16 ms·

Pushback against Saudi funding endangers Silicon Valley valuations

226 points by AndrewBissell 8y ago

jarym 8y ago
Everybody’s known this regime is dirty for decades now. Worst case is they replace MBS because he’s so tainted and draw a line under this incident. They can go back to dropping American and European munitions on school kids in Yemen and the world will go back to turning a blind eye.
- nl 8y ago
  The Yemen disaster is mostly MBS's policy too. The Saudis have a lot of issues, but MBS seems to have made a lot of things worse.
  - sonnyblarney 8y ago
    Stop blaming Yemen on the Saudis, this is ridiculous. The Saudis could care less what goes on in Yemen and have shown through history they have zero imperial interest there. But if there is instability there, causing violence to spill across the border - or worse - Iranian backed antagonists are actually attacking Saudi - then Saudi is forced to take action. If there were no antagonist forces in Yemen threatening Saudi Arabia, then there would be zero Saudi Arabian military intervention. Yemenis are not violent due to some arbitrary violence of Saudis, it's the other way around.
    - nl 8y ago
      Do the words disproportionate response mean anything to you?
      - sonnyblarney 8y ago
        Yes, and it's not.
    - SuoDuanDao 8y ago
      Do you take a similar position on Saudi Arabia's attempts to strongarm Qatar and Canada?
      - sonnyblarney 8y ago
        Saudia Arabia is in no way strong-arming Canada - as for Qatar, that's a non violent dispute between two rich nations. Nothing to do with anything.
    - wolco 8y ago
      The truth is saundi arabia has been trying to control the region for awhile and started to lose control. Ask Quater if the Saudi's would try to influence or threaten a country for no reason other than having a brighter spotlight. When the Saudi's tried to threaten Canada recently by pulling out investment and students you could see this was going to be a challenging year for them. Aside from open up space for other more deserving students in Canada the Saudis did little damage and changed the way the world started looking at them. We are seeing them fall further and further each month.
      - sonnyblarney 8y ago
        Totally missing the point. I say again: Saudi wants nothing to do with Yemen, and that they are personal and prickly with Qatar has nothing do do with anything. When Yemen was peaceful, Saudi coexisted in peace with it. As Iran tries to destabilize the region and antagonize Saudi Arabia by supplying weapons and support ... then it becomes a problem. There are literally missiles flying over Riyadh, supplied by Iran. Now who is trying to disrupt who? "When the Saudi's tried to threaten Canada recently by pulling out investment and students you could see this was going to be a challenging year for them." Again, it's stupid for Saudis - but this has nothing to do with anything. Their childish relationship with Qatar and response to Canada means little. Missiles over Riyadh supplied by Iran is essentially and act of war from Iran and they definitely should defend themselves.
        nl 8y ago
        Oh please. Missiles didn't attack Riyadh until 2 years after the Saudi intervention, and after the cholera outbreak started and after the Saudi siege started killing civilians. No huge argument with the intervention itself, but the indiscriminate harm to the civilian population is indefensible.
- onetimemanytime 8y ago
  MBS is testing--or tested--the limits of his money. I think he overstepped the line, got away with Yemen, the shakedown at the Ritz so why not try this too? Scares the crap out of any dissident, you almost always need to go back to your embassy /consulate even if a US Citizen. So go ahead, yap online about MBS and see what can happen 5 years from now when you a certificate... Same pagebook as Putin with the high profile killings in UK.
- anonymous5133 8y ago
  It is quite a quagmire so to speak for Silicon Valley. For SA they have adopted policies that are basically designed to diversify the country away from oil so they are more willing than other countries to invest in very innovative "pie in the sky" type ideas. SA's population doesn't have the innovation skill that other countries have so SA just invests in the foreign talent. The new ideas are often developed in the Silicon Valley area. For SA, they are willing to invest in these wild ideas because for them...the money effectively just gushed out of the ground. That's why SA is often a big investor in very cutting-edge, high-risk investment funds like softbank's vision fund. For Silicon Valley, this is quite a major situation because entrepreneurs here effectively live or die based on if they can get funding. Even if the idea is amazing and has potential, the founder will just abandon the idea if investment doesn't materialize. SA is a godsend to any entrepreneur who has an idea that is viewed as high risk based on traditional VC investors. If SA pulls out of being so proactive with their investments then it will be a huge wake up call to many early stage startups for sure.
  - compcoffee 8y ago
    >SA is a godsend to any entrepreneur who has an idea that is viewed as high risk based on traditional VC investors. If SA pulls out of being so proactive with their investments then it will be a huge wake up call to many early stage startups for sure. This implies that "traditional" VC couldn't get high risk stuff funded, but SA can. That has no basis in history or reality.
- AndrewBissell 8y ago
  Certainly the CEOs, celebrities, and media outlets that feted MBS earlier this year knew how awful KSA is, but I don't think the same could be said of the general public pre-Khashoggi. A key point Ben Hunt likes to make is that it's not what everybody knows that matters -- it's what everybody knows that everyone else knows that changes behavior. Still, it's very possible (especially with Trump & Kushner running the show) that this will just be a speedbump in business-as-usual for Saudi Arabia and their American business partners. We'll see -- in your worst case I don't think it will necessarily be a smooth process for MBS to be replaced.
- NeedMoreTea 8y ago
  Difference is the world, and particularly the USA, doesn't need Saudi oil to quite the same extent as previously. Perhaps now they don't need to be the West's principle ally in the region, or given a free pass on every human rights abuse.
  - barry-cotter 8y ago
    They’ll get a pass until oil doesn’t matter or the water runs out and it’ll all be irrelevant very shortly thereafter. Saudi Arabia’s long term future is no brighter than Yemen’s. If any of the Arab petro-states make it it’ll be the UAE and that’s borderline.
    - wallace_f 8y ago
      Why do you believe none of the nation states in this region will "make it?"
      - analognoise 8y ago
        I think the general perception is that the region doesn't have anything valuable to export once the oil is gone. They're trying to import scientists and engineers to kick off an economic transition, but those types of people will have zero interest in being in the region once the oil runs out, and the more educated amongst the local populace would leave too. It is already widely held (again, I don't have numbers for this) that the rich/powerful/educated have already secured real estate in other places should instability arise, meaning those people with means or skills would leave once the oil runs out, meaning they don't see a bright future in the region as well. With the recent news articles about the journalist being killed, all of the "modernization" thoughts people had are totally gone. There has been a lot of money thrown into architecting a modern image - all of which was completely undone in one single news cycle. I am no expert on the region though, just fielding some thoughts.
        Nasrudith 8y ago
