Main Restorations Software Audio/Jukebox/MP3 Everything Else Buy/Sell/Trade
Project Announcements Monitor/Video GroovyMAME Merit/JVL Touchscreen Meet Up Retail Vendors
Driving & Racing Woodworking Software Support Forums Consoles Project Arcade Reviews
Automated Projects Artwork Frontend Support Forums Pinball Forum Discussion Old Boards
Raspberry Pi & Dev Board controls.dat Linux Miscellaneous Arcade Wiki Discussion Old Archives
Lightguns Arcade1Up Try the site in https mode Site News

Unread posts | New Replies | Recent posts | Rules | Chatroom | Wiki | File Repository | RSS | Submit news

  

Author Topic: Stern in the NY Times  (Read 20374 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

MazzMn

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 142
  • Last login:March 19, 2013, 12:38:19 am
  • chicken, fight like a robot
    • The IceBox Oak Cocktail Table
Stern in the NY Times
« on: April 25, 2008, 10:05:00 pm »
Blah article on pinball
He's right, the problem is there is nowhere to play pinball.
But Stern says pinball will still be around in 10 yrs
NY Times Article
« Last Edit: April 27, 2008, 11:53:26 am by Peale »

Xiaou2

  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4134
  • Last login:June 11, 2025, 11:55:17 pm
  • NOM NOM NOM
Re: Stern in the NY Times
« Reply #1 on: April 26, 2008, 02:30:29 am »
Wrong!!!


  People put pins on location all the time.   In bars, laundry, pizza joints, rest stops, and more.

 The reason pinball died was due to the fact that they are poorly designed.   They fail too
often... and those failures cause the gameplay to be too terrible for a player to waste money on.

 Also, Stern puts out the cheapest poorly designed turds out there.   Nobody want to play
themes like  "Ripleys"..  and  "Elvis"?   Give me a break.   "Wheel of Fortune" ?  LOL   Get
real!

  Im shocked Stern even made it through the times.   In fact, the only reason seems to be
that they skimped.  Putting out cheap crap = more profits.

 

 Lets give an example of how one could FIX and SAVE pinball:

 - Make flipper coils that could alter in power levels.   Have a senor that could check to see
if the flippers strength was too low.   If too low, it sends more juice to the coils.   

 - Make artwork Plastics out of lexan to reduce cracking.
 
 - Make common plastic parts that crack THICKER... or out of stronger materials!

 - Make Backup Optos.   When one fails, it turns on the backup.   Ops are willing to
pay the extra for guaranteed life.  Frequent maintenance is too much to ask of a busy op.

 - Make 'snap on' type ramps for easy removal and cleanings.

 - Cover the playfield with a 200% thicker more durable mylar so ball wont destroy the playfield.

 - Add auto-ball cleaner system.  Ball picks up dirt,  dirt captured in cleaner. Playfield kept clean
longer.

 - Design better circuitry.  More failsafes.  Greater self-diagnosis.  Backup features.
 
    IE:  Pop bumper 3 blows component.   Game realized it, re-routes to use other pop
bumpers power.  Thus 2 or 3 pop bumpers all fire at once..  but at least all now work.

 
 - Put the brains in the bottom of the cab for shorter wire lengths, less likely to break.

 - Possibly make the bottom of the field - into one massive PCB. (or flexible printed type)
 No massive wire bundles anymore. 

 - More intelligent software diagnosis:

    If on/off switch is broken.. a machine today does not know it.  However, if a ball passes
a broken on/off switch, then hits another switch down the line..  the program would know that switch
21 should have been  "on"  for that ball to have made it to switch 43.  Thus, it reports that 21 is
broken.  (also adds the missing score to the players score count)

 
  Internet  Technology:

    Machine connected to the internet via Lan.   Easy updates.  High score transfers.  Sends out
a page to the Operator when something breaks.   Op can keep pc log of what and when... as
well as can see what has been replaced and fixed and is due for maintenance checkup or replacement.
(life expectancies shown in reports)

 Machine could also connect via wireless kit, phone modem,  and or laptop link.
 
 
 
 - Use High resolution printers or go back to silk screening artwork.   These low res, low quality
playfeild prints are pathetic. 

- Chose COOL THEMES!   Wizards are 1000% more popular than Pat Sajack.   Just because
a ton of people watch  WOF  does not mean they care to play a pinball based on it!  People
dont Dream of being on WOF.  However,  they do dream of conjuring up a fireball.. 
Or Knocking down a Castle wall...  or  Battling the  Black Knight...etc..    (Duh... ::)  )

- HIRE A REAL ARTIST!!!  Sterns so called artist is NOT an artist, and it shows!   Also, PHOTOS
of PEOPLE (unaltered artistically)   IS NOT ART!

- USE BETTER SOUND SYSTEM!  Sterns sound system is garbage.  Probably cause Gary cant
hear for ****...  he dont care.   A great sound system can make or break a game.  Great
clear hi-def sound can take a  "C"  level film, and make it a  "B".   

- Use an Led lit LCD for the backbox animations/mini-games.

- Spend the time and money to make Toys that are interactive in fun/useful ways.
(not simply light up or vibrate)


 Well, Im sick of ranting about Stern.   They really arnt even worth it.   Their pins devalue
instantly... instead of increase like the Williams games.  I think that speaks for itself.

 Heres hopeing that Williams re-forms...  or that SOMEONE will get it right.
Cause Stern certainly has No clue at all.

 (and or he is just a pathetic LIAR )

Lutus

  • Trade Count: (+3)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 808
  • Last login:August 23, 2012, 10:58:10 am
  • "I love my Power Glove. It's so BAD!"
Re: Stern in the NY Times
« Reply #2 on: April 26, 2008, 11:40:10 am »
Xiaou2, how do you really feel!   :laugh2:

I  think sometimes they try to make pinball tables TOO complicated.  The more moving parts, gizmos, and dopplegangers on the table, the more things that will BREAK.

A broken table makes NO money.  Op's put a great deal of money into these tables initially so when they break, OP's aren't too glad about those things and are less likely to buy another pinball.
-----------------------------
www.justin.tv/lutus8
www.encoreinstruction.com <-- for my fellow musicians

SavannahLion

  • Wiki Contributor
  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5986
  • Last login:December 19, 2015, 02:28:15 am
Re: Stern in the NY Times
« Reply #3 on: April 26, 2008, 03:17:41 pm »
Xiaou2, most of the things you're asking for isn't even built into most electronics at all. Even a number of the high end electronics lacks those features.

