User Information

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Charles Bishop & Peter: two sides of the same char...  (Read 1395 times)

SiL
Feb 03, 2019, 11:49:22 AM
Reply #15 on: Feb 03, 2019, 11:49:22 AM
Q
Assuming the death of Charles had a detrimental effect on his company and Peter wanted to rejuvenate and take the company in his own direction.
Why would he need to found a new company? Charles says himself his death will barely affect share prices.



Samhain13
Feb 03, 2019, 11:54:30 AM
Reply #17 on: Feb 03, 2019, 11:54:30 AM
Q
Let it go guys or this thread will be locked too.


Frosty Venom
Feb 03, 2019, 11:58:33 AM
Reply #18 on: Feb 03, 2019, 11:58:33 AM
Q
I see it as a sort of rebranding ( a marketing strategy in which a new name, term, symbol, design, or combination thereof is created for an established brand with the intention of developing a new, differentiated identity in the minds of consumers, investors, competitors, and other stakeholders). Except Peter founded a whole new company just using similar iconography and title. There are many reasons as to why he would do this. 


SiL
Feb 03, 2019, 12:01:35 PM
Reply #19 on: Feb 03, 2019, 12:01:35 PM
Q
Rebranding is not re-founding. There are no reasons given why Peter would start an entirely new company with the same name and basically the same branding. There's no proof Charles Weyland's company collapsed after AvP -- he specifically says it would barely be affected by his death. Peter was supposed to have patents by 14 -- the year AvP takes place, so why would Charles be so worried about his legacy?


Frosty Venom
Feb 03, 2019, 12:02:53 PM
Reply #20 on: Feb 03, 2019, 12:02:53 PM
Q
Let it go guys or this thread will be locked too.

I'm a bit confused as to why they were locked when people were discussing the topic at hand. Yes they were getting passionate and the discussion was starting to go in circles but c'mon.

Rebranding is not re-founding. There are no reasons given why Peter would start an entirely new company with the same name and basically the same branding. There's no proof Charles Weyland's company collapsed after AvP -- he specifically says it would barely be affected by his death. Peter was supposed to have patents by 14 -- the year AvP takes place, so why would Charles be so worried about his legacy?

Weyland Industries doesn't need to have collapsed for there to be multiple reasons as to why Peter would found a new company.

Also maybe Charles was a sh!tty father and didn't consider Peter a part of his legacy? Peter would definitely take after his father in that respect.

« Last Edit: Feb 03, 2019, 12:48:43 PM by Frosty Venom »

SiL
Feb 03, 2019, 12:07:55 PM
Reply #21 on: Feb 03, 2019, 12:07:55 PM
Q
Weyland Industries does need to have collapsed for there to be multiple reasons as to why Peter would found a new company.
It needs to have disappeared at some point. If there are "multiple reasons", why hasn't one been given?


Frosty Venom
Feb 03, 2019, 12:11:33 PM
Reply #22 on: Feb 03, 2019, 12:11:33 PM
Q
Maybe Weyland Industries' name was tainted by the death of Charles and the failed expedition. Maybe Peter Weyland put the company under himself so he was free to rule over his own corporation with no legal bindings to previous members of Weyland Industries. There, just a couple off the top of my head.


SiL
Feb 03, 2019, 12:12:29 PM
Reply #23 on: Feb 03, 2019, 12:12:29 PM
Q
Maybe Weyland Industries' name was tainted by the death of Charles and the failed expedition.
And then collapsed? Was bought out? What?

Quote
Maybe Peter Weyland put the company under himself so he was free to rule over his own corporation with no legal bindings to previous members of Weyland Industries.
Why is this never mentioned anywhere, ever?



Frosty Venom
Feb 03, 2019, 12:14:46 PM
Reply #25 on: Feb 03, 2019, 12:14:46 PM
Q
Maybe Weyland Industries' name was tainted by the death of Charles and the failed expedition.
And then collapsed? Was bought out? What?

Quote
Maybe Peter Weyland put the company under himself so he was free to rule over his own corporation with no legal bindings to previous members of Weyland Industries.
Why is this never mentioned anywhere, ever?

Perhaps collapsed, perhaps bought out. That's good imagination! You're getting the hang of it.

Why and where would this ever be mentioned? Maybe it will be in AVP3.


SiL
Feb 03, 2019, 12:16:22 PM
Reply #26 on: Feb 03, 2019, 12:16:22 PM
Q
Why and where would this ever be mentioned?
The same sources that say when Peter founded the company. The absence of the "original" Weyland Corporation in any of the information can't be overlooked. For all the suppositions of what "could" have happened, there's not a shred of proof.


Samhain13
Feb 03, 2019, 12:18:11 PM
Reply #27 on: Feb 03, 2019, 12:18:11 PM
Q
The wars of canon will spread, and the woods of general Alien-Predator discussion and Aliens Versus Predator films, will burn.

Someone will quarantine the topics before it spreads, otherwise the only option would be to nuke the whole forum from the orbit.


Frosty Venom
Feb 03, 2019, 12:27:28 PM
Reply #28 on: Feb 03, 2019, 12:27:28 PM
Q
The Weyland-Yutani report states that the company was founded when Weyland Corp absorbed the Yutani Corporation. However, the novel Alien: Covenant - Origins reveals this to be inaccurate — it was in fact Yutani's founder, Hideo Yutani, that oversaw a hostile takeover of Weyland Corp. It could be theorized that the report is based on inaccurate information or has been deliberately written to present a false narrative. Same could be said about Charles Bishop Weyland. Perhaps this information has been left out on purpose to paint a certain picture of Peter Weyland. If people knew he used inherited assets and the path his father laid out before him they may not see him or the company in the way they'd like to be seen.


The Old One
Feb 03, 2019, 01:45:52 PM
Reply #29 on: Feb 03, 2019, 01:45:52 PM
Q
Or, Covenant Origins- in addition to being bad is also inaccurate.
It is penned by the same guy that inaccurately wrote that David is working from a blueprint in Covenant,  when according to David's Drawings, and Advent- (whether David's recreating the Alien unknowingly or not) it's made completely clear he is not working from a blueprint.

What reason would they have to falsify the W-Y Report in any way BTW?


 

Facebook Twitter Instagram Steam RSS Feed