WotC WotC - why are we still shocked with layoffs?

[I'm A Banana]

We, however, don't want to support the big corporation. So how do we navigate this? I don't know. I wish I did. I don't need anymore 5e based D&D stuff, I have a bunch, more than I can possibly use. So I'm not a target demographic for anymore products.

I'd like to see a dent in the D&D monolith. That game has had a stranglehold on the industry forever, from a design standpoint, popularity, game play, expectations, etc.

Putting a 'Good/Bad' label on it would fine, but I would argue that 'unnecessary beyond a desire to increase profit and the stock price' would be perhaps more accurate.

We don't know the reasoning behind the layoffs. Just stating they did it because they're greedy MF's just simply isn't informative or necessarily accurate. It might be true, it might not be. It might be because they were forced to because of external creditor demands it might be because the head of the company is the literal devil ... we just don't know.

There's kind of a weird disconnect I see in threads like this.

The explicit, legally-required responsibility of any publicly-traded company, overall, is to increase profit and stock price. This is, in a very real and tangible way the reason they exist.

Hasbro doesn't exist to employ people. They only do so as necessary to fulfill their true obligation, which is increasing profit and stock price. D&D exists only as long as D&D keeps the number going up enough.

We have this sort of folk understanding of companies as things that hire people to make products, but that's not really true when dealing with something like Hasbro. Those companies make profits. Products are a means to an end.

Whether that is Good or Evil or Neutral or whatever probably depends on your own moral code. But in terms of just practical solutions, we can decry the tragedy of losing your job all day long, and never change anything, because we aren't articulating what we want to see instead. Hasbro isn't unique in this tragedy. Good people lose good jobs every year. Do we want to live in a world where no one is ever laid off? Or maybe in a world where being laid off isn't such a dire pronouncement where one loses health care as well? Or one in which everyone lives in the more precarious indie space of "will enough people buy my pdf for me to afford rent this month?" Or something else?

These are all different problems with different solutions and different ways of achieving the outcomes we want, so I think if you're feeling upset about Hasbro's actions here, what's the competing vision? What should happen instead? Cuz then we can look at what it would take to make that world a reality.

By all means, Buy More Indie Stuff. But if that's all, then in 10 years MCDM or Paizo or whatever is laying off 1,000 people because of a market downturn, we'll be here again with the names changed. And I'm not sure that's what we actually want to see...is it?

 

[Oofta]

Generally, speaking its a societal problem in the U.S. and not unique to Hasbro.

What can I say. I think capitalism is the worst possible economic system for a large population other than all the other alternatives.

As for some of the details on corporations in the US, I'm not going to get into that, too much politics.

 

[Malmuria]

Hasbro doesn't exist to employ people. They only do so as necessary to fulfill their true obligation, which is increasing profit and stock price. D&D exists only as long as D&D keeps the number going up enough.

We have this sort of folk understanding of companies as things that hire people to make products, but that's not really true when dealing with something like Hasbro. Those companies make profits. Products are a means to an end.

I think this situation is more complex. As I linked to above, the layoffs seem to stem from mismanagement of some of Hasbro's portfolio, specifically eOne. Hasbro's divisions, specifically MTG, have been making profits, but because of this mismanagement the layoffs were necessary as a strategy to appease investors in the short term. So I think saying "corporations need to make profits" sounds intuitive but doesn't speak to the complexity of the dynamics within these corporations, with executives who are looking to avoid blame in the short term, investors who are looking to turn a profit in the short term, and employees who are trying to build a stable career in the medium-to-long term.

In other words, putting aside the ethical implications of these layoffs, which are real, corporations can be better or more poorly managed, and it seems like Hasbro executives have made some really poor decisions over these past 18 months or so.

 

[Oofta]

I think this situation is more complex. As I linked to above, the layoffs seem to stem from mismanagement of some of Hasbro's portfolio, specifically eOne. Hasbro's divisions, specifically MTG, have been making profits, but because of this mismanagement the layoffs were necessary as a strategy to appease investors in the short term. So I think saying "corporations need to make profits" sounds intuitive but doesn't speak to the complexity of the dynamics within these corporations, with executives who are looking to avoid blame in the short term, investors who are looking to turn a profit in the short term, and employees who are trying to build a stable career in the medium-to-long term.

In other words, putting aside the ethical implications of these layoffs, which are real, corporations can be better or more poorly managed, and it seems like Hasbro executives have made some really poor decisions over these past 18 months or so.

