20 ms·
Jack Ma fell to earth and took Ant's mega IPO with him
- arcticbull 6y agoHonestly I lost all respect for Ma when I watched him debate Elon on the topic of AI last April [1]. Elon just ran circles around him. Like, Elon was playing chess and Ma was playing hopscotch with a football helmet and padded gloves. That video gave me a lot of insight into Ma's character, and frankly, the contents of the article were thoroughly unsurprising in that context. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WSKYWu-S2G0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WSKYWu-S2G0
- threatofrain 6y agoIt's extremely difficult to say that Jack Ma is an idiot because of his discussion with Elon Musk. Jack Ma has to play a parallel game of high-stakes political poker.
- reitzensteinm 6y agoAnd do it in a non native language. In Germany my friends spoke very good English, but there were still times they'd sound like the drunken ramblings of a native speaker. Only later on I'd realize the points they were trying to make and that they were running rings around me intellectually, just having trouble expressing it. That experience has left me more or less giving a free pass to ESL speakers saying things that sound dumb, especially when it's off the cuff.
- arcticbull 6y agoIt’s what he was saying — not how, in particular the part where he believed machines were incapable of being smarter than humans, because if you try to compete with them in an area they’re good at you’re dumb for doing that. He then contradicted himself by using the example of a human in a foot race with a car. Then he states that human intelligence comes from the soul anyways. To be fair, Jack Ma was an English teacher, has a Bachelor of Arts in English from Hangzhou Teachers University and he was an English lecturer at Hangzhou Dianzi University. While he may have an accent his communication style is quite clear IMO. If I thought this was at all a language or communication issue I’d never have posted it.
- reitzensteinm 6y agoWell he sounds to me like he was struggling. Very much so. If I didn't think he was, I wouldn't have posted what I did either. I agree the points he was making were vapid, and I stopped watching fairly quickly because of it. Maybe he really is an idiot, but I don't think this video was at all conclusive proof.
- yorwba 6y ago> It’s what he was saying — not how You also need to take into account to whom he was saying it. Although they were ostensibly talking to each other, Musk was speaking to the fears of Americans afraid their jobs might get automated, while Ma was addressing Chinese who hope their jobs will get automated. Consequently, their definition of "smart" is not the same. Musk equates smartness with being good at your job, while Ma thinks it's better to be "street smart" and let someone else do the work for you. Or in the car vs. human example, why try to outrun it if you could be sitting in the driver's seat? > Then he states that human intelligence comes from the soul anyways. I thought that was a clever riff on Musk's somewhat awkward "AI means love in Chinese, right?" conversation starter. > To be fair, Jack Ma was an English teacher, has a Bachelor of Arts in English from Hangzhou Teachers University and he was an English lecturer at Hangzhou Dianzi University. While he may have an accent his communication style is quite clear IMO. I don't know whether you've ever experienced a foreign-language class taught by a non-native speaker, but I've taken Academic Writing classes in English at a top Chinese university and the quality was terrible. English literacy is rare in China even though it is a mandatory subject, so the bar to becoming a teacher is quite low. Often, they'll have an excellent breadth of vocabulary, while being unfamiliar with many idiomatic expressions and cultural references that come naturally to a native speaker. That said, I did think he was communicating quite clearly, but since my understanding appears to be quite different from yours, maybe that's just a reflection of our different expectations. On the other hand, if the event was specifically organized so that they could speak past each other and endear themselves to their respective audiences, it was a genius move.
- Danieru 6y ago> "AI means love in Chinese, right?" conversation starter. Oh neat, a pun which works both in Japanese and Chinese.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- ciarannolan 6y agoJack Ma taught English at the university level [1]. He wasn't struggling for words, he's just not as smart as some had assumed. [1] https://money.cnn.com/2018/09/09/technology/business/jack-ma-alibaba-bio/index.html https://money.cnn.com/2018/09/09/technology/business/jack-ma...
- reitzensteinm 6y agoAs a sibling reply pointed out, this doesn't necessarily mean as much as you think it means.
