Microsoft's Mattrick Tried To Buy Zynga Before Jumping Ship

Karloff

New member
Oct 19, 2009
6,474
0
0
Microsoft's Mattrick Tried To Buy Zynga Before Jumping Ship



Could Mattrick be a Trojan?

When Don Mattrick leapt like a gazelle made entirely of money [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/125677-Mattricks-Zynga-Offer-Includes-5-Mill-Signing-Bonus] from Microsoft to Zynga, it wasn't fully appreciated at the time just how close Mattrick was to Zynga's top brass. Mattrick and Zynga boss Mark Pincus used to be - and still are - road biking buddies, and while out on the trail they talked about this, that, and the possibility of Microsoft buying out Zynga, as part of a long courtship that went back to 2010. Of course, that isn't how things turned out in the end, as Mattrick was instead bought - to the tune of $95 million, potentially - by Zynga. Analyst Michael Pachter has already pointed out the absurdity of Mattrick's position. "To walk into a company that is not profitable, it's not growing," says Pachter, "and you've got the founder and majority controlling shareholder sitting in the office next to you ... what exactly can you get done?"

Well, that might depend on exactly what it is Mattrick intends to do. To earn the lion's share of his mega-payout Mattrick has to be a Zynga man for three years minimum. But if he really wants a jackpot he could just sell Zynga. Under the terms of his contract Mattrick would collect at least 25%, and perhaps as much as 50%, of his Zynga bonanza as soon as the deal goes through. Of course, a deal would probably also push up Zynga's share price, and a substantial chunk of Mattrick's compensation comes in the form of Zynga stock. Plus any deal is bound to come with golden inducements for the man making the thing happen, your friend and mine, Don Mattrick. As to which big corporation Mattrick might turn to in order to sell off Zynga, weeeeeellll ...

Will this happen? Your guess is as good as mine. But there is something interesting [http://qz.com/101111/zynga-has-given-its-new-ceo-big-incentives-to-sell-the-company/?source=email_rt_mc_body] in Mattrick's pay package regulatory filing. Mattrick is now part of a two man executive committee - Pincus is his other half - designed to "facilitate approval of certain corporate actions." If that committee ever goes away or expands, Mattrick can claim severance as if he had been fired arbitrarily, so he's sitting pretty however this turns out. But you do have to wonder just what those corporate actions are likely to be, and why it wants a team of just two people - who've already talked about selling Zynga - to carry them out.

Source: Bloomberg [http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-07-08/zynga-s-mattrick-looked-to-buy-company-while-at-microsoft.html]


Permalink
 

synobal

New member
Jun 8, 2011
2,189
0
0
It's the executive club, all these executive types know each other and they move from one job to anther job like they are playing musical chairs. Except there is always a seat regardless of how well they did at their previous job. See Mattrick's 5 million dollar signing bonus.
 

Vegosiux

New member
May 18, 2011
4,381
0
0
Ain't free flow information a wonderful thing?

But honestly, it sometimes looks as if they're trying to go for zero approval, these guys...
 

fix-the-spade

New member
Feb 25, 2008
8,639
0
0
Oh well, it's still not as bad as Vivendi forcing massive debt onto Actibliz for the sake of a cash lump sum to cover their corporate failures elsewhere.
 

shirkbot

New member
Apr 15, 2013
433
0
0
"'To walk into a company that is not profitable, it's not growing,' says Pachter, 'and you've got the founder and majority controlling shareholder sitting in the office next to you ... what exactly can you get done?'"

Apparently something worth millions of dollars, usually per year. Or, in layman's terms, you're both overpaid twits currently helming the Titanic into an iceberg, and that has nothing to do with who is sitting next to you.
 

J Tyran

New member
Dec 15, 2011
2,407
0
0
synobal said:
Except there is always a seat regardless of how well they did at their previous job. See Mattrick's 5 million dollar signing bonus.
Except for the Xbone launch Mattrick actually did a good job with Xbox, under him it went from a bottomless money pit into something profitable.
 

Vivi22

New member
Aug 22, 2010
2,300
0
0
J Tyran said:
synobal said:
Except there is always a seat regardless of how well they did at their previous job. See Mattrick's 5 million dollar signing bonus.
Except for the Xbone launch Mattrick actually did a good job with Xbox, under him it went from a bottomless money pit into something profitable.
You mean he walked into the Xbox devision almost two years after the 360 was released and already well established and gets to take credit for it doing well for some reason, despite having nothing to do with it's development, release, or Sony's massive failures that likely contributed more to its success than his stewardship of the brand. He also seems to be credited for the division beginning to turn a profit which is a complete and utter joke since it's typical of next gen consoles to be sold at a loss early on and a profit later as costs go down and install base goes up. We might as well credit him for the 360 being a console that exists because it would make about as much sense. But we can thank him for a few things that really are entirely his: the waste of time known as the Kinect and the massive cluster fuck that is the Xbox One.

