5 ms·

as an executive, do you think that zynga's executive team gave any thought to the bad press this might generate and the talent that this might scare away? From

by joshAg 15y ago

as an executive, do you think that zynga's executive team gave any thought to the bad press this might generate and the talent that this might scare away? From my perspective, this sort of thing scares me away from companies, because they might do it again in the future.

cheald 15y ago
Honestly? I think this is the execs trying to grab as much stock as possible for themselves pre-IPO, so they can dump it and run. There's no way that this actually turns out to be a net positive for the Company. It's going to make it significantly harder to hire actual talent, it's going to cause morale decay and revolt from within the company, and it erodes Zynga's brand. Literally the only benefit here is that the execs end up with more stock when the IPO happens.
- samstave 15y ago
  >I think this is the execs trying to grab as much stock as possible for themselves pre-IPO, so they can dump it and run. This is EXACTLY what is happening - anyone who thinks otherwise is deluded or plain stupid. When Lockheed bought Savi technology, the RFID company, there were massive stock bonuses given out to the the Savi execs just prior to the sale. Then they told all the employees who had been there less than 18 months they would get NOTHING for the shares they were hired on with as incentive. All the other employees were given 15% of what the company had been claiming the street price of the options were. PLUS they held some significant % of the stock value in an escrow account for some number of months should there be a legal backlash and Lockheed were sues - they were to use the escrow share money on that case... Pincus is a very very VERY shady character. Yet another IPO that I would never touch purely on principal alone. Who wants to be Goldman will be taking this IPO?
  - qx 15y ago
    "Pincus is a very very VERY shady character" Any examples of this? Not that I don't believe you, but just curious
    - keeran 15y ago
      http://blogs.sfweekly.com/thesnitch/2010/09/zynga_pincus_copy_games.php http://blogs.sfweekly.com/thesnitch/2010/09/zynga_pincus_cop... Tells his team to steal game ideas, makes millions in the process then shafts the people who made it happen for him. Would love to hear from someone who can paint him in a better light than the horrible individual I have in mind at the moment.
      - kamaal 15y ago
        This isn't surprising, not everybody in the game is for building something or for changing the world or for passion. Someone is here only for the money multiplication factor. Sales, advertising, marketing and your usual MBA subjects are all about that. That is, not to care about what you are selling, but to create an illusion which gives an opportunity to amplify that seed investment. That is the time to cash on and move on.
        samstave 15y ago
        >not everybody in the game is for building something or for changing the world or for passion. You fucking suck. I am not clear if youare advocating these actions or not - but let me make it very clear to you; if you are a proponent of such behavior - lets make sure we never cross paths. This is NOT OK. People like this are CANCER. Sure - many instances of CEOs end up in the position of a Pincus - but it DOES NOT make it ok. Pincus is a detriment not a person to be idolized.
        epo 15y ago
        The guy is telling it how it is, you are behaving like an 11 year-old. The world is not a nice place, it gets less nice when money is involved, grow up.
        tripzilch 15y ago
        You're both right. Just because "it is how it is" doesn't make something OK, as you say the world is not a nice place, but it also doesn't mean you have to sit down and take it like a cabbage either. And it's perfectly fine to tell people with questionable moral values to go and fuck themselves. Even though it's not always the most strategically sound way to make sure they get what they got coming in a world that is indeed not a very nice place at all.
- michaelochurch 15y ago
  Honestly? I think this is the execs trying to grab as much stock as possible for themselves pre-IPO, so they can dump it and run. Seems likely. Zynga is an obvious build-to-flip. Now is the time to cash it in at peak. The original push in social gaming was based on scaling, but people are starting to demand quality and that's where Zynga is going to die.
- Mordor 15y ago
  My thoughts too, they only want the stock for themselves.
johngalt 15y ago
It's not like Zynga will have another IPO in the future, or will need to promise future employees equity. Precisely why "trust" should never be a part of an equity negotiation. When millions are on the table people will do whatever they can get away with. Zynga doesn't want another "google chef", but they took full advantage of the "google chef" when promising equity to early employees.
- pavel_lishin 15y ago
  > It's not like Zynga will have another IPO in the future, or will need to promise future employees equity. No, but they probably will be promising employees something - and now, everyone knows that unless that promise is in writing, in an iron-clad contract peered over by Hell's best lawyers, it's worthless at best.
- fab13n 15y ago
  Indeed, they will only have one IPO. But the PR backlash can seriously affect it, if it's made clear to everyone that the execs are crooks, and that they'll never be able to hire talents again.
  - ChuckMcM 15y ago
    The poster child here is Groupon (GRPN) and while the poor choices of their executives did negatively affect the IPO they are still (11/9) trading above their IPO price of $20 ($24.50 when I glanced).
    - fab13n 15y ago
      I don't think that Groupon execs are widely perceived as crooks, whereas Zynga's ones are more than hard to defend here. Moreover, Zynga execs' move was likely intended to increase the total worth of their shares; if they manage to claw 20% more shares, but destroy 30% of each share's value, they've hurt themselves even in the short term (figures made up for illustration, obviously).
      - 15y ago
kamaal 15y ago
They don't bother much. For most these people, who are basically sales and operation guys. They are made believe in their MBA classes that if they have a brand name and atleast one successful product they will never need any technical talent to run the company. And they can sell anything every after with operations tuning they teach them during their MBA classes. And that they can virtually sell anything by marketing, advertising and brand positioning. And that engineers and technical staff is merely a commodity which just needs to be used like raw material to convert it money later. They are basically in for cashing on pre-IPO gold rush. For me this is more than sufficient to be cautious before working at any start up again.