- ciarannolan 6y agoCan you link it please? I'm not seeing it.
- reitzensteinm 6y agohttps://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25006975 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25006975 For what it's worth this matches my own limited experience from the early 2000s.
- ciarannolan 6y agoThanks! Relevant from other comment: > I don't know whether you've ever experienced a foreign-language class taught by a non-native speaker, but I've taken Academic Writing classes in English at a top Chinese university and the quality was terrible. English literacy is rare in China even though it is a mandatory subject, so the bar to becoming a teacher is quite low. Often, they'll have an excellent breadth of vocabulary, while being unfamiliar with many idiomatic expressions and cultural references that come naturally to a native speaker.
- programmertote 6y ago100% this. As a English-as-a-second-language speaker, there are times when I wish I could speak up and express my thoughts/emotions in a way that is palatable to the audience (native English speakers), but decided to stay quiet because I am not sure if it'll come out right or because my brain cannot process fast enough to speak fluently/eloquently. I consider myself fairly decent in English vocabulary and reading (not bragging but scored 720 out of 800 in both SAT and GRE verbal), but I still cannot do as well as native speakers in expressing my concerns/opinions during business meetings. Sometimes, I wish the tables are turned so that I can speak my native language and am able to make persuasive arguments in discussions. Language barrier is real and I am guessing some English speakers may never understand/empathize with the non-native speakers.
- not_a_moth 6y agoGiven that Jack Ma has been a member of the CCP since the 80s [1] I think his success has come a lot easier than Western entrepreneurs [1] https://www.cnbc.com/2018/11/27/alibabas-jack-ma-has-been-communist-party-member-since-1980s.html https://www.cnbc.com/2018/11/27/alibabas-jack-ma-has-been-co...
- dragonelite 6y agoDoes it really matters, i mean US industrial/tech giants all donate to the parties to get some advantage nationally and globally? Should we be questioning western CEO political affiliations and donations when talking about their companies?
- indigochill 6y ago> Should we be questioning western CEO political affiliations and donations when talking about their companies? Absolutely. Political affiliations speak to the philosophy of the CEO and, by proxy, how they'll lead their company. E.g. Palantir is behaving exactly as expected given Peter Thiel's politics.
- manigandham 6y agoWhat's that actually mean? Does he even have a choice to not be a member? What are the chances this is rewritten history for PR?
- dmix 6y agoI read in a book about China by New Yorker magazines China expert [1] and he said that up to a third of Chinese citizens are either party members, part of youth groups, or work directly for a CCP owned company. So it’s not everyone but it’s a lot. The actual CCP membership itself is much lower though. It’s more like an octopus in their society. [1] https://www.amazon.com/Age-Ambition-Chasing-Fortune-Truth/dp/0374535272/ https://www.amazon.com/Age-Ambition-Chasing-Fortune-Truth/dp...
- 6y ago
- malux85 6y agoJack Ma is an idiot, and he’s just surrounded himself with a bunch of yes men, who can buffer the operational, legal, financial systems that run his empire and mostly protect him ... but his true nature comes out when he’s required to engage in 1:1 discussion with anyone great. At that point there’s no filter directly to his consciousness and it’s clear, from that video, that’s he’s a total moron.
- baybal2 6y agoI knew some people who worked in Alibaba at around the time when Ma started to handing over duties to Tsai, and Zhang. All say the company was actually much better run when Ma was managing company day to day, than when after Tsai took over operations, and himself just hired tons of "pro managers" to hand over errands. At around this time (2012-2013), Tsai decided to show how much of a serious tech exec he was..., and he came with idea to do what big boy do, and rewrite all of Alibaba's core code into one True Enterprise Grade Java MegaFramework of Doom. And it was at that time when their website quality started to fall off a cliff, and they started loosing talented people who were off-put by Tsai's management... I'd say Aliexpress was much better at the time of it launch, than it is now. Alibaba, and 1688 had an even more dramatic loss of quality, and vendor oversight. P.S. People talk about party affiliation of Ma from him joining the part to be allowed to teach in eighties, while forgetting that Tsai does not even hide his affiliation with the United Front (an organisation for CPC's version of "useful idiots,)" and is a much more outspoken political player, and party appologist.
