Writer Argues That Ubisoft Toronto Deal is Good For Ontario

July 9, 2009 -

In yesterday's GamePolitics coverage we took note of an editorial in Canada's National Post which slammed the Ontario government's recent announcement that it would grant Ubisoft $263 million for the publisher's new Toronto studio.

Canadian blogger Eli Green offers the opposite view, however, claiming that the deal is a good one for Ontario because it will boost the local economy. In an opinion piece for Comic Book Bin Green writes:

To begin wit... Torontonians, or anyone else from the general vicinity, looking for a position with the [Ubisoft] will no longer have to make the... six hour jaunt to Quebec... That means more talent stays within Ontario, which, naturally, is beneficial for the province as a whole.

There is something far more important happening here though... an investment of this magnitude, in this industry, from the government of Ontario was long overdue... If the government plays its cards right, the Ontario video game development community should continue to grow and thrive, giving a nice boost to the economy, and local talent will continue to be just that – local.

It's not just important news for Ubisoft, it's important news for Ontario.

GP: In the pic, Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty (right) and Ubisoft CEO Yannis Mallat seal the deal...


Comments

Re: Writer Argues That Ubisoft Toronto Deal is Good For ...

The deal is good. The price is rediculous.

Yes, Toronto will benefit from Ubisoft's studio. But this whole deal could have been closed at a fraction of the cost they paid.

Re: Writer Argues That Ubisoft Toronto Deal is Good For ...

 Well it is a smart move for many reasons. For Ontario, Quebec, and Ubisoft.

Economically this is also a good deal, here is "pnjunction" of Fark explaining why.

"It's over 10 years. 26.3 million a year. Let's say those 800 people make 50k/year (that's low-balling it). That's 40 million a year in paid wages. The company will pay more in rent, utilities, equipment, etc... A big chunk of all of this will come right back to the government in taxes. They're also more likely to grow even further than pack up and leave in 10 years. It will also stimulate the industry as a whole in the area. Directly, they'll probably be hiring local consultants and contractors to work with. It's unfortunate that the norm these days is to throw money at companies like this, but this is a relatively good deal."

Re: Writer Argues That Ubisoft Toronto Deal is Good For ...

Given the economy in general and the volitility of the gaming industry in particular, saying it's "likely to grow even further than pack up and leave in 10 years" is financially irresponsible.

---

Freedom of speech means the freedom to say ANYTHING, so long as it is the truth. This does not exclude anything that might hurt someone's feelings.

--- With the first link, the chain is forged.

Re: Writer Argues That Ubisoft Toronto Deal is Good For ...

Except for the fact that it's still not a deal where Ubisoft is given money. If they go belly up in five years, then the Ontario economy still benefits from their presence for those five years. That's local salaries being paid and spent locally. Food being bought, entertainment, electronics, office supplies etc etc etc...

 

Best keep your wits about you: The gears of life are always spinning, and ignorance eventually means you'll get caught in them.

Best keep your wits about you: The gears of life are always spinning, and ignorance eventually means you'll get caught in them.

Re: Writer Argues That Ubisoft Toronto Deal is Good For ...

True, but the decision to do this in the first place shouldn't be based on faulty economic advise.  Here in the USA, our government is probably going to go bankrupt, based on the idea that we could buy ourselves out of debt.  These decisions were supposedly based on a picture of the economy that was better than what it turned out to be.

---

Freedom of speech means the freedom to say ANYTHING, so long as it is the truth. This does not exclude anything that might hurt someone's feelings.

--- With the first link, the chain is forged.

Re: Writer Argues That Ubisoft Toronto Deal is Good For ...

I must have missed something. Faulty economic advice? There's a pretty big difference between doing tax breaks and and actually giving out cash, both on a straight cashflow basis as well as on a policy & effects basis. The games industry is one of the few that hasn't had the bottom drop out from underneath it (well, computer/console anyhow. Miniatures and RPGs are currently going through an extinction level event).

