Feb 29th 2012 2:39PM That's what's so crazy about the system. Unfortunately, yes, a company's profits do have to have to get bigger and bigger every year because stockholders who live off their portfolios want to see growth every year. No growth = no income for these folks, regardless of how much profit a company is making. If you're a publicly held company and you want people to buy your stock, you want profits to keep growing a little bit every year, forever.
Feb 29th 2012 2:15PM Yep. I've been in the same boat, Caz. And unfortunately, because the obligation of a publicly held company is not just to make profits, but to continuously make larger profits for their stockholders (which is not really sustainable indefinitely), the situation just keeps getting worse.
Feb 29th 2012 2:05PM @emberdione - There isn't a national blanket requirement that companies over a certain size in the U.S. have to give 60 days notice or 60 days pay. It's nice that the companies you've worked for have, but not every company does that. I've been laid off from two very large U.S. companies (well-known brands you'd recognize), and didn't receive 60 days from either one. I did get some severance pay — two weeks in one case, four weeks in the other. One also paid me my unused vacation time, the other didn't.
There might be a state law in California about 60 days — I don't live in CA, so I have no idea — but it isn't a requirement nationally.
Feb 29th 2012 1:29PM @slim1256 - That seems to be the typical way of looking things in the corporate world, but I think just the opposite is true. Companies frequently decide they can do what they need to do with fewer people so they can squeeze out more profits, but that's often a mistake. The truth is, most corporations are trying to do too much with too few resources. Quality inevitably suffers. Well, that and the mental health of the employees who remain and are continuously pressured to work harder, faster and longer.
I'm not saying that's what's happening with Blizzard — I have no idea what their particular situation is — but this trend of corporate downsizing has not generally been a good thing for most of the people affected, including consumers.
Oct 28th 2011 4:24PM The fact that they are reportedly "slowing production" on WoD cracks me up. We all know MMOs take time, but they've been talking about this game for almost 5 years now, and it's still in pre-production. If they get much slower, they'll be in reverse.
Oct 25th 2011 5:56PM @Marz - There definitely is such a thing as bad press. Case in point: Netflix.
Oct 25th 2011 4:17PM @Audacious - Sure, there's all kinds of silliness is WoW. But this is the first time Blizzard has used an inherently silly aspect of lore as the central, front-facing focus of an expansion.
There are walrus dudes in WotLK, and they are incredibly silly. But the xpac wasn't Wrath of the Tuskarr, Hear Them Roar! What sold the xpac to the audience? The Lich King, the Scourge, Frostmourne, Death Knights.
They've sold every previous xpac on epic concepts. This time, they're trying to sell an xpac on silly. I'm not sure it will work as well.
Oct 25th 2011 4:07PM @potaco - I'm not writing it off. I haven't decided whether I'll buy MoP or not - that's still a long way off. I'm just saying, for me and lots of other folks, pandas are an inherently silly concept. Making a silly, jokey element of lore the conceptual focus of the xpac isn't a good idea IMO, but your mileage may vary on that. In any case, trying to make us take them seriously (as Metzen seems to be doing) isn't going to work.
Oct 25th 2011 3:05PM @potaco - For some of us, it's impossible for pandas to be anything other than a joke. The harder Blizz tries to say, "these pandas are serious business," the funnier it is. (Or sadder, depending on your point of view.)
Oct 25th 2011 2:35PM @Gaugamela - Yup. An IPO is the beginning of the end of rational decisions and a sustainable business model. I see that Trion is about to make the same mistake.