        They have tried some moves but they can't break from the fundamentalism making their efforts pretty moot despite all of the money they throw at it. Mystifyingly they were clearly involved with getting a Sex and the City movie set there. They could have reformed to be a productive post petrol economy but I suspect it was too late even before they decided acting like mob hitmen against journalists was a good idea. You can influence media with money but murdering journalists gives them self preservation reasons to refuse to deal with you at all. Apparently there is a pessimism / old joke there paraphrased as grandfather rode a camel, they drove a jeep, their children drove ferraris and their grandchildren will ride camels.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- jjeaff 8y ago
  Replace MBS? You say that like he is in am elected position. He's the heir to an absolute monarchy. Unless by replace, you mean a coup d'état of the Saudi Royal family?
  - cavanasm 8y ago
    There's no formal structure/rule for which prince leads / who is "closest" to the throne. It comes down to politics. MBS has many many siblings and cousins, essentially any of whom could "replace" him.
  - alehul 8y ago
    He's only heir apparent, and that's because his father (and people believe MBS was involved) removed Muhammad bin Nayef. There doesn't have to be a coup against the entire family to change the line of succession.
  - true_religion 8y ago
    Saudi Arabia does not run by a primogeniture succession. Essentially all potential male heirs can become the overall leader. So all his brothers, his uncles, and some of his cousins are possible choices. It is politics that decides which one is heir aparent.
- loceng 8y ago
  I believe the Trump-Russia situation coming to light has made people hypersensitive (good when it's countering a desensitization) to this kind of blatant bad behaviour. The fact that it was a Washington Post journalist may have been crucial to the level of shock it has, at least in America; a situation finally that can resonate close enough to home for us to feel some kind of impact, and in the current climate of authoritarian/totalitarian governments trying to breakdown democracy.
  - loceng 8y ago
    Can only wonder if the downvotes are trolls downvoting anything negative Trump-Russia related. At -2 so far.
- da02 8y ago
  Right. What I am also surprised is how dirty the regime is, yet no one seems to care: * https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/iraq-crisis-how-saudi-arabia-helped-isis-take-over-the-north-of-the-country-9602312.html https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/iraq-crisis-how... * https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/hillary-clinton-wikileaks-email-isis-saudi-arabia-qatar-us-allies-funding-barack-obama-knew-all-a7362071.html https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/hillary-clinton-wikilea... * https://original.antiwar.com/dan_sanchez/2015/06/08/the-us-governments-not-so-secret-support-for-al-qaeda-and-isis/ https://original.antiwar.com/dan_sanchez/2015/06/08/the-us-g...
  - kiliantics 8y ago
    They only care when it can be used as political ammunition, i.e. in this case against Trump
danboarder 8y ago
That headline makes it sound like a bad thing... yet many are concerned that valuations are inflated. So perhaps this is a blessing in disguise?
- AndrewBissell 8y ago
  To the extent that rich valuations are propped up by Saudi money, I think it's a great thing for them to come back down to earth.
  - AndrewBissell 8y ago
    And speaking more broadly, I don't subscribe to the "higher valuations and asset prices == better" ideology, so the headline didn't read in a negative way to me. :-)
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
    - repsilat 8y ago
      Raising at a high valuation means more money for less dilution. Sounds good for the founders and maybe "good for America" too to me.
      - AndrewBissell 8y ago
        That depends on who's ultimately left holding the bag on the inflated valuation, and how much it attracts additional capital to potentially be wasted in a marginal business.
  - hiram112 8y ago
    You obviously didn't just get married, birth a kid, and buy a 1970's ranch in the bay area for 12X your income. Got it!
    - 8y ago
anonymous5133 8y ago
First big victim appears to be virgin hyperloop one. SA pulled out of a planned $1 billion investment in the company. There was also a planned $200 billion solar project that has also been scrapped.
- adventured 8y ago
  The solar project was scrapped before the journalist was murdered (September 30th that news hit, versus October 2nd for when Khashoggi went missing). It was likely known the solar project wasn't going forward a while prior to the news release in September. They don't appear to be linked.
- negamax 8y ago
  Richard Branson said no to Saudi money after murder incident.
  - swebs 8y ago
    He should have been saying this since 9/11, but better late than never, I guess.
    - true_religion 8y ago
      Give the guy a break, the US government itself cleared Saudi Arabia of culpability in 9/11 and reafirmed they were a regional ally.
raverbashing 8y ago
"endangers" So you mean just founded startups with no revenue won't be valued at millions of dollars out of thin air then?
- anonymous5133 8y ago
  It will mean ALL companies will be valued at less because there will be less money being thrown at these companies. Saudi money is all over silicon valley and early stage tech companies.
  - fgheorghe 8y ago
    So in the name of higher valuations we should accept criminal money? Interesting thought.
    - Filligree 8y ago
      Nobody said that.
    - devdas 8y ago
      Oddly enough, it is immoral but not illegal/criminal money.
    - x220 8y ago
      >criminal money First of all, it's Silicon Valley. Check your ethics at the door. Secondly, it's not illegal if it's not against the laws of a country (and in this case, if the crown prince of a monarchy orders something, that's as close to legal as it gets). You could say that it's immoral, but that's a different statement, and you shouldn't conflate "illegal" with "immoral".
      - hobs 8y ago
        >First of all, it's Silicon Valley. Check your ethics at the door. Flip or not, this is gross. Calling a murder not a crime because a king decreed it is mind boggling. You shouldnt conflate "illegal" with "criminal".
gsibble 8y ago
So in other words, tens of thousands of Silicon Valley tech employees at companies that took investment or could be bought out by a company that took investment from a fund that took investment from anything related to Saudi money stand to lose a trenemdous amount because the Saudis murdered someone? Yeah, sounds like those employees should definitely pay the price for something they had nothing to do with.
- anonymous5133 8y ago
  Yes, that is basically what will happen. For those tech companies, it is live or die at this point. Assuming SA doesn't reverse course, it will mean for many companies they simply won't get more funding. It will be either start making money or seek out other forms of funding like maybe an IPO or something. Other VC firms will get flooded with companies to invest in and of course they will just go with whatever companies they feel are most worthwhile but going forward less companies will get the funding they need.
  - gsibble 8y ago
    So you don’t feel bad for the employees at these companies?
    - viraptor 8y ago
      This is basically the "contractors on the Death Star" from Clerks. I feel a bit bad about their situation, but 1. There's no shortage of tech jobs, (and we've been talking about SV being a bubble for a decade or so now, why not have a plan for that case?) 2. People should be aware where their wages come from. If you know your money ultimately comes from crimes... maybe reconsider your job.
- onion2k 8y ago
  I don't understand your post. Why should they be isolated from the effects of what happens in the real world? It's unfortunate for them, of course, but in every situation ever things that happen have knock on effects that you can't control.
killjoywashere 8y ago
Where's the pushback against Russian funding?
- adventured 8y ago
