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

TikTok Sold for $14B

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–49 of 49 posts

Re: TikTok Sold for $14B

#41

Post by TMWNN »

mindcrash wrote: post #9

* TikTok's US operations sold for $14B As far as I know TikTok in Africa and Eurasia will still be owned, and operated, by ByteDance from China. How all of this is going to work out content wise is going to be... interesting, indeed.

When the Trump administration came close to forcing a divestment/shutdown on TikTok in 2020, Americans were 10% of TikTok's user base but 50% of revenue.

Of the top 50 most-followed accounts https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most-followed_TikTok_a...>, 21 of 49 (not including TikTok itself) are American.

Re: TikTok Sold for $14B

#42

Post by TMWNN »

jmull wrote: post #31

I don't think it's a good idea for the US government to dictate (or attempt to dictate) specific deals and specific terms for those deals. I think, in the context of something like a financial crisis, there could be a "this is the least bad thing at this point" argument to be made. But for tiktok today, this has to be among the worst things. It looks like this massively undervalues TikTok's US operations, meaning the…

>I don't think it's a good idea for the US government to dictate (or attempt to dictate) specific deals and specific terms for those deals.

The US government is mandating the transaction happening in the first place, so of course there is going to be government input into the terms. Look at the forced sale of Bayer's US division during WW1. Or, the government requiring very specific actions by GM in return for the 2009 bailout.

>It looks like this massively undervalues TikTok's US operations

Valuation is an art, not a science.

It's a sale required by law, so it's not surprising that the terms are lower than what may be achievable through a public auction. Also, the details of the transaction matter; much of TikTok's value is in the algorithm, and how and whether that is transferred is unclear. But I'm not going to complain about American buyers paying less than they might otherwise.

>meaning the current administration is essentially gifting tens of billions to a friendly oligarch.

"Oligarch" = rich guy you don't like

Re: TikTok Sold for $14B

#44

Post by janice1999 »

guywithahat wrote: post #23
pbiggar wrote: post #5

Incredible that this happened. AIPAC and the ADL targeted Tiktok because it didn't restrict Palestine content while the other social media did. And so the US Congress killed it. Absolutely incredible first amendment work from the Land of the Free.

Honestly I wonder if it's more than that. China has preemptively banned basically all major US social media sites (and many tech companies) to the benefit of their own local brands. Those brands are now entering the US market, and so I could see why the US might want to try and block them, although I suppose I wish social media sites were just allowed to operate in each respective country.

"In recent weeks, powerful politicians, including senators Josh Hawley and Marco Rubio and House Representative Mike Gallagher, have reiterated calls for a ban on TikTok, citing the app’s alleged bias towards anti-Israel and anti-Jewish content."

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/11/10/tiktok-faces-renew...

Re: TikTok Sold for $14B

#45

Post by jmull »

TMWNN wrote: post #42
jmull wrote: post #31

I don't think it's a good idea for the US government to dictate (or attempt to dictate) specific deals and specific terms for those deals. I think, in the context of something like a financial crisis, there could be a "this is the least bad thing at this point" argument to be made. But for tiktok today, this has to be among the worst things. It looks like this massively undervalues TikTok's US operations, meaning the…

>I don't think it's a good idea for the US government to dictate (or attempt to dictate) specific deals and specific terms for those deals. The US government is mandating the transaction happening in the first place, so of course there is going to be government input into the terms. Look at the forced sale of Bayer's US division during WW1. Or, the government requiring very specific actions by GM in return for the 20…

You should look up the definition of oligarch, think about it a bit, and see if you can't relate it to the power structures at play here.

Re: TikTok Sold for $14B

#46

Post by soganess »

am17an wrote: post #27
returnInfinity wrote: post #16

Without the algorithm, TikTok is not TikTok. When Tiktok was banned in India, everyone tried to recreate it, include Instagram. Everyone failed to get anywhere close to TikTok for you page. Once the new algorithm is live, expect massive backlash.

Probably for the better, its incredibly damaging to young brains.

