7 ms·

> After a $75 million fundraising round led by U.S. venture firm Benchmark in May 2025, Manus shut its China offices in July, laying off dozens of employees. It

by wxw 6mo ago

> After a $75 million fundraising round led by U.S. venture firm Benchmark in May 2025, Manus shut its China offices in July, laying off dozens of employees. It then moved its operations to Singapore. > It was not immediately clear on what grounds China was seeking the annulment of a deal involving a Singapore-based company and how, if at all, a completed acquisition transaction would be unwound. > Manus' two co-founders, CEO Xiao Hong and chief scientist Ji Yichao, were summoned to Beijing for talks with regulators in March and later barred from leaving the country, five sources familiar with the matter said. Will be interesting to see how this plays out.

stego-tech 6mo ago
I suspect this is more of a warning shot to others attempting the same playbook ("Singapore-washing", as I've heard folks call it): the state is watching, and shifting geopolitics means it's in their interest to retain successful talent and entities at home rather than let opposition have them. If anything, I'm genuinely surprised it took them this long. America's been doing this for decades without much in the way of pushback, so China must feel very confident in its position to use such tactics.
- aesch 6mo ago
  I don't know if America has done anything quite like this. The example I'm looking for is where a company starts in the US but leaves and incorporates outside the US and then the US attempts to block acquisition by a foreign company. Also, the enforcement mechanism while vague seems un-American. America might tax the company upon exit but it wouldn't hold the founders hostage in America. If you have examples I'd be curious.
  - rzerowan 6mo ago
    Famously back in the day Grindr , which had a plot point in the Silicon Valley series . Probably more obscure ones that havent been heard of outside software in the Hard tech space like MotorSich (Ukranian) was being courted by Chinese investment got blocked due to US pressure. And very recently the whole TikTok fiasco.
  - deleted 6mo ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 6mo ago
    [deleted]
  - vkou 6mo ago
    The US doesn't need to do 'something like this', they can just bar you from the global financial system if they don't like you. [1] Or just order another country to snatch you up. > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meng_Wanzhou https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meng_Wanzhou She was arrested, and was being extradited from Canada into the United States... Because her Chinese company was doing business with Iran. > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viktor_Bout https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viktor_Bout This chap was arrested in Thailand, extradited, and did a decade in a US prison because he had the audacity of selling weapons from Russia to Colombia. I'm not sure how exactly US law is of any relevance to such transactions... --- [1] Or, since 2025, just shoot a missile at your boat, with an option for a follow-up salvo if there any survivors. Strangely enough, everyone who has managed to survive both the initial attack, and the double-tap has so far been repatriated to their countries of origin, with no charges filed by the US.
  - cermicelli 6mo ago
    US has blocked merges of companies especially with Chinese and other non western companies. Including Japan, India etc. For instance US Steel acquisition by Nippon Steel(japanese) is one such example. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cx2vz83pg9eo https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cx2vz83pg9eo More examples, Ant Group(chinese) tried to buy MoneyGram (blocked in 2018) https://www.reuters.com/article/business/us-blocks-moneygram-sale-to-chinas-ant-financial-on-national-security-concern-idUSKBN1ET039/ https://www.reuters.com/article/business/us-blocks-moneygram... Xiamen Sanan Optoelectronics tried buying Lumileds, blocked again by US. Also Chinese ofc. Broadcom and Qualcomm deal was also blocked, Broadcom was then Singapore based in process of moving to US I believe... (very sus happened in 2018 too, someone didn't pay Donald enough) https://thediplomat.com/2014/02/india-inc-and-the-cfius-national-security-review/ https://thediplomat.com/2014/02/india-inc-and-the-cfius-nati... Indian company forced to divest from US tech firm... (2013) I am certain there must be European examples as well but smaller ofc, AI companies are over valued these days, most acquisitions were never this big in the olden days of pre 2020s... I know for a fact that most folks don't want to invest in US for this reason other than in public equities or bonds ofc. Private foreign investment in US has been high only due to European pensions and Middle-eastern money going into it. I don't know about how fair, far, or right it was compared to these were, detaining founders is also not confirmed, but sure let's assume it's true still... Only difference in US is perhaps foreign folks can sue over it. Sometimes, if they are lucky and if the deal is worth it. I find it strange people of HN being based in US can be so ill informed of what their country, does to foreign companies but be mad about things foreign companies do to them? I mean sure rest(96%) of the world doesn't really exist, it's but a myth or a land the better folks of US only want to take value when needed? Unsure what this comment meant, this has happened before as well btw, these are just post 2010s examples because they are relevant. Russians and US used to do this too, India and US were worse of pre-2000s, Japan and US were at their throats in 1980s, in terms of trade and acquisition...
  - DontBreakAlex 6mo ago
    You don't need to incorporate in the US for this to happen to you. You should look up what happened to Marc Lasus after he founded Gemplus (spoiler, he's on social security while the company the CIA stole from him has $3b revenue) or how Frédéric Pierucci was taken hostage to force the sale of France's nuclear reactors to General Electric. I assume the US does this to all the other countries too.
    - justinclift 6mo ago
