4 ms·

Why would it be sold at a deep discount? About 45% of the US population uses TikTok and 63% of teens aged 13 to 17 report using TikTok, with 57% of them using

by bko 2y ago

Why would it be sold at a deep discount? About 45% of the US population uses TikTok and 63% of teens aged 13 to 17 report using TikTok, with 57% of them using the app daily Hell of a product, there would be a crazy bidding war for that kind of engagement

burnte 2y ago
In a fire sale the seller has no leverage.
- drexlspivey 2y ago
  The seller doesn't need any leverage if there are many interested buyers
  - sulam 2y ago
    If you have to get a sale done, it will absolutely create a discount on the price. This is regardless of the interest — all parties know you have a time limit. Yes you may still do a sale quickly and the price may still be at a premium to your last funding round or whatever you want to use as a mark to market, but it will be at a discount to what you could have gotten.
slt2021 2y ago
if US government says who is allowed to buy and buyers collude (by pooling financial and political capital together) they can easily not fight a bidding war and lowball instead
- swatcoder 2y ago
  Can you give an example of how the most eligible buyers might collude in a way that benefits them all equally, so that this would happen? For me, it's very hard to conceive of any concrete way that would work. It's a brand, some partnerships, and a network of users that would all go to whatever buyer, and would give that buyer a huge benefit over their existing domestic competitors. So under what circumstances would those domestic competitors allow that instead of aggresively trying to secure it for themselves? I'm open to believing you, I just don't see what you have in mind.
  - slt2021 2y ago
    only very few rich people can mobilize financial and political capital to pull off tiktok purchase. Larry Ellison (since he is CIA/MIC friendly and tiktok is already running on Oracle cloud) Zuck has too much conflict to acquire tiktok, but other oligarchs like Musk/bezos/gates can pull it off, given their recent meetings with Trump
    - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
      > only very few rich people can mobilize financial and political capital to pull off tiktok purchase Why do you assume only a natural person can buy TikTok? Why do you assume you need political capital? The law doesn’t provide that much executive deference in enforcement.
      - slt2021 2y ago
        Elon musk is an example of acquisition of global social network. Political capital is needed because the tiktok question is politicized heavily (national security as a reason). Plus FTC will review the acquisition process as well. Do you have a counter example?
        JumpCrisscross 2y ago
        > FTC will review the acquisition process as well Why? > Political capital is needed because the tiktok question is politicized heavily (national security as a reason) This is entirely meaningless. You don’t need political capital to maintain the status quo. > Do you have a counter example? To your hypothetical? My example is the law. FACA is tightly defined. Bytedance needs to divest to a non-FAC to return to the status quo. Trump could do something else to fuck with them. But that’s true of anyone anywhere.
        slt2021 2y ago
        Hart-Scott-Rodino Improvements Act requires FTC to approve all large M&A deals + DoJ needs to do antitrust review https://www.ftc.gov/advice-guidance/competition-guidance/guide-antitrust-laws/mergers/premerger-notification-merger-review-process https://www.ftc.gov/advice-guidance/competition-guidance/gui...
- xnx 2y ago
  How would that collusion work?
  - slt2021 2y ago
    syndication. Pool political and financial capital together to win the bidding from smaller less connected buyers, and share the final ownership
    - xnx 2y ago
      That seems like it would work, but how would they portion out the final ownership? Maybe the person who bid the most could get the most shares?
      - slt2021 2y ago
        Rich people can always find a common ground and negotiate deals among themselves, its what they do every day. As a rich person I’d rather get 30% of tiktok with 99% certainty by committing 30% of capital needed, rather than 100% of tiktok with 30% certainty and committing 100% of capital needed.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > if US government says who is allowed to buy It doesn’t. The courts do. TikTok could be sold to a Hungarian businessman. As long as it can’t be proved they aren’t controlled by China, they should be allowed to reënter app stores.
  - zanellato19 2y ago
    Are the courts not US government? Do you think there isn't any collusion between Supreme Court and the other branches of government?
    - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
      > Are the courts not US government? Generally speaking, we tend to refer to governments in countries with independent judiciaries as being separate from their courts. The same way we refer to the government in parliamentary democracies separately from their parliaments. (Or governments separately from a country’s people, even though one is a subset of the other.) > Do you think there isn't any collusion between Supreme Court and the other branches of government? Not super relevant here. This SCOTUS barely upheld the ban with Bytedance as the owner.
      - zanellato19 2y ago
        > Not super relevant here. This SCOTUS barely upheld the ban with Bytedance as the owner. Given that the Court has been lobbied by billionaires, I find really hard to believe they wouldn't help an US company to buy it instead of a Hungarian or any other one.
Larrikin 2y ago
Because if the Chinese government actually is using it or plans to use it as a propaganda tool there is no amount of money they would accept. The fact that it wasn't sold to a US company offers credibility to the fact that the product is useless to China if it's controlled by a US company and they wanted to keep the data they learned about addiction to themselves. Also probably wanted to build some outrage among young users for the government banning their favorite app The sell or be banned part, instead of just banned, was most certainly lobbied for by the US social media companies hoping to get it on the off chance it had served its purpose, wasn't as useful as China had hoped, or the slim chance they really did just want Americans to copy dance trends.

