Electronic Arts Faces Losses, Layoffs

Andy Chalk

One Flag, One Fleet, One Cat
Nov 12, 2002
45,698
1
0
Electronic Arts Faces Losses, Layoffs


Despite predictions that the videogame industry is "recession proof," things are starting to get ugly at EA [http://www.ea.com], which just announced the layoff of six percent of its workforce in response to a $310 million dollar loss in the company's second fiscal quarter.

Net revenue for the quarter was up significantly, to $894 million for the three months ending on September 30, but rising costs, including "certain abandoned acquisition-related costs," resulted in a net loss of $310 million, a big jump over the $195 million loss taken in the same period in 2007. EA shares also took a tumble, losing 14 percent of their value in after-hours trading, dropping from $27.73 to $23.75 per share.

As a result, the company will implement a cost reduction plan, which includes the layoff of roughly six percent of its workforce - between 500 and 600 employees - and will expand its future hiring in "low-cost locations," which is to say, outside the U.S. Electronic Arts estimates the cuts will save the company over $50 million per year.

Revenues for the quarter were driven primarily by the launch of Harry Potter [http://www.easports.com/madden09/] movie and its accompanying videogame, but said that despite being "cautious in the short term," he was "very bullish on the game sector overall and on EA in particular" in the longer term.

Riccitiello's optimism wasn't shared by analyst Michael Pachter, however, who issued an investment note following EA's earnings call (via GamePolitics [http://www.gamepolitics.com/2008/10/31/no-happy-holidays-500-laid-ea]) which continued to recommend the company as a "strong buy" but was nonetheless critical of management. "With the stock hovering near a seven-year low, management continued its recent history of disappointment, and spent an inordinate amount of time sowing seeds of fear about the potential for a tepid holiday sales season," Pachter said. "EA's share price in after hours trading reflects that many investors have abandoned hope... Management has demonstrated an uncanny ability to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory in the eyes of investors, and we think that these old habits will take a long time to die."

In light of all this, it's natural to wonder how the other side of that "certain abandoned acquisition-related cost" is doing: In its last reported fiscal quarter, ended July 31, Take-Two Interactive [http://www.take2games.com/] was up considerably over its previous year, showing net income of almost $52 million.


Permalink
 

Volucer

New member
Sep 4, 2008
413
0
0
Maybe this is good news, maybe EA will see their losses and realise the error of their ways and make game registration easy, remove DRM, one can but dream, one can but dream...
 

calelogan

New member
Jun 15, 2008
221
0
0
We can only hope and dream that this turn of events changes EA's mentality and strategy.

I can't help but look to CD Projekt at how to build a solid and respectable relationship with the gamer community.

Let us only hope they keep their end of the bargain and succeed at many more achievements in order to affect the ideology of other companies as well.
 

Amnestic

High Priest of Haruhi
Aug 22, 2008
8,946
0
0
Wait 3 months->Buy cheap EA Stock->Become a majority stockholder->Rebuild from the ground up with new management techniques-> MEGA PROFIT!
 

PhoenixFlame

New member
Dec 6, 2007
401
0
0
I've never been a big fan of the EA-bashing bandwagon, pretty much since the aftermath of the whole EA dev-wife blog stuff. I patronize many of their products and don't see anything particularly wrong with most of their business practices in part since I haven't really felt the effects - like with DRM.

This being said, I'm not out to defend EA, either. Whether or not it is rational or justifiable, EA still has a reputation problem among gamers. When one mention of a company name can drive many posters to post negative things about the company, you have an image issue. Thing is, dollar signs are the only thing that will speak the language to companies.

If DRM, spotty support, and fubars like the whole C&C forum policy messup are things which drive customers away, then EA really needs to take a hard look at their image among its core gamer fanbase and work to change it, whether that is through an improvement in service or through the release of high-quality, long-term games. You'll never get everyone off the EA hate bandwagon, but you can at least make people think about changing their mind about it.

I've never believed the gaming industry to be recession proof. That honor goes to sex, gambling, and alcohol.
 

