D&D General Hasbro activist begins proxy fight, urges Dungeons & Dragons spinoff

[Parmandur]

I also like the brand strategy and believe that this group are looking for a quick buck but I have no horse in the race other than a customer and as a customer I feel no obligation to take sides in a stockholders bunfight.

As a customer, I dislike sleazy stock shenanigans thst could threaten products I enjoy.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

As a customer, I dislike sleazy stock shenanigans thst could threaten products I enjoy.

I do not believe it will be a threat to the products we enjoy but it could be a threat to products we might enjoy in the TV/Movie and video game space.

 

[Divine2021]

So, there's a huuuge difference between "being corporate" and "shareholders calling the shots."

Shareholders are generally pretty quiet about corporate strategy. Typically, the shots are called by the executive board, not directly by the shareholders.

Who are answerable to the shareholders ultimately. I disagree with what you’re writing here. Shareholders’ bottom line ultimately decides policy, giving direction to those who shape strategy. Hasbro has a market cap of some 14billion, and as of me writing this comment has seen a jump of +6.42 (6.62%) today in light of this news.

 

[Mannahnin]

Strengthen Hasbro

freethewizards.com

Activists explaining their case.

I'm not 100% sure on the financials, but Finkel being one of the nominees, and his comments, give me some confidence. There is definitely opportunity for better handling of Arena and the pro play environment, especially in comparison to eSports in other games.

This may actually be a good idea.

Note that I write that primarily as a gamer, and one without a ton of interest in D&D-branded spinoff media products like movies and TV shows.

 

[Umbran]

Shareholders’ bottom line ultimately decides policy, giving direction to those who shape strategy.

That's typically only in very very broad strokes, and also after the fact. That's why there's a special term ("activist investor") for those who take action to push specific strategy - it isn't the usual shareholder engagement.

Hasbro has a market cap of some 14billion, and as of me writing this comment has seen a jump of +6.42 (6.62%) today in light of this news.

Short term, immediate changes in stock price are nice for day traders, but are not typically indicative of anything in the long term. In another news cycle or two, that price could easily drop. But this will probably take months to resolve. One news cycle here ore there isn't dependable.

 

[Myrdin Potter]

One thing is that today in a very red market, my Hasbro shares are doing well.

 

[Mannahnin]

I should buy some Hasbro.

As a customer, I dislike sleazy stock shenanigans thst could threaten products I enjoy.

I do not believe it will be a threat to the products we enjoy but it could be a threat to products we might enjoy in the TV/Movie and video game space.

Yep. Based on the pitch and some of the folks involved (like Jon Finkel) I strongly doubt that it's a threat to the gaming products. It may be a threat to future potential spinoff TV/movie products.

 

[Seramus]

Damn, beat me to it!

Love that movie, though. It's an unsung classic!

They hid the twist and people actually thought it was a lawyer movie going in. It was glorious!

 

[ECMO3]

"Hey this part is super successful you should cut it off" that doesn't make sense to me...

and I don't know that WotC would be better or worse or just the same without hasbro... but it grew this big WITH hasbro

That is because you are looking at it wrong. It is not whether it is good for the Hasbro brand, the question is whether it is good for the people who own Hasbro (investors).

If they spin of WOTC, the current company is split into two companies. The people who own the current company (shareholders) would gain new shares in the new company WOTC "for free" and the current shares in Hasbro either go down in value (so the Hasbro shares are worth less) or go through a reverse split (so owners own fewer shares).

At that point the question is whether WOTC+new Hasbro would grow faster than current Hasbro alone. If it would then it is in the financial interest of the owners to spin off WOTC.

That is a simplification, an individual's position on the stock also matters and if someone is tied to one or the other company through a non-ownership interest that can matter too, but those are individual considerations and in terms of broader financial considerations, the performance if they separate vs the performance if they don't is what would drive this decision.

 

[Parmandur]

I do not believe it will be a threat to the products we enjoy but it could be a threat to products we might enjoy in the TV/Movie and video game space.

Why not both...?

And the TV/Movie stuff are part of the products thst I enjoy, along with merchandising: I am actively excited Hasbro's current ambitions, and want them to happen.