But what has he personally done?
Given what happened at Blizzard, corporate oversight, fund allocation or media management clearly isn't a strong point of his. Blizzard run right would be making MUCH more money.
I think most people parachuted into the top of a corporation could exploit the goodwill and talents of others to make a short term profit.
Fucking Christ man, you just don't get it.
MICROSOFT run right would be making MUCH more money.
FACEBOOK run right would be making MUCH more money.
CHEVY run right would be making MUCH more money.
These companies operate on a different level from what you can even imagine. Entities as big as Activision are not agile. R&D used to be about identifying a gap in the market and building a new part of the company to exploit it; but now that has turned into identifying that gap and then buying a small company that is capable of exploiting it because the downside cost of being wrong is tens to thousands of times greater than the cost of integrating the new company. This is because the executive is so far removed from the front line talent that they cannot adequately monitor their talent pool and direct it to the most profitable endeavor. This is further hindered by the fact that red tape in each department slows every project down to a crawl that makes the cost of failure exponentially higher than the benefits of success.
I am going to repeat this again because you seem to be missing the point. Blizzard (and other companies that have hit the 'national/multinational corporation' level) would choose the certainty of making 1% more margin next year ONE THOUSAND TIMES OUT OF ONE THOUSAND over a 50/50 chance at either making 30% more margin or 10% less next year.
- 4