Because Disney can no longer do anything but acquire other, more successful companies and attempt to extract every bit of nostalgia or goodwill anyone has towards that company and turn it into...
Because Disney can no longer do anything but acquire other, more successful companies and attempt to extract every bit of nostalgia or goodwill anyone has towards that company and turn it into profit to allow it to continue to devour anything of interest.
Whether people admit it or not, this is the destination that the road of capitalism leads to — might as well just make it the explicit goal. There should be a finish line. We should hold a big...
Whether people admit it or not, this is the destination that the road of capitalism leads to — might as well just make it the explicit goal. There should be a finish line.
We should hold a big award ceremony for Josh D'Amaro and his execs. Let's invite Iger and Chapek too. "Congratulations, gentlemen! You beat the game!" Give 'em all solid gold statuettes and let them make speeches. Don't even interrupt them with the orchestra, let them take all the time they want to thank their parents and all the little people who made this possible. Hell, name some streets and federal buildings after the bastards. We're all so proud of Josh, he's such a good boy. Very successful.
Then prestige the company the next day. All liquid assets exceeding 150% of projected annual operating expenses are immediately due as tax, and the corporation is now subject to a permanent corporate income tax of 65% with zero capacity for future credits or deductions. All copyright and patent holdings exceeding 50% of the legal expiration age are immediately released to the public domain. All investments are liquidated and the proceeds dispersed to every household in the country as stimulus checks.
I know that would be a terrible idea. But part of me loves the idea of "rewarding" corporations of a certain size by seizing their wealth and kneepcapping their ability to continue the same behavior that got them to that point. A bit like a Jubilee in some ways. The CEO class treats moneymaking like a game, which we as a society ostensibly celebrate, so declare a winner every now then so they can cement their legacies and leave gracefully before their businesses' bloated carcasses start stinking up the place.
acquire other, more successful companies and attempt to extract every bit of nostalgia or goodwill anyone has towards that company and turn it into profit to allow it to continue to devour anything of interest.
It's basically the Microsoft strategy. Why bother innovating or creating a good product when you can just wait for somebody else to do it, then buy them out?
It's basically the Microsoft strategy. Why bother innovating or creating a good product when you can just wait for somebody else to do it, then buy them out?
Would expect Tencent (they own 25% or so of Epic) to throw a fit if discussions go anywhere with this, lmao Epic doesn't feel like a company that needs to be bought out for any reason at all,...
Would expect Tencent (they own 25% or so of Epic) to throw a fit if discussions go anywhere with this, lmao
Epic doesn't feel like a company that needs to be bought out for any reason at all, Fortnite is doing well, Unreal Engine royalties are flowing in, etc. Sure, the store is hemorrhaging money but that is by design.
That has to be due largely to mismanagement. They're spending more than ever on an ever increasing number of collabs, which both increases costs and decreases the perceived value of collabs since...
That has to be due largely to mismanagement. They're spending more than ever on an ever increasing number of collabs, which both increases costs and decreases the perceived value of collabs since they're no longer special. They're also pumping out tens (hundreds?) of millions to the "creators" of custom maps full of AI generated crap in an attempt to become Roblox, and I'm very skeptical that they're seeing any real increase in player count or retention from it.
Edit: I'm also gonna go ahead and add other parts of Epic Games' strange priorities: namely Tim Sweeney's weird pet lawsuit against Apple and their instance on having their own game store that no one wants to use despite constantly giving away free games.
I'll be money the Epic Game store is STILL a fucking black hole for funds. They want a cut of that Steam cash but steam can't be jousted with like a normal company because they're actually,...
That has to be due largely to mismanagement.
I'll be money the Epic Game store is STILL a fucking black hole for funds. They want a cut of that Steam cash but steam can't be jousted with like a normal company because they're actually, mostly, doing what the consume wants. Not just screwing them in slightly different colors.
I recall chatting with an Epic Game Store dev who swore up and down they didn't need a shopping cart and it wasn't actually that important and it was on the road map anyways.
They missed the roadmap and I don't get how you can try and do "binge buy" sales without a cart.
Tencent doesn't have a say in this. Sweeney is still the majority owner so the only thing that matters is if he’s willing to sell or not. All the minority owners can do is whine - they’re...
