Strauss Zelnick, Take-Two Interactive

Strauss Zelnick Details a Unique Hostile Takeover and His Foundational Media-Tech Thesis

Strauss Zelnick recounts the unconventional acquisition of Take-Two Interactive, which he describes as a hostile takeover executed "with no money." This method was necessitated by their lack of capital and is considered a singular event, unlikely to be replicated.

The deal stemmed from Zelnick's establishment of ZMC with partners, aiming to invest in and build value within companies at the nexus of media and technology. His 2001 thesis for ZMC posited that technology would both accelerate and undermine value in the media sector.

Despite his extensive two-decade background in various entertainment businesses, including an early role at Columbia Pictures overseeing international television distribution, Zelnick observed that this dual impact of technology was not widely recognized by the entertainment industry at the time. As the self-proclaimed "new media guy," the trend was evident to him.

ZMC's strategy focused on turning around and growing businesses that stood to benefit or be disrupted by technological advancements in media.

we essentially did a hostile takeover with no money.

Strauss Zelnick Became Columbia Pictures' 'New Media Guy' in the Early 80s

In the early 1980s, the entertainment industry was confronting the rise of "new media," which at the time meant home entertainment through videocassette distribution and the advent of pay television. Strauss Zelnick was at Columbia Pictures, an established company undergoing modernization, when he was given the responsibility to oversee these new ventures in addition to his regular duties.

Zelnick, part of a small group of business school graduates brought into the industry, playfully recounts that he was chosen because he was perceived as the "least valuable executive" available for the new media role. Despite this, the position was a natural fit for him, given his background as a futurist. His graduate school thesis covered the history of the electronic entertainment business from 1895 to 1983, which uniquely prepared him to anticipate and adapt to technological changes.

This early experience at Columbia Pictures proved crucial for Zelnick's career. It required him to not only foresee future trends but also generate revenue from these emerging technologies. This challenge of blending traditional business with new, technology-driven opportunities became a defining characteristic of his career path, a dynamic he continues to observe with current developments like AI.

Who is the least valuable executive at this company that we can put in charge of new media? And that was me.

Lessons from entertainment history: embrace change

Strauss Zelnick's study of entertainment history reveals a critical insight: businesses must embrace new technologies rather than resist them. Fighting against technological advancements inevitably leads to being left behind, a lesson observed repeatedly throughout history, from the advent of the phonograph to modern media.

A common human trait is the belief that current conditions will persist indefinitely, whether in politics or business. However, Zelnick emphasizes that the present state of play is constantly in flux and will always change. This perspective counters the natural inclination to assume stability, especially in dynamic industries like entertainment.

This understanding directly influenced Zelnick's investment strategy when he founded ZMC. He deliberately avoided acquiring legacy businesses already under pressure, such as the movie business, which he saw as creatively fun but a "terrible business" economically, or deficit network television production, which had highly speculative, lottery-like economics. Instead, the focus was on future-proof opportunities.

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.

Strauss Zelnick's rapid career progression to Vestron and early experience in film production

Strauss Zelnick achieved early career success at Columbia Pictures, where he quickly figured out how to double a division's revenue in just six months. This accomplishment led to him becoming the youngest vice president at Columbia Pictures.

Recognized for his ability to solve problems, Zelnick was recruited to Vestron, which was then the largest independent home entertainment company. Vestron had ambitions to diversify into a full entertainment company, including starting a movie studio, which aligned with Zelnick's personal goals.

Within nine months of joining Vestron, Zelnick became president of the public entertainment company at the age of 29. He took on responsibility for Vestron's new movie division, which, though still in its early stages, began to produce films.

Vestron's primary business was home entertainment distribution, specifically videocassettes. Zelnick's role involved creating movies to be released on videocassettes for rental in video stores, giving him hands-on experience in early film production and distribution.

I became president, so I was now president of a public entertainment company, and I was twenty-nine, three years out of school, was not my expectation.

Hollywood's Wariness of Video Games After the Atari ET Disaster

In the early 1980s, Hollywood developed a strong aversion to video games due to the catastrophic failure of the ET game. Warner Communications, a forward-thinking company, had acquired Atari, a leading video game company at the time known for both hardware and software.