  Russia is no longer the large funding source they were during the days in which a young Facebook was hoovering up their money. There's an actor ~50 times larger than Russia - and even worse on human rights - when it comes to venture capital. Where's the push-back against Chinese funding? That money is sloshing all over the valley right now, nobody cares in the least. There are no protests, no outrage, no fake performances by politicians and business persons. They've routinely disappeared journalists, human rights workers, etc. over the last decade. Most of the world is absolutely terrified to push back against China on anything at any time. There isn't a single major player in Silicon Valley with the nerve to stand up to China these days. Saudi Arabia is a convenient target (and not in any manner undeserving of the negative response they're getting), that's all that is going on. The aggressively selective outrage, magically showing up now, is how you know it's shooting at something larger.
  - Cthulhu_ 8y ago
    Morals are flexible when they're offering you $100 million or more. Mine would be. And it's not directly doing something immoral, just turning a blind eye to an investor's government's actions - like one would when working with a US based investor.
    - jjeaff 8y ago
      I don't think it's quite equivalent to compare a US investor to a Chinese investor. The Chinese government has proven to be quite involved in the actions of its citizens and has been making moves to nationalize their tech sector (They also have a long history of nationalizing other sectors). While the US has meddled from time to time in private business, the rights of citizens to avoid such action are pretty well laid out. Can you imagine a Chinese company taking their government to court to refuse revealing customer data to the government like apple and other us companies have? So I think you can easily ignore the actions of the US government while taking investor money. But taking Chinese money is essentially like taking money directly from the Chinese government.
sschueller 8y ago
Other than what we read in the news, is the information of who invested in what startup public information that can be found somewhere or can these investors be kept private? I think it would be neat to have a list and map of for example the top 50 SV startups and where their money is coming from.
- rcMgD2BwE72F 8y ago
  It would be great to use Wikidata for that. It's already possible to add a list of investors (https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P1951 https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P1951) to companies (like Uber: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q780442 https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q780442). And then map all these startups using https://query.wikidata.org https://query.wikidata.org (it would be pretty easy to highlight the % of shares by countries / regimes, etc and point out the financial vehicles / intermediaries used for that).
CaptainZapp 8y ago
Allow me a nitpick: SA generally refers to South Africa. It's either KSA, or Saudi Arabia.
- thrillgore 8y ago
  ZA is the ISO Code for South Africa. SA is the ISO code for Saudi Arabia.
  - CaptainZapp 8y ago
    Thanks. My mistake. I leave it there, thoguh, to not break the flow.
- peterkelly 8y ago
  And South Australia :)
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
sumayamanzoor 8y ago
Amazing post. It will be very helpful for beginners like me. Thank you very much for this kind of post.Waiting for your next blog https://www.fita.in/selenium-training-in-chennai/ https://www.fita.in/selenium-training-in-chennai/
sumayamanzoor 8y ago
https://www.fita.in/selenium-training-in-chennai/ https://www.fita.in/selenium-training-in-chennai/
chriselles 8y ago
I had a few lectures with Professor Ilya Strebulaev from Stanford GSB back in 2016. https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/faculty-research/faculty/ilya-strebulaev https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/faculty-research/faculty/ilya-s... He wrote a few articles. 1)How much VC drives the US economy(October,2015): https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/insights/how-much-does-venture-capital-drive-us-economy https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/insights/how-much-does-venture-... 2)Unicorns are overvalued(May,2017): https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/insights/silicon-valleys-unicorns-are-overvalued https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/insights/silicon-valleys-unicor... In class in 2016 Ilya Strebulaev(who has arguably the best VC dataset in the world) stated that 92% of VCs surveyed believed unicorns were overalued and a correction was likely. He also told our class a very memorable and self effacing story of how he placed a bet with a colleague for a bottle of nice wine on the future date of bankruptcy of GM. In order to win the bet, the GM bankruptcy had to occur prior to X date. GM’s bankruptcy was date X+1, thus losing the bet. A lesson on timing. Even when you’re “right”, you can be wrong. Perhaps a Saudi assassination “string” pulled too hard for too long could see a cascading effect. It’s inevitable we will see a correction in valuations. But I also think it’s pointless to fear it. That time is better spent building a sustainable business on a fair valuation with more challenging access to capital. YC’s suggestion for YC Batch(as well as all other) startups to be careful with not accepting money and scaling a startup at excessive valuation sounds like a solid one in this climate and the likely future.
- hiram112 8y ago
  > GM’s bankruptcy was date X+1, thus losing the bet. A lesson on timing. Even when you’re “right”, you can be wrong. Anyone who has tried their luck at day-trading has learned their lesson, i.e. "The Market Can Remain Irrational Longer Than You Can Remain Solvent".
  - nradov 8y ago
    Plus once politics becomes involved, economic rationality goes right out the window. There's no way to reliably forecast that.
- creaghpatr 8y ago
hiram112 8y ago
I'd feel bad if this were any other crew about to be gutted. But with the Silicon Valley crowd - well now I know the true definition of scha·den·freu·de!
- compcoffee 8y ago
  >But with the Silicon Valley crowd Yep, the SV crowd thinks they're the enlightened ones, saving the planet. Between billion dollar valuations based on blood-money, the massive financial inequality and the state surveillance apparatus they built to put us in, I doubt the proletariat think too fondly of the place.
ohiovr 8y ago
What makes this journalists blood worth more than all those murdered in Yemen or the victims of SA's overt or covert terrorism?
- Illniyar 8y ago
  Location and audacity. It was done in another sovereign country, one with string US and European ties, and which isn't currently in civil unrest. Also, they practically took him into their embassy, killed him and then lied about it in the most haphazard way. That represents a massive break from international status quo. Unfortunately getting involved in third-world civil wars and financing terrorist attacks is quite within the status quo.
  - madza 8y ago
    Lest we forget. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraordinary_rendition https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraordinary_rendition This is not a massive break from the international status quo by a any means. The USA and all other nations have operated in a similar manner for a long time with equally gruesome outcomes. If I recall the head of Interpol “disappeared” not long ago, and that little kerfuffle died away right quick. Perhaps the reasons are more mundane. 1. The Saudis got caught out by the Turks with the evidence. Which has been used effectively. The Turks have a lot to gain by seeing the alliance between SA and the US weakened. 2. The senior leadership of SA can be more directly tied to this incident, as opposed to more common case where plausible deniability exists. Rookie mistake. 3. There exists internal opposition to the leadership in the US and SA that find it convenient to escalate the profile of this issue for their own purposes. This will blow over and business as usual will resume shortly.
    - JabavuAdams 8y ago
      The whole point of extraordinary rendition is to remove the target to another country to give some legal cover and plausible (hah) deniability to the subsequent interrogation / torture / what have you. Murdering someone in your embassy (although technically your own sovereign territory) is a new low.