      For reference: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fr%C3%A9d%C3%A9ric_Pierucci#Imprisonment_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fr%C3%A9d%C3%A9ric_Pierucci#Im... This is relevant too: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-47765974 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-47765974
  - capitalhilbilly 6mo ago
    Being stopped that late is a bit different than the US AFAIK, but there is certainly the possibility of being stopped from work and (depending how you react) prevented from leaving the US for purely economic inventions: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invention_Secrecy_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invention_Secrecy_Act I find it notable that the US' actual checks on government have worked against expanding the secrecy act further into economic protectionism for favored industries, etc.
  - cma 6mo ago
    We maintained control of EUV tech after selling key parts to the Dutch, but that came out of US public-private partnerships and not pure private.
- reissbaker 6mo ago
  You've been all over this this thread responding with the same whataboutist comments claiming America does the same thing. And yet, I'm pretty sure America hasn't held American citizens hostage in order to force them to unwind a sale of a foreign company they founded to a different foreign company.
  - stego-tech 6mo ago
    [flagged]
    - nerdsniper 6mo ago
      Just last year the USA de-banked (from EU banks) EU citizens who are International Criminal Court officials for "opening preliminary investigations against Israeli personnel". The USA wields incredible power over financial interactions.
      - stego-tech 6mo ago
        THANK YOU, I knew I was overlooking a recent example in favor of historical ones!
        Alive-in-2025 6mo ago
        Trump is making it worse, but there had been examples of bad behavior. Now the US is completely uncontrolled. I can't say we wouldn't do something like happened here (trying to stop a foreign company from selling stuff or developing stuff) if it was doing something significant about weapons or ai.
      - deleted 6mo ago
        [deleted]
    - stickfigure 6mo ago
      > You're right. You should have just left it at that.
    - 6mo ago
- strangegecko 6mo ago
  What examples do you have of the US government doing to CEOs what has happened to people like Jack Ma and many other public figures? For China, there are so many examples of people doing 180s and being full of contrition after those interventions, it's hard to imagine anything but severe intimidation or worse happening behind closed doors.
  - ninjagoo 6mo ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Nacchio https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Nacchio
    - refurb 6mo ago
      A guy committing insider trading ain’t the same thing
  - cma 6mo ago
    https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2025/01/16/congress/tiktok-sponsor-trump-inauguration-party-00198825 https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2025/01/16/congress/ti...
- axus 6mo ago
  I'm totally fine with what-about-ism here; making China a better place to live and do business is out of my jurisdiction and doesn't help me, encouraging the USA to do better will.
paulsutter 6mo ago
It's easy to see how this will play out. The entrepreneurs will get nothing. Most likely everyone else that has been paid (investors, etc) will keep what they received. Whether Meta or the CCP ends up with the proceeds of the entrepreneurs, that's anyone's guess.
itopaloglu83 6mo ago
Looks like the issue will be “dealt with” though we don’t know how exactly.
throw03172019 6mo ago
Dealt with is the founders / team / investors losing out of the $2B. That’s the punishment from China.
- giwook 6mo ago
  Somehow I think there is a real possibility more will happen. Barring them from leaving the country feels a bit sinister for people who haven't been accused of committing any crimes. I don't claim to know what's going on outside of what's being reported, but I'm reminded of other individuals who have "stepped out of line" (as determined by Beijing) and were also either barred from the country or mysteriously disappeared for weeks or months at a time only to randomly reappear at some point singing a different tune.
  - soperj 6mo ago
    > Barring them from leaving the country feels a bit sinister for people who haven't been accused of committing any crimes. Feels like Guantanamo Bay all over again.
    - EA-3167 6mo ago
      In what conceivable way?
      - T-A 6mo ago
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Residential_Surveillance_at_a_Designated_Location https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Residential_Surveillance_at_a_...
        EA-3167 6mo ago
        This seems like, to be very very VERY generous as per the guidelines, a case of limited superficial similarities being blown out of proportion. Assuming the best of intentions.
skeledrew 6mo ago
The co-founders have roots in China. As such it's already a done deal that China will get its way.
kelnos 6mo ago
The third quote seems to invalidate the second, no? Under the "grounds" that key people are currently physically in China, and as such, the Chinese government can coerce them to do whatever it wants. Though I suppose if those two did not have majority ownership of the company, the actual (former) majority owners can refuse to unwind the sale regardless of their wishes. Company might be worth quite a bit less to Meta without those key people, though. Either way, I assume the two people stuck in China won't be seeing a dime of that sale price, which is not cool. (This is regardless of my feelings about Meta owning more AI capability...)
mc32 6mo ago
Their mistake was not reading the tea-leaves. Just as Youxia Zhang, Weidong He, etc. Although to be fair the party elders and generals were in a no-win situation. They could not just "leave." They were likely baited to come in with some pretense and once they had them, they would not and will not let them get away.
dchftcs 6mo ago
The two cofounders will not be able to work for Meta. Probably it will be complicated to distribute Manus in Hong Kong, possibly Singapore too. But Manus's IP was already transferred and in any case Meta is not legally doing business in China, so Manus will still live on, possibly get rebranded.

