Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

EA Executive Staff Declines Yearly Bonus to Add It to the General Bonus Pool - MMORPG.com News

13

Comments

  • BakgrindBakgrind Member UncommonPosts: 423

    SBFord said:

    I'd rather see this than more layoffs. Honestly, if you think that an EA employee who receives an extra couple thousand bucks isn't going to be happy, you're wrong.

    Is it enough? Well, probably not. It is EA after all. But it's something and it's worthy of notice.



    It's good news for sure, but I used to work for one of the "major chip" makers in the US and they would would hand out the occasional odd bonus for strange reasons or when the company was performing poorly. They would also post new jobs listings during this time as well . Then 6 months later there would be lay offs and the group that received the bonus along with those that got the new positions were let go. It never failed.
    MadFrenchie
  • DaranarDaranar Member UncommonPosts: 392
    Daranar said:
    Daranar said:
    Daranar said:
    Have you seen their stock? Executives sit on and get paid in equity. This is a financial move. They have lost almost a 1/3 of their equity value in the past 12 months. They give up their cash bonuses (which in a year like 2018 isn't that big of a sacrifice) to garner a little positive press to maybe help stop the bleed and counter some share price pressure from difference government policy makers to help retain their future bonuses and stock incentives.

    Not all heroes wear capes, but all villains turn to the camera behind them and snicker. That's what EA execs just did.
    So what you're saying is: the negative press surrounding EA, including consumer sentiment, helped pressure execs into this move.


    And now we wanna demonize them further?  Why would you expect them to do this again, then?

    EDIT- Allow me to state the obvious now so I don't have to later: I have zero emotional interest in seeing these execs get positive press or response.  I'm speaking merely in terms of actions consumers can take not just to discourage bad behavior, but also encourage better behavior.  We really need to do both.
    I don't think consumer sentiment did much IMO.  Poor games drove bad sales, not a moral consumer.  The real pressure came from governments, which sure you can argue was led by consumer sentiment.   But to clarify, I'm not demonizing anyone.  I'm just saying it's a smart fiscal move on their part.  I'm not further demonizing them, I'm simply not glorifying them.

    As someone mentioned above though, EA is the wrong company to give headlines to about execs sharing a fraction of their bonuses.   They aren't heroes because take Andrew Wilson.  First of all the guy gets 2 years of medial insurance coverage when he leaves, that's worth a lot.  But to stay relevant, JUST THIS YEAR.  His target cash bonus (that's being shared) was about $2 million.  His total stock bonus was roughly $17 million.  On top of his $1.2 million salary.  

    So again, not demonizing him but just trying to put it all into perspective.  These execs did nothing 'heroic' or really to be praised.  The average employees share of the execs 'generosity' is equal to a one year raise of about 32 cents an hour.

    It's a nice gesture, and it was for PR.  Nothing more.
    And, well, we have the power to change the culture, but we're too busy forming little tribes of our own over God knows what that doesn't really matter all that much to focus on this.

    That's on us.

    Is this move more benevolent than EA's competitors in the industry?  Yes?  Then let's give them that credit at least.  Otherwise, I can't blame them at all for never doing it again.
    But i'm arguing that it's not more benevolent than others in the industry.  It's based in self interest.  Take Andrew Wilson.  If you add all his options, vested and unvested equity up and look at the almost 4% pop EA experienced today off this news, HE MADE MORE MONEY THAN HE LOST by giving his little cash bonus away.

    This was a move that MADE him millions more.  It's not benevolent if it's self serving.
    Maybe so.  But none of that negates the fact that it's money that's finding it's way to employees under him.


    Win-wins don't make anyone a villain.  And piling onto EA in response to news those employees will get more money this year doesn't do anything for the idea that the execs will do it again, specifically if there's not a huge payday in it for them.

    Continuing to demonize or disparage them or render any positive results invalid because you dislike what they've done in the past is a HUGE part of what's wrong with American politics in general right now.  No need to maintain the same attitude here, is there?
    Or maybe the problem with American politics is not listening to people and being IO about everything.   I already said 3 (i think) times that I'm not demonizing them for this, I'm simply not glorifying them for it because it's a self interested move.  Just because I don't think this is such a benevolent and wonderfully generous move, doesn't mean I think they are all horrible snakes.  I rather respect the move, but not as something it isn't: generous and selfless.  There is a middle.


