149
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 08 Nov 2023
149 points (97.5% liked)
Games
32449 readers
1180 users here now
Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.
Weekly Threads:
Rules:
-
Submissions have to be related to games
-
No bigotry or harassment, be civil
-
No excessive self-promotion
-
Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts
-
Mark Spoilers and NSFW
-
No linking to piracy
More information about the community rules can be found here.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
This was a win for whomever bought it. They cut costs and killed an underperforming unit. Assuming it’s part of a larger entity, they’re able to strip this parts or shutter it completely to post a loss they’ll get tax credit for or can use to offset gains elsewhere. Modern US capitalism only cares about short term shareholder value increases and this story, when viewed through that lens, is just another day in the world of investment banks, venture capital, and corporate sharks.
Note I’m not saying it’s a win for people. In the 70s and 80s when the US markets moved shareholder value above customers and employees, life got fucked. It’s just naive to think any of this actually matters beyond dollars on a balance sheet. Gamurs Group can spin the shutdown of The Escapist as a net win or can rebuild the publication at a loss, also as a net win. They don’t fucking care.
What makes you say the Escapist was underperforming?
I’m speaking from the perspective of how it will be spun. Why would Gamurs Group take a loss on this?
Ah. Well, doesn’t really matter how it’s spun. The Escapist was that company’s golden goose, and they just chased it off. Anyone with any brains in the industry or in private equity will be able to see that, regardless of spin. This isn’t in the interest of short- or long-term gains, it’s just a company-ending error by a fucking stupid exec.
That’s a very naive take on business practices that have made a lot of people a lot of money (which is why they continue). I really don’t see anything happening to any Gamurs Group execs beyond, say, their golden parachute deploying on their way to their next raider role. Companies don’t care about their holdings, they care about their balance sheet. Losing a company can make a ton on a balance sheet.
Again, I’m not saying any of this is right. It’s just how huge businesses work and all of it happens at the expense of employees first and customers second.
I understand the benefit of prioritizing short-term gains over long-term when you intend to flip the property. That’s not what this is though. Explain to me how driving away the most valuable asset of a company turns a profit before you start calling people naïve. You sound like you’re talking out of your ass.
I think you greatly over estimate your knowledge of how business works.
You're like David Rose running around saying "it's a write-off!"