Mar 2nd 2012 8:57PM angelwings017:
While Activision had had a long history I'm not interested in any of it prior to the current CEO and its current owners. It has no bearing on today's company considering who's in charge. Mr Kotich was CEO of Activision before Vivendi purchased it and he was kept in charge once Activision and Blizzard were bought by Vivendi. Mr Kotich as a particular management style and history throughout his entire tenure as CEO of Activision and Activision-Blizzard and to ignore it is stupid.
And again, you misrepresent what I have repeatedly stated, like Drakkenfyre. I never said the monthly money stream from WoW subscriptions is PROFIT; I stated repeatedly it is REVENUE. If you must misrepresent what I have posted then I'm not going to waste my time with you.
As an aside, if anyone is interested in discussing the latest SEC filing I'd be happy to. The latest annual report is from 2/29/2012 and is 75 pages. Respond here with citations and we'll go over it.
As for my mistrust of the released statement I stated why I don't trust it: Activision under Mr. Kotich's tenure has done a number of slimy things to developers and employees under its umbrella as well as its customers. I don't trust Mr. Kotich to do the ethical action, and that mistrust is supported by his actions over the years. Why you feel the need to read more into that is beyond me; maybe you should look more inward than outward for why you do so.
And as an aspiring artist and designer if you haven't worked with business men like Mr. Kotich you will. Any business who has shareholders to answer to will have the Mr. Kotich. They have to; he makes shareholders money, which is his job. That does not put him, his subordinates, and the shareholders who put him in charge above criticism. That so many are willing to overlook his actions over the years and the statements he's made confounds me.
Mar 2nd 2012 6:50PM bwh000:
You are correct Vivendi SA is the parent company. However it was announced at the time that it was Activision would merge with Blizzard, not the other way around. You can use Wikipedia for the info, but there are better sources that go into the detail of the purchase, stock buyback, and "merger". Other sources (Kotaku 7/11/2008) quote Mr. Kotich as saying he offered an outright purchase of Blizzard first. "Mergers" that start out first as outright buyouts are not a combination of equals.
And it's Bobby Kotick who is in charge, and he's the one who sets the tone for the organization. Which corporate culture do you think he runs by: the one he had when he was in charge of Activision, or the culture of the company he had no interactions with until after the "merger"?
Mar 2nd 2012 6:37PM Drakkenfyre:
I understand. You have nothing but my overestimation of the monthly revenue from WoW subscriptions, so you're going to stick with that and harp on it. You have nothing else but a silly comparison, and won't even admit you misrepresented my statements about revenue versus profit.
That's ok. When you can't refute run with what you know. Let me know when you've got something more.
Mar 2nd 2012 6:33PM raingod:
Google is a wonderful thing. Try using it with these terms: "activision poor treatment employee".
As for facts...I have Activision's prior history, a pretty good estimate of their monthly revenue from WoW subscriptions alone (I don't count any other source of revenue, such as the Blizzard store, Starcraft, etc) and the fact that Diablo 3 will be a blockbuster hit with the potential to break the records Halo set for sales revenue.
What facts do you have? One statement from one person, and.....?
Mar 2nd 2012 4:31PM Drakkenfyre:
Your continuing ranting about my miscalculation is funny. I think that no matter what number I pick you won't be happy. Even with the low estimate of $8 million a month is still a lot of money for a gaming company. Most games do not have a subscription; they have to rely on new game sales and the occasional DLC. To ignore or downplay the wave of money that comes in monthly is disingenuous. How many game companies can have a reasonable expectation on $8mx12 months as a revenue stream?
To your next point: I'm not ranting about PvP, PvE, Top Guilds, etc. so I don't know why you even bother mentioning them. They're not relevant to what I originally posted so this is as far as I will pay any attention to them.
All I'm pointing out is that Activision is in charge (Not Blizzard), that Activision has a long history of doing not nice things, and in the light of that history as well the revenue generated by WoW (And soon to be D3) I would not believe the platitudes of any statement issued by anyone without some verifiable information. I'm suggest that Activision is being Activision and is maximizing their profits while sticking it to their employees. Activision's history backs that up more than anything else.
Finally, I didn't count operating costs because I don't know them. That's why I said REVENUE and not PROFIT. The former does not take into account expenses, while the latter does.
Who looks like a moron, to use your words?
Mar 2nd 2012 2:54PM Shinanji:
We have only the published statements of several Activision and Blizzard employees that Activision does not interfere in Blizzard's operation. We are not privy to internal meetings between Activision and Blizzard employees, so no-one can say with certainty that it's true.
I would argue that Activision has been increasing its influence since buying Blizzard and will increase its influence even faster. Losing 2 million subscribers and that revenue stream will sound the klaxons at Activision HQ and they will respond with a direct hand. They have to; Activision has shareholders it has to answer to. To not do so would put them at risk of a shareholder revolt and lawsuits.
Do I attribute this layoff to less than honorable reasons? Yup. Activision has a history of being jerks and taking the low road when it comes to increasing profits so a 600 person first round layoff is not above them. When it comes to business in general and Activision in particular I would always follow the money first and foremost. Anything else without verification is speculation at best, delusion/rationalization at worst.
Mar 2nd 2012 2:41PM Ok Drakkenfyre. So you're unhappy I assumed that every account is $15/mo. Let's stick with $10. What's $10x10m subscribers? Is that or is that not a healthy amount of revenue?
If you want to accept Mr. Mohraime's statement as fact without any verification be my guess. And if you want to accept that Activision would not reduce headcount to maximize profits at the expense of customers and developers (Such as Blizzard) you're more than welcome to.
I will do neither. SEC filings are carefully tailored to meet legal requirements and to make the company look as good as possible to investors (Again I point to Enron, Solyndra, GM, and a raft of other failing and failed companies as examples). And Mr. Mohraine's statements are nothing more than spin.
Where's the breakdown on who's getting laid off? From where? How does that compare to total staff? What's the savings in comparison to payroll prior to the layoffs? Without information like this you're just guessing on the reasons for the layoffs and spinning it in a way to make it palatable for yourself. That's your choice.
I'm sticking with more grounded and verifiable information.
Mar 2nd 2012 1:31PM *Sigh*.
Is that the best you can do Mr. Crow? Do you deny that Activision, like EA, has done a number of things not only to developers under its wings but to consumers that enhanced their bottom line to the detriment of all else? Or is this you attempt of coming up with the gaming version of "Godwin"?
McCurley's arguments are based on...nothing more than a single person's statement and a pretty document filed with the SEC. You have to believe Activision's SEC filing and Morhaime's statements as 100% true. Ask the people of Enron, Solyndra, and most of the Wall Street broker and banker's filing if that's a good idea.
Without some way to verify Morhaime's statements, I'm going to base my opinions on the matter with verifiable facts (D3 release plus WoW subscription income) and the actions of Activision. My opinion has more basis in reality than almost any other one.
Mar 2nd 2012 12:55PM Sorry. For a company that gets 10mx$15 a month and has a guaranteed blockbuster coming out in the second quarter of this year I'm not buying any of this rationalization.
What people leave out of the picture is this isn't Blizzard, it's ACTIVISION-Blizzard. Remember who owns who in this business "merger" and who ultimately calls the shots. And Activision has a LONG history of being exactly like Electronic Arts (EA): money grubbing pricks who will screw over their customers and game developers as long as products are produced that customers are willing to buy.
If Mike Morhaime and his masters want some credibility they can release their entire books. Not the ones prettied up for the SEC and the investors; the real books that their accounting department uses to keep track of Activision-Blizzard's money.
Nov 23rd 2011 8:35AM Alt, sluts....At the time would it have made a difference?