    If I want a world in which people can purchase success and power with cash, I'll play Real Life. Keep Virtual Worlds Virtual!


  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    edited June 2019
    Daranar said:
    Daranar said:
    Daranar said:
    Daranar said:
    Have you seen their stock? Executives sit on and get paid in equity. This is a financial move. They have lost almost a 1/3 of their equity value in the past 12 months. They give up their cash bonuses (which in a year like 2018 isn't that big of a sacrifice) to garner a little positive press to maybe help stop the bleed and counter some share price pressure from difference government policy makers to help retain their future bonuses and stock incentives.

    Not all heroes wear capes, but all villains turn to the camera behind them and snicker. That's what EA execs just did.
    So what you're saying is: the negative press surrounding EA, including consumer sentiment, helped pressure execs into this move.


    And now we wanna demonize them further?  Why would you expect them to do this again, then?

    EDIT- Allow me to state the obvious now so I don't have to later: I have zero emotional interest in seeing these execs get positive press or response.  I'm speaking merely in terms of actions consumers can take not just to discourage bad behavior, but also encourage better behavior.  We really need to do both.
    I don't think consumer sentiment did much IMO.  Poor games drove bad sales, not a moral consumer.  The real pressure came from governments, which sure you can argue was led by consumer sentiment.   But to clarify, I'm not demonizing anyone.  I'm just saying it's a smart fiscal move on their part.  I'm not further demonizing them, I'm simply not glorifying them.

    As someone mentioned above though, EA is the wrong company to give headlines to about execs sharing a fraction of their bonuses.   They aren't heroes because take Andrew Wilson.  First of all the guy gets 2 years of medial insurance coverage when he leaves, that's worth a lot.  But to stay relevant, JUST THIS YEAR.  His target cash bonus (that's being shared) was about $2 million.  His total stock bonus was roughly $17 million.  On top of his $1.2 million salary.  

    So again, not demonizing him but just trying to put it all into perspective.  These execs did nothing 'heroic' or really to be praised.  The average employees share of the execs 'generosity' is equal to a one year raise of about 32 cents an hour.

    It's a nice gesture, and it was for PR.  Nothing more.
    And, well, we have the power to change the culture, but we're too busy forming little tribes of our own over God knows what that doesn't really matter all that much to focus on this.

    That's on us.

    Is this move more benevolent than EA's competitors in the industry?  Yes?  Then let's give them that credit at least.  Otherwise, I can't blame them at all for never doing it again.
    But i'm arguing that it's not more benevolent than others in the industry.  It's based in self interest.  Take Andrew Wilson.  If you add all his options, vested and unvested equity up and look at the almost 4% pop EA experienced today off this news, HE MADE MORE MONEY THAN HE LOST by giving his little cash bonus away.

    This was a move that MADE him millions more.  It's not benevolent if it's self serving.
    Maybe so.  But none of that negates the fact that it's money that's finding it's way to employees under him.


    Win-wins don't make anyone a villain.  And piling onto EA in response to news those employees will get more money this year doesn't do anything for the idea that the execs will do it again, specifically if there's not a huge payday in it for them.

    Continuing to demonize or disparage them or render any positive results invalid because you dislike what they've done in the past is a HUGE part of what's wrong with American politics in general right now.  No need to maintain the same attitude here, is there?
    Or maybe the problem with American politics is not listening to people and being IO about everything.   I already said 3 (i think) times that I'm not demonizing them for this, I'm simply not glorifying them for it because it's a self interested move.  Just because I don't think this is such a benevolent and wonderfully generous move, doesn't mean I think they are all horrible snakes.  I rather respect the move, but not as something it isn't: generous and selfless.  There is a middle.


    Your original post I quoted focused on nothing but the negative side.  Don't try to gaslight me now on the original sentiment of the post I quoted.  You literally fucking implied they were villains.
    Gdemami

    image
  • LimnicLimnic Member RarePosts: 1,116
    edited June 2019
    Sovrath said:

    Asch126 said:

    .....oh so generous, the guys that earn millions anyway want their bonus to go to the general pool.



    See guys? EA cares!! Buy Anthem!! Do you like surprise mechanics?



