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

Arm Announces Public Filing for Proposed Initial Public Offering

arm.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 279 posts

Re: Arm Announces Public Filing for Proposed Initial Public Offering

#251

Post by usrusr »

bemusedthrow75 wrote: post #196
cjrp wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> As a proportion this is only four times what the richest private landowner (the Emmersons) in the USA owns of the USA. And the Emmersons have come by their share pretty quickly by comparison, wouldn't you say? If anything, I feel like the speed (or how recently the land was acquired) is actually in the Emmersons favour here. A generation or two ago somebody got wildly successful, vs. land being inherited because yo…

Yeah. Swings and roundabouts though; most of the truly long-held property of the royal family has become the Crown estate, and over time the family has had to make much more of its income from that wealth due to the contraction of the Civil List. Charles himself will only have income from his estate (whereas his mother had income from the Civil List) What I meant to say is that in the blink of an eye, realistically -…

"It's probably in the nature of land-owning for this to happen: someone ends up with all of it, then can't maintain it, and it ends up being sold off or dispensed to the state, then sold off, reaccumulated, and the circle continues."

Realistically, once someone owns everything, they'd never ever have to sell. Because they could just rent it out temporarily for the same price. Demand isn't that flexible and in absence of other sellers, where else would a would-be buyer take their money?

Re: Arm Announces Public Filing for Proposed Initial Public Offering

#252

Post by klelatti »

Lio wrote: post #201
klelatti wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No fan of Thatcher, but she left power before the world-wide-web even left CERN.

True but the driver before the world wide web would have been cable TV over fibre to the home. She decided it was better to open the market to foreign cable TV providers and so barred BT from selling TV access. Without TV there was no driver for fibre investment. Where BT would have had a requirement to provide universal access to fibre, as with phone provision, Telewest and NTL just did geograhically limited roll ou…

Fair enough, but I don’t see how this supports her thinking the internet was a fad not worth investing in.

Also it denies agency to those in power in the decades that followed. I mean did that decision bind the policymakers that followed when it became clear how important the internet really was?

Re: Arm Announces Public Filing for Proposed Initial Public Offering

#253

Post by tchaffee »

flkenosad wrote: post #249
tchaffee wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well no one can predict the future but what's your reasoning that such an important technology partner to such massive companies will all of a sudden stop innovating and become less significant?

Intel was also an important partner to Apple at one point.

Intel is still around, still innovating, and still profitable. It has a lot more competition than in the past, but they are still a force to be reckoned with.

Re: Arm Announces Public Filing for Proposed Initial Public Offering

#254

Post by vikramkr »

sofixa wrote: post #164
klelatti wrote: post #138

I think in many ways Arm is (or should be) a sort of large 'Mittelstand' [1] business. Long term focus, independence, customer focus etc are key to the success of this type of business. Trouble is, its success and its sector has given it a profile that attracts attention from the likes of Softbank who have other ideas. A company doesn't need to have a Nvidia like P/E ratio to be successful. [1] https://en.wikipedia.o…

> A company doesn't need to have a Nvidia like P/E ratio to be successful. Absolutely true. Sadly nowadays, especially in the US, and especially in tech, unless the company is growing like crazy or massive, it's considered as insignificant and dimissed.

Dismissed by who? Dismissed by the media and public is one thing, but if you think investors are also dismissing them unfairly, that doesn't sound unfortunate at all. That sounds like an investment thesis.

Re: Arm Announces Public Filing for Proposed Initial Public Offering

#255

Post by hsjqllzlfkf »

bartread wrote: post #83
msy wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The UK has a long intellectual tradition which creates a steady stream of creative and capable engineers. Capital however is predominately held via inherited wealth and its controllers want rentier incomes with low risk. As a consequence there is low appetite for risky new ventures and those that want to undertake them mostly migrate elsewhere. What's left is a stock market dominated by octogenarian+ dianosaurs, a de…

> want rentier incomes with low risk. I don't know if I buy your point about inherited wealth but there is what I'd describe as a stifling culture of rentseeking that, if not actively encouraged is certainly tolerated and overlooked, at many levels of society, and across both businesses and public organisations. And once you become aware of it you start to realise how obnoxious and oppressive it is. We certainly don'…

"there is a culture of rent seeking" must be the understatement of the year. What the UK understands as "entrepreneurship" is buying property to rent. This is everyone from your grandma to the shiniest MBAs.