by wxw 6mo ago

stego-tech 6mo ago

I suspect this is more of a warning shot to others attempting the same playbook ("Singapore-washing", as I've heard folks call it): the state is watching, and shifting geopolitics means it's in their interest to retain successful talent and entities at home rather than let opposition have them. If anything, I'm genuinely surprised it took them this long. America's been doing this for decades without much in the way of pushback, so China must feel very confident in its position to use such tactics.

aesch 6mo ago
I don't know if America has done anything quite like this. The example I'm looking for is where a company starts in the US but leaves and incorporates outside the US and then the US attempts to block acquisition by a foreign company. Also, the enforcement mechanism while vague seems un-American. America might tax the company upon exit but it wouldn't hold the founders hostage in America. If you have examples I'd be curious.
- rzerowan 6mo ago
  Famously back in the day Grindr , which had a plot point in the Silicon Valley series . Probably more obscure ones that havent been heard of outside software in the Hard tech space like MotorSich (Ukranian) was being courted by Chinese investment got blocked due to US pressure. And very recently the whole TikTok fiasco.
- deleted 6mo ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 6mo ago
  [deleted]
- vkou 6mo ago
  The US doesn't need to do 'something like this', they can just bar you from the global financial system if they don't like you. [1] Or just order another country to snatch you up. > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meng_Wanzhou https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meng_Wanzhou She was arrested, and was being extradited from Canada into the United States... Because her Chinese company was doing business with Iran. > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viktor_Bout https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viktor_Bout This chap was arrested in Thailand, extradited, and did a decade in a US prison because he had the audacity of selling weapons from Russia to Colombia. I'm not sure how exactly US law is of any relevance to such transactions... --- [1] Or, since 2025, just shoot a missile at your boat, with an option for a follow-up salvo if there any survivors. Strangely enough, everyone who has managed to survive both the initial attack, and the double-tap has so far been repatriated to their countries of origin, with no charges filed by the US.
- cermicelli 6mo ago
  US has blocked merges of companies especially with Chinese and other non western companies. Including Japan, India etc. For instance US Steel acquisition by Nippon Steel(japanese) is one such example. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cx2vz83pg9eo https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cx2vz83pg9eo More examples, Ant Group(chinese) tried to buy MoneyGram (blocked in 2018) https://www.reuters.com/article/business/us-blocks-moneygram-sale-to-chinas-ant-financial-on-national-security-concern-idUSKBN1ET039/ https://www.reuters.com/article/business/us-blocks-moneygram... Xiamen Sanan Optoelectronics tried buying Lumileds, blocked again by US. Also Chinese ofc. Broadcom and Qualcomm deal was also blocked, Broadcom was then Singapore based in process of moving to US I believe... (very sus happened in 2018 too, someone didn't pay Donald enough) https://thediplomat.com/2014/02/india-inc-and-the-cfius-national-security-review/ https://thediplomat.com/2014/02/india-inc-and-the-cfius-nati... Indian company forced to divest from US tech firm... (2013) I am certain there must be European examples as well but smaller ofc, AI companies are over valued these days, most acquisitions were never this big in the olden days of pre 2020s... I know for a fact that most folks don't want to invest in US for this reason other than in public equities or bonds ofc. Private foreign investment in US has been high only due to European pensions and Middle-eastern money going into it. I don't know about how fair, far, or right it was compared to these were, detaining founders is also not confirmed, but sure let's assume it's true still... Only difference in US is perhaps foreign folks can sue over it. Sometimes, if they are lucky and if the deal is worth it. I find it strange people of HN being based in US can be so ill informed of what their country, does to foreign companies but be mad about things foreign companies do to them? I mean sure rest(96%) of the world doesn't really exist, it's but a myth or a land the better folks of US only want to take value when needed? Unsure what this comment meant, this has happened before as well btw, these are just post 2010s examples because they are relevant. Russians and US used to do this too, India and US were worse of pre-2000s, Japan and US were at their throats in 1980s, in terms of trade and acquisition...