    I'm pretty sure the people below them are just happy to have the money.
    Agreed.  We, as consumers, exhibit just a little bit of hypocrisy when we discuss the compensation of execs but refuse to give any credit when they do something like this.

    I get it, it is likely a response to external pressures.  But we're part of that pressure, so it's kind of like blaming them for listening to said pressure (again, at least partially coming from us).
    Does that mean we can pat ourselves on the back for pressuring them into doing something good?
    MadFrenchie
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    Nilden said:
    Torval said:
    I'm sure the middle-management queued for the fallout are ecstatic. The problem is they should just be doing this anyway and not announcing it. Doing the right thing for recognition and accolades takes the good out of it. If they really mean it they'll change corporate culture to make better revenue sharing a normal practice, if not then they're just doing PR.
    Don't disagree, but these execs aren't making emotional decisions with this money.  They respond to the market pressures they feel.

    Continuing to antagonize them or disparage their company publicly, specifically over this specific action, doesn't seem likely to condition them to change said practices.
    Oh I dunno the whole thing seems kinda disingenuous when you just got caught saying loot boxes are actually ethical surprise mechanics...

    I'm completely disgusted with EA and boycott them.
    Don't get me wrong: take them to the shed for shit like that.

    But also show them if they do things that benefit others, like us or the "little guys" in their company, we credit them for it.
    Gdemami

    image
  • AkulasAkulas Member RarePosts: 3,015
    Gets it back through overpaying by 15% each pay check

    This isn't a signature, you just think it is.

  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    edited June 2019
    Daranar said:
    Daranar said:
    Daranar said:
    Have you seen their stock? Executives sit on and get paid in equity. This is a financial move. They have lost almost a 1/3 of their equity value in the past 12 months. They give up their cash bonuses (which in a year like 2018 isn't that big of a sacrifice) to garner a little positive press to maybe help stop the bleed and counter some share price pressure from difference government policy makers to help retain their future bonuses and stock incentives.

    Not all heroes wear capes, but all villains turn to the camera behind them and snicker. That's what EA execs just did.
    So what you're saying is: the negative press surrounding EA, including consumer sentiment, helped pressure execs into this move.


    And now we wanna demonize them further?  Why would you expect them to do this again, then?

    EDIT- Allow me to state the obvious now so I don't have to later: I have zero emotional interest in seeing these execs get positive press or response.  I'm speaking merely in terms of actions consumers can take not just to discourage bad behavior, but also encourage better behavior.  We really need to do both.
    I don't think consumer sentiment did much IMO.  Poor games drove bad sales, not a moral consumer.  The real pressure came from governments, which sure you can argue was led by consumer sentiment.   But to clarify, I'm not demonizing anyone.  I'm just saying it's a smart fiscal move on their part.  I'm not further demonizing them, I'm simply not glorifying them.

    As someone mentioned above though, EA is the wrong company to give headlines to about execs sharing a fraction of their bonuses.   They aren't heroes because take Andrew Wilson.  First of all the guy gets 2 years of medial insurance coverage when he leaves, that's worth a lot.  But to stay relevant, JUST THIS YEAR.  His target cash bonus (that's being shared) was about $2 million.  His total stock bonus was roughly $17 million.  On top of his $1.2 million salary.  

    So again, not demonizing him but just trying to put it all into perspective.  These execs did nothing 'heroic' or really to be praised.  The average employees share of the execs 'generosity' is equal to a one year raise of about 32 cents an hour.

    It's a nice gesture, and it was for PR.  Nothing more.
    And, well, we have the power to change the culture, but we're too busy forming little tribes of our own over God knows what that doesn't really matter all that much to focus on this.

    That's on us.

    Is this move more benevolent than EA's competitors in the industry?  Yes?  Then let's give them that credit at least.  Otherwise, I can't blame them at all for never doing it again.
    But i'm arguing that it's not more benevolent than others in the industry.  It's based in self interest.  Take Andrew Wilson.  If you add all his options, vested and unvested equity up and look at the almost 4% pop EA experienced today off this news, HE MADE MORE MONEY THAN HE LOST by giving his little cash bonus away.

    This was a move that MADE him millions more.  It's not benevolent if it's self serving.
    Maybe so.  But none of that negates the fact that it's money that's finding it's way to employees under him.


