Microsoft is trying to acquire Activision Blizzard (UPDATE: CMA says NO!).

[JPL]

2 minutes ago, Stanley said:

Stop being such an apologist. Why did Microsoft make these redundancies? 

Maybe because they don't need that amount of staff any more. Why do you think they did it?

[RubberJohnny]

4 minutes ago, Stanley said:

Why did Microsoft make these redundancies? 

 

Literally my first post in this thread. Are you OK?

[mikeyl]

Just now, JPL said:

Maybe because they don't need that amount of staff any more. Why do you think they did it?

To make their green column look even bigger?
 

Maybe they need do need the staff rather than get the remaining to worker “faster, leaner and cheaper”?

[Stanley]

2 minutes ago, RubberJohnny said:

 

Literally my first post in this thread. Are you OK?

 

10 hours ago, RubberJohnny said:

They hired 50,000 in 2021 off the back of the big boosts the pandemic gave to tech, 10,000 sounds like a big number, but for an organisation of this size it's not even equal to a years recruitment.

So you don’t know why? Thanks for clearing that up. 

[RubberJohnny]

Just now, Stanley said:

So you don’t know why? Thanks for clearing that up. 

 

Quote

Off the back of the big boosts the pandemic gave to tech

 

Hey, we're no longer in the pandemic and everything returned to normal, also the economy is looking worse. Sorry you needed me to point these incredibly basic details out.

[Stanley]

14 minutes ago, RubberJohnny said:

 

 

Hey, we're no longer in the pandemic and everything returned to normal, also the economy is looking worse. Sorry you needed me to point these incredibly basic details out.

 

10 hours ago, Uzi said:

I think they are hurting for money too so I get it

 

 

 

Worse you say? Probably not the best time to be splurging $70billion on COD then. All this info is right here in the thread, pay attention. 

[PyramidFace]

33 minutes ago, Stanley said:

Stop being such an apologist. Why did Microsoft make these redundancies? 

 

Because corporations are expecting a recession. 

 

So - in expectation of this recession - corporations are conducting mass layoffs.

 

These mass layoffs will in turn cause the expected recession that caused the mass layoffs. 

 

Capitalism makes my head hurty.

[Benny]

I guess someone being unable to recognise the humour in High on Life as being a bit cruel might explain their same inability to recognise the problem people have with them appearing to defend the axing of 10,000 jobs.

[JPL]

22 minutes ago, mikeyl said:

WMaybe they need do need the staff rather than get the remaining to worker “faster, leaner and cheaper”?

Have this is what they've said is the plan? What makes you think it'll make the remaining staff cheaper, are they cutting wages too?

 

Maybe there just isn't the work there for the 10,000, now covid has subsided and people aren't spending as much time at home and as much money on tech stuff.

 

I don't know, but it's just standard business practise isn't it? Lay off staff you don't need, maximise profits, streamline things which become too large, etc

[PaB]

24 minutes ago, JPL said:

Have this is what they've said is the plan? What makes you think it'll make the remaining staff cheaper, are they cutting wages too?

 

Maybe there just isn't the work there for the 10,000, now covid has subsided and people aren't spending as much time at home and as much money on tech stuff.

 

I don't know, but it's just standard business practise isn't it? Lay off staff you don't need, maximise profits, streamline things which become too large, etc

 

40 minutes ago, PyramidFace said:

 

Because corporations are expecting a recession. 

 

So - in expectation of this recession - corporations are conducting mass layoffs.

 

These mass layoffs will in turn cause the expected recession that caused the mass layoffs. 

 

Capitalism makes my head hurty.

 

48 minutes ago, RubberJohnny said:

 

 

Hey, we're no longer in the pandemic and everything returned to normal, also the economy is looking worse. Sorry you needed me to point these incredibly basic details out.

 

[layten]

Love the simplistic console war hot takes that not buying Activision would magically make it so Microsoft wouldn't be making any layoffs.

 

It's fucking shit that it is happening and Microsoft deserve a shit ton of criticism for how they are going about it. But the Activision deal has literally no impact on whether the layoffs would take place or not. 

[JPL]

9 minutes ago, PaB said:

 

 

 

I'm not sure the two things are really related, are they?

 

They can lay off unneeded staff, while also investing by buying Activision. I don't think it's one or the other. I'm sure they've analysed it all and this way makes sense from a business perspective.

 

Whether people like it or not is irrelevant really, as this is what capitalism brings, but making false equivalences is pointless.

 

Edit: or what Layten said above, as I was typing my reply.

[PyramidFace]

1 hour ago, PaB said:

 

 

 

 

Why have you quoted me in this? My post is literally pointing out how self-defeating it is.

[Stanley]

41 minutes ago, layten said:

Love the simplistic console war hot takes that not buying Activision would magically make it so Microsoft wouldn't be making any layoffs.

 

It's fucking shit that it is happening and Microsoft deserve a shit ton of criticism for how they are going about it. But the Activision deal has literally no impact on whether the layoffs would take place or not. 

No one has said that it does, but that doesn’t escape the vulgarity of the whole episode, or explain the lay offs either. 

[Stanley]

48 minutes ago, JPL said:

I'm not sure the two things are really related, are they?

