UPDATE: Keith Fuller expands on what we touched on here. He makes a broader stroke, and his post is a good balancing point to what we have said here. Check it out here.

Here on the blog, we talk about what we’re doing. One of the things we really don’t talk about, or deal with is the business side of things. We have, in the past, talked about how we’re a real company with a corporate charter. We’re a real corporation, with stock and taxes and all those fun things. But we have never really spoken about our actual business side of things.

Recently, I have been in off and on talks and discussion with Mary Kurek, who does professional networking in the game industry. She’s got a lot of awesome advice, and she’s full of energy. I have yet to see a day when she is not go go go for the industry. Double Cluepon’s future includes her services at some point. Along with Keith Fuller. Another talented guy who works in networking and consulting in the game dev field.

Mary recently posted an article about “Game Company Profiles that Work”. It’s good stuff. Some of it, she has told me during our conversations, some of it I have seen elsewhere. Some of it, I have used in the re-tooling of our company page. Some of it I flat out argue against, not because it’s wrong, but because it does not fit us here at Double Cluepon.

I think this is a point that people wholly concerned with the business side of things miss entirely, Mary included. That’s not to say Mary is wrong, or dumb. The reverse is actually true: Mary is as sharp as they come. She knows how to offer different perspectives. She knows how to hone in on issues pertaining to the industry. She knows how to drill to the core of something to get to the matter at hand. It’s this skill that, I think makes her good at what she does. It also works to her advantage another way: it garners respect from the people she interacts with…people who have little time for the slap and tickle games some people in this industry play. To be blunt: she does not peddle in smoke and bullshit.

But, the problem with applying any kind of standard is, you have to ignore the one off cases where it does not apply, and more importantly should not apply. I believe a few people have told me, on occasion, that I can have noble philosophies in policy, and how the company acts, but putting a face to a name is important. In the strongest possible voice I can give: I call bullshit. Where Double Cluepon is concerned…it’s worked in our favor, not against it.

We here maintain ourselves with pseudonyms. It’s actually company policy. You won’t find pictures of us, or anyone in the company here, or on our company page. You won’t find them anywhere. We do not put them up. We do this for a reason, and the reason is this: we own this company, we do what we love. We value our privacy, and we maintain at least a waist high wall between the general public and the company on a personal life level. Mary was actually the most polite person in regard to this subject. She understands the honey/vinegar method pretty well. Keith, whom I mentioned above? This did not even rank on his radar. The few others we have encountered in our past? Meh. It’s all I can say. We will maintain our right to privacy at all costs, no matter what. For a number of reasons. Let me go into them as briefly as I can:

1. Anyone who looks at us, in order to do business with us, will find out who we are. Their desire to pursue leads that turn into positive contact, and business dealings will do so, regardless of whether or not someone knows what Sandalphon, or Caelum look like. How do I know this? Nearly every company I have ever worked with, has had a sales department that spent time networking with people. I’ve seen how this works. If there’s something positive a consultant, a salesperson, or even a creative type can offer someone else, they will ferret out the contact. This is an observed fact, based on some 25 plus years of working in I.T., mainly in places with salesmen and creative types. Keith found me. How? Twitter. Mary found me, and even who I really was. How? Google, the web, Linked In. Why did they find me? I was a contact they wanted to cultivate. I was someone who, to them was worth taking the step. People willing to take the extra step automatically show themselves to be serious, and to the point. In short, I don’t spend a lot of time vetting superfluous email from people.
2. I do not have time to play games with every crap contracting firm who wants to write AS3 for me for pennies on the dollar in India. I do not have time for sound engineers from the UK to constantly send me 10 MB Demo Reels. I don’t have time for every college in northern Illinois to send me resumes and prospects for recent grads, or interns. I definitely do not have time for boiler-room staffing firms, who call me out of the blue and have NO information about what we do, or even what industry we’re in. By keeping the wall, I create an easily scalable barrier for those who are serious, and honestly want to forge some contact. By the way, I still get those first four occasionally. Random cold opens from inappropriate sources trying to contact us. 99.9% of them have not even looked at what we do, or how we do it. The ones who email me, with some clarity, and show they have actually looked at us….they get a response. People like…Mary and Keith. If you want us to spend money, effort or resources on you…then it’s on YOU to show me why I should do so. That’s what’s called “The cost of doing business” The exception being I seek YOU out, to perform something for me..but that’s a different scenario. That’s not to say the door is not open to people wanting to do business with us. It just means, we want you to actually show us that we’re important somehow….like any other customer being pursued. We’ll talk to just about anyone, if they show a real and valid interest. Part of that is: actually digging a bit to learn about who we are, and why we are. If you do that, we will notice.
3. In light of this article, why would I do anything to make it easier for someone to identify me, or the people I love and work with? The people at Double Cluepon are some of my closest friends. As the leader of our band, I feel a responsibility to them all. I also have a duty to them all. Why then, would I want to remove a protection measure that could conceivably put them in harms way? I realize, a game developer or studio head has never been harmed or killed. But you know what? I understand full well there’s always a first time. The law of averages says so.
4. One of the most important reasons: our work is….about our work. It’s not about us. It’s about what we create. It’s about our conversation with the players. It’s about putting out a product, and saying we did this. None of us are in it for the hookers and blow. We’re not in it to stroke our own egos. We’re not in it for the booth babes, or the same celebrity other folks in this industry get. We’re in it to make a living at a trade we love. It’s a business yes. We want to make money, yes. But whether or not we choose to openly identify ourselves with pictures and names that can be looked up on pipl has absolutely no bearing on that. People don’t pay for a product because the CEO or CFO have a bankers hair cut. They buy it because it’s meaningful to them, or they want it, or they need it. Similarly, a business chooses to forge a business relationship with another business because it makes business sense to do so. They don’t make those determinations based on whether or not someone has a goatee or wears socks with Birkenstocks.

But the point I want to get back to is, Mary’s profile points are very very valid. Probably for 95% of all game companies out there. She’s not the only one who has told us these things. I think the important thing here is common sense, really. Adapt what works for your company. There is no such thing as a peel and stick method for anyone. Pictures and Detailed bios may work for many people, but it does not work for Double Cluepon. This is where I think the dialog stops for many. It shouldn’t. We need less cookie cutter and more guerrilla. We need less of the standardized, and more of the experimental. We need more of the controversial, and less of the “this is the way you should do things”.

To re-iterate: do what works for your company, and don’t be cowed. I think more of the business side folks need to be more open to working with companies sticking to unconventional methods. They’re the innovators. In the final analysis, your main goal should be the product mantra: make a great thing, then make it easy to buy/get. If you do that, nobody…and I mean nobody is going to care whether you have a company photo on your website.

Much thanks to Mary, for the impetus for this article, Keith for listening, and both of them for the advice and introductions they have given Double Cluepon.