Columnist Attacks Ubisoft Toronto Deal
Columnist Attacks Ubisoft Toronto Deal
July 11, 2009
The recent news that the government of Ontario would fork over $263 million to Ubisoft for a new studio in Toronto remains controversial. In today's Globe & Mail columnist Marcus Gee is beside himself over the decision:
With a budget deficit of $18.5-billion, your provincial government is strapped - but not so strapped that it can't find a quarter of a billion in the pocket lint to pay some Frenchmen to set up a new video-game studio...
Ubisoft executives say they are in love with Toronto... But game developers are a footloose bunch, jumping from place to place in search of talent and government handouts... Who is to say they won't jump across the pond when the [U.K.] tax picture changes. Or when currency-exchange rates make Canada less desirable...
That quarter-billion has to come from somewhere, much of it from good Toronto businesses that don't have the buzz factor... Their tax burden will rise, and their business will suffer, while the cool kids in the video-game industry collect government cheques.
Meanwhile, David Olive at The Star seems cautiously optimistic about the Ubisoft deal:
Corporate welfare is tough to justify at the best of times... Could there be better uses of public money than developing the next generation of Assassin's Creed... And at a cost of $329,000 for each of the up to 800 workers to be employed by the new Ubisoft Toronto?
On balance, the investment is probably wise...
A PUBLICATION OF THE ECA
SUBSCRIBE
LOGINGamePolitics ShoutBox
Posted 02/09/10 at 01:16pm
Andrew Eisen: Shouldn't be. Spirit of anti-discrimination laws would seem to include sexual orientation (and eye color). Plus there's always equal protection and such. Never know until you try.
Andrew Eisen: Shouldn't be. Spirit of anti-discrimination laws would seem to include sexual orientation (and eye color). Plus there's always equal protection and such. Never know until you try.
Posted 02/09/10 at 01:10pm
Andrew Eisen: Should have sued (unless that wasn't an option given her financial situation or something). Might have won.
Andrew Eisen: Should have sued (unless that wasn't an option given her financial situation or something). Might have won.
Posted 02/09/10 at 01:00pm
Valdearg: Story about a Male to Female TG who was expressly told she wouldn't be given a job because she was TG. Its not the main point of the story, but explicit, perfectly legal discrimination like this exists.
Valdearg: Story about a Male to Female TG who was expressly told she wouldn't be given a job because she was TG. Its not the main point of the story, but explicit, perfectly legal discrimination like this exists.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:53pm
Valdearg: Lol, I don't know. It may very well be legal to do so. Though that might able to fall under the "race" restriction, depending on how that point is argued.
Valdearg: Lol, I don't know. It may very well be legal to do so. Though that might able to fall under the "race" restriction, depending on how that point is argued.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:51pm
Valdearg: I don't think they do have any legal recourse. I'll have to dig around, but I seriously believe that if the law doesn't specifically mention Sexual Orientation or Gender Identity, they can still be discriminated against in those 29 states.
Valdearg: I don't think they do have any legal recourse. I'll have to dig around, but I seriously believe that if the law doesn't specifically mention Sexual Orientation or Gender Identity, they can still be discriminated against in those 29 states.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:51pm
Andrew Eisen: Eye color isn't covered either but I doubt it would be considered legal to refuse to hire people with green eyes.
Andrew Eisen: Eye color isn't covered either but I doubt it would be considered legal to refuse to hire people with green eyes.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:48pm
Andrew Eisen: My explanation is longer than the Shoutbox will allow. Suffice to say that while those who are discriminated against do have legal recourse, anti-discrimination law should specifically cite sexual orientation so that there’s no question about it.
Andrew Eisen: My explanation is longer than the Shoutbox will allow. Suffice to say that while those who are discriminated against do have legal recourse, anti-discrimination law should specifically cite sexual orientation so that there’s no question about it.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:42pm
Valdearg: "There is no federal law that consistently protects LGBT individuals from employment discrimination; it remains legal in 29 states, and in 38 states to do so based on gender identity or expression." From the Human Rights Campaign.
Valdearg: "There is no federal law that consistently protects LGBT individuals from employment discrimination; it remains legal in 29 states, and in 38 states to do so based on gender identity or expression." From the Human Rights Campaign.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:40pm
Valdearg: @AE: Why don't you think I'm correct? I know Wiki could be flawed, but as far as it says, its up to date as of June 2009.
Valdearg: @AE: Why don't you think I'm correct? I know Wiki could be flawed, but as far as it says, its up to date as of June 2009.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:39pm
Andrew Eisen: I don't think you're right but I really don't know and don't have the time to find out. However things actually are, it's very clear how they actually should be.
