Monthly Archives: July 2021

When Chinese authorities swiftly shut down one of its countrys most popular apps in an antitrust crackdown, there were immediate debilitating consequences for Chinese companies already trading in the U.S. But the longer-term ramifications of the move could sting the U.S. IPO market, as well as American tech giants like Apple Inc.

Such is the collateral damage in the cross-border conflict between the U.S. and China on technology. The two countries have been battling each other for technological advances for years, and have simultaneously been challenging their domestic tech giants growing power in different ways in recent years.

The latest move by officials in Beijing was dramatic, blocking new users from downloading the popular ride-hailing app Didi Global Inc. DIDI, +2.38% Chinas version of Uber Technologies Inc. UBER, -1.05% just two days after the companys U.S. initial public offering. Chinese regulators told the company to delay its IPO, according to a Wall Street Journal report, but shares of Didi debuted June 30, and plunged 20% in trading Tuesday and another 4% Wednesday after the news hit.

China is also probing Kanzhun Ltd. BZ, the owner of an online recruitment platform, and Full Truck Alliance Co. YMM, an Uber-like trucking startup. Both companies listed in the U.S. recently.

The effects were immediate for Chinese companies listed in the U.S., with stocks that went public with large valuations in recent years like Alibaba Group Holding Ltd. BABA, +1.26%, and iQiyi Inc. IQ, -4.22% falling sharply along with Didi. But experts said the fallout could be felt more widely, as tech companies like Apple AAPL, +2.23% that attempt to do business in China confront a new reality and the U.S. IPO market faces the loss of a big chunk of its pipeline.

The real story here has much less to do with an impact on the U.S. market, Harry Broadman, managing director at the Berkeley Research Group LLC, told MarketWatch. It is squarely in the Chinese market certainly for Chinese tech firms there, but also possibly U.S. tech firms operating there.

Apple has gleaned 15% to 20% of its twelve-figure annual revenue totals from Greater China in recent years, but with increasing criticism. During Apples antitrust lawsuit with Epic Games Inc., an Epic attorney pointedly brought up aNew York Times investigationthat concluded Apple and its chief executive, Tim Cook, compromised individuals personal information to curry favor in China.

Governments have the right to pass laws for their citizens. We have to comply with the laws in the jurisdictions we operate in, Cook replied.

See: The increasingly complicated Apple-China relationship

Apples conflicted condition in China highlights escalating concerns for U.S. tech companies that deal in data while pursuing business in China, home to the worlds second-biggest economy and largest population, say economists. Paul Zarowin, an accounting professor at New York Universitys Stern School of Business, sees what is unfolding as a referendum on any tech company doing business in China.

China is becoming more and more totalitarian. Regardless of where youre listed, it almost doesnt matter in terms of control in China, Zarowin told MarketWatch. Apple AAPL, +2.23% has compromised its principles to do business in China to appease the government there. It does 20% of its business in China. Anyone who wants to do business there has to sell its soul.

The consequences for the U.S. IPO market, investors, and prospective Chinese tech companies could be disquieting. Chinese companies have raised more than $26 billion in the U.S. IPO market in the past year and a half, according to Dealogic $13.6 billion in 2020 and $12.6 billion already this year and more than 30 companies based in China and Hong Kong were expected to list in the U.S. in the rest of this year, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.

Read also: A tale of two $2 billion Chinese IPOs headed in very different directions

Chinese medical data group LinkDoc Technology LDOC, , backed by Alibaba Health Information, appeared to be the first victim on that impending list of Beijings clampdown on overseas listings. The company had been due to price its deal Thursday but has postponed its plans, according to Nikkei, citing two people familiar with the deal.

The Chinese are leaning on companies like Didi not to go public. Didi was a warning to other companies, James Lewis, senior vice president at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, told MarketWatch.

Though the Chinese are loath to admit it, their actions copy U.S. policy. The Trump administration threatened to restrict Chinese companies access to financial markets; the Chinese are trying to force people to buy Chinese rather than go somewhere else, Lewis said.

For more: Didi debacle riles lawmakers who seek to block U.S. investors from trading Chinese stocks

Chinas strong-arm tactics mirror the Trump administrations attempt to force Chinese telecom companies to delist from U.S. public markets, and underscore tightening policies around data control and privacy by the Chinese government amid a broader crackdown on tech companies. Last week, the Cyberspace Administration of China (CAC) called for Didi to stop accepting new user registrations. The widespread regulatory squeeze on Chinese tech companies began late last year with the cancellation of a $37 billion listing planned by Ant Group, an Alibaba fintech affiliate.

