[kdfjgbdfkjgb]

I saw a reddit comment from a Unity developer that alleged that Unity told them not to worry about the changes because this dev used ironSource for their ads. ironSource merged with Unity last year and other commenters were speculating that this whole thing is a play to try to coerce the huge amount of mobile games that are made with Unity to switch to ironSource.

[ethbr1]

To parent's opinion, I'd respond that bad management is a possibility in any company.

However, a broken revenue model misaligns incentives and makes user-bad decisions a certainty.

Laying it at the feet of management is blaming the messenger -- the root cause was revenue and expectations being strategically unbalanced.

It's surprising how many people watch companies make "dumb" moves and gnash their teeth over "how could they be so stupid?"

They're not being stupid... they're looking at the cards they have in their hand, what they need to win, and playing it the best way they can.

As people have quipped elsewhere in the comments, there were no ways Unity could deliver the financial performance that was expected of them, with a developer-friendly business model.

[fredsmith219]

Since management sets the expectations, laying the blame at their feet is correct. Who else would you hold accountable for management decisions?

[ethbr1]

Majority shareholders for choosing an ownership model that their operating model couldn't service.

Unity going public was like .org's PIR being sold to PE.

[gochi]

You would be right, they have informally stated if developers switch to ironSource/Unity Ads, they would have their runtime fee slashed.