- DontBreakAlex 6mo ago
  You don't need to incorporate in the US for this to happen to you. You should look up what happened to Marc Lasus after he founded Gemplus (spoiler, he's on social security while the company the CIA stole from him has $3b revenue) or how Frédéric Pierucci was taken hostage to force the sale of France's nuclear reactors to General Electric. I assume the US does this to all the other countries too.
  - justinclift 6mo ago
    For reference: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fr%C3%A9d%C3%A9ric_Pierucci#Imprisonment_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fr%C3%A9d%C3%A9ric_Pierucci#Im... This is relevant too: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-47765974 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-47765974
- capitalhilbilly 6mo ago
  Being stopped that late is a bit different than the US AFAIK, but there is certainly the possibility of being stopped from work and (depending how you react) prevented from leaving the US for purely economic inventions: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invention_Secrecy_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invention_Secrecy_Act I find it notable that the US' actual checks on government have worked against expanding the secrecy act further into economic protectionism for favored industries, etc.
- cma 6mo ago
  We maintained control of EUV tech after selling key parts to the Dutch, but that came out of US public-private partnerships and not pure private.
reissbaker 6mo ago
You've been all over this this thread responding with the same whataboutist comments claiming America does the same thing. And yet, I'm pretty sure America hasn't held American citizens hostage in order to force them to unwind a sale of a foreign company they founded to a different foreign company.
- stego-tech 6mo ago
  [flagged]
  - nerdsniper 6mo ago
    Just last year the USA de-banked (from EU banks) EU citizens who are International Criminal Court officials for "opening preliminary investigations against Israeli personnel". The USA wields incredible power over financial interactions.
    - stego-tech 6mo ago
      THANK YOU, I knew I was overlooking a recent example in favor of historical ones!
      - Alive-in-2025 6mo ago
        Trump is making it worse, but there had been examples of bad behavior. Now the US is completely uncontrolled. I can't say we wouldn't do something like happened here (trying to stop a foreign company from selling stuff or developing stuff) if it was doing something significant about weapons or ai.
    - deleted 6mo ago
      [deleted]
  - stickfigure 6mo ago
    > You're right. You should have just left it at that.
  - 6mo ago
strangegecko 6mo ago
What examples do you have of the US government doing to CEOs what has happened to people like Jack Ma and many other public figures? For China, there are so many examples of people doing 180s and being full of contrition after those interventions, it's hard to imagine anything but severe intimidation or worse happening behind closed doors.
- ninjagoo 6mo ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Nacchio https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Nacchio
  - refurb 6mo ago
    A guy committing insider trading ain’t the same thing
- cma 6mo ago
  https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2025/01/16/congress/tiktok-sponsor-trump-inauguration-party-00198825 https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2025/01/16/congress/ti...
axus 6mo ago
I'm totally fine with what-about-ism here; making China a better place to live and do business is out of my jurisdiction and doesn't help me, encouraging the USA to do better will.

