11–20 of 279 posts
Bit of a downer for the UK to see them list in the US, I do understand they just want access to the most capital, but I find a shame LSE is not competitive for this kind of thing.
"250 billion chips" I wonder how many of those are buried in landfill now.
Many. And still, many more are bought up every year. Those small M0 and M0+ cost pennies... if you made all chopsticks in the world out of M0s instead of wood, it would be more cost effective lol (okay, maybe this is an exaggeration, but these small things are pretty much everywhere... not even speaking about chips in other, more complex devices)
Bit of a downer for the UK to see them list in the US, I do understand they just want access to the most capital, but I find a shame LSE is not competitive for this kind of thing.
It begun with the invention of the computer as we know it... - Charles Babbage,"Father of the computer", British - Alan Turing, "Father of modern computer science", British
Then there was Margret Thatcher who decided the internet was a fad and wasn't worth investing in internet infrastructure in the country.
Where did the multi billion (if not trillion by now) industry end up? Silicon Valley and elsewhere....
Bravo UK... Bravo
Bit of a downer for the UK to see them list in the US, I do understand they just want access to the most capital, but I find a shame LSE is not competitive for this kind of thing.
I wonder to what extent the overarching business culture of the UK (which I'd categorise as being generally apathetical, if not hostile, to the engineering profession) might have anything to do with it.
(...speaking as a former UK eng myself)
Bit of a downer for the UK to see them list in the US, I do understand they just want access to the most capital, but I find a shame LSE is not competitive for this kind of thing.
What justifies such crazy increase in value? Also, I believe Nvidia overpaid for the company regardless. Nvidia was willing to pay $40b because they want a world-class CPU design team to integrate their GeForce IP into SoCs and service chips.
But a standalone ARM is not very valuable. The reason is that ARM's business model (licensing core designs and ISA) makes peanuts compared to Qualcomm, Apple, Intel, AMD, etc. In addition, ARM's biggest customers are also their biggest competitors. For example, Apple competes with stock ARM designs with Apple Silicon. Qualcomm will be competing with ARM designs via Nuvia chips. Ampere Computing just designed a custom ARM core of their own.
When ARM only license the ISA (Apple Silicon, Nuvia, and Ampere One), they make peanuts. When they license ARM core designs, they make slightly more than peanuts.
It's generally not a good business to invest in. I find it hard to justify the $60b - $70b valuation. No doubt Softbank will try to sell ARM as an AI company. It's not.
Bit of a downer for the UK to see them list in the US, I do understand they just want access to the most capital, but I find a shame LSE is not competitive for this kind of thing.
> Bit of a downer for the UK to see them list in the US I wonder to what extent the overarching business culture of the UK (which I'd categorise as being generally apathetical, if not hostile, to the engineering profession) might have anything to do with it. (...speaking as a former UK eng myself)
Bit of a downer for the UK to see them list in the US, I do understand they just want access to the most capital, but I find a shame LSE is not competitive for this kind of thing.
I don't think it's about lack of capital but higher valuations. For reasons which don't seem to be well understood, investors on US markets seem to be willing to bid higher multiples than investors on UK and most other markets.
Bit of a downer for the UK to see them list in the US, I do understand they just want access to the most capital, but I find a shame LSE is not competitive for this kind of thing.
I don't think it's about lack of capital but higher valuations. For reasons which don't seem to be well understood, investors on US markets seem to be willing to bid higher multiples than investors on UK and most other markets.
During the height of the covid tech bubble, Nvidia offered to buy ARM for $40b. Right now, Softbank wants a $60b - $70b valuation when many tech stocks have lost 90%+ and some large caps have lost 30% - 50%. What justifies such crazy increase in value? Also, I believe Nvidia overpaid for the company regardless. Nvidia was willing to pay $40b because they want a world-class CPU design team to integrate their GeForce I…
i agree.
> Arm reported $524 million in net income on $2.68 billion in revenue in its fiscal 2023, which ended in March
i find the current valuation ludicrous, and it seems like it's pushed more by Softbank's Vision Fund than a firm grasp in reality.