The ET game, based on the hit movie, was rushed into production in just five weeks without sufficient experience in game development, resulting in a terrible game. Adding to the problem, Warner manufactured more cartridges than there were Atari consoles in existence, leading to massive overproduction.

The game was a commercial disaster; it sold poorly, and images of unsold cartridges being plowed into landfills became infamous. The financial fallout was significant, with Warner Communications taking a $400 million write-down in 1982, a substantial sum for the company at that time.

This event profoundly impacted the entertainment industry, creating a widespread perception that video games were a terrible business to be involved with. Hollywood executives became extremely wary of investing in or developing video game ventures for years following this high-profile failure.

Strauss Zelnick's Fox Turnaround and Lessons from Barry Diller

At 32, Strauss Zelnick was recruited as president of 20th Century Fox, a studio struggling in last place at the box office. Joe Roth, the newly appointed chairman, brought Zelnick in after Barry Diller, then CEO of Fox, advised him to hire a business partner. Zelnick, previously president of Vestron, an independent film company, had a reputation for business acumen, including greenlighting "Dirty Dancing."

Zelnick met with Roth, then with Diller and Rupert Murdoch. Murdoch, who was learning the film business at the time, observed mostly in silence, while Diller asked incisive questions. Zelnick accepted the position, becoming responsible for film production and worldwide film and television home entertainment distribution in 1986.

Zelnick worked for Barry Diller for four years, describing the experience as intensely formative. Diller taught him the entertainment business through robust debates, often with a lot of heat. Zelnick learned to stand his ground and argue his points, understanding that Diller's fierce, non-personal approach was always focused on arriving at the right conclusion.

Despite the challenging dynamic, Zelnick embraced the opportunity to learn, acknowledging Diller's expertise. He understood that not backing down in an argument was crucial to his survival and success, and that the intensity was a fundamental part of Diller's dialectic rather than a personal attack.

You know, we argue all the time, Barry and I, and he's right ninety-nine percent of the time, but one percent of the time I'm actually right. So that's how I learned from him.

Rupert Murdoch's Calm Leadership and the Flawed Economics of the Film Industry's Boutique System

Strauss Zelnick recalls Rupert Murdoch's extraordinary calmness during a major financial crisis at News Corp, when the company was highly leveraged after buying Star and faced potential default with 150 banks. Despite being at risk of losing his family's entire business, Murdoch remained focused and unruffled during crucial bank roadshows, ultimately navigating the company through the challenge with a composed demeanor.

Zelnick identified fundamental economic issues within the film industry, particularly after the 1955 consent decree that separated distribution from production. This shift moved the business from a "studio system" to a "boutique system." In a studio system, creative talent is on the company payroll, leading to better cost control.

Conversely, the boutique system, prevalent since the mid-1950s, involves talent auctioning their services for each project. This structure creates a "heads I win, tails you lose" scenario for the studio: if a project succeeds, boutiques extract significant value due to their negotiated deals, but if it flops, the studio bears the entire cost. This makes the underlying economics of the boutique system generally unfavorable for studios, unlike the studio system model seen in video games and historically in recorded music.

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 it just didn't phase him.

Zelnick identifies video games as the modern studio system and takes a massive pay cut for equity.

Strauss Zelnick observed that the film business in the 1990s had inherently poor economics, even for successful studios. He applied a Warren Buffett aphorism, noting that a brilliant management team cannot overcome a fundamentally bad business structure. Zelnick realized his ambition to run a movie studio was better suited for 1927 than 1991.

He identified the video game business as the modern equivalent of the motion picture industry's golden age. Despite the prevailing skepticism due to the Atari disaster, Zelnick believed video games would become a massive and real business, offering superior economic structures compared to contemporary film. He actively studied the nascent industry and recognized its growth potential in the early 90s.

Driven by this conviction, Zelnick proposed to Rupert Murdoch at Fox that they should enter the video game market. While Murdoch was willing to provide capital, he refused to grant Zelnick an equity stake, adhering to his policy of not having partners beyond public shareholders.

Faced with this denial of ownership, Zelnick committed to his vision. He accepted an offer from a pre-revenue video game startup in Silicon Valley, taking a 95% pay cut and relocating his family. His primary motivation was the opportunity to build something new, gain equity, and be at the technological forefront of media and entertainment.

