fran townsend steps down from abk, still at Activision-Blizzard

[Acidbaron]

In your opinion, but they actually aren't legally. The same statement would also be false "Fran Townsend steps down from ABK, still at King".

They merged together, unlike King or other studios that were merely acquired under the formerly Activision umbrella what now is called Activision Blizzard.

[Dhrizzle]

They merged together, unlike King or other studios that were merely acquired under the formerly Activision umbrella what now is called Activision Blizzard.

Blizzard's relationship to Activision-Blizzard is the same as it was to Vivendi Games, their relationship to Activision is similar to their relationship to Sierra Games. Would you say Blizz was merged with either of those?

[Acidbaron]

Blizzard's relationship to Activision-Blizzard is the same as it was to Vivendi Games, their relationship to Activision is similar to their relationship to Sierra Games. Would you say Blizz was merged with either of those?

That is incorrect you can see the difference more clearly if you take a closer look at the company leadership structure. You will see how since the merger the top roles have all slowly been faded out, as there cannot be two of that role in the same company.

There is no longer a CEO at Blizzard for example, i believe now after Brack is out there is also no longer a president merely co-leaders. Titles matter in business and lay out how a company is structured.

There seem to be some resistance to consider them as one and the same company, i can understand that but they are one and the same Activision and Blizzard no longer exist since the merger, it's ActivisionBlizzard now.

Probably the best thing that could have happened for blizzard is the merger, as much i dislike corporate overreach through MBAs leading creative product developments. The stories coming out now highlight not just scandals and incompetence but also how immature the company is/was and how WoW basically gave them a boatload of money to effectively squander. Best that is just my opinion but the merger and different corporate structure is not merely an opinion and their relationship to both Vivendi and Sierra is different.

To claim they are the same means you never really even looked into what Vivendi was to be brutally honest, but as i said i can understand why some reject this.

[Zyky]

They merged together, unlike King or other studios that were merely acquired under the formerly Activision umbrella what now is called Activision Blizzard.

No see the only thing "merged" was the name. Blizzard is still under Activision-Blizzard(the parent company) and until recently still had a full team of Chief Officers within their own company.

[Magical Mudcrab]

If she'd played for the other political team, you'd be singing a slightly different tune. Just to be clear, I wasn't happy with Townsend (or the Bush administration) when it was current news.

What a stupid statement to make, it's obviously not a Republican vs. Democrat issue. The problem is that she blatantly defended the torture of prisoners, which was shown to not even be an effective form of information gathering. If she hadn't done that and was not part of the administration that did, then she would obviously not have as much flack coming at her because she wouldn't have been blatantly working towards the violation human rights law, such as the Geneva Convention.

[Acidbaron]

No see the only thing "merged" was the name. Blizzard is still under Activision-Blizzard(the parent company) and until recently still had a full team of Chief Officers within their own company.

That is not correct that only the name merged, and the roles where being phased out over time seems completely normal when speaking about two large companies merging to not impact day to day and long term operations over night, considering it was not a hostile take over as Vivendi seemed glad to be rid of Blizzard and later Activision Blizzard.

What are you basing this off exactly, curious to know as no business news or official statements have ever referred to this merger as anything other than a merger, not a merger in name only. Seems to me if i am wrong you can easily provide a reputable source claiming this or else i am afraid i have to simply write this off as yet another former blizzard fan who has issues with accepting that long before Activision came into play Blizzard was a poorly managed goose with eggs, what allowed it to survive for as long as it has or more directly Blizzard was responsible for most what we see today, barring Reforged but that could also been avoided if Blizzard was more capable.

[Alanar]

She's a garbage Homo Sapiens all the way through, but get back to me when she's fired from her actual work at Activision-Blizzard...



"I'd rather be lazy than correct"

Well, ain't that the Social Media era summarised...

- - - Updated - - -



1 year from now shit will be entirely back to normal.

Ya'll have far more hope in lasting change as a result of sexual harassment than I had even when I was still a kid and blue-eyed.

I mean yea I get it, but on top of that is that alot of players are just very unhappy with the game for some time now.

Some people were even talking about how their rolemodels or their image of this big nice blizzard family company is shattered. I wouldnt go as far as that personally.

But the harassement is just cherry on top for many I think, that being said If they can make 10.0 a killer expansion their might still be some hope, but I doubt it honestly. I also think they took a big hit this time for real. This feels a bit more serious.

[Queen of Hamsters]

I mean yea I get it, but on top of that is that alot of players are just very unhappy with the game for some time now.

Some people were even talking about how their rolemodels or their image of this big nice blizzard family company is shattered. I wouldnt go as far as that personally.

