As far as I’m aware, he chose to step down on his own. Tripwire Interactive is a private business. It doesn’t have a board of directors elected by stockholders. Chances are, he couldn’t handle the negative attention and cucked out, appointing his friend as the new CEO. Of course, I say this with no knowledge of Tripwire’s corporate structure beyond the fact that it’s a private company, but it’s a story I’ve seen play out time and time again.
I think you’re right. They probably didn’t like the heat they were getting and he stepped down but will still hold his shares and make the same amount of money on the company’s success or lack thereof.
It’s not a public company, so there’s no shares to hold. However, he probably does still have an ownership stake in the company. Nevertheless, stepping down as CEO means he no longer has control over the direction the company takes and the ideological positions it endorses. As you can see, the first thing the new executives did was put out a statement denouncing John Gibson’s views and saying that they went against “company values”. (Since when did companies start having values? Oh right, thanks Citizens v. United)
Private companies can and do still have boards and shareholders. They just aren't traded on the public market. Generally happens when you start to bring on investors.
I think if it was voluntary the statement would have been in Gibson's name, or he would have made an official statement somewhere along the way as CEO. But it wasn't, and he didn't. Details like that matter to PR people.
As far as I’m aware, he chose to step down on his own
I very much doubt this is the truth. This is what they always say as a way of forcing you out without the paperwork and legal headache of an actual ousting. Likely by leveraging his own affection for everyone else in the company by convincing him it was "for their protection."
That's how 90% of jobs are lost. You don't get fired, you get convinced to leave. I did it to hundreds of retail and warehouse workers in my days as management, and saw it happen to those above me by their own similarly leveled cohorts.
That’s what I mean. Of course they would try to get him to resign, but in the end if he refused to do so, it would have been exceedingly difficult if not impossible for them to force him out depending on the percentage of ownership he held. So it was his choice to step down. You should never step down for the “good of the company” when the people in the company who are persuading you to leave are the ones who hate your guts. As can be seen by the statement put out by Tripwire, the new executives clearly have no affection towards Gibson.
Of course they would try to get him to resign, but in the end if he refused to do so, it would have been exceedingly difficult if not impossible for them to force him out depending on the percentage of ownership he held
Problem being he still had to work there, and he still needed them to work under him. When you are being obstinate and throwing your weight around like that, you basically shatter any chance of the company continuing to function beyond the bare minimum, or worse malicious compliance. Yes he could technically have done so, but it would have likely unraveled the company regardless.
Its really a rock and a hard place. You can't win when those closest to you turn on you like that, as its clear even his closest compatriot threw him out.
As far as I’m aware, he chose to step down on his own. Tripwire Interactive is a private business. It doesn’t have a board of directors elected by stockholders. Chances are, he couldn’t handle the negative attention and cucked out, appointing his friend as the new CEO. Of course, I say this with no knowledge of Tripwire’s corporate structure beyond the fact that it’s a private company, but it’s a story I’ve seen play out time and time again.
I think you’re right. They probably didn’t like the heat they were getting and he stepped down but will still hold his shares and make the same amount of money on the company’s success or lack thereof.
It’s not a public company, so there’s no shares to hold. However, he probably does still have an ownership stake in the company. Nevertheless, stepping down as CEO means he no longer has control over the direction the company takes and the ideological positions it endorses. As you can see, the first thing the new executives did was put out a statement denouncing John Gibson’s views and saying that they went against “company values”. (Since when did companies start having values? Oh right, thanks Citizens v. United)
Private companies can have shares they just aren’t traded on a public market
Private companies can and do still have boards and shareholders. They just aren't traded on the public market. Generally happens when you start to bring on investors.
I think if it was voluntary the statement would have been in Gibson's name, or he would have made an official statement somewhere along the way as CEO. But it wasn't, and he didn't. Details like that matter to PR people.
I very much doubt this is the truth. This is what they always say as a way of forcing you out without the paperwork and legal headache of an actual ousting. Likely by leveraging his own affection for everyone else in the company by convincing him it was "for their protection."
That's how 90% of jobs are lost. You don't get fired, you get convinced to leave. I did it to hundreds of retail and warehouse workers in my days as management, and saw it happen to those above me by their own similarly leveled cohorts.
That’s what I mean. Of course they would try to get him to resign, but in the end if he refused to do so, it would have been exceedingly difficult if not impossible for them to force him out depending on the percentage of ownership he held. So it was his choice to step down. You should never step down for the “good of the company” when the people in the company who are persuading you to leave are the ones who hate your guts. As can be seen by the statement put out by Tripwire, the new executives clearly have no affection towards Gibson.
Problem being he still had to work there, and he still needed them to work under him. When you are being obstinate and throwing your weight around like that, you basically shatter any chance of the company continuing to function beyond the bare minimum, or worse malicious compliance. Yes he could technically have done so, but it would have likely unraveled the company regardless.
Its really a rock and a hard place. You can't win when those closest to you turn on you like that, as its clear even his closest compatriot threw him out.