11 ms·

Company with the “World’s Least Powerful CEO” Makes $2.5 Million Every Day

131 points by smalter 14y ago

turtlebits 14y ago
FYI, They make the top grossing game on iOS, 'Clash of Clans'. And it's the company not the CEO- the first time I read the headline I thought the CEO was making 2.5 mil per day.
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
trcollinson 14y ago
I have noticed that in big businesses (at least the many that I have been associated with) management sees agile methodologies as a "gimmick" used to keep the masses happy. Rarely have I seen it work from the bottom up (or top down, however you'd like to look at it). Although the article didn't specifically call what they are doing "agile" it seems like the spirit of the methodology. It's really nice to see a company that embraces that sort of working methodology and uses it to be successful. I would be interested to see if they find their environment to be less stressful as well. I wonder what it would be like if every company trusted their employees to do what was best for their company and then empowered them to actually fulfil their vision.
alput 14y ago
These guys are peddlers of iOS pay-to-win shit games. Their success is mostly due to the proverbial suckers that are born every day.
- smacktoward 14y ago
  That's no reason they couldn't be an interesting case study, though. I mean, these days everybody in the gaming business is chasing those same suckers, from EA on down. So what these people are doing that makes them so successful at catching them is an interesting question.
- JabavuAdams 14y ago
  I wouldn't describe it as a "shit" game as the production values and craftsmanship are quite high. On the other hand, it is clearly exploiting a bug in my wiring. I've spent over $400 on Clash of Clans. I can afford to, but I don't feel that it's a good use of my money. This game design is definitely on the intrusive / addictive end of the spectrum. The obviously wouldn't be making so much money if it were a flat-rate game like Minecraft.
  - jordan0day 14y ago
    I guess we've known for a while (at least since EverQuest or World of Warcraft at the very latest) that when you combine "polish" with content designed to scratch some addiction-seeking itch in our brains, bad things can happen. At least with those you know the flat rate you're going to be paying over the course of the coming year? I'm sure there's an argument that can be made about you getting "your money's worth" for that $400 of entertainment... but jeez... $400? That's an awful lot of money for a video game. If you knew back when you first installed the game that you'd end up spending so much money on it again, do you think you'd still go ahead and install it?
    - omonra 14y ago
      I imagine that people are not paying $400 for 'a video game' but rather a sense of accomplishment. Ie it simply feels good to get shit done, to score points, to achieve something. Playing these games allows the user to short-circuit this and produce same psychological effect without the work involved. Think of it as masturbation - nature made sex pleasurable so that organisms would procreate. But humans have figured out a way to achieve same result (ie firing pleasure neurons, serotonin release, etc) without going through the trouble of finding a mate (and having to care for the little person that may come after)
    - GFischer 14y ago
      I've spent thousands of dollars on Magic: the Gathering cards and stuff (across 15 years). I think it's way more than I should have, and I'll never get it back. It does have the addicting part (packs and drafts are addictive as hell), and a "collectible" part for rationalization. I have some kind of personal problem that leads me into these time sinks, because I've mostly quit, only to replace it with other time wasters (League of Legends and others). edit: omonra, your post is dead.
Irregardless 14y ago
I'm not sure if this is more of a testament to their corporate strategy or the effectiveness of the freemium model for mobile games. It's amazing how difficult it is to sell an iOS game for anything more than $1.99. But, if you give them the game for free and let them exchange real money for strategic advantages in-game, they'll fork over a small fortune. Supercell is essentially selling $2.5 million/day in "gems" for only 2 games, gems that people then trade for resources or the ability to do things faster (like building units or structures). A user named 'Panda' on the Supercell forums claims to have spent over $6,000 on gems in Clash of Clans[1]. Based on the responses regarding how quickly he was able to reach the top of the rankings, it seems to be true. Many other players in the thread report having spent $20-$40 on gems. [1] http://forum.supercell.net/showthread.php/827-How-much-money-have-you-spent-on-this-game?p=5370&viewfull=1#post5370 http://forum.supercell.net/showthread.php/827-How-much-money...
- teej 14y ago
  Supercell is one of hundreds of developers on the App Store trying to make freemium mobile games. They're doing well because they picked a winning business model for their games and then they went on to make great games. Clash of Clans was a breath of fresh air in an environment with tons of clones and uninspired crap. Also, entertainment is a hits driven business where if a product starts winning, it tends to dominate. Picking a business model is crucial, but not sufficient, to be successful.
  - taytus 14y ago
    Also, both of their games are very polished.
  - greggman 14y ago
    What's your thinking on this opinion that Clash of Clans is actually not a game "Yet I look at these products and I don't see games. I see payment machines, made to look like entertainment." http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2013-04-13-saturday-soapbox-the-high-cost-of-free-to-play http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2013-04-13-saturday-soapbo...
- 14y ago
wilfra 14y ago
When I saw the title I assumed it was Valve. Interesting that it's also a gaming company. There must be something about this kind of corporate structure and gaming that go really well together.
- msandford 14y ago
  It's more about the freedom necessary to make good art. Movies are done in a very similar fashion. No director runs around telling grips how to tape things or how to run wires. Doesn't happen. Micromanaging kills (or slows) creative processes.
  - wittyphrasehere 14y ago
    Considering that a large part of software creation is, well, creative, I'd love to see more of this in the tech industry—like Github, for example.
msandford 14y ago
How long before we see a bunch of startups or consultants trying to cargo cult their success by simply organizing into teams and wondering why it didn't work. There's more to this company than simply "we have small cells that are independent" there was a lot of thought as to who owns what and how they own it.
- mindcrime 14y ago
  You're probably right, but FWIW, there actually exists some somewhat scholarly work on this topic. Stephen Haeckel[1] - formerly at IBM Research - wrote a lot about something he called the "Adaptive Enterprise"[2] and suggested something along the lines of more autonomous operating units, bound together using a "commitment management protocol".[3] And while I haven't explored this in any real depth (yet), my guess is that some of the research into Multi-Agent Systems[4] and Agent-Based Modeling[5] may prove relevant to this aspect of organizational design as well. Another interesting discussion around commitment management: http://coevolving.com/blogs/index.php/archive/conversations-for-action-commitment-management-protocol/ http://coevolving.com/blogs/index.php/archive/conversations-... [1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephan_H._Haeckel http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephan_H._Haeckel [2]: http://books.google.com/books?id=pkrFugJBAn4C&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false http://books.google.com/books?id=pkrFugJBAn4C&printsec=f... [3]: http://www.senseandrespond.com/downloads/Comitmn2.pdf http://www.senseandrespond.com/downloads/Comitmn2.pdf [4]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-agent_system http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-agent_system [5]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agent-based_model http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agent-based_model
  - leashless 14y ago
    Extremely interesting links, thank you. Was anything significant ever built on this model?
    - mindcrime 14y ago
      I don't know if any firms specifically identify themselves as being "Adaptive Enterprises" or not, but I think there are examples of some companies which appear to use at least some of the ideas. The firm mentioned in TFA may well be one. W.L. Gore[1] and Valve[2] are other firms that come to mind that, while they don't use the term, appear to have structures which bear at least some similarity to what Haeckel describes. Back in 1999 when Haecke wrote "The Adaptive Enterprise" he said there were no full-fledged examples of a firm which was totally based on the idea. Whether or not there are any today, I can't say for sure. What I will say, is that I think there is a lot of reason to think that this approach might be a good idea, and to think that it's still an emerging trend. [1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W._L._Gore_and_Associates http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W._L._Gore_and_Associates [2]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valve_Corporation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valve_Corporation
jcampbell1 14y ago
For those that don't know, SuperCell makes the top grossing iOS game called 'Clash of Clans'. It is like Farmville meets Warcraft II. Rather the just growing crops to make your farm better, you grow armies to trash other people's towns. Also to put things in perspective, SuperCell makes 10x more money per employee than Goldman Sachs.
- bvi 14y ago
  > to put things in perspective, SuperCell makes 10x more money per employee than Goldman Sachs. That's...unbelievable. Wow.
- desireco42 14y ago
  Thank you this last piece of info :) very inspiring.
- iskander 14y ago
  >Also to put things in perspective, SuperCell makes 10x more money per employee than Goldman Sachs. I'm not sure that the two are comparable, it might be akin to comparing the metabolic efficiency of yeast vs. an elephant. Could SuperCell scale to make ~$50 billion a year?
  - ghotli 14y ago
    Great analogy. Thanks for that.
  - vacri 14y ago
    Not to mention that games are very short-lived and there's an element to luck. What happens if they don't manage to regularly write another winner? Goldman Sachs will be there as long as corporations need financial services.
mhartl 14y ago
Ilkka Paananen is a good example of a very powerful CEO. Delegation of authority is a sign of strength, not weakness.
- ritchiea 14y ago
  Definitely, the article is conflating micro-managing and power. I'm sure there are ways Ilkka profoundly shapes the company and that kind of CEO influence is likely why he is able to delegate effectively.
bsbechtel 14y ago
Interesting that the author uses the US as a comparison....especially when over the past ~30 years, the power of the executive branch has expanded significantly. At the same time, the US's global influence has been waning...
- richardjordan 14y ago
  Thought the same thing - that the US is falling apart due to structural failings in its construction. Not sure the analogy of president is right though. The presidency may have strengthened its role in some ways but it is still hamstrung by congress and as a whole US government has got less powerful in recent decades not more, but to the gain of corporations and a small wealth elected not the people as a whole. Precisely because no branch of government is particularly powerful it has no effective remedy once corporations and individuals gain sufficient wealth and influence that they are able to demonstrate regulatory capture and wield power against any individual branch which causes problems to their interests.
adaml_623 14y ago
So the obvious question is where is that money going? How much are they paying the developers and designers?
- jakerocheleau 14y ago
  I'd be interested in this too but I doubt the information is public. They must be doing something right for such a small operation.
  - enra 14y ago
    Actually the company is registered in Finland where everyone's tax records are public, but you need to wait for the next tax year. I guess that like usually in Finland, salaries are rather modest compared to Bay / US in general (around 40-100k eur), but because of the functioning society, many things are free and taken care of (education, healthcare, daycare), your standard of living can end up higher. Equity/stock options for employees are almost unheard of and I wish more startups would pick it up. Supercell is also an exception in this regard, that they now offer stock options for everyone (they started it after the last 100M round).
    - geon 14y ago
      > but because of the functioning society, many things are free and taken care of (education, healthcare, daycare), your standard of living can end up higher. If it works anything like in Sweden (i suspect it does), the employer pays a high tax too. The employer pays about twice of what ends up in the pocket of the employee. So I guess the salary levels are comparable.
  - deleted 14y ago
    [deleted]
seivan 14y ago
