Report: Disgraced Former T2 CEO Sells Recent Startup Game Company

June 4, 2008 -

Fortune.com reports that Ryan Brant (left), who pleaded guilty to committing massive fraud during his tenure as CEO of Grand Theft Auto publisher Take-Two Interactive, has sold his newly-started game development company.

In late April Newsweek's N'Gai Croal broke the news that Brant was back in the gaming biz as part of GreenScreen Interactive, although not as a corporate officer. Brant is barred from holding office in a public company as part of his 2007 guilty plea on fraud charges.

Of the GreenScreen sale, Fortune reports:

Brant agreed to sell the videogame company he recently founded, GreenScreen Interactive Software, to a company called Mandalay Media, whose co-chairmen are Peter Guber - the Hollywood producer behind "Midnight Express" and "The Color Purple" - and CEO Bruce Stein, a former Mattel and Sony executive...

 

According to a regulatory filing, GreenScreen and Mandalay entered into merger talks after Mandalay pledged a $2 million bridge loan, collateralized by GreenScreen's corporate assets...

 

Not much is publicly known about GreenScreen - or Brant's role in the company... Nowhere does the company's Web site mention Brant... Brant may well have turned a corner in the way he does business, choosing a quiet life of video game development over fraud and self-dealing.

New York Post reporter Roddy Boyd, who has often written about Take-Two for the newspaper, penned the Fortune.com piece.


Comments

Re: Report: Disgraced Former T2 CEO Sells Recent Startup Game

Very strange that he's bailing on the company so shortly after it was founded.  Wasn't it like 2 weeks ago that they announced the acquisition of DSI Games and Zoo Publishing, those two shovelware companies that had been around for several eyars?  They seemed to have a long-term strategy setup but are bailing out almost immediately.  I always believed that Brant was involved as the name of the company uses the same styling as his previous company (GreenScreen Interactive Software whereas his previous company is Take-Two Interactive Software.)  Very odd turn of events.

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
MattsworknameWait, is that for the upgrade or the clean install only? cause I was gonna do the upgrade07/29/2015 - 8:32am
james_fudgehttps://www.microsoft.com/en-us/software-download/windows1007/29/2015 - 8:30am
PHX Corp@Wilson, I'm still waiting for My upgrade notice aswell07/29/2015 - 7:57am
MattsworknameWilson: how? Im still waiting for my upgrade notice07/29/2015 - 3:44am
Matthew WilsonI updated to a clean instill of windows 10.07/29/2015 - 2:36am
Mattsworknameargue that it's wrong, but then please admit it's wrong on ALL Fronts07/29/2015 - 2:06am
MattsworknameTechnoGeek: It's actually NOT, but it is a method used all across the specturm. See Rush limbaugh, MSNBC, Shawn hannity, etc etc, how many compagns have been brought up to try and shut them down by going after there advertisers. It's fine if you wanna07/29/2015 - 2:05am
Mattsworknamediscussed, while not what I liked and not the methods I wanted to see used, were , in a sense, the effort of thsoe game consuming masses to hold what they felt was supposed to be there press accountable for what many of them felt was Betrayal07/29/2015 - 2:03am
MattsworknameAs we say, the gamers are dead article set of a firestorm among the game consuming populace, who, ideally, were the intended audiance for sites like Kotaku, Polygon, Et all. As such, the turn about on them and the attacking of them, via the metods07/29/2015 - 2:03am
MattsworknameAndrew: Thats kind fo the issue at hand, Accountable is a matter of context. For a media group, it means accountable to its reader. to a goverment, to it's voters and tax payer, to a company, to it's share holders.07/29/2015 - 2:02am
Andrew EisenAnd again, you keep saying "accountable." What exactly does that mean? How is Gamasutra not accounting for the editorial it published?07/28/2015 - 11:47pm
Andrew EisenMatt - I disagree with your 9:12 and 9:16 comment. There are myriad ways to address content you don't like. And they're far easier to execute in the online space.07/28/2015 - 11:47pm
Andrew EisenMatt - Banning in the legal sense? Not that I'm aware but there have certainly been groups of gamers who have worked towards getting content they don't like removed.07/28/2015 - 11:45pm
DanJAlexander's editorial was and continues to be grossly misrepresented by her opponents. And if you don't like a site, you stop reading it - same as not watching a tv show. They get your first click, but not your second.07/28/2015 - 11:40pm
TechnogeekYes, because actively trying to convince advertisers to influence the editorial content of media is a perfectly acceptable thing to do, especially for a movement that's ostensibly about journalistic ethics.07/28/2015 - 11:02pm
Mattsworknameanother07/28/2015 - 9:16pm
Mattsworknameyou HAVE TO click on it. So they get the click revenue weather you like what it says or not. as such, the targeting of advertisers most likely seemed like a good course of action to those who wanted to hold those media groups accountable for one reason07/28/2015 - 9:16pm
MattsworknameBut, when you look at online media, it's completely different, with far more options, but far few ways to address issues that the consumers may have. In tv, you don't like what they show, you don't watch. But in order to see if you like something online07/28/2015 - 9:12pm
MattsworknameIn tv, and radio, ratings are how it works. your ratings determine how well you do and how much money you an charge.07/28/2015 - 9:02pm
Mattsworknameexpect to do so without someone wanting to hold you to task for it07/28/2015 - 9:00pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician