User comment history
< Newer [ 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 ] Older >
| News Comments > Out of the Blue |
 |
| 18. |
Re: Out of the Blue |
Nov 29, 2012, 12:13 |
Beamer |
|
|
The whole point is you need them to stick around to the end. Yes, you can gamble that they won't be able to find jobs in time, but the basic point is that these positions are vital to the upcoming transition, and you cannot afford they leave.
You need to guarantee they stay.
"Executives" is the press' word, not Hostess. This is 19 people they consider vital. The CEO is sadly probably one. CFO. CTO. CMO. A bunch of Operations and Management people. And I guarantee a few IT guys keeping the systems going.
"Stay motivated" is bad terminology, I agree. But again, it isn't motivated to do their job, it's motivation to stick with their job. Again, I completely agree this company was run into the ground by raiding and by bad management, but it needs to be sold. There's no other option. Part of those proceeds will go towards the pension fund. You want to make sure you get the best deal possible, and that won't happen if you don't have the key decision makers available to help that transition. That's needed any time a company is purchased. You need someone running reports, then explaining reports and decisions, otherwise the buying company will feel they don't have a clear idea of the business, will rightly perceive that as risk, and will lowball their offer based upon that risk.
Keeping these guys around will cost $1.8MM to make sure they won't flee. But the expertise they will offer companies looking to purchase, even if flawed, will raise the buying price considerably. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Out of the Blue |
|
| 12. |
Re: Out of the Blue |
Nov 29, 2012, 11:39 |
Beamer |
|
|
Creston wrote on Nov 29, 2012, 11:27:
Beamer wrote on Nov 29, 2012, 11:17:
No, in this case it's kind of valid.
Think of it this way, Creston: you're an executive at a company that is going out of business. They ask you to stick around for a year to help wind it down.
What do you do? You update your resume, call a headhunter, and take the next job offer to come your way.
These guys will not, under any circumstances, stick around. It's a bad decision. The only way to get them to do so is to overpay them to do what is ultimately a waste of their time, especially considering that they could find themselves unemployed for a long time afterwards and it's hard to convince them not to job hunt immediately to lessen that risk.
Your argument kind of already defeats itself. What would be better for these guys, to stick around for a year and still get paid their horribly overinflated salary, or to go unemployed immediately? And yeah, you do run the risk of them leaving for another job. (And sadly, plenty of companies always seem more than happy to pick up utterly failed executives. "He ran Hostess into the ground? Fucking HIRE that guy!!!!!")
So okay, in the case of hostess I can sort of see it, somewhat. Maybe. But this "motivation" card is now played for all fucking executives everywhere. The CEO makes 8 million in salary, but he really needs the 50 million dollar bonus to "stay motivated."
Fuck those assholes right down their windpipe.
Creston
I don't get your first point. They cannot get unemployed immediately - it's more or less impossible to sell this company without these guys. They're the ones that have actually been running it - they're needed to run it in the time being and whoever buys it will want to spend considerable time speaking with them as part of due diligence. There's more or less no way to move forward with this company without having many of these people in place.
Lots of these guys aren't the ones that ran it into the ground, either. Put the blame on the CEO for that. Many of these guys weren't in that decision-making position. Like I said, I'm sure many IT guys are part of this. Can you blame the guy maintaining the Exchange server for running Hostess into the ground?
Listen, I agree CEOs are way overpaid (again, I'll call this a function of taxation), and I agree that the management team for Hostess, while dealing with a brand that likely deserves to be dead, completely screwed everything up, greedily took as much from it as they could, and pointed their finger at the union when it blew up for the umpteenth time. Their pay raises, their raiding, is all inexcusable.
But, when a business is being wound down and is courting new buyers, you need at least a skeleton crew to keep operations going and you need some of the people that were in charge of functional areas (e.g., anyone in the upper half of marketing, whoever runs the IT infrastructure, all your field operations people) to stick around to answer questions for the due diligence so that a buyer is convinced that it's worth whatever asking price.