Meanwhile, Chinese regulators are considering a change that would require companies using a variable interest entity structure Alibaba, Tencent Holdings Ltd. 700, +0.18%, and JD.com Inc. JD, -1.62% employ it to skirt Chinese restrictions on foreign ownership and capital and currency controls to seek Beijings approval before listing in the U.S., Hong Kong or elsewhere.

At the same time, Chinese companies face intensifying pressure within the U.S. On Wednesday, Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., who last month called on the Securities and Exchange Commission to block Didis IPO, said it was reckless and irresponsible for Didito have been allowed to sell shares in New York. In May, Rubio introduced an act that would bar U.S. listings for Chinese companies out of compliance with American regulators.

Critics point out Chinese tech companies were encouraged by the government to grow at all costs, but when a few behemoths Baidu Inc. BIDU, -1.76%, Alibaba and Tencent are considered the biggest, and known to some investors by the acronym BAT got too big while elbowing out competition and innovation, regulators stepped in. (BAT extended their vice-like grip on digital advertising, to 67% in 2018, from 61% in 2015, according to consulting firm TS Lombard.) Something quite similar is playing out in the U.S., where the Obama administration was an unbridled champion of Silicon Valley as the Big Five Apple, Amazon.com Inc. AMZN, +0.52%, Google parent Alphabet Inc. GOOGL, +0.72% GOOG, +0.90%, Microsoft Corp. MSFT, +0.45%, and Facebook Inc. FB, -1.03% became all-powerful, leading to antitrust scrutiny by the Trump and Biden administrations, along with states.

The Chinese government is doing what U.S. and EU regulatory bodies have been doing for years, Ionut Ciobotaru, chief product officer at Verve Group, told MarketWatch. Though they do have governmental surveillance, they want to make sure thats not the case for the tech companies. It could also be that they want to keep these unicorns in check, like preventing AliPays IPO.

View original post here:

China is cracking down on its own tech giants, but Apple and the U.S. IPO market could pay the price - MarketWatch

Creative destruction plays a key role in entrepreneurship and economic development.

Coined by economist Joseph Schumpeter in 1942, the theory of creative destruction suggests that business cycles operate under long waves of innovation. Specifically, as markets are disrupted, key clusters of industries have outsized effects on the economy.

Take the railway industry, for example. At the turn of the 19th century, railways completely reshaped urban demographics and trade. Similarly, the internet disrupted entire industriesfrom media to retail.

The above infographic shows how innovation cycles have impacted economies since 1785, and whats next for the future.

From the first wave of textiles and water power in the industrial revolution, to the internet in the 1990s, here are the six waves of innovation and their key breakthroughs.

Source: Edelsen Institute, Detlef Reis

During the first wave of the Industrial Revolution, water power was instrumental in manufacturing paper, textiles, and iron goods. Unlike the mills of the past, full-sized dams fed turbines through complex belt systems. Advances in textiles brought the first factory, and cities expanded around them.

With the second wave, between about 1845 and 1900, came significant rail, steam, and steel advancements. The rail industry alone affected countless industries, from iron and oil to steel and copper. In turn, great railway monopolies were formed.

The emergence of electricity powering light and telephone communication through the third wave dominated the first half of the 1900s. Henry Ford introduced the Model T, and the assembly line transformed the auto industry. Automobiles became closely linked with the expansion of the American metropolis. Later, in the fourth wave, aviation revolutionized travel.

After the internet emerged by the early 1990s, barriers to information were upended. New media changed political discourse, news cycles, and communication in the fifth wave. The internet ushered in a new frontier of globalization, a borderless landscape of digital information flows.

To the economist Schumpeter, technological innovations boosted economic growth and improved living standards.

However, these disruptors can also have a tendency to lead to monopolies. Especially during a cycles upswing, the strongest players realize wide margins, establish moats, and fend off rivals. Typically, these cycles begin when the innovations become of general use.

Of course, this can be seen todaynever has the world been so closely connected. Information is more centralized than it has ever been, with Big Tech dominating global search traffic, social networks, and advertising.

Like the Big Tech behemoths of today, the rail industry had the power to control prices and push out competitors during the 19th century. At the peak, listed shares of rail companies on the New York Stock Exchange made up 60% of total stock market capitalization.

