On 6 Nov 2002, at 17:49, Dave P wrote:
> > but it's > still a very strong allegation without some lighter questioning first, > even if you had reached a point of going public. OK, you're not the only one to make this point and I can accept that. I was just pretty fed up. > > MAY ? > > Do they? > > I don't know, and nor do you. Yes I do - they don't. > My mistake. I think of "The Grafs" as the originator oif the rather spiffy > Q60, which is made by D&D. No doubt, the Graffs had an arrangement for > SMSQ/E which they may have transferred or sublicensed to D&D to make quite > lawfully. We do not know. See above. > Unfortunately, knowing may be very destructive, as knowing the license > fees paid means knowing exactly what D&D's sales are, and therefore what > production is, and if you knew how few units they may have sold, the scene > may become even more disheartened than it already is. Well, I never asked D&D to make their sale figures public, did I? I personally don't care whether they sold 1 or 100, even if I would prefer if they sold 1000s! > It's not the message, it's the voice. So my tone of voice wasn't appropriate. Message understood! Wolfgang