Hostess is a fantastic example of a poorly run company, of a product no one wanted anymore, of a company crippled by pension payments, and of greedy management calling everyone greedy but themselves.
But you cannot sell Hostess without overpaying its key people to stick around. Notably, the CEO doesn't have to be one of those people. Odds are whoever is buying doesn't have any interest in talking to him. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Out of the Blue |
|
| 8. |
Re: Out of the Blue |
Nov 29, 2012, 11:17 |
Beamer |
|
|
Creston wrote on Nov 29, 2012, 11:08:
nin wrote on Nov 29, 2012, 10:56:
I'm amazed they'd ask for more money now...talk about out of touch.
I love how in executive land, the bonuses are now necessary to "keep the executives motivated."
THEN WHAT ARE YOU BEING PAID A FUCKING SALARY FOR??
We should just shoot every executive in this country. We'll name it "Let's stop wasting 900 trillion dollars on useless cuntsacks" day, and we all go out and just shoot every executive we see. Imagine how much better shit would be without all the money being wasted on those fucking assholes.
Creston
No, in this case it's kind of valid.
Think of it this way, Creston: you're an executive at a company that is going out of business. They ask you to stick around for a year to help wind it down.
What do you do? You update your resume, call a headhunter, and take the next job offer to come your way.
These guys will not, under any circumstances, stick around. It's a bad decision. The only way to get them to do so is to overpay them to do what is ultimately a waste of their time, especially considering that they could find themselves unemployed for a long time afterwards and it's hard to convince them not to job hunt immediately to lessen that risk.
Everything else they've done, though? The constant CEO shuffle? The constant pay raises? The blaming of the union when that was only a part of the issue, and the union had taken cuts before? Yeah, all scummy. This is a company that was pretty much mismanaged and raided.
But overpaying people to shut it down is an unavoidable reality. It's not about "keeping them motivated," as you say, it's about keeping them in that job as long as they are needed. They aren't some kind of indentured servant - they're free to leave whenever, and a smart employee would leave asap and have no gap in salary. Just imagine you're the IT guy there, or whatever job function you have. Would you plan to be there until the end? God no, you'd have called everyone you know about a new job long ago. If they asked you to stay, because IT is something necessary, would you do it? Again, god no, because you don't want to be unemployed and staying guarantees some time of that. So what could possibly motivate you to stay until you're no longer needed, during a time that you're critically needed and desperate to go?
Money. Lots and lots of money. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > MS Planning Annual "Windows Blue" Releases? |
|
| 12. |
Re: MS Planning Annual |
Nov 29, 2012, 10:52 |
Beamer |
|
|
It's not about "sales targets," it's about Apple releasing a new, cheap OSX every year and people salivating. The hype goes into overdrive, there are a billion articles covering new features, a billion articles reviewing it, and people generally flocking to Apple stores to punch each other in the face in order to buy it first.
While Microsoft will never have the rabid fans that Apple does, they can certainly create a new version of Windows event, much like those Apple events, to keep people talking and interested in a way that's difficult when you only release every 3-5 years. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Morning Consolidation |
|
| 12. |
Re: Nintendo's Fils-Aime: Microsoft, Sony need to react to us |
Nov 28, 2012, 18:21 |
Beamer |
|
|
OK, so basically you went from "you have no idea what you're talking about" to "you're pretty much right, but here's my excuses why."
I'll accept an apology any time. Plus, you read like a fanboy. Sorry, it's way too soon to say that the Wii U will dominate. People thought the Wii would. Go, search my history for "Revolution" and see how I drooled. It didn't dominate. It did in sales, it didn't anywhere else, and it was totally irrelevant for the hardcore gaming crowd.
The WiiU has a giant uphill battle with that crowd. Giant. It doesn't have the buzz the Wii had, in large part because it tapped into a new audience that wasn't very hardcore about gaming and has moved on to iPad gaming.
