this post was submitted on 13 Sep 2023
104 points (94.8% liked)

Games

16406 readers
1473 users here now

Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)

Posts.

  1. News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
  2. Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
  3. No humor/memes etc..
  4. No affiliate links
  5. No advertising.
  6. No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
  7. No self promotion.
  8. No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
  9. No politics.

Comments.

  1. No personal attacks.
  2. Obey instance rules.
  3. No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
  4. Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.

My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.

Other communities:

Beehaw.org gaming

Lemmy.ml gaming

lemmy.ca pcgaming

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
nanoUFO@sh.itjust.works
104
Unity backtracks slightly on plans to charge developers for game installs (www.eurogamer.net)
submitted 1 year ago by stopthatgirl7@kbin.social to c/games@sh.itjust.works
27 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Game development engine Unity has U-turned on some parts of its hugely controversial plan to enforce fees on game creat…

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] stopthatgirl7@kbin.social 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

And seeing as how the CEO sold 2000 shares just days before this announcement, short-term profit really is all they’re in for.

[–] Amaltheamannen@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

2000 shares is nothing

[–] stopthatgirl7@kbin.social 14 points 1 year ago (2 children)

The insider transaction history for Unity Software Inc shows a clear trend: over the past year, there have been 49 insider sells and no insider buys. This could be a red flag for potential investors, as it suggests that those with the most intimate knowledge of the company's operations and prospects are choosing to sell their shares

[–] eestileib@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago

Ehh, the top folks at Google were all selling their maximum-permitted amount every window they got for a decade and the stock held up.

You typically don't need to buy shares as an insider, the company just prints more gambling slips -- er, I'm sorry, non-transferrable stock options -- and hands them out.

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago

Or it just means they see it as compensation and are selling for taxes and expenses, not because they are worried about the long term direction of the company.

[–] ABCDE@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's best part of $80k, it's still money made from insider trading.

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No, it's probably just being sold to pay taxes.

[–] ABCDE@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Which is still money.

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Yes, but it doesn't rise to the level of "insider trading," which means using internal-only information to make trading decisions. If they sell these stocks regularly, on a schedule, in the same quantity, it's not insider trading.

And that's exactly what they're doing, you can see their trades, and they're consistent for about the same amount. So they're not trading because of changes going on internally, they're trading based on a schedule, probably because they need cash flow for some reason. My guess is taxes for their stock compensation.