qaq 8y ago
With Softbank playing such a big role I wonder if there is some component of incumbents playing this up to try to curb the influence of Softbank ? (Iremember Sequoia raising 8 bil. fund specifically because they needed a more equal footing with Softbank).
- compcoffee 8y ago
  >With Softbank playing such a big role I wonder if there is some component of incumbents playing this up to try to curb the influence of Softbank ? Playing what up? The fact that Silicon Valley and their new "hey, just stay private!" mentality was heavily funded by blood/oil money? Is this actually news to people that Saudi Arabia has done terrible things? Or does it only matter now that there's been a scandal? Well, thank God for the scandal, then.
  - qaq 8y ago
    The cynical part of me says it matters now because there are special interests that for one reason or another have an interest in reducing SA influence or want some concession from SA and in reality it has 0 to do with SA being a brutal absolute monarchy which it has being for a long time.
    - lmm 8y ago
      Be that as it may, it's good if being a brutal absolute monarchy is a liability you can be attacked for, even if those attacks only happen when there's someone on the other side.
JustSomeNobody 8y ago
It's going to be interesting to see where this goes. Techies have been up in arms about Google and China, Microsoft and the military. What about the Saudis and murder?
netcan 8y ago
Whether this murder-scandal blows over or not, it makes the case for a random "one-damned-thing-after-another" version of history. One day, the real-politic thing works. All money is green. A feudal monarchy makes a fine ally. The next it isn't, it doesn't. The next day, one little murder in the journalist persecution capital of the world threatens to blow up the entire alliance, military, political & economic. Saudi Arabia's had an erm.. "eventful" power transition (MBS') but it isn't fundamentally different. It's a monarchy in the real, undiluted sense. Laws and courts are mostly religious. There are no rights, on paper or in practice. No freedom of speech, affiliation, religion or concious. No pretense of these either. Religion & Monarchy share power with eachother. Neither are bound by rule of law or by the people in any way. Are these barriers to alliance, trade or investment? Whatever your answer, I don't see what Khashoggi's murder changes. Yet, this murder (or some other catalyst event, if this blows over) can change everything. It really does seem like random chance.
- tompccs 8y ago
  That's one way of looking at it. Another is that the West's see-no-evil hear-no-evil approach to the Saudis has always been fundamentally unstable, and an event like this was bound to happen at some point. Glad that if finally has, even if it did take the murder of a journalist (who had a dubious stance on democratic rights to begin with) to light the touchpaper.
  - telchar 8y ago
    I'm not convinced that this will change anything in the near term. While the Obama administration had started (cautiously) pivoting from Saudi to Iran (see the nuclear deal, increased criticism of the Saudis, very limited engagement in Syria), the current admin threw that away and has reaffirmed their affiliation with the Saudis. So while they might make a show of being upset, after the way they snubbed Iran they have nowhere to go if they want to pivot from the Saudis to a different potential regional ally. Further, Trump is expressly in favor of violence against journalists [0] so he's not going to push for punishment for this. [0] https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2018/10/19/trump-encourages-violence-against-reporters-and-his-supporters-cheer https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2018/10/19...
philipodonnell 8y ago
This can only be good, right? Less money means earlier IPOs and less dilution of founders and early employees? I don't read many "More money needed to fund startups in Silicon Valley" headlines recently...
sergefaguet 8y ago
this does not change in any way my willingness to take money from softbank. they are an investor in my current company and i will be delighted to take them in the next. i am really not sure why anyone would consider the interests of their company's fundraising strategy to be less important than that a certain investor has a large LP that is a country that had someone killed. this will blow over.
- dd36 8y ago
  Some companies can choose their investors.
  - sergefaguet 8y ago
    and they will still choose them. on material things like terms and governance, as smart companies do. not on irrelevant things like this Khashoggi story.
oytis 8y ago
I'm glad dear industry has noticed that Saudi Arabia is an authoritarian country with no respect to rule of law and human rights. I just fear that this awareness might not last for long: big money tend to cause dementia in tech. By the way, once we're all here: China is an authoritarian country with no respect to human right as well, keep that in mind next time you read (or God forbid write) another fascinated article about Greater Bay etc.
- mtw 8y ago
  Don't be quick on generalization. China is not a democracy but they don't kidnap and murder people in foreign soil, and they don't bomb other countries. They don't also fund and promote extreme religion exportation, like Saudi Arabia does. Saudi is a net exporter of terrorism. If China really did all this, you would hear about thousands of Falun Gong followers kidnapped or murdered in USA or Canada. Or you would already have Taiwan and other countries like Vietnam invaded. Taiwan is a bigger pain point to China than Yemen is to Saudi Arabia.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - lenkite 8y ago
    Umm.China does indeed kidnap people off foreign soil. They just do so more efficiently and far more smartly than the incompetent House of Saud. http://theweek.com/speedreads/764194/intelligence-officials-fear-chinas-global-kidnapping-program-reached-america http://theweek.com/speedreads/764194/intelligence-officials-...
  - _jgdh 8y ago
    > China is not a democracy but they don't kidnap They do kidnap people. They've kidnapped people from Hong Kong, Vietnam, Myanmar, Australia and Canada. Some of these people confess to a series of crimes and in exchange pay fines or are sentenced to long prison sentences, or they are simply never heard from again. They kidnapped a Swedish citizen from Thailand for having the audacity to publish a book critical of Xi Jinping. Source - https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/03/29/the-disappeared-china-renditions-kidnapping/ https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/03/29/the-disappeared-china-r...
pxtail 8y ago
LOL, this is so naive point of view. When that much money is involved nothing will change. There might be some ephemeral change, some PR campaign, sad nods, sad words, some companies might be rebranded etc. But unfortunately at the core nothing will change, this is sad, harsh and grim reality but when that much is at stake life of one man is not enough to tip the scales.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
bgribble 8y ago
There are "bad people" throughout the startup investment ecosystem, including but not limited to: * just plain jerks * serial harassers, misogynists and the like * supporters of various evil/hateful politics * white-collar criminal/fraudster types * straight-up mob, american, russian, or other * nation-state actors with very dirty hands like KSA Making ethical decisions about who you are willing to work for is a routine part of working in startup world... and you're never done, because surprise! You may have an even harder decision to make after that Series B closes with new investors!
writepub 8y ago
This article is admission from there VC community that valuations are basically price gouged as a function of available capital - with little, if any, scientific basis the them. This was always evident from how badly unicorns have fared in the open market post IPO - but this is a direct admission of price gouging

