My only argument against your opinion, is that he actually has a trackable history of poor performance as a CEO and a trackable record of very bad monetization schemes. He’s the reason EA is the way it is.
This isn’t the first company he’s ruined the reputation of.
Granted, the board that elected him is still there. That’s an issue that will persist for a while.
To that I would say, his track record is what makes him the perfect scapegoat. That might very well have been a consideration when bringing him on in the first place.
I’m not saying they had the plan all laid out in advance, but him being a convenient scapegoat if things went south certainly could have been part of the discussion. Both you and I are speculating of course, since we weren’t there for the discussion, and we can’t really trust anyone from Unity to be honest.
My only argument against your opinion, is that he actually has a trackable history of poor performance as a CEO and a trackable record of very bad monetization schemes.
…which could be because he has offered this service to many boards in the past.
I strongly suspect this is just damage control and that there’s no meaningful change whatsoever.
Companies using a scapegoat to deflect criticism is a tale as old as capitalism.
My only argument against your opinion, is that he actually has a trackable history of poor performance as a CEO and a trackable record of very bad monetization schemes. He’s the reason EA is the way it is.
This isn’t the first company he’s ruined the reputation of.
Granted, the board that elected him is still there. That’s an issue that will persist for a while.
To that I would say, his track record is what makes him the perfect scapegoat. That might very well have been a consideration when bringing him on in the first place.
He joined Unity in 2014. I don’t believe for a second that a board of investors agreed on anything for that long.
I’m not saying they had the plan all laid out in advance, but him being a convenient scapegoat if things went south certainly could have been part of the discussion. Both you and I are speculating of course, since we weren’t there for the discussion, and we can’t really trust anyone from Unity to be honest.
…which could be because he has offered this service to many boards in the past.
Him being fired is a necessary step for unity to regain an ounce of trust
Well … yes, that’s what I’m saying. From a corporate perspective, they will do whatever it takes to profit.
I just don’t see this as a meaningful change, and I don’t think it should be interpreted as such.