The internet access is an interesting idea. However, more than 2/3 of the pins I've spotted on location barely qualify as viable locations much less locations that would actually serve up network access of some kind. Based on my talks with ops, location owners generally call in pretty quick when any machine fails to pull in money. In any case if we run with the idea;

Quote
Sends out a page to the Operator when something breaks.   Op can keep pc log of what and when... as
well as can see what has been replaced and fixed and is due for maintenance checkup or replacement.
(life expectancies shown in reports)

A better method would be the cabinet (or pin, whatever) dialing home to a waiting PC on a regular basis, eg, once a week even if it is working fine. The idea being that if there is a catastrophic failure of the machine, B&E, power outage, total destruction, you'll know something is up when a machine fails to dial home. I saw a completely raped cabinet in a skank laundromat sit there for nearly two weeks before it was removed and replaced, probably because the owner never visits and the op probably had no idea.

Level42

  • Wiki Contributor
  • Trade Count: (+5)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5965
  • Last login:November 13, 2018, 01:56:39 am
  • A Suzo stick is a joy forever...
Re: Stern in the NY Times
« Reply #4 on: April 26, 2008, 03:31:13 pm »

Hey Xiaou.

I like Stern Pinballs.

I like LOTR.
I like POTC.
I like Family Guy.
I even like Elvis.

TOK

  • Trade Count: (+4)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3604
  • Last login:January 24, 2024, 05:14:24 pm
  • The Game Always Wins
Re: Stern in the NY Times
« Reply #5 on: April 26, 2008, 08:10:03 pm »
Congrats Xaiou... You've just designed a $14,000 pinball machine that would still make 80 bucks a month.

CheffoJeffo

  • Cheffo's right! ---saint
  • Wiki Master
  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7784
  • Last login:July 14, 2025, 12:11:49 pm
  • Worthless button pusher!
Re: Stern in the NY Times
« Reply #6 on: April 26, 2008, 08:27:48 pm »
Congrats Xaiou... You've just designed a $14,000 pinball machine that would still make 80 bucks a month.

 :applaud:

Working: Not Enough
Projects: Too Many
Progress: None

Xiaou2

  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4134
  • Last login:June 11, 2025, 11:55:17 pm
  • NOM NOM NOM
Re: Stern in the NY Times
« Reply #7 on: April 26, 2008, 09:01:54 pm »

 It doesnt cost tipple to make redundant features.

 And, a pin that last years can make boatloads more money than was paid for it.

 
 Level 42,   you have lousy taste in pins.

 
 Compared to any good playing Williams games, the list you provided
doesnt even come compare.

 You probably couldnt trade all of those to get a  Medieval Madness.
And most wouldnt trade their Williams Indy for them either.

 Ever play a  Creature from the black lagoon  or   Theatre of Magic,
White Water,  MM, Indy, Haunted House, Tales Of The Arabian Nights ?
All those are better than any Stern EVER Made.


 Look to the Market.  Stern pins are depreciating.  Not gaining like
the Williams and others are.   That speaks volumes about the quality of Sterns
machines.


 I think anyone who has never played a well working Williams might be clueless
enough to think that Stern pins are good.  Of course, once you have ate
Fillet Minion,  a Hamburg just wont cut it.


CheffoJeffo

  • Cheffo's right! ---saint
  • Wiki Master
  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7784
  • Last login:July 14, 2025, 12:11:49 pm
  • Worthless button pusher!
Re: Stern in the NY Times
« Reply #8 on: April 26, 2008, 09:27:14 pm »
I would agree that many Williams machines, in particular those titles mentioned, are superior to what Stern is putting out now.

The difference, which Xiaou2 seems to be all-too-eager to overlook in his quest as the anti-Stern-right-fighter, is that the current iteration of Stern is not the cause of the decline of pinball, but rather the result of the decline of pinball.

As for Xiaou2's assessment of costs -- have a look at every pinball machine built in the last several years. Only one company is making money at it and, for whatever it is worth, that gives them more credibility than anybody else (in particular a guy who tells us how the government is watching him through his TV!).

Based on what I have seen, Big Bang Bar was made with higher quality than the stuff that Stern is putting out, BUT since Gene lost a ton of money on it and won't do it again, I wouldn't exactly say that his vision for pinball is better than Gary's.
Working: Not Enough
Projects: Too Many
Progress: None

Xiaou2

  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4134
  • Last login:June 11, 2025, 11:55:17 pm
  • NOM NOM NOM
Re: Stern in the NY Times
« Reply #9 on: April 26, 2008, 09:31:34 pm »
Xiaou2, most of the things you're asking for isn't even built into most electronics at all. Even a number of the high end electronics lacks those features.

 - Are you so sure about that?   Lets look at a technology called RAID.  Using up to 5 hard disks, a raid system will not only made your system run faster... but if one drive dies,  you dont lose data... and when you replace the dead drive, it will rebuild the data automatically.

 There are many other electronics systems with redundant measures, and highly reliable
anti-fail parts.

 We all know, that if you buy cheap, your most likely to get junk that wont last long.  Most of
us choose to spend more for quality equipment.   And when you are in a business where
quality and durability are key factors... you are certainly going to pay more.

 Think about a band like  Megadeth hitting the stage with a  Big-Lots  Microphone.   A Walmart
Electric Guitar...etc.   It aint gona happen.   

 An OP will pay the extra money...  IF  its a good, fun, QUALITY pin that has a Guarantee for
many years of nearly service-less action.


 Video games used to be high-turnover items.   They could make tons of money in a fraction
of time.    Most were rare to blow up, lasting years before needing any service... and the service
usually may have been cheap or easy to fix.   Or the game made so much money, that they didnt
even care ... and placed a new machine in its place.

 Pins, for most years,  have been slow but steady earners.   Unlike video games,  pinball can
have a much higher replay value.   So while a person may not want to see the end of Area 51
again... they may still want to try to rock the pinball in the corner again.    They can earn well,
but only IF they are fully functional.

 Obviously, a video game such as a fighting game will not earn squat when the joystick
wont register a directional press.   Same thing for pinball.   A non working assembly ruins the
entire experience for most people.  And thats why extra measures have to be put into place.

--

The internet access is an interesting idea. However, more than 2/3 of the pins I've spotted on location barely qualify as viable locations much less locations that would actually serve up network access of some kind. Based on my talks with ops, location owners generally call in pretty quick when any machine fails to pull in money. In any case if we run with the idea;


* Well, putting in money -vs- a stuck flipper  are two different things.   And a stuck flipper will turn
off anyone from playing more than one chance game... and they may not ever put in more money at
a later date - figuring its still probably broken.    Customers rarely report game problems.  They just
dont play anymore.

 Almost any location has a phone line.  A modem should be able to be used to send data pretty
easily.  Of course, with tech growing... we may one day see a wireless internet all around us. 
Actually, if it had a mobile phone built into it,  it could wirelessly get internet access that way too.