But the harassement is just cherry on top for many I think, that being said If they can make 10.0 a killer expansion their might still be some hope, but I doubt it honestly. I also think they took a big hit this time for real. This feels a bit more serious.

The Hong Kong incident and WoD says hello.

It'll be just fine.

[Alanar]

The Hong Kong incident and WoD says hello.

It'll be just fine.

Fair enough, but for some reason this time it feels different. There is a lot of shit going on at the same time.

[Aggressive]

For clarity she is not "at" Blizzard, she's at Activision Blizzard. Very different for the sake of the debate that's going to happen.

No matter where the bitch is at, I am glad she stepped down. She is nothing but a heartless cunt that believes if something in the world hasn't happened to her then it just didn't happen at all. I wish the bitch would step down completely from where ever she is at and just go into hiding....Heartless twat.

[Zyky]

That is not correct that only the name merged, and the roles where being phased out over time seems completely normal when speaking about two large companies merging to not impact day to day and long term operations over night, considering it was not a hostile take over as Vivendi seemed glad to be rid of Blizzard and later Activision Blizzard.

What are you basing this off exactly, curious to know as no business news or official statements have ever referred to this merger as anything other than a merger, not a merger in name only. Seems to me if i am wrong you can easily provide a reputable source claiming this or else i am afraid i have to simply write this off as yet another former blizzard fan who has issues with accepting that long before Activision came into play Blizzard was a poorly managed goose with eggs, what allowed it to survive for as long as it has or more directly Blizzard was responsible for most what we see today, barring Reforged but that could also been avoided if Blizzard was more capable.

I mean you can literally look at my profile and see that I'm not a "die-hard Blizzard supporter". I was the only person who publicly stated that Alex Afrasiabi was a rapist, 8 months before the official court documents. I have a proven track record of posting information early that later turns out to be true. So no matter what nonsense you spew, it's not going to tarnish my record or reputation lmao.

[Ealyssa]

That is incorrect

Actually you are the one incorrect. No matter how much you like repeating yourself.

Blizzard Entertainment and Activision Publishing are 2 separate subsidiaries under Activision-Blizzard. That's the factual legal state of things. Every earning report clearly proving it. No amount of your rambling can change that.

[Dhrizzle]

That is incorrect you can see the difference more clearly if you take a closer look at the company leadership structure. You will see how since the merger the top roles have all slowly been faded out, as there cannot be two of that role in the same company.

There is no longer a CEO at Blizzard for example, i believe now after Brack is out there is also no longer a president merely co-leaders. Titles matter in business and lay out how a company is structured.

There seem to be some resistance to consider them as one and the same company, i can understand that but they are one and the same Activision and Blizzard no longer exist since the merger, it's ActivisionBlizzard now.

Probably the best thing that could have happened for blizzard is the merger, as much i dislike corporate overreach through MBAs leading creative product developments. The stories coming out now highlight not just scandals and incompetence but also how immature the company is/was and how WoW basically gave them a boatload of money to effectively squander. Best that is just my opinion but the merger and different corporate structure is not merely an opinion and their relationship to both Vivendi and Sierra is different.

To claim they are the same means you never really even looked into what Vivendi was to be brutally honest, but as i said i can understand why some reject this.

Blizz no longer had a CEO because the founder who was in that role stepped down, they don't currently have a president because of the clusterfuck that's engulfing the company right now. Can you say for certainty that a similar state wouldn't have been brought about if Vivendi had still been holding the purse strings?

Saying Blizzard only exists as part of ActivisionBlizzard is like saying prior they only existed as VivendiBlizzard.

[Egomaniac]

Fair enough, but for some reason this time it feels different. There is a lot of shit going on at the same time.

Activision-Blizzard will put out a few sacrificial lambs, make some promises that something like this will never happen again and weather the storm a bit. In a few days or maybe a few weeks...something will come to light in another corporation and that company will be the villain for a while. Maybe it will be Amazon again.

[Acidbaron]

I mean you can literally look at my profile and see that I'm not a "die-hard Blizzard supporter". I was the only person who publicly stated that Alex Afrasiabi was a rapist, 8 months before the official court documents. I have a proven track record of posting information early that later turns out to be true. So no matter what nonsense you spew, it's not going to tarnish my record or reputation lmao.

That's good for you i suppose, all i can see here is arrogance really. Might want to be a wee bit less paranoid all i am asking for here is a reputable source which should not be hard to supply. Also could not care less about your reputation so...

Now i am not interested in discussing you as a person either so, i guess i will see if you provide something to back up your claim of ''merger in name only'' but i guess if you actually had something of substance to say you would have already mentioned it.

- - - Updated - - -

Actually you are the one incorrect. No matter how much you like repeating yourself.

