Установить Steam
войти
|
язык
简体中文 (упрощенный китайский)
繁體中文 (традиционный китайский)
日本語 (японский)
한국어 (корейский)
ไทย (тайский)
Български (болгарский)
Čeština (чешский)
Dansk (датский)
Deutsch (немецкий)
English (английский)
Español - España (испанский)
Español - Latinoamérica (латиноам. испанский)
Ελληνικά (греческий)
Français (французский)
Italiano (итальянский)
Bahasa Indonesia (индонезийский)
Magyar (венгерский)
Nederlands (нидерландский)
Norsk (норвежский)
Polski (польский)
Português (португальский)
Português-Brasil (бразильский португальский)
Română (румынский)
Suomi (финский)
Svenska (шведский)
Türkçe (турецкий)
Tiếng Việt (вьетнамский)
Українська (украинский)
Сообщить о проблеме с переводом
And now you are here discussing this game because Blackrock and Vanguard have shares in the publishing company.
I thought this was a simple thing to say... I thought I wouldn't need to explain that there is only one CEO of blackrock (Larry Fink) and one CEO of vanguard (Mortimer J. Buckley).
You keep missing the point, let's just say for argument sake we agree that the CEO wants to change things.
Your not happy with said change, I personally thing some of it would be good If he actually meant but both of our views on If it is good or bad is irrelevant.
So this guy wants to change the world, yep all on board with you. How is he doing it?
His Corp is big yes $125bn, huge until you then you look at the entire market of investment management assets - JUST THE UK has assets owned by investment management in excess of, $8.8 trillion. Just the UK.
So how is this Corp with not even 0.5% of world investment able to control so much.
And investment management corps are by far not the only way of securing investment.
Unless there is a huge part of the puzzle we are all missing your argument sounds utterly crazy.
I would have to explain a lot to you, and you clearly just want to attack me instead of understanding...
I'll tell you what you need before getting into this discussion:
First you would have to understand the relationship of Smilegate and Qihoo 360 Technology Co. Ltd (which is a fund).
Then you would have to understand the relationship between publishing and development.
I'm not going to read this, you shouldn't try to answer for other people and on top of that try to create narratives.
edit: It's not a matter of what you assumed.
Obviously you are not going to read it,
What do you mean by that? Tell me.
I don't know what's incorrect or wrong about this outlook it's just bog standard investor talk and probably sound advice
Well, that's a start, let's go from there, since you said about "alternative energy", why does Tesla have a low ESG score? even if it pollutes less than companies with a high ESG score?
So-called sustainable funds attract money, that's the least you need to understand. I'm talking about tens of billions. But this is just a facade to control the narrative while they do worse things - see how a narrative works in this same post, even though I am objective all the time, you find individuals trying to weigh in, and take control of the conversation.
edit: The same is with these multinationals, if you control the conversation, you control how people should act.
It seems like culture war fear-mongering to me from people who are economically and politically illiterate
As for what a game publisher does well word for word as it is typically described. A game publisher give developers the money upfront to make a game. They strike up a deal with a studio (game development company) to make a game according to an agreed brief. The publisher then works closely with the game producer at the studio to make sure the game's being made as agreed, to budget and on time.
That being said are you upset about the development side of DD2, the publisher side, or both?