• SorteKaninA
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    368
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    10 months ago

    It’s called “being privately owned” or “not having to suck up to shareholders”

    • Jackiedoodle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      160
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Yup hit the nail on the head. Not only can he make decisions that are risky that don’t pay off he is also 100 percent legally in his right to make decisions that lose the company money. If he feels it pushes the industry in the right direction.

        • Riley@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          Doubled their revenue? I think you’re severely underestimating how much money Steam pulls in yearly if you think ~2 million Steam Decks are that much of a percentage of it.

          • Fushuan [he/him]@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            11
            ·
            10 months ago

            They weren’t talking about deck sales, they meant the games that the new deck users that didn’t own a gaming PC bought from steam. Idk if that holds true but that’s what they meant.

    • Socsa@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      56
      ·
      10 months ago

      Valve also has a very unique organizational structure where engineers manage themselves and pretty much all decisions are handled by horizontal committees.

    • Wrench@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      34
      ·
      10 months ago

      Costco is a public company, and their CEO just pushes back whenever investors ask why they don’t increase the membership fee or prices on staple goods.

      His answer is consistently “because we don’t need to”

      There’s definitely room for companies to have responsible growth. It’s just that most execs don’t care enough and just want a giant payday in the form of short term gains so they can do it again at another company.

      • nomous@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        10 months ago

        It seems like no publicly traded C-suite cares about a brand anymore. Even though building a loyal userbase and delivering a consistent good product is essentially a long-term cash machine, they all just want the short-term growth and quarterly profit.

        • Tinidril@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          10 months ago

          I’ve given up on brands. It used to be that brand meant something, but most of the solid brands have been bought out and turned to crap for a quick buck now.

    • Vilian@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      epic are also private, the difference is that Gabe aren’t a dubmass CEO, now epic…

      • frezik@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        10 months ago

        That’s the facet people miss. Being privately owned gives you the opportunity to make better decisions. Doesn’t mean they’ll actually happen.

    • runjun@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      10 months ago

      I say this every time this comes up but if valve changes CEOs or talks about going public then run.