I am not saying it can't win this generation, I'm saying it's dumb to stand here and say it will dominate.
But whatever, I'm the guy that pointed out to you that the Wii had a rockier road than you make it out, and you're the guy who called me someone that knows nothing for saying it then basically admitted to it when called out on that with, you know, facts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Gollop on X-COM Remake |
|
| 33. |
Re: Gollop on X-COM Remake |
Nov 28, 2012, 17:58 |
Beamer |
|
|
Certainly the AI is better than in the original X-COM, where it consisted mostly of walking forward, turning around, walking back to the original spot, possibly firing a shot, walking forward again, possibly firing a shot, and ending the turn out in the open, right?
Or the chrysalis, which walked up, maybe zombified your guy, walked back, maybe zombified again, then ended the turn out in the open. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Telepath Tactics Kickstarter |
|
| 10. |
Re: Telepath Tactics Kickstarter |
Nov 28, 2012, 17:45 |
Beamer |
|
|
Creston wrote on Nov 28, 2012, 17:40:
Beamer wrote on Nov 28, 2012, 13:42:
I adore strategy, I hate tactics. What's the difference? Hard to say
Not really. 
Strategy is on a macro level, while tactics are micro level. So your overall plan in a war is considered strategy, while the assignment of each combat squad in any given engagement are considered tactics.
Creston
Yeah, for me it depends on whether it's pure tactics or not. X-COM and JA work for me because they aren't in a bubble.
And, when I played RTS games, I loved anything that required building, hated anything that involved only having units that are given to you (Gettysburg remains my least favorite Sid Meier game.) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Out of the Blue |
|
| 27. |
Re: Out of the Blue |
Nov 28, 2012, 17:27 |
Beamer |
|
|
Yeah, can this guy please explain how Nuclear Winter was disproven? We haven't had a nuclear war that results in dozens of urban environments smoldering for days, as the theory claims, so it hasn't been disproven via actions. Nor has it been disproven via research and modeling, as best as I can tell, as reports validating it still come out frequently.
And, even if it was disproven via research and modeling, he's using nuclear winter as proof that research and modeling can be flawed, so, bu his own admission, any research and modeling disproving it may be incorrect and, therefore, it may be a valid theory (doesn't defeat his point that it makes the research and modeling moot, as it would be contradictory, but does defeat his point that nuclear winter isn't a valid theory.) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Morning Consolidation |
|
| 10. |
Re: Nintendo's Fils-Aime: Microsoft, Sony need to react to us |
Nov 28, 2012, 17:21 |
Beamer |
|
|
Axis wrote on Nov 28, 2012, 17:01:
Beamer wrote on Nov 28, 2012, 09:28:
Axis wrote on Nov 28, 2012, 09:23:
Julio wrote on Nov 28, 2012, 07:00:
Axis wrote on Nov 27, 2012, 20:17:
Wii 2006 skepticism, meet Wii U 2012 skepticism. I doubt your alone Lokust.
However I think you'll be proven quite wrong.
I barely use my Wii compared to my PS3, Xbox360 or PC. Wii-U smells like failure.
The Wii sold more units than the PS3 and the xbox 360. The Wii is the only console actually doing things differently, and that sells.
And, as people have pointed out, it only made money for Nintendo. Third party games sold like crap, the attach rate was crap, and sales have fallen off a cliff so hard that Nintendo has lost enormous amounts of money over the last numerous quarters.
Beamer, you get the "I have no idea what I'm talking about" award in more posts than anyone else here on BN. Well Cutter and Dades come pretty close.
Hey, maybe if they chime in here you guys can race for it!
What part am I wrong about?
Randy Pitchford said, just this week, that it only made money for Nintendo.
Here's an article, albeit from 2010, about how the Wii lags in attach rate.