226 points by AndrewBissell 8y ago

Everybody’s known this regime is dirty for decades now. Worst case is they replace MBS because he’s so tainted and draw a line under this incident. They can go back to dropping American and European munitions on school kids in Yemen and the world will go back to turning a blind eye.

nl 8y ago
The Yemen disaster is mostly MBS's policy too. The Saudis have a lot of issues, but MBS seems to have made a lot of things worse.
- sonnyblarney 8y ago
  Stop blaming Yemen on the Saudis, this is ridiculous. The Saudis could care less what goes on in Yemen and have shown through history they have zero imperial interest there. But if there is instability there, causing violence to spill across the border - or worse - Iranian backed antagonists are actually attacking Saudi - then Saudi is forced to take action. If there were no antagonist forces in Yemen threatening Saudi Arabia, then there would be zero Saudi Arabian military intervention. Yemenis are not violent due to some arbitrary violence of Saudis, it's the other way around.
  - nl 8y ago
    Do the words disproportionate response mean anything to you?
    - sonnyblarney 8y ago
      Yes, and it's not.
  - SuoDuanDao 8y ago
    Do you take a similar position on Saudi Arabia's attempts to strongarm Qatar and Canada?
    - sonnyblarney 8y ago
      Saudia Arabia is in no way strong-arming Canada - as for Qatar, that's a non violent dispute between two rich nations. Nothing to do with anything.
  - wolco 8y ago
    The truth is saundi arabia has been trying to control the region for awhile and started to lose control. Ask Quater if the Saudi's would try to influence or threaten a country for no reason other than having a brighter spotlight. When the Saudi's tried to threaten Canada recently by pulling out investment and students you could see this was going to be a challenging year for them. Aside from open up space for other more deserving students in Canada the Saudis did little damage and changed the way the world started looking at them. We are seeing them fall further and further each month.
    - sonnyblarney 8y ago
      Totally missing the point. I say again: Saudi wants nothing to do with Yemen, and that they are personal and prickly with Qatar has nothing do do with anything. When Yemen was peaceful, Saudi coexisted in peace with it. As Iran tries to destabilize the region and antagonize Saudi Arabia by supplying weapons and support ... then it becomes a problem. There are literally missiles flying over Riyadh, supplied by Iran. Now who is trying to disrupt who? "When the Saudi's tried to threaten Canada recently by pulling out investment and students you could see this was going to be a challenging year for them." Again, it's stupid for Saudis - but this has nothing to do with anything. Their childish relationship with Qatar and response to Canada means little. Missiles over Riyadh supplied by Iran is essentially and act of war from Iran and they definitely should defend themselves.
      - nl 8y ago
        Oh please. Missiles didn't attack Riyadh until 2 years after the Saudi intervention, and after the cholera outbreak started and after the Saudi siege started killing civilians. No huge argument with the intervention itself, but the indiscriminate harm to the civilian population is indefensible.
onetimemanytime 8y ago
MBS is testing--or tested--the limits of his money. I think he overstepped the line, got away with Yemen, the shakedown at the Ritz so why not try this too? Scares the crap out of any dissident, you almost always need to go back to your embassy /consulate even if a US Citizen. So go ahead, yap online about MBS and see what can happen 5 years from now when you a certificate... Same pagebook as Putin with the high profile killings in UK.
anonymous5133 8y ago
It is quite a quagmire so to speak for Silicon Valley. For SA they have adopted policies that are basically designed to diversify the country away from oil so they are more willing than other countries to invest in very innovative "pie in the sky" type ideas. SA's population doesn't have the innovation skill that other countries have so SA just invests in the foreign talent. The new ideas are often developed in the Silicon Valley area. For SA, they are willing to invest in these wild ideas because for them...the money effectively just gushed out of the ground. That's why SA is often a big investor in very cutting-edge, high-risk investment funds like softbank's vision fund. For Silicon Valley, this is quite a major situation because entrepreneurs here effectively live or die based on if they can get funding. Even if the idea is amazing and has potential, the founder will just abandon the idea if investment doesn't materialize. SA is a godsend to any entrepreneur who has an idea that is viewed as high risk based on traditional VC investors. If SA pulls out of being so proactive with their investments then it will be a huge wake up call to many early stage startups for sure.
- compcoffee 8y ago
  >SA is a godsend to any entrepreneur who has an idea that is viewed as high risk based on traditional VC investors. If SA pulls out of being so proactive with their investments then it will be a huge wake up call to many early stage startups for sure. This implies that "traditional" VC couldn't get high risk stuff funded, but SA can. That has no basis in history or reality.
AndrewBissell 8y ago
Certainly the CEOs, celebrities, and media outlets that feted MBS earlier this year knew how awful KSA is, but I don't think the same could be said of the general public pre-Khashoggi. A key point Ben Hunt likes to make is that it's not what everybody knows that matters -- it's what everybody knows that everyone else knows that changes behavior. Still, it's very possible (especially with Trump & Kushner running the show) that this will just be a speedbump in business-as-usual for Saudi Arabia and their American business partners. We'll see -- in your worst case I don't think it will necessarily be a smooth process for MBS to be replaced.
NeedMoreTea 8y ago
Difference is the world, and particularly the USA, doesn't need Saudi oil to quite the same extent as previously. Perhaps now they don't need to be the West's principle ally in the region, or given a free pass on every human rights abuse.
- barry-cotter 8y ago
  They’ll get a pass until oil doesn’t matter or the water runs out and it’ll all be irrelevant very shortly thereafter. Saudi Arabia’s long term future is no brighter than Yemen’s. If any of the Arab petro-states make it it’ll be the UAE and that’s borderline.
  - wallace_f 8y ago
    Why do you believe none of the nation states in this region will "make it?"
    - analognoise 8y ago
      I think the general perception is that the region doesn't have anything valuable to export once the oil is gone. They're trying to import scientists and engineers to kick off an economic transition, but those types of people will have zero interest in being in the region once the oil runs out, and the more educated amongst the local populace would leave too. It is already widely held (again, I don't have numbers for this) that the rich/powerful/educated have already secured real estate in other places should instability arise, meaning those people with means or skills would leave once the oil runs out, meaning they don't see a bright future in the region as well. With the recent news articles about the journalist being killed, all of the "modernization" thoughts people had are totally gone. There has been a lot of money thrown into architecting a modern image - all of which was completely undone in one single news cycle. I am no expert on the region though, just fielding some thoughts.
      - Nasrudith 8y ago
        They have tried some moves but they can't break from the fundamentalism making their efforts pretty moot despite all of the money they throw at it. Mystifyingly they were clearly involved with getting a Sex and the City movie set there. They could have reformed to be a productive post petrol economy but I suspect it was too late even before they decided acting like mob hitmen against journalists was a good idea. You can influence media with money but murdering journalists gives them self preservation reasons to refuse to deal with you at all. Apparently there is a pessimism / old joke there paraphrased as grandfather rode a camel, they drove a jeep, their children drove ferraris and their grandchildren will ride camels.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
jjeaff 8y ago
Replace MBS? You say that like he is in am elected position. He's the heir to an absolute monarchy. Unless by replace, you mean a coup d'état of the Saudi Royal family?
- cavanasm 8y ago
  There's no formal structure/rule for which prince leads / who is "closest" to the throne. It comes down to politics. MBS has many many siblings and cousins, essentially any of whom could "replace" him.
- alehul 8y ago
  He's only heir apparent, and that's because his father (and people believe MBS was involved) removed Muhammad bin Nayef. There doesn't have to be a coup against the entire family to change the line of succession.
- true_religion 8y ago
  Saudi Arabia does not run by a primogeniture succession. Essentially all potential male heirs can become the overall leader. So all his brothers, his uncles, and some of his cousins are possible choices. It is politics that decides which one is heir aparent.
loceng 8y ago
I believe the Trump-Russia situation coming to light has made people hypersensitive (good when it's countering a desensitization) to this kind of blatant bad behaviour. The fact that it was a Washington Post journalist may have been crucial to the level of shock it has, at least in America; a situation finally that can resonate close enough to home for us to feel some kind of impact, and in the current climate of authoritarian/totalitarian governments trying to breakdown democracy.
- loceng 8y ago
  Can only wonder if the downvotes are trolls downvoting anything negative Trump-Russia related. At -2 so far.
da02 8y ago
Right. What I am also surprised is how dirty the regime is, yet no one seems to care: * https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/iraq-crisis-how-saudi-arabia-helped-isis-take-over-the-north-of-the-country-9602312.html https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/iraq-crisis-how... * https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/hillary-clinton-wikileaks-email-isis-saudi-arabia-qatar-us-allies-funding-barack-obama-knew-all-a7362071.html https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/hillary-clinton-wikilea... * https://original.antiwar.com/dan_sanchez/2015/06/08/the-us-governments-not-so-secret-support-for-al-qaeda-and-isis/ https://original.antiwar.com/dan_sanchez/2015/06/08/the-us-g...
- kiliantics 8y ago
  They only care when it can be used as political ammunition, i.e. in this case against Trump

