3 ms·
Maybe I'm reading a bit too much in it, but the top comments seem to have a bit of discriminatory tone: China = pyramid scheme or money laundering. When 1997, 2
by appleiigs 9y ago
Maybe I'm reading a bit too much in it, but the top comments seem to have a bit of discriminatory tone: China = pyramid scheme or money laundering. When 1997, 2007, SF real-estate, unicorns with no earnings, all happen(ed/ing) in the US, in addition to Bernie Madoff. The original article topic is industrial companies buying tech and the arbitraging of valuations.
- msie 9y agoYes, I see it too. On the other hand, the Saudi-Softbank deal is viewed as a way to diversify and not to launder money.
- CodeWriter23 9y agoI think maybe you are reading too much into it. Adding "value" to a company's bottom line by purchasing assets COMPLETELY outside of the core competency of the company tilts the scales toward cooking the books and away from creating actual value.
- sjg007 9y agoWhy? Berkshire Hathaway did this in the past. Holding companies can be well diversified.
- rb808 9y agoNo, I'm saying is: you're right "1997, 2007, SF real-estate, unicorns with no earnings, all happen(ed/ing) in the US" - and now there is a similar thing happening in China too.