Good games and low cost operations ALWAYS make money. Just hire developers,graphics artist and/or sound guys. No suits, no hr, no nothing else other then content creators. If you _HAVE_ to hire non content creators, make it count.
- coryl 14y ago
  No they don't. You know how many smaller indie devs are out there trying to be the next Supercell? A lot of them have great games but lose money for any number of reasons.
- jussij 14y ago
  To put a software development team of 5 good guys into an office, you're going to need a $1 million in revenue just to break even. At $1.99 per app you're going to need to move a lot of apps every month, year on year, just to keep the business afloat.
Geee 14y ago
Damn, interesting article suddenly turned into American propaganda.
desireco42 14y ago
I think their secret sauce, aside from obviously being attentative to customers, is to have small teams, 6-7 is considere ideal team for development of games and I would project that to pretty much anything. Just enough talented people to get the job done and nobody to interfere.
jacobquick 14y ago
Isn't "a game company that empowers its employees" the same story as Gabe Newell and Valve? It's cool that there's another company doing it but that management style has plenty of previous examples, some basic research would've made for a better article.
waylandsmithers 14y ago
Definitely an interesting story, but I hate the "$2.5 Mil per Day" framing of the headline. This isn't anything noteworthy-- lots of companies have annual revenues of over $900 million.
- no_more_death 14y ago
  They don't want to report daily revenue because it would average out to a lot less than $900 million a year, I think. Two weeks ago they were making over 1 million a day, now it's over 2 million a day.[1] To me, that growth rate at this kind of scale is more meaningful than a yearly figure (or a daily figure, to be honest). Of course, the reason they use "2.5 million per day" is to give you a classic Scrooge McDuck kind of visual, with a big semi trailer packed with money entering your palace every day. [1] http://techcrunch.com/2013/03/28/supercell-2/ http://techcrunch.com/2013/03/28/supercell-2/
hkmurakami 14y ago
>As its name implies, Supercell is organized as a collection of small, independent teams called cells tasked with developing new games or building new deep features for existing games. Cells are given complete autonomy in terms of how they organize themselves, prioritize ideas, distribute work and determine what they ultimately produce. Correct me if I am wrong, but this is effectively how Valve organizes itself right? :)
- no_more_death 14y ago
  Valve doesn't have a CEO. It's an undifferentiated mass of people, at least as far as power structure goes -- sort of like a slime mold. I think that's a lot different than having a CEO who prides himself on being an inspirer instead of a controller (if I'm reading the article correctly). In other words, it sounds like he is a constitutional monarch. (Of course, that bursts the whole "American miracle" thing about him being like the president.)
  - rodgerd 14y ago
    The "American miracle" thing bursts if one spends more than a few afternoons noting that the combination of lax IP laws and WW I and II were a great deal more influential than structural detail.
  - sopooneo 14y ago
    However, is there an underlying truth at Valve, that if he wanted to, Newell could fire everyone on the spot? I have no idea if that is true, and if so, don't necessary think such an arrangement is bad. But if that is the case, it needs to be acknowledged that authority, even if unstated and unexercised, still has an effect.
    - hkmurakami 14y ago
      Gabe Newell apparently owns more than 50% of Valve's equity so yes, he can do whatever he pleases with the company. http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-03-08-gabe-newell-is-worth-USD1-5-billion http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-03-08-gabe-newell-is-...
rawrly 14y ago
I'm surprised no one has attempted to connect servant leadership practices to tech companies. It seems like it would work well.
ktr 14y ago
I'm really interested in how organizations are organized. Does anyone have any suggested reading material for things like this? I've only ever heard the term "cells" before as it relates to terrorist groups, but I'm not sure if this is a similar concept. But I often wonder if organizing a business more like a democracy would yield better results in the long run ...
DustinCalim 14y ago
I love the top voted comment at the end of the article.