danboarder 8y ago

That headline makes it sound like a bad thing... yet many are concerned that valuations are inflated. So perhaps this is a blessing in disguise?

AndrewBissell 8y ago
To the extent that rich valuations are propped up by Saudi money, I think it's a great thing for them to come back down to earth.
- AndrewBissell 8y ago
  And speaking more broadly, I don't subscribe to the "higher valuations and asset prices == better" ideology, so the headline didn't read in a negative way to me. :-)
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - repsilat 8y ago
    Raising at a high valuation means more money for less dilution. Sounds good for the founders and maybe "good for America" too to me.
    - AndrewBissell 8y ago
      That depends on who's ultimately left holding the bag on the inflated valuation, and how much it attracts additional capital to potentially be wasted in a marginal business.
- hiram112 8y ago
  You obviously didn't just get married, birth a kid, and buy a 1970's ranch in the bay area for 12X your income. Got it!
  - 8y ago

anonymous5133 8y ago

First big victim appears to be virgin hyperloop one. SA pulled out of a planned $1 billion investment in the company. There was also a planned $200 billion solar project that has also been scrapped.

adventured 8y ago
The solar project was scrapped before the journalist was murdered (September 30th that news hit, versus October 2nd for when Khashoggi went missing). It was likely known the solar project wasn't going forward a while prior to the news release in September. They don't appear to be linked.
negamax 8y ago
Richard Branson said no to Saudi money after murder incident.
- swebs 8y ago
  He should have been saying this since 9/11, but better late than never, I guess.
  - true_religion 8y ago
    Give the guy a break, the US government itself cleared Saudi Arabia of culpability in 9/11 and reafirmed they were a regional ally.

raverbashing 8y ago

"endangers" So you mean just founded startups with no revenue won't be valued at millions of dollars out of thin air then?

anonymous5133 8y ago
It will mean ALL companies will be valued at less because there will be less money being thrown at these companies. Saudi money is all over silicon valley and early stage tech companies.
- fgheorghe 8y ago
  So in the name of higher valuations we should accept criminal money? Interesting thought.
  - Filligree 8y ago
    Nobody said that.
  - devdas 8y ago
    Oddly enough, it is immoral but not illegal/criminal money.
  - x220 8y ago
    >criminal money First of all, it's Silicon Valley. Check your ethics at the door. Secondly, it's not illegal if it's not against the laws of a country (and in this case, if the crown prince of a monarchy orders something, that's as close to legal as it gets). You could say that it's immoral, but that's a different statement, and you shouldn't conflate "illegal" with "immoral".
    - hobs 8y ago
      >First of all, it's Silicon Valley. Check your ethics at the door. Flip or not, this is gross. Calling a murder not a crime because a king decreed it is mind boggling. You shouldnt conflate "illegal" with "criminal".

gsibble 8y ago

So in other words, tens of thousands of Silicon Valley tech employees at companies that took investment or could be bought out by a company that took investment from a fund that took investment from anything related to Saudi money stand to lose a trenemdous amount because the Saudis murdered someone? Yeah, sounds like those employees should definitely pay the price for something they had nothing to do with.

anonymous5133 8y ago
Yes, that is basically what will happen. For those tech companies, it is live or die at this point. Assuming SA doesn't reverse course, it will mean for many companies they simply won't get more funding. It will be either start making money or seek out other forms of funding like maybe an IPO or something. Other VC firms will get flooded with companies to invest in and of course they will just go with whatever companies they feel are most worthwhile but going forward less companies will get the funding they need.
- gsibble 8y ago
  So you don’t feel bad for the employees at these companies?
  - viraptor 8y ago
    This is basically the "contractors on the Death Star" from Clerks. I feel a bit bad about their situation, but 1. There's no shortage of tech jobs, (and we've been talking about SV being a bubble for a decade or so now, why not have a plan for that case?) 2. People should be aware where their wages come from. If you know your money ultimately comes from crimes... maybe reconsider your job.
onion2k 8y ago
I don't understand your post. Why should they be isolated from the effects of what happens in the real world? It's unfortunate for them, of course, but in every situation ever things that happen have knock on effects that you can't control.