by bko 2y ago

burnte 2y ago

In a fire sale the seller has no leverage.

drexlspivey 2y ago
The seller doesn't need any leverage if there are many interested buyers
- sulam 2y ago
  If you have to get a sale done, it will absolutely create a discount on the price. This is regardless of the interest — all parties know you have a time limit. Yes you may still do a sale quickly and the price may still be at a premium to your last funding round or whatever you want to use as a mark to market, but it will be at a discount to what you could have gotten.

slt2021 2y ago

if US government says who is allowed to buy and buyers collude (by pooling financial and political capital together) they can easily not fight a bidding war and lowball instead

swatcoder 2y ago
Can you give an example of how the most eligible buyers might collude in a way that benefits them all equally, so that this would happen? For me, it's very hard to conceive of any concrete way that would work. It's a brand, some partnerships, and a network of users that would all go to whatever buyer, and would give that buyer a huge benefit over their existing domestic competitors. So under what circumstances would those domestic competitors allow that instead of aggresively trying to secure it for themselves? I'm open to believing you, I just don't see what you have in mind.
- slt2021 2y ago
  only very few rich people can mobilize financial and political capital to pull off tiktok purchase. Larry Ellison (since he is CIA/MIC friendly and tiktok is already running on Oracle cloud) Zuck has too much conflict to acquire tiktok, but other oligarchs like Musk/bezos/gates can pull it off, given their recent meetings with Trump
  - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
    > only very few rich people can mobilize financial and political capital to pull off tiktok purchase Why do you assume only a natural person can buy TikTok? Why do you assume you need political capital? The law doesn’t provide that much executive deference in enforcement.
    - slt2021 2y ago
      Elon musk is an example of acquisition of global social network. Political capital is needed because the tiktok question is politicized heavily (national security as a reason). Plus FTC will review the acquisition process as well. Do you have a counter example?
      - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
        > FTC will review the acquisition process as well Why? > Political capital is needed because the tiktok question is politicized heavily (national security as a reason) This is entirely meaningless. You don’t need political capital to maintain the status quo. > Do you have a counter example? To your hypothetical? My example is the law. FACA is tightly defined. Bytedance needs to divest to a non-FAC to return to the status quo. Trump could do something else to fuck with them. But that’s true of anyone anywhere.
        slt2021 2y ago
        Hart-Scott-Rodino Improvements Act requires FTC to approve all large M&A deals + DoJ needs to do antitrust review https://www.ftc.gov/advice-guidance/competition-guidance/guide-antitrust-laws/mergers/premerger-notification-merger-review-process https://www.ftc.gov/advice-guidance/competition-guidance/gui...
xnx 2y ago
How would that collusion work?
- slt2021 2y ago
  syndication. Pool political and financial capital together to win the bidding from smaller less connected buyers, and share the final ownership
  - xnx 2y ago
    That seems like it would work, but how would they portion out the final ownership? Maybe the person who bid the most could get the most shares?
    - slt2021 2y ago
      Rich people can always find a common ground and negotiate deals among themselves, its what they do every day. As a rich person I’d rather get 30% of tiktok with 99% certainty by committing 30% of capital needed, rather than 100% of tiktok with 30% certainty and committing 100% of capital needed.
JumpCrisscross 2y ago
> if US government says who is allowed to buy It doesn’t. The courts do. TikTok could be sold to a Hungarian businessman. As long as it can’t be proved they aren’t controlled by China, they should be allowed to reënter app stores.
- zanellato19 2y ago
  Are the courts not US government? Do you think there isn't any collusion between Supreme Court and the other branches of government?
  - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
    > Are the courts not US government? Generally speaking, we tend to refer to governments in countries with independent judiciaries as being separate from their courts. The same way we refer to the government in parliamentary democracies separately from their parliaments. (Or governments separately from a country’s people, even though one is a subset of the other.) > Do you think there isn't any collusion between Supreme Court and the other branches of government? Not super relevant here. This SCOTUS barely upheld the ban with Bytedance as the owner.
    - zanellato19 2y ago
      > Not super relevant here. This SCOTUS barely upheld the ban with Bytedance as the owner. Given that the Court has been lobbied by billionaires, I find really hard to believe they wouldn't help an US company to buy it instead of a Hungarian or any other one.

Larrikin 2y ago

Because if the Chinese government actually is using it or plans to use it as a propaganda tool there is no amount of money they would accept. The fact that it wasn't sold to a US company offers credibility to the fact that the product is useless to China if it's controlled by a US company and they wanted to keep the data they learned about addiction to themselves. Also probably wanted to build some outrage among young users for the government banning their favorite app The sell or be banned part, instead of just banned, was most certainly lobbied for by the US social media companies hoping to get it on the off chance it had served its purpose, wasn't as useful as China had hoped, or the slim chance they really did just want Americans to copy dance trends.