I'm so tired of this "revenue damage" rhetoric, so let's me pull out the 'ackshually' glasses and make use of my honours degree 🤓 1. Yao Runhao's ownership and control over Papergames' major decisions. (IMAGE 1) According to Chinese financial reports, Yao Runhao, the founder and CEO of Papergames, owns approximately 54.74% of Suzhou Papergames Network Technology, the parent company of Shanghai Papergames. More recently, on October 16, 2026, he also established a new company called Nuwa Bionics (女娲仿生), which focuses on artificial intelligence and robotics. The company has a registered capital of RMB 10 million, of which Yao personally subscribed RMB 6 million, giving him 60% ownership. Sources: (finance.sina.com.cn/tech/she…) (bjnews.com.cn/detail/1792649…) These figures are important because Yao is not simply an employee or executive working for Papergames. He is its founder, CEO, and majority shareholder. This gives him significant control over the company's direction, investments, and major business decisions. Therefore, when discussing Valko's cancellation and the possibility of bringing him back, I believe we need to look beyond LADS itself and consider the financial interests of the person who holds the most power within Papergames. 2. Is the revenue decline really enough to pressure Papergames? First and foremost, according to AppMagic estimates report, LADS generated approximately $933.7 million in mobile player spending during its first two years, with $410 million in its first year and $522.6 million in its second year. This makes LADS the top of the highest-grossing games in its market. (IMAGE 2) Following the Valko controversy, LADS experienced a sharp decline in revenue, reaching just $10.3 million in July 2026. However, its revenue recovered to around $17.7 million in August and $19.5 million in September, an increase of nearly 89% from July to September. (IMAGE 3) This recovery brings light to the boycott's declining financial impact, as players appear to be spending on the game again despite Papergames maintaining its decision regarding Valko. Now, let's consider the estimated $50 million revenue shortfall between July and September as a working figure for this discussion. Compared to the $933.7 million LADS generated in its first two years, that would represent approximately 5.4% of its historical mobile player spending. (IMAGE 4) ONLY 5.4%. Why is this important? Think about it. We're talking about a game that generated nearly a billion dollars in just two years, a company that already owns several successful gaming franchises. The slight 5.4% decrease in revenue following the cancellation of a product is objectively a reasonable minor corporate loss. From a business perspective, Papergames may consider the revenue decline an acceptable short-term cost of maintaining its current strategy. And as long as the company believes it can afford that cost, there may be little financial reason for its leadership to change direction. 3. Revenue decline alone is evidently not enough. A boycott can also create public and reputational pressure. Despite the sharp decline in LADS' revenue, Papergames has maintained its decision regarding Valko. This suggests that the financial pressure so far has not been enough to change its position. However, a boycott is not limited to refusing to spend money. It can also involve public campaigns that raise awareness, voice consumer dissatisfaction, and damage a company's reputation. Ultimately, a broader and more sustained boycott could combine financial losses with reputational pressure, making the decision to maintain Valko's cancellation increasingly costly for Papergames and its leadership. #DeleteLoveAndDeepspace #SaveValkoDeleteLaDS #NoValkoNoPapergames