Epic is starting to worry me

[Quadsword]

Despite massive backlash from their practices, Epic hasn’t let up even slightly. They have financial backing from Disney and Tencent, two of the largest corporations in the world, and a massive cash flow from Fortnite and unreal engine, the former being the most popular game in the world and the latter being the most popular commercial game engine in the world.

I feel like no amount of consumer backlash will stop them getting the monopoly they obviously want. They can just keep throwing money around until they control the entire games industry. I miss the days before mega corporations entered this industry.

[McGillicutti]

Messaggio originale di Eisberg:

Messaggio originale di McGillicutti:

Nope. You fully do not understand how any of it works.

The 12% is sales of the product through Epic. Everything else isn't subject to the cut unless it happens by purchase through Epic. If it's purchased directly from the Publisher/Developer not a dime goes to Epic, and that appears to be strictly for PC sales.

However, if the game is not sold by Epic, then the 5% royalty applies to all sales of product and anything else, including microtransactions, any time the seller achieves greater then $3000 in sales per quarter, and it doesn't matter if it sells on PC, Console Etc.

You've regularly claimed that when you don't know something the other person is illogical.

The mixture and expectation haven't anything to do with Epic running Epic's store. Epic is concerned about Epic in running their store, no one else. And Epic will make decisions that are to the benefit of Epic regarding their store not in concern of what other stores have or don't have, as their lack of features at launch and for almost a year waiting for them to come has proven.

You keep on talking like your point is a fact, yet you have not proven it at all. So since you're the one that came up with saying that Epic isn't doing it for a specific reason the onus of the proof is on you.

I've looked up Epic's royalty agreement, have you? I am speaking from it, are you? Obviously you are not. So please go off with your opinions of how the 5% works on consoles that has no meaning to the 5% Epic Royalty Fee charged for use of the Unreal Engine and, if it's really that important to you, add it to the 5% Royalty as an additoinal charge by Epic if there's those specific arrangement that you're so sure of because, by the way the Epic Royalty Agreement works, they would have to be on top of the 1st Rights in the Epic Unreal Engine and Epic as Royalty Holder who must be paid first. Just like a 1st mortgage on a house.

Maybe math can help you.

GAME X uses Unreal Engine, it is a PC and console release. Lets say it makes $10 million total, $7 million from Console, and $3 million for PC in it's life time. (this includes microtransactions, DLCs sales as well.)

Not on Epic Store, Epic gets $500k from those sales. (5% of $10 million)

Now lets say that it was on the Epic store, exclusive for 1 year, and it made $2 million through Epic store, and $1 million everywhere else for the PC, console sales remain the same.

5% of (Console + non Epic sales) = $400k
12% of Epic sales = 240k

400k + 240k = $640k

640k is more than 500k.

And yes, I have seen the Royalty agreement, which is also why I know you are absolutely wrong.

I have already proven your point to be wrong:

1- Your argument makes no logical sense, and I even proven it makes no logical sense with actual math.

2- The fact that they have a mixture of unreal and non unreal games proves your point to be wrong.

I have proven you wrong using common sense, logic, and now actual math for an example.

So the onus of proof is still on you to prove your highly illogical point has any merit at all.

Okay, let's start from the beginning.

Your math is about something that isn't the net effect of the Epic Exclusivity agreement.

The Epic Agreement is solely for sales through the Epic store and those will be the 12/88 split, but that's all, and that doesn't include microtransactions that don't take place through the Epic Store.

The 5% on consoles is a separate sales agreement and I think where the confusion is is in your thinking this 5% if the 5% Royalty Fee for use of the Unreal Engine that applies to ALL transacitons of any kind done by the Developer over the course of their product.

Okay so now duration differences:

-- 12/88 split results in 90% of the money deriving from sales of the product itself, and as more and more Publishers and Developers have their own launchers, and their own stores, operating outside Epic and any other retailer's store, most sales of microtransactions aren't subject to the retail launcher's commission. This is the basic terms of the 12/88 split Epic Exclusivity Agreement.

-- 5% commission on console sales is identically treated, only due to the hardware limitations and lack of separate Publisher and Developer launchers the 5% applies to all sales of the product on that platform. The Epic Exclusivity Agreement appears to be solely PC sales thus far.

And then we have royalties....