    Win-wins don't make anyone a villain.  And piling onto EA in response to news those employees will get more money this year doesn't do anything for the idea that the execs will do it again, specifically if there's not a huge payday in it for them.

    Continuing to demonize or disparage them or render any positive results invalid because you dislike what they've done in the past is a HUGE part of what's wrong with American politics in general right now.  No need to maintain the same attitude here, is there?
    Its making its way back into the company, which isn't quite the same thing. Also these people gave up their bonuses due to not deserving them, as its under their less than stellar control that their company and products have lost value. These are the same people who have been steering the company into the rocks for years. Nothing there has changed. So how the blue bloody fucking hell is this a win win situation!? While it is great they didn't try to do damage control by laying off people at the lowest positions, you know, the people who didn't cause this shit, that does not change the hard fact the company is still in the hands of the people that caused this crisis in the first place by way of piss poor management. Until the power structure changes, or EA starts to show true interest in improvement, I'm not changing my position that they are not a company I wish to support, just because they gave up bonus money that they failed miserably to earn in the first place.



    You don't have to.  Like @nilden mentioned, this comes on the heels of a gaffe, and will likely be followed by more in the future.  And as I said in my quote to them: take them to the shed for it.


    But bringing that shit in here and painting employees getting more money as just another shit move by EA execs only sends the message that consumers hate them for merely existing.  That gets you and I nothing.

    EDIT- We do all realize we dislike the EA execs because they're making moves that don't serve us, right (like lootboxes)?  And now we're criticizing them for making a move that happens to serve them as well as their employees.  Think about that.
    Gdemami

    image
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    Daranar said:
    Daranar said:
    Daranar said:
    Have you seen their stock? Executives sit on and get paid in equity. This is a financial move. They have lost almost a 1/3 of their equity value in the past 12 months. They give up their cash bonuses (which in a year like 2018 isn't that big of a sacrifice) to garner a little positive press to maybe help stop the bleed and counter some share price pressure from difference government policy makers to help retain their future bonuses and stock incentives.

    Not all heroes wear capes, but all villains turn to the camera behind them and snicker. That's what EA execs just did.
    So what you're saying is: the negative press surrounding EA, including consumer sentiment, helped pressure execs into this move.


    And now we wanna demonize them further?  Why would you expect them to do this again, then?

    EDIT- Allow me to state the obvious now so I don't have to later: I have zero emotional interest in seeing these execs get positive press or response.  I'm speaking merely in terms of actions consumers can take not just to discourage bad behavior, but also encourage better behavior.  We really need to do both.
    I don't think consumer sentiment did much IMO.  Poor games drove bad sales, not a moral consumer.  The real pressure came from governments, which sure you can argue was led by consumer sentiment.   But to clarify, I'm not demonizing anyone.  I'm just saying it's a smart fiscal move on their part.  I'm not further demonizing them, I'm simply not glorifying them.

    As someone mentioned above though, EA is the wrong company to give headlines to about execs sharing a fraction of their bonuses.   They aren't heroes because take Andrew Wilson.  First of all the guy gets 2 years of medial insurance coverage when he leaves, that's worth a lot.  But to stay relevant, JUST THIS YEAR.  His target cash bonus (that's being shared) was about $2 million.  His total stock bonus was roughly $17 million.  On top of his $1.2 million salary.  

    So again, not demonizing him but just trying to put it all into perspective.  These execs did nothing 'heroic' or really to be praised.  The average employees share of the execs 'generosity' is equal to a one year raise of about 32 cents an hour.

    It's a nice gesture, and it was for PR.  Nothing more.
    And, well, we have the power to change the culture, but we're too busy forming little tribes of our own over God knows what that doesn't really matter all that much to focus on this.

    That's on us.

    Is this move more benevolent than EA's competitors in the industry?  Yes?  Then let's give them that credit at least.  Otherwise, I can't blame them at all for never doing it again.
    But i'm arguing that it's not more benevolent than others in the industry.  It's based in self interest.  Take Andrew Wilson.  If you add all his options, vested and unvested equity up and look at the almost 4% pop EA experienced today off this news, HE MADE MORE MONEY THAN HE LOST by giving his little cash bonus away.

    This was a move that MADE him millions more.  It's not benevolent if it's self serving.
    Maybe so.  But none of that negates the fact that it's money that's finding it's way to employees under him.


