• darq@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    184
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Gamers have gotten quite lucky so far that the company that has been in the position to turn the screws and establish a monopoly has been content to only make gobs of money, instead of trying to make all the money like pretty much every other entertainment industry.

    • WolfhunterGer@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      175
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Yeah, the reason why Valve can do that is that they are not a publicly traded company but a privately owned one. Gabe Newell doesn’t have a fiduciary duty to any shareholders, so they don’t have to squeeze every penny from their users or abuse their quasi monopoly.

      • Molecular0079@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        83
        ·
        1 year ago

        The whole idea of investments always going up is an absurd idea that needs to go. At this point I infinitely prefer a private company over a publicly traded one.

        • LwL@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          16
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s a bit of an inherent issue sadly, if your goal is to multiply money why would you invest in a company whose profits stay the same over one whose go up? And you have no reason to care if the company eventually dies as a result, you just move your money into the next one.

          And most people investing money will be doing so with the only purpose of multiplying that money, as it’s mostly banks and similar institutions. In theory if the main investors of a company want it to prioritize user experience over profits, the companies’ duty to its shareholders would also be to ensure good user experience. But that’s never going to happen.

        • ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s not even an “idea”. They legally have to do whatever they can to make it go up. It’s idiotic and poisonous.

      • joelfromaus@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        If Gabe ever leaves Valve and the powers that be decide to go public I hope it’s done in a way that gives power to the users instead of faceless investment firms. I don’t even know what that would look like but I fear the day that Valve comes under control of an ex-AAA game company CEO or the like.

        • Gamey@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          25
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I wish something like that existed, once you go public you are obligated to grow and that has limits so you always end up squeezing your users! :/

          • ALostInquirer@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            16
            ·
            1 year ago

            Perhaps a transition to a not-for-profit organization structure might be what folks would prefer? It seems like a potentially better alternative than going public, but I’m not sure how it might work in practice for something like a digital storefront.

            In a weird way, one could almost argue that’s roughly how Valve’s been operating anyway, except I imagine they’ve been lining their pockets more than a not-for-profit organization’s owners/employees do.

            • Gamey@feddit.de
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              14
              ·
              1 year ago

              I bet they make a shit ton of money but they certainly seem to reinvest enough of it too. There is a interesting concept called purpose companies here in Europe but it’s not especially wide spread or planned by regulators so the transition is extremly complicated and expensive. The search engine Ecosia is a relatively well known one, it’s basically a company in self ownership where no one from outside can become CEO and no one can sell or go public, they are obligated to their chosen purpose and that’s where their profits go (in the case of Ecosia that’s planting trees), not sure how it works exactly or if it’s doable in the USA at all tho.

          • aksdb@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            We should do this in the food industrie. Then I would become a steakholder.

        • Vespair@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          Bro what do you think those Steam levels and experience are for? Obviously they’re gonna divest the company across the playerbase and divvy it up based on Steam levels!

          /s

        • Trainguyrom@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          One of the big reasons many companies go public is it’s naturally a really nice retirement package for the owners of the company. The owners of the company may have put so much time and money into building the company that they don’t have sufficient retirement savings, so by going public they turn a portion of their ownership into a boatload of cash as well as a boatload of wealth that can be leveraged, then simply elect a new CEO, retain their significant voting power on the board so they aren’t entirely abandoning their baby and then peace out

    • Vespair@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      Yeah I’m not really to call Valve a good guy company, but I might be willing to call them the least bad company