by joshAg 15y ago

cheald 15y ago

Honestly? I think this is the execs trying to grab as much stock as possible for themselves pre-IPO, so they can dump it and run. There's no way that this actually turns out to be a net positive for the Company. It's going to make it significantly harder to hire actual talent, it's going to cause morale decay and revolt from within the company, and it erodes Zynga's brand. Literally the only benefit here is that the execs end up with more stock when the IPO happens.

samstave 15y ago
>I think this is the execs trying to grab as much stock as possible for themselves pre-IPO, so they can dump it and run. This is EXACTLY what is happening - anyone who thinks otherwise is deluded or plain stupid. When Lockheed bought Savi technology, the RFID company, there were massive stock bonuses given out to the the Savi execs just prior to the sale. Then they told all the employees who had been there less than 18 months they would get NOTHING for the shares they were hired on with as incentive. All the other employees were given 15% of what the company had been claiming the street price of the options were. PLUS they held some significant % of the stock value in an escrow account for some number of months should there be a legal backlash and Lockheed were sues - they were to use the escrow share money on that case... Pincus is a very very VERY shady character. Yet another IPO that I would never touch purely on principal alone. Who wants to be Goldman will be taking this IPO?
- qx 15y ago
  "Pincus is a very very VERY shady character" Any examples of this? Not that I don't believe you, but just curious
  - keeran 15y ago
    http://blogs.sfweekly.com/thesnitch/2010/09/zynga_pincus_copy_games.php http://blogs.sfweekly.com/thesnitch/2010/09/zynga_pincus_cop... Tells his team to steal game ideas, makes millions in the process then shafts the people who made it happen for him. Would love to hear from someone who can paint him in a better light than the horrible individual I have in mind at the moment.
    - kamaal 15y ago
      This isn't surprising, not everybody in the game is for building something or for changing the world or for passion. Someone is here only for the money multiplication factor. Sales, advertising, marketing and your usual MBA subjects are all about that. That is, not to care about what you are selling, but to create an illusion which gives an opportunity to amplify that seed investment. That is the time to cash on and move on.
      - samstave 15y ago
        >not everybody in the game is for building something or for changing the world or for passion. You fucking suck. I am not clear if youare advocating these actions or not - but let me make it very clear to you; if you are a proponent of such behavior - lets make sure we never cross paths. This is NOT OK. People like this are CANCER. Sure - many instances of CEOs end up in the position of a Pincus - but it DOES NOT make it ok. Pincus is a detriment not a person to be idolized.
        epo 15y ago
        The guy is telling it how it is, you are behaving like an 11 year-old. The world is not a nice place, it gets less nice when money is involved, grow up.
        tripzilch 15y ago
        You're both right. Just because "it is how it is" doesn't make something OK, as you say the world is not a nice place, but it also doesn't mean you have to sit down and take it like a cabbage either. And it's perfectly fine to tell people with questionable moral values to go and fuck themselves. Even though it's not always the most strategically sound way to make sure they get what they got coming in a world that is indeed not a very nice place at all.
michaelochurch 15y ago
Honestly? I think this is the execs trying to grab as much stock as possible for themselves pre-IPO, so they can dump it and run. Seems likely. Zynga is an obvious build-to-flip. Now is the time to cash it in at peak. The original push in social gaming was based on scaling, but people are starting to demand quality and that's where Zynga is going to die.
Mordor 15y ago
My thoughts too, they only want the stock for themselves.

johngalt 15y ago

It's not like Zynga will have another IPO in the future, or will need to promise future employees equity. Precisely why "trust" should never be a part of an equity negotiation. When millions are on the table people will do whatever they can get away with. Zynga doesn't want another "google chef", but they took full advantage of the "google chef" when promising equity to early employees.

pavel_lishin 15y ago
> It's not like Zynga will have another IPO in the future, or will need to promise future employees equity. No, but they probably will be promising employees something - and now, everyone knows that unless that promise is in writing, in an iron-clad contract peered over by Hell's best lawyers, it's worthless at best.
fab13n 15y ago
Indeed, they will only have one IPO. But the PR backlash can seriously affect it, if it's made clear to everyone that the execs are crooks, and that they'll never be able to hire talents again.
- ChuckMcM 15y ago
  The poster child here is Groupon (GRPN) and while the poor choices of their executives did negatively affect the IPO they are still (11/9) trading above their IPO price of $20 ($24.50 when I glanced).
  - fab13n 15y ago
    I don't think that Groupon execs are widely perceived as crooks, whereas Zynga's ones are more than hard to defend here. Moreover, Zynga execs' move was likely intended to increase the total worth of their shares; if they manage to claw 20% more shares, but destroy 30% of each share's value, they've hurt themselves even in the short term (figures made up for illustration, obviously).
    - 15y ago

kamaal 15y ago

They don't bother much. For most these people, who are basically sales and operation guys. They are made believe in their MBA classes that if they have a brand name and atleast one successful product they will never need any technical talent to run the company. And they can sell anything every after with operations tuning they teach them during their MBA classes. And that they can virtually sell anything by marketing, advertising and brand positioning. And that engineers and technical staff is merely a commodity which just needs to be used like raw material to convert it money later. They are basically in for cashing on pre-IPO gold rush. For me this is more than sufficient to be cautious before working at any start up again.