• wildginger@lemmy.myserv.one
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    If you dont think point 3 is a real point, Im curious if you even know what a bridge is.

    Legal obligations to shareholders drastically change the company meaning of profitable.

    • echo64@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      point 3 was suggesting that because tim sweeney holds 51% of the company, he has no obligations to those who invested.

      • wildginger@lemmy.myserv.one
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Its stating that because he owns a majority share, he has the ability to suppress publicly traded short term value inflation in favor of showing other private investors that long term growth is both sustainable and profitable.

        Which, as shown by how completely anti-short term the epic games store is run, is clearly a sales pitch that his other private investors are buying into.

        Which is probably the exact reason they are remaining off the public market

        • echo64@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          This assumes a lot, it assumes a lot about the investment agreements, especially about veto rights

          • wildginger@lemmy.myserv.one
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            No it doesnt.

            It points at the long term focused business decisions, and then points at the private nature of its investors, and says “hey thats a pattern we see a lot with privately owned and invested companies.”