Royalties are for the duration of the product's existence using the Unreal Engine. So long as the product uses the Unreal Engine every single thing sold by anyone, Publisher, Developer, Retailer is charged a 5% fee by epic, with one exception: If the game itself is sold on the Epic Store, then that Developer is no longer required to pay a 5% Royalty Fee on every aspect of their game's revenues. It is a 5% Gross sales charge too, without any reduction due to any other factors whatsoever and entirely for the benefit of the Royalty Holder Epic Unreal Engine.

So when company A that is paying Epic $100,000 per year in royalties applies to have their product sold on the Epic store so they don't have to pay that fee, and Epic reviews their product and decides it won't promote the Epic store to the extent it will be worth more than the $100,000/yr, Epic rejects their application to be sold on the Epic store.

Thus when company B that is using a different engine and pays not one dime to Epic applies to be on the Epic Store, or Epic goes to them to offer pay-to-play bribed exclusivity, Epic is using Company A's royalty money to gain a means to get 12% on Company B's product, with a more important criteria, that company B's product must promote the Epic Store in excess of Company A's Royalty of $100,000/yr.

The hidden undermining of the mix of Unreal Engine and non-Unreal Engine products may offend those paying royalties to Epic, may make them question making those payments when they realize that company B is being paid theirs and every other of up to 7 million Unreal Engine Developer's royalties while Epic is rejecting them to keep the royalty money flowing in.

To be clear the 5% royalty has nothing to do with the 5% console sales commission.

Eisberg please try to tell the truth. You aren't telling the truth:

"Once you've begun collecting money for your product, you'll need to track gross revenue and pay a 5% royalty on that amount after the first $3,000 per game per calendar quarter. To report your earnings, complete and submit this form[link omitted]." --
https://www.unrealengine.com/en-US/release

[⎠⎝Zushikatetomoto⎠⎝ UFO]

Messaggio originale di Eisberg:

Messaggio originale di Frodo T Baggins:

I guess you're right. Getting the info out there is good but all the reasoning behind it is just wasted on him. But i guess if others can see and understand this info then it's good enough. Just don't get caught up in his "bs, lies and videotape" but you don't need anyone to tell you that haha. :2018salienpsychic:

Well considering I just used simple math and logic to completely debunk his whole point, I would say that he needs to stop "giving info" because he is consistently wrong.

I think you need to ask a doc for help or you are PR . Stop saying prove it and call it lies.
People showed you proof and you yell lies.
stop fighting steam users over you miss info and lies.
No matter how hard you try you will not get people to join epic.
Keep this up and see what will happen next.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gqyCC4f2YOg

[McGillicutti]

Messaggio originale di Eisberg:

Messaggio originale di McGillicutti:

I'll quote it from the original post "38 minutes in."

Since when is 10-15% equal to 30%?

Well since you brought up math previously. The average retailer like Gamestop where I buy my cards, the manager said they charge 15% sales commission to Steam, so 15% + 15% = "up to 30%." The video mentions that the retailers are paid a cut for selling the card.

So another way to say it is, Steam Wallet Card Retail sales ALWAYS result in steam losing anywhere from 5-15% in sales commission to the retailer selling the cards, on top of the $1.50 cost of the cards. so the more we put on them the more we can mitigate the amount Steam loses but no less than the retailers charge in commission for selling them and that percentage varies from retailer to retailer but is on average around 15%.

Interesting to note I asked about the prepaid VISA cards at the Gamestop store, I want to put an amount on to pay something anoymously to show support for a game, well, Visa charges 5.95 cents to activate the card on top of the amount I put on it. I can put from 20-500 bucks on the card. so you can see that if i put 100 dollars on the card, VISA got 6% from me. So when you look at it from that perspective too, Steam is losing basically 4.50 cents on each card compared to VISA and all for the convenience of the Customer.

[WolfEisberg]

Messaggio originale di McGillicutti:

Messaggio originale di Eisberg:

Maybe math can help you.

GAME X uses Unreal Engine, it is a PC and console release. Lets say it makes $10 million total, $7 million from Console, and $3 million for PC in it's life time. (this includes microtransactions, DLCs sales as well.)

Not on Epic Store, Epic gets $500k from those sales. (5% of $10 million)

Now lets say that it was on the Epic store, exclusive for 1 year, and it made $2 million through Epic store, and $1 million everywhere else for the PC, console sales remain the same.