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 nineteen twenty-seven, not a studio in nineteen ninety-one.

Strauss Zelnick faced early entrepreneurial challenges before launching a video game division at BMG.

Strauss Zelnick initially felt unready for entrepreneurship due to a young family and limited financial protection, describing it as being "right in the middle" between having no responsibilities and having full protection. He explained that emotionally, this period was very challenging. His first entrepreneurial venture was leading Crystal Dynamics, a company backed by Kleiner Perkins, where he secured distribution deals and raised capital.

After being recruited to turn around the record company BMG, Zelnick negotiated to start a video game division internally. This strategic move leveraged BMG's existing massive worldwide distribution system, which had physical offices for selling music discs globally. This allowed the new video game division to distribute cartridges and discs without incurring significant additional overhead.

The BMG video game division, led by Jay Moses, focused on external development. It was a "skunkworks project" allocated approximately $40 million, a minor investment compared to BMG's $5 billion annual revenue. Zelnick noted that the economics of video games at the time mirrored those of recorded music and toys, relying on physical sales, strong fourth-quarter performance, and managing messy inventory characteristics of cartridges before the full shift to discs.

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.

Bertelsmann's CEO inadvertently sells the precursor to Grand Theft Auto, creating Take-Two Interactive.

Thomas Middelhoff, the CEO of Bertelsmann, instructed Strauss Zelnick to divest BMG's nascent video game division, deeming it a poor business. Zelnick objected, arguing they had already invested heavily and only needed to distribute the completed titles, but Middelhoff insisted on selling to the highest bidder.

Despite Zelnick's skepticism about finding buyers for a business with games still in production, a small public company with about a $100 million market cap acquired it. BMG received 20% of the buyer's company in stock, valued at $20 million at the time.

Zelnick tried to convince Middelhoff to hold onto the stock, pointing out that $20 million was a mere rounding error compared to Bertelsmann's $5 billion in revenue. Middelhoff, however, ordered the stock to be sold on the open market, which ultimately yielded $14 million.

Just one month after the sale, the public company, which was Take-Two Interactive, launched the first property BMG had completed: Grand Theft Auto. This decision by Bertelsmann's leadership resulted in them missing out on what became one of the most successful media properties globally.

So the name of the public company was Take-Two Interactive, and the first release was Grand Theft Auto.

ZMC's First Deal: The Challenging Turnaround of Columbia Music Entertainment

Zelnick Media Capital (ZMC) began its journey with an incredibly difficult first deal: the acquisition of Columbia Music Entertainment, a Japanese recorded music company. In the early 2000s, the music industry was in turmoil due to digital disruption from Napster, iTunes, and the iPod. Columbia Music had a tiny 0.5% market share, excessive debt, and no current hits, making it a highly undesirable investment.

Zelnick initially refused the deal multiple times, recognizing the company's dire situation. Ripplewood, a capital provider, needed someone to run this problematic company after taking the 'good part' of a two-part entity. Despite Zelnick's repeated rejections and his and partner Ben Feder's analysis confirming the company was 'even worse' than first thought, Ripplewood partner Jeff Hendren persisted, ultimately convincing Zelnick to take on the challenge by highlighting his firm's lack of other immediate engagements.

Motivated by the high stakes—knowing that failure on this initial, large investment would mean the end of ZMC—Zelnick became singularly focused on the turnaround. He leveraged lessons from his past experience, committing to seeing the complex, nine-year process through to completion. The effort was immense, describing it as the 'hardest deal I've ever done in my life.'

Against all odds, ZMC successfully turned the company around, achieving an 'insane' 22% internal rate of return in a collapsing music market. This remarkable success established ZMC's credibility, generated crucial initial income, and provided the capital needed to build a team and pursue further acquisitions, laying the foundation for the firm's future growth.

Because I realized correctly that if someone gave me three hundred million dollars to take over a company and I failed, that would be my last deal.

Zelnick Recalls His Initial Resistance to Carl Icahn's Interest in a Distressed Take-Two Interactive

Strauss Zelnick intentionally cultivated a relationship with Carl Icahn by bringing him investment ideas without seeking payment. This strategy led to an early success with Reader's Digest, where Zelnick's advice helped Icahn make a quick $50 million profit. Icahn's initial lack of familiarity with Zelnick's name underscored the purely transactional nature of their early interactions, which later evolved into Zelnick's team conducting free research for Icahn.