As cycle longevity continues to shorten, the fifth wave may have a few years left under its belt.

The sixth wave, marked by artificial intelligence and digitization across information of things (IoT), robotics, and drones, will likely paint an entirely new picture. Namely, the automation of systems, predictive analytics, and data processing could make an impact. In turn, physical goods and services will likely be digitized. The time to complete tasks could shift from hours to even seconds.

At the same time, clean tech could come to the forefront. At the heart of each technological innovation is solving complex problems, and climate concerns are becoming increasingly pressing. Lower costs in solar PV and wind are also predicating efficiency advantages.

View post:

The World's Tech Giants, Compared to the Size of Economies - Visual Capitalist

Today President Biden is taking decisive action to reduce the trend of corporate consolidation, increase competition, and deliver concrete benefits to Americas consumers, workers, farmers, and small businesses, is how the White House described an executive order signed by the president on Friday.

Its title is Promoting Competition in the American Economy, and its 72 separate initiatives from more than 12 federal agencies are not JUST about big technology companies healthcare, financial services and agriculture are also in its targets.

But among those that will provoke particular consternation for Big Tech: the way the order calls for the Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission to enforce the antitrust laws vigorously and recognizes that the law allows them to challenge prior bad mergers that past Administrations did not previously challenge.

Later in the order, it hones in on big tech platforms purchasing would-be competitors; gathering too much personal information on their users; and unfairly competing with small businesses when they run their own platforms.

Apple, Facebook, Google and Amazon are clearly among the companies potentially affected by greater scrutiny and tougher regulation, but even smaller companies like Spotify which has seen itself more as complainer than complained-about in antitrust circles could fall under some of this.

Stuart Dredge

Processing...

You might have left one of the fields blank, or be posting too quickly

Thanks for your comment. We appreciate your response.

Please wait a while before posting your next comment

See the rest here:

US government puts tech giants on notice over 'bad mergers' - Music Ally

Alibaba Group Holding Ltd. and Tencent Holdings Ltd. are considering moves to gradually open up their services to one another, as Beijings tech crackdown makes it harder for Chinas two online giants to maintain the virtual barriers they have built in recent years.

That would mark a big shift for Chinas consumer internet, which has largely split into two camps built around the arch rivals. The restrictions mean, for example, that customers cant use Tencents payment system to buy goods on an Alibaba platform.

Now, both companies are separately working on plans to loosen those curbs, according to people familiar with the matter. The system could make life more convenient for consumersand help spur greater competitionbut will also mean the duo will have more insight into each others businesses.

Initial steps from Alibaba could include introducing Tencents WeChat Pay to Alibabas e-commerce marketplaces, Taobao and Tmall, some of the people said.

Tencent could make it easier to share Alibaba e-commerce listings on its WeChat messaging app, or allow selected Alibaba services to access WeChat users via so-called mini-programs, some of the people said. Mini-programs are light apps embedded in the main WeChat app.

Excerpt from:

Alibaba and Tencent Consider Opening Up Their Walled Gardens - The Wall Street Journal

Name the trolls

THE outpouring of love for Marcus Rashford shows the true nature of our nation.

Manchester is united, like the rest of Britain, behind Englands young black players after their Euros heartbreak and the hate they endured from racists.

4

Those morons and the drunken, violent mob which gate-crashed Wembley have tarnished our image as the worlds most welcoming country.

But both cases involve a tiny, bovine hardcore, their thuggery amplified via instant broadcast to smartphones the world over.

We dont blame social media firms for that. We do blame them for becoming safe spaces for often nameless hate-filled trolls. Twitter, especially, is a cesspit of ignorance. So we like Harry Maguires common sense today.

Social media, he says, allows players to interact with fans with unprecedented ease. But it also makes it far too easy for bigots to abuse them directly and without consequence.

So bar anonymous posters, says Harry. Force tech giants to verify every account and hand details to police if asked. Racists can then be arrested.

It wont solve every ill. But its a start.

4

IN a parallel universe the Taliban peacefully share power and guide Afghanistan into a prosperous future. Sadly we do not live in that universe.

So the assertion by Defence Secretary Ben Wallace that Britain would then treat these murderous fanatics like any other world government is a triumph of hope over experience.

They will come to power only by force. Like the cold-blooded execution of 22 Afghan troops after they surrendered.

Expect them then to overturn 20 years of transformed human rights. They may be a little less bloodthirsty than Islamic State . . . its hardly a recommendation.

