And? Laying off 200 employees isn't really that much, Activision-Blizzard employs 17k people after all, and he is creating a lot of value. Boards want to incent

And? Laying off 200 employees isn't really that much, Activision-Blizzard employs 17k people after all, and he is creating a lot of value. Boards want to incentivise CEOs to take moonshots -- for institutional investors, a 50% chance to make $100 million is better than a 100% chance to make $30m. Keeping employees around for the sake of keeping them around is just bad business. A 1% layoff isn't a cost cutting exercise, it's just organisational reshuffling. Employee churn is a fact of life, no need to get too hung up over it. The optics might be not great, but that doesn't really matter.