Icahn repeatedly asked Zelnick's team to research Take-Two Interactive, a company Zelnick knew intimately and considered to be in catastrophic condition. At the time, Take-Two's chairman was indicted, and the company faced investigations from four government entities (IRS, SEC, New York DA, and FTC). It hadn't filed financial statements, was losing significant money on $700 million in revenue, and possessed only $50 million in cash, leading Zelnick to project bankruptcy within six months.

Despite the dire assessment, Zelnick's team wrote two separate memos strongly advising Icahn and a friend of Icahn's to "stay away" from Take-Two, highlighting its extreme distress and Zelnick's personal disinterest in the video game sector. His partner, Carl Seidoff, grew increasingly frustrated with doing unpaid research for Wall Street's richest investor.

Even with repeated warnings, Icahn remained interested. His team eventually discovered that Take-Two possessed a plain vanilla, unamended Delaware charter, which allowed a 50.1% shareholder vote to remove the board. This structural vulnerability became mathematically feasible because the company's stock had collapsed and was concentrated among roughly 20 hedge funds, revealing a potential takeover opportunity despite the financial mess.

They're gonna be bankrupt in six months. That's what's going to happen here.

Engineering a No-Capital Hostile Takeover of Take-Two

Facing the challenge of acquiring Take-Two Interactive without the capital for a traditional proxy fight, a team devised an ingenious strategy. They leveraged SEC rules that allowed them to solicit up to ten major shareholders, who collectively held approximately 70% of the company's stock, without triggering public disclosure requirements. By presenting a detailed plan to fix the troubled company, they began securing commitments from these shareholders.

Initially, they secured commitments representing 48% of the stock through written consent. However, they discovered an obscure provision in the company's Delaware charter. This loophole allowed a board change to be enacted by a simple majority vote of shareholders physically present at the annual meeting, without requiring the item to be placed on the agenda in advance. This was critical because they were unable to solicit proxies.

Despite a setback revealing that some committed shares were loaned out to short sellers, reducing their apparent support to 22%, the team proceeded. They formed a group with their committed shareholders, publicly announcing their intentions weeks before the meeting. The incumbent board, being disorganized and poorly advised, had no idea how to respond to this unprecedented tactic. On the day of the meeting, a chance interaction with a representative from Fidelity, a large shareholder typically loyal to management, provided a crucial signal of victory.

The unconventional strategy proved successful. The team was informed of a provisional vote count showing they had secured 88% of the votes present at the meeting. This allowed them to immediately take control, demonstrating how deep research into corporate bylaws and a willingness to exploit obscure procedural advantages can lead to a successful, capital-light hostile takeover.

If you show up at the annual meeting and you don't have to put an item on the agenda in advance, which is unheard of. You can just raise your hand at the meeting and say, 'I want to vote,' 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, doesn't exist, but it did exist here.

Take-Two's Turnaround Strategy Focused on Initial Vendor Cost-Cutting and a Studio System Model

Strauss Zelnick's initial turnaround strategy at Take-Two involved renegotiating contracts with the top ten vendors to achieve immediate cost savings. This approach was chosen specifically to build credibility with the team by demonstrating financial improvements without resorting to layoffs or implementing strict new expense policies that could alienate employees.

The company deliberately avoided immediate, granular expense report scrutiny, recognizing that such actions often drive away valuable staff. Instead, after an initial period of three to six months to understand the business, they would then address the need to "right size the overhead," which often included necessary headcount reductions.

Zelnick applied his long-held ambition to run a 1926-style movie studio to Take-Two, viewing it as an entertainment business focused on creative output. He maintained that this core rubric, which he previously used at Fox, remained consistent and effective for guiding decision-making in the entertainment industry.

I said, "It doesn't. It's the same plan. It's the entertainment business."

Empowering Creative Talent with a Rational Business Approach

Strauss Zelnick emphasizes that the core of the entertainment business is the hitmaker, not the executive. He believes that while executives are replaceable, individuals who consistently create successful products are indispensable. This philosophy guides his approach to building a company that attracts top creative talent.

