I’m with you on both McAvoy and Miranda. Scoresby is 100% a pirate cowboy, which Miranda is just not. I almost feel like Channing Tatum might fit, but he’s not quiiiiiite swashbucking enough. As for Lord Astriel, if you’re looking to convey “Older Gentleman With Infinite Gravitas, The Ability To Generate Fearful…

I mean, shifts in direction are common everywhere, no matter the business and no matter who agrees. Sometimes it works, and sometimes it doesn’t, but I think the assertion that this is approach has *some* potential and *might* make sense with people who’ve a)history making it happen b)monetary pull towards having this…

I don’t have any particular insight into it, but I’m looking at it from the perspective of this PE firm. Their goal at the end of all of this is to sell the collection of sites for more than they paid for, preferably a lot more. To get there, they have internal metrics to base their judgement off of, and a history of…

It’s not an enormous editorial shift, as it is still a sports blog. It has some non-sports things, but it’s the sports blog arm of the media universe that they bought. It’s still not even close to having Pizza Hut make luxury goods or tractors, and lets not forget that, yeah, Pizza Hut has sold things other than…

Well, PE firms don’t work on the time span of a couple of months, they work on the span of years (like 5-10). Reworking what PE firms buy and then, years later, reaping the benefits is the business model of the entire industry.

I mean, I do.

I mean, it’s not about overthinking, it’s understanding how PE firms work. They want to make the choices that make the brand the most valuable in the eventually sell off. I haven’t seen anything which especially indicates an opposition to liberal messaging.

Whereas the inverse rests on the premise that the way they had operated up to that point was their absolute peak. Maybe they were. Clearly this PE firm doesn’t see it that way, and feels they can create better value for the company with a realignment. You disagree with that view, which is fine and not necessarily…

They might have bought it because they felt that with a refocusing and some strategic staffing moves, they’d be able to sell it for more than they paid. Maybe they got it at an especially low price. Restructuring of companies - especially companies which have historically had a few rough patches - are common practices …

I can’t say; I’m saying that it’s well within the realm of possibility that people whose job it is to do so and have both history of doing that and internal metrics towards that end goal of value creation aren’t necessarily automatically wrong.

You’d think they would want to put their best and most creative foot forward, wouldn’t you, but as for me, considering I haven’t played WoW since WotLK, no...?

Hermes typically has a [in my mind dumb and needless] upfront cost to purchasing their higher end (ie, Birkin or Kelly) bags; generally you need to spend about 10k-20k to be afforded access. Actually, the stores sell a bunch of incredibly dumb knicknacks (like a riding crop or saddle or whatever) whose sole purpose is…

Makes sense to me. Most of the counterarguments I’m seeing as “Down with the rich” or “items at certain levels of value shift the responsibility somehow”, neither of which are particularly strong legal arguments. If I had a coat/shirt/whatever ruined by a restaurant spilling wine on it, I’d expect compensation for the…

Well, I’ve seen companies refocus themselves which leads to an initial downturn, but then after a few years, go on to reach an even bigger audience. I think it’s not entirely out of the realm of possibility that the thinking was as great as Deadspin’s numbers were, and as loyal as the readers were, that even higher…

Seriously. They look like Outlands 2.0, just normal mortal lands with typically “zany” creatures and barely different architecture.

Where are the huge twisted artifices where they stretch out so far in every direction that even just by looking at them it’s unclear where is up or down?

I’ll be honest, and I expect some *serious* pushback, but the PE villians part...eh...I guess I don’t see it?

Obviously I know of the recent firings, but “the boss has decided to focus on an interest section for one of the sites which is already ostensibly focused on that section”...I don’t know, it doesn’t seem…

1. They might have a hard time finding anyone who conveys the same qualities as De Niro, which, well, fair.

Pro-lifers are akin to rapists; change my mind.

Not saying you’re wrong, but people always seem to exclude the fact that he also directed the best episode of TV to have ever existed (Breaking Bad’s “Ozymandias”) - I know that TV works differently, with the showrunners being the true shot callers as opposed to directors, but still, it never comes up. 

I mean, I feel like the fact that the first amendment exists doesn’t necessarily mean there will never be regulations about advertising - especially political ads.