-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Fire Bobby Kotick (The Jimquisition)
- Thread starter lashman
- Start date
Even if he did, some of the videos could and would still be shared in their own separate threads. Like Easy Allies has an OT, yet we get a thread for every Top 10 they release. And that's absolutely fine. I think you can make Jim Sterling OT though, if you so want. Don't think there's any rules against it.
And a CEO who costs a company shittons of money while fucking over employees will subsequently be cut loose with a golden parachute and then find themselves immediately rehired to be CEO somewhere else.
It's a great little racket once you're in the executive club.
That is capitalism in a nut shell, it encourages greed. People can call for the CEO's head all they want, he is doing what is best for himself, and what he is doing is legal and ethical according to capitalism.
Yes he is doing what's best for himself. He's a selfish asshole. Also "ethical according to capitalism", that seems a bit like an oxymoron.
Did you miss the whole thing about people getting fired to cut costs to appeal to the investor board and maybe people like bobby kotic willing to do that instead of taking cash from his already filled pockets might be the problem. ( also you know... unions are nice ).
Are you being purposefully dense,
Oh okay you paladin you.
Shareholders, more often than not, are the polar opposite of being a bastion of morality. They.do.not.give.a.fuck. They are in for the money. Thankfully, we have companies such as Ubisoft who are taking pride at keeping their employees whether in good or bad times. With the Guillemot brothers winning the share war a couple of years ago against Vivendi, the lower shareholders have no choice but to comply with this mentality. But guess what? Those same shareholders would probably welcome a Bobby Kotick as the new CEO. It's how this shitty system works.
Basically, this won't change even though it's wrong. The only way I could think of them to take note is if their customers would boycott their games in such a significant way that it would drastically lower the price of their shares. I don't know about you, but I'm not sure your average Call of Duty player, or even gamer for that matter, has any decent sens of morality.
We can sing Kumbaya all we want around a fire and tap our back. Or we can vent off on an online forum and try to partly blame other users for how things turned to shit while tapping our own back for having the moral ground. Truth of the matter, it's all about the shitty shareholders system. It always has been.
From his prospective, he is being ethical to himself and share holders, because that's really what matters to him.
I would hope most of these strong feelings toward Activision will help workers unionize.
But I don't understand the comparison between Activision and Nintendo.
We concluded that seeking larger revenues for no apparent reason is unnecessary greed. And we concluded that rapid expansion to get more dollars from gamers caused this issue (debatable). Why would Activision executives take a pay cut to let go of teams that they do not believe will be necessary for Activision future? Activision is still hiring people for core franchises and efforts. Activision provided packages to the affected employees and is down sizing to become more purposeful. Nintendo did not want to downsize and let departments and people go. These are separate scenarios and arguably Activision actions are aligned with what Jim wants--slowing down unnecessary or poorly planned growth.
But I don't understand the comparison between Activision and Nintendo.
We concluded that seeking larger revenues for no apparent reason is unnecessary greed. And we concluded that rapid expansion to get more dollars from gamers caused this issue (debatable). Why would Activision executives take a pay cut to let go of teams that they do not believe will be necessary for Activision future? Activision is still hiring people for core franchises and efforts. Activision provided packages to the affected employees and is down sizing to become more purposeful. Nintendo did not want to downsize and let departments and people go. These are separate scenarios and arguably Activision actions are aligned with what Jim wants--slowing down unnecessary or poorly planned growth.
I'm not going to get into an absolute vs. relative discussion but I will say "he is being ethical to himself" doesn't seem to make sense. Morality has to come into play with ethics, it's not just about people's own interpretations of how they govern their behavior.
User Banned (5 days): Inflammatory series of posts, false equivalencies
From Ted Bundy's perspective he was being ethical to himself and his needs, because that's what really matters to him.
The guy is doing his job and is, frankly speaking, very good at it. None of us can comment on what kind of person he actually is unless someone can demonstrably say they have a close relationship with him to claim otherwise.
Firing him is both petty and not a solution, you fire Kotick and someone else will get the job (possibly even with a hefty cash bonus for accepting the position). You wan't to make an actual change instead of throwing a tantrum? Lobby for better job security and unionize.
I love Sterling, but lately its been hard to tell satire from honest opinion with him...
Firing him is both petty and not a solution, you fire Kotick and someone else will get the job (possibly even with a hefty cash bonus for accepting the position). You wan't to make an actual change instead of throwing a tantrum? Lobby for better job security and unionize.
I love Sterling, but lately its been hard to tell satire from honest opinion with him...