Tencent doesn't have a say in this. Sweeney is still the majority owner so the only thing that matters is if he’s willing to sell or not. All the minority owners can do is whine - they’re powerless, ultimately.
While I don't know the details of the agreement regarding shared in Epic, tag-along and drag-along are pretty standard I think. I own a minority share in the company I work at and that whats we...
While I don't know the details of the agreement regarding shared in Epic, tag-along and drag-along are pretty standard I think. I own a minority share in the company I work at and that whats we have in our shareholder agreement at least.
This gets complicated fast and is why there's entire branches of law for it. Short answer is "anything is possible" and likely answer is "they wouldn't bother"
This gets complicated fast and is why there's entire branches of law for it. Short answer is "anything is possible" and likely answer is "they wouldn't bother"
Yeah, the game is 8 years old at this point, anyone of legal age who was interested in actively playing it is already doing so. They should be working to maintain what they already have instead of...
Yeah, the game is 8 years old at this point, anyone of legal age who was interested in actively playing it is already doing so.
They should be working to maintain what they already have instead of chasing endless growth, but have fun telling that to an executive.
It's not like there's a board of faceless executives telling them what they need to do, Epic is still a private founder-owned company, with majority ownership still owned by the original founder...
but have fun telling that to an executive.
It's not like there's a board of faceless executives telling them what they need to do, Epic is still a private founder-owned company, with majority ownership still owned by the original founder of the company. Sweeney is the only executive that matters, there's no public stock price to manage.
Moreover, cutting costs is what "working to maintain what they already have" looks like. You pursue expansion by spending more than you take in to increase the underlying product; you reduce costs when you're in a rest-and-vest mode.
Sure, you can cut costs in a process of optimizing and streamlining operations, or you can just do it to maximize profits and keep the line going up no matter what. Also privately run companies...
Sure, you can cut costs in a process of optimizing and streamlining operations, or you can just do it to maximize profits and keep the line going up no matter what.
Also privately run companies very much do have executives, Epic included. I did not mean investors when I said executives, I meant the CEO, CFO, VP layer.
Maximizing profits is what “maintaining what you have” means. When you pursue growth, you eschew profits now for profits in the future. When you shift back to maximizing profitability at the...
Maximizing profits is what “maintaining what you have” means. When you pursue growth, you eschew profits now for profits in the future. When you shift back to maximizing profitability at the current user base, that is the opposite of maximizing growth.
There's always a bigger fish. Makes me think of the internal memos that came out during Epic v. Google where some Google execs were throwing around "could we just buy Epic?" as a possible solution...
There's always a bigger fish.
Makes me think of the internal memos that came out during Epic v. Google where some Google execs were throwing around "could we just buy Epic?" as a possible solution to the app store conflicts.
I could see Disney wanting Fortnite itself and maybe some of their other media IPs. This seems like it would be a very odd fit for Unreal Engine though. I could see them wanting it for the video...
I could see Disney wanting Fortnite itself and maybe some of their other media IPs.
This seems like it would be a very odd fit for Unreal Engine though. I could see them wanting it for the video production side, but I don't think Disney has any other examples of them licensing their tools to third-parties do they? Let alone to competitors and to the extent of UE.
Because Disney can no longer do anything but acquire other, more successful companies and attempt to extract every bit of nostalgia or goodwill anyone has towards that company and turn it into profit to allow it to continue to devour anything of interest.
Whether people admit it or not, this is the destination that the road of capitalism leads to — might as well just make it the explicit goal. There should be a finish line.
We should hold a big award ceremony for Josh D'Amaro and his execs. Let's invite Iger and Chapek too. "Congratulations, gentlemen! You beat the game!" Give 'em all solid gold statuettes and let them make speeches. Don't even interrupt them with the orchestra, let them take all the time they want to thank their parents and all the little people who made this possible. Hell, name some streets and federal buildings after the bastards. We're all so proud of Josh, he's such a good boy. Very successful.
Then prestige the company the next day. All liquid assets exceeding 150% of projected annual operating expenses are immediately due as tax, and the corporation is now subject to a permanent corporate income tax of 65% with zero capacity for future credits or deductions. All copyright and patent holdings exceeding 50% of the legal expiration age are immediately released to the public domain. All investments are liquidated and the proceeds dispersed to every household in the country as stimulus checks.