 Yes, you are correct...  A daily (or even hourly) report is a good idea.

RayB

  • I'm not wearing pants! HA!
  • Trade Count: (+4)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11279
  • Last login:July 10, 2025, 01:33:58 am
  • There's my post
    • RayB.com
Re: Stern in the NY Times
« Reply #10 on: April 26, 2008, 09:59:53 pm »
-10 Credibility for being unable to use the Quoting feature.
NO MORE!!

Mauzy

  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1191
  • Last login:September 23, 2020, 11:51:27 am
Re: Stern in the NY Times
« Reply #11 on: April 26, 2008, 11:46:51 pm »
If I may throw in my 2 cents...
It seems to me that Stern isn't purposely making games that some see as  sub-standard. I spent about $20 on a POTC machine last year in three days... The only way they have stayed alive is by cutting some costs. If they spent more money that they don't have to develop the next toy that may or may not be the next big thing, they are taking too big of a risk. I whole-heartedly believe that if pinball all of a sudden became the hottest trend, the quality of the Stern machine would greatly improve as they would be able to PAY better artists and PAY for more research. They are simply doing what they can with what they have. Now I'm not saying they shouldn't try to improve, I'm just saying that it wouldn't be cost effective to put a lot of effort into research and development.
"Son, all hobbies suck. But if you keep at it, you might find you managed to kill some precious time."

Xiaou2

  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4134
  • Last login:June 11, 2025, 11:55:17 pm
  • NOM NOM NOM
Re: Stern in the NY Times
« Reply #12 on: April 27, 2008, 01:08:00 am »

The difference, which Xiaou2 seems to be all-too-eager to overlook in his quest as the anti-Stern-right-fighter, is that the current iteration of Stern is not the cause of the decline of pinball, but rather the result of the decline of pinball.


 - I never said that Stern was the death of pinball.  However, they are not doing much to ensure its
survival.   They are merely bottom feeders, making money with Junk.  Not innovators.  The "Big-Lots" of
pinball.


As for Xiaou2's assessment of costs -- have a look at every pinball machine built in the last several years. Only one company is making money at it and, for whatever it is worth, that gives them more credibility than anybody else (in particular a guy who tells us how the government is watching him through his TV!).


 - So, to you, making money means greatness?!  A crook can make money on selling snake oil,  but that does
not make him credible nor worthy of respect.    While they may not be crooks... they certainly are not "great"

 Does them making money change the fact that their games stink and cant hold a candle to 20 yr old machines from Williams?!   

 The only thing that changed for Stern was that the competition decided to run other ventures.
 I dont think Ive ever played more than one Stern that was decent at best.   They have always been crap,
 and even without any competition... are still crap.

 Williams made some bombs too... IMOP.   But at least they had a greater series of hits... and made the
efforts of greatness.   

 Greatness is more like: taking the chances, and investing everything youve got on that dream. 
Greatness isnt cutbacks, limitations, and skimping.  The makers of Dragons Lair even worked without
pay for a time period - because they were after greatness... and they attained it.

 People who just are in it to make money are Nothing to me.   They are not great.  Its probably the
main reason why most greatness is destroyed.   Such as in the case of the Marble Madness remake.
The Greedy corporate marketing/manager guys imposed their stupid ideals on the game and Ruined it.

 Art is beyond money.   However, great art is Priceless.   Just as many of Williams games are Historical
masterpieces.  Games like Midevil Madness  are demanding prices that nobody could have imagined for an
ancient, used game.  Yet to many, the game is Priceless.   And that price will no doubt climb even more
over the years.   That is Greatness.

 Credibility?!   Truth is credibility.  And Sterns article was NOT Pure Truth. 


Based on what I have seen, Big Bang Bar was made with higher quality than the stuff that Stern is putting out, BUT since Gene lost a ton of money on it and won't do it again, I wouldn't exactly say that his vision for pinball is better than Gary's.


 - Try getting the Facts straight.   Gene lost money, because he contracted out to suppliers who made
horrific mistakes in their works.   Entire playfields had to be redone,  thus costing Tons of money. 

 Vision?   He made a remake.  There was no real vision there.   Still I have more respect for what
was done by him, because he didnt release the machines with crap quality.   He actually sucked it up,
and reworked the machines so that they were top notch quality.   He attains/maintains a deserved
high reputation from such a feat.   


 

Xiaou2

  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4134
  • Last login:June 11, 2025, 11:55:17 pm
  • NOM NOM NOM
Re: Stern in the NY Times
« Reply #13 on: April 27, 2008, 01:26:34 am »
It seems to me that Stern isn't purposely making games that some see as  sub-standard.

 - You havent been looking at the History books.  Nor have all the facts.  BTW - Ever play any
of those machines I listed?

I spent about $20 on a POTC machine last year in three days...

 - POTC is better than some of their efforts.. Yet it also screams generic. (art)  The sound was also
so wretched that it hurt to listen to it.    If a willaims Indy, TOM, or heck.. a Haunted House 
was next to this thing, I dont think it would have gotten much of your money at all.

 It also proves that his answer was a lie.  There are places to play.


The only way they have stayed alive is by cutting some costs.

 - Wrong.   Pinball died because of too many mechanical failures.   Selling the same technology will
NOT change the outcome... which will be eventual bankruptcy. 
(even if they are making more profit per game)

  Making lackluster CRAP isnt going to save the business either.   They need a Hit.  A real GEM of a game.   
They need to take the risk and invest fully in it.

 They need to re-invent pinball.  They need to fix the problems that led to pinballs near demise.   


 There is the saying... goes something like:   Scared money is lost money.

 and another:

 "Insanity is doing the same exact thing over and over and expecting different results"


SavannahLion

  • Wiki Contributor
  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5986
  • Last login:December 19, 2015, 02:28:15 am
Re: Stern in the NY Times
« Reply #14 on: April 27, 2008, 05:14:38 am »
Quote
Xiaou2, most of the things you're asking for isn't even built into most electronics at all. Even a number of the high end electronics lacks those features.

 - Are you so sure about that?   Lets look at a technology called RAID.

(I've cut that other crap out because I really don't need an explanation on what RAID is or how it works.)

You're comparing RAID, a system that's been around for more than twenty years that is incorrectly implemented in most consumer PC's with a redundant power circuit for rubber bumpers in pinballs?

You don't actually get it, do you? That's OK. Here's something to consider.

Go get a pinball. Any pinball. Then go in and rebuild the entire pinball with every design idea that you've presented before us on this forum. Make an announcement in the Project Announcements even. Once you complete this project, please let us know the outcome along with the analyses of the feasibility and a cost/benefits analyses of your design. Feel free to open up a website and sell your circuit boards while you're at it.

