Live data from Hacker News

Bytedance said to be valued at over $75B in new round

bloomberg.com

151–160 of 193 posts

Re: Bytedance said to be valued at over $75B in new round

#151

ByteDance also made news for "highest salaries in the world" and "unlimited salary for unlimited talent". $1M USD salaries plus options. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/on-small-business/wp/201... https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-09-24/in-battle...

"ByteDance’s top earners make more than $1 million a year plus stock options, with total compensation sometimes exceeding $3 million. " I bet top earners at Google, Facebook etc make much more than this.

[deleted]

Re: Bytedance said to be valued at over $75B in new round

#152
post #35

Thanks to this article I'm now aware that Musically is Chinese. That's all the info I need to explain to my kid why it needs to be deleted from her phone. Thank you, Bloomberg!

Are you ethnically Chinese yourself (but identify with HongKongers / Taiwanese)? Cos its a typical response from people from hk or tw

My objection is that Musically is a social network. Inherently, its Chinese ownership renders it government spyware, the only kind of chat app permitted under the regime.

Re: Bytedance said to be valued at over $75B in new round

#153
post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1) Large, mostly homogeneous nation. 2) Government bans foreign internet/social media services, protecting local companies from foreign competition.

1. Korea is much more homogeneous than China. China has a wide diversity of ethnicities. (Before you downvote, check Wikipedia first) 2. China doesn't "ban foreign internet/social media". LinkedIn is in China, so is Bing. It bans companies that do not follow Chinese law. If you want to argue that the Chinese law is bad, you should know that Korea bans Google map because of law.

China is 91.5% Han. That's not what most people think of as "wide diversity".

Re: Bytedance said to be valued at over $75B in new round

#154
post #7

> Bytedance now faces questions over when or even how it will start making a profit. $75B value and it still faces the most basic question. Makes me feel I don't understand business at all. Also its main app seems to be musically. I have only heard of it but it seems a little to an app like Dubsmash. Did dubsmash ever make any money? What is the business model for such apps?

It’s because getting money is not a thing anymore

Re: Bytedance said to be valued at over $75B in new round

#155
post #121

ByteDance also made news for "highest salaries in the world" and "unlimited salary for unlimited talent". $1M USD salaries plus options. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/on-small-business/wp/201... https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-09-24/in-battle...

Well,frankly it's "easy" when you don't make a profit and rely on investor money rather than balanced account.

Frankly that's between the board and their investors. I don't see why I personally should mind if investors' money is being wasted (as in Moviepass, or this company as you claim), especially if it's partially going to a big salary. Of course, if it really is such a scam, the gravy train will obviously end at some point.

Re: Bytedance said to be valued at over $75B in new round

#156
post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GP was wrong. They acquired musica.ly in 2017 for $800 million. Musica.ly accounts for a minuscule portion of their valuation. The article itself clearly spells out what Bytedance's main businesses are, but commenters don't appear to want to read!

I can't see how it's worth close to $800 million either. Besides the icky sexualized content, isn't ads to kids illegal in most countries? How are you going to monetize that market? And even if it's legal, how moral is it?

> I can't see how it's worth close to $800 million either.

It's worth $800 million because someone was willing to buy it for $800 million. Why is anything worth anything? Because someone is willing to pay for it.

> isn't ads to kids illegal in most countries?

What? Then how does nickelodean, toys stores, kids clothes store, etc exist? I can assure you that ads to kids are most definitely legal in most countries. We have back-to-school sales and of course we have christmas.

> And even if it's legal, how moral is it?

What's immoral about it? Targetting adult specific ( cigarettes, alcohol ) to kids shouldn't be allowed, but what's immoral about targeting age specific products to kids?

You sound like people saying kids shouldn't be taught about sex education, learn about violent news, etc. Kids and everyone should be taught about ads and adults should help kids deal with ads because ads are a part of life and they are going to have to deal with it eventually. Rather than ads themselves, I think the lack of educating kids about ads is the problem. But lots of backwards controlling parents want to keep children uninformed and naive and ill prepared for real life.

Re: Bytedance said to be valued at over $75B in new round

#157
post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't see how it's worth close to $800 million either. Besides the icky sexualized content, isn't ads to kids illegal in most countries? How are you going to monetize that market? And even if it's legal, how moral is it?

> I can't see how it's worth close to $800 million either. It's worth $800 million because someone was willing to buy it for $800 million. Why is anything worth anything? Because someone is willing to pay for it. > isn't ads to kids illegal in most countries? What? Then how does nickelodean, toys stores, kids clothes store, etc exist? I can assure you that ads to kids are most definitely legal in most countries. We h…

I'd rather ban it all, but the idea that advertising targeted at children should be banned for various reasons[1][2] is not especially obscure.

1: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/9984366/...

2: https://parenting.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/07/13/ban-on-advert...

Re: Bytedance said to be valued at over $75B in new round

#159

The way things go these days, you need to consider the context of this headline (and the whole article really). Worlds most valuable dog shit on a stick isn't something anyone cares about, regardless of how much someone says its worth. Similarly that dog shit on a stick doesn't make it's owner any money. So. What exactly is the difference?

> $75B > doesn't make it's[sic] owner any money

Give me 76B and I can make 75B too!

Re: Bytedance said to be valued at over $75B in new round

#160
post #121

ByteDance also made news for "highest salaries in the world" and "unlimited salary for unlimited talent". $1M USD salaries plus options. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/on-small-business/wp/201... https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-09-24/in-battle...

Well,frankly it's "easy" when you don't make a profit and rely on investor money rather than balanced account.

Starting a startup with the engagement of TouTiao is not easy.
Post reply on HN