I found this link last week (if I remember correctly) and just wanted to share it with you all on gamedev.net Computer Programming Business Plan Although I'm still polishing up mine, I was wondering if you feel that this would be a good example for others? Either way, I don't actually plan on basing my entire plan on this one; takes me back to what Top Sloper said about finding information yourself and doing your own research is the best idea. Just asking because I've seen others ask for sample business plans for game businesses, so I thought I'd post this one and let the experienced members of gamedev.net rate it. Thanks.

My quick notes:

The general document format is okay.

As a very brief overview and summary it is mostly passable, but the details to convince a publisher, investor, or lender would need to be *much* longer. I will assume there are many other external documents, and this is the summary sheet that accompanies an introductory cover letter.


Executive summary section
Needs to be rewritten for clarity, but the information is there. Their only objective is to make money? What about products and IP? I would provide a bulleted list of the main production items followed by a table of estimated gross and net, but that's just me. Assuming you used real information, the idea is correct.

Company section
Excellent. It tells me their goals. Interested people need to know the names and details of core people. Many early contracts will be tied to the core staff -- meaning they will be personally liable. The numbers are essential, the graphs aren't. Those numbers are incomplete. Assuming it was realistic, it would be good.

Services section
This section is horrible. It would need to have significant real details about the company. Even as an example document, they should have included many additional fake details.

Market analysis summary
Good headings, horrible content. There should be many additional sub-headings, but they are specific to the business. Every sentence should be supported and detailed by a few pages of text in another document.

Strategy and Implementation
5.1 = Sucks. It just states the obvious. Don't do that in your plan.
5.2 = Excellent.
5.3, 5.4 = Concept is good, the actual numbers are very bogus, don't use that many graphs.

Personnel
The list of key people is excellent, but I believe it is too short. The plan acknowledges the lack of leadership, which would kill most business plans. Somebody has to be in charge, and waiting three years for it is probably not acceptable. At least, it isn't to me.

Financial plan
Again, the numbers are bogus. I assume there would be another big document that details how the numbers were formulated and specifically how they intend to reach them.



Assuming real content, using that as a layout as a summary of your company to pass around would be perfectly reasonable. As a summary it works nicely, because it lets people like me determine if you have actually done your homework before asking for my help. I can look at the numbers and see if they are realistic, and either toss it or ask for more details based on the content.

After reviewing that document, anyone interested in the company would require more in-depth documentation. It wouldn't get you a loan or a publishing deal, but it would help get your foot in the door with the initial loan application or the initial publication pitch as notes about the company.

So if I must rate it as a template, I'd give it a moderate passing grade.