Well there is more potential money in mobile than console, so I suppose it makes sense.

Why are people complaining about Season Passes? I don't get that. You never, ever have to buy one. It's completely optional.

Well they don't want to but they need to so they can make $$$.

People complain when they feel like the price is too high relative to what the season pass provides, or if the season pass contains things that the main game should have had (such as more maps or a campaign in the new Star Wars game).

EA is especially guilty of trimming content from their main releases and selling it back in a season pass, so it's really strange that their CFO is talking about not wanting to nickel and dime gamers. 

Note, that he is not saying that they won't do it anymore or even that they don't want to do it anymore, just that it shouldn't 'feel like' nikel and diming to the consumer.

As much flag as EA gets for this, PVZ2 is actually a positive example for F2P on mobile. You can play the whole game without feeling the need to buy something or feeling as if the game is purposefully slowing you down if you don't pay.

And horses have wings and can fly.

No, they rather sell two emoticons for Star Wars Battlefront for $10 US / $20 AUD.

We don't know what's in the season pass, so complaining about the value now makes little sense.  As for the content, I can understand complaining about individual DLC but a season pass is just an item of convenience for those who will buy all the DLC regardless.  Everyone else is free to pick and choose or not buy any DLC at all.  Personally, I'd never buy a season pass unless it's heavily discounted, as I only buy DLC that interests me.  I'm very selective but I have no problem with those who are not.

I think they are just trying to find a way to justify their new model of cutting content and then selling that content as season passes or DLC. personally I find this as bad if not worse than micro transactions as it is deceptive as you find you have purchased half a game.