5% of (Console + non Epic sales) = $400k
12% of Epic sales = 240k

400k + 240k = $640k

640k is more than 500k.

And yes, I have seen the Royalty agreement, which is also why I know you are absolutely wrong.

I have already proven your point to be wrong:

1- Your argument makes no logical sense, and I even proven it makes no logical sense with actual math.

2- The fact that they have a mixture of unreal and non unreal games proves your point to be wrong.

I have proven you wrong using common sense, logic, and now actual math for an example.

So the onus of proof is still on you to prove your highly illogical point has any merit at all.

Okay, let's start from the beginning.

Your math is about something that isn't the net effect of the Epic Exclusivity agreement.

The Epic Agreement is solely for sales through the Epic store and those will be the 12/88 split, but that's all, and that doesn't include microtransactions that don't take place through the Epic Store.

The 5% on consoles is a separate sales agreement and I think where the confusion is is in your thinking this 5% if the 5% Royalty Fee for use of the Unreal Engine that applies to ALL transacitons of any kind done by the Developer over the course of their product.

Okay so now duration differences:

-- 12/88 split results in 90% of the money deriving from sales of the product itself, and as more and more Publishers and Developers have their own launchers, and their own stores, operating outside Epic and any other retailer's store, most sales of microtransactions aren't subject to the retail launcher's commission. This is the basic terms of the 12/88 split Epic Exclusivity Agreement.

-- 5% commission on console sales is identically treated, only due to the hardware limitations and lack of separate Publisher and Developer launchers the 5% applies to all sales of the product on that platform. The Epic Exclusivity Agreement appears to be solely PC sales thus far.

And then we have royalties....

Royalties are for the duration of the product's existence using the Unreal Engine. So long as the product uses the Unreal Engine every single thing sold by anyone, Publisher, Developer, Retailer is charged a 5% fee by epic, with one exception: If the game itself is sold on the Epic Store, then that Developer is no longer required to pay a 5% Royalty Fee on every aspect of their game's revenues. It is a 5% Gross sales charge too, without any reduction due to any other factors whatsoever and entirely for the benefit of the Royalty Holder Epic Unreal Engine.

So when company A that is paying Epic $100,000 per year in royalties applies to have their product sold on the Epic store so they don't have to pay that fee, and Epic reviews their product and decides it won't promote the Epic store to the extent it will be worth more than the $100,000/yr, Epic rejects their application to be sold on the Epic store.

Thus when company B that is using a different engine and pays not one dime to Epic applies to be on the Epic Store, or Epic goes to them to offer pay-to-play bribed exclusivity, Epic is using Company A's royalty money to gain a means to get 12% on Company B's product, with a more important criteria, that company B's product must promote the Epic Store in excess of Company A's Royalty of $100,000/yr.

The hidden undermining of the mix of Unreal Engine and non-Unreal Engine products may offend those paying royalties to Epic, may make them question making those payments when they realize that company B is being paid theirs and every other of up to 7 million Unreal Engine Developer's royalties while Epic is rejecting them to keep the royalty money flowing in.

To be clear the 5% royalty has nothing to do with the 5% console sales commission.

Eisberg please try to tell the truth. You aren't telling the truth:

"Once you've begun collecting money for your product, you'll need to track gross revenue and pay a 5% royalty on that amount after the first $3,000 per game per calendar quarter. To report your earnings, complete and submit this form[link omitted]." --
https://www.unrealengine.com/en-US/release

Hold on, you seem to be combining all kinds of things that have nothing to do with any of this to try to prove a point you really do not have at all, you are trying to add a bunch of stuff to make it look like you know what you are talking about, well that doesn't work on me. So throwing everything out that has nothing to do with Epic's revenue stream and the royalty agreement, for example of these: Epic doesn't have a Console commision, they only have the royalty, also what other store takes or doesn't take is also irrelevant because the royalty is based on gross revenue and not net revenue:

Epic gets 5% of all sales (above $3k per quarter) from any Unreal Game, that includes microtransactions, DLCs, subscriptions, ect.

That 5% is waived for any sales that happen through the Epic store, but is not waived for any sales that happen outside of the store.

Using the math example I used above, it shows that Epic would stand to make more money from having the game on their store, then they would not having the game in the store.

how about trying to use a mathmatical example to show your point in action?