Here's a list of the best-selling Wii games, the first of which isn't published by Nintendo is Just Dance 3 at #15
And here's an article about how Nintendo has experienced losses for H1 2012, hundreds of millions of dollars, and was forced to reduce its net income estimate by 82%, obliterating its stock price
Not sure what part of my post makes you think I have no idea what I'm talking about. Maybe I exaggerated, but developers ARE complaining it only made money for Nintendo, third party games didn't sell very well for it, the attach rate lagged behind the other systems (and is light years behind if you discount first party titles), and sales have fallen off so hard that Nintendo has lost millions of dollars.
What part of that are you disputing? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Out of the Blue |
|
| 21. |
Re: Out of the Blue |
Nov 28, 2012, 16:39 |
Beamer |
|
|
Wait, what's wrong with nuclear winter? How was that disproven? Did we have a large scale thermonuclear war and I missed it?
Last I heard we were still operating under the assumption that a massive trauma to the Earth, such as a comet strike, enormous volcanic eruption, or large scale nuclear war, could stir up enough debris to cause long-term sun blockage and winter-like effects. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Telepath Tactics Kickstarter |
|
| 8. |
Re: Telepath Tactics Kickstarter |
Nov 28, 2012, 16:32 |
Beamer |
|
|
DarkCntry wrote on Nov 28, 2012, 16:27:
Beamer wrote on Nov 28, 2012, 13:42:
"as well as 2-to-6 player multiplayer with support for hotseat play (i.e. you and your friends playing together in the same room, Super Smash Brothers style)."
That's more or less a lie. Smash Brothers is NOT hotseat, and hotseat is NOT Smash Brothers.
While grammatically the sentence is sound, the end result is that people misinterpret it as how you read it. What is meant is that 2-6 player multiplayer support is akin to the SSB style, which is quantified by the "you and your friends..together in the same room" statement.
I still say it's a blatant misstatement. They could have picked any game, but they deliberately chose one of the single most popular single-screen multiplayer games of all time. One that's also frantic.
There are a million other ways to phrase that without deliberately misleading people. Choose a better game. Describe what happens. Anything. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Gollop on X-COM Remake |
|
| 22. |
Re: Gollop on X-COM Remake |
Nov 28, 2012, 14:42 |
Beamer |
|
|
While I liked the concept of base invasions in the original, the way the game handled inventory made it an awful experience.
"Oh, good, I've got 40 soldiers but only 6 clips, half of which are HE clips for the autocannon I started with and never bothered selling..."
While it was avoidable if you diligently sold excess guns, the base invasions tended to come during the point in the game that I was trying to rush and focus exclusively on researching Cydonia. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Telepath Tactics Kickstarter |
|
| 5. |
Re: Telepath Tactics Kickstarter |
Nov 28, 2012, 13:42 |
Beamer |
|
|
"as well as 2-to-6 player multiplayer with support for hotseat play (i.e. you and your friends playing together in the same room, Super Smash Brothers style)."
That's more or less a lie. Smash Brothers is NOT hotseat, and hotseat is NOT Smash Brothers.
I'm out on this. I adore strategy, I hate tactics. What's the difference? Hard to say, and maybe this game fits my definition because it's turn based, but while I love things like X-COM I hated things like Freedom Force. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Gollop on X-COM Remake |
|
| 7. |
Re: Gollop on X-COM Remake |
Nov 28, 2012, 10:46 |
Beamer |
|
|
I haven't bought this yet, either. I think I may love the original too much to maybe love this as much, and I'm waiting on a deal. Too many games waiting to play to buy something full price right now. By the time I get to it it'll be $20 or so.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Gollop on X-COM Remake |
|
| 4. |
Re: Gollop on X-COM Remake |
Nov 28, 2012, 10:37 |
Beamer |
|
|
nin wrote on Nov 28, 2012, 10:32:
I gotta say this has probably been the best game Ive played all year.
It's been a great year for gaming!