I mean, the CEO's job is to make the owners money, not to keep employees or make them happy.
If having a larger or happier staff is expected to make the owners more money, then it makes sense to do that. Otherwise, no.
Let's put it this way. If I hired someone to manage my company, and I found out we were over staffed I'd ask why this wasn't being corrected right away. A smart manager will get it done before this is asked.
I think it's worth noting that they plan on hiring 30% more developers and that the layoffs are largely aimed at non-development positions. They aren't taking successful teams like Treyarch and cutting them in half to save a few pennies. The people being let go are involved with redundant or low ROI sectors.
The divisions that were laid off were underperforming though. If eSports is losing the company money each year, WoW is only getting half as many customer support calls, and nobody is playing HotS, then is Activision expected to keep those staff around just because? Yeah it sucks, but no company (except maybe Microsoft because they're stubborn) will subsidize fruitless business ventures out of charity.
The divisions that were laid off were underperforming though. If eSports is losing the company money each year, WoW is only getting half as many customer support calls, and nobody is playing HotS, then is Activision expected to keep those staff around just because? Yeah it sucks, but no company (except maybe Microsoft because they're stubborn) will subsidize fruitless business ventures out of charity.
Sucks you lost your job, but did you know the shareholders are happy?
They wouldn't fire him for the employees or the value/profit shifts unless they thought he couldn't right the ship.
To be honest, most investors would look at the employee layoffs as a means of doing just that, so they're less likely to cut him loose now. If they stay stagnant while EA and TTWO keep beating them, however, you could see a push for him to move on.
To be honest, most investors would look at the employee layoffs as a means of doing just that, so they're less likely to cut him loose now. If they stay stagnant while EA and TTWO keep beating them, however, you could see a push for him to move on.
what's up with the "he's done nothing wrong by the shareholders" posts?
isn't that precisely why we're here? stock prices cut, falling short of estimates, forecasting less revenue than last year. he has done wrong.
after years of historic growth, it's not enough to jump straight to firing. but for this shareholder upset, workers at the bottom are paying the price and bobby sees no consequences.
isn't that precisely why we're here? stock prices cut, falling short of estimates, forecasting less revenue than last year. he has done wrong.
after years of historic growth, it's not enough to jump straight to firing. but for this shareholder upset, workers at the bottom are paying the price and bobby sees no consequences.
Last edited:
Not sure I would listen to Jim on how to run a major organization. Jim's resume includes such credits as..... "whining on the internet".
I can only hope that this next year his actions reflect poorly on the company's revenue. The only reason why Kotick might have been perceived as a better person in recent years is simply because his shitty deeds were overshadowed by other publishers' shitty deeds.
I think a call to fire is the wrong move. I think a call to shame, scrutinize, and publicly crucify on a platform of shame for what he's done, relentlessly, is a much better move. Embarrass him. Dig into his past, find things he's said, ruin the public perception of him.
That said, no one has the balls to do that in the industry because it's so locked up in exclusive stories for marketing deals, etc, and none of the enthusiast press want to risk losing those opportunities to do the right thing.
That said, no one has the balls to do that in the industry because it's so locked up in exclusive stories for marketing deals, etc, and none of the enthusiast press want to risk losing those opportunities to do the right thing.
Capitalism in a nutshell. Not going to happen because shareholders give as much of a fuck about employees as kotic does.
You aren't saying anything I don't already know. I'm certainly not blaming other users, so don't put words in my mouth. This entire situation just illustrates why the industry needs to unionize.
Running a business within the guidelines of the laws is the same as serial killing?
Ruining several lives versus thousands? I don't know. Billionaires are the most prolific killers in history.
Your reasoning was shit and comes from a place of psychopathy. Own it.
Exactly my point. Jim looks at it from a gamer's point of view. Shareholders' will look at it differently, and a person who is generating them a lot of profit is probably not gonna be fired anytime soon, unless they believe a different person could generate bigger profits. With companies big as these, the people at the end of the chain matter quite a lot less than in smaller "family-based" companies, and even there shit like this can happen. It's a bit disingenious, really. He's not wrong that it's anachronistic that a company celebrating record profits is laying people off. But this isn't an Activision problem, this is the whole capitalist system's issue.
I actually do not agree that running a successful business is the same as raping and murdering women, no.
It was the Infinity Ward drama, wasn't it? I remember Daniel Kayser rapping "My name is Bobby, I fire bitches as a hobby, try to cross(?) me now you find your ass out in the lobby. You know it's crazy, some people call me lazy, but then those people find that their future is kind of hazy" on EpicBattleCry.
