Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

NBA's China dilemma: $4B at risk as Chinese TV cancels game broadcasts

foxbusiness.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 477 posts

Re: NBA's China dilemma: $4B at risk as Chinese TV cancels game broadcasts

#161

Post by thaumasiotes »

avn2109 wrote: post #153
nostromo wrote: post #14

It's not much of a dilemma though, is it? Already-rich folks kowtowing to fascists for a quick buck is beyond pathetic. US companies should stop targeting China for growth. If they don't steal your IP completely, they'll eventually freeze you out like they just did the NBA. It's happened to many companies and will eventually happen to you too. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

>> "... kowtowing to fascists ..." "Fascists" is probably not a good description of the Chinese Communist Party, since Fascism is widely regarded as always and everywhere the diametric opposite/enemy of Communism and Communists. Examples of this include [0] and [1] and [2] and [3], which are the results of me googling "is fascism the enemy of communism?" for 5 seconds. Probably you mean "Totalitarians" or "Statists"…

> Fascism is widely regarded as always and everywhere the opposite/enemy of Communism and Communists.

By who? Is there a reason for this?

Fascism's self-description is basically just the motto "united we stand, divided we fall". It's right there in the name. As a philosophy, I know it best for strict intolerance of public dissent. That sort of thing undermines unity.

And that's pretty much it. I would have said that "fascism" in modern American usage had lost all meaning other than as a generic term of abuse; I would never have guessed that it was supposed to mean "the opposite of communism, whatever that might mean". "The opposite of communism" is usually considered to be capitalism.

But there seem to be many good correspondences between Chinese practice today and original, Mussolini-style fascism.

Re: NBA's China dilemma: $4B at risk as Chinese TV cancels game broadcasts

#163

Post by cthalupa »

i_am_nomad wrote: post #62
yummypaint wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly this. They have no claim of neutrality or being apolitical. They have already demonstrated that losing money for the sake of attacking lgbt rights is a sacrifice they're willing to make. The values of team owners and major nba stakeholders are already more in line with the ccp than the american public, so let them choke on our scorn. It's our collective responsibility to do them enough financial damage that t…

I’ll expand on this by pulling two sequential quotations in the article from NBA commissioner Adam Silver: "It is inevitable that people around the world -- including America and China -- will have different viewpoints over different issues. It is not the role of the NBA to adjudicate those differences.” Bullshit, see North Carolina. “However, the NBA will not put itself in a position of regulating what players, empl…

>Bullshit, see Donald Sterling.

Yeah, blatant racism, including against some of the biggest stars in the NBA's history, is definitely the same thing here. That's not regulating political discourse - that's not allowing a racist to be in a position of power over the very people he is prejudiced against.

Re: NBA's China dilemma: $4B at risk as Chinese TV cancels game broadcasts

#164

Post by coldtea »

Ill_ban_myself wrote: post #123
heavyset_go wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a reason that, historically, fascists cozied up to the ownership class. People who operate on the assumption that they must profit over everything else are easily coerced into aligning their interests with those of fascists.

China has intentionally conflated dealings with government cartels with capitalist enterprise. Its just a means to obscure what would otherwise be called "treason" and sweep under the rug any notion that your business can be, "nationalized" at their whim. I don't understand how American businesses didn't learn their lesson in Cuba in the 60's?

What would that lesson be?

US and American businesses did fine business with the Cuban dictatorship of Batista:

"Fulgencio Batista y Zaldívar (/bəˈtiːstə/;[1] Spanish: [fulˈxensjo βaˈtista i salˈdiβaɾ]; born Rubén Zaldívar;[2] January 16, 1901 – August 6, 1973) was a Cuban military officer and politician who served as the elected President of Cuba from 1940 to 1944, and as its U.S.-backed military dictator from 1952 to 1959, before being overthrown during the Cuban Revolution."

I guess the takeaway is: "Do business with friendly dictatorships we helped install, as opposed to independent ones".

Re: NBA's China dilemma: $4B at risk as Chinese TV cancels game broadcasts

#165

Post by Rebelgecko »

behringer wrote: post #135
5trokerac3 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everything from that list is from within the last 60 years. While China was murdering between 60 to 100 million of its citizens, America passed the Civil Rights Act.

The US jails something like 5 times as many people as China. That's today, not 60 years ago.