I know that would be a terrible idea. But part of me loves the idea of "rewarding" corporations of a certain size by seizing their wealth and kneepcapping their ability to continue the same behavior that got them to that point. A bit like a Jubilee in some ways. The CEO class treats moneymaking like a game, which we as a society ostensibly celebrate, so declare a winner every now then so they can cement their legacies and leave gracefully before their businesses' bloated carcasses start stinking up the place.
As a lifelong Disney fan, you are 100% correct, and I really wish they would just stop doing nonsense like this and start being creative again.
So another EA? :(
It's the Microsoft tact. Corner, stifle and break the market, then exit because "consumer trends are changing".
It's basically the Microsoft strategy. Why bother innovating or creating a good product when you can just wait for somebody else to do it, then buy them out?
Would expect Tencent (they own 25% or so of Epic) to throw a fit if discussions go anywhere with this, lmao
Epic doesn't feel like a company that needs to be bought out for any reason at all, Fortnite is doing well, Unreal Engine royalties are flowing in, etc. Sure, the store is hemorrhaging money but that is by design.
They just laid off 25% of their employees because Fortnite revenues were down, and after they've increased the prices on V-bucks.
That has to be due largely to mismanagement. They're spending more than ever on an ever increasing number of collabs, which both increases costs and decreases the perceived value of collabs since they're no longer special. They're also pumping out tens (hundreds?) of millions to the "creators" of custom maps full of AI generated crap in an attempt to become Roblox, and I'm very skeptical that they're seeing any real increase in player count or retention from it.
Edit: I'm also gonna go ahead and add other parts of Epic Games' strange priorities: namely Tim Sweeney's weird pet lawsuit against Apple and their instance on having their own game store that no one wants to use despite constantly giving away free games.
I'll be money the Epic Game store is STILL a fucking black hole for funds. They want a cut of that Steam cash but steam can't be jousted with like a normal company because they're actually, mostly, doing what the consume wants. Not just screwing them in slightly different colors.
I recall chatting with an Epic Game Store dev who swore up and down they didn't need a shopping cart and it wasn't actually that important and it was on the road map anyways.
They missed the roadmap and I don't get how you can try and do "binge buy" sales without a cart.
Tencent doesn't have a say in this. Sweeney is still the majority owner so the only thing that matters is if he’s willing to sell or not. All the minority owners can do is whine - they’re powerless, ultimately.
I mean, if a buyout is a possibility they certainly would want a seat at that table.
Am curious, can a majority owner force minority owners to sell their shares?
While I don't know the details of the agreement regarding shared in Epic, tag-along and drag-along are pretty standard I think. I own a minority share in the company I work at and that whats we have in our shareholder agreement at least.
This gets complicated fast and is why there's entire branches of law for it. Short answer is "anything is possible" and likely answer is "they wouldn't bother"
Afaik Fortnite isn't growing like it used to.
Yeah, the game is 8 years old at this point, anyone of legal age who was interested in actively playing it is already doing so.
They should be working to maintain what they already have instead of chasing endless growth, but have fun telling that to an executive.
It's not like there's a board of faceless executives telling them what they need to do, Epic is still a private founder-owned company, with majority ownership still owned by the original founder of the company. Sweeney is the only executive that matters, there's no public stock price to manage.
Moreover, cutting costs is what "working to maintain what they already have" looks like. You pursue expansion by spending more than you take in to increase the underlying product; you reduce costs when you're in a rest-and-vest mode.
Sure, you can cut costs in a process of optimizing and streamlining operations, or you can just do it to maximize profits and keep the line going up no matter what.
Also privately run companies very much do have executives, Epic included. I did not mean investors when I said executives, I meant the CEO, CFO, VP layer.
Maximizing profits is what “maintaining what you have” means. When you pursue growth, you eschew profits now for profits in the future. When you shift back to maximizing profitability at the current user base, that is the opposite of maximizing growth.
There's always a bigger fish.
Makes me think of the internal memos that came out during Epic v. Google where some Google execs were throwing around "could we just buy Epic?" as a possible solution to the app store conflicts.
I could see Disney wanting Fortnite itself and maybe some of their other media IPs.
This seems like it would be a very odd fit for Unreal Engine though. I could see them wanting it for the video production side, but I don't think Disney has any other examples of them licensing their tools to third-parties do they? Let alone to competitors and to the extent of UE.
It's Godot's time to shine!