Is Bobby toast?

WoW Classic Mists of Pandaria Classic Discussion
41

So can you.

42

I meant fantasizing about my relationship status. I don’t care if you keep replying.

1 Like
43

Imagine replying to a forum post! The audacity!

1 Like
44

The comment you quoted wasn’t directed at you, but go ahead and assume it was and interject per usual.

45

You’re talking to me right now, you seem very confused.

Indeed!

Replying in a forum VS creeping on someone’s sexuality and dating preferences

Ixmucane can’t tell the difference!

1 Like
46

Yeah, Fasc! Didn’t you know it was against the rules to reply to a comment that was not directed at you.

wags finger

1 Like
47

I feel nothing but shame… :sob:

1 Like
48

Mind your business. Fasc follows me around the forums like an angry ex stalking you on FB.

49

Oh to be young and silly again…

50

Actually the biggest rat if that’s true. Same guy who then went on to say

2 Likes
51

Found an article published one hour ago:

“Activision Blizzard shareholders pen letter calling for CEO, board member resignations“ by Lucas Manfredi.

Given the WSJ article, the tumbling reality following California’s investigations, and this… it is likely major change is incoming to Activision’s leadership.

2 Likes
52

It’s not going to be enough. Those shareholders own like 4% of the stock or something small like that.

When it comes to capitalist corporations, you have 1 vote per share.

It’s the literal manifestation of the old saying “Money talks, bull$#!^ walks”.

There are about 3 ways to get bobby boy out of office. Convincing the shareholders isn’t going to happen, so the first one is out. Buying enough stock to vote him out isn’t happening so the second one is impossible. And I don’t wish to discuss the third option.

1 Like
53

I saw that. And you are right about it. It’s a wait and see moment for sure. Although the penning to remove Bobby is a step, albeit small, in that direction.

54

Hey, that comment wasn’t directed at you!

1 Like
55

What tumbling reality? California is all bark and no bite.

1 Like
56

It doesn’t matter anyway. He’ll just buy his way out.

1 Like
57

Nah he will be fine, too much money to boot him

58

Go to their stock price, sort by Max, then look at when he took over

That boy ain’t going anywhere.

59

If you look at the shareholders involved here, the majority among that crew is SOC Investment Group, which is an activist investment group that lobbies nonstop for pro-union positions at every opportunity. They purchase a fraction of total shares so they can bluster about their advocacy and they’ve done this with literally every Silicon Valley big name they can actually buy into.

The irony is that entities like SOC Investment Group are facially anti-corporate structures and anti-capitalism and claim to be pro-worker… all while utilizing the stocks of the very corporations they claim to “watch” and “hold to account” to grow their own portfolio and fund their lobbying efforts. It is just one big sham to get people to throw money at a group that “works for the people” that doesn’t actually accomplish anything special other than generate money for its members like any other investment group.

You’d be hard pressed to find a CEO whose company has had stock fluctuations NOT have a letter or three (or a dozen) demanding he/she step down immediately. The corporate world simply isn’t Twitter or other social media microcosms, they don’t care about this kind of rabble rousing, and all it takes is a company to simply FIDO one time to realize how anemic these kinds of campaigns truly are. The other CEOs reacting to the WSJ article aren’t even actually mad, they’re just using it as a chance to say “SEE SEE!!! We are so much more noble than THAT guy!!! Buy our stuff for Christmas!!!”

:rofl:

6 Likes
60

Timing is everything.