paulsutter 6mo ago

It's easy to see how this will play out. The entrepreneurs will get nothing. Most likely everyone else that has been paid (investors, etc) will keep what they received. Whether Meta or the CCP ends up with the proceeds of the entrepreneurs, that's anyone's guess.

itopaloglu83 6mo ago

Looks like the issue will be “dealt with” though we don’t know how exactly.

throw03172019 6mo ago

Dealt with is the founders / team / investors losing out of the $2B. That’s the punishment from China.

giwook 6mo ago
Somehow I think there is a real possibility more will happen. Barring them from leaving the country feels a bit sinister for people who haven't been accused of committing any crimes. I don't claim to know what's going on outside of what's being reported, but I'm reminded of other individuals who have "stepped out of line" (as determined by Beijing) and were also either barred from the country or mysteriously disappeared for weeks or months at a time only to randomly reappear at some point singing a different tune.
- soperj 6mo ago
  > Barring them from leaving the country feels a bit sinister for people who haven't been accused of committing any crimes. Feels like Guantanamo Bay all over again.
  - EA-3167 6mo ago
    In what conceivable way?
    - T-A 6mo ago
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Residential_Surveillance_at_a_Designated_Location https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Residential_Surveillance_at_a_...
      - EA-3167 6mo ago
        This seems like, to be very very VERY generous as per the guidelines, a case of limited superficial similarities being blown out of proportion. Assuming the best of intentions.

skeledrew 6mo ago

The co-founders have roots in China. As such it's already a done deal that China will get its way.

kelnos 6mo ago

The third quote seems to invalidate the second, no? Under the "grounds" that key people are currently physically in China, and as such, the Chinese government can coerce them to do whatever it wants. Though I suppose if those two did not have majority ownership of the company, the actual (former) majority owners can refuse to unwind the sale regardless of their wishes. Company might be worth quite a bit less to Meta without those key people, though. Either way, I assume the two people stuck in China won't be seeing a dime of that sale price, which is not cool. (This is regardless of my feelings about Meta owning more AI capability...)

mc32 6mo ago

Their mistake was not reading the tea-leaves. Just as Youxia Zhang, Weidong He, etc. Although to be fair the party elders and generals were in a no-win situation. They could not just "leave." They were likely baited to come in with some pretense and once they had them, they would not and will not let them get away.

dchftcs 6mo ago

The two cofounders will not be able to work for Meta. Probably it will be complicated to distribute Manus in Hong Kong, possibly Singapore too. But Manus's IP was already transferred and in any case Meta is not legally doing business in China, so Manus will still live on, possibly get rebranded.