The fact they have taken back half the country since we pulled out will break the hearts of Brits who served there and the families of the 457 who died.

OUR MPs decision to trim the colossal aid budget has huge public support.

It was backed in a YouGov survey last year by most voters from all main parties and by Remainers and Leavers.

Tory rebels and Labour argued that even after the pandemic forced us to borrow 300billion and counting we must borrow more to give away.

But far from every aid cause has merit. And the cut to 0.5 per cent of GDP still leaves us one of the worlds top donors.

Manifesto pledges to keep it at 0.7 per cent were made before a once-in-a-lifetime catastrophe changed everything.

We cannot saddle generations yet unborn with more debt and higher taxes to salve the consciences of MPs who enjoy being generous with other peoples money.

Excerpt from:

Harry Maguire is right to press tech giants to bar vile trolls online they must be named... - The US Sun

Microsoft Corp. is betting hybrid work will provide an opening to make its Windows operating system more widespread, launching a new service aimed at getting users of Apple Inc. and Android products to use the software.

Unlike the traditional Windows software that is typically installed on personal computers, the version Microsoft is introducing on Wednesday will run entirely in the cloudthe remote software-hosting data centers that underpin many modern apps. Windows 365, the company said, will be accessible on any device running any operating system that has a web browser, such as Apple Mac computers, iPhones and iPads, or those running Android software made by Alphabet Inc.s Google.

The company said the new service is designed for businesses and to accommodate the growing demands of hybrid work environments, where employees split their time between the office and home, said Jared Spataro, a corporate vice president at Microsoft. Instead of having to commute with their PC, workers will be able to access their personalized cloud-based Windows desktop whether they log on from the office or at home, he said.

This is our take on hybrid, Mr. Spataro said in an interview. Hybrid is really driving a bit of a rewiring of the operating model of our customers.

Windows 365 represents the second major update to Microsofts iconic software franchise in as many months. The company said in June it was launching Windows 11 this year, the products first new version in almost six years. It seeks to reposition the operating system as a hub in a computing universe incorporating rival companies platforms.

Read the original post:

Microsoft Aims to Put Windows in Hands of Apple, Android Users Through Hybrid Work - The Wall Street Journal

As SpaceX, Virgin Galactic, and Blue Origin ramp up competition over space travel,not everyone is over the moon about it. This week, Richard Branson beat Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk to the punch by travelling 50 miles into space in a Virgin Galactic rocket.

Although hes elated, a sense of aversion tothecommodification of spacehas swept socialmediaplatforms, especially when inequality on Earth is rife.A tweet thats been sharedmore than20,000 timesreads:I think my favourite thing this week has been Richard Branson going into space and absolutely nobody giving a shit, while another sarcasticallyclaimsthat Branson had begged that government for a handout last year, yet he just took to space in a rocket costingmore thana billion pounds.

Eyebrows have been raised over the environmental effects, too. Jeff Bezos has been vocal about his belief that new approaches to combating climate change could lie in outer space. But, travelling there in the first place might be counterproductive to that approach.

i's guide to helping the planet in your everyday life

The higher a spacecraft flies, the more fuel it needs, while it also emits black carbon and CO2. The Blue Origin spacecraft will run on hydrogen, which is carbon neutral, but to produce it, carbon is often a byproduct.

Then theres the issue of boredom. Not just at the perceived hedonistic whims of the unfathomably rich, but at space exploration itself.Last year,communicationsresearch professor Linda Billingswho works with Nasatold the BBC that whilethe space agencycontinues to do tremendous work, she thinks the response from governments and corporations is still dominated by thank you very much but we dont care reactions.

To the average person, there hasnt been much in the pipeline since the moon landings of the late 1960s.

You might be waiting for someone to land on Mars next, and that hasnt happened, says Zachary Goldberg, a space-research manager at Trilateral Research, a UK-based tech-insights firm.

Ironically, its a lack of public interest that set the pace for giant tech companies, headed by billionaire chief executives, to swoop into the space-travel market, he believes.

Governments cut funding for space programmes in the 1990s and early 2000s, creating a gap, says Goldberg.

A lot of that had to do with public perception, governments felt like they couldnt garner the public support for space development in the way they could in the 1960s and 1970s, when everything was new and seen as a human pursuit towards knowledge and discovery.

While India is making strides in the remote sensing area, gathering data on masses in space from a far, and China is eyeing further exploration on Mars, after a successful uncrewed mission the collective frenzy that the original space race inspired, just isnt there.