- projektfu 6y agoI’ve never really understood how one can use Alibaba effectively. It’s mostly spam from middlemen who lie about having their own factories. It must be a full time, specialized job being a purchasing manager who can use the platform.
- baybal2 6y agoThe thing is, their search used to be much better, and they had much better spam control before.
- scotty79 6y agoI wonder how different would the conversation feel if it was done in chinese not english.
- ddorian43 6y agoHe can do it with Zuckerberg. Pretty sure the result would be the same.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- arcticbull 6y agoI think that’s underselling Ma, who was an English teacher, graduated with an English degree and was an English lecturer at university.
- blackbear_ 6y agoThis is interesting because I felt the exact opposite, seeing Musk babbling incoherent ideas and Ma with a clear vision of AI's future.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- Darmody 6y agoI remember watching some of his stuff and thinking, the guy knows his stuff. But then I started watching more and it didn't make sense. He sounds more like some kind of new age guru or a motivational speaker rather than someone with a good insight into the future. He's probably in the position he is because he bows down to the CCP.
- arcticbull 6y agoMy thoughts exactly. Bowed down -- and then got too big for his britches maybe, and forgot who was actually in charge.
- Darmody 6y agoWell, maybe being under an oppressive regime makes him look dumber than he really is. If you can't say certain things and have the obligation to say others...you could end up making no sense.
- approxim8ion 6y agoI feel the same about most pundits and billionaire "visionaries" touted today, to be honest. Including Elon.
- comboy 6y agoI remember this one and I’m pretty certain he is not that stupid. Must have been political pressure. Maybe AI is/was taboo.
- tpmx 6y agoAI isn't/wasn't taboo there - the opposite, rather. https://becominghuman.ai/china-aims-to-be-a-leader-in-ai-by-2030-ec5382329034 https://becominghuman.ai/china-aims-to-be-a-leader-in-ai-by-...
- TenJack 6y agoI wonder if he just doesn't have a good enough grasp of the English language to articulate his ideas well enough. I would go as far to say that no self-made billionaire is stupid.
- arcticbull 6y ago> I would go as far to say that no self-made billionaire is stupid. Making money is far more about luck than skill. Always has been. Net worth is not a proxy for ability. [edit] Don't get me wrong I'm not saying billionaires are idiots. I'm just saying that having a fat stack is not in and of itself a proxy for aptitude. Judge that on the person instead. Just judging them on their bank balance is an unnecessary appeal to authority that hasn't historically held.
- manigandham 6y agoThat may be the case for millionaires in the right place at the right time but not for the self-made billionaires.
- Pungsnigel 6y agoI'd say normally it requires both, or extreme levels of either. Not sure normal rules apply under CCP though.
- dlkf 6y agoI'll raise you to extreme levels of both.
- cambalache 6y agoNot necessarily.You need to be smart, but not in the sense HN thinks.A charismatic, charming person can become quite wealthy if luck and connections help and still be very dumb by conventional standards. People like Kim Kardashian.
- WanderPanda 6y agoI would still argue net worth is a unbiased (if you discount for corruption) proxy for ability (in the sense of ability to create wealth = products and services that people demand). It is extremely high variance though
- manigandham 6y agoCan Ma even speak freely? I find it hard to judge a conversation when one of them is under incredible political pressure by a powerful regime that has no problem squashing him at any time.
- cambalache 6y agoSure, but to be honest Elon Musk is neither a person worth listening regarding AI.
- hungryhobo 6y agoAgreed
- ffpip 6y agoThe first comment made me laugh. ''He's not stupid. He just has a lot of Alibaba Intelligence.'' Jack Ma had said AI is Alibaba Intelligence
- knolax 6y agoSums up the HN mentality to me. "some foreign business exec didn't correctly decipher a cryptic technical abbreviation that only exists in my language correctly? What an idiot".