131 points by smalter 14y ago

FYI, They make the top grossing game on iOS, 'Clash of Clans'. And it's the company not the CEO- the first time I read the headline I thought the CEO was making 2.5 mil per day.

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

trcollinson 14y ago

I have noticed that in big businesses (at least the many that I have been associated with) management sees agile methodologies as a "gimmick" used to keep the masses happy. Rarely have I seen it work from the bottom up (or top down, however you'd like to look at it). Although the article didn't specifically call what they are doing "agile" it seems like the spirit of the methodology. It's really nice to see a company that embraces that sort of working methodology and uses it to be successful. I would be interested to see if they find their environment to be less stressful as well. I wonder what it would be like if every company trusted their employees to do what was best for their company and then empowered them to actually fulfil their vision.

alput 14y ago

These guys are peddlers of iOS pay-to-win shit games. Their success is mostly due to the proverbial suckers that are born every day.

smacktoward 14y ago
That's no reason they couldn't be an interesting case study, though. I mean, these days everybody in the gaming business is chasing those same suckers, from EA on down. So what these people are doing that makes them so successful at catching them is an interesting question.
JabavuAdams 14y ago
I wouldn't describe it as a "shit" game as the production values and craftsmanship are quite high. On the other hand, it is clearly exploiting a bug in my wiring. I've spent over $400 on Clash of Clans. I can afford to, but I don't feel that it's a good use of my money. This game design is definitely on the intrusive / addictive end of the spectrum. The obviously wouldn't be making so much money if it were a flat-rate game like Minecraft.
- jordan0day 14y ago
  I guess we've known for a while (at least since EverQuest or World of Warcraft at the very latest) that when you combine "polish" with content designed to scratch some addiction-seeking itch in our brains, bad things can happen. At least with those you know the flat rate you're going to be paying over the course of the coming year? I'm sure there's an argument that can be made about you getting "your money's worth" for that $400 of entertainment... but jeez... $400? That's an awful lot of money for a video game. If you knew back when you first installed the game that you'd end up spending so much money on it again, do you think you'd still go ahead and install it?
  - omonra 14y ago
    I imagine that people are not paying $400 for 'a video game' but rather a sense of accomplishment. Ie it simply feels good to get shit done, to score points, to achieve something. Playing these games allows the user to short-circuit this and produce same psychological effect without the work involved. Think of it as masturbation - nature made sex pleasurable so that organisms would procreate. But humans have figured out a way to achieve same result (ie firing pleasure neurons, serotonin release, etc) without going through the trouble of finding a mate (and having to care for the little person that may come after)
  - GFischer 14y ago
    I've spent thousands of dollars on Magic: the Gathering cards and stuff (across 15 years). I think it's way more than I should have, and I'll never get it back. It does have the addicting part (packs and drafts are addictive as hell), and a "collectible" part for rationalization. I have some kind of personal problem that leads me into these time sinks, because I've mostly quit, only to replace it with other time wasters (League of Legends and others). edit: omonra, your post is dead.

Irregardless 14y ago

I'm not sure if this is more of a testament to their corporate strategy or the effectiveness of the freemium model for mobile games. It's amazing how difficult it is to sell an iOS game for anything more than $1.99. But, if you give them the game for free and let them exchange real money for strategic advantages in-game, they'll fork over a small fortune. Supercell is essentially selling $2.5 million/day in "gems" for only 2 games, gems that people then trade for resources or the ability to do things faster (like building units or structures). A user named 'Panda' on the Supercell forums claims to have spent over $6,000 on gems in Clash of Clans[1]. Based on the responses regarding how quickly he was able to reach the top of the rankings, it seems to be true. Many other players in the thread report having spent $20-$40 on gems. [1] http://forum.supercell.net/showthread.php/827-How-much-money-have-you-spent-on-this-game?p=5370&viewfull=1#post5370 http://forum.supercell.net/showthread.php/827-How-much-money...

teej 14y ago
Supercell is one of hundreds of developers on the App Store trying to make freemium mobile games. They're doing well because they picked a winning business model for their games and then they went on to make great games. Clash of Clans was a breath of fresh air in an environment with tons of clones and uninspired crap. Also, entertainment is a hits driven business where if a product starts winning, it tends to dominate. Picking a business model is crucial, but not sufficient, to be successful.
- taytus 14y ago
  Also, both of their games are very polished.
- greggman 14y ago
  What's your thinking on this opinion that Clash of Clans is actually not a game "Yet I look at these products and I don't see games. I see payment machines, made to look like entertainment." http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2013-04-13-saturday-soapbox-the-high-cost-of-free-to-play http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2013-04-13-saturday-soapbo...
14y ago

wilfra 14y ago

When I saw the title I assumed it was Valve. Interesting that it's also a gaming company. There must be something about this kind of corporate structure and gaming that go really well together.

msandford 14y ago
It's more about the freedom necessary to make good art. Movies are done in a very similar fashion. No director runs around telling grips how to tape things or how to run wires. Doesn't happen. Micromanaging kills (or slows) creative processes.
- wittyphrasehere 14y ago
  Considering that a large part of software creation is, well, creative, I'd love to see more of this in the tech industry—like Github, for example.

msandford 14y ago

How long before we see a bunch of startups or consultants trying to cargo cult their success by simply organizing into teams and wondering why it didn't work. There's more to this company than simply "we have small cells that are independent" there was a lot of thought as to who owns what and how they own it.

