A more appropriate answer would be "I was clearly wrong". Your second sentence is I suppose an attempt to deflect away from you being clearly wrong. It's also a weak attempt at making a point. I could have sworn we'd already covered the fact that Simmons himself was responsible for 60% of the site's traffic, and that it was steadily increasing? If Simmons had played nice and was still with ESPN, Grantland would still be an operational website. No question.
This is more passive-aggressive than a Lebron James tweet. We can go five or six more pages of you posting cute little replies like above, or you could just acknowledge you were wrong. John Skipper left no room for interpreation, homeboy.
Yes because it's in his best interest to talk about how they revenues have dropped 40 percent. Executives love to talk about how their business sucks.
He was a gigantic asshole with a huge salary who also wasn't making his company any money. This should be fairly obvious to everybody.
They are laying off people like crazy. Even earners in actual revenue producing segments like cowherd which generated them a shitload of money were let go and this idiot thinks Simmons, a guy in the ESPN division that by far generates the smallest amount of revenue who was one of the highest paid guys at the company and was LOSING them millions a year was fired solely because of personal reasons. All because his little man complex can't let him admit he's wrong about something. This is why he's the dumbest mother****er on this site
Show premiered tonight. Not bad, Charles was great, Affleck made some good points about deflategate. Show was choppy and seemed like amateur hour from a production and editing sense, probably tighten that up as they go.
The fact that they laid off guys that were making money kills your argument. Thanks you for the Cowherd example. You aren't very good at this. Do keep posting, though. I enjoy a laugh.
their entire business model is built on the brand, not individuals, being the most important factor. if they feel they can replace someone who actually is in a division that makes them money do you seriously think they are going to think twice about firing someone who loses them money? vanity projects are nice when you are living high on the hog, but they aren't going to pay anyone that kind of money anymore in the era of them losing a million subscribers a week.