I'm not trying to be an ass.... OK, now that I think about it, I am. But that's besides the point. I'm also not trying to defend Stern. I don't even care about what Stern does to their pins. What I'm trying to show you is to be a little bit realistic about.... realistic.....

You know what? Forget it. Trying to be realistic with someone who believes in a "BYO Free Energy Gravity Wheel Machine" is probably pointless. Have fun. :)

Level42

  • Wiki Contributor
  • Trade Count: (+5)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5965
  • Last login:November 13, 2018, 01:56:39 am
  • A Suzo stick is a joy forever...
Re: Stern in the NY Times
« Reply #15 on: April 27, 2008, 05:43:20 am »
Level 42,   you have lousy taste in pins.
 
 Compared to any good playing Williams games, the list you provided
doesnt even come compare.

 You probably couldnt trade all of those to get a  Medieval Madness.
And most wouldnt trade their Williams Indy for them either.

 Ever play a  Creature from the black lagoon  or   Theatre of Magic,
White Water,  MM, Indy, Haunted House, Tales Of The Arabian Nights ?
All those are better than any Stern EVER Made.

If fact, I played almost all of the machines you mentioned there yes. Only recently. The guy I'm repairing his SW's for has about 50 pins up and ready for play, and another 50 or so waiting "to be checked out". And most of the titles you mention there are within the first 50.

I liked those too yes. I haven't played any of them for hours on end (hey with a choice like that you tend to switch games pretty regularly).

Maybe I'm just a beginner or something, but I do enjoy the Stern games I mentioned. I didn't like WOF much though. I may have a lousy taste, but if I enjoy a game it's me who decides if I like it or not, not anyone else. F.I. I think Twilight Zone is much overrated. It's a nice game, but not _that_ special IMHO. I really like Addams Family though.

Look to the Market.  Stern pins are depreciating.  Not gaining like
the Williams and others are.   That speaks volumes about the quality of Sterns
machines.

If I look at the market I see that AFAIK there is one (1) pinball manufacturer now and am I glad that they still stick around. This als depreciate the games, because Stern regularly does re-runs of the recent machines. As long as you can buy new one's, the value won't increase right ?

I think anyone who has never played a well working Williams might be clueless
enough to think that Stern pins are good.  Of course, once you have ate
Fillet Minion,  a Hamburg just wont cut it.

OK. I have a Williams Getaway myself. My only pin. Got it because it was only €60.-
It's not yet 100% working but maybe that eases your mind a bit ? :D

CheffoJeffo

  • Cheffo's right! ---saint
  • Wiki Master
  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7784
  • Last login:July 14, 2025, 12:11:49 pm
  • Worthless button pusher!
Re: Stern in the NY Times
« Reply #16 on: April 27, 2008, 08:01:01 am »
As for Xiaou2's assessment of costs -- have a look at every pinball machine built in the last several years. Only one company is making money at it and, for whatever it is worth, that gives them more credibility than anybody else (in particular a guy who tells us how the government is watching him through his TV!).

 - So, to you, making money means greatness?!  A crook can make money on selling snake oil,  but that does
not make him credible nor worthy of respect.    While they may not be crooks... they certainly are not "great"

Did I say great anywhere ? No, but if pinball is to more forward, the people making them need to make money. Only one company is making money, so ... only one company is doing the first thing required to ensure that pinball survives -- they, themselves are surviving.

I'm not going to respond to the rest of your points, because they are mostly anarcho-romantic ---That which is odiferous and causeth plants to grow---. You ignore the salient points, exagerate the truth and then pretend that the only vision that matters is your vision of beauty. Iin your mind, the practical economic aspects like building, paying for and selling machines aren't worthy of consideration. In my mind, they have to be front-and-center, or the company won't last long and then there won't be *anything* created, whether it is worthy of Xiaou2's praise or not.

FWIW, if I could choose between playing pinball with Gene or Gary -- I would choose Gene every time. Somehow you have mistaken understanding what Gary is doing with liking Gary or thinking that he is great. My point is that *everybody* else failed (or is busy preaching the "truth" in the forums and newsgroups), so the guy left standing automatically has the most credibility when it comes to the realities of the pinball business.
Working: Not Enough
Projects: Too Many
Progress: None

CheffoJeffo

  • Cheffo's right! ---saint
  • Wiki Master
  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7784
  • Last login:July 14, 2025, 12:11:49 pm
  • Worthless button pusher!
Re: Stern in the NY Times
« Reply #17 on: April 27, 2008, 08:37:56 am »
It also proves that his answer was a lie.  There are places to play.

You realize it was Tim Arnold, not Gary Stern, who said that, right ?

Quote
“The thing that’s killing pinball,” Mr. Arnold added, “is not that people don’t like it. It’s that there’s nowhere to play it.”

Quote
Corner shops, pubs, arcades and bowling alleys stopped stocking pinball machines. A younger audience turned to video games. Men of a certain age, said Mr. Arnold, who is 52, became the reliable audience. (“Chicks,” he announced, “don’t get it.”)

Let me get this straight ... we have had to endure your rantings, along with your personal insults ... because you're comprehensionally-impaired ?

 :dizzy:

Working: Not Enough
Projects: Too Many
Progress: None

KevSteele

  • Trade Count: (+3)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 941
  • Last login:January 20, 2025, 11:29:37 am
  • Retrogaming Media Mogul in Rehab
Re: Stern in the NY Times
« Reply #18 on: April 27, 2008, 09:15:17 am »
Watch: "Tilt - the Battle to Save Pinball"



http://www.gameroommagazine.com/index.php?main_page=pubs_product_book_info&cPath=5&products_id=396

It talks about the last gasp attempt to re-invent pinball at Williams...how it both succeeded and failed, and why Williams is no longer in the pinball business.

Stern has cut a lot of costs for two reasons:
1. a lot of their sales are now to the home market, which don't buy super-expensive pins.
2. a lot of their sales are to the operator market, which don't buy super-expensive pins.

I agree that reliability is key for on-site operation, but Stern can't increase the cost-per-machine just to make a bullet-proof pin. They're not competing with other pinball companies - they're competing with video game machines like Golden Tee, which cost $1000 less than Stern's pins, have maybe two or three moving parts, and rake in hundreds without requiring any sort of weekly maintenance.

And yes, availability is the major problem - name one place where kids can play pinball. You can still play pinball in the occasional bar, but I haven't seen a mall arcade in years and the only pin I've seen where a kid can play it is one lonely Simpsons in the local Chuck E Cheese.