- franklampard 6y agoHe is also a proponent of 996. Zero respect
- dredmorbius 6y agoFor those unaware: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/996_working_hour_system https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/996_working_hour_system https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/15/business/jack-ma-996-china/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/15/business/jack-ma-996-china/in...
- fossuser 6y agoSame for me - after seeing that I became convinced he's just some figurehead the CCP put there in what's ultimately a government funded/run business. I wasn't surprised when they removed him.
- vmurthy 6y agoColour me biased but how is innovation supposed to thrive in an environment where a "miscalculated talk" is enough to halt a $37b IPO? I had heard Matt Ridley speak about how [0] innovation thrives where there is "freedom" and gives me doubts about China's capabilities to innovate as much as it wants to. [0] https://www.aier.org/article/matt-ridley-on-innovation/ https://www.aier.org/article/matt-ridley-on-innovation/
- mochialex 6y agoYou are free to grow as much as you can until it’s time to harvest
- aabhay 6y agoI think this is definitely the western assumption from events like this, that the regulators want a cut, etc. The real risk here is that once you grow big enough to pose a real risk to economic stability, AND you are clearly not publicly pledging your fealty to the state, then you get 'out of control' and Chinese culture would support reining you in. While this may seem corrupt to the US lens, I personally have to admit that this kind of action strikes me as politically savvy. Regulate before Jack makes the statement, and it seems like stifling innovation; don't regulate at all, and the capitalists gain power.
- kristianov 6y agoOn the other hand I also hope the financial elites would stop innovating with shits like "sub prime".
- Proven 6y agoYou still don't get it. The innovation is not that it exists. The rest is left as an exercise to the reader.
- ur-whale 6y agoIt all depends on what kind of "freedom" one talks about. If it's things like free speech and a wide and colorful political spectrum, then yes, China basically has no freedom. But if it's economic freedom, China has way more than most western countries. Remains to be seen which kind matters for innovation.
- oefrha 6y agoIt’s certainly weird to deliver a speech about how you operate in the gray area of regulations to facilitate risky loans and you’re proud of it and regulators are all wrong when said regulators are sitting in the audience...
- mcintyre1994 6y agoWhere did you read about the content of the speech out of interest? The article linked is pretty vague and makes it sound like he just over-aggressively criticised regulation and said there should be reform, which is just what every billionaire business owner says about the regulations in their space.
- oefrha 6y agoI haven’t seen a transcript or even an outline of the speech, but there were previous reports that went into a little more detail, e.g. also from Reuters, https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN27J0D4 https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN27J0D4: > The outspoken billionaire railed against the Basel Accords, a series of international regulations that require banks to hold a certain amount of capital, as outmoded for the modern era. He also accused Chinese lending institutions of having a “pawnshop” mentality of using collateral instead of advanced credit ratings and watchdogs of not knowing the difference between regulation and supervision. And on new regulations in draft stage to cover the current gray areas https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN27I1WB https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN27I1WB: > While it made no mention of Ant, the draft comes as regulators sharpen their focus on banks that heavily use micro-lenders or third-party technology platforms like Ant for underwriting consumer loans, amid fears of rising defaults and deteriorating asset quality in a pandemic-hit economy. I derived much of my understanding of Ant not from reporting, but rather, from talking to local sources who are more familiar with the matter. I’m on mobile now so won’t expand on this complex topic... However, if you know the Chinese language you can find plenty of criticisms of Ant’s personal credit/loan products (which, for instance, offer unsecured credit and loans to people with absolutely no income and/or collaterals, like college students, and coupled with aggressive marketing from online marketplaces including Alibaba’s Tmall, lead to hopeless debt cycles); probably less about risky business loans.
- unnouinceput 6y agoAnd if anyone was remotely believing that Chinese Party has nothing to do with their companies, this just hit the last nail on that belief. I'm looking at you Huwaei and your "we do not spy for Chinese Govt." statement from last year. As a member of an EU country, that went full Huwaei in past years regarding 5G, I'm sad that we just gave to Chinese full control over us, technologically speaking.