    Win-wins don't make anyone a villain.  And piling onto EA in response to news those employees will get more money this year doesn't do anything for the idea that the execs will do it again, specifically if there's not a huge payday in it for them.

    Continuing to demonize or disparage them or render any positive results invalid because you dislike what they've done in the past is a HUGE part of what's wrong with American politics in general right now.  No need to maintain the same attitude here, is there?
    Its making its way back into the company, which isn't quite the same thing. Also these people gave up their bonuses due to not deserving them, as its under their less than stellar control that their company and products have lost value. These are the same people who have been steering the company into the rocks for years. Nothing there has changed. So how the blue bloody fucking hell is this a win win situation!? While it is great they didn't try to do damage control by laying off people at the lowest positions, you know, the people who didn't cause this shit, that does not change the hard fact the company is still in the hands of the people that caused this crisis in the first place by way of piss poor management. Until the power structure changes, or EA starts to show true interest in improvement, I'm not changing my position that they are not a company I wish to support, just because they gave up bonus money that they failed miserably to earn in the first place.



    You don't have to.  Like @nilden mentioned, this comes on the heels of a gaffe, and will likely be followed by more in the future.  And as I said in my quote to them: take them to the shed for it.


    But bringing that shit in here and painting employees getting more money as just another shit move by EA execs only sends the message that consumers hate them for merely existing.  That gets you and I nothing.
    It gets clicks ......
    Fair enough! :D 
    [Deleted User]

    image
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    Limnic said:
    Sovrath said:

    Asch126 said:

    .....oh so generous, the guys that earn millions anyway want their bonus to go to the general pool.



    See guys? EA cares!! Buy Anthem!! Do you like surprise mechanics?



    I'm pretty sure the people below them are just happy to have the money.
    Agreed.  We, as consumers, exhibit just a little bit of hypocrisy when we discuss the compensation of execs but refuse to give any credit when they do something like this.

    I get it, it is likely a response to external pressures.  But we're part of that pressure, so it's kind of like blaming them for listening to said pressure (again, at least partially coming from us).
    Does that mean we can pat ourselves on the back for pressuring them into doing something good?
    We should demonize them AND pat ourselves on the back...  For convincing them to give us something to demonize them over. :D
    Limnic[Deleted User]

    image
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    edited June 2019
    Limnic said:
    Sovrath said:

    Asch126 said:

    .....oh so generous, the guys that earn millions anyway want their bonus to go to the general pool.



    See guys? EA cares!! Buy Anthem!! Do you like surprise mechanics?



    I'm pretty sure the people below them are just happy to have the money.
    Agreed.  We, as consumers, exhibit just a little bit of hypocrisy when we discuss the compensation of execs but refuse to give any credit when they do something like this.

    I get it, it is likely a response to external pressures.  But we're part of that pressure, so it's kind of like blaming them for listening to said pressure (again, at least partially coming from us).
    Does that mean we can pat ourselves on the back for pressuring them into doing something good?
    We should demonize them AND pat ourselves on the back...  For convincing them to give us something to demonize them over. :D
    No we just shouldn't let them making one right move deflect us from remembering the many other wrong ones. Giving away their, aforementioned by me, undeserved bonuses does not exonerate them of the rest of their wrong doing. And most importantly does nothing to change the current state, and perception of their brand, or product. Just like changing loot boxes to "surprise mechanics" via soft language does not change their predatory nature, nor the sheer dislike for such mechanics by many of their current and ex-customers.



    And if Loki saves the day and Thor is like "Fuck YOU!  YOU DID THIS TO SERVE YOURSELF!" how, exactly, does this provide any motivation for Loki to continue working for good?

    Nobody said we should all run out and buy another copy of Anthem just to show how excited we are.  But piling on in this thread does nothing and persuades no one of anything other than "gamers will always bitch."

    EDIT- Also, I'm starting to feel like you enjoy arguing with me because it's gives you more opportunities to post awesome YouTube videos.  And if so, I gotta say: I approve (of the videos). :D 

    image
  • DarkEvilHatredDarkEvilHatred Member UncommonPosts: 229
    This couldn't be a publicity stunt, COULD IT?!
    At a time when they are looking pretty bad in the public's eye, what a nice thing to do on a whim!
  • ScorchienScorchien Member LegendaryPosts: 8,914
    edited June 2019
       As a shareholder with EA since 08 , its strange watching the hate and vitriol on a publicly owned company that some of your friends family and or coworkers could have money tied up in thru there 401k for ex...