His pitch to these talented individuals at Take-Two Interactive centers on running a "rational organization." This means granting creative freedom to make the best video games and providing unwavering support. The company commits to a professional environment, free from internal drama, legal issues, or regulatory conflicts, akin to a "grown-up company."

Furthermore, Zelnick promises a solid balance sheet. He acknowledges that failure is inevitable in the entertainment industry, and a strong financial position ensures the company can withstand setbacks and continue to support its creators for future projects. This financial stability is crucial for long-term resilience.

Dealing with highly talented, often disagreeable geniuses, Zelnick states he loves them and genuinely cares for his colleagues. He believes effective leadership requires sincere care for others, treating everyone with respect, and demanding the same in return, fostering a collaborative yet professional environment.

You can replace people like me. You can't replace a hitmaker.

Take-Two's Culture of Rationality and Trust in Creative Talent

Take-Two fosters a professional enterprise culture built on respect, kindness, and a pursuit of excellence, rather than behaving as a "big family." The company has a zero-tolerance policy for bad behavior, ensuring employees are treated with dignity regardless of background. This environment allows for difficult business conversations without taking things personally, and even handling challenging personalities by setting boundaries, such as deleting unpleasant emails from a valuable creative person.

The company emphasizes rationality over long periods, especially crucial in the entertainment business where "magical thinking" can easily lead to poor decisions. This approach means grounding decisions in facts and sound judgment, rather than optimistic assumptions or desires. This commitment to rationality allows Take-Two to make unconventional choices that might seem counterintuitive to others.

This rational and trusting culture was tested significantly when a division head reported that a game, two months from release, was not good enough. The proposed solution was a complete remake, costing an additional $50 million and delaying the launch by another year. This decision was made during a period of limited capital for the company.

Despite the immense cost and delay, management supported the creative team's assessment after thorough due diligence. This non-obvious decision, which few competitors would have made, ultimately led to the game becoming the massively successful title, Borderlands. It exemplifies how truly testing moments reveal the strength of a company's culture and its commitment to creative excellence and long-term vision.

Culture like character is tested in the breach.

The Power of Specific Goal Visualization and Focused Execution

The enduring appeal of games like Grand Theft Auto is not just their content but also their strong social elements, allowing players to connect and offering valuable experiences across all ages. This ranges from children on Roblox to a 90-year-old playing online bridge, demonstrating that gaming is a fundamental and enduring human activity.

Strauss Zelnick emphasizes that success comes from knowing precisely what one wants, distinguishing this from "magical thinking." He believes that "the universe rewards the specific ask and punishes the vague wish" not due to supernatural forces, but because intense, exclusive, and frequent concentration on a clear objective drives consistent action.

Zelnick applied this principle when founding ZMC, setting an ambitious goal to build a $20 billion company. Despite initial skepticism and falling short for years, his persistent focus and willingness to work hard in service of that specific goal ultimately led the company to exceed its target, reaching $40 billion.

This philosophy extends to Take Two Interactive, which operates with a bold mission: to be the number one entertainment company on Earth. This clear, specific mission is supported by a strategy focusing on creativity, innovation, and efficiency, and a culture of seeking excellence, teamwork, and kindness, ensuring all 14,000 employees understand the path forward.

I'm pretty sure it works because the method requires one to concentrate hard, exclusively, and frequently on what one wants.

Zelnick's Service-Oriented Leadership and Value Creation

Strauss Zelnick advises that to succeed, individuals must first clarify their ambitions and then consistently "create more value than they cost." He illustrates this with an example: if an employee earns $125 (salary plus benefits) but only generates $10 in value, it's unsustainable for both the individual's job security and the company's health. This principle emphasizes the critical link between personal output and economic contribution within an organization.

Zelnick also highlights a surprising challenge in mentorship: despite making himself accessible and dedicating significant time to coaching, about half of those he mentors fail to follow up on assigned tasks. He attributes this to people expecting a "magic wand" solution rather than understanding that success requires personal effort and diligent work, rather than shortcuts or mere proximity to successful individuals.

