What is the legal basis, if any, for getting rid of your investors for this or other reasons?
There's no legal basis. It's just Xenophobia.
Chinese Cash Is Suddenly Toxic in Silicon Valley, Following U.S. Pressure
11–20 of 311 posts
Re: Chinese Cash Is Suddenly Toxic in Silicon Valley, Following U.S. Pressure
#12Do all of you have WSJ and NYTimes subscriptions? I can't read any of those links submitted quite frequently
For WSJ submissions you can append ?mod=rsswn to the url and read the article that way.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/chinese-cash-is-suddenly-toxic-...
Re: Chinese Cash Is Suddenly Toxic in Silicon Valley, Following U.S. Pressure
#13Do all of you have WSJ and NYTimes subscriptions? I can't read any of those links submitted quite frequently
Append "?mod=rsswn" to the url. Paywall gone!
Re: Chinese Cash Is Suddenly Toxic in Silicon Valley, Following U.S. Pressure
#14Re: Chinese Cash Is Suddenly Toxic in Silicon Valley, Following U.S. Pressure
#15What is the legal basis, if any, for getting rid of your investors for this or other reasons?
There's no legal basis. It's just Xenophobia.
It could be xenophobia. It could be money laundering regs. It could be "national security concerns" which may be xenophobia or may be legitimate.
Re: Chinese Cash Is Suddenly Toxic in Silicon Valley, Following U.S. Pressure
#16Here is a snippet of the article, which I am posting under the Fair Use Act (I think you should all consider a subscription):
"Silicon Valley startup Pilot AI Labs Inc. signed a Chinese-backed venture-capital firm as its first big investor. By last summer, Pilot AI wanted it gone.
The U.S. startup hoped to sell more of its artificial-intelligence software to the U.S. government after working with the Pentagon, according to people familiar with its operations, and worried its effort could be hurt by the investor’s ties to China’s government. The chairman of the Chinese-backed investor, Digital Horizon Capital, was asked to sell back its stake, said one of the people. He angrily refused.
Chinese investors were once embraced in Silicon Valley both for their pocketbooks and their access to one of the world’s largest and trickiest markets. Today, they are suddenly less welcome.
Since late last year, amid rising U.S-China tensions, venture firms with China ties have been dialing back their U.S. investments, structuring deals in novel ways to avoid regulators or shutting their U.S. offices. Some American venture firms are dumping their Chinese limited partners or walling them off with special structures. And some U.S. startups that have taken significant Chinese money are keeping the investments quiet or trying to push their Chinese investors out to avoid scrutiny..."
Re: Chinese Cash Is Suddenly Toxic in Silicon Valley, Following U.S. Pressure
#17Good. We raised Series A from Chinese investors a few years ago and they were toxic. Not to mention the political implications of enriching countries like China and Saudi Arabia. In hindsight would have rather closed up shop than taken their money.
Re: Chinese Cash Is Suddenly Toxic in Silicon Valley, Following U.S. Pressure
#18Do all of you have WSJ and NYTimes subscriptions? I can't read any of those links submitted quite frequently
For WSJ submissions you can append ?mod=rsswn to the url and read the article that way. https://www.wsj.com/articles/chinese-cash-is-suddenly-toxic-...
Created an account just to thank you for this tip.
Re: Chinese Cash Is Suddenly Toxic in Silicon Valley, Following U.S. Pressure
#19Unlaundered Chinese cash, of course. Hop it through an "investment" somewhere else and suddenly it's the investment arm of a multinational REIT.
Dampens direct influence proportionally, though. The "cleaner" the money is, the more difficult it is for nefarious sources to dictate terms of use to the end user.
Re: Chinese Cash Is Suddenly Toxic in Silicon Valley, Following U.S. Pressure
#20Earlier quoted context omitted.
When is WSJ I don't even click anymore.
I just flag them and move on. Your garbage site doesn't want me reading it, I won't.
It's precisely because the WSJ has a paywall (since 2007 IIRC) that it's not a "garbage site". That dubious honour would go to the hordes of medium.com and elektrek.co links who give their information away because, well, exposure is better than nothing. You get what you pay for.