[WolfEisberg]

Messaggio originale di McGillicutti:

Messaggio originale di Eisberg:

Since when is 10-15% equal to 30%?

Well since you brought up math previously. The average retailer like Gamestop where I buy my cards, the manager said they charge 15% sales commission to Steam, so 15% + 15% = "up to 30%." The video mentions that the retailers are paid a cut for selling the card.

Valve stated their costs for those cards are between 10-15%, that is going to include what ever Gamestop is taking as well. There is no 15+15 involved. If there was 15+15, then they would have stating 30%, but they didn't, they stated between 10-15% for their costs for those cards, and that is going to include the costs for selling it at Gamestop for example. Yes, retailers get a cut of the card sale, and that is in the costs of between 10-15%.

[McGillicutti]

Messaggio originale di Eisberg:

Messaggio originale di McGillicutti:

Okay, let's start from the beginning.

Your math is about something that isn't the net effect of the Epic Exclusivity agreement.

The Epic Agreement is solely for sales through the Epic store and those will be the 12/88 split, but that's all, and that doesn't include microtransactions that don't take place through the Epic Store.

The 5% on consoles is a separate sales agreement and I think where the confusion is is in your thinking this 5% if the 5% Royalty Fee for use of the Unreal Engine that applies to ALL transacitons of any kind done by the Developer over the course of their product.

Okay so now duration differences:

-- 12/88 split results in 90% of the money deriving from sales of the product itself, and as more and more Publishers and Developers have their own launchers, and their own stores, operating outside Epic and any other retailer's store, most sales of microtransactions aren't subject to the retail launcher's commission. This is the basic terms of the 12/88 split Epic Exclusivity Agreement.

-- 5% commission on console sales is identically treated, only due to the hardware limitations and lack of separate Publisher and Developer launchers the 5% applies to all sales of the product on that platform. The Epic Exclusivity Agreement appears to be solely PC sales thus far.

And then we have royalties....

Royalties are for the duration of the product's existence using the Unreal Engine. So long as the product uses the Unreal Engine every single thing sold by anyone, Publisher, Developer, Retailer is charged a 5% fee by epic, with one exception: If the game itself is sold on the Epic Store, then that Developer is no longer required to pay a 5% Royalty Fee on every aspect of their game's revenues. It is a 5% Gross sales charge too, without any reduction due to any other factors whatsoever and entirely for the benefit of the Royalty Holder Epic Unreal Engine.

So when company A that is paying Epic $100,000 per year in royalties applies to have their product sold on the Epic store so they don't have to pay that fee, and Epic reviews their product and decides it won't promote the Epic store to the extent it will be worth more than the $100,000/yr, Epic rejects their application to be sold on the Epic store.

Thus when company B that is using a different engine and pays not one dime to Epic applies to be on the Epic Store, or Epic goes to them to offer pay-to-play bribed exclusivity, Epic is using Company A's royalty money to gain a means to get 12% on Company B's product, with a more important criteria, that company B's product must promote the Epic Store in excess of Company A's Royalty of $100,000/yr.

The hidden undermining of the mix of Unreal Engine and non-Unreal Engine products may offend those paying royalties to Epic, may make them question making those payments when they realize that company B is being paid theirs and every other of up to 7 million Unreal Engine Developer's royalties while Epic is rejecting them to keep the royalty money flowing in.

To be clear the 5% royalty has nothing to do with the 5% console sales commission.

Eisberg please try to tell the truth. You aren't telling the truth:

"Once you've begun collecting money for your product, you'll need to track gross revenue and pay a 5% royalty on that amount after the first $3,000 per game per calendar quarter. To report your earnings, complete and submit this form[link omitted]." --
https://www.unrealengine.com/en-US/release

Hold on, you seem to be combining all kinds of things that have nothing to do with any of this to try to prove a point you really do not have at all, you are trying to add a bunch of stuff to make it look like you know what you are talking about, well that doesn't work on me. So throwing everything out that has nothing to do with Epic's revenue stream and the royalty agreement, for example of these: Epic doesn't have a Console commision, they only have the royalty, also what other store takes or doesn't take is also irrelevant because the royalty is based on gross revenue and not net revenue:

Epic gets 5% of all sales (above $3k per quarter) from any Unreal Game, that includes microtransactions, DLCs, subscriptions, ect.

