David Senra · JA + tiny EN

GTA6を支える男——ストラウス・ゼルニック

The Man Behind Grand Theft Auto 6: Strauss Zelnick

英語はYouTube自動字幕ベース。日本語は学習用の整文対話。一次情報は動画。

センラゼルニック
FAQ 一覧 YouTube
センラ#1

Take-Two Interactive を買い取り、ディールをまとめた経緯を一通り話してくれないか。

EN

Can you run through the the how you wound up buying and taking of the deal to get Take-Two Interactive? You know, interestingly, it's not a story that we've told. And part of the reason is stories like this tend to be sort of self-serving because it worked out well. And uh not everything works out well. In fact, most deals don't happen, and deals that do happen don't always work out. But this one did. It's kind of a a set of one of one cuz the way we did this deal uh has never happened before, and I'm pretty certain it will never happen again because we we essentially did a hostile takeover with no money. The reason we did that is we had no money. So, it was really our only choice. But I had a background in the video game business. I'd started ZMC with partners, and the goal of ZMC was to buy, in certain instances turn around, and all instances build up and create value in companies that stood at the intersection of media and technology. And the idea, in '01 when we started the business, uh was that technology would supercharge media uh and create lots of value and destroy value. And And of course, that's a story now that's more resonant than ever. I thought in '01 it was pretty obvious, but it was not obvious to the entertainment business. I guess we should give some some context. By that time you would already spent two decades in the entertainment business, longer?

ゼルニック#2

興味深いことに、あまり語ってこなかった話なんだ。うまくいった話は自己宣伝に聞こえやすいし、すべてのディールがうまくいくわけでもない。実際、大半のディールは起きないし、起きてもうまくいかないことが多い。でもこれはうまくいった。しかもやり方が一度きりの一回限りで、前にも後にも起きないだろうと思う。なぜなら、本質的には金のない敵対的買収だったからだ。

EN

About that. Yeah, I I and I've been in every entertainment business there there is. So, why was it obvious to you in 2001 and not obvious to other people in the industry then? I was a new media guy. So, I my goal getting out of grad school was to run a movie studio, an old business even when I graduated from grad school. So, I got to Columbia Pictures in a very junior job. It was the the only job I was offered, and by definition the best I could get in the entertainment business. I was responsible for international television distribution, which um was basically the last stop on the train of distribution of film and television. Those days there weren't many outlets. You With motion pictures, you went to cinemas. And then you went to the beginning, the very beginning of home entertainment, the very beginning of cable television, and eventually free television. And my job was to distribute to free television. So I um I'm sitting around and new media has come along to the entertainment business. In those days, believe it or not, new media was home entertainment, which at that time was video cassette distribution, and pay television. And this is in the '80s?

ゼルニック#3

金がなかったから、それが唯一の選択肢だった。ただ、ビデオゲーム事業の経験はあった。パートナーと ZMC を始めていて、狙いはメディアとテクノロジーの交差点に立つ会社を買い、場合によっては立て直し、どの場合でも価値を積み上げることだった。2001年の創業時の発想は、テクノロジーがメディアを加速させ、価値を生んだり壊したりする、というもの。今のほうがずっと共感されやすい話だ。01年当時は自分には明白に見えたが、エンタメ業界には明白ではなかった。

EN

still used all the time, 50 almost 50 years later.

センラ#4

その時点でもう、エンタメ業界に二十年ほどいたはずだよね。もっと長い?

EN

Amazingly. Yeah. So at big companies like Columbia Pictures, which made their money in film and television production and distribution, and were really old-line companies who were just beginning to modernize, I was one of a small cadre of business school grads who'd been recruited into the business, which was atypical for the industry uh until the early '80s. So they realized like we need a new media guy. Like the way today everyone needs an AI guy. AI you know, army. Uh and so they looked around and they're like, "Who is the least valuable executive at this company that we can put in charge of new media?" And that was me. So in addition to my day job, I became responsible for new media, which was the best thing that ever happened to me. Because I'd always been a futurist. My thesis in grad school was a history of the electronic entertainment business from its inception in 1895 until when I graduated in '83, and I tried to stay current since then. So the notion of looking ahead sort of came naturally to me, but now I had to do it for my job. Oh, and I had to deliver revenue in that job as well. So that was my initial exposure to new media. And actually, if you look at my career, it has been the combination of traditional businesses and new businesses driven by technology, which is why this is such an exciting time with all things AI. I want to interrupt you one second. Did you say So you were you were a futurist by looking back, though? Did I just hear you were studying

ゼルニック#5

だいたいそれくらい。エンタメのあらゆる事業に関わってきた。

EN

have to be a futurist by looking back.

センラ#6

ではなぜ2001年に、君には明白で業界の他の人には明白でなかったのか。

EN

So, wait. You started back in 1895. What was happening in 1895? What were you studying in addition?

ゼルニック#7

自分は「ニューメディア」側の人間だった。大学院を出たときの目標は映画スタジオを率いること——卒業当時ですら古い業態だ。コロンビア・ピクチャーズに、非常にジュニアな職で入った。オファーされた唯一の仕事で、つまりエンタメで取れる最善の仕事だった。担当は国際テレビ配給。当時はフィルムとテレビの配給の「最後の駅」みたいなものだった。劇場→ごく初期のホームエンタメ→ごく初期のケーブル→最終的に無料テレビ、という流れで、僕は無料テレビ向け配給をやっていた。

EN

entertainment, recorded music, beginning of motion pictures.

ゼルニック#8

そこにニューメディアが来た。信じがたいかもしれないが、当時のニューメディアはホームエンタメ——つまりビデオカセット配給——とペイテレビだった。

EN

I'm more interested in like what insights you were deriving from the past and then how you thought it was uh you were applying them in the '80s. So, there are many insights, obviously, and we can go into them um you know, one after another. But, the the insight I guess that spoke to me that probably helped me the most was you always have to embrace new technologies. If you fight against them, you'll be left behind. Number two, and I I've said this all the companies I've been at, um most human beings are wired to believe that which is going on now will never change. But, the actual state of play is exactly what is going on now will change. It will always change. Uh for example, people, whether they like it or not, think today today's political environment is what it is. If they like it, it's going to stay forever. If they don't like it, they're moaning that it will stay forever. But, it won't stay forever. It'll change. The economy will change. And media and entertainment will change. And because I've always been wired that way, I was able when I started ZMC to make sure I have an idea. Let's not buy legacy businesses that are under pressure. Remember, this is 01, so it was non-obvious. Like, let's not go into the movie business. It's a terrible business, you know, as a business. It's fun creatively, but as as a business, it's a bad business. Let's not go into deficit network television production. Um just a bad economic business. Different today than it was, but it was really bad then, where you you would deficit these shows in hopes of creating enough episodes that you could syndicate them. And if you didn't get there, you had a massive loss. And if Occasionally, there, you had a huge hit, which is what motivated everyone. But, it was, you know, the economics looked a lot like winning the lottery. Uh but, I don't win the lottery. How about you? Yeah. Um but, that's not my life experience. But, there are many other lessons, as well. But, the biggest lesson, I think, is that new things come along, and they can grow. Uh old things in the medium entertainment business take a really long time to die. Sometimes, they don't. Sometimes, they they stay in the business forever. Sometimes, they come back. What would be an example of that from the '80s, where we're at where we're talking about new media, and that's what your focus is? Home entertainment, and which was, basically, um video cassette distribution, which became DVD distribution, which became digital distribution.

センラ#9

80年代?

EN

Which was a tiny market at that time that drastically expanded.

ゼルニック#10

83年だ。

EN

It was just beginning to boom in the early '80s.

センラ#11

83年のニューメディアが、50年近く経った今でもまだ使われている、と。

EN

And you were an early believer in that? Well, so much so that I left Columbia Pictures to go to the largest independent home entertainment company, Vestron. Okay, so tell me about that. Well, I've been very fortunate at Columbia Pictures. I figured out how to double the division's revenue in 6 months, which was good for my bosses' career, and therefore, good for mine. So, I became the youngest vice president of Columbia Pictures, and then I was recruited I got sort of reputation for like, "Oh, this guy figures stuff out." And I was recruited to a company called Vestron, uh which was then the largest home entertainment company that had ambitions to become a diversified entertainment company, which was also my ambition. You know, just refreshing conversation from earlier, I wanted to run a movie studio. Vestron wanted to start a movie studio. So, I left to go to Vestron, where within, I think, about Pardon me, about 9 months of arriving, I became president. So, I was now president of a public entertainment company, and I was 29, 3 years out of school. Uh it was not my expectation. And then, I had this, you know, ability to take on the the new movie division that hadn't actually made any pictures yet. So, it was very early. I didn't start it though. I got there and the team was already there, but I gained responsibility for it. And uh we started making movies. Go to the new media part though. So, the biggest part of Vestron's business was home entertainment distribution, which was video cassette distribution. They would create movies and put them on video cassettes, which you would rent in video stores, you may recall. And they would also ultimately make movies and put them through the entire distribution system.

ゼルニック#12

驚くほどそうだ。コロンビアのような大会社は、フィルムとテレビの製作・配給で稼ぎ、近代化し始めたばかりの老舗だった。僕は、80年代初頭まで業界では異例だったビジネススクール出身の幹部の小さな一団の一人だった。彼らは「ニューメディアの人間が必要だ」と考えた——今日みんなが AI の人間を欲しがるのと同じだ。そして「この会社でいちばん価値の低い幹部で、ニューメディアを任せられるのは誰か」と見回して、それが僕だった。

EN

Would they buy other other content made by other people?

ゼルニック#13

本業に加えてニューメディアも担当することになり、それが人生でいちばん良いことだった。自分はもともと未来志向で、大学院の論文は電子エンタメ産業の歴史——1895年の始まりから83年の卒業まで——だった。以来もできるだけ追っている。先を見ること自体は自然だったが、それが仕事になり、しかも売上も出さなければならなかった。キャリア全体が、伝統事業とテクノロジー駆動の新事業の組み合わせだった。だから AI の今はとても興奮する。

EN

Okay. In the same way that Netflix started as distribution company and realized how to be in production.

センラ#14

ちょっと遮る。後ろを見て未来主義者になる、と言った? 1895年まで遡った、と。

EN

I've been a subscriber subscriber, never turned from Netflix and when they were just mailing me DVDs. So, that's I don't know, 20 years or however long.

ゼルニック#15

そう、後ろを見ないと未来主義者にはなれない。

EN

One of my favorite things that I've ever heard Strauss Zelnick say was that he said the thing that he's best at is he has the ability to identify genuine talent in other people, that he can tell the difference between the real deal and not the real deal. The presenting sponsor of this podcast is Ramp, and I think there's a lesson in the way they're building their company that is applicable to anyone who's trying to make something great in the world. The founders of Ramp know, just like Strauss Zelnick knows, that you always bet on talent. Ramp has the most talented technical team in their industry. That means when your business runs on Ramp, you have top-tier technical talent and some of the best AI engineers on the planet working on your behalf 24/7 to automate and improve all of your businesses financial operations, and they do this on a single platform. Ramp gives your business fully programmable corporate credit cards for your entire team, automated expense reporting, bill payments, accounting, and more, all in one place. Ramp is the only all-in-one platform designed to make your finance team faster and happier. Many of the top founders and CEOs that I know run their business on Ramp. I run my business on Ramp, and you should, too. Go to ramp.com today to learn how they can help your business save time, save money, and grow revenue. That is ramp.com. How did you get from new media is, you know, DVDs and and home entertainment to oh, wow, I think I'm going to have a I have a religion on video games and I want to like move myself into that industry. So, I was not a pioneer in the video game business. The video game business started in the late '70s and began to grow in the early '80s. Uh and just by way of background, um I was really a contrarian about video games because Hollywood had a horrible video game experience, which I'm not sure too many people would remember today, but in 1982, there was a huge hit called E.T. And Warner Communications, very forward-thinking, had purchased Atari, which at that time was a leading video game company. And they made both hardware and software. And software in those days was cartridges, and cartridges were expensive to make and had a long lead time. So, before you released something, you had to decide how many you were going to sell and order it all. And if you were right, you did great. And if you were wrong, you had excess inventory. You you didn't have just-in-time inventory with cartridges. It took too long to create. So, um Warner's has Atari. They're doing well with it. And uh they have E.T. and they're like, we should make an E.T. game. And because they didn't really have a lot of experience in how video games are made, they basically they made the game in 5 weeks and put it in the box. And it was a terrible game. And then they manufactured more games, more cartridges than there were Atari consoles. Not sure what their idea was, but they did. And then it it was a disaster. No one bought the game cuz it was terrible. And there are visuals of the cartridges being plowed into landfill that you can find online today. And the entertainment business is a small business. And um everyone was like, oh my god, that that nearly tanked Warner Communications. I think they took a write-down in '82 of $400 million, which was a lot of money in for Warner Communications. So, the rest of the business is like this is a disaster. Like, don't don't ever get involved with video games. It's a terrible business. Okay. Roll the clock forward. I've been at Vestron. I made a bunch of hits. The first picture I greenlit turned into a huge hit. That was very good for my career. Sometimes, you know, it's better to be lucky than smart. That got me recruited to become president of 20th Century Fox just a couple years later when I was 32. So, now I'm at Fox and we turned around Fox went from last place at the box office to first place. Who recruited you to Fox? Uh Joe Roth, who was chairman of had been newly named the chairman of the studio with the support of Barry Diller and Rupert Murdoch. Okay. So, what was Barry Diller's role at Fox at this point?

センラ#16

1895年に何が起きていた? 何を勉強していた?

EN

a CEO of Fox.

ゼルニック#17

エンタメ、録音音楽、映画の始まりだ。

EN

CEO, but then Rupert Murdoch Well, he he was the owner. Yeah, okay. News Corp owned it. Okay. But, this was a flat-out turnaround. The studio part was because they were in last place at at the box office and they weren't doing well at all. Weren't making a lot of money. But, you're 32? Yes. How do they identify you as the guy to hire for this?

センラ#18

録音音楽の始まりはフォノグラフ?

EN

So, it's sort of a long complicated story, so I'll try to compress it.

ゼルニック#19

当時はワックスシリンダーだった。博物館で見られる。それが録音音楽の始まりで、自動ピアノもそうだ。

EN

Give me whatever version you want.

センラ#20

過去からどんな洞察を引き出して、80年代にどう適用したかが知りたい。

EN

so in those days imagine like the independent business is over here, siloed, and the major business is here. And never the twain shall meet. So, Joe Roth was an independent producer. And he had never worked in a major studio. And um he made movies for Vestron. That's how I knew him. He made Young Guns and Young Guns II for Vestron, which were hits for us. And he and I became friendly in the way that I am Well, first of all, a friendly person, if you don't know that. And secondly, like when I work with people, I want to develop relationships with them. And he was a highly creative person, a good guy. So, we became friendly, not intimate friends, but but friendly. Um so, I'm now I'm at Vestron for a couple years. I'm getting very worried about Vestron's business model for an array of reasons. And Vestron's senior leadership, the person I reported to

ゼルニック#21

洞察はたくさんあるが、いちばん効いたのは——新しい技術は常に受け入れなければならない。戦えば取り残される。二つ目は、どの会社でも言ってきたことだが、ほとんどの人間は「今起きていることは変わらない」と信じるようにできている。でも実際は、今起きていることこそ必ず変わる。政治環境も、経済も、メディアとエンタメも変わる。自分はそういう配線だから、ZMC を始めるとき「圧力下のレガシー事業は買わない」と決められた。01年当時、それは非自明だった。映画事業は事業としてはひどい——創造的には面白いがビジネスとしては悪い。赤字のネットワークテレビ製作も、当時は経済が悪く、当たらなければ大損、当たれば大ヒットという宝くじみたいな経済だった。僕は宝くじには当たらない。

EN

anything to do with technology? Uh it had to do with the fact that the reason for Vestron to exist was that they were pioneer in home entertainment. But everyone else got into home entertainment. You can never have a competitive advantage in the entertainment business through distribution only. That's why Netflix produces content. You can start with distribution only if you're a pioneer, but you got immediately go into production and production is a very tough business as I said earlier. So, Vestron's not capitalized to be a diversified film and television production company with a video game division. Sorry, a video store division, not video games. And um, it's it's apparent to me they're going to have problems, so I start looking around and uh, for a job and remarkably enough at the age of 31, people are not exactly lined up knocking on my door to ask me to be president of a major film studio. But Joe gets this job as chairman of Fox. And behind the scenes, and this I was not aware of, but I became aware of it. Barry said to Joe, "Look, you've never worked at a major and you never run a business. You're an independent producer." But he needed creative engine to turn around the studio. He was aware of that, which was true. "You got to hire a business guy to support you here, like to to be your partner in building the business." So, Joe comes from the independent world, remember? Totally different world than major world. He has no relationships in major world. But in independent world, like I'm kind of well-known. Like I'm president of the biggest independent. We've done really well. I greenlit 30 Dancing, which was the highest grossing independent film of all time then and stayed that way for a very long time in until pop quiz, what? I don't know. Blair Witch. Oh, yeah. Anyway, many years later. So, he's looking around. He's like, "Well, who's the number one guy to be the business guy at the studio?" Now, to say that I wasn't I wasn't the number one guy. I was not the number 100 guy. I was the number one guy in this little narrow independent entertainment business. So, he called me up and he was like, "Do you want to Well, I called him actually to say congratulations. He said, "Is that the only reason you're calling?" I said he said, uh, "My, you want to come here and work here?" I was like, "Coincidentally,

ゼルニック#22

最大の教訓は、新しいものは来て成長しうる、ということ。一方でメディア・エンタメの古いものは死ぬのに本当に時間がかかる。永遠に残ることもあるし、戻ってくることもある。80年代の「ニューメディア」——ホームエンタメ、ビデオカセット配給がDVDになりデジタルになる——が、当時は小さく、その後激しく拡大した例だ。

EN

yes." And he said, "So, um, do you think you'll be in LA anytime soon?" I'm like, "Yeah, like how's Thursday?" And um, so I He's like, "Good. So, we meet at the Bel Air Hotel for breakfast." which was a big thing in those days.