So honestly now, what should I place more weight on in evaluating his performance: The success of a console he didn't even play a role in for the first two years and which was already riding high on Sony's fuck ups, or his completely unnecessary addition to the dead end world of motion controls and a complete pile of shit for a console and console announcement which he oversaw start to finish?
 

J Tyran

New member
Dec 15, 2011
2,407
0
0
Vivi22 said:
J Tyran said:
synobal said:
Except there is always a seat regardless of how well they did at their previous job. See Mattrick's 5 million dollar signing bonus.
Except for the Xbone launch Mattrick actually did a good job with Xbox, under him it went from a bottomless money pit into something profitable.
You mean he walked into the Xbox devision almost two years after the 360 was released and already well established and gets to take credit for it doing well for some reason, despite having nothing to do with it's development, release, or Sony's massive failures that likely contributed more to its success than his stewardship of the brand. He also seems to be credited for the division beginning to turn a profit which is a complete and utter joke since it's typical of next gen consoles to be sold at a loss early on and a profit later as costs go down and install base goes up. We might as well credit him for the 360 being a console that exists because it would make about as much sense. But we can thank him for a few things that really are entirely his: the waste of time known as the Kinect and the massive cluster fuck that is the Xbox One.

So honestly now, what should I place more weight on in evaluating his performance: The success of a console he didn't even play a role in for the first two years and which was already riding high on Sony's fuck ups, or his completely unnecessary addition to the dead end world of motion controls and a complete pile of shit for a console and console announcement which he oversaw start to finish?
Please excuse me if I take the word of financial experts over yours...
 

DTWolfwood

Better than Vash!
Oct 20, 2009
3,716
0
0
word on the street is that Mattick is actually very good at turning a company's fortunes around. Zynga may still benefit from this.

Time will tell...thought when it does, no one will remember.
 

Robert Roberge

New member
Dec 14, 2010
18
0
0
J Tyran said:
synobal said:
Except there is always a seat regardless of how well they did at their previous job. See Mattrick's 5 million dollar signing bonus.
Except for the Xbone launch Mattrick actually did a good job with Xbox, under him it went from a bottomless money pit into something profitable.
So you mean a good job at being a dick to people? Pushing huge restrictions on the xbox one and over all being anti-consumerism? I think that did completely the opposite thing than be profitable. To top that if he was doing a good job I'm pretty sure he wouldn't jump ship that fast.
 

TheRightToArmBears

New member
Dec 13, 2008
8,674
0
0
It looks to me like Mattrick is just going to squeeze what he can from Zynga then jump ship after those three years are up. Hell, that's what I'd do, fuck 'em.
 

CriticalMiss

New member
Jan 18, 2013
2,024
0
0
Devoneaux said:
A wild Cop-out appeared!

Devoneaux uses Logical Rebuttal!

"You know, someone being an expert does not mean he's right, furthermore, your failure to refute anything Vivi22 said is either telling of your lack of insight into the matter or of him simply being right, in which case, you were wrong and should own up to it."

It's super effective!
You should lay off the Rare Candies, you're way OP. Devoneaux, return! *raises tennis ball painted red and white*

I didn't really see something like this coming, maybe his hiring was some kind of mercy bro-fist from Pincus so he wouldn't be embarassed at being friends with someone who isn't an overpaid wanker in a suit. My guess is that they will point Zynga towards the nearest iceberg, set the autopilot and jump ship to EA. Rinse and repeat, jump to Ubisoft. Rinse and repeat, get turned down by Valve.
 

J Tyran

New member
Dec 15, 2011
2,407
0
0
Devoneaux said:
J Tyran said:
Vivi22 said:
J Tyran said:
synobal said:
Except there is always a seat regardless of how well they did at their previous job. See Mattrick's 5 million dollar signing bonus.
Except for the Xbone launch Mattrick actually did a good job with Xbox, under him it went from a bottomless money pit into something profitable.
You mean he walked into the Xbox devision almost two years after the 360 was released and already well established and gets to take credit for it doing well for some reason, despite having nothing to do with it's development, release, or Sony's massive failures that likely contributed more to its success than his stewardship of the brand. He also seems to be credited for the division beginning to turn a profit which is a complete and utter joke since it's typical of next gen consoles to be sold at a loss early on and a profit later as costs go down and install base goes up. We might as well credit him for the 360 being a console that exists because it would make about as much sense. But we can thank him for a few things that really are entirely his: the waste of time known as the Kinect and the massive cluster fuck that is the Xbox One.