Oh yes, I remember reading the am17an report about that! It was incredibly detailed and definitely not just a single-sentence declarative summary of Haidt's "The Anxious Generation."

It is not even like I disagree with the gist. Sadly, my feelings don't decide fact... or so the lesswrong weirdos keep telling me. If it was incredibly damaging, it would be incredibly easy to show. Instead, it's some poorly picked cherries by someone (Haidt) who should know better. Worse still, the best you can get from the data is a "maybe. I mean it is not immediately dis-proven... which is a start."

Re: TikTok Sold for $14B

#47

Post by am17an »

soganess wrote: post #46
am17an wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably for the better, its incredibly damaging to young brains.

Oh yes, I remember reading the am17an report about that! It was incredibly detailed and definitely not just a single-sentence declarative summary of Haidt's "The Anxious Generation." It is not even like I disagree with the gist. Sadly, my feelings don't decide fact... or so the lesswrong weirdos keep telling me. If it was incredibly damaging, it would be incredibly easy to show. Instead, it's some poorly picked cherr…

The kind of person who doesn’t believe this is bad for children, is the same kind of person who would believe Big Tobacco sponsored studies about how cigarettes don’t cause cancer in the 80s. For the data driven like yourself, I remember a Jeff Bezos anecdote, “When the data and the anecdotes disagree, the anecdotes are usually right"

Try spending time with a phone addicted teen and you might have a more sympathetic take.

Re: TikTok Sold for $14B

#48

Post by soganess »

am17an wrote: post #47
soganess wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh yes, I remember reading the am17an report about that! It was incredibly detailed and definitely not just a single-sentence declarative summary of Haidt's "The Anxious Generation." It is not even like I disagree with the gist. Sadly, my feelings don't decide fact... or so the lesswrong weirdos keep telling me. If it was incredibly damaging, it would be incredibly easy to show. Instead, it's some poorly picked cherr…

The kind of person who doesn’t believe this is bad for children, is the same kind of person who would believe Big Tobacco sponsored studies about how cigarettes don’t cause cancer in the 80s. For the data driven like yourself, I remember a Jeff Bezos anecdote, “When the data and the anecdotes disagree, the anecdotes are usually right" Try spending time with a phone addicted teen and you might have a more sympathetic…

  > The kind of person...
That's on me, I came in hot and you came back hotter. Apologies.

Let me take the temp down and ask it a different way. You don't feel weird saying there is an epidemic happening to our kids (again, something I’m at least partially convinced of), but we can't really put together a narrative one-tenth as cohesive as what we have for the efficacy of gray-market/off-label Ozempic?

Re: TikTok Sold for $14B

#49

Post by am17an »

soganess wrote: post #48
am17an wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The kind of person who doesn’t believe this is bad for children, is the same kind of person who would believe Big Tobacco sponsored studies about how cigarettes don’t cause cancer in the 80s. For the data driven like yourself, I remember a Jeff Bezos anecdote, “When the data and the anecdotes disagree, the anecdotes are usually right" Try spending time with a phone addicted teen and you might have a more sympathetic…

> The kind of person... That's on me, I came in hot and you came back hotter. Apologies. Let me take the temp down and ask it a different way. You don't feel weird saying there is an epidemic happening to our kids (again, something I’m at least partially convinced of), but we can't really put together a narrative one-tenth as cohesive as what we have for the efficacy of gray-market/off-label Ozempic?

I don't feel weird about it because it's a trillion dollar business, and it's in their best interests to muddy the waters regarding any cohesive argument. But when you just look at these things from first principles, boasting about 1 billion hours of shorts watched in a month or something ridiculous like that, AI generated content on loop, teens/adults getting into status/envy games on these platforms, the "connection" aspect looks like a very small positive.

I don't think your example of off-label Ozempic is isomorphic - the more apt comparison is one I already gave: Why did it take us 30 years to realize cigarettes cause 400k deaths a year? The answer is because there was simply huge amounts of money involved.

Post reply on HN