Without a new generation of players, Pinball is dead. Heck, all of my kid's friends who come over to play in our basement have never seen a pinball machine, and can't even figure out how to start the game, let alone do a flipper pass. Just like the jukebox generation is dying out, the pinball generation's time is coming. There's a reason there's only one pinball manufacturer left...and I can't say I'm optimistic that they'll be around in 10 years.
Kevin Steele, Former Editor and Publisher of RetroBlast! and GameRoom Magazine

Mauzy

  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1191
  • Last login:September 23, 2020, 11:51:27 am
Re: Stern in the NY Times
« Reply #19 on: April 27, 2008, 12:38:35 pm »
It seems to me that Stern isn't purposely making games that some see as  sub-standard.

 - You havent been looking at the History books.  Nor have all the facts.  BTW - Ever play any
of those machines I listed?

I spent about $20 on a POTC machine last year in three days...




Though you are correct in saying that I don't have all the facts (nor do you), I cannot say I have played those games. Funny thing about pinball being nearly dead, THOSE MACHINES CAN NOT BE FOUND EVERYWHERE! I live in the midwest, and finding a semi uncommon pin in the middle of a cornfield simply does not happen. If we do find one its an Addams or a TZ, possibly a  Theatre of Magic. All amazing games. You are right that Stern games aren't as good as these, but they could be a helluva lot worse. It seems that it is a bit mch to ask that every machine that leaves the Stern factory sells 15,000 and becomes an instant classic. I think it might have been said here already, but Williams made some crappy games too.
"Son, all hobbies suck. But if you keep at it, you might find you managed to kill some precious time."

fixedpigs

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 627
  • Last login:Yesterday at 01:02:44 pm
  • warning: drew can't handle my avatar...
Re: Stern in the NY Times
« Reply #20 on: April 27, 2008, 02:17:45 pm »
- POTC is better than some of their efforts.. Yet it also screams generic. (art)  The sound was also
so wretched that it hurt to listen to it.    If a willaims Indy, TOM, or heck.. a Haunted House 
was next to this thing, I dont think it would have gotten much of your money at all.

but they weren't...

in this day & age...you're lucky to find a pin to play when you can...

RayB

  • I'm not wearing pants! HA!
  • Trade Count: (+4)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11279
  • Last login:July 10, 2025, 01:33:58 am
  • There's my post
    • RayB.com
Re: Stern in the NY Times
« Reply #21 on: April 27, 2008, 02:34:31 pm »
Let's summarize...

The article is simply a small "fluff piece" about the only pinball manufacturer in the world. They're not exactly raking in billions. In fact the article states their productions numbers are almost a third what it was a few years ago. It's hard to build something low cost when you're not producing parts in high numbers. But Xiau2 would prefer to criticize every aspect of their efforts.

As I see it, it doesn't even make sense for Stern to be in business at all in such a small niche market.

I applaud their efforts.
NO MORE!!

Mauzy

  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1191
  • Last login:September 23, 2020, 11:51:27 am
Re: Stern in the NY Times
« Reply #22 on: April 27, 2008, 06:40:45 pm »

Pinball 2000 curled up and died because the designers got lazy and didn't have *anything* ready to go after Star Wars Episode 1 hit the line. 



What about Attack from Mars? I thought that was really good, although I was 8 when it came out...
"Son, all hobbies suck. But if you keep at it, you might find you managed to kill some precious time."

Xiaou2

  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4134
  • Last login:June 11, 2025, 11:55:17 pm
  • NOM NOM NOM
Re: Stern in the NY Times
« Reply #23 on: April 27, 2008, 09:35:41 pm »
You're comparing RAID,     with a redundant power circuit for rubber bumpers in pinballs?


 - Road is a concept.  (Ive cut the crap explaining how raid isnt implemented correctly)
A concept that shows how important redundancy is, and how that was tackled.

 Runner bumpers are NOT the issue and you know it.  It shows you want to
use lame tactics to try to win an argument, not the truth.

 Many pinballs use an  'End of Stroke Switch".   These have a plastic/rubber cover on the
end of them.   However, after a short time, that wears down.   When that does, the
flipper will get stuck on the switch, and wont go back down.    There ARE better ways
to fix this problem.   Yet, nobody did fix it.   Instead,  they left it in the hands of the Ops...
which was the reason why Pinball just about died.


Go get a pinball. Any pinball. Then go in and rebuild the entire pinball with every design idea that you've presented before us on this forum. Make an announcement in the Project Announcements even. Once you complete this project, please let us know the outcome along with the analyses of the feasibility and a cost/benefits analyses of your design. Feel free to open up a website and sell your circuit boards while you're at it.

 - You really think I have to build a complete machine to know why something works and why
it does not?  You think I shouldnt have the right to an opinion just because I have not
made a machine yet?  You are full of brown power.

 Pinball CAN be made better. And at a lower cost than was 20 yrs ago... and be more reliable. 

 Themes like Ripleys, and WOF are a Joke.   It shows how tasteless the company is.


 Btw - I own 2 pins, and just finished getting paid to do a shop job on a Theatre of Magic.
I also used to MANAGE an ARCADE for 3 years... fixing and cleaning pins all the time.  I know pinball very well.

 And furthermore... One day I will in fact design and build my own pin.
It probably wont have all the goodies that I stated.. .but I dont have a monster bankroll
and an electronics PCB designer degree either.


I'm not trying to be an ass.... OK, now that I think about it, I am.

 - That was clear from the start.   But at least this time you are being honest.  Its about time.

But that's besides the point. I'm also not trying to defend Stern. I don't even care about what Stern does to their pins. What I'm trying to show you is to be a little bit realistic about.... realistic.....


 - Id say that you take your argument to heart - considering your not defending Stern.
 Your idea of realistic is based on what experience?   Do you have the cost rollouts?
Do you even know what an  EOS  Switch is?


You know what? Forget it. Trying to be realistic with someone who believes in a "BYO Free Energy Gravity Wheel Machine" is probably pointless. Have fun. Smiley

  -  Ooooh... you so burned me!  Umm.. maybe not.     There are plenty of things out there
that are unexplained.  Plenty of free-energy people who have died of mysterious
untimely deaths on the verge of going public.   

 You believe whatever you want.   What is clear here... is that you are a mindless fool.   
Jump on the bandwagon and agree with the BS that is spewed from the main sources tell you.
Until you have an original thought, and decided to look at both sides of an equation.. then
you will always be a fool.

 Your attempt at bashing me, will never change that.
« Last Edit: April 28, 2008, 07:25:08 pm by Xiaou2 »

Mauzy

  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1191
  • Last login:September 23, 2020, 11:51:27 am
Re: Stern in the NY Times
« Reply #24 on: April 27, 2008, 10:06:05 pm »
What about Attack from Mars? I thought that was really good, although I was 8 when it came out...