It's been nuts. I am so absurdly backlogged. I am still hooked on Borderlands 2, I have at least 6 PS3 games and 12 360 games in shrink-wrap, and I think next I'll have to either finally do The Walking Dead or Hotline Miami from my Steam backlog. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Evening Tech Bits |
|
| 14. |
Re: Human body.. |
Nov 28, 2012, 09:33 |
Beamer |
|
|
PHJF wrote on Nov 28, 2012, 09:20:
Human body could power smartphones, pacemakers and other devices
Does "other devices" include armies of malicious robots/AIs?
This isn't requiring us to eat more, it's just using the excess energy that's wasted.
I should think the sheer amount of energy wasted everywhere else in life, from my heatbox of a computer to my shitty car to my poorly insulated house, far surpasses the meager extra calories I could offer.
You're right about that, and plenty of companies are looking into it, but since your house and your car aren't regularly with you it's pointless, eh? Can't power a pacemaker with your house.
It's weird that you guys are pushing back with "there are better ways" or "this isn't green." This is looking at a problem: there are many devices on you regularly, some of which are very difficult to get to (e.g., attached to your damn heart) which need energy. At the same time, your body produces a lot of excess energy that goes nowhere. It seems like an easy solution. Even if we're not producing enough energy to permanently power a Pacemaker we can probably extend the lifespan of the battery considerably. And having something in your shoes, or wherever, that takes some of the energy of you walking to power a device in your pocket longer is a no-lose situation.
Yes, there are other forms of lost energy that are of a much high magnitude, but they aren't permanently with you. And yes, the human body isn't particularly efficient, but this isn't using the body to create more energy, it's using energy the body is already creating but not using. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Evening Consolidation |
|
| 6. |
Re: Evening Consolidation |
Nov 28, 2012, 09:28 |
Beamer |
|
|
nin wrote on Nov 28, 2012, 08:42:
The Half Elf wrote on Nov 27, 2012, 22:12:
And for Black Friday, once again Microsoft had SHIT on sale (least on Xbox Live).
Lets be honest here: did you REALLY expect deals from MS?
Their store gave deals. Ridiculous amounts of $10 Xbox games!
So yeah, I'm surprised the XBLA deals blew. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Morning Consolidation |
|
| 8. |
Re: Nintendo's Fils-Aime: Microsoft, Sony need to react to us |
Nov 28, 2012, 09:28 |
Beamer |
|
|
Axis wrote on Nov 28, 2012, 09:23:
Julio wrote on Nov 28, 2012, 07:00:
Axis wrote on Nov 27, 2012, 20:17:
Wii 2006 skepticism, meet Wii U 2012 skepticism. I doubt your alone Lokust.
However I think you'll be proven quite wrong.
I barely use my Wii compared to my PS3, Xbox360 or PC. Wii-U smells like failure.
The Wii sold more units than the PS3 and the xbox 360. The Wii is the only console actually doing things differently, and that sells.
And, as people have pointed out, it only made money for Nintendo. Third party games sold like crap, the attach rate was crap, and sales have fallen off a cliff so hard that Nintendo has lost enormous amounts of money over the last numerous quarters.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Evening Mobilization |
|
| 9. |
Re: Evening Mobilization |
Nov 28, 2012, 08:03 |
Beamer |
|
|
Ozmodan wrote on Nov 28, 2012, 07:37:
You know it is funny, my gf was trying to give me directions with her iphone which did not match what my tom tom was giving me. The tom tom was right, the iphone wrong.
If they are using tom tom data, sounds to me like apple's software is messing it up. The guy deserved to get fired. Unfortunately another software house will hire him to screw up their software.
P.S. If you bought a Vita, excuse me, but I am rolling on the floor laughing at you. Must be nice to get sucked in on such an obvious scam.
You said the same thing about people using iPads.
You really take offense to people that can find uses for products you can't, eh? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
10554 Comments. 528 pages. Viewing page 68.
< Newer [ 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 ] Older > |
|
Twitter 
