• gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    40
    ·
    2 days ago

    Yeah, the day Gabe leaves is going to be a sad day for gaming, because Steam is probably gonna get real shitty real quick. I’m sure some finance-minded jackasses will do their best to maximize short-term profit and fly the whole ecosystem into the ground at Mach 3.

    • Almacca@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 days ago

      As long as it remains privately owned, it should be OK. The day shares go public, god forbid, will be the beginning of the end.

      • Kairos@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        29
        ·
        2 days ago

        Thats not true. Privately owned firms tend to be really bad because they don’t have a feduciary duty to long term value. They suck everything dry. Private equity is the reason why daycare costs so much yet the daycare workers make minimum wage.

        Steam just happens to be fine under private ownership because it makes enough profit for Gabe to be satisfied.

        • Tollana1234567@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          3 hours ago

          Thats PE firms, not the same as private owned companies. THERE WAS only one istance of a hybrid of PE and private owned sitaution, SEARS.

        • cardfire@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          20 hours ago

          Gross oversimplification of Private vs Public. We are really taking about three kinds of ownership models, if arguing in good faith.

          1. The people that are invested in the company, usually the people that built it, are at the helm.

          2. The people that built it took a payout from Private Equity who now have ownership stake, and who now set the growth agenda.

          3. The compant is now public, and given to the irrational whims if the ENTIRE marketplace, while at the same time primarily being at the whims of the board and the largest few investor stakeholders.

          Steam has largely existed exclusively in the first category. So have most of the oldest businesses in the planet, which are often family-owned and maintained operations across generations.

          • Kairos@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            9
            ·
            2 days ago

            The first sentence

            When you choose a software vendor, do you question how the company is financed? Should that be part of your evaluation?

            This article seems to be about the ethos of private equity. Legally they’re nearly identical.

            • Caveman@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              22 hours ago

              Private equity is commonly referring to “owned by a private equity fund” like Blackrock. It often involves extracting unhealthy amount of short term profit to make the numbers look better then sell the business so they can record a profit.

                • Caveman@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  5 hours ago

                  … and Gabe N owns more than 50% so it’s not really the same as owned by Blackrock. It’s still a founder owned and operated company.

                  • Kairos@lemmy.today
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    4 hours ago

                    Yes. And it could end up being sold to an entity such as blackrock and still be “privately owned”

              • Kairos@lemmy.today
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                12 hours ago

                Holy fucking shit Lemmy is becoming like Reddit. Can you guys learn to think please. This whole thing stated because I replied to this message

                As long as it remains privately owned, it should be OK. The day shares go public, god forbid, will be the beginning of the end.

                With something “that’s not true because private equity is bad and that’s still privately owned” and you all act like I said that all private ownership is identical to private equity.

                This is a very plausable thing that can happen to Steam. Doesn’t Gabe not have kids?

                Like what the fuck?? Am I going insane? Am I dreaming?

                • Almacca@aussie.zone
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  11 hours ago

                  Am I going insane?

                  I’m not ruling it out ;⁠)

                  Getting bought out by a private equity firm would be pretty dire for them as that never ends well, but that’s not what I was talking about and I thought that was pretty clear, but you responded as though it was. ‘Legally’ they may be the same, but they’re functionally very different, as the article I linked pointed out, but you chose to keep digging.

                  Whatever. You’re right. Have a cookie.

                  • Kairos@lemmy.today
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    10 hours ago

                    ‘Legally’ they may be the same, but they’re functionally very different

                    Yes that’s what I said.

        • mnemonicmonkeys@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          21 hours ago

          Privately owned firms tend to be really bad because they don’t have a feduciary duty to long term value.

          Neither do publicly traded companies. All they are required to do is make money for shareholders, and most of them push for short-term value

          • Kairos@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            12 hours ago

            The profits are taken away from the trading price, yes

            Although it still helps the long term price

        • AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          Privately owned firms tend to be really bad because they don’t have a feduciary duty to long term value

          You say that as if publicly traded firms do