I believe that stat is only true for Chinese people that are in prisons and have been convicted of crimes. If you count ALL people being held against their will (e.g. including the Xinjiang "Reeducation" camps), China has more than the US.

Re: NBA's China dilemma: $4B at risk as Chinese TV cancels game broadcasts

#166

Post by tehjoker »

heavyset_go wrote: post #25
nostromo wrote: post #14

It's not much of a dilemma though, is it? Already-rich folks kowtowing to fascists for a quick buck is beyond pathetic. US companies should stop targeting China for growth. If they don't steal your IP completely, they'll eventually freeze you out like they just did the NBA. It's happened to many companies and will eventually happen to you too. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

There's a reason that, historically, fascists cozied up to the ownership class. People who operate on the assumption that they must profit over everything else are easily coerced into aligning their interests with those of fascists.

It is more accurate to say allied rather than coerced. They use the fascists to stabilize societies on the brink of rejecting them and the fascists use the rich to fund and empower their movements.

Re: NBA's China dilemma: $4B at risk as Chinese TV cancels game broadcasts

#167

Post by FussyZeus »

paggle wrote: post #92
tyre wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The owner of the Nets is an executive at Alibaba. He will follow the party line and has (calling Hong Kong protestors “separatists”, etc.) The jersey sponsor of the LA Lakers is Wish.com, a company doing drop shipping from China. LeBron James is sponsored by Nike (as are all of the jerseys) and Nike has significant interest in keeping the Chinese market open. LeBron is leading production of Space Jam 2. He won’t jeop…

As Michael Jordan didn't say... "Republicans buy sneakers too." Billionaires didn't get to be billionaires by leaving money on the table. We need large scale political action against China.

Billionaire's shouldn't exist. Name literally one benefit of having a billionaire in our society. Any one thing we wouldn't otherwise have.

Re: NBA's China dilemma: $4B at risk as Chinese TV cancels game broadcasts

#168

Post by isoskeles »

uoaei wrote: post #75
sorenn111 wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is self-made a myth? Not saying all billionaires should be envied, praised, etc. I'm sure many are huge manipulative asshole. But many also came from very modest to virtually no means, how is that a myth?

"Self-made" is almost always a misnomer because there's a point very early in the process of accruing wealth where you use it to bootstrap its own operations, i.e., you start paying other people for their output to collect a net profit. At that point, "self-made" no longer applies because now other people are involved. At what point that transition happens determines how "self-made" they are, but no one is ever 100%…

> you start paying other people for their output to collect a net profit

Didn't realize it was that easy. Why doesn't everyone just do this one little trick?

Re: NBA's China dilemma: $4B at risk as Chinese TV cancels game broadcasts

#169

Post by Aperocky »

paggle wrote: post #92
tyre wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The owner of the Nets is an executive at Alibaba. He will follow the party line and has (calling Hong Kong protestors “separatists”, etc.) The jersey sponsor of the LA Lakers is Wish.com, a company doing drop shipping from China. LeBron James is sponsored by Nike (as are all of the jerseys) and Nike has significant interest in keeping the Chinese market open. LeBron is leading production of Space Jam 2. He won’t jeop…

As Michael Jordan didn't say... "Republicans buy sneakers too." Billionaires didn't get to be billionaires by leaving money on the table. We need large scale political action against China.

Let's look at some large scale political action in the past:

1. Invade Iraq. 4000+ Americans dead, over 1 million Iraqi died.

2. Bombed Libya, it is now a $democratic_wonderland.

I'm not putting Afghanistan here because I think it's justified, but then why are we still there after Bin Laden's dead?

How about just minding our own business. If China don't want to watch NBA, then so be it. If you don't want to buy shit made in China, then don't buy it.

Re: NBA's China dilemma: $4B at risk as Chinese TV cancels game broadcasts

#170

Post by Ygg2 »

NotSammyHagar wrote: post #100
fhood wrote: post #72

China presents a huge opportunity for growth to the NBA, and this is a really crucial period for them as it seems like the NFL's stranglehold might be weakening and extra money to reinvest might help that process. I don't understand how people can act like losing the Chinese market is some sort of trivial decision?!? I would love for the NBA to stand up to China on this issue, but it IS NOT AN EASY OR OBVIOUS DECISIO…

Money or surrender to evil. It's pretty simple.

Seeing how we live in capitalism - money it is.

Remember when Google, promised it wouldn't kowtow to China? Then kowtowed anyway.

Post reply on HN