killjoywashere 8y ago

Where's the pushback against Russian funding?

adventured 8y ago
Russia is no longer the large funding source they were during the days in which a young Facebook was hoovering up their money. There's an actor ~50 times larger than Russia - and even worse on human rights - when it comes to venture capital. Where's the push-back against Chinese funding? That money is sloshing all over the valley right now, nobody cares in the least. There are no protests, no outrage, no fake performances by politicians and business persons. They've routinely disappeared journalists, human rights workers, etc. over the last decade. Most of the world is absolutely terrified to push back against China on anything at any time. There isn't a single major player in Silicon Valley with the nerve to stand up to China these days. Saudi Arabia is a convenient target (and not in any manner undeserving of the negative response they're getting), that's all that is going on. The aggressively selective outrage, magically showing up now, is how you know it's shooting at something larger.
- Cthulhu_ 8y ago
  Morals are flexible when they're offering you $100 million or more. Mine would be. And it's not directly doing something immoral, just turning a blind eye to an investor's government's actions - like one would when working with a US based investor.
  - jjeaff 8y ago
    I don't think it's quite equivalent to compare a US investor to a Chinese investor. The Chinese government has proven to be quite involved in the actions of its citizens and has been making moves to nationalize their tech sector (They also have a long history of nationalizing other sectors). While the US has meddled from time to time in private business, the rights of citizens to avoid such action are pretty well laid out. Can you imagine a Chinese company taking their government to court to refuse revealing customer data to the government like apple and other us companies have? So I think you can easily ignore the actions of the US government while taking investor money. But taking Chinese money is essentially like taking money directly from the Chinese government.

sschueller 8y ago

Other than what we read in the news, is the information of who invested in what startup public information that can be found somewhere or can these investors be kept private? I think it would be neat to have a list and map of for example the top 50 SV startups and where their money is coming from.

rcMgD2BwE72F 8y ago
It would be great to use Wikidata for that. It's already possible to add a list of investors (https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P1951 https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P1951) to companies (like Uber: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q780442 https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q780442). And then map all these startups using https://query.wikidata.org https://query.wikidata.org (it would be pretty easy to highlight the % of shares by countries / regimes, etc and point out the financial vehicles / intermediaries used for that).

CaptainZapp 8y ago

Allow me a nitpick: SA generally refers to South Africa. It's either KSA, or Saudi Arabia.

thrillgore 8y ago
ZA is the ISO Code for South Africa. SA is the ISO code for Saudi Arabia.
- CaptainZapp 8y ago
  Thanks. My mistake. I leave it there, thoguh, to not break the flow.
peterkelly 8y ago
And South Australia :)

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

sumayamanzoor 8y ago

Amazing post. It will be very helpful for beginners like me. Thank you very much for this kind of post.Waiting for your next blog https://www.fita.in/selenium-training-in-chennai/ https://www.fita.in/selenium-training-in-chennai/

sumayamanzoor 8y ago

https://www.fita.in/selenium-training-in-chennai/ https://www.fita.in/selenium-training-in-chennai/

chriselles 8y ago

I had a few lectures with Professor Ilya Strebulaev from Stanford GSB back in 2016. https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/faculty-research/faculty/ilya-strebulaev https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/faculty-research/faculty/ilya-s... He wrote a few articles. 1)How much VC drives the US economy(October,2015): https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/insights/how-much-does-venture-capital-drive-us-economy https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/insights/how-much-does-venture-... 2)Unicorns are overvalued(May,2017): https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/insights/silicon-valleys-unicorns-are-overvalued https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/insights/silicon-valleys-unicor... In class in 2016 Ilya Strebulaev(who has arguably the best VC dataset in the world) stated that 92% of VCs surveyed believed unicorns were overalued and a correction was likely. He also told our class a very memorable and self effacing story of how he placed a bet with a colleague for a bottle of nice wine on the future date of bankruptcy of GM. In order to win the bet, the GM bankruptcy had to occur prior to X date. GM’s bankruptcy was date X+1, thus losing the bet. A lesson on timing. Even when you’re “right”, you can be wrong. Perhaps a Saudi assassination “string” pulled too hard for too long could see a cascading effect. It’s inevitable we will see a correction in valuations. But I also think it’s pointless to fear it. That time is better spent building a sustainable business on a fair valuation with more challenging access to capital. YC’s suggestion for YC Batch(as well as all other) startups to be careful with not accepting money and scaling a startup at excessive valuation sounds like a solid one in this climate and the likely future.

hiram112 8y ago
> GM’s bankruptcy was date X+1, thus losing the bet. A lesson on timing. Even when you’re “right”, you can be wrong. Anyone who has tried their luck at day-trading has learned their lesson, i.e. "The Market Can Remain Irrational Longer Than You Can Remain Solvent".
- nradov 8y ago
  Plus once politics becomes involved, economic rationality goes right out the window. There's no way to reliably forecast that.
creaghpatr 8y ago

hiram112 8y ago

I'd feel bad if this were any other crew about to be gutted. But with the Silicon Valley crowd - well now I know the true definition of scha·den·freu·de!

compcoffee 8y ago
>But with the Silicon Valley crowd Yep, the SV crowd thinks they're the enlightened ones, saving the planet. Between billion dollar valuations based on blood-money, the massive financial inequality and the state surveillance apparatus they built to put us in, I doubt the proletariat think too fondly of the place.

ohiovr 8y ago

What makes this journalists blood worth more than all those murdered in Yemen or the victims of SA's overt or covert terrorism?

Illniyar 8y ago
Location and audacity. It was done in another sovereign country, one with string US and European ties, and which isn't currently in civil unrest. Also, they practically took him into their embassy, killed him and then lied about it in the most haphazard way. That represents a massive break from international status quo. Unfortunately getting involved in third-world civil wars and financing terrorist attacks is quite within the status quo.
- madza 8y ago
  Lest we forget. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraordinary_rendition https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraordinary_rendition This is not a massive break from the international status quo by a any means. The USA and all other nations have operated in a similar manner for a long time with equally gruesome outcomes. If I recall the head of Interpol “disappeared” not long ago, and that little kerfuffle died away right quick. Perhaps the reasons are more mundane. 1. The Saudis got caught out by the Turks with the evidence. Which has been used effectively. The Turks have a lot to gain by seeing the alliance between SA and the US weakened. 2. The senior leadership of SA can be more directly tied to this incident, as opposed to more common case where plausible deniability exists. Rookie mistake. 3. There exists internal opposition to the leadership in the US and SA that find it convenient to escalate the profile of this issue for their own purposes. This will blow over and business as usual will resume shortly.
  - JabavuAdams 8y ago
    The whole point of extraordinary rendition is to remove the target to another country to give some legal cover and plausible (hah) deniability to the subsequent interrogation / torture / what have you. Murdering someone in your embassy (although technically your own sovereign territory) is a new low.