You mean 'Revenge from Mars' and it came out before Star Wars: Episode 1.



Yea. That one. Like I said, I was 8. Its been a few years...
"Son, all hobbies suck. But if you keep at it, you might find you managed to kill some precious time."

Xiaou2

  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4134
  • Last login:June 11, 2025, 11:55:17 pm
  • NOM NOM NOM
Re: Stern in the NY Times
« Reply #25 on: April 27, 2008, 10:16:41 pm »
Maybe I'm just a beginner or something, but I do enjoy the Stern games I mentioned. I didn't like WOF much though. I may have a lousy taste, but if I enjoy a game it's me who decides if I like it or not, not anyone else. F.I. I think Twilight Zone is much overrated. It's a nice game, but not _that_ special IMHO. I really like Addams Family though.

 - Yeah.. I agree.  Im not to into  TZ either.   

 I do think that being a beginner has an effect on the opinion that one does have.  Also,
if you play a machine that is not fully working  (such as Indy with a flipper too weak to
make up a ramp easily),  than your opinion will be quite different than if it was working as
designed.

 When one plays that magical game... or watches that one special movie... everything
gets compared to that one, and everything can become very disappointing after it.  Especially
when the new is made half-butt.
 
 I definitely dont expect nor want everyone to have the same opinion.   However, there are some
things that cant be denied.. and those are basically what Im arguing.


If I look at the market I see that AFAIK there is one (1) pinball manufacturer now and am I glad that they still stick around.


 - With their current strategy,  I dont think they will last much longer.   Putting out the alternative
ideas and strategies is much more productive than kissing someones butt.   

 I dont know about you... but I vote with my dollars.   When a company makes something great,
I buy.   Heck, I even sometimes write companies asking for certain features and products.  Some
smart ones actually listen...     Just cause you like a company... Telling them what they want to hear, does not improve the end result and the bottom line.    Making them face the reality, might
take a slow nose dive into a steady rise in altitude.



This als depreciate the games, because Stern regularly does re-runs of the recent machines. As long as you can buy new one's, the value won't increase right ?


 - You know what, your right on that one.  Forgot about the re-runs.   

 However,   I can tell you one thing... they are not going to be re-running Ripleys  heh
« Last Edit: April 28, 2008, 07:28:27 pm by Xiaou2 »

Xiaou2

  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4134
  • Last login:June 11, 2025, 11:55:17 pm
  • NOM NOM NOM
Re: Stern in the NY Times
« Reply #26 on: April 28, 2008, 01:32:58 am »
It talks about the last gasp attempt to re-invent pinball at Williams...how it both succeeded and failed, and why Williams is no longer in the pinball business.

 - Thanks.   If money were not an object with me today, I may be interested in getting a set.

 However,  I can say that Ive seen plenty of people come out and put forth absolute drivel
on similar events... such as the  Video game crash.   Not many people are going to admit to
the real reasons...  and many dont know the real reasons and are merely shooting out
opinions.


Stern has cut a lot of costs for two reasons:
1. a lot of their sales are now to the home market, which don't buy super-expensive pins.


 - I know many collectors personally.  Ive been to their parties in which they have
entire basements of top quality pins that they have paid mints of money for.

 I realize that most Home players will not spring much more than the current price for a New pin.
However, these home users are willing to spend good money for a great playing Used
pin.

 If a pin lasts longer, and stays in better shape,  then even the used pins which ops may
choose to sell off,  will still sell at great prices.   Also, a greatly designed pin is eternally great.

 Buying a  "New"  pin and  New videos were once unthinkable...   (to the avg. home user)
   

2. a lot of their sales are to the operator market, which don't buy super-expensive pins.


I agree that reliability is key for on-site operation, but Stern can't increase the cost-per-machine just to make a bullet-proof pin. They're not competing with other pinball companies - they're competing with video game machines like Golden Tee, which cost $1000 less than Stern's pins, have maybe two or three moving parts, and rake in hundreds without requiring any sort of weekly maintenance.

  - A lot of Opinion in there.

   When you go to buy a new car...  Do you get the extra 'Protection plan"  ?   Even if you dont,
Id bet that most do.
 
  Why?   Because they know that even though the car is nearly out of budget... they want
to make sure it lasts no matter what.   They want reliability.   They NEED it...  and they pay for it.

 An OP also needs it.   Its merely a question of Sales tactics to convince them of it.   A non working
pin can cost an op over hundreds of dollars a week, and possibly turn people off to a game
forever... thus costing them even more in the long run.

 An Op will be willing to pay a bit more for lasting quality.

 
 Golden Tee isnt that much of a competition.   There is only one other thing, and that is those
cheezy bartops.    Ive never payed to play any Golf game.  I can tell you that there are tons of
people who feel the same way.   Which is why there are still many Ops who have pins and other
vids on location.

 Golden Tee is a cheap investment I believe... but that does not mean its a great earner.
A Pin player may play 3+ games in a row.  How many people play Golf 3 times in a row?
How many are excited to go back and play again? 

 Making a cheap cheezy pin isnt going to make Ops like them any more.  The problems still
are there.  And now with gas prices as high as they are - and climbing... driving to fix machines
often is only going to make things worse.   

 Give an Op a machine that is solid as a tank, and draws great interest with high replay
value... then they will want to buy more pins. 


And yes, availability is the major problem - name one place where kids can play pinball. You can still play pinball in the occasional bar, but I haven't seen a mall arcade in years and the only pin I've seen where a kid can play it is one lonely Simpsons in the local Chuck E Cheese.

 - I dont think kids were ever the biggest spenders on pins.  Usually the teens and adults put the most
into pins.

 The reason for Pins failing is similar to videos failing.

 If innovation wasnt lost, risks were not token, then we might still have arcades today.

 Instead, they dumbed down games... made them too easy and pointless.  Sucked the fun
and replay vaule out.  Used cheezy gimmicks, and remade the same crap over and over again.
 

Without a new generation of players, Pinball is dead. Heck, all of my kid's friends who come over to play in our basement have never seen a pinball machine, and can't even figure out how to start the game, let alone do a flipper pass. Just like the jukebox generation is dying out, the pinball generation's time is coming. There's a reason there's only one pinball manufacturer left...and I can't say I'm optimistic that they'll be around in 10 years.


 - All the more reason to understand the real reason pinball died,  and whats best to fix it so that
it can be fully revived.   Doing the same crap over again isnt going to cut it.  The only reason its working
now, is because there is no competition...  and that wont work for too much longer IMOP.