Even found the audio: http://podcast.epicbattleaxe.com/epic-battle-cry/ebc-066.mp3
Good times.
This type of tit for tat mentality is ridiculous and childish...
What do these people who are asking for Activision to fire their CEO think will happen other than costing the company more money and trouble not only during the firing process but also during the hiring for a replacement period. Do they think someone else is going to take the CEO position for free without similar wages to what Kotick is already getting on top of a initial pay out?
What do these people who are asking for Activision to fire their CEO think will happen other than costing the company more money and trouble not only during the firing process but also during the hiring for a replacement period. Do they think someone else is going to take the CEO position for free without similar wages to what Kotick is already getting on top of a initial pay out?
That division does not represent the entirety of the 800 employees laid off though. The staff can transition to other things, that's what companies do when they don't view their employees as disposable.
I mean they also laid off a bunch of development staff from High Moon and publishing staff who worked on Destiny. Considering they want to scale up development, and are going to continue to publish other games, it seems like that talent could've been retained to work on other projects even if the eSports division is completely gone from the company.
Your equating people losing jobs to a serial killer who raped and killed women... Ok then.
Your really doubling down on comparing a serial killer to Activision/Bobby Kotick?...
That's not what I did at all. Haha.
I just pointed out that what you said is shit and could be applied to any harmful thing done by anyone to justify their own actions.
Could have just as easily applied that same logic to giving small pox blankets to first nation peoples or dumping C8 in the Ohio River for 40 years.
By the by, both those things were legal when they were done.
No, that user was pointing out that your argument was not a good one. It was also legal to enslave other human beings a little over a hundred years ago in this country, so just stating that 'its legal' says nothing about the moral implications of these decisions.
I'm absolutely loving all the posts along the lines of wHaT DoEs jIm sTeRlInG KnOw aBoUt rUnNiNg a bUsInEsS
So many of these threads are just disasters because people are completely unwilling to contemplate
a) an economic system other than the major one that dominates the globe
b) that their games would not be under threat by guaranteeing workers' rights
c) maybe the whole game is rigged and just because someone is rich doesn't mean they actually know what they're doing
So many of these threads are just disasters because people are completely unwilling to contemplate
a) an economic system other than the major one that dominates the globe
b) that their games would not be under threat by guaranteeing workers' rights
c) maybe the whole game is rigged and just because someone is rich doesn't mean they actually know what they're doing
Activision has already announced they will be operating at a loss in Fiscal Year 2020. Those "record" profits are backwards looking, investment is forward looking. Those jobs were cut as a reaction to the loss they will be suffering this year. Their share price has dropped over 40% in the past 4 months, a change was needed. Kotick is doing his job as CEO of a publicly traded corporation. The fact that people can't seem to grasp this most basic fact is baffling. But, apparently he's obligated to keep around a bunch of jobs that lose Activision money and are no longer a part of their business strategy.
Your point was moronic beyond words. So yes, your point is beyond comprehension by a rational mind. Willfully choosing to be a cog in someone else's money making machine is not equivalent to getting murdered.
Separate threads might make more sense. They are about different topics
Ruining lives? Didn't Activison provide severance packages? Let's talk in reality.
Now you're just purposely missing it to justify your role in defending this poor billionaire.
FUCK the shareholders and whole stock market with it! The world would be better place without it!
Firing Bobby isn't as simple as firing an employee. The man has a seat on the board, is a shareholder himself and his resume doesn't look too bad to his fellow shareholders and members of the board.
To fire such a guy, someone or some event needs to create doubt in the investors and board member's minds and at the current moment, that ain't happening.
To fire such a guy, someone or some event needs to create doubt in the investors and board member's minds and at the current moment, that ain't happening.
Bro churns out more and more money for Activision year over year. What kind of crazy ass company would fire such a CEO? Sure the firing is absolutely fucking disgusting, but that's what you get in a predatory capitalist system focused on deriving the maximum benefit for shareholders. It's a travesty, but asking a company to fire a CEO that works incredibly well within the confines of such a system is ludicrous. I think he raised PROFITS from 0.28 billion to 1.3 billion this year. It's inane to think Activision would fire him. Jim should stick to criticizing games and not business measures.
Yes I'm aware of the reasoning behind the decision. In my view it was still a poor business decision, and also Kotick is ultimately the one responsible for the upcoming losses that they are projecting.
Publishing staff and development staff that they laid off are not 'losing the company money' just by existing, they are resources to be allocated, and if they are not being allocated properly then that is on the leadership of the company, not the employees.