センラ#23

80年代初頭にブームが始まったばかり、と。

EN

I'm very familiar with that breakfast.

ゼルニック#24

そうだ。だからこそ、コロンビアを辞めて当時最大の独立系ホームエンタメ会社 Vestron に移った。コロンビアでは事業部の売上を半年で倍にする方法を見つけ、それが上司のキャリアに効き、自分のキャリアにも効いた。コロンビア最年少の副社長になり、「この人は問題を解く」という評判がついて、Vestron に引き抜かれた。Vestron は当時最大のホームエンタメ会社で、多角的なエンタメ会社になる野心があり、僕の野心とも一致した。映画スタジオをやりたかったし、Vestron も映画スタジオを始めたがっていた。着任からだいたい9ヶ月で社長になった。公開エンタメ会社の社長で、29歳、卒業から3年。予期していなかった。新しい映画部門の責任も負い、まだ1本も撮っていない段階だった。

EN

Yeah. And uh that's where In those days, like if you were chairman, you went to Bel Air for breakfast. If you were president, you went to the Polo Lounge. But anyway, separate issue. So, he We're meeting at Bel Air on a Friday morning cuz I I I think I said I'm coming Thursday. We're meeting Friday morning for breakfast. And we have a very nice breakfast. He says, "Do you want to do this thing?" And I said, "That sounds pretty interesting." He said, "Are you free to meet with Barry and Rupert this morning?" And I said, "As it happens, No, I'm I'm a little busy. tied up. [laughter] Yeah, I have to rearrange my sock drawer. So, uh so, I go over to the studio and I walk into a room with Barry and Rupert and Barry asks the very incisive questions that he does and Rupert sat rather quietly. I'm not sure he even asked me a question. Is that normal for Rupert?

センラ#25

他社のコンテンツも買って配給していた?

EN

Yeah, he he's a great listener. And in those days, he was learning the film business. And remember, I was only going to be responsible for film production and then worldwide film and television home entertainment distribution.

ゼルニック#26

そう。それが事業の始まりで、着任時はそれが事業そのものだった。のちに自社製作を始め、「自分たちでやらなきゃ」となった。

EN

What year are we in? This is '86. So, what is the scope of Rupert Murdoch's business at this point? Is it just the newspapers? It's News Corp. No, it's a pretty big business at this point. It's worldwide newspapers. That's a lot of it. Um, and then of course, the the Fox assets. That's pretty much what it was, but it was a big business. All right. So, take me back to You're in a room with Rupert

センラ#27

Netflix が配給から始めて製作に入ったのと同じ構造だ。

EN

in and I have can visualize it like it was yesterday and we have and Barry asks me these really tough questions and I leave the office and the head of HR walks toward me and says, "Um, okay. We're Would you like to do this?" And I said, "Sure." And I walked into his office and signed the contract. And that was how it worked. But did Barry say you're hired? Or they just It was

ゼルニック#28

DVDを郵送していた頃から今まで Netflix の加入者だ。20年くらいかな。

EN

No, it's I just walked out and it was like, yeah, like the HR guy was like, "Okay, come on." And

センラ#29

ゼルニックが言ったことで好きな言葉の一つは、本物の才能を見分ける能力が自分のいちばんの強みだ、というものだ。本物とそうでないものを見分けられる、と。

EN

[laughter]

センラ#30

ところで、ホームエンタメやDVDから、どうやって「ビデオゲームに信仰を持って業界に入る」まで行ったのか。

EN

Yeah, it's good.

ゼルニック#31

ビデオゲームのパイオニアではなかった。事業は70年代末に始まり、80年代初頭に成長した。ハリウッドはビデオゲームでひどい経験をしていて、1982年の大ヒット E.T. がある。ワーナー・コミュニケーションズは先見の明で Atari を買収し、ハードとソフト(当時はカートリッジ)をやっていた。カートリッジは高く、リードタイムが長い。発売前に何本売れるか決めて全部発注する。当たれば良いが、外れれば過剰在庫。ジャストインタイムはできなかった。

EN

What did you learn cuz you've you've like worked with him and like known him

ゼルニック#32

ワーナーは Atari を持ち、うまくいっていた。E.T. があるからゲームを作ろう、となったが、作り方の経験が乏しく、5週間で作って箱に入れた。ひどいゲームだった。しかも Atari 本体の台数より多いカートリッジを製造した。何を考えていたのか分からない。災害になり、誰も買わず、カートリッジが埋め立てに鋤き込まれる映像が今でもオンラインで見られる。エンタメは狭い業界で、ワーナー・コミュニケーションズが危うく沈みかけた、となった。82年に約 4億ドル の減損を出したと思う。当時のワーナーには巨額だ。業界の残りは「ビデオゲームに関わるな、最悪の事業だ」となった。

EN

So can you tell me like some of the things that you've learned from Barry? Or things that you think stand out just about him as a person? Yeah, I mean I learned I mean he taught me the entertainment business. So I learned everything from him because remember I knew very little. I mean I was really and I thankfully I knew what I didn't know. So to this day I'm good at knowing what I don't know and I'm a I'm a an avid learner but I I've never um I never resisted learning more and I'm comfortable asking questions including dumb questions. I have to be because I I kept getting thrown into these big jobs much earlier than I should have been. He kind of had that in his career, right?

ゼルニック#33

時計を進める。Vestron でヒットを出し、最初にゴーサインを出した作品が大ヒットになった——キャリアには運が頭の良さより大事なこともある。それがきっかけで数年後、32歳で 20世紀フォックス の社長に引き抜かれた。フォックスを興行収入の最下位から1位に立て直した。

EN

Yes. Everyone had that. I had that. And she said, "That's you. You just get punched, you go over, you keep coming back up." But, are you naturally like argumentative? No, not at all. I'm much more collaborative. I thought so. This is the vibe I get off of you. But, that didn't matter. I wasn't in charge. It was his style, and I had to comport with his style to get to the right conclusion. What are you learning from Rupert at this time? I mean, you're in you're in these weekly meetings with him?

センラ#34

誰が引き抜いた?

EN

Mhm. With maybe the most successful Please, maybe the most successful person in media of all time? He was extraordinary. What I learned from him really was in a different moment, which is um he over-leveraged the company during my tenure there uh by buying um Star, and the company had a real trouble with its debt facility. And my recollection is they had a diversified debt facility with like 150 banks and a whole cross-default mechanism. And um which is great when things are going well because they kept the interest costs low and horrible if things are going badly because the cost of funds suddenly things go badly. And he was at risk of losing the whole thing. I went on the roadshow with a bank roadshow with him for a couple of the um a couple of the visits. And what I found remarkable was he was cool the whole time. He was wasn't overconfident. He just wasn't ruffled. I mean, he was at risk of losing his whole business, which had been his family's business. And just didn't faze him. He just kept going. And he had he was a laser focused on the conclusion, and he reached the conclusion just by being focused and calm. That's really what I learned from him. It's incredible. Okay, so you're 32, you're doing this turnaround. What are the insights that you are deriving at Fox that you're going to wind up using later on when you do Take-Two? So the the biggest insight, well, we can get into how I work with creative people cuz that's probably the most important long-term thing. But the I think going back to your question about video games, so what's now mid-80s cuz I've been there for a couple years, and I now really understand the economics of the movie business. So I maybe I'm slow to pick it up, but I I got it. And they're terrible. They're terrible underlying economics. And they were bad and and they've been bad since 1955, since the consent decree that basically disaggregated um distribution from production and and turned the motion picture business from a studio system into a boutique system. And a rubric for good versus bad entertainment businesses, a boutique system is generally good or can be good. The studio system was long gone. And studio system means your creative talent, all your talent is on the payroll. Boutique system is they're not on your payroll, they can auction their services. And obviously talented people are auctioning their services for every project, it's going to be much more expensive than if they're on your payroll in success. Um so you have a structure in the motion picture business since '55 essentially. It wasn't didn't happen overnight '55. But by the by the late '60s, early '70s, mid-'70s, where it's heads I win, tails you lose. If the project does well, the boutique extracts a lot of the value because the deal they were able to negotiate so they didn't go across the street. And if the if it's a flop, you as a studio bear the entire cost of the flop, obviously. Whereas in the in a studio system, recorded music before its most recent changes was essentially a studio system. Video games to this day is a studio system. In success, you obviously pay your creative people and we are incredibly generous in the way that we compensate our creative people for success. But the company also has an opportunity to create a return. I was aware that the economics of the film business were really lousy and that you can't fight that. There was a Buffett aphorism which I'm going to get wrong, but the aphorism was to the effect of if you take a management team with a reputation for Brilliance. for brilliance and a and a business with a reputation for being bad, it is the business's reputation that will stay intact.

ゼルニック#35

Joe Roth。新たにスタジオ会長に就いた。Barry DillerRupert Murdoch の支持があった。

EN

Yeah. And again, I I I didn't I didn't that wasn't an elegant version, but you get the idea. So I saw actually saw this in Forbes magazine those days of you read magazines. It was in the back. Remember they had quotes in the back of Forbes and I I read it was like, that's what I'm dealing with here. And I've been really fortunate that Astron did well cuz we made hits and Fox is doing well cuz we made hits. But you can't fight the underlying structure of the business. So I'm My blinding flash of the obvious was I thought to myself, "See, here's the thing. As it turns out, my ambition had been to run a movie studio. And as it turns out, my ambition should have been to run a movie studio in 1927. Not a studio in 1991, whatever it is. So I I think to myself, "What is a moral equivalent of the motion picture business in the 1920s?" Well, that is the video game business. How did you know that? Because I was a student of the business and I was aware that video games were a thing and I was aware that they were, despite the issue that Atari and Warner Communications had, it was still a growing business. And by um the early '90s, it was it was a real business. It was a small business, but it was a real business. And I looked at I said, "I think this is going to be huge." And remember, that was a very unpopular view in the entertainment business because of the Atari disaster, which people still saw in you know, bright flashing neon. So, almost the way you get where you called in the past like the religion on video games is by comparing it to like what is the the movie studio version of that today? Okay, so

センラ#36

当時のバリーの役割は?

EN

your point about being a student of the business. Okay, so then you have that insight.

ゼルニック#37

フォックスのCEOだった。ルパートはオーナーで、News Corp が所有していた。完全な立て直し案件で、興行も収益も良くなかった。

EN

Yeah. So, now I've been at I've been at this studio for um whatever it was, nearly 4 years. And we've had a great run. And I think I I I had to go to the video game business. So, what's your next move? I went to Rupert and I said, "Next big business is the video game business." And I remember sitting in his office and I said, "So, I think we should be in that business." He said, "Great. Go start one." And [snorts] I said, "Yeah, I'd love to do that, you know, while I do my day job." Which was now I'd been promoted. I was now running the creative end business side working for then Peter Chernin cuz Joe Joe and Barry both had left. And he said, "Great. You You could do it. We'll give you the capital. You can pursue it. Build a video game business." And I said, "Well, the only thing is like I see it as an entrepreneurial venture, so I'd like a piece of it." And he said, "No interest. Like, that's not an offer." So, I was like

センラ#38

32歳で、なぜ「この人」と見られた?

EN

Why why did he say no? Because Rupert doesn't have partners in his businesses except his public shareholders. Okay. And it's just his, you know, there's nothing like this There's nothing wrong with that. It was just his approach. And he didn't pause but it wasn't like he paused, "Oh, let me think about it." He was like, "No." So, I was like, "Okay, I guess I have to think about, you know, am I serious about this thing?" And then coincidentally I get a call from a recruiter saying there's this startup pre-revenue video game business in Silicon Valley that is doing the most advanced video games. They're really going to be the next generation of video games. Are you interested? And I left. I took a 95% pay cut and moved my family from our beautiful house in West LA to Atherton, to a rental house that was going to be torn down. Um so, it was maybe a little dated inside. It was about to be torn down for a golf course. Cuz you wanted equity. You wanted ownership in the

ゼルニック#39

長い話になるが圧縮する。当時、独立系とメジャーは完全にサイロで交わらなかった。ジョーは独立系プロデューサーで、メジャーで働いたことがなかった。Vestron で Young GunsYoung Guns II を作り、ヒットだった。そこで親しくなった——親密な親友ではないが、仕事で関係を築きたいタイプだ。創造的でいい男だった。

EN

I wanted to build something and I wanted equity but primarily what motivated me was this notion of being at the cutting edge of media and entertainment and the fact that it was driven by technology made it even more appealing. Did you think that you were [snorts] always going to be an entrepreneur? Because at this point, if I understand your career, you've always just had jobs. You were a phenomenal operator. You were a business guy but did you did you in your heart you're like, "I feel like I'm I should be running my own thing. I should be an entrepreneur." Yes. And I wasn't ready as it turns out. So, um but I did think that. And I I know I wasn't really a born entrepreneur cuz I was a good employee and I liked running big businesses for other people. But I also knew that if I really wanted to build something meaningful, I had to take a risk. Why do you say you weren't ready? I didn't have much money and I had a young family. And I think there are kind of two stages in life to be an entrepreneur. Before you have anything and any responsibilities and obligations and after you have some protection. And I was right in the middle. I had some responsibilities. I had no protection. So, emotionally it was very challenging for me. And um, I I don't think I was emotionally ready. So, I did it for a couple of years. Crystal Dynamics was very successful. Not hugely successful, but it still exists today.

ゼルニック#40

Vestron に数年いて、ビジネスモデルに不安が募っていた。Vestron が存在した理由はホームエンタメの先駆者だったことだが、みんなが入ってきて、配給だけでは競争優位を持てない。だから Netflix はコンテンツを作る。先駆者として配給から始められても、すぐに製作に入らなければならない。製作は難しい。Vestron は多角的な映画・テレビ製作会社+ビデオ店事業になる資本がなかった。問題が来るのが見えて転職活動を始めた。31歳で、メジャー映画スタジオの社長に行列ができるわけではない。

EN

That was the company that I founded.

ゼルニック#41

ところがジョーがフォックス会長になり、裏で——当時は知らなかったが——バリーがジョーに言った。「君はメジャーで働いたことも、事業を回したこともない。独立系プロデューサーだ。でもスタジオを立て直す創造エンジンが必要だ。ビジネス側の人間を雇って、パートナーとして事業を作れ」。ジョーは独立系の世界にしか人脈がなく、そこで僕は知られていた。最大の独立系の社長で、うまくやっていて、Dirty Dancing にゴーサインを出した——当時史上最高興行の独立系映画で、長くその座にいた。Blair Witch が出るまで、何年も後だ。

EN

Before you took the job? Correct. Okay, cuz I was going to say the jump from you you got religion on video games and now we're jumping from video games to music. Why'd you do that? Okay, so Another turnaround. It was really interesting. Um, I'd never done music. And, they said I could start a video game company. Strauss Zelnick prides himself on running what he calls a rational organization. He said that he tells his talent that the company they build will be efficient, organized, will make sound decisions, we will be calm, and we will be well financed. He tells them that no one will let their ego interfere with what you do, and no one will take credit for what you do. We won't do anything crazy, and we won't go bankrupt. I've spent a bunch of time with Adam, who's the founder of AppLovin, and I would describe the way that he runs his business, and the way that Strauss runs his business as hyper competence matched with ruthless efficiency. Both Strauss and Adam want to build world-class products, and that is exactly what Adam and his team have done with their advertising platform Axon. Axon connects you with over a billion potential new customers. Axon allows you to capture undivided attention. Axon ads are full-screen videos that are watched for an average of 35 seconds. That is retention that blows other ad platforms out of the water, and you can launch in minutes. You set the goal, and Axon achieves it. No complex setup, no expertise needed. And Axon scales quickly. They can put your ads in front of over a billion potential customers. Other businesses have seen immediate results, scaled to hundreds of thousands of dollars a day in spend, and increase their revenue by millions. So, you want to get started quickly before all of your competitors are on Axon, and you can do that by going to axon.ai/centra. That is axon.ai/centra. So, talk about starting the video game company inside of BMG. So, I'm going to hire Jay Moses, who's now on the board of Take-Two, and the model was uh external development, so making deals with external developers, and we were going to use the BMG recorded music distribution system to distribute worldwide. Which is pretty smart, cuz we had this massive worldwide system of off local offices, so we could slot right into it without adding any overhead. That was the beauty of doing this. Say more about that. Well, in those days, when you distributed records, you actually had to have, you know, physical offices to go sell physical discs, CDs. Beginning of CDs and the end of vinyl to stores. Very similar to video games at the time, cuz you're buying physical

ゼルニック#42

ジョーが電話してきて、「ここで働かないか」。ちょうど彼を祝う電話をしたら「それだけ?」と言われて、偶然にも「はい」。ベルエア・ホテルで朝食を取った。

EN

Were any of the music companies doing music and video games?