Andrew Eisen: I don't think you're right but I really don't know and don't have the time to find out. However things actually are, it's very clear how they actually should be.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:34pm
Valdearg: "just because there's no specific state level protection for it, doesn't make discrimination right or legal." I would disagree. If there's no laws against it, it makes it perfectly legal. It's definitely not right, but perfectly legal to do.
Valdearg: "just because there's no specific state level protection for it, doesn't make discrimination right or legal." I would disagree. If there's no laws against it, it makes it perfectly legal. It's definitely not right, but perfectly legal to do.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:33pm
Valdearg: Meaning in 29 states, private sector discrimination against gays is perfectly legal.. Sickening.
Valdearg: Meaning in 29 states, private sector discrimination against gays is perfectly legal.. Sickening.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:33pm
Valdearg: 19 states have no protections, and another 10 only have protections for public sector jobs.
Valdearg: 19 states have no protections, and another 10 only have protections for public sector jobs.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:32pm
Andrew Eisen: Well, most businesses have equal rights policies in place and just because there's no specific state level protection for it, doesn't make discrimination right or legal. Still, no argument against adding such protections.
Andrew Eisen: Well, most businesses have equal rights policies in place and just because there's no specific state level protection for it, doesn't make discrimination right or legal. Still, no argument against adding such protections.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:28pm
Valdearg: More information. Apparently, it's worse than I actually thought.
Valdearg: More information. Apparently, it's worse than I actually thought.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:28pm
Valdearg: Check the link. Apparently, its more like 20 states that have no protections.
Valdearg: Check the link. Apparently, its more like 20 states that have no protections.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:26pm
Andrew Eisen: In the US? Not that I'm aware of. Sad if true.
Andrew Eisen: In the US? Not that I'm aware of. Sad if true.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:25pm
Valdearg: @AE: Actually, I think, at least for now, businesses can still discriminate against gays in a few states.. Something like 5 or 8. Its part of why Gay Rights Advocates are in support of the Employee Nondiscrimination Act, or ENDA.
Valdearg: @AE: Actually, I think, at least for now, businesses can still discriminate against gays in a few states.. Something like 5 or 8. Its part of why Gay Rights Advocates are in support of the Employee Nondiscrimination Act, or ENDA.
Copyright © 2007 ECA. All rights reserved.
Game Politics and Game Politics logo are trademarks of the ECA.
Game Politics and Game Politics logo are trademarks of the ECA.
Comments
Once again, the government isn't paying anyone nor are they giving anyone cheques in this deal, it's simply a tax relief, making it cheaper for them to set up shop.
They're still going to pay taxes, the government will just collect a bit less. A bit less by the way, is a lot more than nothing.
Please. No decent journalist is going to let facts and truth get in the way of a good sensationalized story. Truth doesn't sell stories anymore. Won't someone think of the children? Etc. Etc.
I need a beer.
but not so strapped that it can't find a quarter of a billion in the pocket lint to pay some Frenchmen to set up a new video-game studio...
Now that just seems prejudice against French people more then anything.
Also, provinces are seperate enough that they squabble over who is paying the most taxes where.
Edit: I am an idiot, and apparently Ubisoft is from france. I was assuming this was a "you give tax breaks to quebecois companies" issue.
Canada is such bizarre place...
Seriously, french and english togheter in the same place, with one continously hating each other, but refusing to separate...
It is like two kids that decided that they both own a toy (own alone that is...), and ended sharing the toy because none of them want to give it away to the other...
criadordejogos.wordpress.com
OMG! Frenchmen in Ontario! Hide your children!
but not so strapped that it can't find a quarter of a billion in the pocket lint to pay some Frenchmen to set up a new video-game studio...
Whoa, Racist much. I guess this guy has something the French.
I don't think racist means what you think it means.
Parallax Abstraction
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
blog.digital-lifeline.ca
If the French had it their own way they would leave Canada and bring Quebec with it.
Slow news week?
No, why do you ask?
Andrew Eisen
Probably because we have had 3 stories about this in a week when the first would have sufficed. In my opinion.
--------------------------------------------------
I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.
Nah, that can't be it. There were over 30 other stories published in the last week.
Andrew Eisen
"Or when currency-exchange rates make Canada less desirable"
Um, what? While the exchange rate has fluctuated some, it's still quite high as compared to the american dollar. In other words it's ALREADY "less" desireable. Chances are the the canadian $ will become cheaper as compared to the USD, so this is unlikely in the extreme.
Further Ubisoft has massive investments in Quebec, so the exchange of the CAD is not something new to them.
There's no shortage of RPGs on the market these days (certainly different from when I was growing up!), bu tthat doesn't mean fans of the genre aren't always on the lookout for good new ones. Surely the ears of those fans will perk up when they hear that Ubisoft is working on a new fantasy-themed RPG. bad credit payday loans