Arguably, this public scepticism might have deepened. Especially as tech giants have entered the space.

From inadequate working conditions, questions over tax contributions, and dives into the crypto space, an industry that involves huge electricity outputs for mining coins criticisms of how Bezos, Branson and Musk approach business are widespread.

And many argue billionaire status andsoundethics cant coexist. This sentiment gave rise to the #EatTheRich movement, a socialism-driven campaign thats now commonly used as a rallying hashtag across social media.

An Oxfam study from 2015found that 71 per cent of global billionaire wealth has benefitted from cronyism, inheritance, or monopoly. To top it off, a single ticket on Bransons Virgin Galactic, which isnt yet operating tourist trips into space, will set you back just over 180,000. Its no wonder were seemingly disinterested, then,as people online claim we simply cant afford to be.

However, Joe Sercel, founder of the California based Trans Astra, who build space exploration tech,warns not to underestimate the average persons interest in space exploration. The public knows instinctively that we are at a very important time in history as we make moves into space that are commercially sustainable, he says.

Sercel even suggests that the private sector taking the wheel will speed up the process to accessibility and affordability, eventually. Sooner than we know, the average person will be able to travel in space, he explains.

Just like cars, colour TVs and computers, at first it will be too expensive, but if private sector innovation is allowed to flourish, cost competition will drive down prices every year.

Pondering the concept of ethical space development, he adds, The key is to make sure its not dominated by unethical players. And, he stresses that countries with better human rights records should play a leadership role, too. Though, deciphering what nations can truly take a moral high ground on human rights might prove tricky.

Sercel also rejects the idea that space exploration is being dominated by the ultra-privileged,viewing those at the helm as simply driven innovators who pulled themselves up by their bootstraps.

The private sector is investing in small space businesses with vital growth potential, he says. The founders of these businesses are not rich fat cats, they are middle- or working-class folks like me. Fighting poverty is about creating opportunities.

A viral tweet oncefloated the idea that once viable for human habitation, a Starbucks chain would appear on the moon in a flash. To avoid space monopolies, theres been intervention in space dealings before.

We saw this in the 1960s, when the UN got involved over jurisdiction in space as the US and Russian programs took off, leading to an international consensus that no single country would have property rights, says Goldberg. Space is an area where international collaboration without political squabbling could be really successful.

Even so, as new activitiessuch astourism and mining minerals in space become realities, legal and political tensions could arise if anyone makes claims around ownership or sole use. Goldberg points out thatBranson, Bezos and Muskhave been successful as business minds, not as ethicists, and urges vigilance, not resistance, on that front.

We do need to ask what it means if these private companies want to put cell phone towers on the moon, or build a hotel orbiting it, he says.

Sercel warns of the danger of over-regulation, instead. He reckons some companies might push for regulations on ethical grounds, while truly motivated by something else. The big, old aerospace companies lack the innovation and agility to compete, and they know it, he says.

Minimal but effective regulation is needed to make sure the resources of space are not squandered by bad actors, but those companies want excessive regulation that gives them the advantage to [dominate unfairly].

On the flipside of ethical concerns, Goldbergsays the potential for levelling inequality must be considered, too. Satellite technology can monitor climate changes, and provide educational opportunities to rural areas, or facilitate information sharing around political uprising, he says. Technology can have a democratizing effect.

As for dwindling earth resources, theres urgency around necessity, too. Accessing resources on extra-terrestrial bodies like the moon or asteroids might be something we need to do, says Goldberg.

As long as we change our approach, its possible for resources to be distributed equally, not just for the few. But asking, is space just the latest plaything for billionaires? Thats still valid.

Excerpt from:

How space travel ethics and tech giants make us sceptical about galactic exploration - iNews

For the world of investors, for Xi Jinping president is trying to manage big data, which is one of the resources that the most valuable in the country, the story over the dropwise outgoing has a more dangerous betting the largest technology companies in China ..

Diddy is almost always a fascinating success story. The company controls almost the entire Chinese ride hailing market and is SoftBank Group Corp. And Tencent Holdings Ltd. Is counted as a major shareholder. Diddy was actually making a profit in the first quarter, which is unusual in the industry. Last weeks initial public offering was well received, with China-based companies being the second largest in the United States. Diddy sold 317 million shares. This is about 10% more than originally planned.

