They mass deleted threads about Devotion after Devotion removal... And during that time deleted a thread I made which had nothing to do with Devotion and didnt break any rules. So I dont think they were told to ignore the board.

Major shareholders of CDP are execs and/or board members.

My apologies for not being more clear earlier.

What I meant by "ignoring the board" is that they haven't replied to the threads regarding devotion other than to mod/lock/delete threads/posts.

Sidenote: They also seemingly have been avoiding modding too many users for smaller infractions re: their posts and avatars on the devotion subject which might normally go against the forum tos.
(for example, the mentions of ccp/xinnie the pooh/etc usually netted warnings or "time outs" from staff before the devotion debacle)

They also have non-staff shareholders as well, I believe.

Now of course(assuming the same laws apply in Poland) the majority(staff) shareholders wouldn't likely call a vote of no confidence on themselves, but the non-staff minority shareholders might......like if the company were to say do something to cut itself out of a certain market segment through it's actions.

Essentially, greed for them chyna bux likely influenced their decision re: Devotion, but I am guessing some of them possibly losing their jobs by displeasing the others shareholders also played a part in their decision.

They account for 33% of the shares. The rest are free float.
https://www.cdprojekt.com/en/investors/shareholders/

One major issue with such things is that minor shareholders dont have enough information. They dont get to know any more than the general public. And the management is not communicating critical business plan things (just look at investor call stuff on their web page etc), making some excuses about some competition.
And without knowing the shareholder spectrum (this is a flagship company in Poland kind of, I dont think US Wall Street investment perspective necessarily fits here) there really is no way to know whether the China thing would be seen as good or bad by the majority of the 'free float' shareholders.

I have not bought anything so far, but I'm worried I'll be able to keep up the boycott. Now that i've switched to using Playnite over Galaxy, I don't spend as much time here, I care less about where a game is from as long as I can play it without any other clients. I'll keep deprioritizing buying from GOG and I will hopefully make it to the end of the year, but maybe I'll buy a bunch of games in the winter sale that will have equaled as much money as I would have spent throughout the year anyway.

So they don't even own the majority stake in the company? No wonder why they seem to bow so much "many gamers"(and likely the shareholders too in some ways).

=-=-=

Essentially they're often(minus the ones who are "in the loop" and know more than others somehow) either less informed or wrongly informed, and they get to (in a way) help dictate how the company should be run.

And even when told the truth, they more often seem to side on the thing or choice that makes them more money.

(this is part of why I dislike seeing companies like this go public, btw)

Many shareholders like to make money, so i'm gonna go out on a limb and guess that GOG possibly getting cut from a sizeable market(chyna) would likely be seen as bad to them.

Don't forget those who downvote just because they can. The content of the post in that case is completely irrelevant.

Then you did not read the rules carefully enough since in fact EVERYTHING you post can be against the rules because of this very convenient rule:

"Taking any other actions that are deemed inappropriate by GOG at our sole discretion."

These morons fighting the protest on that Worms tweet, I tell you guys. I'd like to get a look at their wishlist and get a game they're looking forward to pulled to see how they act. Assuming they're actually gamers in the first place, considering how suspiciously defensive of GOG they're being...

So CDP don't even control a majority stake in their own company? ...suddenly a lot of this makes a depressing amount of sense.

Which ironically is exactly what they do when they drive some of their established long-term customers into running a boycott.

But yeah, even if some of the shareholders do realize that, I can see how that segment might still look to them like the more sensible one to cut out of, if they are under the impression that they have to choose one.

Makes me wonder, though, if it would be possible (as a group of shareholders) to call a vote of no confidence in things like their ethics or customer relations rather than plain profit.

I had the same thoughts several posts back....and yeah, it seems they sold more shares and control away for easy cash. Now they're likely stuck (more or less) following what the shareholders dictate in some ways.

(It reminds me of all those businesses over the years that went in with "venture capitalists", and then their businesses turned to shyte)

=-=-=

Possibly, but as most are likely there to make money, it'd likely be hard to set in motion and get going.

(reminds me of the shareholder meeting from Mr. Deeds remake...where the one guy says Mr. Deeds needs to convince a bunch of people to stop loving money)

Yes. CDP has sold out. Literally.


The problem with being controlled by free fload share-holders is, that they don't have to care about the long-term perspective of the company. They are in it to make a profit. Preferably quickly. And if the company goes down in the long run, they will just sell their stock. So a big cash influx from China/Epic/Tencent or from some new DRM-ed AAA game or from micro-transactions is a plus in dividend, at first. Why should investors, that aren't personally invested in the company, care whether that makes GOG lose it's identity and maybe their customers over time in the future, because they can't compete with Steam in the long run? Companies rising and falling again is the motor of the stock marked. As an investor, you just have to leave the sinking ship in time. So destroying companies in the long run for short-term profit is an entirely viable strategy at the stock markets.

GoG of old is not the GoG of now.
I kept the majority of my game library here, but I've already started building it again on Steam. I'm done with this platform and company.
It's a significant loss of money down the drain, but it is what it is and it needs to be done sooner rather then later.
I'm very aware that writting on this forum is like pissing in the rain, but if there's at least another user who reconsiders his patronage of GoG as a result of my post, then it's worth it.

PS: I don't want to be on any list since i'm not boycotting, i'm abandoning out right.

How is there a loss of money involved? You can back up offline installers of all your games. And how does it make any sense to abandon GOG in protest... and move to Steam? What exactly is it you're protesting against that Steam isn't already guilty of to an even greater degree?