      That being said this is one step , showing a conscious and intention , others are coming ..
    MadFrenchieTacticalZombeh
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    edited June 2019

    Bullshit, most of us here have said that what EA was the right move. 
    That's not true at all, Zebub.

    From the first page, it's half "slam dunk" thinking:

    "They know a bigger bonus will land next year, "But this time with the peoples accept."

    ".....oh so generous, the guys that earn millions anyway want their bonus to go to the general pool.

    See guys? EA cares!! Buy Anthem!! Do you like surprise mechanics?"

    "Don't get fooled. They probably plan to rebrand bonuses to "Surprise Mechanics"."

    "Damage control.. not gonna work."

    "What a surprise mechanic"

    "That general bonus pool is one big in-house surprise mechanic. Employees love it, though they may never get what's in it.

    Employee: i worked hard this year so i'm getting a bonus!
    EA: Surprise! dust off your resume."

    "well, they should get some "suprise mechanic" boxes instead of the bonus each year .. hell, they should buy them each month with own money, as they like them so much ..maybe they will get some very rare big fat bonus woucher, or may be a uncommon EA logo t-shirt. but they should keep the same rng as in their games ..so mostly they'll get a common Anthem pen ..but maybe they'll get lucky with the next "whateverucalllootboxitisstilllootbox" crate ..there I call it crate ..it's not lootbox right?"

    "Translation:

    Andrew Wilson declined an extra 10-day salary and instead asked the company to invest it in his personal PR.

    We are awaiting the reaction of the 350 people not in the least affected by this move."

    "I'm certainly surprised by them using this mechanic."

    "PR stunt is an obvious PR Stunt"

    "Can't help to think that this is 100% PR."

    "oh how nice, there is just some problems with this pr move, most don't read what they do and don't even care, they still are not making good games so again matter little"

    Roughly half the posts are nothing but sarcasm or downright shade thrown at EA.


    There is no "most of us" here giving EA due credit.
    [Deleted User]

    image
  • goboygogoboygo Member RarePosts: 2,141
    Idiots
    MadFrenchie
  • NildenNilden Member EpicPosts: 3,916
    Dude if you walk around for years kicking puppies and kittens then donate a single tennis ball to the SPCA it doesn't make you a saint.
    Daranar[Deleted User]

    "You CAN'T buy ships for RL money." - MaxBacon

    "classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon

    Love Minecraft. And check out my Youtube channel OhCanadaGamer

    Try a MUD today at http://www.mudconnect.com/ 

  • jason523jason523 Member UncommonPosts: 96
    Just don't confuse a PR stunt with a generous donation. If things were well and fine over at EA land, this would have never happened. They need to pull eyes off the loot box fiasco and give people a new headline. The U.S government is really good at this. Ohh a trillion dollars is missing? Look what happened over here, divert your eyes to this new headline.
    Daranar
  • LimnicLimnic Member RarePosts: 1,116
    Well guess that's the thing then. We can commend it as a good first step, but a single action is not a trend. Kinda still have to hold them to certain expectations and standards until they show they are actually committed to further improvement.

    Otherwise it cycles right to the point of some people's continued vitriol, the expectation that this is just a one-off placation rather than an indication of any extended effort.

    The skepticism is pretty well earned, but there is the idea of "being the better person" and not accompanying that skepticism with antagonism. 
    MadFrenchieKyleranHatefull
  • DaranarDaranar Member UncommonPosts: 392
    edited June 2019
    Daranar said:
    Daranar said:
    Daranar said:
    Daranar said:
    Have you seen their stock? Executives sit on and get paid in equity. This is a financial move. They have lost almost a 1/3 of their equity value in the past 12 months. They give up their cash bonuses (which in a year like 2018 isn't that big of a sacrifice) to garner a little positive press to maybe help stop the bleed and counter some share price pressure from difference government policy makers to help retain their future bonuses and stock incentives.

    Not all heroes wear capes, but all villains turn to the camera behind them and snicker. That's what EA execs just did.
    So what you're saying is: the negative press surrounding EA, including consumer sentiment, helped pressure execs into this move.


    And now we wanna demonize them further?  Why would you expect them to do this again, then?

    EDIT- Allow me to state the obvious now so I don't have to later: I have zero emotional interest in seeing these execs get positive press or response.  I'm speaking merely in terms of actions consumers can take not just to discourage bad behavior, but also encourage better behavior.  We really need to do both.
    I don't think consumer sentiment did much IMO.  Poor games drove bad sales, not a moral consumer.  The real pressure came from governments, which sure you can argue was led by consumer sentiment.   But to clarify, I'm not demonizing anyone.  I'm just saying it's a smart fiscal move on their part.  I'm not further demonizing them, I'm simply not glorifying them.

    As someone mentioned above though, EA is the wrong company to give headlines to about execs sharing a fraction of their bonuses.   They aren't heroes because take Andrew Wilson.  First of all the guy gets 2 years of medial insurance coverage when he leaves, that's worth a lot.  But to stay relevant, JUST THIS YEAR.  His target cash bonus (that's being shared) was about $2 million.  His total stock bonus was roughly $17 million.  On top of his $1.2 million salary.  

    So again, not demonizing him but just trying to put it all into perspective.  These execs did nothing 'heroic' or really to be praised.  The average employees share of the execs 'generosity' is equal to a one year raise of about 32 cents an hour.

    It's a nice gesture, and it was for PR.  Nothing more.
    And, well, we have the power to change the culture, but we're too busy forming little tribes of our own over God knows what that doesn't really matter all that much to focus on this.

    That's on us.

    Is this move more benevolent than EA's competitors in the industry?  Yes?  Then let's give them that credit at least.  Otherwise, I can't blame them at all for never doing it again.
    But i'm arguing that it's not more benevolent than others in the industry.  It's based in self interest.  Take Andrew Wilson.  If you add all his options, vested and unvested equity up and look at the almost 4% pop EA experienced today off this news, HE MADE MORE MONEY THAN HE LOST by giving his little cash bonus away.

    This was a move that MADE him millions more.  It's not benevolent if it's self serving.
    Maybe so.  But none of that negates the fact that it's money that's finding it's way to employees under him.


    Win-wins don't make anyone a villain.  And piling onto EA in response to news those employees will get more money this year doesn't do anything for the idea that the execs will do it again, specifically if there's not a huge payday in it for them.

    Continuing to demonize or disparage them or render any positive results invalid because you dislike what they've done in the past is a HUGE part of what's wrong with American politics in general right now.  No need to maintain the same attitude here, is there?
    Or maybe the problem with American politics is not listening to people and being IO about everything.   I already said 3 (i think) times that I'm not demonizing them for this, I'm simply not glorifying them for it because it's a self interested move.  Just because I don't think this is such a benevolent and wonderfully generous move, doesn't mean I think they are all horrible snakes.  I rather respect the move, but not as something it isn't: generous and selfless.  There is a middle.


    Your original post I quoted focused on nothing but the negative side.  Don't try to gaslight me now on the original sentiment of the post I quoted.  You literally fucking implied they were villains.
    So OK, calm down.  I implied they were already villians.  I'm not demonizing them (God I feel like a broken record with you) over THIS decision.  They are villians because they have been a-holes for decades on end.  

    What's with people?  Why can't I think they are horrible execs for decades of poor business practices, theivery, lying, breaches of contract (that never get enforced), anti-competitive behavior, and the list goes on, and see through this PR stunt without demonizing them further for a financially brilliant move without glorifying them as saints.  Why is that such a hard concept?

    EA has always been villians in the gaming industry and for the past decade it's been a virtually unanimous opinion.  But your suggesting if I think that then I have to also think that they are even worse for this move?  Wrong, pal.  They are the villians but this move isn't total scumbaggery (especially compared to their history) nor is it a great and generous offer.  It's pathetically generous move to secure more money for themselves.  It's sad, but smart.




    MadFrenchie

    If I want a world in which people can purchase success and power with cash, I'll play Real Life. Keep Virtual Worlds Virtual!


  • ScorchienScorchien Member LegendaryPosts: 8,914
    Nilden said:
    Dude if you walk around for years kicking puppies and kittens then donate a single tennis ball to the SPCA it doesn't make you a saint.
    Yes ,yes and lets be sure to ignore the millions of units sold and Millions upon Millions of hours of entertainment they have delivered and the many charitys donated to , and security brought to folks who retirement plans depended on there success ...
    GdemamiKyleran
  • NildenNilden Member EpicPosts: 3,916
    Scorchien said:
    Nilden said:
    Dude if you walk around for years kicking puppies and kittens then donate a single tennis ball to the SPCA it doesn't make you a saint.
    Yes ,yes and lets be sure to ignore the millions of units sold and Millions upon Millions of hours of entertainment they have delivered and the many charitys donated to , and security brought to folks who retirement plans depended on there success ...
    Do you want me to start listing the scummy, bad, horrible shit EA has done? We could be here a while it's a hell of a lot longer than the good stuff...
    Roin

    "You CAN'T buy ships for RL money." - MaxBacon

    "classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon

    Love Minecraft. And check out my Youtube channel OhCanadaGamer

    Try a MUD today at http://www.mudconnect.com/ 

  • IselinIselin Member LegendaryPosts: 18,719
    Interesting I guess and about as relevant to gaming as the janitor getting a new mop. These are just the same MBAs, accountants, lawyers and spin doctors that run any major corporation doing what they do for PR purposes.

    Megastudios like EA, Activision and all the other publicly traded humongous studios are run by the same guys who run any large corporation. It's extremely rare these days that anyone in their top brass has ever been a games developer. Developers are the grunts that work for them and produce what they're told to produce.

    This shows in what they produce and the obnoxious ways they monetize it as well as how they can sometimes announce record profits the same day they announce massive layoffs like Blizzard did just a couple of months ago.

    Also this latest PR move is aimed at their investors not at gamers since it has SFA to do with us.
    Gdemami[Deleted User][Deleted User]
    "Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”

    ― Umberto Eco

    “Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” 
    ― CD PROJEKT RED

  • ScorchienScorchien Member LegendaryPosts: 8,914
    Nilden said:
    Scorchien said:
    Nilden said:
    Dude if you walk around for years kicking puppies and kittens then donate a single tennis ball to the SPCA it doesn't make you a saint.
    Yes ,yes and lets be sure to ignore the millions of units sold and Millions upon Millions of hours of entertainment they have delivered and the many charitys donated to , and security brought to folks who retirement plans depended on there success ...
    Do you want me to start listing the scummy, bad, horrible shit EA has done? We could be here a while it's a hell of a lot longer than the good stuff...

      
    sure go ahead .. go

      altho most will be what some people call smart business decisions , and why they are a leader in the industry ..

      But as a gamer i am well aware of there decisions , and some i am not so happy with ..

      As an Investor , many are very bold and brilliant moves ...

      Ya gotta break some eggs , as they say ..  And some were not intentional but unavoidable in there history , tuff choices at times ,

         And i am aware of all they have done good and bad , and they have some direction in creating a better image ...

       They are on a positive uptick and should be over 100$ again by end of week up 3.67 today closing at 99$
    Gdemami
  • AlbatroesAlbatroes Member LegendaryPosts: 7,671
    The money would've been better spent with EA not being so damn cheap and letting developers work on the game engines they are familiar with instead of funneling everyone into the retarded frostbite engine.
    Gdemami
  • esc-joconnoresc-joconnor Member RarePosts: 1,097
    Well, better than layoffs of the regular staff. Never thought I'd see the day that EA would be lower down my shit list than Blizzard. Funny old world.
    I just assumed lower on the shit list would be worse . . . XD
    [Deleted User]
  • NildenNilden Member EpicPosts: 3,916
    I don't think there's much of a point in going down the EA rabbit hole of massive suck and corporate greed. You could spend hours on youtube and google with that... I know I did...

    If you are willing to invest in a company that uses predatory gambling to get it's money from kids, treats it's workers like crap, has been voted worst company in America multiple times, has the most downvoted post on reddit ever, and has killed more studios than you can shake a stick at.

    I hope they get regulated into the ground. How's that for a surprise mechanic.


    [Deleted User][Deleted User]

    "You CAN'T buy ships for RL money." - MaxBacon

    "classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon

    Love Minecraft. And check out my Youtube channel OhCanadaGamer

    Try a MUD today at http://www.mudconnect.com/ 

Sign In or Register to comment.