TsunamiWombat

New member
Sep 6, 2008
5,870
0
0
fsanch said:
I've never been a big fan of the EA-bashing bandwagon, pretty much since the aftermath of the whole EA dev-wife blog stuff. I patronize many of their products and don't see anything particularly wrong with most of their business practices in part since I haven't really felt the effects - like with DRM.

This being said, I'm not out to defend EA, either. Whether or not it is rational or justifiable, EA still has a reputation problem among gamers. When one mention of a company name can drive many posters to post negative things about the company, you have an image issue. Thing is, dollar signs are the only thing that will speak the language to companies.

If DRM, spotty support, and fubars like the whole C&C forum policy messup are things which drive customers away, then EA really needs to take a hard look at their image among its core gamer fanbase and work to change it, whether that is through an improvement in service or through the release of high-quality, long-term games. You'll never get everyone off the EA hate bandwagon, but you can at least make people think about changing their mind about it.

I've never believed the gaming industry to be recession proof. That honor goes to sex, gambling, and alcohol.
I never really hated EA for all it's games until DRM and they started accusing me of being a pirate or ignorant. If they can ever turn their ship around and stop being such unbelievable ASSHOLES and produce good games, i'll buy their products. Right now, I hope they f**king crash and burn and all that IP they own goes up in a free for all corporate feeding frenzy. Jail Break!
 

Melaisis

New member
Dec 9, 2007
1,014
0
0
500 jobs, they're saying.

"hey guys, we keep losing money, but we've got enough stock and cash to buy you--let's do it!"

"no thanks, we like our business plan that involves making money, we're just fine on our own"

"wha? you guys are stoooopid--why wouldn't you want to be part of a big company that keeps losing money when you're just a small company that keeps making money? Don't you like, understand economies of scale and synergy and um, stuff?"
In short: No, they don't. Sadly, with an enterprise this big it is difficult to contain expansion once an expedition has set out, so they simply don't bother in interests of time and management. This leads to huge booms as it swallows smaller companies, but in times of recession this continued growth simply cannot be sustained. So, we have this strange paradox of them trying to expand still whilst having to lay people off. Ridiculous, really. No human resource management at all.
 

ElArabDeMagnifico

New member
Dec 20, 2007
3,775
0
0
Holy crap people, We can bring down the monolith. If they are able to go out of business, then lets put them out of business.
 

TsunamiWombat

New member
Sep 6, 2008
5,870
0
0
Melaisis said:
500 jobs, they're saying.

"hey guys, we keep losing money, but we've got enough stock and cash to buy you--let's do it!"

"no thanks, we like our business plan that involves making money, we're just fine on our own"

"wha? you guys are stoooopid--why wouldn't you want to be part of a big company that keeps losing money when you're just a small company that keeps making money? Don't you like, understand economies of scale and synergy and um, stuff?"
In short: No, they don't. Sadly, with an enterprise this big it is difficult to contain expansion once an expedition has set out, so they simply don't bother in interests of time and management. This leads to huge booms as it swallows smaller companies, but in times of recession this continued growth simply cannot be sustained. So, we have this strange paradox of them trying to expand still whilst having to lay people off. Ridiculous, really. No human resource management at all.
Yeah, it's the 'Rome' Effect. The Roman Empire was so wealthy and powerful because it conquored other lands and plundered their lands. Afterwards though their aquisitions became Roman Citizens, and a draw on their resources. Eventually they grew so big and so wealthy that the only way to maintain their empire was to conquor MORE ground to gain MORE plunder which meant MORE strain on their economy. Make no mistake though, much like Rome it will take several disasters and several years to destroy EA. We can plant the seeds here though, by boycotting their products.
 

Elurindel

New member
Dec 12, 2007
711
0
0
I'm all for buying shares in EA, if it looks like the shit is about to hit the fan. And to think, if they'd just been less asshole-ish about Spore, maybe they could have gotten more money rom it, rather than losing half a million copies to pirates. Or is it more, now?