センラ#43

あの朝食には詳しいよ。

EN

No, no. Oh, that's smart. No. So, we um we put aside a small amount of capital for BMG, because in those days BMG's revenue was I don't know, 5 billion a year, and it was very profitable, and I think we devoted around 40 million dollars to investing in this basket of games and building up the distribution system and hiring a team. Can I pause you there?

ゼルニック#44

当時、会長クラスはベルエア、社長クラスはポロ・ラウンジ、みたいな区別があった。金曜朝に朝食をして、「やるか」「面白そうだ」。「今日バリーとルパートに会えるか」「実は忙しい……靴下の引き出しを並べ替えないといけない」——もちろん冗談で、スタジオに行き、バリーとルパートの部屋に入った。バリーが鋭い質問を連発し、ルパートはかなり静かで、質問したかさえ定かでない。

EN

Sure. At this point video game like there's no free to play, there's no you can't download anything over the internet, right?

センラ#45

ルパートとしては普通?

EN

Correct. So the the economics of the video game is very similar to recorded music. It's you're buying

ゼルニック#46

彼は偉大な聞き手だ。当時は映画事業を学んでいる最中だった。僕の責任は映画製作と、世界のフィルム・テレビ・ホームエンタメ配給だった。

EN

Somewhere between toys and recorded music. It was a top 10 business and most of the sales were in the fourth quarter. It had a lot of the aspects of the toy business and we were there were still cartridges that hadn't shifted entirely over to discs. So you had all the messy um inventory characteristics of a cartridge business. So it had plenty of um hair on it as a business that it no longer has. But did you have any inclination at that time that they would there would be the there would be an end to the cartridge or Oh sure. I know I knew it was becoming a disc business. Absolutely.

センラ#47

何年?

EN

you couldn't predict what was going to happen after discs. No. Okay. No. So go back to where we are in the story. Sorry. So anyhow, we we um I'm by the way I'm running the record company. That's my day job cuz it's a big business. The Jay is building up the video game company with my oversight. But it's a you know, it's a skunk works project. It's tiny little project.

ゼルニック#48

86年。ルパートの事業は当時、世界の新聞とフォックス資産が中心の大きな事業だった。

EN

Yeah, you said 40 million compared to revenue of 5 billion.

ゼルニック#49

バリーの厳しい質問のあと部屋を出ると、HRの責任者が「やりますか?」と言った。「もちろん」と言って契約にサインした。それが当時のやり方で、今はもうそうはならない。

EN

do [laughter] you Precisely. So we sell the stock in the open market for, wait for it, $14 million. So um a month later this public company launches the first property that we had completed into the market. Oh, no. Don't tell Don't say

センラ#50

バリーの自伝を読み終えたばかりで、すごく良かった。働いて知っている立場から、何を学んだ?

EN

So the name of the public company was Take-Two Interactive and the first release was Grand Theft Auto. We're going to pause right here though. Grand Theft Auto is the most successful media property of all time. Is that right?

ゼルニック#51

正確に言うと、彼の下で働いた。4年間で膨大に学び、以来ずっと友好的で、年に何度かランチする。彼がエンタメ事業を教えてくれた。ほとんど知らなかったから。知らなかったことを知っている、という自覚は今もある。熱心に学び、愚問も含めて質問するのが平気だ。大きすぎる仕事に若くして放り込まれ続けたから、そうするしかなかった。

EN

so. Yeah.

センラ#52

バリーとの議論で覚えていること、暗黙に伝えられたことは?

EN

Yeah. Okay. [clears throat]

ゼルニック#53

形式としての議論を覚えている。熱を帯びた激しいディベートだ。よく言っていた——「いつも言い争うが、バリーが99%正しい。でも1%は自分が正しい」。それが学び方だった。彼は当時すでに業界の大物で、怖かった。この仕事がダメなら他が並んで雇ってくれる状況でもない。若くて新婚で子供がいて住宅ローンがあった。職を失えない。でもそれが彼の弁証法だと理解していた。引いて議論しなければ終わりだ。個人攻撃ではない。良い側でも個人的ではなかった。バリーが「ストラウスは素晴らしかった」と今でも言うか分からないし、働いていたことすら覚えていないかもしれない。だから個人ではなく、事そのもの——正しい結論に至るためのものだと分かった。自分も正しい結論に至りたかったし、学びたかった。ひどい日もたくさんあって、とても消耗した。

EN

[laughter]

ゼルニック#54

テレビを率いていた Lucy Salhany と親しく、毎週月曜日にルパート・バリーと各部門長の「社長会議」があった。次に若い人より10〜15歳若かったが、議論し続けた。他の多くは黙って座っていた。ルーシーが言った。「子どもの頃、殴ると倒れてまた起き上がる膨らましのピエロ人形、覚えてる? あなたがそれよ。殴られて倒れて、また起き上がる」。

EN

That's correct. I did leave. I did leave.

センラ#55

みんな持ってた。自分も持ってた。もともと議論好き?

EN

Okay. So then what happens next? I realized it's time to go. And now I'm ready to be an entrepreneur. Because I have a vision for what I want to build and I have a few bucks in the bank so my family's not going to starve. Um cuz I saved well and I made a lot of money, you know, as a professional executive. Uh so um I decided to start ZMC. Explain what ZMC is though.

ゼルニック#56

全然。ずっと協調型だ。

EN

It's Well, today it's private equity firm. Okay. So we raise capital from institutions in funds and then we buy companies and build them and then eventually sell them to create a return. Okay. But at that time that wasn't the vision. The vision was to create an entity that would build a portfolio of media and entertainment properties that are supercharged by technology. That was the thesis. And again, this is '01 and I you know, I thought it was pretty obvious thesis, but in retrospect it was not. And if that is your thesis, then video games is a perfect Well, yes and no, actually. I didn't have an appetite to go back into video games when I started ZMC. First of all, I've been there and done that twice. Secondly, it still was kind of a top 10 fourth quarter toy-ish business with bad inventory characteristics.

センラ#57

そう見える。

EN

cuz it's 2001. Yeah, and and no, so I and it was cyclical and you know, the console generation would, you know, cause the business sort of come and go and I No, I wasn't anxious to get back into that business. What's the first thing you're doing with ZMC? We started Buying Take-Two stock?

ゼルニック#58

でも自分がボスではなかった。彼のスタイルに合わせないと正しい結論に至れない。当時、週次でルパートから何を学んだか?

EN

No.

ゼルニック#59

別の瞬間が大きかった。在任中に Star の買収などで過大レバレッジになり、債務ファシリティが危うくなった。150行くらいが絡む複雑なクロスデフォルト構造で、順調なときは金利が低くて良いが、悪化すると一気にひどい。事業全体——家族の事業——を失うリスクがあった。銀行ロードショーのいくつかに同行したが、彼はずっと冷静だった。過信ではなく、動じない。結論にレーザーのように集中し、落ち着いたまま到達した。それが学びだ。

EN

I wish. No, direct marketing companies that were becoming digital, uh market research companies that were becoming digital. Um we turned around a Japanese record company of all things. So, you know, whatever deals that we could find, often often very, very troubled companies. Uh because remember we had no capital. Oh, I left that part out. We had no capital. So, how do you start a company with no capital? Exactly. So, I put in $300,000 of my own money. I convinced people to work for free. We borrowed offices. We had one fewer chair than we had people, and I'm not kidding. The offices were so horrible that if you went to the restroom, like half the time it was flooding, and by flooding I mean like water sheeting down the walls. Uh, and I'm I mean like you couldn't believe this was actually going on. And, uh, I would run around and talk to capital providers, you know, professional financial services firms and say, you know, we're trying to Here's our vision. We're trying to buy companies to build them up and create value, and they'd be like, "Okay, well, show us the company you want to buy. We'll consider putting capital in." And then I would go to targets, to companies, and say, "I'd like to buy you." And they'd be like, "Okay, great. Show us the capital that you have to buy us, and we'll have a conversation." So, this is going on for like for like 6 months, and I'm like, "Hmm, there is a problem here." Like, I had an empty suitcase and going to a lot of meetings. It became obvious to me that there was an issue when, um, we were at this very fancy private equity firm. And they said the same thing. They were like, "You guys are great. You have all of great resumes. So, we'd love it if you would bring us a deal, and, you know, we'll put money into the deal." And we It was at the end of the day, and we're, um, we're packing up, and they've left the room. They And the there was a cleaning person who's emptying the garbage. And I said to my colleagues, I said, "I guarantee you that after we leave, someone who works here is going to go to that person and say, 'Incidentally, if you see a really interesting company, why don't you come talk to us about it? We could both finance it for you.'" I realized like these were empty words. They said it to everyone. They were just looking for free options.

センラ#60

32歳で立て直しをしている。フォックスで得た洞察のうち、後の Take-Two で使うものは?

EN

Yeah. So, I had to find this lightning in a bottle, where there'd be an opportunity to buy a company with third-party capital. And thankfully, one came along. It was called Columbia Music Entertainment. It was a deeply troubled Japanese record company. Uh, and I had recording music experience. The short story is, amazingly enough, we turned it around. And it was

ゼルニック#61

いちばん大事なのは創造的な人との付き合い方だが、ビデオゲームの話に戻ると——80年代半ば、映画事業の経済を本当に理解した。ひどい。1955年の同意判決で配給と製作が分離され、スタジオシステムがブティックシステムになった頃から悪い。スタジオシステムは創造人材が給与台帳にいる。ブティックは給与ではなく、サービスをオークションする。成功時、才能は通りの向かいへ行くのを防ぐ交渉で価値の多くを抜き、失敗時はスタジオが全部被る。heads I win, tails you lose だ。

EN

your idea is to buy, improve, and sell. Correct. You're not

ゼルニック#62

録音音楽は最近まで本質的にスタジオシステムだった。ビデオゲームは今日までスタジオシステムだ。成功時は創造人材に非常に手厚く報いるが、会社にもリターンを作る余地がある。映画の経済は構造的に悪く、バフェットの格言——華麗な経営チームと悪い事業の評判がぶつかると、残るのは事業の評判のほう——を Forbes の裏の引用で読んで、「今自分が向き合っているのはこれだ」と思った。Vestron もフォックスもヒットでうまくいったが、構造とは戦えない。

EN

was early 2000s, but this all has happened.

ゼルニック#63

目が覚めるような当然の気づきはこうだ。野心は「映画スタジオを率いること」だったが、本当は 1927年の映画スタジオ を率いるべきで、1991年のスタジオではない。では1920年代の映画の道徳的等価物は何か。ビデオゲーム事業だ。

EN

why would I want to be in the record business?

センラ#64

どうして分かった?

EN

Yes. Yeah, I didn't want to be in the record business. I was like, "Been there, done that." Um I had no interest and it was a really horrible company. So it came about because one of the capital providers that we spoke to was a company called Ripplewood. And um there's a partner there named Jeff Hendren and Columbia Music had been part of a a sort of a two-part company and essentially Ripplewood wanted to own the good part. And they wanted to find some person like me to run the bad part. I didn't know that entirely, but okay. I didn't I wasn't smart enough to figure that out until it was too late. And so Jeff, who was um I'd had a couple of meetings with him, you know, let's buy a company together, called me up and said, "Here's a perfect deal for you for your first deal." It's recorded music, which you know. Sure, it's in Japan and they have 0.5% market share and altogether too much debt and probably there are criminals lurking around. But nonetheless." And so I said, "Well, I know the business cuz I was in the record music business. I said, "It's a horrible company. It's a disaster. Like don't don't do this deal. And I'm not doing this deal. Sorry." He said, "Okay." A week later he calls me and he said, "You know, we're still looking at this business. We really think you ought to look at it seriously with us cuz you'd be perfect for it and your first deal." And I said uh "Okay, listen. It's a public company. So I'll I'll pull all the public docs and I'll look at them over the weekend." And my partner at the time, Ben Feder, and I spent the weekend pouring through the documents. On Monday I called Jeff and I said, "It's even worse than I thought. Just run in the other direction. Don't do this deal. It's a disaster." And he said, "Okay, thank you." Called me a week later. I promise all this exactly like there's no hyperbole. I sometimes can be accused of hyperbole. This is not one of those moments. I remember I'm I'm in my dining room and there's like a wall phone like long time ago. This is '01. And um he calls and I I pick up and he says, "Um look, we're going to do this deal." And we really want your firm to take it on and be responsible for building and managing and you know, obviously going we got to upside in the deal. And they would put up the capital. And I said, "Jeff, look, I told you it was really bad. Then I spent a week in looking at it. It's even worse than I thought. Like we're passing. You should pass." He said, "Can I ask you a question?" I said, "Sure." He said, "Just how busy are you?"

ゼルニック#65

事業の学生だったから。ビデオゲームが存在し、Atari/ワーナーの問題があっても成長していると知っていた。90年代初頭には小さくても本物の事業になっていた。「これは巨大になる」と思った。Atari の災害がネオンのように残っていたから、エンタメ業界では非常に不人気な見解だった。過去に「ビデオゲームへの信仰」と言われたルートは、要するに今日の映画スタジオ版は何か、という比較から来ている。

EN

[laughter]

センラ#66

その洞察を得て、次の一手は?

EN

I laughed and I was like, "You make a very good point." He said, "I think you should do this deal." So we did. It was the hardest deal I've ever done in my life. It was terrible. Terrible. I could tell we could tell literally take 5 hours and I could tell you every horrible problem this company had. But I remembered my experience with Rupert. And I became laser-focused on just turning it around and getting to the finish line, no matter what it took. Because I realized correctly that if someone gave me $300 million to take over a company and I failed, that would be my last deal. And that's true. That's not dramatic. That's true. No one's giving you more money after that. So we turned it around remarkably enough and got about a 22% IRR in the record music business in the early 2000s unheard. That's insane. And this is the first deal of That was the first ZMC deal. That's incredible. And that's how we began to generate income to build up a team that I reinvested and reinvested and build an enterprise and buy more companies. So take me to Take-Two. All right. So it's '07. Um we we started raising our own capital in '07 and '08. So it's the very end of our being was at that time called a fundless sponsor. Now today they're called an independent sponsor because it sounds much nicer than fundless, but I promise you we were fundless. So, even though we'd done six deals at that point, we had very little capital. We had a very tiny balance sheet. I'd become quote friendly with Carl Icahn. I put it in quotes because he is the man who said, "On Wall Street, if you want a friend, buy a dog." But, um in any case, I had a relationship with Carl. And the relationship took the form of, and I did this intentionally, was I'd go over and visit with him. He's a lot of fun to spend time with. And I'd bring him ideas. And I brought him an idea initially for something that we couldn't act on, but he could cuz he would do public markets investing. And he said, "Listen, I just want you to know I'm happy to listen to your ideas, but I'm not paying you for them." And I said, "Yeah, I know." Um and, you know, I thought to have a relationship with Carl Icahn, you never know where it could go. So, I'd bring him ideas and they were good ideas. And uh the first one I brought him was actually Reader's Digest. I had a feeling something would happen there. It was underpriced. He bought, I don't know, for him nothing. He bought like $50 million of stock. Uh it immediately went up. I go over to his office like 3 months later and I said, "Sell your stock." And he made whatever. For to for him, nothing, but nonetheless, he likes making money. He made like 50 million bucks. Um Incidentally, at the end of it he said, "You know, I really I need to thank you." He said, "I told you I wasn't to pay you." I said, "Yes, you did." He said, "But you know what I'd like to do? I'd like to take you and your wife out for dinner."

ゼルニック#67

スタジオにほぼ4年いて良いランのあと、ビデオゲームに行かなければならないと思った。ルパートのオフィスで「次の大きな事業はビデオゲームだ。入るべきだ」と言った。彼は「いい。作れ」と言った。本業——当時はピーター・チャーニンの下で創造とビジネス側を回していた(ジョーもバリーも去っていた)——と並行で資本を出してくれる、と。「起業的なベンチャーだと思うので、持分が欲しい」と言ったら、「興味ない。それはオファーじゃない」と。ルパートは公開株主以外にパートナーを持たない。ためらいもなく「ノー」だった。

EN

[laughter]

ゼルニック#68

本気かどうか考え直していると、偶然リクルーターから電話が来た。シリコンバレーの売上ゼロ前のスタートアップで、次世代の最先端ゲームをやっている。興味はあるか、と。給料95%カットで、ウェストLAの美しい家からアサートンの——ゴルフ場のために取り壊される予定の賃貸へ家族を移した。

EN

[laughter]

センラ#69

エクイティが欲しかった?

