layoffs?

[Fifth Element]

Ah, those opportunity costs. Note though that these are not real costs. The really important thing to look at is the ROI. If you meet an acceptable return on investment, you really should be fine.

They're not real in the sense they're not cash payouts, but they are real costs. As for ROI, that's just a calculation based on profit and capital. So in SKR's example, in reality they wouldn't be saying "we expect $10 million profit", they'd be saying "we expect 15% ROI" or what have you. Falling short on the profit means you'll fall short on your ROI, unless it was accompanied by a reduction in capital as well.

If you are talking shifting capital elsewhere, you need to look at the cost of closing down whatever projects/product lines/plants you are shifting the capital away from.

Indeed. I don't think we need to get into the details, I was just pointing out a basic idea of how business profits are evaluated.

 

[Plane Sailing]

Violating the trust that thousands of people have put into your company - a trust that impacts their prospects for retirement, college for their children, and providing for their loved ones after they are deceased - is reprehensible when you misuse the funds for an over-seas junket and is likewise reprehensible when you misuse the funds to keep your friends and allies in employment past the time when the company could best employ their services.

I may be an old cynic, but I don't think that comes into it for a second for most execs in publicly funded companies. I cynically think that most of them want to make sure their own job is safe and their earnings increase. Shareholders only become a concern if there is reason for a significant enough bloc of them to get together and vote on an issue in a way you don't want.

Is that too cynical?

 

[scourger]

Thanks for all the kind words and thoughts. Personally, I'm in good shape financially and emotionally. Wizards has offered me a generous severance package, things are in good shape on the home front, and work hasn't exactly been wine and roses for me lately. No one needs to worry about me.

That's a classy response denoting a very positive attitude.

 

[scourger]

CEO of the Year.

That article is an interesting read. Thanks for posting it.

 

[Roland55]

I may be an old cynic, but I don't think that comes into it for a second for most execs in publicly funded companies. I cynically think that most of them want to make sure their own job is safe and their earnings increase. Shareholders only become a concern if there is reason for a significant enough bloc of them to get together and vote on an issue in a way you don't want.

Is that too cynical?

No. No, it's not.

I've made the same observation many times over the decades.

 

[Fifth Element]

I may be an old cynic, but I don't think that comes into it for a second for most execs in publicly funded companies. I cynically think that most of them want to make sure their own job is safe and their earnings increase. Shareholders only become a concern if there is reason for a significant enough bloc of them to get together and vote on an issue in a way you don't want.

Is that too cynical?

Probably a bit.

But not much.

 

[gribble]

I may be an old cynic, but I don't think that comes into it for a second for most execs in publicly funded companies. I cynically think that most of them want to make sure their own job is safe and their earnings increase.

There is a reason why most executive packages contain an not inconsiderable proportion of stock (or options) in the company. Making what's good for the shareholders also good for the execs helps to limit this sort of behaviour...

 

[ruemere]

CEO of the Year.

Please, do not draw conclusions from this article. The tone and content is typical for glowing marketing spiel, focusing on successes and avoiding any negativity.

For example, there is no mention of aggressive policy against smaller companies, severing ties with established business partners or relegating production to China.

Note the year please:

]Toys of Misery 2004
A Joint Report by National Labor Committee and China Labor Watch
February 2004
National Labor Committee

Note the year (bold) in Hasbro's own FAQ:

What is Hasbro’s response to claims of sweatshop conditions in toy factories?
Hasbro takes manufacturing ethics very seriously and we have had a program in place to monitor and improve workplace conditions since the early 1990s. [...]

Note the year again please: Increasing production costs

Hasbro's Chinese suppliers to shift inland
14 Feb 2008
As costs continue to increase, Hasbro, the world's second-largest toymaker, believes that its China-based suppliers are gradually moving inland from the coastal industrial regions.

Conclusion: Hasbro policy on using cheap labor did not change since 2004, while their ethics took a hit at least twice since implemented in 1990s.

If you google more, you'll find about factory workers in China rebelling, removal from the FTSE4Good Index series (which encourages investment in socially responsible companies, as a result of failing to satisfy supply chain labor standards), another report on worker conditions and possibly more.

I think I am going to agree with Sean K. Reynolds and Monte Cook on this.

Regards,
Ruemere

 

[mxyzplk]

Thanks for all the kind words and thoughts. Personally, I'm in good shape financially and emotionally. Wizards has offered me a generous severance package, things are in good shape on the home front, and work hasn't exactly been wine and roses for me lately. No one needs to worry about me.

The next thing I plan to do is nothing, and when I'm through doing that I'll look around for something new. Maybe RPGs, maybe games of some other stripe, maybe something entirely different.

Good luck. Add me to the list of people who want to see you back and making more stuff like OtE!

 

[justanobody]

And he knows how to make things happen in Hollywood, apparently. Who knows? Maybe with him at the reins, we'll finally get a decent D&D movie.

"Thus sang Zarathustra."

But I think your singing may fall on deaf ears, or any script will be written to 4th edition and alienate many people that don't play 4th and give the movie bad reviews because it acts so little like D&D with Magic Missiles being thrown about at everything under the sun, and the status effects from the powers not translating well to an actual movie as the game tries to emulate a more cinematic experience.

I vote Dave Noonan to play the Rakshasa!

Conclusion: Hasbro policy on using cheap labor did not change since 2004, while their ethics took a hit at least twice since implemented in 1990s.

I am pretty sure they use sweatshop for Hasbro products, because that is pretty much all China has devolved into.