Re: Arm Announces Public Filing for Proposed Initial Public Offering

#256

Post by themiddleupper »

surajrmal wrote: post #220
amiga1200 wrote: post #187

I’m glad that RISC-V SBCs are starting to become usable.

Depends on what you mean by usable. If you don't need long term support, strong software ecosystem support, and performance parity, it's great. It'll be a few more years before everything comes together, but hopefully not too many.

The RISC V fanboism is rampant here with bunch of them repeating their marketing slogan in the comments. There is nothing inevitable about RISC V. If anything it has lot of mountains to climb before it can be considered a challenge to the existing instruction set. It may or it may not do that. Being open does not automagically make it happen.

Re: Arm Announces Public Filing for Proposed Initial Public Offering

#257

Post by gotstad »

berkle4455 wrote: post #218
Mistletoe wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do people use P/E as a metric for company success? I find the Nvidia one of 223 or so just a gross perversion, no real success there. It’s more about how irrational the average investor is now and how top heavy the SP500 is.

I think it’s a reflection of earnings potential. If nvidia can average 50% Y/Y earnings growth for the next 5 years, and stock price remains flat, that 223 falls to 30.

It is a reflection of exactly that, but this completely dismissed all the risks: - Maybe new ml-tech is invented that does not require as heavy equipment. - Maybe AI does not grow as fast as expected. - Maybe a competitor comes along and pricing comes under pressure. - Maybe supply chain issues.

Re: Arm Announces Public Filing for Proposed Initial Public Offering

#258

Post by jrno639 »

moconnor wrote: post #48
scrlk wrote: post #2

F-1: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1973239/000119312523...

The "risks" section is pretty interesting, e.g.: "Arm China is 25% of our revenue, but we have no control over them, they have failed to pay us in the past resulting in us taking on additional costs to recover the money, also we have no way of knowing what they actually owe us and other than what they say, which has already been a problem"

ARM learning the hard way what “49% ownership in a joint venture” really means.

Re: Arm Announces Public Filing for Proposed Initial Public Offering

#259

Post by snvzz »

themiddleupper wrote: post #256
surajrmal wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depends on what you mean by usable. If you don't need long term support, strong software ecosystem support, and performance parity, it's great. It'll be a few more years before everything comes together, but hopefully not too many.

The RISC V fanboism is rampant here with bunch of them repeating their marketing slogan in the comments. There is nothing inevitable about RISC V. If anything it has lot of mountains to climb before it can be considered a challenge to the existing instruction set. It may or it may not do that. Being open does not automagically make it happen.

>If anything it has lot of mountains to climb before it can be considered a challenge to the existing instruction set.

That's not what ARM thinks[0].

>There is nothing inevitable about RISC V.

As it turns out, the decisions have long been made, and RISC-V has been chosen.

0. https://thechipletter.substack.com/p/risc-v-part-2-ambitious...

Re: Arm Announces Public Filing for Proposed Initial Public Offering

#260

Post by snvzz »

unethical_ban wrote: post #239

I don't understand what ARM does. They have designed a processor architecture that is RISC-style. For some companies, ARM sells the design and others manufacture the chip. So what do Apple and Qualcomm get out of it, if they design their own architecture? Is apple tacking on proprietary extensions or instructions? Why didn't apple design a CPU architecture from the ground up ala RISC-V?

Your confusion seems to have to do with microarchitecture vs ISA.

An ISA is the Instruction Set Architecture, the interface between software and hardware.

A microarchitecture is a hardware implementation of an ISA.

RISC-V is an ISA.

ARM is a company that has both an ISA (actually several, but their current is ARMv9) and a bunch of microarchitectures.

Their business model is to license their IP:

- They may license you a microarchitecture, so that you can include it in your chip's design.

- They may license you the ISA, so you can implement your own microarchitecture for the ISA. Note that you can't then license your microarchitecture to others, that's ARM's sole privilege.

RISC-V's instruction space has some room for custom extensions. Thus it can be adapted to find specific needs, without asking for permission nor opting out of the strongest software ecosystem which RISC-V is rapidly building.

But while RISC-V is pretty good technically, enabling the best processors, what's most disruptive is that it is an open ISA.

It means there's now an open market with RISC-V microarchitectures to license, from a range of vendors. There's also some open source microarchitectures.

Microarchitecture licensing aside, there's an ecosystem of companies offering related services, such as helping you verify your designs, trace your code and so on.

Post reply on HN