EN

Anyway, uh Carl then started calling us cuz I had a team and he would ask us to research ideas that he had. So we would research ideas and I remember my partner Karl Slatoff, who's still to this day the president of Take-Two, got really annoyed at Carl who speaks his mind because I was asking them to do like research for Carl Icahn and he's like, "He is the richest guy on Wall Street and we're doing spec research for him. Oh, and incidentally, he has informed us we will never get paid. Like what are we doing here?" I said, "You know, I just don't know, but I feel good about this." So one day Carl calls up and he says, "Are you you familiar with this video game company called Take-Two Interactive?" And I said, "I'm really familiar with it, obviously. It's a really messy company at this point."

ゼルニック#70

何かを作りたかったしエクイティも欲しかったが、主に動かしたのは、メディアとエンタメの最前線にいるという感覚で、テクノロジー駆動であるほど魅力的だった。

EN

to own 20% of it.

センラ#71

ずっと起業家だと思っていた? キャリアを見ると常に雇われの凄腕オペレーターだったが。

EN

[laughter]

ゼルニック#72

はい、そう思っていた。でも準備はできていなかった。生まれつきの起業家ではなかった。良い従業員で、他人の大きな事業を回すのが好きだった。でも意味のあるものを作るならリスクを取らなければ、とも知っていた。金もあまりなく若い家族がいた。起業家になるタイミングは二段階ある——何もなく責任もない頃と、ある程度の守りができたあと。自分は真ん中で、責任はあるが守りがない。感情的にきつかった。何年かやって、Crystal Dynamics はそれなりに成功した。巨大ではないが、今も存在する。

EN

Take-Two is in very bad shape. It's failing. It's got very bad management. The chairman had been indicted. It was under investigation. They hadn't filed financial statements. And it wasn't even that cheap despite all that Wait, the chairman is under indictment? Yes. Okay. They're being investigated.

センラ#73

Crystal Dynamics の話を。

EN

Yes, they did.

ゼルニック#74

Kleiner Perkins などが、当時セガ出身の才能ある女性二人を支援して立ち上げ、エンタメ出身のCEOが必要だった。雇われて、スタジオを整え、配給契約を取り、資本を集めた。そのあと、まだ「矛盾語法」ではなかった時代に、大きなレコード会社の立て直しに引き抜かれた。起業家としてはまだ早い、と判断した。そのレコード会社——BMG——は、社内にビデオゲーム部門を作ることを認めてくれた。

EN

their annual meeting. They're not filing financial statements. The company is being investigated by a bunch of different Four, four entities. Okay, four different entities.

センラ#75

就任前に?

EN

Yeah, IRS, SEC, New York DA's office, and uh FTC. They have how much in revenue? Uh about 700 in revenue and losing loads of money and no debt, thankfully, and about 50 in cash. And we looked at the numbers and we're like, "They're going to be bankrupt in 6 months. That's what's going to happen here." And you're like, "Great." No, I'm not great. I said, "This is a disaster and so we wrote a whole memo and we said stay away from it. No, I I wish I could send so forward thinking. So I sent over the memo saying this is a disaster stay away from it. By the way, like I've done video games. I like no interest. And we were doing other stuff that was more tech driven that we were doing really well with really well with. So he calls up like

ゼルニック#76

そう。ビデオゲームに信仰を持ったのに音楽へ飛ぶのは、なぜか、という話になる。別の立て直しで面白かった。音楽はやったことがなかったが、ビデオゲーム会社を始められると言われた。

EN

market cap of the company back then now?

センラ#77

BMG 内でどう始めた?

EN

About 700. So it went up 7x from when you had to sell cuz it was 100 million when you had 20% okay. Okay. So you know, it's not great frankly and a good growth business and they had increased the revenue material. They built a business. It was a business all all be a very bad one. So he calls a month later and he says, "Listen, I have a friend who's looking at buying a big stake and take two. Can you refresh your memo and and do this for the friend?" This point Carl Icahn like loses his mind. His head explodes. He said, "All right, so this is it was bad before when we were doing free work for Carl Icahn. Now he's pimping us out through his Wall Street buddies for free? Like this is outlandish." And I said, "Just you just never know where this can go. Like you never know." So we do the memo which essentially says once again it's a mess stay away. Again, not being so forward thinking. I don't know how much time goes by. Carl calls me and he says, "Listen, this thing Take-Two, you ever look at this?" I was like, "Yes, I looked into it for you and then I looked into it for your buddy and I said don't do it." He said, "Yeah, yeah, yeah, that thing Take-Two, it's really interesting." He said, "Have you read the bylaws?" I said, "No, Carl. Not read the bylaws." He said, "Well, you know what you ought to do? Read the bylaws." And he hung up. So Ben read the bylaws and he comes in the next day says, "Holy this company has a plain vanilla unamended Delaware charter and in this charter uh the right exists um that if you have 50.1% of the shares vote to fire the board you can take over the company. And because the company was so troubled the stock had collapsed into about 20 hedge funds' hands. So, this was actually mathematically possible. The problem is you can't go run around and solicit people to vote their stock without creating a group, most likely. And this is arcane stuff, but um and we didn't have any money, so we couldn't buy stock. For the like of we could go in the market. And we didn't have the money even to mount a proxy fight, which would be the standard way of going about it. In those days, a proxy fight would cost $3 million. We didn't have that. Particularly cuz it was total totally spread. But, under SEC rules, you could solicit up to 10 shareholders. And about 70% of the stock was in the hands of 10 shareholders. I mean, without triggering any kind of filing requirement. So, we put together a deck of what we would do to fix the company. And we go meet the 10 shareholders, who are happy to meet with us cuz you're talking about an position they have in a troubled company. And we start getting commitments of who's going to, you know, sign the unanimous not the sign the written consent that would give us the company. It's all you had to do, sign a consent. So, we go through this whole process. We've now gotten all 10 that we can get to. We can't go to number 11 through 20 legally. Or you can't publicize it, either. You can't market this at all. So, it's all done quite quietly. And Ben comes in and he actually said, "We got 48%." I was like, "Okay, it's game over. We're done." And he said, "Well, let me just think about it." And Ben's a very smart guy. He goes home the next day, comes in. Turns out there's another provision in the agreement in the uh bylaws. If you show up at the annual meeting and you you don't have to put a item on the agenda in advance, which is unheard of. You can just um raise your hand at the meeting and say, "I want to vote." Uh and if a majority of the shareholders vote in favor of your slate, you can take over the company at the meeting. Which is unheard of. Just unheard of. It doesn't exist, but it did exist here. But, it's not 51% of the people who show at the meeting. It's 51% of the votes in the meeting, but you have to be there physically. You cannot vote by proxy cuz remember, we didn't file a proxy. And we can't solicit anyone. But what we did do was go back to those 10 people and say, "Look, do you want to form a group with us now so we can actually talk and reach an agreement, show up at the annual meeting, vote for us?" And we think we can win that way. Uh even though we only had 48% because we we knew not 100% of the shares would show at the meeting. So, that's what we plan to do. And we um get a lot of support, we think. We think. Until it's very close to the the had scheduled the meeting. Um we form a group. We now announce that we indicate to the company that we're doing this weeks before the meeting. The company, not a professionally managed company to say the least, not a good board to say the least, they really didn't even know what to make of this. They They'd never seen it before. They didn't understand it. They had bad counsel. They They just no idea what to do. So, we're we're like we have 48%. We think that's pretty good. If you you know, 75% of the shares are at the meeting, we're probably good. Until we find out that these hedge funds had uh loaned out their stock to short sellers, as one does. And if you do that, you can't vote the shares. And we can't solicit anyone, remember. We've solicited our 10. So, I said to Ben, "So, what what percent do we have?" He said, "You're not going to like this. 22%." And I was like, "Hmm." So, we have to disclose that. We had prior disclosure about the group, which was at 48%. And we go to the meeting, physically go to the meeting. And this point, there's been a journal article cuz this no one's seen this before, and there's like television cameras out front. And we're at the meeting, walking into the meeting in a hotel. And we'd hired the two top proxy solicitors just to protect us. And we'd been smart about the people we hired. And we spent a lot of money for us on fees because we had to We go to the meeting and before it starts, uh a guy waves across the room. And I go over and say super friendly. He said, "Hey, I haven't seen you since law school. It's great." I went to law school. He said, "It's great to see you. This is so interesting. How are you doing? How's your family?" And we talked for like 5 minutes. I go back and I said to my proxy solicitors, "Who was that guy?" And they said, um he's Fidelity. Now, Fidelity was a larger shareholder, but they had declined to participate in our group. So, we had no idea where they would vote. And Fidelity doesn't typically support anything hostile. They typically support management. So, I looked at my solicitors and I said, "We just won." So, they the company had the new general counsel. We had a room in the hotel. The company had a room in the hotel. Oh, incidentally, the CEO of the company declined to attend the meeting. That gives you a sense of what the what we were dealing with here. This is a Thursday, by the way. And the general counsel comes into the meeting room that we're in and he says, "Well, we don't have the final vote, but we have a provisional vote. Um you have 88%." He said, "So, will you accept that or do you want us to keep counting?" I said, "We'll accept that."

ゼルニック#78

今 Take-Two の取締役でもある Jay Moses を雇い、モデルは外部デベロッパーとの契約。BMG の録音音楽の世界配給網でゲームを配る。物理オフィスでディスクを売っていた時代で、ゲームもカートリッジ/ディスクの物理販売だったから、オーバーヘッドを足さずに差し込めるのが美しかった。

EN

[laughter]

センラ#79

他の音楽会社はゲームもやっていた?

EN

And the next morning, Friday morning, I walked into the company and walked into the corner office and became chairman of the company. That was what year? That was '07. And you're still running it? I'm chairman now, I'm CEO. Ben was the CEO from '07 to '11, then he decided to leave and I became the CEO.

ゼルニック#80

いや。BMG の売上は当時だいたい年50億ドルで非常に利益が出ており、ゲームのバスケットと配給とチームにだいたい 4000万ドル を割いた。

EN

So, this is what you described as basically a hostile takeover with no capital.

センラ#81

当時は無料プレイもネットダウンロードもない?

EN

Yeah. Deel is how the best founders turn the world into their talent pool. I've been studying how history's greatest founders operate for a decade, and one thing they all have in common is they understand that recruiting and hiring the very best talent is your most important priority. A players recognize other A players, which is why top companies like Ramp, Shopify, Eleven Labs, Uber, and DoorDash all use Deel. Many of the top founders I know have personally invested in Deel after using their product. And what they discovered is that Deel is the best company in the world at building infrastructure for global hiring. Deel will help your business hire, pay, and manage any worker anywhere in the world so you can retain the best talent anywhere and spend the rest of your time focusing on what you do best, delivering value to your customers. The founder of 11 Labs has a great description of the value Deel can give your company. He said, "We built 11 Labs to break down language and communication barriers. With Deel enabling us to hire and support exceptional talent anywhere, we can accelerate our innovation and bring more voices, stories, and ideas to every corner of the world." Deel is trusted by over 40,000 companies and growing fast. Learn how they can help your business by going to deel.com/centra. That is deel.com/centra. So, now you come in. You went from writing this memo to Carl Icahn like stay away from this to we just took over the company. What was your plan? The plan was there was only one good property which was GTA which was in development and was soon to be released we thought. Ended up getting delayed. And everything else was total mess except the NBA franchise which was really tiny. It was making a tiny amount of money. Everything else was losing money. So, our plan was meaningfully to cut costs, run a rational company, be friendly to creative talent, diversify the product pipeline, and build an entertainment company. Did I hear correctly that you cut something like 40 to 50 million Yeah, we cut about 40 million.

ゼルニック#82

ない。経済は録音音楽に近く、おもちゃと録音音楽のあいだ——トップ10事業で売上の多くが第4四半期、カートリッジの在庫特性もまだ残っていた。ディス化は見えていたが、その先までは予測できなかった。本業はレコード会社で、ジェイがスカンクワークスの小さなゲーム事業を監督下で育てていた。50億に対する4000万は丸め誤差だ。

EN

Explain how you did this. Well, we have an approach you know when you're doing turnarounds you have to cut costs but our approach is a little different which is we don't want to show up and fire people. It's a great way to build ill will. Also, you don't know anything when you show up. And so you you might fire the wrong people. And also, who knows maybe you need everyone like you just don't know. But badly run companies Oh, we have a rule we only we're we only do turnarounds if we're the first team in. Like if someone tried and failed, we don't do it. You know why? We're not so smart. Smart people all do the same things. So if someone came in before us to do a turnaround and they failed, guess what? They probably did all the stuff that we would end up doing and they still failed. That's not for us. But we were the first team in. If you're the first team in, the first thing we look at is third-party expenses. Every company, particularly big company, has big companies has deals with third parties. You know, I don't know the in the [clears throat] in the this was the days where you put um discs and cartridges in the boxes. So we had a printing deal. We had a cardboard deal. We had a pressing deal for our discs. And we we do a top 10 vendor survey. So all the top 10 vendors and how much we spend with all. Then we call them all up and negotiate them down. And the reason we do that is number one, you immediately save money. Number two, you don't scare or upset the team. Number three, you begin to create credibility with the team because the team's like, "Wow, they just saved all this money and no one got fired." Like that's pretty good. We also don't do things like I you know, put in new expense policies. Like that is a great way to alienate everyone. Or or let's say, "David, let me see your expense report. Why did you have lunch, you know, at McDonald's on Tuesday with, you know, Mike? Like why?" Like that's a great way to alienate David. And if David has another option, he's going to leave the next day. So we don't do that either. But our top 10 vendor approach saves a lot of money. And then, you know, about three to six months in when we know, you know, what's going on, then we have to right-size the overhead. And most instances, of course, you know, you have sadly you have to cut some headcount. Yeah, especially at a company like this. How much money was GTA making back then? When GTA released, the company would have a meaningful profit, like a hundred or so a year. But it only released every four years, so they lost money the rest of the time. Okay, so what was your plan for that? Make other hit titles. This is it goes back to your your insight from cuz I don't even know if we were explicit about this enough, but you wanted when you were like a kid, you're like, "I want to run a movie studio." Right?

ゼルニック#83

タイトルが完成に近づき配給準備をしていると、親会社 Bertelsmann の新CEO Thomas Middelhoff が「ビデオゲームは最悪の事業だ、全部売却しろ」と言った。「もう投資済みで、残るのは配給だけだ。配ってから結果で判断させてくれ」と言ったが、「最高入札者に売れ」。「入札者はいない。製作中のゲームに食欲はない」と言っても「どうでもいい、売れ」。彼は直感で賭け、うまくいかなかった人だが、それは別の話だ。

EN

And here we are. So then you you took that idea and you're like, we're going to build a movie studio and it's going to be great.

ゼルニック#84

市場に出して買い手は少なく、時価総額だいたい 1億ドル の小さな上場会社が、事業の対価として自社株 20%——つまり約2000万——を出すことで合意した。クローズして株を持ち、「50億の会社に2000万の株は丸め誤差の丸め誤差だ。持って様子を見よう」とトーマスに言った。彼は「公開市場で売るな」と言った——だから売った。約 1400万ドル で。

EN

isn't what people thought. What people thought about there was making a great video game. That's what they had to think about.

センラ#85

……まさか。

EN

No, I meant you. Was I thinking that?

ゼルニック#86

一ヶ月後、その上場会社が、完成させていた最初のタイトルを市場に出した。会社名は Take-Two Interactive。最初のリリースは Grand Theft Auto だった。

EN

No, yeah. Like, any other people doing Oh, doing I was doing that.

センラ#87

GTA は史上最も成功したメディアIP、と言っていい?

EN

Yeah, like you were applying this idea. There was No, but I mean, I don't I'm not sure that that idea informed what we did day-to-day. And there were some great executives who built great companies at EA and Activision, among others. And certainly, uh I don't feel like I had any kind of monopoly on figuring this out. And it took us a long time to turn the company around. And we had some meaningful missteps. Uh and and we have not created more that, you know, more value than anyone else in the business. I would argue that I mean, for pure play, probably Bobby Kotick has with Activision. So, what was the these missteps? Oh, I mean, there's they're daily. I mean, I'm I'm I'm probably making one right now, for

ゼルニック#88

そう思う。

EN

No, but what were the big ones back at the very beginning? Um

センラ#89

なんて話だ。つまりビデオゲーム事業の「戦記」はそれで終わりで、ゲームから追い出されてレコード会社を回している。腹が立たなかった?

EN

You you a much more precarious position back then than

ゼルニック#90

会社は自分のものではなかったし、簡単に怒らない。給料をもらっている立場で、ボスが戦略を決める権利がある。愚かな決定だと分かっていたが。

EN

no, no. At the beginning we didn't make too many mistakes. I mean, how you how could you? Like when you're on the floor, there's nowhere to fall. This is a terrible company, terribly run. Every decision they made was horrible. I mean, no, no, it was very easy to make sound decisions. Yeah, this is something I thought that was interesting I heard you say where, you know, your pitch to talent was well, one, you I think anybody that's successful has some form of ego. Um but you're willing to like put yours aside and you said some stuff where like in entertainment business the only people that matter are you like I don't matter, it's the people that make the hits that matter. Yeah. Which is like a very interesting thing thing to say. It also had the added benefit of being true. Yeah.

