More lay-offs at WOTC! [Merged]

[drakhe]

I can tell you never been in a management position in any company. The "suits" you describe are a fantasy.

You're right, I have never been in management, but I assure you they exist!

Case in point: What is going on in the firm I work for (an international bank). Five years ago, we as a local branch of a European bank were bought up by this international bank. Originaly our new shareholder promised to leave us alone and let us "play" on our local market. Now five years down the line the shareholder is in trouble, costs have to be cut and the whole organisation (including local branches) have to be reorganised to be more efficient. We notice two major initiatives. For one, they are starting to dump (read outsource) anything they deem "not our core business". Even those departments that have been the core support for the whole of the bank since ages are targeted. Second thing we notice is centralisation of business. Especialy since a bank's business is completely electronic and there is no reason to have local presence (appart from comercial personel for consumer contact) in each and every vilage/town/province/country, the powers that be have decided to (amongst other things) move all IT to ONE giant IT center near to the main seat of the bank and to move certain services (for instance on a European level) to one country.

Now why am I so shure that these suits do exist? I work at IT and as you may have noticed, we're targeted by this reorganisation. All IT activity in my country is to be outsourced. And in several meetings we had over this, it has become very clear that the suits over at main seat HAVE NO CLUE WHATSOEVER what they are doing. They have NO IDEA what our software needs are and HAVE NO CLUE that (at least concerning bank operations) we are bound to our local legal obligations that differ considerably from legal obligations in the country the main seat of the bank is localised. They actualy proved it when one of the representatives of the main seat was invited to one of our meetings to explain to us why they decided the way they did. This person was very friendly but a) gave absolute proof that he didn't understand or even know ANYTHING ABOUT OUR LOCAL SITUATION AND BLIGATIONS and b) when asked questions HIS UNIVERSAL ANSWER WAS : I CAN'T ANSWER THAT QUESTION AS I DON'T KNOW YOUR LOCAL SITUATION OR LAWS!

Need anymore proof....

 

[Xeriar]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The Quandry

Thank you for proving my point. In my world, being a thief is nothing to be proud about.

There was a reason that software publishers picked up 'piracy' rather than calling it 'IP theft'.

IP Theft is industrial espionage, stealing implies that you deprive someone of something. You are allowed, legally, to make copies of songs and movies for you family and 'normal circle of friends' (the whole of the Internet is not your friend, by the way

That the RIAA and MPAA would paint the above as illegal and immoral is an act of deception, not pleading.

 

[Piratecat]

Here is the cold, hard fact :

No one is left at Hasbro that knows anything about GAMES.

The top level executives are all corporate DRONES... There is not one person among Hasbro's top level management who is willing to take any risk.

JC, you know this because...? Sure, it sounds dramatic and makes for a good sound bite, but unless you're personally acquainted with everyone in Hasbro's management I've got to think that you're just making this assertion up. That's a shame, because the hyperbole blunts the message you were trying to make.

 

[Furn_Darkside]

JC, you know this because...?

Darn it- I had my whole response planned out while washing the car, but you covered it well enough.

*chuckle*

FD

 

[Lizard]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The Quandry

There was a reason that software publishers picked up 'piracy' rather than calling it 'IP theft'.

IP Theft is industrial espionage, stealing implies that you deprive someone of something. You are allowed, legally, to make copies of songs and movies for you family and 'normal circle of friends' (the whole of the Internet is not your friend, by the way

That the RIAA and MPAA would paint the above as illegal and immoral is an act of deception, not pleading.

Can you please cite the relevant sections of US copyright law?

The Sony case (http://lamar.colostate.edu/~dvest/346/project/silos/BETACASE.HTML), which established the legality of VCRs, granted the right to record television programs for purposes of 'time shifting'. I believe other cases, involving software, have held that there is a right to make backup copies for personal use. In general, making copies of media for your own use has been held to be legal.

