7 ms·
Americans can’t invest directly in Chinese companies and shouldn’t be obligated to host Chinese companies in their markets or be surprised when political whims
by supernetworks_ 2y ago
Americans can’t invest directly in Chinese companies and shouldn’t be obligated to host Chinese companies in their markets or be surprised when political whims ban them, since the lack of shared investment is political too. People clearly enjoy the content on there so the outcome is sad but it’s a complicated economic dynamic that is hard to grasp
- shalmanese 2y ago60% of Bytedance is owned by American investors https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/26/technology/tiktok-investors-bytedance.html https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/26/technology/tiktok-investo... > Susquehanna, a global trading firm, first invested in ByteDance in 2012 and now owns roughly 15 percent of the company, a person familiar with the investment said. The Chinese arm of Sequoia Capital, a Silicon Valley venture capital firm, invested in ByteDance in 2014 when it was valued at $500 million. Sequoia’s U.S.-based growth fund later followed suit. > General Atlantic, a private equity firm, invested in ByteDance in 2017 at a $20 billion valuation. Bill Ford, General Atlantic’s chief executive, has a seat on ByteDance’s board of directors. The company’s other notable U.S. investors include the private equity firms KKR and the Carlyle Group, as well as the hedge fund Coatue Management.
- wordofx 2y agoLiterally does not matter. ByteDance is a Chinese company and beholden to the CCP.
- solaarphunk 2y agoJust like US companies are beholden to national security letters that can compel them to spy on non-US persons who may be users of their product?
- Dylan16807 2y agoIf other countries ban US websites for specifically that reason, I applaud them. Especially if they do it without being hypocritical.
- est 2y agoChina will not only ban American companies or services next, Xi will probably ban the US dollar.
- seanmcdirmid 2y agoThat won’t happen. China would be more angry if the USA all of a sudden didn’t let them participate in treasury auctions.
- est 2y agoYou know there's a rumor saying Trump/Xi would trade Taiwan with US treasury bonds.
- wordofx 2y agoThe funny thing is. China can talk about removing the U.S. dollar and trade when Yen. But they need a stable currency to convert between and so conversion is still done with the U.S. dollar. The U.S. dollar won’t be removed from trade in our life time.
- seanmcdirmid 2y agoChina doesn’t let the RMB float freely, so trade still happens in dollars. Also, the American government buys a lot of treasuries, so it’s easy to save a few billion quickly when you need to, which isn’t really supported by any other currency…saving money by lending it to the USG conversely prevents it from re-entering your own economy and stoking inflation (China isn’t the only country to use the USA like that, Japan buys more treasuries than China usually).
- arcticbull 2y agoNo, not like that.
- sschueller 2y agoYes, it's exactly like that.
- OWMYT 2y agoAre you suggesting that only a "perfect" government gets to counter the Chinese government's attacks?
- solaris152000 2y agoIt's name in English is the Communist Part of China, CPC not CCP.
- richrichardsson 2y agoThis shit winds me up no end. It feels almost like propaganda in itself, to evoke CCCP connotations. It would be like if I just decided to start unilaterally referring to a "Language to Markup Hyper-Text" (LMHT) instead of its correct name. tbf though, even the BBC can't get it right : https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cvg68vyz9lgo https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cvg68vyz9lgo
- xanderlewis 2y agoExactly. I've never heard someone use 'CPC' before. It's quite obvious why the alternative isn't liked.
- catlikesshrimp 2y agoApparently, the official CPC is pro-stablishment, unsurprisingly, while the common CCP is anti-stablisment https://chinamediaproject.org/2023/03/30/ccp-or-cpc-a-china-watchers-rorschach/ https://chinamediaproject.org/2023/03/30/ccp-or-cpc-a-china-...
- supernetworks_ 2y agoI have been assuming that the ownership is in the Cayman company and it is analogous to the situation with VIEs. The ownership would have no votes on controlling the company but only ownership for hypothetical dividends on profit from the cayman shell. If anybody knows otherwise please elucidate us. Oddly enough Snapchat IPOd with stocks with zero control as well.
- solaarphunk 2y agoAmericans can definitely invest into most Chinese tech companies- the exception is direct investments into non-tech, licensed companies, that require a VIE structure, which enables Americans to still invest.
- supernetworks_ 2y agoThis is what I meant by direct investment. Owning true controlling shares versus the cayman economic proxy
- soheil 2y ago[flagged]
- lovich 2y agoAnd a larger portion of the population doesn’t care that you can’t share cat and dance videos on an app labeled TikTok instead of an app labeled Instagram or Reels or X other copycats. TikTok was allowed to continue to exist as well as long as they divested from Chinese ownership
- tgma 2y agoNo one is restricted from "free exchange of ideas." TikTok can divest and stay in the US market just fine. It is an ownership question, not a freedom of exchange of ideas question. There is no constitutional right for a foreign entity to do unrestricted business in the United States. US Congress likewise does not give a fuck what you think though, unless you are a US Citizen and even then you get a single vote. The US population at large has decided on this by their representative government.
- Dalewyn 2y agoIt is worth noting that the Constitution itself states (interpreted as stating) that Constitutional rights only apply to US nationals/citizens (which the Constitution derives powers from) and only those residing within US sovereign jurisdiction.[1][2] So you are correct, except this was decided at literally the most fundamental level of US governance instead of on Capitol Hill. Obligatory IANAL. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preamble_to_the_United_States_Constitution#People_of_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preamble_to_the_United_States_... [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preamble_to_the_United_States_Constitution#Where_the_Constitution_is_legally_effective https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preamble_to_the_United_States_...
- wiseowise 2y agoI do. West is being bombarded by disinformation that hides under “freedom of speech” umbrella.
- supernetworks_ 2y ago
- throwaway2037 2y ago> Americans can’t invest directly in Chinese companies This is not true. You can trade onshore Mainland China stocks through the Hongkong Stock Exchange. There is a special programmed called "Northbound" and "Southbound" in the broker-dealer industry. (This also allows investors from Mainland China to trades Hongkong stocks.) Any big brokerage should offer access to the Hongkong Stock Exchange. There is even a weird special currency called "CNH" that is the Chinese RMB that is allowed to settled in Hongkong, so you don't need a brokerage account in Mainland China to trade. Read more here: https://www.hkex.com.hk/Mutual-Market/Connect-Hub/Stock-Connect?sc_lang=en https://www.hkex.com.hk/Mutual-Market/Connect-Hub/Stock-Conn...
- supernetworks_ 2y agoThat’s a good clarification as not all companies are tech related and there are companies eligible for trading. However northbound trading still follows all applicable laws and there’s no access to direct ownership in some amazing companies
- throwaway2037 2y ago> there’s no access to direct ownership in some amazing companies Can you provide some examples?
- codedokode 2y agoAmericans are selling iPhones into China and are getting exorbital profits from this though. Doesn't look fair to me.
- 15155 2y agoThey have Xiaomi - they are free to ban iPhones if they so choose.