The toy business side of things hasn't been doing well, and the majority of layoffs are with those divisions. Perhaps there was some general headcount reduction policy, perhaps it was just the corporate version of housekeeping where they changed some policies to streamline the entire company a bit. My best guess would be that managers at every level had to justify their headcount. They took a look at the fact that the vast majority of work for the 2024 edition has been completed and it's difficult to predict how well the revision will be received.

It's quite likely eOne is not particularly relevant, it's all about projected staff requirements for existing products, even successful ones, and forecasts for the coming year. Since the reception of the 2024 edition is uncertain, those forecasts may be conservative.

In any case, businesses large and small ay off people now and then. It's not exactly earth shattering news.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

In other words, putting aside the ethical implications of these layoffs, which are real, corporations can be better or more poorly managed, and it seems like Hasbro executives have made some really poor decisions over these past 18 months or so.

Problem: you don't always know if an investment will be a good one or a bad one. Sometimes it is doing calculated risks. A company that never invests in the future also has a risk to be left behind.
Also consider that taking risks might involve hiring more people who otherwise had no job there in the first place.
Expanding the brand make WotC hiring people. Consolidating it afterwards includes letting people go.
Tge alternative would be hiring only freelancers. I don't know if that is possible or if it is possible is it better.

I am no expert in this to be honest. But my feeling is that some people here are making things a bit easy. I don't think any manager is purposefully mismanaging. Aren't here lawyers who could tell me if it isn't actually illegal to mismanage and they could be held accountable for this?

 

[Malmuria]

I don't think any manager is purposefully mismanaging.

Not purposefully, of course. But the implication here is that the cost of that mismanagement is borne by employees who had nothing to do with it and no control over those investment decisions. Again, this has nothing to do with those executives being 'evil' or whatever; they are just looking out for their own short term interest.

 

[cranberry]

Run, don't walk away from WoTC, and support smaller companies.

You have to Find the right Path.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Hasbro's divisions, specifically MTG, have been making profits, but because of this mismanagement the layoffs were necessary as a strategy to appease investors in the short term. So I think saying "corporations need to make profits" sounds intuitive but doesn't speak to the complexity of the dynamics within these corporations, with executives who are looking to avoid blame in the short term, investors who are looking to turn a profit in the short term, and employees who are trying to build a stable career in the medium-to-long term.

In other words, putting aside the ethical implications of these layoffs, which are real, corporations can be better or more poorly managed, and it seems like Hasbro executives have made some really poor decisions over these past 18 months or so.

You're expecting a kind of fairness that just isn't on the menu at a large corporation like Hasbro. All that matters is the bottom line.

They purchased a media company? That was for the bottom line. It didn't work out, so the response? Also driven by the bottom line. On the books, everyone taking a 10% headcount reduction could look like a better investment than losing one member of the C-suite.

So, what should happen instead? Companies should never make bad investments? The results of those bad investments should only fall on the people that made the choice? These things aren't conceivable right now to a company like Hasbro, so if that's the world we want, we've gotta make it relevant to them. Just expecting them to do the fair and equitable thing isn't going to get results.

 

[overgeeked]

Not purposefully, of course. But the implication here is that the cost of that mismanagement is borne by employees who had nothing to do with it and no control over those investment decisions. Again, this has nothing to do with those executives being 'evil' or whatever; they are just looking out for their own short term interest.

Over the short-term and long-term interests of their employees...which a lot of people would classify as evil.

 

[cranberry]

First there's this idea that corporations are evil, or more evil than a more independent company. I simply disagree. Business large and small are driven by needing to make a profit. Some may be have more moral practices than others, but by and large what's considered "more moral" is in the eye of the beholder. But it's not like the size of a company makes them inherently better or worse.

Second, at least a couple of the people that were laid off have little more than praise for their previous employer https://www.enworld.org/threads/dan...mf-podcast-youtube-stream-notify-link.701659/. They enjoyed their time while working on the D&D team and had positive things to say, it sounds like they had generous severance packages.

Third, I think that it's better if people accept that while layoffs happen it's just a reality of business. My father ran a small drainage tiling business in addition to farming and at one point had to let go of the surveyor that he had employed. It wasn't anything personal, it was just that with new technology the guy wasn't needed any more. It wasn't great for my dad or the person he let go. A company doesn't owe an employee a job any more than an employee owes a company their loyalty.

So do with that whatever you want. Companies aren't evil because they lay off people, WOTC is one of the better employers according to ex employees than most other options. There's nothing to solve. If you really want to give creative people the best chance at gainful employment, spend money of TTRPG products, including WOTC which according to many is one of the best companies to work with.

Just because it's nothing personal, or not inherently evil, doesn't make it OK.