Still, the list on the eve of the Communist Partys 100th anniversary did not seem to have triggered a celebration in Beijing. Instead, two days after the IPO, Chinese cyberspace regulators said they were reviewing the company for national security reasons. Two days later, regulators said the company had committed a serious breach in the collection and use of personal information.Then to the company app Removed from store..

What made Diddy so valuable to investors is the same as making Diddy and other tech companies a potential threat to Beijing. Diddy holds vast amounts of sensitive data from 500 million active users annually, primarily in China. Over the past year, the Xi government has used data to promote broader economic growth, rather than simply enriching a cohort of millionaires who could protect users from abuse and challenge the Communist Party. Ive been trying to get control of this data to find out. Party authority.

Diddy, like many other Chinese tech giants, grew rapidly without comprehensive surveillance. Beijing is currently aiming to close regulatory loopholes, but more time is needed. By listing on the United States, Diddy effectively circumvented the extensive approval process by Chinas Securities Watchdog when authorities demanded more companies to raise money domestically.

Xiaomeng Lu, a senior analyst at Eurasia Group, a political risk consultancy, said: We also want tech companies to retain their core assets of data and algorithms in China.

Some projections show that China will hold one-third of the worlds data by 2025, giving it a potentially significant competitive advantage in areas such as artificial intelligence that drive the modern economy. I will. It also has a high geopolitical stake. The Biden administration is considering which user data to keep out of China, and Beijing is similarly concerned about passing information that the enemy might use.

After recovering from the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic and increasing tensions with the United States, a campaign to impose strict regulations on Chinese tech companies accelerated at the end of last year. Officials launched a strong broadside in the fintech sector when they acquired Ant Group Co.s $ 35 billion dual-listed company in Shanghai and Hong Kong in the 11th hour.

The trader is Didi Global Inc, a Chinese ride-hailing service company, on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange on June 30th. Working during an IPO.Reuters

Like Diddy, Ali dominated the field. In just 10 years, Jack Mas Alibaba Group affiliate has grown to revolutionize the lives of millions of Chinese through the Alipay app and the giant Yuebao money market fund.

By March, it was clear that authorities were expanding the attack. At a meeting of the Communist Partys Chief Financial Advisory Board, President West warned that Beijing would chase after so-called platform companies that have accumulated data and market power. The term effectively covers a variety of companies serving hundreds of millions of people, from Didi to e-commerce leaders like food delivery giant Meituan and JD.com Inc.

The crackdown weighs heavily on the tech department. Alibabas Hong Kong-traded stocks are down 33% from their October highs, and Tencent (Chinas leader in social media, games and music publishing) is down 28% from its January record. Diddy fell 11% on Friday.

China is not alone in trying to control the dominance of large tech companies. The US Congress is Amazon.com Inc. And Apple Inc. While trying to force companies such as and others to radically change their business models, Google is facing a thorough European Union investigation into its advertising technology.

Joshua Club, Senior Portfolio Manager at Robeco in Hong Kong, said:

However, the size and speed of Xis campaign speaks to its obsession with Communist rule. The party is fighting what it sees as multiple threats to national security, and the October five-year plan included a focus on security issues for the first time. Competition with the United States is intensifying only under the Biden administration, which recently rallyed allies to present a more united front to Beijing.

Headquarters of Didi Chuxing, a major Chinese ride-hailing service in Beijing | AFP-JIJI

The problem is that Chinese entrepreneurs often turn to the US stock exchange. The US stock exchange offers founders something they cant get at home. A rich pool of international capital and low barriers to entry mean that the worlds largest markets remain important destinations for Chinese and Hong Kong companies that were raising at record paces earlier this year. To do. The potential delisting by the New York Stock Exchange and the stricter requirements for the Nasdaq were not deterrents for Chinese companies in need of cash.

The Communist Party has made little to say about the listing process of US private companies, but it often has the potential to fine-tune top-level management. But, as in Diddys case, exerting influence on a companys business is a much bolder move, imposing a government mark on the US stock market.

Chinas cyberspace regulators are trying to exert influence over this entire process, said Chucheng Feng, co-founder and partner of Chinas political and economic research firm Plenum. .. They are using Didi to set up this example of how the company will be listed in New York in the future.

In an era of both false and too much information, Quality journalism is more important than ever.By subscribing, you can help us understand the story correctly.

Register now

The rest is here:

Didi shows that all Chinese tech giants have to answer Beijing first - Illinoisnewstoday.com