So honestly now, what should I place more weight on in evaluating his performance: The success of a console he didn't even play a role in for the first two years and which was already riding high on Sony's fuck ups, or his completely unnecessary addition to the dead end world of motion controls and a complete pile of shit for a console and console announcement which he oversaw start to finish?
Please excuse me if I take the word of financial experts over yours...
A wild Cop-out appeared!

Devoneaux uses Logical Rebuttal!

"You know, someone being an expert does not mean he's right, furthermore, your failure to refute anything Vivi22 said is either telling of your lack of insight into the matter or of him simply being right, in which case, you were wrong and should own up to it."

It's super effective!
Well you see thats the difference, I do not claim any great insight over the ins and outs of being a CEO because I have no great insight and I do not like to talk to rubbish about something I don't know.

This is actually a good thing.

So when most financial institutions say someone did a good job of being a CEO I am inclined to listen, you can claim cop out all you want but the real logic is listening to the experts instead of someone that has probably never even progressed through even middle management. Which is fairly obvious as he doesn't even talk from a business perspective and whines like a typical gamer.
 

BloodSquirrel

New member
Jun 23, 2008
1,263
0
0
J Tyran said:
So when most financial institutions say someone did a good job of being a CEO I am inclined to listen, you can claim cop out all you want but the real logic is listening to the experts instead of someone that has probably never even progressed through even middle management. Which is fairly obvious as he doesn't even talk from a business perspective and whines like a typical gamer.
What you're engaging in is Appeal to Authority, a recognized logical fallacy. So you might want to stop that before talking about "the real logic". Let's not forget about how "experts" in EA thought that buying companies for $100 million was a good idea, only to turn around and shutter them in a year.

Bonus points for your "Authority" being some nebulously-defined "experts".

Personally, I'm going to rely more on the Xbone's disaster of a reveal- an objective measure of performance- over the opinions of some "experts" who may or may not know a single thing about the games industry.
 

J Tyran

New member
Dec 15, 2011
2,407
0
0
BloodSquirrel said:
J Tyran said:
So when most financial institutions say someone did a good job of being a CEO I am inclined to listen, you can claim cop out all you want but the real logic is listening to the experts instead of someone that has probably never even progressed through even middle management. Which is fairly obvious as he doesn't even talk from a business perspective and whines like a typical gamer.
What you're engaging in is Appeal to Authority, a recognized logical fallacy. So you might want to stop that before talking about "the real logic". Let's not forget about how "experts" in EA thought that buying companies for $100 million was a good idea, only to turn around and shutter them in a year.

Bonus points for your "Authority" being some nebulously-defined "experts".

Personally, I'm going to rely more on the Xbone's disaster of a reveal- an objective measure of performance- over the opinions of some "experts" who may or may not know a single thing about the games industry.
Wait what? Talking to a doctor for a medical problem is a fallacy? Consulting a builder if someone wants a conservatory is fallacy? Getting a mechanic in when you need your car fixed is a fallacy?

I think your fallacy is a fallacy or at least your use of it is.

Edit.

Indeed your use is inappropriate, ironic really as the fallacy your trying to pin on me is actually related to the appeal to "inappropriate authority" and not taking an experts word over someone who probably doesn't know what they are talking about.
 

BloodSquirrel

New member
Jun 23, 2008
1,263
0
0
J Tyran said:
Wait what? Talking to a doctor for a medical problem is a fallacy? Consulting a builder if someone wants a conservatory is fallacy? Getting a mechanic in when you need your car fixed is a fallacy?

I think your fallacy is a fallacy or at least your use of it is.
Doctors, builders, and mechanics can all be wrong. If your doctor tells you that he's going to bleed you to get the devil out, are you going to go along and not argue just because he's a doctor? Are you going to spend $2000 on car repairs because your mechanic tells you that your car needs its blinker fluid replaced?

And, for someone who is so enamored with listening to experts, you sure are bizarrely insistent on reject the one piece of actual authoritative knowledge that's been brought into this discussion, ie, that Appeal to Authority is a logical fallacy and should not be relied on to make arguments.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority