Another day, Another Rumor of Valve being Acquired

[Zarathustra[H]]

The latest rumor is that Microsoft is putting together a $16B offer to acquire Valve.

Seems like a stretch to me. And $16b seems a little small considering Valves presumed revenues and profit margins (but we don't know them for sure, considering they are privately held)

 

[Armenius]

It is based on one idiot's post on X. I wouldn't even classify that as a rumor.

 

[sharknice]

I'm not sure I believe this rumor, but it was pretty clear to me Microsoft planned to buy Valve when they started putting their games on Steam.

Gabe seems like the kind of guy that probably won't sell and they'll have to wait until he dies. He has enough money and doesn't really seem interested in anything beyond Valve. But who knows, he isn't a super outgoing guy that makes all his views public.

 

[LukeTbk]

This would be such a giant battle to pass (and would probably not pass, if something that is barely relevant like microsoft having Activision and that could mean some game not being on PlayStation was an issue to some legislator.... imagine something actually relevant like the main selling platform in the world). It is certain Microsoft is running a with the current world governance, would this have any change to pass ? and would be interested if so, but I doubt with the current white house that the answer is yes.

Steam not being that successful at everything else is probably a good think, we are lucky to have the giant selling platform being almost only this, steam OS becoming the norm being something really similar to Microsoft buying steam in a way.

The good think about this would be the Xbox that play pc game having way more chance to happen, know that they would know that they can undersell them and still get money back via game sales....

Having been always private I am not sure about valuation number being throw around, 3 billion gross operating income from sales, market leader, IP-brand (counter strike-halflife, some hardware name brand recon ignition, etc... hard to put a price on that when you do not have too)

 

[Prince Valiant]

Unless Valve's margins are terrible an offer like this would be insulting.

 

[sc5mu93]

Outside of the idiocy of the dollar amount, anti trust wouldn’t allow this to happen. Especially after actibliz

 

[LukeTbk]

Unless Valve's margins are terrible an offer like this would be insulting.

For recent reference
Linked: 26 billions
Skype: 8.5 billions (in 2011, that 11.85 billions today)

Those companies were not making profit at the time (or much revenues).

google bought fitbit, the simplest of accelerometer in a wrist band affaire 2.1 billion.

Now we leave in a world where government are so anti-everything that they stopped Amazon buying Roomba (could you think of a more inconsequential irrelevant matter for them to care about).... EU better having nothing to do with this move... Adobe could not get Figma based on possible future theorical business Figma could have made.

 

[Lakados]

I'm not sure I believe this rumor, but it was pretty clear to me Microsoft planned to buy Valve when they started putting their games on Steam.

Gabe seems like the kind of guy that probably won't sell and they'll have to wait until he dies. He has enough money and doesn't really seem interested in anything beyond Valve. But who knows, he isn't a super outgoing guy that makes all his views public.

That said, Gabe currently owns something around 25% of Valve, so Microsoft just needs to make an offer the remaining 75% doesn’t want to refuse.
But if Microsoft purchased Valve that would put a massive spotlight on them, I am not sure that would get approved, the EA thing was tricky enough, toss Valve in there and oof, the pushback on that… Not sure it would be worth the effort.

Microsoft would be far better off turning the next XBox into something that can run Steam and have games purchased from Steam installed, release the XBox with a stripped down Windows install that basically has access to the various game publisher services. Just turn the XBox into a budget gaming PC and run with it.
Hell follow it up by porting over an official emulator for the older XBox consoles and start doing the whole Nintendo virtual console thing, tie it in with Game Pass and watch the subscriptions roll in.

 

[Lakados]

Unless Valve's margins are terrible an offer like this would be insulting.

Valve is currently valued around $8B, so a $16B offer is basically double, which is pretty good.

 

[LukeTbk]

Valve is currently valued around $8B, so a $16B offer is basically double, which is pretty good.

For never been for sales, random guy evaluation can be thrown around a bit willy nilly too.

Gabe currently owns something around 25% of Valve,

Voting right can be often disproportional for founder owner with different class of stock, Brin and Page voting power is much bigger than their ownership I think, they own share that have 10 votes each and together they have over > 50% control despite having like 10% of the company.

Gabe could easily have 60+% of the votes with 25% of the ownership ? I imagine actual ownership table and vote count for private company are not actually known ?

 

[DouglasteR]

Lord Gaben don´t even consider this possibility.

He (and the core Valve team) knows that they are one of the industry finest (alas not that speedy).

 

[Comixbooks]

Steam is like a uncensored Discord channel. If Microsoft acquires it I suspect alot of games would get removed.

 

[DukenukemX]

If Microsoft were to acquire Valve then it would be the end of PC gaming as we know it. I'd even go so far to say that it would be the end of Linux as we know it. Microsoft would try to merge Steam into Xbox, and therefore into the Windows store. Valve also contributes a lot to Linux, which likely just end the moment Microsoft acquires them. Valve is probably the reason why Linux is viable today. They're responsible for Vulkan on Intel and helped make RADV for AMD. Donated so much code to the Linux kernel. They made ACO for AMD. I would even say that without Valve you wouldn't want AMD over Nvidia on Linux. Microsoft would put an end to all of it. I'm sure Microsoft has offered to buy Valve but I'm hopeful the government would deny it. If Gabe Newell were to die, the person who takes his place would take $16B and run.

 

[LukeTbk]

Microsoft would try to merge Steam into Xbox, and therefore into the Windows store

Depend what you mean by merge, Steam is so much bigger and monetizable than the window store and has a lot of non-store feature.

When they bought Skype, MSN messenger was merged into Skype not the other way around for an example. Losing the Steam brand would be a big decision.

I'm sure Microsoft has offered to buy Valve but I'm hopeful the government would deny it.

With the current EU and Whitehouse, that almost impossible to pass.

 

[SeymourGore]

Not even Wccftech has touched this rumor, so I've got my doubts.

 

[bigdogchris]

Valve is currently valued around $8B, so a $16B offer is basically double, which is pretty good.

IMO the price should be 10x what the companies profits will be to consider selling.

 

[Zarathustra[H]]

Valve is currently valued around $8B, so a $16B offer is basically double, which is pretty good.

Considering they are privately held and don't report transparent sales or other revenue figures, how would anyone even arrive at a valuation?

Last numbers I can find for revenue suggests $13B in 2022, and they have certainly grown since. But we can't even know if those numbers are accurate.

Rumor has it (again, because we don't have detailed data) that annual revenues from Counter-Strike loot boxes alone are in the several millions annually...

Of course, as little data s we have about their actual revenues, we have even less data about what their bottom line looks like after all expenses have been paid.

I guess if this is realistic or not comes down to what Gaben wants. I understand he owns a significant portion of the shares (~25%?) and has significant pull with what adds up to a majority of shareholders.

He has always been a kind of "fuck the establishment" kind of guy, and he has already earned his "fuck off" money many times over. It is difficult to picture him just being OK with selling to Microsoft of all companies, especially since he has previously identified them as part of the problem, in their attempts to push Linux as a gaming platform, to reduce the dominance of Windows.

What would be in it for him? An increased liquid asset personal wealth statement over his already "god status" wealth?

I tend to assume he is more in it for legacy than for additional money at this point. Any additional money would change his life very little, so why not protect his legacy and his baby instead? I mean, it can be difficult to stand on principle when you don't have wealth, and selling out can bring that wealth, but he already has the wealth, and has always seemingly been somewhat of a principled guy, so if he were to sell, selling to Microsoft of all businesses seems kind of unlikely to me.

I mean, maybe if he has health issues (which - lets face it - he doesn't exactly come across as the healthiest looking dude, he likely suffers from some combination of type II diabetes and/or heart disease) it might convince him to get out, or at the very least think about a worthy succession plan.

Who knows.


From Microsoft's perspective - in addition to the obvious desire for more game sales market share - this could also be a move to kill (or at least reduce the threat of) Proton, such that they can protect Windows as the one and only computer gaming OS platform. That would be a sad outcome of all this if it happens. (And it may even have anti-trust implications)

 

[LukeTbk]

IMO the price should be 10x what the companies profits will be to consider selling.

That would be low for a growing one with strategic synergy for the buyer.

Last numbers I can find for revenue suggests $13B in 2022, and they have certainly grown since. But we can't even know if those numbers are accurate.

2021-2022 covid years could have been their best until 2030, they estimated sales (like you say we have known nothing) jumped like crazy. Would not be surprising if it dropped a lot in 2023 and starting back to grow from there.

 

[EchtoGammut]

I was curious what estimates were for Valve's value and I feel dumber having read those reports. The Bloomberg report, which is the origin of the $6.9B valuation literally makes no sense. They are saying Valve is worth roughly 2/3rds it's average annual revenue. Once Bloomberg published that every other report just updated itself to reflect that valuation.

There is no way, the government would allow a Microsoft/Valve merger and Microsoft is smart enough to not even spark rumors of such talks as the government would be breathing down their neck.

 

[Lakados]

Considering they are privately held and don't report transparent sales or other revenue figures, how would anyone even arrive at a valuation?

Last numbers I can find for revenue suggests $13B in 2022, and they have certainly grown since. But we can't even know if those numbers are accurate.

Rumor has it (again, because we don't have detailed data) that annual revenues from Counter-Strike loot boxes alone are in the several millions annually...

Of course, as little data s we have about their actual revenues, we have even less data about what their bottom line looks like after all expenses have been paid.

I guess if this is realistic or not comes down to what Gaben wants. I understand he owns a significant portion of the shares (~25%?) and has significant pull with what adds up to a majority of shareholders.

He has always been a kind of "fuck the establishment" kind of guy, and he has already earned his "fuck off" money many times over. It is difficult to picture him just being OK with selling to Microsoft of all companies, especially since he has previously identified them as part of the problem, in their attempts to push Linux as a gaming platform, to reduce the dominance of Windows.

What would be in it for him? An increased liquid asset personal wealth statement over his already "god status" wealth?

I tend to assume he is more in it for legacy than for additional money at this point. Any additional money would change his life very little, so why not protect his legacy and his baby instead? I mean, it can be difficult to stand on principle when you don't have wealth, and selling out can bring that wealth, but he already has the wealth, and has always seemingly been somewhat of a principled guy, so if he were to sell, selling to Microsoft of all businesses seems kind of unlikely to me.

I mean, maybe if he has health issues (which - lets face it - he doesn't exactly come across as the healthiest looking dude, he likely suffers from some combination of type II diabetes and/or heart disease) it might convince him to get out, or at the very least think about a worthy succession plan.

Who knows.


From Microsoft's perspective - in addition to the obvious desire for more game sales market share - this could also be a move to kill (or at least reduce the threat of) Proton, such that they can protect Windows as the one and only computer gaming OS platform. That would be a sad outcome of all this if it happens. (And it may even have anti-trust implications)

Yeah, Bloomberg and their $8M is probably conservative at best, but the likelihood of it being allowed to even proceed is so low Microsoft could up that number to $32B and it wouldn't make a difference.
Valve makes up something like 80% of the PC gaming sales, toss in the figures done by the Activision Blizzard store as well as the Microsoft store and they are well into the Monopoly area, that deal would get regulated so hard that even if they owned it they would have to spin it off into a legally distinct entity, which lands them exactly where they are now without dropping the money on it.
Microsoft would be far better working with Valve to build a Windows version for Consoles or dedicated Gaming PC, that could then install Steam as well as the other stores of course, or god forbid, Microsoft rolls out the DX libraries for Linux.... But I have a better chance of buying Microsoft and turning it Private and ordering it myself than I do seeing Microsoft do that on its own.
Though maybe if Microsoft were to release a stripped-down Windows OS for consoles, that could be run inside a VM, just need some fine-tuning with Discrete Device Assignments and your off to the races.

 

[nthexwn]

Outside of the idiocy of the dollar amount, anti trust wouldn’t allow this to happen. Especially after actibliz

Maybe I haven't been paying close enough attention, but it seems like every company is merging/acquiring every other company these days and the politicians are all too paid off to care. Do anti-trust laws actually do anything anymore? Do you have any examples of them working in recent history? I'm not even being sarcastic here. That would be very reassuring to see.

 

[LukeTbk]

Maybe I haven't been paying close enough attention, but it seems like every company is merging/acquiring every other company these days and the politicians are all too paid off to care. Do anti-trust laws actually do anything anymore? Do you have any examples of them working in recent history? I'm not even being sarcastic here. That would be very reassuring to see.

We leave in the opposite, every merging-acquisition are extremelly long battle.

Amazon was not able to buy the Roomba to give an idea of how ridiculously anti acquisition government around the world are, it is the easiest populism and obviously the company that do not want the acquisition to happen can also buy government to stop it, see Sony with Activision acquisition of Microsoft.

Adobe was not able to acquire Figma, even just the least important of things that exist we can think video game, microsoft had to battle for getting Activision. Company almost do not try to do it, use stock cashback or sleep on mountain of cash instead because how complicated it became (when did Apple made its last over 10 billions acquisition ?) Something has small and irrelavant has Beats electronic was their biggest ever.

Look at the pretzel Microsoft did with OpenAI to avoid doing an acquisition.

 

[Zarathustra[H]]

We leave in the opposite, every merging-acquisition are extremelly long battle.

Amazon was not able to buy the Roomba to give an idea of how ridiculously anti acquisition government around the world are, it is the easiest populism and obviously the company that do not want the acquisition to happen can also buy government to stop it, see Sony with Activision acquisition of Microsoft.

Adobe was not able to acquire Figma, even just the least important of things that exist we can think video game, microsoft had to battle for getting Activision. Company almost do not try to do it, use stock cashback or sleep on mountain of cash instead because how complicated it became (when did Apple made its last over 10 billions acquisition ?) Something has small and irrelavant has Beats electronic was their biggest ever.

Look at the pretzel Microsoft did with OpenAI to avoid doing an acquisition.

I think the Nvidia ARM acquisition was a good recent example as well.

Unlike the tone I am detecting from you - however - I wouldn't mind regulators pursuing this stuff MUCH harder though. For consumers not to be hurt every industry needs 3-5 viable competitors, and we are hopelessly behind in that goal.

I'd be breaking every single company in every single industry up until we reach that competitive goal. Name me a market (or even a small market segment) where there are not 3-5 viable competitors, and it is time to mercilessly bring out the meat cleaver and go all "Ma Bell" on their asses.

I wouldn't even back off from mini-niche market segments. Sellers need to face strong competition in every market they serve, or they should not be allowed to exist. No more cash cows or carved out niche segments. If you can with words express a market segment that any one company dominates, it's time to slash them.

Only then can we have free market capitalism.

 

[LukeTbk]

For consumers not to be hurt every industry needs 3-5 viable competitors, and we are hopelessly behind in that goal.

This is in general a misunderstanding, were consumer by Bell monopoly ? or Bell Labs was one of the best things ever for them ? Does a phone company fighting quarter by quarter for it survival get to work to come up with Unix, make new laser, photocell etc...

Any consumer hurt by google/youtube ? Seem to work incredibly well for them. Lot of time it make it easier for consumer to have everything integrated by a giant.

No more cash cows

cash cow give us Bell Labs and today: https://blog.google/technology/ai/google-deepmind-isomorphic-alphafold-3-ai-model/

Giant corporation that make so much money and so comfortable they can spend on project that are likely to fail and if they work will not turn a profit in 10-20-30 years have disadvantage and people have reason to try to break them, but obviously have a lot of advantage has well.

There a way too easy, monopoly = bad, giant = bad, it is way more gray than that.

 

[Zarathustra[H]]

This is in general a misunderstanding, were consumer by Bell monopoly ? or Bell Labs was one of the best things ever for them ? Does a phone company fighting quarter by quarter for it survival get to work to come up with Unix, make new laser, photocell etc...

Well, I mean, consumers had to pay an arm and a leg for phone service. They could not even own their own phone, the only way to get one was to rent it (at an expensive fee) from Bell. Long distance service was particularly pricy, just to name a few.

Yes, consumer were hurt pretty badly by the Bell Labs monopoly. That doesn't mean that everything Bell Labs did was bad. They came up with some pretty neat things as well, as noted, but one could argue that in the post Bell Labs split up innovation has increased in pace by orders of magnitude compared to before the breakup.

Any consumer hurt by google/youtube ? Seem to work incredibly well for them. Lot of time it make it easier for consumer to have everything integrated by a giant.

Depends on who you consider the customer. Viewers are frustrated that they see too many ads. They could go to another competiung service with fewer ads, but there really aren't many real alternatives (save for a few small attempts that haven't taken off. There hasnt been much of an alternative since Google Video shut down after they acquired Youtube.

Also, if you ask content producers they are livid at how they keep being pressed by Google making it more and more difficult to earn atheir income, and how they can unceremoniously be shut down. Again, if they had good alternatives, Google may be forced to improve, but they don't really.

Advertisers also can feel constrained by their choices when it comes to finding consumers with ads, since Google dominates so much of the online ad industry.

So yea, I'd say Google/YouTube customers are definitely being harmed.

cash cow give us Bell Labs and today: https://blog.google/technology/ai/google-deepmind-isomorphic-alphafold-3-ai-model/

Giant corporation that make so much money and so comfortable they can spend on project that are likely to fail and if they work will not turn a profit in 10-20-30 years have disadvantage and people have reason to try to break them, but obviously have a lot of advantage has well.

There a way too easy, monopoly = bad, giant = bad, it is way more gray than that.

The key is that everyone - no matter if they are consumers or B2B customers need to have alternative sources for everything, such that if they don't like the service they can choose something else. Every industry needs 3-5 choices to avoid monopolistic behaviors that inevitably harm customers.

 

[LukeTbk]

So yea, I'd say Google/YouTube customers are definitely being harmed.

You can never say iif it is as a whole the case, you can find downside, but say the ads, having less ads compete with the content creator revenues which compete with the quality of content being made that the consumer envoy, this is what is meant by simple view of one of the most complicated question that exist.

Did Unix, C programming language, Laser and so on ended up being has a whole benefit than higher than otherwise long distance call ?

The key is that everyone - no matter if they are consumers or B2B customers need to have alternative sources for everything, such that if they don't like the service they can choose something else. Every industry needs 3-5 choices to avoid monopolistic behaviors that inevitably harm customers.

It is almost never about actual absence of alternative these (and never for the M&A being stopped being talked about)

Take Space X, it is getting higher than Google search level of hold on space launch market, would it be good for their clients for a goverment to break them and remove the best option to launch stuff in space to humanity ? Maybe, but that purely a guess than a return to competition among the 10 way worst alternative that exist and would pop-up would be worth the years or lesser space launch we create and a pure guess that they end up with something better than SpaceX that continue to cook.

In a lot of case incentive to still get better so people consume more of your product still exist, unlike some market like food, making near monopoly less bad, can be good to let them cook and be sure they got stale before we act.

And in tech right now, by the time procedure would have gone thought what people thought was a monopoly with a stronghold would have already change, not so long ago the biggest duopoly ever of humanity was facebook-google on new digital ads spending it was like 90% of the planet marketshare, now you have tiktok, netflix, amazon, disney, airbnb, uber, microsoft, apple, the market shifted fast and continue.

Google monopoly on search is possible shifting, them forced to add AI resume more and more and shift the cash cow, without state intervention.

 

[DukenukemX]

Depend what you mean by merge, Steam is so much bigger and monetizable than the window store and has a lot of non-store feature.

Microsoft could just redirect game purchases to the Microsoft Store. Microsoft doesn't care to maintain Steam. They just want to use it to uplift their App Store.

When they bought Skype, MSN messenger was merged into Skype not the other way around for an example. Losing the Steam brand would be a big decision.

Steam is Microsoft's worst enemy right now. Steam is why Xbox failed and why Linux is considered a viable alternative to Windows. The $16 Billion Microsoft wants to spend is to end their competition, and not to sustain it. I don't think people understand how much Valve has thwarted Microsoft.

With the current EU and Whitehouse, that almost impossible to pass.

One thing I've learned about the US recently is that it's fully corrupt. If you got lobby money then anything goes. I don't think Microsoft had any business acquiring ZeniMax but it still happened. Same goes for Activision/Blizzard. They will most certainly dismantle and shut down Valve over time. Plus side is we'll probably see Half Life 3 and Portal 3. The downside is they'll be bad games for certain.

 

[Comixbooks]

Fake some kid on Twitter spread the Rumor nammed Dior. This guy I work said they wanted to buy Ninendo in 2020 if you remember that.

 

[Twisted Kidney]

$16B? For Valve!?

Yeah, no. I think you still aren't there if you square that.

 

[SamuelL421]

This rumor is nonsense - not just because it’s wccftech and some random bot on twitter. $16B is laughably low for Valve. That’s crazy to consider, but think about that purchase of Activison/Blizzard. Their annual revenue was around 8B in 2021 and that was before half of their recent, terrible decisions. Valve (supposedly) had revenue of 13B in 2021, they own PC gaming in every sense of the word, and they aren’t a tarnished brand / hated by consumers. They don’t have many tangible assets compared to a lot of bigger gaming companies, but Valve is the gatekeeper to all success in the PC gaming space. I think a real offer for Valve would be closer to $160B than 16B.

 

[Lakados]

This rumor is nonsense - not just because it’s wccftech and some random bot on twitter. $16B is laughably low for Valve. That’s crazy to consider, but think about that purchase of Activison/Blizzard. Their annual revenue was around 8B in 2021 and that was before half of their recent, terrible decisions. Valve (supposedly) had revenue of 13B in 2021, they own PC gaming in every sense of the word, and they aren’t a tarnished brand / hated by consumers. They don’t have many tangible assets compared to a lot of bigger gaming companies, but Valve is the gatekeeper to all success in the PC gaming space. I think a real offer for Valve would be closer to $160B than 16B.

Well revenue is one thing, but what does Valve pay out to developers from that revenue? If Valve does only skim their 20% off the top and assume some 1.5B in first party lootboxes and such then you are looking at less than $3B left for them to cover all the costs of running steam.
Which given what information was handed out in the Apple-Epic lawsuits could easily be half that in upkeep and processing.

 

[SamuelL421]

Well revenue is one thing, but what does Valve pay out to developers from that revenue? If Valve does only skim their 20% off the top and assume some 1.5B in first party lootboxes and such then you are looking at less than $3B left for them to cover all the costs of running steam.
Which given what information was handed out in the Apple-Epic lawsuits could easily be half that in upkeep and processing.

Agreed, though I still think their real value is in effectively owning the PC gaming industry. Valve has every PC developer and publisher by the balls. Count us all fortunate that Valve/Gabe is a benevolent dictator . I’d wager that degree of influence over the industry is worth a lot more than $16B to some.

 

[Lakados]

Agreed, though I still think their real value is in effectively owning the PC gaming industry. Valve has every PC developer and publisher by the balls. Count us all fortunate that Valve/Gabe is a benevolent dictator . I’d wager that degree of influence over the industry is worth a lot more than $16B to some.

Yeah for sure it’s easily one of those “they are a monopoly but they haven’t abused their position as a monopoly” situations..

Microsoft doesn’t get that same benefit of the doubt as they have routinely abused their position.

 

[vegeta535]

What they paid for Activision/Blizzard would of been better spent on Steam. Would also mean the end of gaming.

 

[Lakados]

What they paid for Activision/Blizzard would have been better spent on Steam. Would also mean the end of gaming.

Microsoft could buy A/B because they make huge amounts of money, but make up a small fraction of the gaming space.
Microsoft buying Valve would create a chokehold on the PC gaming space with the only real competition being Epic.
And we all know how the general populace feels about Epic in regards to their store.

 

[uOpt]

This isn't good for Linux. The Wine emulation layer that allows people to run Windows software on Linux is the foundation of the Steamdeck. Many important improvements to the Wine project come from Valve.

It is hard to imagine that MS as an owner would continue this.

 

[sover]

This isn't good for Linux. The Wine emulation layer that allows people to run Windows software on Linux is the foundation of the Steamdeck. Many important improvements to the Wine project come from Valve.

It is hard to imagine that MS as an owner would continue this.

Which would probably be the main impetus for MS to attempt to buy Valve, but this whole thread is just about a very dumb rumor.

One thing I'm sure of is the acquisition price for Valve would be many multiples of $16 billion. Valve is the Apple of computer gaming, I can't see them selling out any time soon, and if they ever do I could only see it as a merger, not an acquisition.

 

[Marees]

Which would probably be the main impetus for MS to attempt to buy Valve, but this whole thread is just about a very dumb rumor.

One thing I'm sure of is the acquisition price for Valve would be many multiples of $16 billion. Valve is the Apple of computer gaming, I can't see them selling out any time soon, and if they ever do I could only see it as a merger, not an acquisition.

Valve is on track to sell more consoles than Microsoft

Already Microsoft lead on average daily sales has shrunk to less than 50%

Eventually Microsoft might give up making xbox & instead open up xbox OS to allow installation of Steam

 

[Lakados]

Valve is on track to sell more consoles than Microsoft

Already Microsoft lead on average daily sales has shrunk to less than 50%

Eventually Microsoft might give up making xbox & instead open up xbox OS to allow installation of Steam

That makes more sense in every conceivable way.

 

[KazeoHin]

The latest rumor is that Microsoft is putting together a $16B offer to acquire Valve.

View attachment 655637

Seems like a stretch to me. And $16b seems a little small considering Valves presumed revenues and profit margins (but we don't know them for sure, considering they are privately held)

16 Billion dollars is nowhere NEAR what Valve is worth, if we consider that Activision is worth 35 Billion.

That said, Microsoft COULD introduce Windows Updates that make Steam seen as dangerous, limit installations, throw warnings, break functionality. Let that disaster stew for a while, let Valve's engagement drain a bit as normies start to stop logging into it because Windows blocks it running on startup, they can't trust games purchased on it to run smoothly without issues....

Really run the value of Steam down using the resources they have.

THEN they make the bid.