That 5% is waived for any sales that happen through the Epic store, but is not waived for any sales that happen outside of the store.

Using the math example I used above, it shows that Epic would stand to make more money from having the game on their store, then they would not having the game in the store.

how about trying to use a mathmatical example to show your point in action?

And again you're not telling the truth and the entire confusion was by you bringing up consoles etc. I specifically speak to the Epic Unreal Engine 5% royalty, which, to help show they make no money on it when the game is sold by Epic, Epic claims they cover the 5% from their 12% (waive it basically) when the product is sold on the Epic Store, that's not money coming in which is exactly what I said:

"Developers receive 88% of revenue. There are no tiers or thresholds. Epic takes 12%. And if you’re using Unreal Engine, Epic will cover the 5% engine royalty for sales on the Epic Games store, out of Epic’s 12% -- https://www.unrealengine.com/en-US/blog/announcing-the-epic-games-store

So not just losing the 5% as cost free income, they also pay out the 5% for a net total of 10% lost to put a Developer who is currently paying 5% to Epic on the Epic store to gain a net of 7%, which further proves my point why Epic curation is intended to control and keep many of the 7 million other Unreal Developers off the Epic Store, and why Epic would rather put a game on the Epic store that isn't using the Unreal Engine.

So if you could please stop being disrespectful to me and accusing me of things that aren't true according to Epic's own website and confusing things by speaking of consoles and their percentage when that's what you did in trying to confuse things because you think others must prove something to you, and apparently, solely because you didn't go read Epic's own websites for yourself while promoting it so hard it's unbelievable.

[McGillicutti]

Messaggio originale di Eisberg:

Messaggio originale di McGillicutti:

Well since you brought up math previously. The average retailer like Gamestop where I buy my cards, the manager said they charge 15% sales commission to Steam, so 15% + 15% = "up to 30%." The video mentions that the retailers are paid a cut for selling the card.

Valve stated their costs for those cards are between 10-15%, that is going to include what ever Gamestop is taking as well. There is no 15+15 involved. If there was 15+15, then they would have stating 30%, but they didn't, they stated between 10-15% for their costs for those cards, and that is going to include the costs for selling it at Gamestop for example. Yes, retailers get a cut of the card sale, and that is in the costs of between 10-15%.

Nope. In the video they explain that the retailer wants a commission as well AFTER explaining the cost to PRODUCE the card is the 10-15%.

[WhiteKnight]

Messaggio originale di Erebus:

Messaggio originale di Frodo T Baggins:

No offence but is it really worth explaining all this to him? Don't get me wrong, it's nice to see how much you know. But when it's put to him.... I think he reads it (barely but there we go) and he hears a whooshing sound above his head.
He doesn't accept anything that shines a bad light on Epic and never will. Indoctrination is a powerful tool.

Eisberg has proven many a time over that he only reads the first line or two, cherrypicks something with which to shout 30% or 88/12 at someone and then carry on his merry way ignoring everything else.

Ha so true.

[Erebus]

Worth noting wallet cards can be used across at least <some> regions. That too could impact things to a degree too as far as fees versus earnings.

Plus distribution, taxes, import/export all that whatever.

[McGillicutti]

But you know what? In the end the amount Steam loses, whether 5 up to 30% is irrelevant, in that Steam loses money on our behalf, definitely when compared to a prepaid VISA card, and all in the interest of the Customer, Publisher and Developer, and that's something Epic has and will never do, as proven by their every certain accounting for and using the Unreal Engine Royalty fees against Publishers and Developers, unless of course you're more valuable than your royalty in how Tim Sweeney can exploit you as a Publisher and/or Developer, or for that matter as a Customer.

[WolfEisberg]

Messaggio originale di McGillicutti:

Messaggio originale di Eisberg:

Valve stated their costs for those cards are between 10-15%, that is going to include what ever Gamestop is taking as well. There is no 15+15 involved. If there was 15+15, then they would have stating 30%, but they didn't, they stated between 10-15% for their costs for those cards, and that is going to include the costs for selling it at Gamestop for example. Yes, retailers get a cut of the card sale, and that is in the costs of between 10-15%.

Nope. In the video they explain that the retailer wants a commission as well AFTER explaining the cost to PRODUCE the card is the 10-15%.

