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

Alibaba F-1

sec.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 31 posts

Re: Alibaba F-1

#21

Post by instoftech »

TrainedMonkey wrote: post #3

"We operate a micro-finance business that provides micro loans to small- and medium-sized enterprises who are sellers on our wholesale and retail marketplaces, or our SME loan business. We extend micro loans through our lending vehicles licensed by the relevant local governments in China." Turns out reading these is actually useful, I had no idea they issued microloans.

Yes, their microloans business is what makes investors particularly excited. They have the technology (big data) and resource to disrupt internet finance.

One note: . Their microloan business is not called AliPay (AliPay is the Chinese version of Paypal from Alibaba).

Re: Alibaba F-1

#22

Post by alaskamiller »

crashandburn4 wrote: post #18
alaskamiller wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What they mean is AliPay - http://global.alipay.com/ospay/home.htm Jack Ma spoke on it last year at Stanford - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MRp4jiJed3c My prediction: Alibaba is on a path to take over the world. In the next 5 years the startup and silicon valley landscape will change dramatically with the introduction of Alibaba as a major player stateside. Yahoo will be bought, all these spree acquisitions and pro…

>My prediction: Alibaba is on a path to take over the world. I couldn't ask about some sources/information on this? I've only been tangentially aware of alibaba, reading the odd news story here and there, I'd be interested to hear what has inspired such strong words on the subject as that makes me think maybe there's something I'm missing about them.

Start with that YouTube video at 1.5x

Then look at this http://qz.com/206283/all-the-western-companies-youd-have-to-...

Re: Alibaba F-1

#23

Post by tokenadult »

jacquesm wrote: post #16

At least compared to the valuations of instagram, pinterest and so on this one actually makes sense.

Jacques, Shakespeare would call that "damning with faint praise." It does seem to me that Alibaba has an actual underlying business with real business value, but I wonder about the transparency, even with listing in the United States, of a company that does most of its business in China. We shall see what value the market sets on the company at first, and how that works out over time.

Re: Alibaba F-1

#25

Post by nemothekid »

alaskamiller wrote: post #22
crashandburn4 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>My prediction: Alibaba is on a path to take over the world. I couldn't ask about some sources/information on this? I've only been tangentially aware of alibaba, reading the odd news story here and there, I'd be interested to hear what has inspired such strong words on the subject as that makes me think maybe there's something I'm missing about them.

Start with that YouTube video at 1.5x Then look at this http://qz.com/206283/all-the-western-companies-youd-have-to-...

The Quartz article is eye opening, but then I also realized Google also operates in a very similar fashion, and alot of those entities have Google counterparts.

What will be interesting from the IPO would be to know if there is a single cash cow (like Google's Adwords) or if theres are more healthy split

Re: Alibaba F-1

#26

Post by khc »

tormeh wrote: post #20
boomzilla wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

200B valuation is actually very reasonable: it's PE would be roughly 35 compared to Amazon's 400. Now the big question which I have not been able to figure out from their S1 is why they have so much more margin compared to Amazon, given the two are operating more or less in the same space. Is that because US is a free (and more efficient) market, where China has more artificial barriers for other players?

I think Alibaba does more bulk shipments, connecting manufacturers. Alibabas' customers are businesses, Amazon is a consumer company. They are not comparable at all. Searching for pens on Alibaba gives you offers with minimum shipment of 500 pens.

That's only talking about the Alibaba site itself. They own several gigantic websites that in the consumer business (taobao, t-mall, etc).

Re: Alibaba F-1

#27

Post by tanzam75 »

tokenadult wrote: post #23
jacquesm wrote: post #16

At least compared to the valuations of instagram, pinterest and so on this one actually makes sense.

Jacques, Shakespeare would call that "damning with faint praise." It does seem to me that Alibaba has an actual underlying business with real business value, but I wonder about the transparency, even with listing in the United States, of a company that does most of its business in China. We shall see what value the market sets on the company at first, and how that works out over time.

Actually, the Alibaba that is being listed does not have an underlying business. The stock represents ownership of a Cayman Islands variable interest entity that has a contractual claim on the actual Alibaba's profits.

This is not a new trick. It's a longstanding loophole in the Chinese law barring foreign ownership of certain companies. But it's also not exactly risk-free: http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2014/05/06/i-p-o-revives-debate-...

Re: Alibaba F-1

#29

Post by rahimnathwani »

tanzam75 wrote: post #27
tokenadult wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Jacques, Shakespeare would call that "damning with faint praise." It does seem to me that Alibaba has an actual underlying business with real business value, but I wonder about the transparency, even with listing in the United States, of a company that does most of its business in China. We shall see what value the market sets on the company at first, and how that works out over time.

Actually, the Alibaba that is being listed does not have an underlying business. The stock represents ownership of a Cayman Islands variable interest entity that has a contractual claim on the actual Alibaba's profits. This is not a new trick. It's a longstanding loophole in the Chinese law barring foreign ownership of certain companies. But it's also not exactly risk-free: http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2014/05/06/i-p-…

Dan Harris wrote some interesting articles about the VIE structures (aka Sina structure). If you're interested, a good place to start is here: http://www.chinalawblog.com/2013/06/buying-into-a-china-vie-...

Re: Alibaba F-1

#30

Post by lifeisstillgood »

misterbwong wrote: post #7
lifeisstillgood wrote: post #6

It failed to list in Hong Kong after HK said the partners could not retain control of board nominations after the sale """The negotiations foundered after regulators decided they would not allow Alibaba's partners to retain control over board nominations, maintaining that all shareholders should be treated equally, sources said.""" [+] So does that mean that the SEC is going to allow them control? Does that mean HKSE…

I believe this has to do with the inability to issue non-preferred (non-voting) stock on the HKSE, something that is allowed on NYSE.

But ... why? Why should one company allow voting with all shares and another not? Seems to me that's turning comparable markets into apples v oranges. The price of two shares then are not just based on strengths of companies but whether shareholders can influence the company too. I would rather have two markets in that case.
Post reply on HN