tables, a shared license would no longer be so dicey. FarSight could flip the switch and start selling their back catalog once more and Zen could continue making new tables. At that point though, would FarSight bother? They'd have to update their engine, redo graphics, and certainly eliminate every bug that has plagued them before day one of sales. If they were currently pumping out Stern and Gottlieb tables, I could see this happening but instead it's as if they've given up on pinball entirely.

Zen and FarSight are not strangers to having licenses pulled and no longer being able to sell that product. Stern had the Pirates of the Caribbean license, they made their run of tables, that was it. Now JJP has it and is making their run. From a competition point of view, JJP one has to assume is trying to make a better table. They did the same thing with the Hobbit (but is it better than LotR? I don't really think so). Were both making them at the same time, Disney would have to be worried of the potential of one company making a terrible machine which in turn would tarnish the other by association. The general public doesn't pay attention to the manufacturer, they just know it as "the good Indiana Jones table" and "that other Indiana Jones" table. Some don't even realize there's two different machines.

Timed licenses ensure the license holder that if they are in any way unhappy with the licensee, they can end it. Exclusivity ensures the licensee will be able to make and sell in the timed window they have to the fullest profit possible. Both sides see benefit in these arrangements. As a consumer, if when SG pulled the WMS license from FarSight all the tables I had got pulled too, then yes I'd be ticked. That's not how it worked though, I have my tables still. If FarSight turns off their servers, thus rendering the game unplayable, I'll be ticked. Zen doesn't demand online access connectivity for their tables, so this won't ever be a concern.

Zen is certainly competing to gain control of the digital pinball market, they are innovating with all the visual enhancements as well as new Williams physics, and everything they do is even influencing Magic Pixel and how they are handling the Zaccaria license. Are you equally concerned about them? Do you wish FarSight could do those tables? Because even Magic Pixel has gone through and revamped the Zacc collection once already just to keep up with the digital landscape.

I wouldn't see Farsight's headstart as an advantage at this point, were they to start directly sharing license competition with Zen...because Zen is doing a different thing with Pinball. Farsight would have had to scramble to catch up with UI, matchups and online play, original tables, etc, where all Zen would have to do is start building the new tables. I think Farsight would have still been behind.

I don't think signing a 2 year license contract makes anyone feel confident about dumping a few hundred grand into developing some tables. In some cases half that time could be already spent coding, developing, and debugging that table, then you just have a year to make up that money before you can possibly lose your contract? Weren't they crowdfunding table development? Doesn't that alone show that they didn't feel comfortable dumping their own money into precarious license situations? Sure, the devs got paid either way, but the company is taking a huge risk. If they specifically chose exclusivity contracts, then they shot themselves in the foot. I think Zen should NOT seek exclusivity, because they already have the Queen Chess piece, and competition would just be fun for them. I think they should seek contracts that can never expire on a specific game platform, currently FX3, and be open to others being licensed and competing. It just keeps them in the real world where you don't get to drink from a magic flask and avoid competition for a period of time.

"Learn the subways, Kevin. Use them. Stay in the trenches. Only way I travel."

 

[Pete]

Once i hit the big jackpot lottery without ever playing because i never do... im gonna take my millions and buy all the bally/williams table rights because clearly if you throw more money at them they will quickly be yanked away from zen. Then im gonna make terrible recreations of them that dont even work and laugh at you all. Wahahahaha. Mine wont have any censorship though, in fact they will be defaced with scribbled mustaches on everyone and random curse words and genitallia in crayon everywhere for no reason at all.

 

[Naildriver74]

Once i hit the big jackpot lottery without ever playing because i never do... im gonna take my millions and buy all the bally/williams table rights because clearly if you throw more money at them they will quickly be yanked away from zen. Then im gonna make terrible recreations of them that dont even work and laugh at you all. Wahahahaha. Mine wont have any censorship though, in fact they will be defaced with scribbled mustaches on everyone and random curse words and genitallia in crayon everywhere for no reason at all.

I’d buy that for a dollar

 

[wolfson]

Once i hit the big jackpot lottery without ever playing because i never do... im gonna take my millions and buy all the bally/williams table rights because clearly if you throw more money at them they will quickly be yanked away from zen. Then im gonna make terrible recreations of them that dont even work and laugh at you all. Wahahahaha. Mine wont have any censorship though, in fact they will be defaced with scribbled mustaches on everyone and random curse words and genitallia in crayon everywhere for no reason at all.

Pete if you could see me now , rolling on the ground pissing myself laughing !!!! good one !!!

 

[wolfson]

I totally agree Zen is better and is doing much more for digital pinball at this point, but I worry about Farsight tanking, and Zen ending up with no real competition. I can totally see SG just liking Zen better now. Makes sense.

Hopefully Farsight takes this as a chance to compete, and use those tables they lost as platforms to make their own tables, and fix their UI and all of that. It just doesn't look that way right now.

msilcommand , I`ve been buying tables from Zen since 2012 , they hardly ever change there pattern , about 12-15 tables a year , sometimes they`ll chuck in an extra table here and there . quality has always been good and are getting better all the time . Zen said from now on they going to pump out 3 tables every 6-8 weeks . so in the next year we should get about 18 - 27 tables , which is a lot for them . they do tables from the big boys , Star Wars , Marvel and a few others . they seem to have a great negotiating ability . as for TPA I want them to do the latest Sterns and the old Sterns as well . there is still some good old Gottlieb tables left .

 

[msilcommand]

msilcommand , I`ve been buying tables from Zen since 2012 , they hardly ever change there pattern , about 12-15 tables a year , sometimes they`ll chuck in an extra table here and there . quality has always been good and are getting better all the time . Zen said from now on they going to pump out 3 tables every 6-8 weeks . so in the next year we should get about 18 - 27 tables , which is a lot for them . they do tables from the big boys , Star Wars , Marvel and a few others . they seem to have a great negotiating ability . as for TPA I want them to do the latest Sterns and the old Sterns as well . there is still some good old Gottlieb tables left .

Agreed!