Any chance Cakewalk could be sold to another party (That would keep it going)?

I think the chances are good if Cake is for sale.

I like the idea of a co-operative if the rest falls through.
 
From Gibson's vantage point, if the choice is either a scaled down sale or no sale, why not sell it to someone who cares at least? This is the only semblance of respect they have left.

If there was any chance of a buyer, then the announcement that they're ending development would be a very strange business decision.
 
I think that ship has sailed.

I don't get why everyone has assumed no one will buy Cakewalk. Tracktion had a long absence. Gibson doesn't gain anything by keeping it.

kitekrazy1
I don't get why everyone has assumed no one will buy Cakewalk. Tracktion had a long absence. Gibson doesn't gain anything by keeping it.

 
That hasn't stopped them in the past. look at Slingerland among others for eg, if you read up about it, they even had offers to buy it but declined. So there is no good in having someone willing to buy Cakewalk if Gibson wont sell it.

elsongs
If Gibson would be willing to sell off Cakewalk's technology (programming code, development research) to another company that would be ideal. If they sold it to PreSonus, I'd be really happy. Studio One is my 2nd (by a long-shot) DAW, and it can do things SONAR can't, and likewise SONAR can do many things Studio One can't (Instrument Definitions/integration with hardware). If they were to merge Cakewalk technology into Studio One, I can be focused on one truly awesome DAW.
 
Or how about Microsoft buying Cakewalk? There is precedent for this, of course, when Apple bought Emagic and brought Logic under its wing. Since MS wants to push the Surface Pro line as being a product for creatives, why not? Cakewalk products have always been the most compatible software with regard to the Windows spec from Day One.
 
And speaking of Gibson, I will NEVER buy a Gibson guitar, ever.

Microsoft is really high on killing of good aps these days. I dont trust them anymore.

The sensible acquisition would be by a mostly windows audio company that needs a flagship DAW. This company would need to wait for team to build code from ground up to be cross platform. Magix seems like a decent option until you consider they already own a powerful flagship DAW and several lighter ones.

Maybe a mid-tier plug-in developer loiking to nake big step. I think larger plug-in makers would be more inclined to develope their own. I return to smaller company owning cakewalk would take them back to roots.

How about Roland buying it, since they already have a hardware union , I think

guitz
How about Roland buying it, since they already have a hardware union , I think

Considering Roland already tried , that is least likely scenario. I think the age of big name instrument makers buying up music software makers has passed.

If I were rich, I'd buy it. Then I'd only do monthly updates if you all begged and kissed my arse in these forums.
 
I hope it gets bought by a music lover, not a music company which concentrates on other priorities.
 
If it really is the end, they could rename it, open source it, or give it away for a period until the user base is huge.
 
Respect and appreciation to the Cakewalk crew and Sonar. 

If Cakewalk was making money I would assume Gibson would hold on to it.. Now, my next question is, with a DAW like Sonar with ALL THOSE FEATURES, IP and bundled add-ons... why the heck is it NOT making money? You can only blame marketing for that. I only know three Sonar users in my city - of 3 million people...

LJB
If Cakewalk was making money I would assume Gibson would hold on to it.. Now, my next question is, with a DAW like Sonar with ALL THOSE FEATURES, IP and bundled add-ons... why the heck is it NOT making money? You can only blame marketing for that. I only know three Sonar users in my city - of 3 million people...

 Gibson is in major debt and eventually they have to pay the bills. Jim Roseberry made a great post in KVR about this.

A few thoughts, although it's probably too soon to be making guesses. Cakewalk unprofitable? Well, if it is that's Gibson's fault - they've been running it. However, given all the development that's been going into Sonar in recent times, they must have thought it was profitable enough for that expense.
 
I can easily see how Cakewalk wouldn't have suited the Gibson brand. Presumably, Gibson had a plan that never came to fruition. Gibson is on its last legs with huge debts. They would either keep Cakewalk as an asset or sell it to recoup capital. The announcement makes it sound like they are ditching it. The only reason a company would ever do that is through pride - afraid another company would make a success where they failed; it wouldn't look good to the shareholders.
 
Gibson may have approached possible buyers silently in the run-up to all this, but now it's gone public and become public knowledge many other potential buyers could come forward.
 
The announcement states that further development has stopped, but the website etc. will remain. The wording of the announcement is interesting;
 
1) "I am saddened to announce that we ceased new product development".
2) "this decision was made in order to align with the company’s acquisition strategy, focused on growth in the global consumer electronics audio business."
3) "and reduced overall operations this past Friday". 
4) "A dedicated team has been established during this transition period".
5) "Monthly updates to SONAR from Cakewalk will however cease during this time".
6) "We will continue to post notifications to keep you informed with any relevant developments".
 
While part of the message seemed like an emotional goodbye, it didn't actually state that directly that Cakewalk is no more. Two other things could be read into the message. They are still waiting for a buyer to come forward. Or the Cakewalk development team are being reallocated to the consumer electronics audio department. It doesn't seem likely that Gibson would just chuck an asset in the trash at this time. More likely that it's holding out for a good offer or rebranding for a new market.

Matron Landslide
 
Do you think they sold it? No they didn't, just left to rot, even though they apparently had offers. It seems to be the Gibson way, they have a reputation for doing it. Have a read around the traps, you should notice a recurring theme.

 
Yes, but the difference between now and the 1970s is that Gibson is a company in serious financial trouble.  They can't afford to just hold on to properties that they can sell.  If there's a good buyer out there for Cakewalk, it'll get sold.