5 ms·

Does "TikTok" here refer to worldwide or just USA only? I also didn't understand how USA forced TikTok to sell the company it owned.

chomp 6y ago
I believe it's the US-based operations, which includes USA, Australia, New Zealand, and Canada. The story of how the US can force them to sell is long, but it boils down to some powers granted to the President that allow the office to freeze assets of foreign people or groups if they're determined to be a threat to the American economy or national security. It's useful in that it allows the US to freeze assets for e.g. terrorist organizations, but also as we can see, can be abused somewhat.
- throwaway122378 6y ago
  Abused? China is actively allowed to spread its all hearing and seeing app in the US while US social media companies are banned from operating in China.
rich_sasha 6y ago
Re the forced sale: I think USA is saying, unless TikTok (US operations) is owned by a US-company, it gets outright banned in the US. So TikTok the company needs to choose between the loss of revenue, and a buyout price (presumably affected by the sale under duress). Quite naughty policy, you could say, though probably insignificant compared to what China does to western companies.
- echelon 6y ago
  > though probably insignificant compared to what China does to western companies. It's certainly not espionage. And we're not brain draining away top talent with above-market, state-funded pay (anticompetitive, but nice to the workers that get offers -- something maybe we should do). While we're not being nearly as imposing as China has with US companies, we need to be careful. Tesla, Starbucks, Apple, and a whole host of other American companies are making quite a lot of money in China. If we escalate, we might expect the same treatment. I think the safer play is to decentralize the supply chain by re-outsourcing to Vietnam, India, Mexico, and Africa in the near term, then re-onshore with automation in the long term. We should also try to duplicate the whole One Belt thing. It'd give us allies, influence, and hedge our risks.
paulpauper 6y ago
the deal was already in the works before Trump threatened to block it. The odds to Trump actually following through on this in the event of no sale, are extremely low. It may not even be Constitutionally enforceable.
- parliament32 6y ago
  It's almost definitely not legal, but I suspect it will regardless get pulled from the app stores until a lengthy legal process goes through, which will kill the market anyway.
alfalfasprout 6y ago
Will probably be downvoted like crazy but it's insane that the US would allow TikTok to operate in the US when China doesn't allow most US apps to be used at all. If the Chinese want equal access to US markets they need to cooperate too.
- xster 6y ago
  This keeps coming up but it's not factual https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/tiktok-china-state-media-accuses-us-of-trying-to-steal-the-app https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/tiktok-china-state-medi... According to Lee Kai-Fu who launched Google in China: "Chinese laws are clear about what foreign companies can do to operate in China. In TikTok's case, though, the company was left no choice but to consider a forced sale." China doesn't not allow western companies to operate. Google proactively made the choice to exit China (it also somewhat didn't. Google ads has a sizable market share in China as does Facebook). I'm not arguing that they should have elected to follow Chinese laws but the actions the Chinese government took with western companies was not to either tell them to stop existing in the Chinese market or abdicate their ownership to a domestic company. These were also the same laws domestic companies follow. Conversely, I don't see the executive actions being applied to TikTok applied uniformly to the US market.
  - alfalfasprout 6y ago
    Being complicit in censorship and outright disrespecting user's privacy isn't exactly what I mean.
  - mantap 6y ago
    How many western social networks can you name that work in China? Zuck literally asked Xi Jinping to name his child he wanted to be in China so much and he still got denied.

chomp 6y ago

I believe it's the US-based operations, which includes USA, Australia, New Zealand, and Canada. The story of how the US can force them to sell is long, but it boils down to some powers granted to the President that allow the office to freeze assets of foreign people or groups if they're determined to be a threat to the American economy or national security. It's useful in that it allows the US to freeze assets for e.g. terrorist organizations, but also as we can see, can be abused somewhat.

throwaway122378 6y ago
Abused? China is actively allowed to spread its all hearing and seeing app in the US while US social media companies are banned from operating in China.

rich_sasha 6y ago

Re the forced sale: I think USA is saying, unless TikTok (US operations) is owned by a US-company, it gets outright banned in the US. So TikTok the company needs to choose between the loss of revenue, and a buyout price (presumably affected by the sale under duress). Quite naughty policy, you could say, though probably insignificant compared to what China does to western companies.

echelon 6y ago
> though probably insignificant compared to what China does to western companies. It's certainly not espionage. And we're not brain draining away top talent with above-market, state-funded pay (anticompetitive, but nice to the workers that get offers -- something maybe we should do). While we're not being nearly as imposing as China has with US companies, we need to be careful. Tesla, Starbucks, Apple, and a whole host of other American companies are making quite a lot of money in China. If we escalate, we might expect the same treatment. I think the safer play is to decentralize the supply chain by re-outsourcing to Vietnam, India, Mexico, and Africa in the near term, then re-onshore with automation in the long term. We should also try to duplicate the whole One Belt thing. It'd give us allies, influence, and hedge our risks.

paulpauper 6y ago

the deal was already in the works before Trump threatened to block it. The odds to Trump actually following through on this in the event of no sale, are extremely low. It may not even be Constitutionally enforceable.

parliament32 6y ago
It's almost definitely not legal, but I suspect it will regardless get pulled from the app stores until a lengthy legal process goes through, which will kill the market anyway.

alfalfasprout 6y ago

Will probably be downvoted like crazy but it's insane that the US would allow TikTok to operate in the US when China doesn't allow most US apps to be used at all. If the Chinese want equal access to US markets they need to cooperate too.

xster 6y ago
This keeps coming up but it's not factual https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/tiktok-china-state-media-accuses-us-of-trying-to-steal-the-app https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/tiktok-china-state-medi... According to Lee Kai-Fu who launched Google in China: "Chinese laws are clear about what foreign companies can do to operate in China. In TikTok's case, though, the company was left no choice but to consider a forced sale." China doesn't not allow western companies to operate. Google proactively made the choice to exit China (it also somewhat didn't. Google ads has a sizable market share in China as does Facebook). I'm not arguing that they should have elected to follow Chinese laws but the actions the Chinese government took with western companies was not to either tell them to stop existing in the Chinese market or abdicate their ownership to a domestic company. These were also the same laws domestic companies follow. Conversely, I don't see the executive actions being applied to TikTok applied uniformly to the US market.
- alfalfasprout 6y ago
  Being complicit in censorship and outright disrespecting user's privacy isn't exactly what I mean.
- mantap 6y ago
  How many western social networks can you name that work in China? Zuck literally asked Xi Jinping to name his child he wanted to be in China so much and he still got denied.