 

They can lay off unneeded staff, while also investing by buying Activision. I don't think it's one or the other. I'm sure they've analysed it all and this way makes sense from a business perspective.

 

Whether people like it or not is irrelevant really, as this is what capitalism brings, but making false equivalences is pointless.

 

Edit: or what Layten said above, as I was typing my reply.

“Unneeded staff” lovely. As for the two things not being related - it’s the same fucking company making these decisions. I think it’s fair therefore to ask why they think it’s reasonable, necessary even, to spend $70 billion on COD, but sacking these staff which cost a faction of that, is unavoidable.

[thesnwmn]

What explanation are you expecting?

 

They don't think they need these staff and will be more profitable without them. Simple.

 

They are a company. They will do what they can to make more money. Sometimes they'll try to pretend to be nice when it suits them.

 

Of course it's shit.

[thesnwmn]

Its necessary because the system we've created makes it necessary for them to return the most money to their shareholders. Therefore it's reasonable. And right (for them and their shareholders).

[Stanley]

1 minute ago, thesnwmn said:

Its necessary because the system we've created makes it necessary for them to return the most money to their shareholders. Therefore it's reasonable. And right (for them and their shareholders).

But they are already doing that, they have just recorded record profits. 

[thesnwmn]

Just now, Stanley said:

But they are already doing that, they have just recorded record profits. 

 

But if they can be higher then that's the goal. There is no limit to "enough".

[layten]

7 minutes ago, Stanley said:

or explain the lay offs either. 

Well it cannot be purely financial as Microsoft would still have tens of billions in the bank post the Activision deal. It could be due to the entire industry shrinking that no longer have sufficient tasks for them to undertake, or it could be down to performance. Maybe a mix of both. 🤷

[Stanley]

2 minutes ago, thesnwmn said:

 

But if they can be higher then that's the goal. There is no limit to "enough".

The money they save is nothing, it’s not even a drop in the ocean. I’m not looking for an answer btw. There is no answer. 

[JPL]

6 minutes ago, Stanley said:

“Unneeded staff” lovely. As for the two things not being related - it’s the same fucking company making these decisions. I think it’s fair therefore to ask why they think it’s reasonable, necessary even, to spend $70 billion on COD, but sacking these staff which cost a faction of that, is unavoidable.

What do you want me to call them? Should they keep paying people for jobs that are no longer needed?

 

And it’s not just CoD as well you know, but to answer that part of your question; the Activision deal is an investment which they see as strengthening their gaming division and making them more money in the long run, while keeping staff that are no longer needed will cost them money.

 

To be honest, I do feel for the people being laid off as it’s never a nice thing, but it doesn’t hugely bother me as I’m sure they’re talented folk who won’t struggle to find new work. Why is it affecting you so much?

[Stanley]

Just now, JPL said:

What do you want me to call them? Should they keep paying people for jobs that are no longer needed?

 

And it’s not just CoD as well you know, but to answer that part of your question; the Activision deal is an investment which they see as strengthening their gaming division and making them more money in the long run, while keeping staff that are no longer needed will cost them money.

 

To be honest, I do feel for the people being laid off as it’s never a nice thing, but it doesn’t hugely bother me as I’m sure they’re talented folk who won’t struggle to find new work. Why is it affecting you so much?

How do you know their jobs are no longer needed? I mean look at the fucking state of Xbox Game Studios, look at what the guys at 343 are saying, bearing in mind these layoffs impact on them. 

[Haribokart]

5 minutes ago, JPL said:

I do feel for the people being laid off as it’s never a nice thing, but it doesn’t hugely bother me

 

[JPL]

3 minutes ago, Stanley said:

How do you know their jobs are no longer needed? I mean look at the fucking state of Xbox Game Studios, look at what the guys at 343 are saying, bearing in mind these layoffs impact on them. 

Well, I’m just assuming they’re no longer needed. It’d be a strange and shitty thing to sack people who are needed and doing a good job. What makes you think it isn’t because they’re no longer needed?

 

What’s wrong with Xbox Game Studios and how does it relate to this?

 

Can you tell my why this affects you so much now? Is it something you’ve experienced yourself?

[JPL]

2 minutes ago, Haribokart said:

 

What’s up dude?

[thesnwmn]

What does needed even mean here?

 

MS have decided they're surplus to whatever their goals are and that laying of this many people won't adversely impact others. Maybe this will lead to others leaving 343. Or maybe they'll all stick around and take the extra pressure. I guess MS expects the later.

 

I suspect we'll get to use this as another reason they continue to be unable to release any/many games to properly complete in the market.

[Stanley]

27 minutes ago, thesnwmn said:

What does needed even mean here?

 

MS have decided they're surplus to whatever their goals are and that laying of this many people won't adversely impact others. Maybe this will lead to others leaving 343. Or maybe they'll all stick around and take the extra pressure. I guess MS expects the later.

 

I suspect we'll get to use this as another reason they continue to be unable to release any/many games to properly complete in the market.

By the sounds of it they were under pressure anyway following decisions made by their incompetent superiors. 

[Giddas]

FOR THE emPLOYERS

[layten]

The entire industry is shedding jobs, heck some have been at it for over a decade despite spending billions in acquisitions during that time.

Spoiler