センラ#91

そういう決定をする人の下で、この先も働く気にはならないよね。

EN

Yeah, you can replace people like me. Yeah, you can't replace the hit makers. So, but what's fascinating to me is your pitch them is just like I'm just going to run a rational organization. I want you you've used the word rational organization I think at least once in this conversation. I've heard you say it before, too. So, it's like but the pitch is we're just not going to do any crazy Yeah. Over a long period of time that is an edge. Can you talk about that?

ゼルニック#92

その通りで、辞めた。起業家になる準備ができた、と感じた。作りたいもののビジョンがあり、家族が飢えずに済む程度の貯金があった。幹部として稼ぎ、貯蓄もしていた。ZMC を始めると決めた。

EN

That was a sort of a nice to have, but the must have was we are going to give you the resources creative and financial to pursue your passion. We're not going to interfere creatively. We want you to make the best video games on Earth. That was the pitch and we mean it. And we will support you through thick and thin to do so more than any other company. Oh, and by the way, then we'll run a rational business organization. No one's going to scream at you. You're not going to find out that someone's getting indicted. We're not going to get sideways with the FTC. And um you know, it it'll be like a real grown-up company. And then over time I couldn't promise this right away, but but I had to promise it. I said, "We'll also have a solid balance sheet so that when we fail inevitably, you fail in the the entertainment business, we can live to play another day." That took us a few years. Cuz these these super talented people also tend to be like highly disagreeable, somewhat erratic, like and I I find it interesting that you kind of balance their, you know, you are you say you're not talented, which obviously your your talents are different. You're very talented, but I think you mean like a creative way, like you're not the one that can create the video games.

センラ#93

ZMC とは。

EN

Not in the least. How do you deal with these very disagreeable, like, you know, talented geniuses? I love them.

ゼルニック#94

今日はプライベートエクイティ——機関からファンドで資金を集め、会社を買い、育て、最終的に売ってリターンを作る。当時のビジョンは違った。テクノロジーでスーパーチャージされたメディア・エンタメ資産のポートフォリオを作ること。01年には明白に見えたが、振り返るとそうではなかった。ではビデオゲームが完璧な対象か、というと、実は「はいでもいいえ」。ZMC を始めたとき、ゲームに戻りたい食欲はなかった。二度経験済みで、2001年時点ではまだ第4四半期中心のおもちゃっぽい事業で在庫特性が悪く、コンソール世代で循環的だった。

EN

[laughter]

センラ#95

最初にやったのは Take-Two 株を買うこと?

EN

I'm serious. Okay, then well, you got to say more about that. I mean, you you have to sincerely care about other people to be an effective leader. I sincerely care about care about my colleagues, genuinely. And I don't love every attribute of every one of them, and I don't love every conversation we have. But they don't love every attribute of me. I just did a 360. I found that out. Not that it came as a surprise. Um but we care about one another, and I want the best for them and for the organization, and um I treat everyone with respect, and I demand that everyone do the same thing. There's no yelling at the company. There's no bad behavior. If If you engage in bad behavior, you got to leave. So, one of our competitors at one point had 500 sexual harassment claims at their company. From one guy? No, no. Unfortunately, it was broadly distributed. You know, and we don't we don't have You know, we've had, obviously, a few things here and there, but we don't have claims like that. Um we are we treat people with respect. People can come as they are. We don't care about your ethnic background, your religious background, your orientation, your lifestyle, the color of your hair. Just do great work, seek excellence, and be kind to others. And by the way, I've had plenty of hard conversations, like, super hard conversations. And um you know, you said it earlier, like, and we I think I learned this with Barry Diller. I still take it personally. It's not personal. Like, we have a business I never say the word that executives use to me, like, we're a big family here. We're not a big family here. This is an enterprise. Like, my family's at home. Um so, we don't have all the angst around being a family. However, we are an enterprise that treats people with respect. And if someone is offsides with me and they misbehave, like, I don't see myself as so important that you can't do that. I don't feel the need to like teach everyone all the time. I had to learn the hard way, like, the delete key is there for a reason. I had one um creative person who isn't with us any longer because it just it did get to be too much and then the value delivered wasn't worth it, to say the least. But, he used to send the most outlandish and unpleasant emails. And I remember saying to someone, I don't know, maybe a board member or something, like, "This is really tough because the lack of decorum is is so outlandish that at some point he's going to do or say something where I just have no choice but to fire him." And then I realized, "Wait a second, I always have a choice." You know what the choice is? Delete. Right now, I just started deleting his emails. I hadn't seen the first Oh, I thought you meant delete him as a person.

ゼルニック#96

いや。そうできていれば、と思う。デジタル化していくダイレクトマーケティングやマーケットリサーチ、日本のレコード会社の立て直しなど、取れるディール——多くは非常に困った会社。資本がなかった、という部分を言い忘れた。自分の30万ドルを入れ、人を無給で説得し、オフィスを借り、椅子は人数より一つ足りなかった。トイレに行けば壁を水がシート状に流れるような場所だった。資本家にビジョンを話すと「買いたい会社を見せろ、資金を検討する」。ターゲットに「買いたい」と言うと「資本を見せろ、話をする」。半年、空のスーツケースで会議を回っていた。

EN

No, delete his emails. I was like, "How can I be offended if I delete them?" I just delete them. Without reading them? Absolutely. If I read them, they'd upset me.

ゼルニック#97

ある高級PEで同じことを言われ、相手が部屋を出たあと清掃の人がゴミを捨てていた。「僕らが帰ったあと、誰かがその人にも『面白い会社を見たら話してくれ、資金を出せる』と言うだろう」。みんなに言う空文句で、無料オプションを漁っているだけだと分かった。第三者資本で買える「稲妻」が必要だった。

EN

Eventually, he had to go cuz it was just too bad. But, but I put up with it for a long time. I don't know. I find this very interesting that like just doing like being rat- completely rational over a long period of time can actually give you an edge in business. Well, in the entertainment business, particularly.

ゼルニック#98

それが Columbia Music Entertainment——深刻に困った日本のレコード会社だった。録音音楽の経験があり、驚くほど立て直せた。買い・改善・売りが発想で、永遠に持つものではない。9年かかった。2000年代初頭の録音音楽、日本、シェア0.5%、過剰債務、ヒットなし。iPod、iTunes、Napster(99年)の時代に、なぜレコード事業に?

EN

Yeah. We don't engage in magical thinking. Which is hard not to do in the entertainment business. Magical thinking is because I want it, it's going to happen. Right? Magical thinking is oh, I I don't know, someone's going to see this podcast and they're going to call me up and say, you know, we need to give you $10 to do X. Like, that's magical thinking. That's very likely going to happen. it. know. I'll let I'll give you a call. I'll give you 10%. Um that's magical

ゼルニック#99

入りたくなかった。「もうやった」。話は資本提供者の一つ Ripplewood から来た。パートナーの Jeff Hendren が、二部構成の会社の「良い部分」を欲しがり、僕のような人間に「悪い部分」を回したがっていた。完全には分かっていなかったが、あとで遅すぎた。ジェフが「最初のディールに完璧だ。音楽は分かるだろう。日本でシェア0.5%、債務過多、たぶん犯罪者もいるかも。でも」と言った。「最悪の会社だ。やるな。自分もやらない」と断った。一週間後また電話。「真剣に見てくれ」。公開書類を週末にパートナーの Ben Feder と読み、「思ったより悪い。逃げろ」と月曜に伝えた。また一週間後、ダイニングの壁電話で——01年だ——「やる。君のファームに任せたい。アップサイドもある。資本は出す」。「悪いと言った。一週間見てさらに悪い。パスだ。君もパスしろ」。彼が「質問していい? 君、どれくらい忙しい?

EN

[laughter]

センラ#100

(笑)

EN

I got I but I got dinner with Carla I got And then he like goes, you got to you got to dinner and then you found out he didn't even know your name. And then he puts you to work.

ゼルニック#101

笑って「いい指摘だ」。ディールをやった。人生でいちばんキツいディールで、問題を5時間話せると言える。でもルパートの経験を思い出し、立て直しにレーザーで集中し、ゴールまで行った。3億ドルを任されて失敗したら最後のディールになる——ドラマではなく事実だ。奇跡的に立て直し、2000年代初頭の録音音楽でだいたい IRR 22%。聞いたことがない。それが ZMC の最初のディールで、収入を生み、チームに再投資し、企業を作り、次の会社を買えるようになった。

EN

So the starting point is not like we run a rational organization. The starting point is we will support your creative activities through thick and thin. And that gets tested. It And you know, when it gets tested at the worst possible time. And so I like to say, culture like character is tested in the breach. You're not tested when things are going well. Great, we just delivered a hit. We're making all this money. This is awesome. Like have a celebration. That's not a test. The test is when someone comes into your office and this happened to me and we had not turned around the company and we had very limited capital. And we were developing a game and it was about to be released 2 months later, which is to say it's done. I mean, we spent a lot of money. And the head of the division came into my office and said, "Look, we just don't think this is good enough and we think we screwed up and the art style is not appropriate and it's not differentiated. So we want to remake the game." I was like, "Well, what does that mean?" And this is a long time ago, so it's slightly different. He said, "It means $50 million of incremental dev costs. It's a lot of money to us and another year." And it was on a release schedule, which we didn't announce. And um I was like, I dug in. I mean, I would I don't give like knee-jerk uh answers. I dug in and did my homework and in the end of it I supported the decision. And that title became Borderlands. Had we not done that, Borderlands wouldn't have been a hit. Yeah, it's a huge that's a huge game now.

センラ#102

Take-Two へ。

EN

And that was a non-obvious decision. And I can I'm pretty much going to assure you, no one else in the business would have done it. Why? Cuz it was insane. They would have said the game is done. Put out the game. Move on to the next thing. I'm not spending 50 million bucks to remake the god damn thing in another art style and I have no evidence that it wouldn't work either. So, you just trusted the the intuition of the talent? I had to. That's what I'm That's the story. Be the most creative, be the most innovative, be the most efficient. I hired the most creative people. I said, "You have to pursue your passions, we will support you." They came and said, "This is our assessment. This is our passion. Are you going to support us?" And I said, "Yes." The timeline's slipping because you're sitting on the most valuable media property in the world. And everybody online is just like, "When's GTA 6 coming out?"

ゼルニック#103

07年。07〜08年に自分たちの資本を集め始め、当時「fundless sponsor」と呼ばれていた時代の終わり——今は independent sponsor と言うが、金がないことに変わりはなかった。6件ディールをしていてもバランスシートは極小。Carl Icahn と「友好的」になっていた——引用符付きで。彼が「ウォール街で友人が欲しければ犬を買え」と言った男だから。意図的にアイデアを持って会いに行き、楽しかった。最初に出したアイデアは自分たちでは動けないが彼なら動ける公開市場投資で、「アイデアは聞くが金は払わない」と言われた。「分かっている」。関係がどこへ行くか分からないから続けた。最初の一つは Reader's Digest で、割安だと感じて彼が自分にとっては小さな 5000万ドル 分買い、すぐに上がった。3ヶ月後「売れ」と言い、彼はまた自分にとって小さな利益だが約5000万稼いだ。最後に「礼を言わなきゃ。払わないと言ったが、君と奥さんをディナーに連れて行きたい」。

EN

Yeah.

センラ#104

(笑)

EN

Like, how do you deal with this? How do you deal with the timelines? It's just like, the answer to that question is, "I don't know." Right?

ゼルニック#105

妻の Wendy と、カールと Gail とディナー。当時彼が行く店は日中・中華・イタリアの Il Tinello くらい。早めに着いて待っていると、彼が入ってウェイターがスムーズにマティーニを手に置き、彼は座って飲み干して空のグラスを置く——ディナーの始まり。途中で妻が耳打ちした。「ねえ、彼、あなたの名前を知らない」。

EN

Well, no, no. November 19th, I do know. Oh, okay. No, it's been announced. But, this has been pushed back I think twice. For like, how many years? I think we're about 18 months behind the original date. Okay. Not not much more than that. Is it the most successful video game of all time? I think so. But, it depends on how you count. I think if you count it from just revenue. I think if you counted every like Mario Kart and Call of Duty and a bunch of others, it's not entirely clear. But, I think in terms of the value of the IP, most people believe it's the most valuable entertainment IP ever created. But, people could argue about that. And you don't disclose the revenue for GTA 5, correct? Not the total revenue. It's a lot.

センラ#106

(笑)

EN

[laughter]

ゼルニック#107

その後カールがチームに調査を頼むようになった。今も Take-Two 社長のパートナー Karl Slatoff は激怒した。「ウォール街で一番金持ちの男のために無料のスペック調査をしている。しかも絶対に払わないと言われている。何やってるんだ」。僕は「分からないが、良い気がする」と言った。ある日カールが電話してきて、「Take-Two Interactive というゲーム会社を知っているか」。よく知っている、めちゃくちゃな会社だ、と答えた。

EN

The reason people keep playing is because it's constantly updated and it's really good. And the most recent content pack was awesome.

ゼルニック#108

Take-Two は非常に悪い状態だった。失敗しつつあり、経営は悪く、会長は起訴され、調査下で、財務諸表を出していない。それでも株価はそれほど安くもなかった。

EN

Well, it's everything. I mean, my mom is 90. She plays um she plays bridge online and With Buffett? Sorry? With Buffett? Warren Buffett?

センラ#109

会長が起訴? 調査?

EN

[laughter]

ゼルニック#110

はい。年次総会もあり、財務を出していない。調査主体は IRS、SEC、ニューヨーク地方検事、FTC の四つ。売上約 7億、大赤字、幸い債務なし、現金約 5000万。数字を見ると「6ヶ月で破産する」となった。

EN

Somehow I doubt that. She's good though. And she has bridge friends who she's never met in person. And she gets around. She's she's mobile. But she's not doesn't get around the way she used to. And so this is an enhancement of her life. It's a social life and it's something she's good at and loves doing. And she's 90. So this is a This is an industry that speaks to little kids and people, you know, Gaming is endearing. I mean, we play that since the dawn of humanity. We figured out games to play with each other. There was something you said earlier that I want to pull out from your book. You said, "I don't believe in magical thinking." And I don't think visualization is magical thinking, but you do talk about in your book being very, very particular. The note I left myself when I got to this section of the book is that the universe rewards the specific ask and punishes the vague wish. And your your point was And that does sound a little magical, but you have to dig into That that was my note based on like my interpretation of what you're saying. And you're talking about this idea of like creative visualization, which again, like people think is like some woo-woo foo-foo thing. I've read 415 now biographies of history's greatest entrepreneurs. I've kept every single note, every single highlight, every single transcript of anything I've done for that project I've been doing for a decade in this giant searchable database. Visualization comes up all the time. And these are not woo-woo foo-foo people. No. And I love what you said about why it might be effective. You said, "I'm pretty sure it works because the method requires one to concentrate hard, exclusively, and frequently on what one wants." You say a little bit about that?

センラ#111

「最高」と思った?

EN

Sure. I mean, I think having not done as much research as you, but having read a billion biographies, I was very focused going up on success, to traditional success. But also political success. And I tried to sort of drill it down to like what is the factor that is most common among highly successful people? And the only thing I could come up with was they knew what they wanted. And it's not because you know what you want, and Napoleon Hill, you know, write it on your mirror like I want a million dollars on Thursday. It's because I wanted to build a diversified collection of media communications and entertainment assets supercharged by technology starting in '01 and I've been laser-focused on it ever since which means I make choices that are in service of that. So here's magical thinking is I want to do that but you know what? It's a very nice day out there. I'm going to the beach today, tomorrow and the next day. You just told me like you're reasonably successful guy. I think. You just told me you work 7 days a week. I have, you know, three jobs. I work really hard. Why? Because I have a set of goals and I'm focused on achieving those goals. Now there's still no guarantee. There's still no guarantee. But by knowing what you want and working in service of what you want, you are much more likely to get what you want than if you don't know what you want or work in service of that thing. That's the truth. And I when I started ZMC, I thought I want to build, I don't know, a $20 billion company that looks like this. And it was out of the blue and I can't It wasn't like I ran around and was talking to people as I was endlessly and vainly trying to raise capital or find companies that they were saying this is awesome. You're doing great. Like you are Who's better than you? People are like this is a crazy idea. This is crazy. But I looked at it and said I don't think it's so crazy. I think it's possible and even if I fall short, I'll probably get closer than if I don't try. And I was okay with that. And I've said this and I've said it publicly like it took us I think after 10 years I was speaking at MIT. Remember I wanted to build a $20 billion company and one of the students said uh how big's your company now? And I said well if you take everything together, I don't know. It's about a billion dollar company. And he said are you deeply disappointed?

ゼルニック#112

いや。「災害だ」とメモを書き、「近寄るな」と送った。ビデオゲームもやった、興味ない、もっとテック寄りでうまくいっている案件がある、と。

EN

[laughter]

センラ#113

当時の時価総額は?

