Just realized a major reason why Co-Ops threaten the status quo of corporate entities in the sphere of 3rd Party game publishing (Activision-Blizzard, Electronic Arts, etc), and it's not just the most immediately obvious concept of "Workers quit working at a bad company."
Because even if their staff don't speak up (And a fair few of them can't either due to not having the financial stability or knowledge to do so), the publishers have locked themselves into a particular business pattern.
1: Make a game with absolutely no holds barred on the shit you put the team through to get it done. Put them under NDAs so they can't talk about the experience until they're done.
2: Fire half of them. Pay hush money as bonuses to further ensure a lack of negative press until it's all over and done with. Report remainder of fiscal earnings as net gain to investors.
3: Get more investors. Use that money to buy more companies by convincing the fraction of the people who make decisions for the majority there with enough money to sell.
4: Redistribute workers amongst projects for the next game to dissolve any potential companionship. Give the CEO of the bought company a golden parachute as needed.
Step 3 is the part I want to emphasize because it's the reason this is all able to work. A major reason they are able to sustain this is because they can use developers like batteries and toss them out because they only had to convince a small fraction of them to sell the souls of everyone on the team and start the process over again. This is the REAL step one, but the typical process one has in their head when it comes to producing a thing hides it from view unless you know how the business works.
A Co-Op, on the other hand, is joint-owned by every single person there. They all decide what to work on and what financial decisions to make for the company at large.
And a publisher, assuming the co-op would ever sell, would thus need to wave around that original figure that bought you a normal company, multiplied by however many people are in the company, plus the salary they would need to put up with the horsecrap they know you'll pull because the concept of the co-op was made in response to this, because at that point all you would be buying would be the IPs with none of the names attached, which is already a hot button issue.
Now they do still hire for positions normally... but from what i've seen, and the frequency with which it happens, a majority of their workforce at this point is gained exclusively through buyouts because it's just the most efficient method as opposed to having to manually enter someone into the system and assign them somewhere.
If more co-ops happen, the companies they can reasonably buy out go down. As those go down, so do staff they can treat as resources. And as staff is maintained, fiscal earnings are no longer able to be gerrymandered into something resembling investor growth.
Co-ops threaten them not just because it gives their victims hope to thrive without them, it can starve them of new victims entirely by making their previous source of bodies immune to their horseshit. Not just "Quit working at bad company", but "Never have to work at it to start with."
And after that point, they are at the final crossroad of any company stuck in a new business climate; "Evolve or die". Either they collapse in on themselves and liquidate assets, or they actually resolve to treat their workers with some fucking respect and accept thaPffahahahahaha no the publishers would literally rather starve lets be honest.