I have never heard of any cases cited which establish the right to make copies for your 'circle of friends'. How, precisely, was this term defined in the case? Which case was it? If it was not the result of a court decision, can you please cite the exact law? (Thomas, the online Congressional database, should be of use to you in this.)

I eagerly await your citation of "RIAA vs. Joe And Those Guys He Normally Hangs Out With". Thank you.

 

[Mathew_Freeman]

For all those talking about how awful their managers are, I can say that although I've only worked in an office for two months of my life, I can confirm some of friends statements:

<b><u><i>Everything in Dilbert is true.</b></i></u>

Even the talking animals, but they keep them away from lower level grunt types.

 

[Piratecat]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The Quandry

Can you please cite the relevant sections of US copyright law?

Keep this thread on topic, please. Branching off onto piracy issues is NOT on topic.

Thanks.

 

[Nikchick]

Has anyone here read Toy Wars ?

Nicole

 

[jasamcarl]

Mobius...

Your confusing the issue yet again...price represents what the aggregate MARKET feels is an efficient outcome. How many of those who are laid off find jobs in other pursuits within a the consumer sector. The data indicates most. Why is this. Because the economies of scale which you dismiss in Walmart and other larger chains increases the value of the dollar and thus increases the total purchasing power of the consumer. What isn't spent on one product is either funneled into another or is saved to fund asset expansion. Either increases labor demand. So the VALUE of the NATIONAL market is increased on all levels. A few may suffer, but the majority benefit. Outside of blatent violations of anti-trust statutes, market concentration is mostly a GOOD thing. You can point to a few personal/rhetorical exceptions to market value, but the only reason they don't express their preference in these terms is because THEY ARE SUCH A SMALL NICHE AS TO BE CROWDED OUT OF THE MARKET. Majority rules..don't you love capitalism? And this is coming from a tried and true Marxist. Those who express exceptions to capitalism usually simply trade in the market economy for the political economy..don't trust the rhetoric.

And what you term as psychological tricks, i.e. brand identity, is something that consumers want and are willing to pay for. Individual brands rise and fall, but it is a continuous factor in the American marketplace. Why? BECAUSE PEOPLE WANT TO FEEL A PART OF AN EXCLUSIVE OR INCLUSIVE GROUP AND ARE WILLING TO PAY FOR IT. Both sides profit and it is thus prato efficient, as there is no non-Normative policy that could increase the value to either side.

 

[Falcmir]

I think history has shown that there isnt a large enough market for D&D products to make it's ownership more than an afterthought for a huge company like Hasbro. Conversly a smaller company like TSR didnt have the resources necessary to continue publishing a significant amount of product.

What does this mean for the game and for the gaming industry?

Most likely it means fewer products coming out on a regular basis from Hasbro. The game doesnt show a potential to explode in popularity, and developing extra sourcebooks for the game will not change that. Therefore it doesnt make sense to continue to pay people to work on ideas that have a limited return. They will still make money off of the rule books but the amount they make back on a guidebook that attracts a limited percentage within the gaming community is negligible.

The setting search contest seems like an attempt to develop an idea that may have a wider appeal. They are looking for the new 'Toy' that will catch on with a larger segment of the population. I think they're hoping to find something that will really hook on to the imagination of the public at large and by that draw more people into the role playing crowd.

The D&D movie was a flop but I wouldnt be surprised to see them try and develop a new one within a half dozen years. One likely based on a new setting they've developed and have published a string of novels for, a game world, some kind of other game be it minis or ccg or maybe even a board game.
The chances of their success is questionable but it seems like a reasonable goal.

Somehow I cant see them letting the game fall apart and dont see the layoffs as any prediction of them abandoning the game.
They have a strategy and even if it's a flawed one they have to realize the value of the product. In a worse case scenario they stop developing new product and simply put out the rulebooks and continue to make money off of them. They will continue to make money on it just as they make money on products like Monopoly or GI Joe or Barbie (not that Hasbro makes all these).