His leadership style is rooted in service, influenced by principles from Dale Carnegie. Zelnick believes a CEO's true role is to set mission, strategy, and culture, and then motivate people to drive daily execution. He genuinely cares about his colleagues at every level, making them feel heard and valued. This authentic interest extends even to casual interactions, reflecting a belief that fostering positive relationships is fundamental, regardless of immediate tangible gain.

This service-oriented approach aligns with the maxim, "Money comes naturally as a result of service." Zelnick applies this by focusing on how he can be of service to others, whether in business interactions or daily life. This philosophy suggests that by consistently adding value and genuinely caring for people, long-term success and opportunities naturally follow.

Money comes naturally as a result of service.

Embracing Personal Evolution and Diverse Leadership Approaches

Strauss Zelnick reflects on a significant personal evolution in his leadership style. He admits that in his early career, he was insecure and overly concerned with how he was perceived, approaching situations from a self-focused perspective. Reading "How to Win Friends and Influence People" at Fox proved to be a life-changing moment, prompting a fundamental shift in his mindset.

This transformation led him away from a self-serving ambition, which he initially masked, towards a service-oriented approach. He began to prioritize being of service to others and truly getting to know his team, rather than simply leveraging them to achieve his own goals. This shift was critical in overcoming anxiety and nearly failing early in his career.

Zelnick stresses that his service-minded approach is not the only path to success, firmly rejecting the idea that "one size fits all" in leadership. He contrasts his style with successful, yet diametrically opposed, leaders like Elon Musk, who has a different view on team camaraderie, and Barry Diller, known for his Socratic method. He acknowledges that these varied styles are also highly effective.

While proud of his own journey, Zelnick recognizes the limitations of his approach, admitting he can sometimes be too soft or support team members longer than he should. This self-awareness reinforces his belief that diverse leadership styles can all lead to significant achievements, and that adapting one's approach to personal strengths and context is key.

I reject the notion that one size fits all in almost anything in life.

Take-Two's CEO Discusses Broad Entertainment and Interactive Media's Dominance

Strauss Zelnick clarifies that Take-Two defines itself as an "entertainment business" rather than strictly a "video game company." He explains that the term "video games" is too narrow to encompass the wide range of experiences, from quick mobile games to expansive titles like Grand Theft Auto 6, which are all forms of entertainment with diverse engagement levels.

Zelnick views all forms of entertainment and information as competing for consumer attention within the "media day," which Activator consultancy estimates to be 13 hours in the US. While acknowledging that playing a video game is a different experience from watching a linear TV show, he emphasizes that they both coexist and vie for a share of this media day.

A key insight is Zelnick's belief that the most valuable new media will be interactive, not passive. He notes that interactive media is growing at roughly double the rate of all other forms combined at the software level. This trend highlights the increasing importance of engaging, interactive experiences in the evolving media landscape, and Take-Two remains open to future diversification into other non-legacy entertainment forms.

the most valuable new media isn't going to be passive, it's going to be interactive.

Take-Two's AI Strategy Focuses on Productivity, Not Creative Hits

Take-Two Interactive actively integrates AI into its operations, deploying enterprise versions of ChatGPT and Claude. The company has over 200 projects dedicated to boosting productivity, efficiency, and innovation across its creative and executive functions. These AI initiatives are managed under CTO Dave Klein, aligning with Take-Two's long-standing identity as a technology company that produces entertainment.

CEO Strauss Zelnick sees AI as highly beneficial for improving efficiency. However, he is skeptical about AI's capability to generate breakthrough creative "hits." Zelnick clarifies that AI, built on large datasets and language models, is inherently backward-looking, processing existing information.

Zelnick argues that true creativity is forward-looking and produces unexpected results. While AI excels at asset creation, such as developing game elements that resemble an existing successful title, it cannot spontaneously create entirely new, non-derivative properties that resonate as "hits." Cloned content, no matter how efficiently produced, typically fails to attract an audience.

Zelnick emphasizes that the real challenge in the gaming industry isn't merely having tools to make games, but creating genuine hits. He notes that despite thousands of mobile games released annually, only a handful achieve success, usually by established companies. Hits are unexpected by nature, a quality that purely data-driven AI struggles to achieve, making asset creation a necessary but insufficient condition for hit creation.

All hits are by their very nature unexpected. Things that are data-driven in their entirety can't be unexpected.