 

 

Best keep your wits about you: The gears of life are always spinning, and ignorance eventually means you'll get caught in them.

Best keep your wits about you: The gears of life are always spinning, and ignorance eventually means you'll get caught in them.
 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
MattsworknameWilson: how? Im still waiting for my upgrade notice07/29/2015 - 3:44am
Matthew WilsonI updated to a clean instill of windows 10.07/29/2015 - 2:36am
Mattsworknameargue that it's wrong, but then please admit it's wrong on ALL Fronts07/29/2015 - 2:06am
MattsworknameTechnoGeek: It's actually NOT, but it is a method used all across the specturm. See Rush limbaugh, MSNBC, Shawn hannity, etc etc, how many compagns have been brought up to try and shut them down by going after there advertisers. It's fine if you wanna07/29/2015 - 2:05am
Mattsworknamediscussed, while not what I liked and not the methods I wanted to see used, were , in a sense, the effort of thsoe game consuming masses to hold what they felt was supposed to be there press accountable for what many of them felt was Betrayal07/29/2015 - 2:03am
MattsworknameAs we say, the gamers are dead article set of a firestorm among the game consuming populace, who, ideally, were the intended audiance for sites like Kotaku, Polygon, Et all. As such, the turn about on them and the attacking of them, via the metods07/29/2015 - 2:03am
MattsworknameAndrew: Thats kind fo the issue at hand, Accountable is a matter of context. For a media group, it means accountable to its reader. to a goverment, to it's voters and tax payer, to a company, to it's share holders.07/29/2015 - 2:02am
Andrew EisenAnd again, you keep saying "accountable." What exactly does that mean? How is Gamasutra not accounting for the editorial it published?07/28/2015 - 11:47pm
Andrew EisenMatt - I disagree with your 9:12 and 9:16 comment. There are myriad ways to address content you don't like. And they're far easier to execute in the online space.07/28/2015 - 11:47pm
Andrew EisenMatt - Banning in the legal sense? Not that I'm aware but there have certainly been groups of gamers who have worked towards getting content they don't like removed.07/28/2015 - 11:45pm
DanJAlexander's editorial was and continues to be grossly misrepresented by her opponents. And if you don't like a site, you stop reading it - same as not watching a tv show. They get your first click, but not your second.07/28/2015 - 11:40pm
TechnogeekYes, because actively trying to convince advertisers to influence the editorial content of media is a perfectly acceptable thing to do, especially for a movement that's ostensibly about journalistic ethics.07/28/2015 - 11:02pm
Mattsworknameanother07/28/2015 - 9:16pm
Mattsworknameyou HAVE TO click on it. So they get the click revenue weather you like what it says or not. as such, the targeting of advertisers most likely seemed like a good course of action to those who wanted to hold those media groups accountable for one reason07/28/2015 - 9:16pm
MattsworknameBut, when you look at online media, it's completely different, with far more options, but far few ways to address issues that the consumers may have. In tv, you don't like what they show, you don't watch. But in order to see if you like something online07/28/2015 - 9:12pm
MattsworknameIn tv, and radio, ratings are how it works. your ratings determine how well you do and how much money you an charge.07/28/2015 - 9:02pm
Mattsworknameexpect to do so without someone wanting to hold you to task for it07/28/2015 - 9:00pm
MattsworknameMecha: I don't think anyone was asking for Editoral changes, what they wanted was to show those media groups that if they were gonna bash there own audiance, the audiance was not gonna take it sitting down. you can write what you want, but you can't07/28/2015 - 8:56pm
MattsworknameAndrew, Im asking as a practical question, Have gamers, as a group, ever asked for a game, or other item, to be banned. Im trying to see if theres any cases anyone else remembers cause I cant find or remember any.07/28/2015 - 8:55pm
Andrew EisenAs mentioned, Gamasutra isn't a gaming site, it's a game industry site. I don't feel it's changed its focus at all. Also, I don't get the sense that the majority of the people who took issue with that one opinion piece were regular readers anyway.07/28/2015 - 8:43pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician