5 ms·
> * Alternatively, American govt takes the position of "American companies don't have to follow the laws of random countries just because they accept IP packets
by XorNot 9d ago
> * Alternatively, American govt takes the position of "American companies don't have to follow the laws of random countries just because they accept IP packets from those countries". American companies eliminate their official business presence in onerous legal regimes but keep serving users there
Why would they do that? If they can't have a local business presence then they can't book local advertisers.
Which directly cuts any revenue they would get from the enterprise.
None of these companies need to have local business presences: they do because otherwise you can't get revenue from users in that nationality.
- brainwad 8d agoThey could still book global advertisers, in particular other foreign companies that also pulled out of the relevant jurisdictions.
- XorNot 8d agoBut they already do that. They have local presences because they need it to get local ad dollars and trade locally. You don't need a total solution to have an influence: it's a saturated market where you're only as good as quarterly growth figures.
- brainwad 8d agoYes, but the value of local presence is only the marginal value of the local advertisers over foreign ones. It's not all the revenue from the country, and it can be possible to be not worth having a local presence but still worth operating from offshore.