 And BTW - Do you really think making Pins with themes like  WOF or Ripleys is going to sway a young
audience into pins?  :P

 If I was hired to work for a pinball company,  and the boss said I was to design a layout for
Ripleys... I would have laughed and walked out on the spot.   What future can a company have
that makes that bad of decisions?


 As for Williams  "solution" , Pinball2000, .... it was poor.    The concept was interesting, yet, the
problem was that the monitor took away from the ball flow of the game.    Very boring and limited
layouts.    The cost to make the video for them was also too much to add to that too.

 If they had LCD tech, and or made the CRT into the backbox... it might have had a chance.   Still,
the main failure was not the game itself..  but instead the mechanical/electrical failures.  There are
EM pins that have almost no features at all, and are fun as heck to play.   
 
 If anyone is bright enough and brave enough to understand and admit it,   and has the
drive to make an impact...  then just maybe  Pinball will live on.   Otherwise... Id say Pinball wont
last much longer.

« Last Edit: April 28, 2008, 07:31:11 pm by Xiaou2 »

SavannahLion

  • Wiki Contributor
  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5986
  • Last login:December 19, 2015, 02:28:15 am
Re: Stern in the NY Times
« Reply #27 on: April 28, 2008, 02:44:41 am »
Xiaou2 since your quoting suck there's not much point in even making the effort.

My qualifications are in other fields like my stints at HP, A study with NASA and a start up company in NY. So you're right, I have no direct experience with pinballs. It would be impossible for me to take what I learn in one field and apply it to another. That sort of things never happens.

Do you have the cost roll out? That was the point. Since it would be impossible for me to have one (see above reason) that responsibility would be left to you since you are the one with the desire to implement these features.

EOS == End Of Stroke. Used to cut the high power to a coil once it reaches the end of travel. A more elaborate method would be to monitor the current and cut it off at a certain threshold, like a stall circuit. Implementing both can be done to help ensure that the failure of the EOSS doesn't burn out the coil.

You'll need to know the equation before you can look at both sides. To everything else you write....

 :blah: :blah: :blah: :blah:

CheffoJeffo

  • Cheffo's right! ---saint
  • Wiki Master
  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7784
  • Last login:July 14, 2025, 12:11:49 pm
  • Worthless button pusher!
Re: Stern in the NY Times
« Reply #28 on: April 28, 2008, 06:39:37 am »
+1 Ignore
Working: Not Enough
Projects: Too Many
Progress: None

KevSteele

  • Trade Count: (+3)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 941
  • Last login:January 20, 2025, 11:29:37 am
  • Retrogaming Media Mogul in Rehab
Re: Stern in the NY Times
« Reply #29 on: April 28, 2008, 07:52:53 am »
Pinball 2000 curled up and died because the designers got lazy and didn't have *anything* ready to go after Star Wars Episode 1 hit the line. 

Actually, it wasn't the designer's call. Willams' brass shut down the whole operation when SW:E1 failed to exceed Revenge from Mars' sales. Didn't matter that it was a worse pin: they had paid a fortune for the Star Wars license and expected it to triple the sales figures for RFM.

In some ways you could say Lucas killed pinball at Williams with his lousy prequel...but it wasn't the designers being lazy that was the problem...

<edit> Oh, and Xiaou2 -- I can't read your reply, since I can't tell which is quoted material and which is your reply. It's a mess, and not worth trying to sort out who said what, and who you're trying to reply to. There's a "quote" button you can apply to copy-n-pasted text, which would help.
« Last Edit: April 28, 2008, 07:57:20 am by KevSteele »
Kevin Steele, Former Editor and Publisher of RetroBlast! and GameRoom Magazine

CheffoJeffo

  • Cheffo's right! ---saint
  • Wiki Master
  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7784
  • Last login:July 14, 2025, 12:11:49 pm
  • Worthless button pusher!
Re: Stern in the NY Times
« Reply #30 on: April 28, 2008, 09:36:22 am »
PBJ -- a serious question (I know, hard to believe coming from me) -- what is your take on what Xiaou2 has said ?
Working: Not Enough
Projects: Too Many
Progress: None

RayB

  • I'm not wearing pants! HA!
  • Trade Count: (+4)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11279
  • Last login:July 10, 2025, 01:33:58 am
  • There's my post
    • RayB.com
Re: Stern in the NY Times
« Reply #31 on: April 28, 2008, 11:26:02 am »

Pure R&D is expensive. It's absolutely necessary in most fields to invest in R&D, to innovate, as it advances the field and related products. This is absolutely required in order to compete. However, Stern has no competition, so it does not need to compete. It also is in a declining market. Any other business would diversify and move into other related products. But Stern is a 1-product company in a market they KNOW is declining. It's not their fault it's declining. It's just the march of time and progress. So again, it would make no sense for them to invest too much in R&D. They're doing what they can.


* For the record, I SKIPPED most of Xiau's long posts because I cannot take the time to try and figure out WHO said WHAT. *
NO MORE!!

HaRuMaN

  • Supreme Solder King
  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+45)
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10328
  • Last login:July 14, 2025, 02:03:34 pm
  • boom
    • Arcade Madness
Re: Stern in the NY Times
« Reply #32 on: April 28, 2008, 02:06:38 pm »
* For the record, I SKIPPED most of Xiau's long posts because I cannot take the time to try and figure out WHO said WHAT. *

Same here...  learn to use the quote feature!

KevSteele

  • Trade Count: (+3)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 941
  • Last login:January 20, 2025, 11:29:37 am
  • Retrogaming Media Mogul in Rehab
Re: Stern in the NY Times
« Reply #33 on: April 28, 2008, 02:17:02 pm »
Actually, it wasn't the designer's call. Willams' brass shut down the whole operation when SW:E1 failed to exceed Revenge from Mars' sales. Didn't matter that it was a worse pin: they had paid a fortune for the Star Wars license and expected it to triple the sales figures for RFM.

There's a ton of BS floating around about Pinball 2000.  I'd take anything you heard in that documentary (which did not feature the man that created the original concept) with a big helping of  'the people in this are attempting to be as self-serving as possible'.

Popadiuk is about as hard to get ahold of as your local telephone operator and he's certainly answered plenty of my obnoxious questions in the past.  The documentary was fairly well done but it's extremely slanted without his input.  There are also plenty of readily available folks that worked on RFM/SW1 that weren't sold on the whole Pin2k format, and none of them were interviewed either.

And we can bicker over the details until the end of time, but the big hurdle here is both of the Pinball2000 games suck.  Wizard Blocks ain't supposed to be any better, either.


I've talked to Popadiuk about it, and the documentary is pretty fair in it's depiction of what happened. Out of curiosity, have you seen the movie? It's actually quite comprehensive and a good look at what happened.

