Stu

The answer to what Cory's departure means is... "It Depends". :-)

Here's why:
It's important to understand the nature of the disagreement, before we can fully appreciate the impact.

Hopefully, Philip and Cory will agree to be transparent about the nature of the disagreement at some point, outside of any contractual or legal obligations that they must adhere to.

They have both implied in some way that it was a disagreement about the future direction of the company. Second life has the media attention and 'mindshare' that's necessary to grow into the fundamental VR platform of the future. However, if the "invitations go out, and the party sucks”, they run the risk of burning through that 'advertising capital' without leveraging it in a way that benefits the company, the customer base, and ultimately, the world.

So the specifics of their disagreement, especially if these disagreements are around the current readiness of the SL platform (in terms of scalability, feature set, manageability, etc.) prior to any major expansion of scope, are far more relevant to SL-ers.

On one hand, you're never completely prepared for the next round of expansion. It's healthy and natural to have some anxiety around any major shift, but you can't let it stop you from growing. Risk aversion has sunk many companies after their initial successes.

On the other hand, there are some fundamental elements of Due Diligence that customers expect, prior to any major shift in direction, architecture, etc. Ignoring these fundamentals has sunk many companies after their initial successes.

Depending on whether these two opposing perspectives had anything to do with the departure, and if so, which position was held by which person, is crucial to understanding how the company might be affected in the future.

Hopefully, one or both of them will share further details about this 'difference in future direction' when things calm down.

Stu

Whether he was 'fired' or decided to leave is really irrelevant. At Cory's level, when a firing results from irreconcilable differences, it doesn't mean the same thing as when a normal employee is fired due to incompetence or negligence. It's much more interesting to ask (and find out, definitively) about the nature of the disagreement.

While we can speculate, I really wish Philip and Cory would agree to be transparent about the nature of the disagreement, outside of any contracual or legal obligations that they must adhere to.

They have both implied in some way that it was a disagreement about the future direction of the company. Second life has the media attention and 'mindshare' that's necessary to grow into the fundamental VR platform of the future. However, if the "invitations go out", and the party sucks, they run the risk of burning through that 'advertising capital' without leveraging it in a way that benefits the company, the customer base, and ultimately, the world.

So the specifics of their disagreement, especially if these disagreements are around the current readiness of the SL platform (in terms of scalabilty, feature set, managability, etc.) prior to any major expansion of scope, are far more relevant to SL-ers.

On one hand, you're never completely prepared for the next round of expansion. It's healthy and natural to have some anxiety around any major shift, but you can't let it stop you from growing. Risk adversion has sunk many companies after their initial successes.

On the other hand, there are some fundamental elements of Due Diligence that customers expect, prior to any major shift in direction, architecture, etc. Ignoring these fundamentals has sunk many companies after their initial successes.

Hopefully, one or both of them will share further details about this 'difference in future direction' when things calm down.

Stu