Blizzard Entertainment and Activision Publishing are 2 separate subsidiaries under Activision-Blizzard. That's the factual legal state of things. Every earning report clearly proving it. No amount of your rambling can change that.

And yet they are still one company, with a single CEO and the merger was more than just in name only, which was the claim being made here.

- - - Updated - - -

Blizz no longer had a CEO because the founder who was in that role stepped down, they don't currently have a president because of the clusterfuck that's engulfing the company right now. Can you say for certainty that a similar state wouldn't have been brought about if Vivendi had still been holding the purse strings?

Saying Blizzard only exists as part of ActivisionBlizzard is like saying prior they only existed as VivendiBlizzard.

No, because there is a clear difference in how Vivendi operated and that is more like a holding, where as Activision is much more than a holding hence they took over their corporate structure and leadership.

I firmly believe that if Vivendi still had an interest in the company and did not reduce their position in the company and thus voted against the merger that there would still be a CEO at Blizzard.

[Zyky]

That's good for you i suppose, all i can see here is arrogance really. Might want to be a wee bit less paranoid all i am asking for here is a reputable source which should not be hard to supply. Also could not care less about your reputation so...

Now i am not interested in discussing you as a person either so, i guess i will see if you provide something to back up your claim of ''merger in name only'' but i guess if you actually had something of substance to say you would have already mentioned it.

The facts are in front of you and other people have already mentioned where they are if you're as slow as you're letting on. Every single earnings call shows them are 2 separate entities, they had TWO DIFFERENT CEOs until two years ago when Mike stepped down. The Merger was IN NAME ONLY, this is an indisputable LEGAL fact.

[rhorle]

The Merger was IN NAME ONLY, this is an indisputable LEGAL fact.

While Blizzard is still a subsidary before and after it is silly to keep saying that the merger was in name only. It did change things in regards to Blizzard with more then just the name. Even back in 2009/10 there were reports of corporate rules/stuff changing that was based more on the Activision side of things rather then the Vivendi side. Which is common when mergers take place. One entities rules are usually adopted to be used company wide rather then keeping two individual things for stuff.

Even if we just look at the legal corporate structure it was more then just the name since the Board changed in favor of Activision rather then Vivendi/Blizzard at the time of the merger. It is what helped the eventually buy back of ownership stake from Vivendi that gave Activision Blizzard its independence.

[Acidbaron]

The facts are in front of you and other people have already mentioned where they are if you're as slow as you're letting on. Every single earnings call shows them are 2 separate entities, they had TWO DIFFERENT CEOs until two years ago when Mike stepped down. The Merger was IN NAME ONLY, this is an indisputable LEGAL fact.

Rhorle already answered this pretty well, you are pinning yourself down on the legal structure. Where as i look at the entire company as a whole and the motivation of said structure, in this case there is more likely a legal or financial benefit in keeping the legal structure, it is not to keep the operational structure so that both companies remain autonomous. Morhaine was the last CEO and the chances of their being another Director after JAB is pretty slim, any reasonable amount of doubt surrounding this was lifted once the story came out over the mismanagement pre and post release of ''Reforged''.

So from am operational point of view they are very much one company. I would argue rather than saying the merger was in name only, that the merger was in everything but the legal name to maintain legal and financial benefits, if i would have to guess this is most likely done to avoid taxation.

Ask yourself this, if the autonomy of both entities was intended to maintain why was no new CEO appointed at Blizzard and did they fell directly under Kotick? As that is generally what happens when a CEO steps down, a new one gets appointed.

[rhorle]

Ask yourself this, if the autonomy of both entities was intended to maintain why was no new CEO appointed at Blizzard and did they fell directly under Kotick? As that is generally what happens when a CEO steps down, a new one gets appointed.

The 3 subsidiaries don't have a CEO. Only presidents or now in the case of Blizzard co-leaders. So it seems that is some kind of plan by Activision Blizzard to make them less individual companies and just "advanced studios" controlled by the Activision Blizzard board and CEO.

[Trumpcat]

"There is a difference between harassing a woman... and harassing a woman..."

Or shall we say "There is a difference between harassing a person and harassing a person."

You condone it when it aligns with your opinions or there is something more subjective? The amount of hatred and toxicity going about social networks from pseudo "good people" is sickening.

Once again, she is not being harassed for simply being a woman. She's being "harassed" because she's pro-torture and anti-whistleblower. If she were a man that held those positions...the result would be the same.

Context is a thing...however much you might want to ignore it in an attempt to grab a "gotcha"

Is this supposed to be some kind of gotcha attempt, or...?

I say harassing a person is bad. You say harassing a person is okay if you agree with the motives.

Call it whatever makes you feel morally superior.