- hungryhobo 6y agoHow does this prove CCP has anything to do with ant? If that were the case wouldn't they want ant to ipo and reap in the capital?
- TaylorAlexander 6y agoProbably, but they can let it IPO in a few months, after making some adjustments to the structure. They are in no rush.
- hungryhobo 6y agoBut the change they are proposing significantly devalues the company
- JumpCrisscross 6y ago> How does this prove CCP has anything to do with ant? The Ant IPO has been hotly anticipated. This delay will cost many millions. The regulatory changes, billions. That these were acceptable costs to reining in Ma over nothing more than public criticism speaks miles to the party’s cost-benefit mindset. For tangible gains it implies few hurdles to extreme consequences for noncompliance.
- mytailorisrich 6y agoGovernments wield huge power over private companies if or when they decide to take action. That's obviously very true in China, but that's also true in the West. Just look at what happened to Huawei and Tiktok in the US/West, look at how Facebook is careful in order to prevent action against them, etc. That's especially true in industries that are seen as strategic (telecommunications, energy, finance, etc). Companies know that and spend a lot of efforts on building and maintaining contacts within governments.
- ngcc_hk 6y agoIt is not. Spending fake news. It is the last stand of him to fight against the authority that torture him fir 1 year and even take alibaba from him. Do not treat the victim as the killer. He was shouting before his dearth.
- yurlungur 6y agoI dunno, reading the article I get some mixed feelings about this. On one hand, it doesn't seem that bad that regulators can rein in even the biggest players and at least judging from the description the move may not be that bad for consumers. What if Ant is indeed taking too much risks and now is on its way to grow to too big to fail? On the other hand, the timing and turn of events look very capricious to say the very least.
- eunos 6y agoDo you think it's better for China's regulator to rein them before the IPO (with delaying the said IPO) or after the IPO? if the regulators rein them after the IPO, the stocks gonna crash for sure and people will speculate that the regulators might play insider trading or simply cheat international investors.
- afjl 6y agoThey should have reined them in long before the IPO date this week, when they were supposed to be doing their due diligence and assessing the risk that ANT's lending practices pose. The decision to do so after this PR broadside from Jack Ma appears (to some) as a political statement, and not truly policy-based regulation.
- geodel 6y ago> turn of events look very capricious to say the very least. In so many places that's the only way when hotshot businessman's tactics get investigated. Otherwise they wine and dine with top politicians and their brokers. So regulators can't touch them.
- robertlagrant 6y ago> China’s securities industry watchdog said subsequently that recent regulatory changes could have a “major impact” on Ant’s business structure and profit model Fabulously successful Chinese businessman criticises China. China government's response: "That's a nice business you got there. Would be a shame if anyfin' were to 'appen to it."
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- ineedasername 6y agoChina certainly wants massive internationally successful businesses, but Ma's remarks were very poorly timed. Given concerns outside of China about a loose oversight & regulatory process amidst an economic crisis, Ma's remarks played right into those criticisms. Not a smart move with an over-sensitive & censor-happy regime. Which isn't meant to justify China's actions, only to observe that the consequences of Ma's remarks weren't exactly unforeseeable.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- lm28469 6y agoThat's the difference between China and the US. In the US Capital reigns over politics, in China politics reign over Capital
- shard972 6y agoUnlike America where it's just bankers.
- zby 6y agoI don't know - but it is kind of naive to assume that he did not know what would happen after his speech.
- newbie578 6y agoStuff like this is why China will never be able to achieve its full potential. I'm not saying they won't become successful, unfortunately it is only a matter of time until they eclipse the U.S. as the world's biggest economy (having 1.3 billion citizens and not having to waste money on R&D wink wink tends to help also), however they are still holding themselves back and not managing to utilize their full potential.
