<< No offense, but quickly paging through your site, I'd mark you most probably Individual or Small, as you don't seem to actually have anything available for sale. (or at least I've never seen your products in my local store, and you don't have anything available for sale on the site). >>
I'm currently just starting out, and no I don't have any product available. Admittedly, the time I devote to my products, is similar to WotC's priority WRT d20 and their business plan. Things get done when time and money permits. << hmmmm. Perhaps I need a another category -- "NEW" -- Which consists of any "company" that "intends" to do great things, but currently doesn't have any products available. >> How about "Start-up". Fantages Studios definitely fits the Start-up category. I've already told the world (or atleast those who have seen my proposed product line) what things I intend to produce for my setting. I have yet to produce anything, and there is no guarantee that I will. << So you (a member or owner of this company) are not going to do any writing? Perhaps I need to reword that critera. In-House, just means that the company either has employees (not contract writers/artists) or owners that produce content to be included in a product. >> Okay, I had started out saying that I wasn't going to have any employees (because of tax reasons), but then I changed that to say that to mean I wouldn't have anyone (other than myself) doing work "In-House". I will often revise email sometimes 3 or 4 times before sending, so I've come to expect the meaning of my email gets mutated. << But, uh, is there a different between the "distributed" and "distribution" from A to B (seems like your contradicting yourself). I had intended the criteria to be B, independant of the # of products. >> Looking at what I wrote, I can agree that it's contradictory. << hmm. But when do they become "in business" there are a lot of "in business," or so they would claim, companies that haven't published anything after being in-business for a year. Some are legitamate companies hard at work, others are people who through together a webpage, and made a bunch of announcements but never went any farther. >> I suppose the best "definition" of "in business" would be from the time they first produce a product until a time where there appears to be no significant development or updates from the company. It's very much a subjective decision. If a company decides to spend 12 months in secretive development after their first release, that interim time, really shouldn't be counted. In a case like this where they produce one product and then for 12 months have nothing, and then start back up with 1 product per month, you'd count the time when they started frequent releases, and note that they had a product release 12 months previous to this time, during which they were silent. << Perhaps it would be better to give companies more then one specific category -- rather then trying to come up with general categories. 1) Distribution 2) Time in Business 3) Size/# of Company/Product Lines >> That'd be a good idea. It has better flexibility than 5 or 6 broad categories. -- Korath, Fantages Studios: http://wind.prohosting.com/fantages/ "He was already dead, he died a year ago, the moment he touched her. They're all dead, they just don't know it." --Eric Draven, The Crow _______________________________________________ Ogf-l mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