Nope, didn't hear him say that at all. Provide a time stamp of the exact spot where he said you are claiming he said.

[McGillicutti]

Messaggio originale di Eisberg:

Messaggio originale di McGillicutti:

Nope. In the video they explain that the retailer wants a commission as well AFTER explaining the cost to PRODUCE the card is the 10-15%.

Nope, didn't hear him say that at all. Provide a time stamp of the exact spot where he said you are claiming he said.

I could and keep you arguing since you clearly want to or you could look at the fact that in all cases Steam loses money on behalf of the Customer, Publisher, and Developer regardless of amount. That speaks volumes, period.

[WolfEisberg]

Messaggio originale di McGillicutti:

Messaggio originale di Eisberg:

Hold on, you seem to be combining all kinds of things that have nothing to do with any of this to try to prove a point you really do not have at all, you are trying to add a bunch of stuff to make it look like you know what you are talking about, well that doesn't work on me. So throwing everything out that has nothing to do with Epic's revenue stream and the royalty agreement, for example of these: Epic doesn't have a Console commision, they only have the royalty, also what other store takes or doesn't take is also irrelevant because the royalty is based on gross revenue and not net revenue:

Epic gets 5% of all sales (above $3k per quarter) from any Unreal Game, that includes microtransactions, DLCs, subscriptions, ect.

That 5% is waived for any sales that happen through the Epic store, but is not waived for any sales that happen outside of the store.

Using the math example I used above, it shows that Epic would stand to make more money from having the game on their store, then they would not having the game in the store.

how about trying to use a mathmatical example to show your point in action?

And again you're not telling the truth and the entire confusion was by you bringing up consoles etc. I specifically speak to the Epic Unreal Engine 5% royalty, which, to help show they make no money on it when the game is sold by Epic, Epic claims they cover the 5% from their 12% (waive it basically) when the product is sold on the Epic Store, that's not money coming in which is exactly what I said:

"Developers receive 88% of revenue. There are no tiers or thresholds. Epic takes 12%. And if you’re using Unreal Engine, Epic will cover the 5% engine royalty for sales on the Epic Games store, out of Epic’s 12% -- https://www.unrealengine.com/en-US/blog/announcing-the-epic-games-store

So not just losing the 5% as cost free income, they also pay out the 5% for a net total of 10% lost to put a Developer who is currently paying 5% to Epic on the Epic store to gain a net of 7%, which further proves my point why Epic curation is intended to control and keep many of the 7 million other Unreal Developers off the Epic Store, and why Epic would rather put a game on the Epic store that isn't using the Unreal Engine.

So if you could please stop being disrespectful to me and accusing me of things that aren't true according to Epic's own website and confusing things by speaking of consoles and their percentage when that's what you did in trying to confuse things because you think others must prove something to you, and apparently, solely because you didn't go read Epic's own websites for yourself while promoting it so hard it's unbelievable.

So you want to remove console from this. Ok.

Unreal game makes $5 million in its life time for the PC (including DLC/Microtransactions ect)

Not on the Epic store = $250k

It was on the Epic store for a year, made $3 million total on the Epic store in its life time, and $2 million every where else on the PC.

Epic got $360k from Epic store sales
Epic gets $100k from everywhere else That is a total of $460k

$460k is more than $250k

Epic would benefit the most by having the game on the store rather than not having it on the store.

Your whole 5+5 for a total of 10% makes zero sense as well, that one seems like something you are pulling out of thin air based on absolutely nothing.

again, try to use some math to show your point in action. But I am guessing you won't because it will show just how illogical your point is.

[WolfEisberg]

Messaggio originale di McGillicutti:

Messaggio originale di Eisberg:

Nope, didn't hear him say that at all. Provide a time stamp of the exact spot where he said you are claiming he said.

I could and keep you arguing since you clearly want to or you could look at the fact that in all cases Steam loses money on behalf of the Customer, Publisher, and Developer regardless of amount. That speaks volumes, period.

You have not proven that Valve loses any money at all. You had to use very bad math of adding 2 numbers together where one number already included the second number.

Prove that Valve is losing money on our behalf, you have not done so at all, your bad math doesn't count.

And I know why you are not giving a time stamp of what you are claiming what he said, and that is because he never said it, you can't give a time stamp on something never said.

[Trundle]

Arm chair bussinesman on the moves. 🍿