- powerapple 6y agoI see this as China's advantage. The government is super flexible. There were 3k fintech p2p lending companies in last few years, because it is a new thing, the government don't know how to regulate it. Rather than waiting for regulation, it allows companies to run, and slowly put out regulation to fix problems. There are 15 fintech p2p lending companies now. The policy does not come out just for Ant, I am sure it has been for a few months at least in preparation. Ma definitely knew this is coming, that's why Ant is rushing to IPO now. In government, there might be people supporting relax regulation on finance industry, and people supporting more restrict regulation. Although I am sure Ant group's business is very profit, I don't really like how they push a credit card culture to young people. I would argue a loan is not something should be done in a few seconds, and that is not something you should be proud of.
- Barrin92 6y agoLetting financial markets and lending spiral out of control just for the sake of having a mega IPO on public display to the world is a horrible idea. I actually see this move as a good sign that Chinese governance is still very functional. They're putting the health of the financial system ahead of their image as the new finance superstar, it would have been easy to just let it go through to show off China's financial independence. Letting unregulated finance run rampart isn't a signal of achieving your full potential. It's a fairly new development maybe from the 80s onward.
- redleggedfrog 6y agoMa, come to the USA! We'd love a guy like you.
- geodel 6y agoLol. Maybe he can elucidate his views on racial justice, I am sure it will be quite enlightening.
- thecleaner 6y agoOh give me a break with this fell to earth nonsense. The IPO isnt cancelled and its not lile Ant Group has somehow become a weak business. Eventually they will get to the IPO stage and I suppose the markets will reward or punish them for theit financials.
- jessaustin 6y agoPeople don't want to think. It's easier to just slot this into the "WeWork" bucket and ignore all the details.
- ineedasername 6y agoSure, it's wrong for the PRC to retaliate against criticism. On the other hand, when regulators of an overly-sensitive & censor-happy regime start taking a closer look at you, it's probably best not to poke them in the eye. Again, that doesn't justify things, it's just that the consequence were probably foreseeable.
- bogwog 6y agoThe day the Chinese Communist Party falls is the day the US's global dominance will actually start to be threatened.
- Congeec 6y agoIf a financial institution operates like a bank but creates more risk than a bank, shouldn't it be regulated like a bank? Jack Ma said banks should ditch the "pawnshop" mindset and switch to a credit-based loan service, because his Ant's micro/small loan service is completely backed by credit rather than something risk-proof properties like a house. Ant not only acts like a bank, but also is the largest credit buerau in China. It provides loan based on the credit score it rates on its customers. This article also fails to mention the Basel Accords that Jack Ma criticized. After the 2008 financial crisis, Basel III includes regulations on "shadow banks" like Ant in addition to traditional banks. Is it possible for a bank that has only assets of 3B lends out 300B[1]? No, banks are prohibited due to regulations. But, Ant already did. They created an Asset-Backed Security (ABS) via a process called securitization. It is unprecedented that a financial institution with such big financial leverage and a large amount loan going unregulated. A pawnshop is at least backed by real properties like houses. What back the risk Ant create? Consumers' credit? If I still cannot make you understand, please google "2008 MBS ABS". You'd be surprised at the similarity of what Ant's been doing and what caused the financial crisis. I sincerely hope hacker news readers take a look into the underlying financial bubble rather than "Chinese government reaps tech innovator" to which this article tries to mislead you. [1] https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=zh-CN&u=https://dy.163.com/article/FQHFENEB0519E14O.html&prev=search&pto=aue https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=zh-CN&u=http...
- wbc 6y agoWhere do you get the 3/300B numbers? Didn't see them from the article. If true, that would be an insane amount of leverage.
- Congeec 6y agoSorry I don't have an English source but translation https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=zh-CN&u=https://dy.163.com/article/FQHFENEB0519E14O.html&prev=search&pto=aue https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=zh-CN&u=http...
- blueblisters 6y agoThe real question people are asking is why now? Didn't the regulators have enough time to assess the irregularities earlier? A $30 billion IPO plan couldn't have been made public without the regulators giving at least some in-principle approval, and I'm sure Jack Ma knows how to navigate the bureaucracy/politics in China before he would make such plans public. I don't understand Chinese politics much but this just reeks of vendetta. >After the 2008 financial crisis, Basel III includes regulations on "shadow banks" like Ant in addition to traditional banks. Is it possible for a bank that has only assets of 3B lends out 300B? But, Ant already did. They created an Asset-Backed Security (ABS) via a process called securitization. It is unprecedented that a financial institution with such big financial leverage and a large amount loan going unregulated. If that's the case, why were they being allowed to continue as a privately-owned lender for so long?