mindcrime 14y ago
You're probably right, but FWIW, there actually exists some somewhat scholarly work on this topic. Stephen Haeckel[1] - formerly at IBM Research - wrote a lot about something he called the "Adaptive Enterprise"[2] and suggested something along the lines of more autonomous operating units, bound together using a "commitment management protocol".[3] And while I haven't explored this in any real depth (yet), my guess is that some of the research into Multi-Agent Systems[4] and Agent-Based Modeling[5] may prove relevant to this aspect of organizational design as well. Another interesting discussion around commitment management: http://coevolving.com/blogs/index.php/archive/conversations-for-action-commitment-management-protocol/ http://coevolving.com/blogs/index.php/archive/conversations-... [1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephan_H._Haeckel http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephan_H._Haeckel [2]: http://books.google.com/books?id=pkrFugJBAn4C&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false http://books.google.com/books?id=pkrFugJBAn4C&printsec=f... [3]: http://www.senseandrespond.com/downloads/Comitmn2.pdf http://www.senseandrespond.com/downloads/Comitmn2.pdf [4]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-agent_system http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-agent_system [5]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agent-based_model http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agent-based_model
- leashless 14y ago
  Extremely interesting links, thank you. Was anything significant ever built on this model?
  - mindcrime 14y ago
    I don't know if any firms specifically identify themselves as being "Adaptive Enterprises" or not, but I think there are examples of some companies which appear to use at least some of the ideas. The firm mentioned in TFA may well be one. W.L. Gore[1] and Valve[2] are other firms that come to mind that, while they don't use the term, appear to have structures which bear at least some similarity to what Haeckel describes. Back in 1999 when Haecke wrote "The Adaptive Enterprise" he said there were no full-fledged examples of a firm which was totally based on the idea. Whether or not there are any today, I can't say for sure. What I will say, is that I think there is a lot of reason to think that this approach might be a good idea, and to think that it's still an emerging trend. [1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W._L._Gore_and_Associates http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W._L._Gore_and_Associates [2]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valve_Corporation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valve_Corporation

jcampbell1 14y ago

For those that don't know, SuperCell makes the top grossing iOS game called 'Clash of Clans'. It is like Farmville meets Warcraft II. Rather the just growing crops to make your farm better, you grow armies to trash other people's towns. Also to put things in perspective, SuperCell makes 10x more money per employee than Goldman Sachs.

bvi 14y ago
> to put things in perspective, SuperCell makes 10x more money per employee than Goldman Sachs. That's...unbelievable. Wow.
desireco42 14y ago
Thank you this last piece of info :) very inspiring.
iskander 14y ago
>Also to put things in perspective, SuperCell makes 10x more money per employee than Goldman Sachs. I'm not sure that the two are comparable, it might be akin to comparing the metabolic efficiency of yeast vs. an elephant. Could SuperCell scale to make ~$50 billion a year?
- ghotli 14y ago
  Great analogy. Thanks for that.
- vacri 14y ago
  Not to mention that games are very short-lived and there's an element to luck. What happens if they don't manage to regularly write another winner? Goldman Sachs will be there as long as corporations need financial services.

mhartl 14y ago

Ilkka Paananen is a good example of a very powerful CEO. Delegation of authority is a sign of strength, not weakness.

ritchiea 14y ago
Definitely, the article is conflating micro-managing and power. I'm sure there are ways Ilkka profoundly shapes the company and that kind of CEO influence is likely why he is able to delegate effectively.

bsbechtel 14y ago

Interesting that the author uses the US as a comparison....especially when over the past ~30 years, the power of the executive branch has expanded significantly. At the same time, the US's global influence has been waning...

richardjordan 14y ago
Thought the same thing - that the US is falling apart due to structural failings in its construction. Not sure the analogy of president is right though. The presidency may have strengthened its role in some ways but it is still hamstrung by congress and as a whole US government has got less powerful in recent decades not more, but to the gain of corporations and a small wealth elected not the people as a whole. Precisely because no branch of government is particularly powerful it has no effective remedy once corporations and individuals gain sufficient wealth and influence that they are able to demonstrate regulatory capture and wield power against any individual branch which causes problems to their interests.

adaml_623 14y ago

So the obvious question is where is that money going? How much are they paying the developers and designers?

jakerocheleau 14y ago
I'd be interested in this too but I doubt the information is public. They must be doing something right for such a small operation.
- enra 14y ago
  Actually the company is registered in Finland where everyone's tax records are public, but you need to wait for the next tax year. I guess that like usually in Finland, salaries are rather modest compared to Bay / US in general (around 40-100k eur), but because of the functioning society, many things are free and taken care of (education, healthcare, daycare), your standard of living can end up higher. Equity/stock options for employees are almost unheard of and I wish more startups would pick it up. Supercell is also an exception in this regard, that they now offer stock options for everyone (they started it after the last 100M round).
  - geon 14y ago
    > but because of the functioning society, many things are free and taken care of (education, healthcare, daycare), your standard of living can end up higher. If it works anything like in Sweden (i suspect it does), the employer pays a high tax too. The employer pays about twice of what ends up in the pocket of the employee. So I guess the salary levels are comparable.
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]

seivan 14y ago

Good games and low cost operations ALWAYS make money. Just hire developers,graphics artist and/or sound guys. No suits, no hr, no nothing else other then content creators. If you _HAVE_ to hire non content creators, make it count.