EN

And I said well I was I really appreciated the question. I said look, it isn't what I set out to do yet but you know what? We're it's directionally correct and I'm not stopping. And if this is as good as it gets, at least I tried and you know, we we made a little progress. We did okay. Well, today our company taken as a whole and comes in our market cap called a $40 billion company. We kind of exceeded our goals and we're not done yet, but we wouldn't have done that if we didn't know what we were trying to achieve. So today Take-Two has this and I advocate this for every enterprise. The mission of Take-Two is to be the number one entertainment company on Earth. That's a pretty bold idea, but everyone understands it. The strategy to get there is be the most creative, be the most innovative, be the most efficient. Remember I said that earlier. And the culture in which we work is one of seeking excellence, working together as a team, and being kind. Remember that from before. There are 14,000 people at Take-Two. There's not one person who can't tell you that. It's simple, it's straightforward, it has the added benefit of being true. This is why I asked you before we started recording like if you mind if I do an episode on your book for my other podcast. I I again I want to read this cuz I think it's really important and you know, people have asked me before it's like what's the most important thing you've learned from this this crazy like decade-long study of history because it's centuries you've done. I was like if I had to put it in one word it'd be focus. It's like they're just unbelievably almost like a different species in the term of in in terms of how they can focus. I want to read that part I just read. It says I'm pretty sure it works because the method requires one to concentrate hard, exclusively, and frequently on what one wants. And then you end this chapter with another great sentence. The most important thing you can do to achieve the success you desire is [snorts] to discover your ambition, narrow its scope with a great with as great a degree of specificity as possible, and blazon it on your consciousness, and revisit it daily. And that is visualization. It's just not like magical visualization. I was on the phone with them a Zoom call with one of my colleagues cuz I'm I'm reachable by everyone, everyone. Um if if people email me or text me or Slack me, I respond. And I'd been doing a town hall in our office in Austin, and this woman Slack me afterwards, brand new um colleague, and said, "Can I have a chat with you about my career?" And um I said, "Sure." And we were chatting, and she was really impressive. I was quite taken with her. And at the end of the call, she said, "What should I do to succeed around here?" I said, "Well, you need to know what you want. And then you need to show up on Monday and think about how you're going to create more value than you cost. And then on Friday, think about, "Did I create more value than I cost?" Because if you're here for a year and you get paid $100 plus $25 in benefits, and you generated $10 in value for this enterprise, one of two things will happen. Either you're going to lose your job, or this company will fail. If you want to succeed and you want the company to succeed, you got to create more value than what you cost. And I said, "So, think about that." Cuz she'd already decided what she wanted. This was not about She knew what she wanted. She wants to be CEO, which is great. Um terrific. Um and then I said, "And so, you know, and then come to work, don't have political exchanges, put a smile on your face, say yes, you know, you're going to be fine." Are you surprised so first of all, I've heard you say this, and you're like this with me cuz when we were like at lunch, and I was like, "Hey, do you have like a team I need to go through to like schedule the podcast?" You're like, "You No, we're going to do it together. Like, just text me." And like, you respond. Are you surprised how few people take you up on this? The fact that you will respond to emails or to messages? No. Um here's what surprises me, and this part I don't get. So, I spend like 20 to 25% of my time mentoring coaching people, Which I want to talk about, yeah. using the the tools in the book. And as you saw in the book, like some of them are exercises. Like, you have to do the work to get the benefit. And so, someone will reach out to me, and while I'm easy to get to, like, you still have to do some homework. And I don't schedule. Maybe I schedule I like having an assistant who schedules me. So, there's a bit of a process to have a meeting with me. It's not like, "Hey, come on in tomorrow at 9:00." And I am amazed like people will come in with a specific ask for something that would affect their life. And we spend time on it, we talk about it, and maybe I assign them one of the exercises in the book. I usually do. And I would say about half the time, they never follow up. And that to me is kind of astonishing, and I don't think it's because I'm a horrible person or I'm scary or something. Um I think there are people who believe if I can just get into a room with that really successful person, they can just wave a magic wand, and I will have success. Sort of my point earlier, someone's going to listen to the podcast, and I'm going to win the lottery. And it doesn't work that way. One of the things I understood about starting ZMC, look, I've been around the block. I I don't think I have an enemy in the business. I mean, I And you probably know this from your homework. Like, I know everyone, and I like everyone, and as well, most people like me, and I think candidly, I have a very good reputation. Nonetheless, uh I think people confuse, you know, that with somehow like having a shortcut. So, I had the attributes I just described. Lots of people wanted to help me when I started ZMC. You know the conclusion I arrived at was, no one can. They would love to. I had all kinds of goodwill. What can they do for me? I had to run out, I had to find the deals, I had to go see Carl Icahn, I had to hire a team, I had to pay the team out of my pocket. I had to, you know, manage the team, you know, Think of the story you told earlier when you were recruited to 20th Century Fox. I have a maxim that that appears in these biographies of his just gets explained as like, opportunity handled well leads to more opportunity. Right. You had to handle the opportunity at Verstra, how do I say the company name? Verstra. Verstra first for this guy to be like, "Hey, I need some help now." And the whole thing is like that's why he's like, "Whatever This is um again from from and Munger." They say they believe in like Carlisle's prescription, which is like do the best possible job on the opportunity you have in front of you. Yeah. And that will then you don't have to worry about the opportunity that it will unlock future opportunities.

ゼルニック#114

7億。後に君が20%を売ったときの1億から7倍、という話ともつながるが、とにかく成長はあっても悪い事業だった。一ヶ月後カールが「友人が大きなステークを見ている。メモを更新してくれ」。カール・スラトフは頭が爆発した。「カール・イカーンの無料仕事が、今度はウォール街の仲間への斡旋? 法外だ」。「どこへ行くか分からない」と言ってまたメモ——「やはり近寄るな」。

EN

Or or it may not, but it's the best that you can do. What else would you be doing anyways?

ゼルニック#115

しばらくしてカールがまた電話。「あの Take-Two、見たことある?」「あなたと友人のために見て、やるなと言った」。「ああ、あの Take-Two、面白い。定款を読んだか?」「読んでない」。「読んだほうがいい」。切れた。ベンが定款を読み、翌日「なんてことだ」。会社はプレーンバニラの改正されていないデラウェア定款で、株式の50.1%が投票で取締役を解任すれば会社を取れる権利があった。株が崩壊してだいたい 20のヘッジファンド の手に集中していたから、数学的には可能だった。

EN

But you said earlier when you were on my friend Patrick's podcast, I think you mentioned this book. You're like, "How few people this book is not for sale. You can't buy it, but you you give it out." And he even that where you know, hundreds of thousands of people heard that and you're like, "50 people asked for it."

ゼルニック#116

問題は、グループを作らずに勧誘するとSEC上ややこしく、株を買う金もなく、プロキシーファイト(当時約300万ドル)の金もなかった。だがSECルールでは 最大10株主まで勧誘でき、株の約70%が10株主にあった。会社を直すデッキを作り、困ったポジションを持つ10人と会い、書面同意で会社を渡すコミットを集めた。11人目以降には行けず、宣伝もできない。すべて静かに。ベンが「48%取れた」。「ゲームオーバーだ」と思った。

EN

That's the goal. Let's go back to the the talent and how you serve the talent because when I hear what the conversation we had, the book I've read and interviews I've heard of you, it's like you seem to be like very comfortable almost like you're in like the service business. Is that a way that you think about this or not? Yeah, I think a a good CEO needs to serve his or her team. And no work gets done in the CEO's office. So, what do you really do? You agree on the mission, you set the strategy, you agree on the culture and then you drive daily execution, but you're driving that daily execution through other people. And how do you do that? You have to motivate them for you have to obviously stay informed so you know what's happening and then you have to motivate them. In the very rare occasion that a problem can't get solved below my level, you got to solve the problem. On the rare occasion that a decision about an approach or capital allocation, you know, isn't obvious or is above someone's approval level, it comes to me. You know, I'm not writing memos. I'm not, you know, I'm not doing Excel spreadsheets.

ゼルニック#117

ベンがさらに定款を見て、別の条項を見つけた。年次総会で事前に議題を出さなくても手を挙げて投票でき、過半がスレートに賛成すれば総会で取れる——聞いたことがないが、ここにあった。総会に物理的にいる必要があり、プロキシーは使えない(出していない)。10人に戻り「グループを組んで総会に来て投票してくれ。48%でも全員が出席するわけではないから勝てる」と。会社に事前に通知し、記事にもなり、テレビカメラも来た。プロキシー・ソリシターを二人雇い、僕らには大金の手数料を使った。

EN

Of course. Okay, so this is

ゼルニック#118

総会前、部屋の向こうから手を振る男がいて、話しかけに行くと「ロースクール以来だな、家族は?」と5分話した。ソリシターに「誰?」と聞くと Fidelity。大口だがグループには入らず、通常は敵対には乗らず経営を支持する。ソリシターを見て「勝った」と言った。ちなみにCEOは総会に来なかった——相手がどんな会社か分かる。新任の法務が暫定結果を持ってきて「88%。これで受け入れるか、数え続けるか」。「受け入れる」。

EN

like how to be the most popular boy in the class.

センラ#119

(笑)

EN

It is just like Yeah. So many people told me about that book. I didn't read it cuz I was like the title is terrible. But you almost saved me the need I already read the book, but you almost saved me the need to to read how to win friends and influence people and your whole thing is just like take a sincere interest with an emphasis on the word sincere in other people.

ゼルニック#120

翌朝金曜、会社のコーナーオフィスに入り、会長になった。07年。今も会長で、CEOでもある。07〜11年はベンがCEOで、彼が辞めて僕がCEOになった。

EN

Right. That is really That's the story of the book.

センラ#121

つまり、資本なしの敵対的買収、と。

EN

That is really a book on sales and leadership.

ゼルニック#122

そうだ。

EN

Yep. And friendship. So explain how you would apply that inside of your own work. Well, I mean, I just did a 360 and you know, the there was criticism in it, to be clear. But one of the positive attributes, and there were plenty of those too that were noted, was when he sits with you, he really really cares about you. He sits with anyone at any level in the organization. He responds to everyone. He's kind to everyone. And you think you're the only person in the room when he's talking to you. You asked me like, how do you deal with like difficult creative personalities? I say cuz I love them. I care about them. I genuinely care about them and I care about my executive team. I care about everyone who works at the business. But frankly, I care you're going to find this hard to believe, but it sounds I really don't mean it sounds self-serving. I think it's it's like table stakes of humanity. I care about the person behind the counter at Starbucks enough to say hello, ask them how their day is going, and interact with them a bit if they're not busy, you know, pouring coffee, which sometimes they are, to see if maybe I can brighten their day a little bit. Like, why wouldn't I? There's a great story in Dale Carnegie's book where he tells the story about I had a I had an idea. When I out and went went into the post office and I wanted to brighten the day of the guy behind the counter. And he's I'm struggling with what I can say cuz I really was this is an exercise for me. He gets to the front of the counter and he and the the uh uh post man behind the counter apparently had a great head of hair and so Dale Carnegie says, "You have a great head of hair. I wish I had a head of hair like that." And the guy said, "Oh, thank you because I actually kind of proud of my hair." And that little interchange. And Dale's telling the story to a friend and the friend says, "Well, Dale, what did you get out of that?" And he said, "What did I get out of it? Are we so small-minded that we need to get something out of every interaction? How about that I improved that person's day and it improved my day. How about that?" So, if you're taking that position as a starting point. Look, if you're taking a position like I'm here doing this podcast. Here's my goal. My goal is to look awesome in your podcast. Well, that's a very bad approach. You know, my goal is when I show up to have some engagement like this now have plenty. How can I be of service to David and to his audience? That's what I'm thinking. One of my favorite quotes ever, it comes from Henry Ford. He says, "Money comes naturally as a result of service." And I think part of what we're trying to do here is like this whole show is like a essentially a love letter to capitalism. And reason I say that

センラ#123

イカーンへのメモが「近寄るな」から、会社を取った。計画は?

EN

or it's apocryphal, not clear. Whether you think you can or you can't, you're right. Yeah, he's a That's attributed to him. It's not clear it was him, but We used that line at DMC for the first couple of years because it was so hard to do what we did. It's in your book.

ゼルニック#124

良いプロパティは開発中で近々出ると思っていた GTA だけ——結局遅れた。他は全部ぐちゃぐちゃで、NBAフランチャイズだけが小さく利益。他は全部赤字。計画はコストを本気で削り、合理的な会社を回し、創造人材に友好的で、パイプラインを多様化し、エンタメ会社を作ること。

EN

Yeah. See, that line is in

センラ#125

コストを4000〜5000万カットしたと聞いたが。

EN

I'm going to write the book in a while. Well, I read it this this past week. Uh but no, I to the degree that we do have any kind of influences, like uh you know, I'm son of a Cuban immigrant. I grew up meeting people that literally risked their lives to flee communism. I knew from time I was probably 9 years old something's weird about this country I've been born into. Something special here. And so, what we're trying to do is like there's also like the you know corruption and crony capitalism which is like we're trying to celebrate people that like they build products that make other people's lives better. They build wealth for their themselves, their family, their employees. They create jobs. We had John Mackey on this podcast, founder of Whole Foods. One of the stories he told was one of my favorite stories. It's just like because of the the fact that we went public early and and there were stock options for so for our employees like these are grocers. These are normal just they they just want to live a normal life and they're able to send their kid to college because of the stock. They're able to buy a home because of the stock. Like why wouldn't that John started that with an idea with his girlfriend, two other co-founders. Like these people should be celebrated and I think the reason I thought that came to mind when we're talking right now is just like but not celebrated cuz you want to do it for yourself. It's in service of other people. Oh, I mean I listen, I'm not saying and I definitely my own personal ambitions including material ambitions.

ゼルニック#126

4000万 だ。

EN

And they were palpable and they were meaningful and the truth is that I've evolved over time. So when I started out, I didn't read How to Win Friends and Influence People for the first few years. I was at Fox when I read it. And I

センラ#127

どうやった?

EN

the book for a while. I did. I saw it like you. I was like "Ugh." Um

ゼルニック#128

立て直しではコストを切るが、アプローチが少し違う。乗り込んですぐ人を切らない——悪意を作り、何も知らないうちに間違った人を切る可能性がある。ルールとして、先に入ったチームだけ立て直しをする。前のチームが失敗した案件はやらない。賢い人は同じことをするので、先に誰かがやって失敗していれば、自分たちも同じことをして失敗する可能性が高い。先に入ったなら、最初に見るのは第三者費用だ。ディスクやカートリッジを箱に入れる時代で、印刷・段ボール・プレスなどの契約がある。上位10ベンダーを洗い、全部電話して値を下げる。すぐに金が残り、チームを怖がらせず、「誰も首にせず金を節約した」と信頼が生まれる。経費ポリシーの細かい監査もやらない——疎外の最短ルートだ。3〜6ヶ月で分かってからオーバーヘッドを適正化し、悲しいが人数削減も多くは必要になる。

EN

[laughter]

センラ#129

当時 GTA はどれくらい稼いでいた?

EN

and I I mean I think I I was the guy who I was I was insecure and my approach to a situation was how am I coming across? How do I look? What do people think about me? What do you think? Let's talk about me. Like and I I could mask it behind sort of a um sort of a humble exterior but frankly you can't you just can't fake humility. And I was anxious all the time as a result. And I nearly failed at Fox as a result of this and it was a book that changed my life. I turned it upside down. Like immediately turned my life upside down. What was the different position you were taking when you were in your early 30s at Fox? It was like basically I'm trying to work through you to accomplish what my ambitions were as opposed to actually figuring out I have

ゼルニック#130

リリース年は意味のある利益——年1億くらい——が出るが、4年に一度なのでそれ以外は赤字だった。計画は他のヒットタイトルを作ることだ。

EN

[clears throat]

センラ#131

子どもの頃は映画スタジオをやりたかった。キャリア20年で「1926年の映画スタジオをやりたい」となった。その発想で「映画スタジオを作る」と。

EN

I'm the smartest guy in the room. I got the sharp suit on. I can speak grammatically. I got a couple of Harvard degrees. We're just going to do it my way. I mean, I wasn't like that cuz I wasn't a But But that was the subtext.

ゼルニック#132

業界で最も創造的で、最も革新的で、最も効率的な会社になる——どのエンタメ会社でも使った同じルーブリックだ。Take-Two は公開会社だからその物語を話さなければならず、投資家に「フォックスのときと何が違う?」と聞かれた。「違わない。同じ計画だ。エンタメ事業だ」。正直に、意思決定がそのルーブリックを支えるなら、今も効く。取ったとき時価総額約7億、今はだいたい 300〜350億。すごいランだ。最高のチームのおかげだ。

EN

Yeah. And I shifted that to how can I be of service to you? How can I be of service and how can I get to know you? Have you seen anybody have long-term success that doesn't have a service mindset? Sure. There are different styles that work. And one of the things I've learned is it isn't one size fits all. And my approach is not for everyone. And by the way, I'm not the most successful guy on Earth. Not even close. So, I I this is not by way and I hope it didn't come across this way. Like, this is my approach and everyone should follow my approach. To your To your point, you've interviewed loads of people and you've read hundreds of books. It's not the same approach. There are some common elements, of course. Um but Elon Musk's approach to business is diametrically different than mine. Yeah, he's does not have be kind as one of the company values. I just did an episode on with the author of the new book and one of the things that in that book that he wrote on Elon in Elon's own words was that camaraderie's dangerous. So, I don't know him. It is clear that we have very different approaches. And last time I checked, he's the richest guy on Earth and I'm not. So, I'm not here to criticize him or his approach. It's his journey. But I'm aware of the fact that his style, though completely different than mine, is a very successful style. And in the video game business, I would argue that we run our business differently than anyone else. And there are other successful enterprises, plenty of them. By the way, thank God there are cuz if we were, you know, one of one, I'd be nervous about our future. Even more broadly in the entertainment business, there styles that win that are not my style. Barry Diller's style, for example, the pardon me, the Socratic method that he pursues, which can be brutal. It really can. I mean, I can't use a It is brutal at times. That's just not my approach. I just don't do it that way. But it works for him. We're different people. And I think there are times when I have missed things because I take too soft an approach to I am I I think I can sometimes support people who are on the team longer than I should, more than I should. Um there are times when I've kicked the can down the road and shouldn't have done that. Although that I I really learned from. But I don't I don't have the view that my approach is the only one or the best one. It just happens to be my approach. And it does, generally speaking, work. And it's worked for my life in that, you know, not the richest guy on Earth, but I'm not going to miss a meal. And I haven't built the biggest

センラ#133

1920年代のスタジオ作りのアイデアを2000年代初頭のゲームに持ち込む、と誰かが考えていた?