qaq 8y ago

With Softbank playing such a big role I wonder if there is some component of incumbents playing this up to try to curb the influence of Softbank ? (Iremember Sequoia raising 8 bil. fund specifically because they needed a more equal footing with Softbank).

compcoffee 8y ago
>With Softbank playing such a big role I wonder if there is some component of incumbents playing this up to try to curb the influence of Softbank ? Playing what up? The fact that Silicon Valley and their new "hey, just stay private!" mentality was heavily funded by blood/oil money? Is this actually news to people that Saudi Arabia has done terrible things? Or does it only matter now that there's been a scandal? Well, thank God for the scandal, then.
- qaq 8y ago
  The cynical part of me says it matters now because there are special interests that for one reason or another have an interest in reducing SA influence or want some concession from SA and in reality it has 0 to do with SA being a brutal absolute monarchy which it has being for a long time.
  - lmm 8y ago
    Be that as it may, it's good if being a brutal absolute monarchy is a liability you can be attacked for, even if those attacks only happen when there's someone on the other side.

JustSomeNobody 8y ago

It's going to be interesting to see where this goes. Techies have been up in arms about Google and China, Microsoft and the military. What about the Saudis and murder?

netcan 8y ago

Whether this murder-scandal blows over or not, it makes the case for a random "one-damned-thing-after-another" version of history. One day, the real-politic thing works. All money is green. A feudal monarchy makes a fine ally. The next it isn't, it doesn't. The next day, one little murder in the journalist persecution capital of the world threatens to blow up the entire alliance, military, political & economic. Saudi Arabia's had an erm.. "eventful" power transition (MBS') but it isn't fundamentally different. It's a monarchy in the real, undiluted sense. Laws and courts are mostly religious. There are no rights, on paper or in practice. No freedom of speech, affiliation, religion or concious. No pretense of these either. Religion & Monarchy share power with eachother. Neither are bound by rule of law or by the people in any way. Are these barriers to alliance, trade or investment? Whatever your answer, I don't see what Khashoggi's murder changes. Yet, this murder (or some other catalyst event, if this blows over) can change everything. It really does seem like random chance.

tompccs 8y ago
That's one way of looking at it. Another is that the West's see-no-evil hear-no-evil approach to the Saudis has always been fundamentally unstable, and an event like this was bound to happen at some point. Glad that if finally has, even if it did take the murder of a journalist (who had a dubious stance on democratic rights to begin with) to light the touchpaper.
- telchar 8y ago
  I'm not convinced that this will change anything in the near term. While the Obama administration had started (cautiously) pivoting from Saudi to Iran (see the nuclear deal, increased criticism of the Saudis, very limited engagement in Syria), the current admin threw that away and has reaffirmed their affiliation with the Saudis. So while they might make a show of being upset, after the way they snubbed Iran they have nowhere to go if they want to pivot from the Saudis to a different potential regional ally. Further, Trump is expressly in favor of violence against journalists [0] so he's not going to push for punishment for this. [0] https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2018/10/19/trump-encourages-violence-against-reporters-and-his-supporters-cheer https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2018/10/19...

philipodonnell 8y ago

This can only be good, right? Less money means earlier IPOs and less dilution of founders and early employees? I don't read many "More money needed to fund startups in Silicon Valley" headlines recently...

sergefaguet 8y ago

this does not change in any way my willingness to take money from softbank. they are an investor in my current company and i will be delighted to take them in the next. i am really not sure why anyone would consider the interests of their company's fundraising strategy to be less important than that a certain investor has a large LP that is a country that had someone killed. this will blow over.

dd36 8y ago
Some companies can choose their investors.
- sergefaguet 8y ago
  and they will still choose them. on material things like terms and governance, as smart companies do. not on irrelevant things like this Khashoggi story.

oytis 8y ago

I'm glad dear industry has noticed that Saudi Arabia is an authoritarian country with no respect to rule of law and human rights. I just fear that this awareness might not last for long: big money tend to cause dementia in tech. By the way, once we're all here: China is an authoritarian country with no respect to human right as well, keep that in mind next time you read (or God forbid write) another fascinated article about Greater Bay etc.

mtw 8y ago
Don't be quick on generalization. China is not a democracy but they don't kidnap and murder people in foreign soil, and they don't bomb other countries. They don't also fund and promote extreme religion exportation, like Saudi Arabia does. Saudi is a net exporter of terrorism. If China really did all this, you would hear about thousands of Falun Gong followers kidnapped or murdered in USA or Canada. Or you would already have Taiwan and other countries like Vietnam invaded. Taiwan is a bigger pain point to China than Yemen is to Saudi Arabia.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- lenkite 8y ago
  Umm.China does indeed kidnap people off foreign soil. They just do so more efficiently and far more smartly than the incompetent House of Saud. http://theweek.com/speedreads/764194/intelligence-officials-fear-chinas-global-kidnapping-program-reached-america http://theweek.com/speedreads/764194/intelligence-officials-...
- _jgdh 8y ago
  > China is not a democracy but they don't kidnap They do kidnap people. They've kidnapped people from Hong Kong, Vietnam, Myanmar, Australia and Canada. Some of these people confess to a series of crimes and in exchange pay fines or are sentenced to long prison sentences, or they are simply never heard from again. They kidnapped a Swedish citizen from Thailand for having the audacity to publish a book critical of Xi Jinping. Source - https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/03/29/the-disappeared-china-renditions-kidnapping/ https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/03/29/the-disappeared-china-r...

pxtail 8y ago

LOL, this is so naive point of view. When that much money is involved nothing will change. There might be some ephemeral change, some PR campaign, sad nods, sad words, some companies might be rebranded etc. But unfortunately at the core nothing will change, this is sad, harsh and grim reality but when that much is at stake life of one man is not enough to tip the scales.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

bgribble 8y ago

There are "bad people" throughout the startup investment ecosystem, including but not limited to: * just plain jerks * serial harassers, misogynists and the like * supporters of various evil/hateful politics * white-collar criminal/fraudster types * straight-up mob, american, russian, or other * nation-state actors with very dirty hands like KSA Making ethical decisions about who you are willing to work for is a routine part of working in startup world... and you're never done, because surprise! You may have an even harder decision to make after that Series B closes with new investors!

writepub 8y ago

This article is admission from there VC community that valuations are basically price gouged as a function of available capital - with little, if any, scientific basis the them. This was always evident from how badly unicorns have fared in the open market post IPO - but this is a direct admission of price gouging