coryl 14y ago
No they don't. You know how many smaller indie devs are out there trying to be the next Supercell? A lot of them have great games but lose money for any number of reasons.
jussij 14y ago
To put a software development team of 5 good guys into an office, you're going to need a $1 million in revenue just to break even. At $1.99 per app you're going to need to move a lot of apps every month, year on year, just to keep the business afloat.

Geee 14y ago

Damn, interesting article suddenly turned into American propaganda.

desireco42 14y ago

I think their secret sauce, aside from obviously being attentative to customers, is to have small teams, 6-7 is considere ideal team for development of games and I would project that to pretty much anything. Just enough talented people to get the job done and nobody to interfere.

jacobquick 14y ago

Isn't "a game company that empowers its employees" the same story as Gabe Newell and Valve? It's cool that there's another company doing it but that management style has plenty of previous examples, some basic research would've made for a better article.

waylandsmithers 14y ago

Definitely an interesting story, but I hate the "$2.5 Mil per Day" framing of the headline. This isn't anything noteworthy-- lots of companies have annual revenues of over $900 million.

no_more_death 14y ago
They don't want to report daily revenue because it would average out to a lot less than $900 million a year, I think. Two weeks ago they were making over 1 million a day, now it's over 2 million a day.[1] To me, that growth rate at this kind of scale is more meaningful than a yearly figure (or a daily figure, to be honest). Of course, the reason they use "2.5 million per day" is to give you a classic Scrooge McDuck kind of visual, with a big semi trailer packed with money entering your palace every day. [1] http://techcrunch.com/2013/03/28/supercell-2/ http://techcrunch.com/2013/03/28/supercell-2/

hkmurakami 14y ago

>As its name implies, Supercell is organized as a collection of small, independent teams called cells tasked with developing new games or building new deep features for existing games. Cells are given complete autonomy in terms of how they organize themselves, prioritize ideas, distribute work and determine what they ultimately produce. Correct me if I am wrong, but this is effectively how Valve organizes itself right? :)

no_more_death 14y ago
Valve doesn't have a CEO. It's an undifferentiated mass of people, at least as far as power structure goes -- sort of like a slime mold. I think that's a lot different than having a CEO who prides himself on being an inspirer instead of a controller (if I'm reading the article correctly). In other words, it sounds like he is a constitutional monarch. (Of course, that bursts the whole "American miracle" thing about him being like the president.)
- rodgerd 14y ago
  The "American miracle" thing bursts if one spends more than a few afternoons noting that the combination of lax IP laws and WW I and II were a great deal more influential than structural detail.
- sopooneo 14y ago
  However, is there an underlying truth at Valve, that if he wanted to, Newell could fire everyone on the spot? I have no idea if that is true, and if so, don't necessary think such an arrangement is bad. But if that is the case, it needs to be acknowledged that authority, even if unstated and unexercised, still has an effect.
  - hkmurakami 14y ago
    Gabe Newell apparently owns more than 50% of Valve's equity so yes, he can do whatever he pleases with the company. http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-03-08-gabe-newell-is-worth-USD1-5-billion http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-03-08-gabe-newell-is-...

rawrly 14y ago

I'm surprised no one has attempted to connect servant leadership practices to tech companies. It seems like it would work well.

ktr 14y ago

I'm really interested in how organizations are organized. Does anyone have any suggested reading material for things like this? I've only ever heard the term "cells" before as it relates to terrorist groups, but I'm not sure if this is a similar concept. But I often wonder if organizing a business more like a democracy would yield better results in the long run ...

DustinCalim 14y ago

I love the top voted comment at the end of the article.