EN

going to miss a meal for several lifetimes.

ゼルニック#134

現場の人は「良いゲームを作ること」を考えていればよかった。自分がそういうメタをやっていた。EA や Activision にも素晴らしい経営者がいて、独占的に気づいたわけではない。立て直しには時間がかかり、大きな失敗もあった。純粋プレイではおそらく Bobby Kotick の Activision のほうが価値を作った、とも言える。

EN

[laughter]

センラ#135

初期の大きな失敗は?

EN

And let's be clear.

ゼルニック#136

初期はあまり失敗できない。床にいるとき落ちる場所がない。会社はひどく、経営はひどく、判断は全部悪かった。健全な判断をするのは簡単だった。

EN

And uh and you know, I haven't built the biggest business, but I built a business I'm proud of. Built a giant business.

センラ#137

才能へのピッチが面白い。成功者にはエゴがあるが、君は脇に置き、「エンタメで大事なのは君たちで、僕は替えが効く。ヒットメーカーは替えが効かない」と言う。

EN

Yeah. You don't think in those terms, though, right?

ゼルニック#138

しかもそれが真実だ、という利点もある。

EN

the notion that one size fits all in almost anything in life. Oh, well, so I do something I want to transition to and ask you about because you have all this experience in media. So, like, and obviously I'm kind of in that business, even though I don't know if I think about it, so I want some personal advice to you. But this is such an important thing about one size doesn't fit all that Daniel Ek, the founder of Spotify, and I are working on this project to try to outline all the different founder archetypes. We might even like commission a book on this because it's so important. And it became a lot of conversations where he was just like he was essentially playing a role. He's like everybody all young entrepreneurs he was technology entrepreneurs in their 20s they said like, "Oh, like what's my options? I had to be like Steve Jobs in the way he communicates." And then now I have to be like Elon. And so he's like I was literally like playing a role that wasn't me. Right. And he says he wasted so many years of his life not realizing that it it there isn't one type and it is dependent on who you are and your own style. You just said something that was interesting. I had somebody that works with you email me. I'm [snorts] curious. People think Take-Two is in the video game business. I think you think of it you're just in the media business.

センラ#139

ピッチは「合理的な組織を回す」。rational organization という言葉を何度も使う。長い目で見るとエッジになる、と。

EN

The and business, yeah. Okay, what's the difference between the media business and the entertainment business? Well, media is just a broader rubric that can include any could include advertising, for example, would be media business. Why not describe it like what's the difference between entertainment and video games then? Video games just sounds a bit narrow and we provide an entertainment experience expressed through video games. And maybe that's a difference it doesn't make a difference, but I think it does. Okay, so explain like how you think about this. You could think of a video game as like a mobile video game you spend 7 minutes on or you could think of it as Grand Theft Auto 6 that you spend hundreds of hours on. Um, they're very different experiences. They're both entertainment experiences. I think to call them both video game experiences maybe understates the diversity of experience. Do you think all the different forms of entertainment are kind of like they compete with one another, but they kind of like they're all kind of collapsing. Do you look at it like that or no? Like the distinction between a video game and watching something else or listening to a podcast or interacting with AI to me is just all entertainment and information.

ゼルニック#140

「あったらいいな」は合理的な組織だが、必須は——情熱を追う創造的・財務的リソースを渡す。創造には介入しない。地球上で最高のゲームを作ってほしい。本気だ。どの会社より厚く薄く支える。そのうえで合理的な事業組織——怒鳴られない、誰かが起訴されない、FTC と衝突しない、大人の会社。時間はかかったが、失敗してもまた戦える健全なバランスシートも約束した。超才能ある人はしばしば非常に不同意で、やや不規則でもある。

EN

Oh, yeah. I mean, I look at the media day broadly and according to Activate Consultancy, the media day is like 13 hours in the US. And anything that fits within the media day can compete or coexist. So, yes in that way, but no at the end of the day like you know, playing a video game is still a very different experience than watching a linear television show or

センラ#141

自分は才能がないと言うが、才能の種類が違う、という意味だよね。どう付き合う?

EN

just is.

ゼルニック#142

愛している。本気だ。効果的なリーダーは人を本気で気にかける。全員の全属性や全会話を愛するわけではないし、向こうも僕を愛するわけではない——360度評価で確認した。でも互いを気にかけ、敬意を持って扱い、同じことを求める。怒鳴りはない。悪い行動は退場。ある競合は一時、セクハラの申し立てが500件あった——一人ではなく広く。僕らはそういうことは起きないよう、敬意で扱う。民族・宗教・性的指向・ライフスタイル・髪の色は問わない。優れた仕事をし、卓越を求め、他者に優しく。

EN

This goes back to your your insight that I don't even think we talked about this, but when you thought

ゼルニック#143

難しい会話はたくさんする。バリーから学んだ——今でも個人的に感じるが、個人ではない。経営者が言う「大きな家族」とは言わない。これは企業で、家族は家にいる。だから家族のアレコレのアングストはないが、敬意のある企業だ。誰かがラインを越えても、自分が偉すぎて教えなければならない、とは思わない。ハードに学んだのは、削除キーは理由があってそこにあるということ。ある創造人材——最終的には耐えきれず、提供価値も釣り合わず去った——がとんでもなく不快なメールを送り続けた。あるとき「礼儀が崩壊していて、いつか首にするしかないことを言う」と誰かに漏らした。そして気づいた——常に選択肢がある。削除だ。読めば怒るから、読まずに削除する。

EN

that's the case with video games cuz the biggest entertainment business and it's growing more rapidly than any other. And the size, it's bigger than all the other forms combined, is that Yeah, at the at the software level, yeah. That's an insane like and it's growing faster. Absolutely. Yeah, about roughly double the rate. Is there any other thing that you would be interested in pursuing in media besides video games? Sure, I'm open-minded. I think that in the fullness of time one could ask, would it make sense for example for Take-Two to diversify into other forms of entertainment? I can assure you we would not diversify backwards into backward-looking legacy declining businesses. But there are other exciting entertainment businesses and there'll be more in the future. And you know, live entertainment's really interesting space for example that's growing. How is Take-Two using AI right now? We have hundreds of projects going on and we already have promulgated enterprise software. So we have enterprise versions of chat GPT and Claude that are available to everyone to use that are fully licensed and paid for. And then we have about 200 projects going on to try to create more productivity and to give people the tools they need to to do their jobs whether they're creative jobs or executive jobs more effectively, more efficiently. With more innovation. Let's go back to that story where you're like, well, we need a 20th Century Fox. We need a business guy. Let's grab this guy. So when you realized you needed an AI person, did you create an entirely new role? Like how was the structure? No, we have a new CTO, so David Klein and it all reports to David because it's technology. It sits within the technology world and no, I don't you know not in any way to minimize the effect of all things AI. But first of all, the words mean different things to different people. And we're a technology company that makes entertainment. We always have been. So this is not new to us and engaging with technology aggressively to create better products, to market them better and to run our business better is what we do. You know, innovation and efficiency. So it fits well within our system and we've pushed really, really hard to be as ambitious as possible and even so I'd say we're getting internal criticism and that we're not moving fast enough. But we're trying to. So what is your overall viewpoint on AI though? Again, that's that's sort of like saying how do you feel about motherhood and apple pie? I like both. All things technology that can create efficiency, I'm I'm all in on. But, you're doubtful of the creative ability of AI? No, I'm not doubtful of anything. I'm totally open-minded. But, do I believe that um remember what AI is, despite the fact that there are people in Silicon Valley who don't want you to believe this, is big data sets, lots of compute, and a large language model mushed together. That's what they are. So, data sets by their very nature are backward-looking. Creativity by its very nature is forward-looking. Creativity is informed by data. We're in You're informed by those hundreds of books that you read. And when you have a podcast, you're informed by the ones you've listened to. How could you not be? But, if yours was just a really high-quality clone of Patrick's, who would watch yours? And the thesis that wow, with AI we can more efficiently create a completely derivative property, like derivative properties don't work. So, that's where the threat has been lost, that AI so far is really great at asset creation, but hit creation is not asset creation. Asset creation is a necessary but insufficient condition for hit creation. So, I would love to say that AI will make it easier, quicker, and better to make hits, because who would benefit more than we? We're in the business already. We own IP, right? That you know. So, you don't have to create new IP, but it's really, really hard to do with or without AI. Like, create a you know, a "This table goes to Hollywood." Getting someone to buy that video game, that's incredibly hard. Getting them to buy GTA 6, not so hard by comparison. So, um it's it's not that I take at all lightly the potential benefits of new technology, to the contrary. No, I think your entire career has been a good example

センラ#144

人を削除する話かと思った。

EN

of my career. It's just that when, you know, our stock goes down by 50 points because people are like, "Anyone can make a video game." That was the thesis. "Any with AI, anyone can make a video game." It's like, "Anyone can make a video game last week." Like, anyone can make a video game 5 years ago. The technology is readily available. It's commoditized. You know how many mobile games get put out a year? Thousands. You know how many hits are made in a year? Zero to five. You know who makes them? Thank you very much, we do.

ゼルニック#145

メールだ。読めば傷つく。最終的には去ってもらったが、長く耐えた。長い目で完全に合理的であることが、特にエンタメでエッジになる、というのは興味深い。

EN

[laughter]

センラ#146

マンガーとバフェットもそうだ。長期に合理的でいられること。

EN

This is just true. And that's not I mean, that's just true. It's like, we don't you don't need this new technology to create assets that are competitive. That already exists. It will be quicker to do it, but speed isn't the issue. If I told you, "David, with this technology, you can create something that looks exactly like GTA, and it's going to take 3 years, not 30 seconds." You'd be like, "I'll spend 3 years on it. It's worth it." But, and that exists. You can In 3 years, technology exists prior to AI to clone But, it won't be GTA. It'll be a clone of GTA. Clones don't sell. All hits are by their very nature unexpected. That's the most important thing to take away. Things that are data-driven in their entirety can't be unexpected. But, that doesn't mean AI isn't super helpful. Perfect place to end. Charles, thanks for the time. This was awesome. Really appreciate it man. I hope you enjoyed this episode. Please remember to subscribe wherever you're listening and leave a review. And make sure you listen to my other podcast, Founders. For almost a decade, I have obsessively read over 400 biographies of history's greatest entrepreneurs, searching for ideas that you can use in your work. Most of the guests you hear on this show first found me through Founders.

ゼルニック#147

マジカルシンキングはしない。欲しいから起きる、という思考。誰かがこのポッドキャストを見て1000万ドルくれる、みたいな。

センラ#148

ブラッド・ジェイコブスはエピソード3で、聴衆から7億5000万調達したのに手数料を払わされた、と笑っていた。

ゼルニック#149

僕はディナーをもらって、名前も知られていなくて、無料で働かされた。

センラ#150

(笑)

ゼルニック#151

出発点は「合理的な組織」ではない。厚く薄く創造活動を支えること。試されるのは最悪のタイミングだ。文化は性格と同じく、破綻のときに試される。ヒットが出て金が入っているときは試験ではない。まだ立て直し途中で資本が薄いとき、リリース2ヶ月前——つまりできている——のゲームについて、部門長が来た。「十分良くない。アートスタイルが適切でなく、差別化もない。作り直したい」。何が必要か。「追加開発費 5000万ドル と、もう1年」。リリース予定にも乗っていた。即答せず宿題をして、最終的に支持した。そのタイトルが Borderlands になった。やらなければヒットにならなかった。

センラ#152

非自明な決断だ。業界の他は誰もしない、と。

ゼルニック#153

狂っているから。ゲームはできている、出せ、次へ行け、5000万かけてアートを作り直す証拠もない、と言うだろう。才能の直感を信じた。それが物語だ——最も創造的・革新的・効率的であれ。最も創造的な人を雇い、情熱を追えと約束し、彼らが評価を持ってきた。支持するか。はい、と。

センラ#154

タイムラインがずれる。世界で最も価値あるメディアIPを抱えていて、オンラインは「GTA6はいつ?」ばかりだ。どう扱う? 答えは「分からない」?

ゼルニック#155

いや、11月19日は分かっている。発表済みだ。元の日付からだいたい18ヶ月遅れで、それ以上ではないと思う。史上最も成功したゲームか、は数え方による。収益だけならそうかもしれないが、マリオカートや CoD などを入れると議論になる。IPの価値として史上最も価値あるエンタメIP、と多くの人が信じている。GTA5の総売上は開示していない。多い。

センラ#156

人々が遊び続けるのは常に更新され、本当に良いから。ソーシャル要素もある。

ゼルニック#157

オンラインゲームは高度にソーシャルだ。母は90歳でオンラインでブリッジをやる。バフェットと一緒かは疑わしいが、上手い。会ったことのないブリッジの友人がいて、移動は減ったが人生の向上になっている。ゲームは人類の夜明けからある。子供から90歳まで届く産業だ。

センラ#158

本でマジカルシンキングを信じない、と言いつつ、クリエイティブ・ビジュアライゼーションの話がある。自分のメモは「宇宙は具体的な願いを報い、曖昧な願望を罰する」。効果がある理由として、「方法が、欲しいものにハードに、排他的に、頻繁に集中することを要求するから」と書いていた。

ゼルニック#159

成功の共通因子をドリルダウンすると、何が欲しいかを知っていることしか出てこなかった。鏡に「木曜に100万ドル」と書くナポレオン・ヒル式ではない。01年から「テクノロジーでスーパーチャージされたメディア・通信・エンタメ資産の多角的コレクションを作る」と知り、以来レーザーでそれに奉仕する選択をしてきた。マジカルシンキングは「それを欲しいが、天気がいいから今日も明日も明後日もビーチ」だ。君は週7日働いている、と言っていた。目標があり、達成に集中しているからだ。保証はない。でも欲しいものを知り、それに奉仕して働くほうが、知らない/奉仕しないよりはるかに得やすい。それが真実だ。

ゼルニック#160

ZMC を始めたとき「200億ドル規模の会社をこう作る」と思った。資本を集めようと走り回っているとき、誰も「最高だ」とは言わなかった。「狂ったアイデアだ」と言われた。でも可能だと思い、届かなくても試さないより近づく、と納得していた。10年後にMITで話したとき、学生が「今どれくらい?」と聞いた。「全部合わせるとだいたい10億」。彼が「深く失望している?」

センラ#161

(笑)

ゼルニック#162

「まだ目指したところではないが、方向は正しく、止まっていない。これが最高でも試したし、少し前進した」。今日、全体として時価総額で言うとだいたい 400億ドル の会社だ。目標を超え、まだ終わっていない。何を達成しようとしているか知らなければ、そうはならなかった。

ゼルニック#163

Take-Two のミッションは地球上でナンバーワンのエンタメ会社になること。大胆だが全員が理解する。戦略は最も創造的・革新的・効率的。文化は卓越を求め、チームで働き、優しく。1万4000人いて、言えない人はいない。単純で、真実だ。

センラ#164

歴史上の起業家を十年読んで学んだいちばん大事なことを一言で言うと focus だ。本の章の締めも——望む成功のためにできる最も重要なことは、野心を発見し、可能な限り具体的に狭め、意識に刻み、毎日見直すこと——ビジュアライゼーションだが、マジカルではない。

ゼルニック#165

オースティンのタウンホールのあと、新しい同僚が Slack でキャリアの話をしたいと言った。印象的な人で、最後に「ここで成功するには?」と聞かれた。「何が欲しいかを知れ。月曜に、自分がコストより多くの価値を作るにはどうするかを考えろ。金曜に、コストより多く作ったか考えろ。年収100に福利25で、企業に価値10しか生まなければ、職を失うか会社が潰れるかだ。成功したいならコストより多くの価値を作れ」。彼女はすでに何が欲しいか決めていて、CEOになりたい、と。素晴らしい。あとは政治を持ち込まず、笑顔で「イエス」と言え、大丈夫だ、と。

センラ#166

ランチのときも、ポッドキャストの調整はチームを通さず「テキストして」と自分で返す。驚くほど少ない人がそれを利用する、とは思わない?