I have to agree that neither P2K pin was that great, but RFM actually did set some sales records...only to be followed by SW1, which sealed pinball's fate at Williams. Considering the time constraints the developers had, they did a pretty good job with P2K. It was modular, used off-the-shelf PC components, and did bring some innovation (however limited in reality) to the table.

Nevertheless, it was a last gasp, and quite honestly nothing they would have come up with would have saved the pinball division at Williams. Williams' management had already decided to kill off the pinball division, they just needed the excuse to do it...and SW1 gave them the excuse they needed.

I don't see pinball making a comeback. Much like the arcade, it's time has come and gone...
Kevin Steele, Former Editor and Publisher of RetroBlast! and GameRoom Magazine

SirPeale

  • Green Mountain Man
  • Global Moderator
  • Trade Count: (+23)
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12963
  • Last login:August 04, 2023, 09:51:57 am
  • Arcade Repair in New England
    • Arcade Game and Other Coin-Op Projects
Re: Stern in the NY Times
« Reply #34 on: April 28, 2008, 02:20:56 pm »
* For the record, I SKIPPED most of Xiau's long posts because I cannot take the time to try and figure out WHO said WHAT. *

Same here...  learn to use the quote feature!

Agreed.  I couldn't figure out what was going on.

I think the problem with pin "reliability" isn't so much that they're unreliable, but more that routine maintenance isn't done.  Sure, there are problem pieces on pins, but when you cash out the machine, check out the errors reported, heck just slide the glass off and take a good visual look - both top and bottom.  I've repaired pins before where I knew a problem was there, fixed that problem, but found another just by using my eyes.

fixedpigs

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 627
  • Last login:Yesterday at 01:02:44 pm
  • warning: drew can't handle my avatar...
Re: Stern in the NY Times
« Reply #35 on: April 28, 2008, 03:11:38 pm »
I'm not sure I really buy into the "kill pinball" conspiracy theory.  Williams had built up their brand name with pinball, and it seems unlikely they'd just kill it on a whim.  It's worth noting that the pinball division hadn't been profitable in years, though. 

five million in revenue isn't profitable...?

take a look at the profit chart at 35:05ish...

the pinball division never went lower than five million in revenue...that's hardly not being 'profitable in years'...

williams had their growing slot machine division...which was simply making them _more_ money than their pinball division...

fixedpigs

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 627
  • Last login:Yesterday at 01:02:44 pm
  • warning: drew can't handle my avatar...
Re: Stern in the NY Times
« Reply #36 on: April 28, 2008, 04:08:14 pm »
10,000 * 3,500 = $3,500,000

you mean $35,000,000...

CheffoJeffo

  • Cheffo's right! ---saint
  • Wiki Master
  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7784
  • Last login:July 14, 2025, 12:11:49 pm
  • Worthless button pusher!
Re: Stern in the NY Times
« Reply #37 on: April 28, 2008, 04:57:58 pm »
Anyway, the point still stands - the business had declined drastically, and I still think the $5million figure is a fabrication.

OK, so you come up with a $35,000,000 estimate for revenue and then indicate that a $5,000,000 is a fabrication ?

NOTE: I have no background and have not yet seen the DVD.

EDIT: FWIW, I don't think that $5,000,000 in revenue is all that strong ... particularly with the type of overhead required for manufacturing.
« Last Edit: April 28, 2008, 05:08:02 pm by CheffoJeffo »
Working: Not Enough
Projects: Too Many
Progress: None

CheffoJeffo

  • Cheffo's right! ---saint
  • Wiki Master
  • Trade Count: (+2)
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7784
  • Last login:July 14, 2025, 12:11:49 pm
  • Worthless button pusher!
Re: Stern in the NY Times
« Reply #38 on: April 28, 2008, 05:28:20 pm »
To make $5 million dollars free and clear, they'd have had to be making $500 per machine. 

If they were clearing $500/machine, Williams would still be producing them.

EDIT: you guys are mixing revenue and profit.  The argument is that the pinball division was making $5mil in profit.  So far I haven't been able to dig up a financial statement from the mid 90s that lays out their expenses and sales from the pinball section, but I'd assume their pinball revenue was in the realm of $20mil?

*I'm* not mixing them ... hence my statement about $5,000,000 not being much revenue for a manufacturing operation.
Working: Not Enough
Projects: Too Many
Progress: None

Xiaou2

  • Trade Count: (+1)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4134
  • Last login:June 11, 2025, 11:55:17 pm
  • NOM NOM NOM
Re: Stern in the NY Times
« Reply #39 on: April 28, 2008, 08:03:47 pm »

 Anyone here work as an OP fixing Pins?

  Cause the arcade I MANAGED had over 40 games,  and 3 pins.

  Those pins got filthy  (I mean Black as coal)   If you didnt clean them EVERY WEEK.

 Almost every week, there was at least one problem with one of the Pins.  Sometimes
more than one.

 
  Maintenance is very high on these, especially in a busy area where its played almost non stop
all day and night long.     Add more than one pin... and that maintenance required climbs dramatically!

 The problems ranges from minor things like cleaning, lights out, ..  to stuck or dead switches...   to more serious things like sticking flippers,  flipper coils too weak,  flipper bearing shot,  pcb problems where coils
dont fire at all,  entire motor assemblies destroyed because a screw came loose... and much more.

 Merely cleaning a pin took at very least of an hour for such a highly used game.   Much longer if and when
you took off ramps,  and  'subways', lamps, rubbers, ... etc.   

 
 I actually took good care on my pins.   They took more maintenance time out of my week than all of the
40 other games total.   Id have 0 to 3 vids/mechanical games go down in a week.   But they were usually
easy ups.   Pins however were always needing attention.   Some things taking hours or even days to repair.
(one cant ignore customers and just work on pins)   

 I barely had time to work on them... And I was right there in the same location!   I cant imagine these guys trying to fix these things remotely.   Having to truck just about every tool known to mankind + extra parts + cleaning solutions... and more.

 An op who has over 20 pins all over the place,  will have failures all over the place.   Then add his 60 other
games on top of that... which he has to collect and repair... and they just wont be able to keep those
pinballs up to spec.


 Its so easy for someone who has a home pin that doesnt get much play to say that its not
that bad to keep them up.  But dealing with heavily played machines is very different.    And dealing with
2+ machines is going to really surprise you om how much maintenance is really involved.

 If you dont wana take my word for it... go to any of the remaining Namco arcade managers and ask them.
They will tell you the same things.   

 I worked with them for 3 long years... so I know exactly what going on.

 
 And while a broken pin made really crappy earnings... the pins which were working, and well
cleaned and token care of... were making decent money, and getting played consistently.


 (ive fixed my previous posts)