- tpmx 6y agoThis post suddenly fell off the front page ~6 hours ago and now reappeared. Moderators manually unflagging it?
- ineedasername 6y agoI wonder how much of this is deliberate realpolitik calculation on the part of the PRC: Amidst international concerns about their regulatory & oversight process, Ma gave them an extremely visible opportunity to appear to crack down in a way that increases their regulatory credibility. They don't even need to actually change anything: They can simply let Ma pay lip service to addressing regulator concerns and proceed with the IPO in another 6 months with very little lost except a bit of time. China then reaps the benefits of both another massively successful corporation and the perception of tighter regulation.
- A4ET8a8uTh0 6y agoI find the language used by Reuters odd. Can someone explain the odd amount of glee it seems to take at Jack's change of fortune? I am not aware of any inherent bias thus, but I can't tell if Reuters is becoming more clickbaity or there is some actual bias behind it.
- vermontdevil 6y agoLearned something about the pawn shop industry in China. Had no idea.
- watertom 6y agoIt seemed like a giant scam. I think the CCP got cold feet and use Jack's comments to avoid a much bigger embarrassment.
- TearsInTheRain 6y agoIm curious if this will have chilling effects on investment in China.
- llsf 6y agoOr is it a brilliant move to justify the introduction of Ant in NYSE/NASDAQ ? It is hard to imagine that Ma did not anticipate the possibility of the regulator reacting to his speech. If he did anticipate, then it becomes part of the plan. If he did not anticipate it, then it would be a mistake.
- blackrock 6y agoNews finally started to emerge about Ant after this incident. It turns out, Ant is more of a loan shark, and giving out loans at 15% interest. However, Ant is operating as a financial company, but without the regulations of a financial company. Meaning that Ant was only keeping 2% of money to back up their loans, and lending out at a 50-to-1 ratio. Whereas financial companies had to keep 30% available. And there were other news that Ant was merely acting as a finder, and routing the customers to the banks, who took on the financial risk of giving out the loan. All of it sounds rather risky. Things are good when the good times roll, but what happens when the wheels fall off the car? Ant’s premise was that they were smart enough to know who were good credit risks, and who wasn’t, by using their AI system to monitor things on your phone, like your battery life, and how quickly you paid your bills. Things that quite frankly sounds superficial and irrelevant in the greater scheme of things. The basic question is: What happens when the music stops? Who will be left to pick up the pieces if Ant fails?
- SZJX 6y agoFrom what we can see so far (also reported in this Reuters article), he seems to have made the speech fully knowing the upcoming regulatory changes. It seemed to be his last gambit to try to appeal to whoever is relevant out there (e.g. central government) to stop the regulators from enacting tougher rules, since changing the required funding level for loans from 2% to 30% will no doubt make the originally envisioned IPO valuation completely moot. It might have been a case where Ant has been planning the IPO for some time already, but in the meantime the regulators became determined to rein in the rampant private loan industry. Even though the older generations were renowned for saving, the young generation is being encouraged to borrow like there's no tomorrow, and the situation is becoming a lot like the US. Shadow banking has been a huge problem in China for a few years already (you can easily Google news reports about it). This is a huge risk that the regulators will understandably want to curb, especially given the uncertainty this year. I think it's a case of Ma knowing of this regulatory change but still wanting to salvage the original valuation of the IPO, just as any capitalist would want to try to do, but failed. So there might be no point in reading too much into it and dismissing the situation to an essentialist argument "because China/CCP, of course this happened...". Sure, in other countries the regulators might not move so resolutely to halt an IPO. But from what we can see the motive is genuine and out of concerns of the crazily leveraged business model, instead of anything dirty or political.
- sizt 6y agoccp are gangsters and jack ma is a tool