ゼルニック#167

驚くのは別のところだ。時間の20〜25%をメンタリングとコーチングに使い、本の演習を課す。会うには少しプロセスがある。人生を変える具体的な依頼で時間を使い、演習を出すと、半分くらいはフォローアップしない。自分が恐ろしいからではないと思う。「成功した人と部屋にいれば魔法の杖が振られる」と信じている人がいる。宝くじだ。ZMC を始めたとき、敵はいないと思い、人脈も評判もあった。善意はたくさんあったが、誰も代わりにはできなかった。ディールを見つけ、イカーンに会い、チームを雇い、ポケットから払い、回すのは自分だった。

センラ#168

伝記に繰り返し出る格言は、目の前の機会を最善で扱えば次の機会が開く、というもの。Vestron をうまく扱ったからフォックスが来た。

ゼルニック#169

開かないかもしれないが、それでも最善を尽くすしかない。他に何をする?

センラ#170

パトリックの番組で、本は売っていないが渡す、と言っていた。何十万人が聞いても、50人しか頼まなかった、と。

ゼルニック#171

狂っていると思う。長期に合理的な組織を回すエッジと、時間が大半の重みを運ぶことの理解がつながっている。7.5億から400億への複利は、良い事業、テクノロジーの追い風、最高の人材との合理的組織で、スコアは何十年かでついてくる。200億を目指して倍にして、まだ行く。

センラ#172

才能に仕える話に戻る。サービス業にいるような居心地の良さがある?

ゼルニック#173

良いCEOはチームに仕える必要がある。CEOのオフィスでは仕事は起きない。ミッションに合意し、戦略を決め、文化に合意し、日々の実行をドライブする——他の人を通じて。動機づけし、情報を持ち、自分のレベルでしか解けない問題だけ解く。資本配分や承認権限を超えるものが来る。メモを書いたりエクセルをいじったりしているわけではない。

センラ#174

スタイルを個人に合わせる?

ゼルニック#175

もちろん。自分には誠実だが、合わせる。

センラ#176

『人を動かす』みたいなタイトルがひどい本がある。中身は「他者に、sincere を強調した誠実な関心を持て」。

ゼルニック#177

それが本の物語だ。セールスとリーダーシップと友情の本だ。360で批判もあったが、ポジティブな属性の一つは——座ると本当に気にかけてくれる、どのレベルの誰とも座る、全員に返す、優しい、話しているとき自分が部屋の唯一の人のように感じる、だった。難しい創造人格とどう付き合うか、と聞かれたら、愛しているからだ。本気で気にかける。スターバックスのカウンターの人にも、忙しすぎなければこんにちはと今日はどう、と声をかける。なぜしないのか。

ゼルニック#178

デール・カーネギーの話で、郵便局で相手の日を明るくしたいが何を言うか悩み、前に出たら髪が素晴らしかったので「素晴らしい髪ですね」と言い、相手が誇らしげに礼を言った。友人が「それで何を得たか」と聞き、デールは「すべての交流から何かを得なければならないほど狭いのか。相手の日を良くし、自分の日も良くした。それで十分では」と。出発点をそう取る。このポッドキャストで「自分がかっこよく見える」が目標なら最悪のアプローチだ。「デイヴィッドと聴衆にどう奉仕できるか」を考えている。ヘンリー・フォード——金は奉仕の結果として自然に来る

センラ#179

この番組全体は資本主義へのラブレターみたいなものだ。キューバ移民の息子で、共産主義から命がけで逃げた人に会い、9歳くらいでこの国は特別だと感じた。製品で人の生活を良くし、自分と家族と従業員に富を作り、仕事を作る人を祝いたい。ジョン・マッキー(Whole Foods)は、初期上場とストックオプションで、普通の食料品店員が子供を大学に送り家を買えた、と話した。自分のためだけでなく、他者への奉仕だ。

ゼルニック#180

個人的・物質的な野心もはっきりあったし、意味があった。時間とともに進化した。『人を動かす』はフォックスの最初の数年は読んでいなかった。タイトルが嫌いだった。不安で、状況へのアプローチは「どう見られるか、どう思われるか、自分の話をしよう」だった。謙虚な外見で隠せても、謙虚さはニセられない。常に不安で、そのせいでフォックスで危うく失敗した。本が人生をひっくり返した。

センラ#181

30代前半のフォックスでのポジションは?

ゼルニック#182

相手を通じて自分の野心を達成しようとする。部屋でいちばん頭が良く、スーツが決まり、文法が正しく、ハーバードの学位がいくつもあるから、自分のやり方でやる——表向きはそうでなくても、サブテキストはそれだった。

ゼルニック#183

それを「どう奉仕できるか、どう知り合うか」に移した。奉仕のマインドセットなしで長期成功する人はいるか? いる。スタイルは一つではない。自分のやり方が全員向けではないし、地球上で最も成功した人間でもない。イーロン・マスクのアプローチは正反対で、「優しく」は価値観にない。新しい本で彼自身の言葉として「仲間意識は危険」とあった。知らないが、明らかに違う。前回確認した限り彼は地球一の資産家で自分は違う。批判するつもりはない。彼の旅だ。ゲーム業界でも僕らは他と違う回し方をし、他にも成功企業がある。ありがとう、でなければ未来がもっと不安だ。エンタメ全体でも、バリーのソクラテス式——時に残酷——など、自分のスタイルではないが機能するやり方がある。柔らかすぎてチームを長く支えすぎたり、先送りしたりしたこともある。学びはある。自分のやり方だけが最良だとは思わない。自分のやり方で、概ね機能し、人生にも機能した。地球一の富豪ではないが、食事を逃すことはない。

センラ#184

何世代分も食事は逃さないだろう。

ゼルニック#185

はっきり言っておく。最大の事業を作ったわけではないが、誇りに思う事業を作った。巨大な事業だ。

センラ#186

でもそういう物差しでは考えていないよね。

ゼルニック#187

人生のほとんどで「一サイズが全員に合う」という発想がない。

センラ#188

ダニエル・エク(Spotify)と、ファウンダーのアーキタイプを整理する仕事をしている。若いテック起業家が「スティーブ・ジョブズのように、次はイーロンのように」と役割を演じ、何年も無駄にした、という話が出る。一つではない。ところで、Take-Two はビデオゲーム会社だと思われているが、君はメディア/エンタメ事業だと考えている、と聞いた。

ゼルニック#189

そうだ。メディアは広告なども含むより広いルーブリック。ビデオゲームと呼ぶと狭く聞こえ、僕らはビデオゲームという表現を通じたエンタメ体験を提供する。7分のモバイルと、何百時間もやる GTA6 は違う体験で、両方を「ビデオゲーム体験」と呼ぶと多様性を過小評価しうる。メディアの1日は米国で約13時間(Activate など)で、その中は競合も共存もする。でもゲームを遊ぶこととリニアTVを見ることは、やはり違う体験だ。

センラ#190

以前の洞察——最も価値あるニューメディアは受動ではなくインタラクティブ——につながる。

ゼルニック#191

ビデオゲームがそうで、ソフトウェアレベルでは他の形態を合わせたより大きく、成長もだいたい倍速だ。ゲーム以外のメディアもオープンだ。時間をかけて Take-Two が他のエンタメ形態へ多角化するのはありうるが、後退するレガシー衰退事業には戻らない。ライブエンタメなど成長分野は面白い。

センラ#192

AI はどう使っている?

ゼルニック#193

プロジェクトが何百もあり、ChatGPT と Claude のエンタープライズ版を全員が使えるようライセンス済みで配っている。創造職でも幹部職でも、生産性・道具・効率・イノベーションのための約200プロジェクトがある。構造としては新しい CTO David Klein の下に技術として置いた。AI の言葉は人によって違うが、僕らは常にエンタメを作るテクノロジー企業だ。製品・マーケ・事業運営のために技術と積極的に関わるのは「革新と効率」そのもの。野心的に押しているが、社内からはまだ遅いという批判もある。

センラ#194

AI 全体への見方は? 創造能力には懐疑的?

ゼルニック#195

懐疑的ではない。完全にオープンだ。でも AI は——シリコンバレーの一部が認めたくなくても——大きなデータセット、大量の計算、大規模言語モデルの組み合わせだ。データセットは本質的に後ろ向きで、創造性は本質的に前向きだ。データに情報はされる——君が何百冊読んだように。でもパトリックの高品質クローンだけなら誰が見る?「AI で完全に派生的なプロパティをより効率的に作れる」は、派生は売れない。AI はこれまでのところアセット作成には本当に優れているが、ヒット作成はアセット作成ではない。アセット作成はヒットの必要条件だが十分条件ではない。AI がヒットをより簡単・速く・良くするなら誰より嬉しい——すでに事業にいて IP を持っている。でも AI があってもなくても本当に難しい。「このテーブルがハリウッドへ行く」を誰かに買わせるのは極めて難しい。GTA6 を買わせるのは、比較すればそうでもない。

ゼルニック#196

新技術の潜在利益を軽く見ているわけでは全くない。キャリア全体がその例だ。ただ、株が50ポイント下がるとき、テーゼが「AI で誰でもビデオゲームを作れる」になる。先週も5年前も、誰でも作れた。技術はコモディティだ。モバイルゲームは年に何千本出る。ヒットは年にゼロから5本。誰が作るか。ありがたいことに、僕らだ。

センラ#197

(笑)

ゼルニック#198

これはただの事実だ。競争力のあるアセットを作るのに新技術は必須ではない。すでに存在する。速くはなるが、速度が論点ではない。「この技術で GTA そっくりが30秒ではなく3年で作れる」と言われたら、3年かける価値がある、と言うだろう。AI 以前から3年でクローンはできた。でもそれは GTA ではなくクローンで、クローンは売れない。すべてのヒットは本質的に予期せぬものだ。それが最も大事な学びだ。完全にデータ駆動だけのものには、予期せぬものは生まれない。それでも AI が極めて有用でない、という意味ではない。

センラ#199

終わるのに完璧な場所だ。ストラウス、時間をありがとう。最高だった。

ゼルニック#200

こちらこそ。

FAQ

なぜ英語が「自動字幕ベース」なの? 公式の文字起こしは?

このページの英語は、YouTube が生成した automatic captions(ASR=音声認識) を yt-dlp で取得したものです。人手で整えた公式トランスクリプトではありません。

- 動画: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ZgUcrR0K7I - 公式: https://www.davidsenra.com

公式サイトにはエピソード要約・ショーノートはありますが、取得時点では全文の公式文字起こしは前提にしていません。

自動字幕の精度は? どこが壊れやすい?

インタビュー2人で比較的クリアですが、固有名詞・会社名・金額・法律用語・早口で崩れます。

| 字幕に出やすい崩れ | おそらく正しい表記 | |---|---| | 30 Dancing | Dirty Dancing(Vestron 時代のヒット) | | Verstra / Vestron 聞き違い | Vestron | | Charles(締めの呼びかけ) | Strauss(ストラウス・ゼルニック) | | Middlehoff 等 | Thomas Middelhoff(Bertelsmann 元CEO) | | Apploven / axon | AppLovin / Axon(スポンサー) | | Deal / deel.com | Deel / deel.com(スポンサー) | | centra(URL) | 番組スポンサー用ランディング(senra 系) | | PSC / 各種略語 | 文脈依存。一次情報は動画 |

日本語本文では多くを修正済み。英語欄は「音声の生ログ」に近く、引用の一次ソースは動画を優先してください。

日本語と英語は1対1で完全対応している?

していません。 日本語は読みやすさのためまとめ・整文。英語は字幕切れ目が細かい。話者(センラ/ゼルニック)を手がかりに話題の塊として読むのが正しい使い方です。スポンサー読み上げ(Ramp、AppLovin/Axon、Deel)および番組締めの Founders 宣伝は日本語から省略しています。

上部トグルは何のため?

- 英語原文 ON/OFF … まず日本語だけ読みたい人向け(英語は約9.5px) - 英語を少し大きく … 対照精読用(約11px)

デフォルトは「日本語メイン・英語は極小」。

Strauss Zelnick / Take-Two / ZMC とは?

Strauss Zelnick(ストラウス・ゼルニック) は Take-Two Interactive の会長兼CEO(本編口頭。役職の正確な肩書きは時期により確認)。コロンビア・ピクチャーズ、Vestron、20世紀フォックス、Crystal Dynamics、BMG などを経て、2001年に ZMC(Zelnick Media Capital 系のプライベートエクイティ/投資プラットフォーム)を創業。2007年に Take-Two の支配権を取得し、以降 GTA などを抱えるパブリッシャーを成長させた、と本編で語られる。

Take-Two Interactive は *Grand Theft Auto*、*Borderlands*、NBA 系など複数フランチャイズを持つ上場パブリッシャー。数字・時価総額は話者の口頭ベースで、公式IRと完全一致する保証はありません。

David Senra(センラ)とは?

起業家伝記を扱う Founders ポッドキャストで知られるホスト。本番組 David Senra Show では創業者・経営者インタビューを行う。本編ではゼルニックの著書(社内配布・非売品として言及)についても触れる。

「金のない敵対的買収」とは何が起きた?

本編口頭の骨子(字幕ベース):

- 07年頃、Take-Two は経営混乱(会長起訴・複数当局調査・未提出財務などと語られる) - 株が少数のヘッジファンドに集中 - 定款が「プレーンバニラ」のデラウェア定款で、過半の書面同意/総会でのスレート承認により取締役交代が可能だった、と語られる - SEC上、一定条件下で最大10株主まで勧誘でき、約70%が10株主に、と語られる - ショート貸しで投票権が落ち一時22%まで見えるなど紆余曲折のあと、年次総会で約 88% を得て支配 - 翌営業日にコーナーオフィスへ入り会長に

法的・手続きの正確な解釈は証券・会社法の一次資料を優先してください。本編は回想の物語です。

Carl Icahn との関係は?

ゼルニック側がアイデアを持ち込み、Icahn は「アイデア代は払わない」と明言しつつ関係を続けた、と語られる。Reader's Digest の例(約5000万買い→売却益)や、Take-Two の定款を「読め」とだけ言って切った電話、などの逸話が出る。「ウォール街で友人が欲しければ犬を買え」は Icahn に帰される有名な一句として引用。

BMG・GTA・20%株の「戦記」は?

BMG 在籍中に社内ゲーム事業(約4000万投資と語られる)を立ち上げ、親会社CEOの方針で売却。買い手の小さな上場会社が自社株約20%を対価とし、その後公開市場で約1400万に換金。一ヶ月後にその会社——Take-Two——が完成済みタイトル Grand Theft Auto を出した、という逸話。会社はゼルニック個人の所有ではなかった、と本人が強調する。

合理化・4000万カット・Borderlands とは?

- ベンダー上位10の再交渉でまずコストを削り、人をすぐ切らない(先に入った立て直しチームのみ、というルール) - 創造人材へのピッチ: リソースと創造の自由、厚く薄くの支援、合理的で大人の組織、のちに健全なバランスシート - リリース直前のタイトルをアートスタイルから作り直す判断(追加約5000万+1年)が Borderlands になった、と語られる

GTA6 の日付・IP価値の話は?

本編口頭では発表済みの日付として 11月19日、元スケジュールからだいたい18ヶ月遅れ、と語られる(エピソード収録時点の発言。発売日・延期は後から変わりうる)。IPとしての価値が史上最大級、という業界通念に触れつつ、総売上の開示方針などと区別する。

スタジオシステム vs ブティック/映画経済とは?

1955年同意判決以降、映画は才能がプロジェクトごとにオークションされるブティック化し、成功時は才能側が価値を抜き失敗時はスタジオが全部被る構造になりやすい、という話。一方ビデオゲームは今日までスタジオシステム(才能が社内/長期関係で、成功時に会社にもリターンが残る余地)に近い、というのがゼルニックの比較軸。「1927年の映画スタジオ」を現代でやるならゲーム、という洞察。

ミッション・戦略・文化の公式は?

本編で繰り返される Take-Two の枠:

- ミッション: 地球上でナンバーワンのエンタメ会社になる - 戦略: 最も創造的・最も革新的・最も効率的 - 文化: 卓越を求め、チームで働き、優しく(be kind)

従業員約1万4000人が言える、と語られる。

AI と「ヒット vs アセット」とは?

AI=データセット+計算+LLM。データは後ろ向き、創造は前向き。アセット(見た目・素材)の作成は速く安くなりうるが、ヒットは予期せぬものであり、完全データ駆動だけでは予期せぬものは出にくい。クローンは売れない。モバイルは年何千本出てもヒットは年0〜5本、という口頭の対比。それでも社内では数百プロジェクトとエンタープライズLLMを推進、と語られる。

本・ビジュアライゼーション・メンタリングは?

社内・知人向けに渡す非売品の本として言及。欲しいものを具体化し毎日意識に刻む=集中の技法。時間の2〜3割をメンタリングに使い、演習を課しても約半数がフォローしない、という観察。「部屋にいれば魔法がかかる」型の期待への批判。

スポンサーはなぜ日本語にない?

Ramp、AppLovin(Axon)、Deel などの読み上げは学習用対話から意図的に省略。英語原文側の字幕には残ります。