Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

If China manages to reduce its dependency of US based tech like CPUs, I wonder how this will affect the two economies.

Would it be a viable idea to buy shares in China based tech companies now? The thinking is that if CCP pushes something real hard by investing large amounts of resources in it, the chances are higher that they will succeed. Not tomorrow but in 10 or 20 years. Conversely, if US based tech companies will have competition, it is likely that their value will go down a bit at one point.

Also, it's possible that if China builds domestic silicon tech we will see a race to the bottom if they will want to aggressively price their products and try to undercut their competitors. Then it might be a bad idea to own any shares in tech companies, no matter where they are located.




Competition is good, if the US and China end up competing to make more interesting CPUs, everybody wins. We’re wasting a lot of good brains in the US on ad companies and food delivery apps, a real competitor to focus our attention would be great, in my opinion.


I never looked at it in good/bad terms, but you are, probably, right.

I was more interested in terms of investment.


>Conversely, if US based tech companies will have competition, it is likely that their value will go down a bit at one point.

Keep thinking. If US tech firms don't have much competition right now, they are not incentived to innovate or improve their products. If they had more competition, they would need to put up or shut up, rather than reaping profits from money they might otherwise spend on R&D.

Personally, I think that if you put competitive pressure on a large and lazy incumbent, they will either increase in value or fold outright. (Or convince politicians to bail them out, write protectionist legislation, etc.)


Yes, US companies will have the incentive to innovate and better themselves. But my question is just about the material outcomes: how will the shares of US and China based companies be affected.


One more thing to consider: The new iron curtain, now called "sanctions".

My best guess currently would be that the US will try to outlaw the competing market should one arise: The US will just forbid its people and the people in the allied countries to make business with China, like they do with a lot of other countries, like Russia or Iran.

It's unlikely this would happen immediately as the US is currently still depended on China. But as the economic war intensives walling-off will happen at some point. There are already "sanctions" in place against Chinese companies in some market areas. This will likely only worsen over time.

You can still invest in China, sure. But you will be forced to move there at some point, or loss everything over there, I guess.


I think that the sanctions policy is terribly misguided, because they are basically trade protection in reverse. They may have some results in the short term, but in the long term they always backfire, unless when applied to terribly poor countries who are caught in a trap where they can't bootstrap their industry by themselves.


> The thinking is that if CCP pushes something real hard by investing large amounts of resources in it, the chances are higher that they will succeed. Not tomorrow but in 10 or 20 years.

China’s ASML is Years and Years Behind: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DtOyW-JpJjM

tl;dw - Nope. Can't just throw money at this problem.


28nm can cover the vast majority of chip production needs for the next 5-10 years. Most things don't need an advanced node.

By the time SMEE is hitting 5nm, processes for 3d will be mature. I wouldn't discount any of this at this point.


28nm with multi patterning can go to lower process node. SMIC has experience up to 7nm for that. I think early TSMC 7nm used DUV.


28nm is good for everything besides mobile, desktop and server which is a huge market.

I guess China will crack EUV in some time.


SMEE won't be making EUV, it has it's hands full of DUV.

Chinese Academy of Sciences will (a spinoff company for commercialization), they publish research papers on EUV and so on.

Multiple project are being developed in parallel.


Yes, I know. I didn't say SMEE will create EUV, I said China will. I don't think differentiation between various industrial arms of CCP is of importance.

Right now they've made bets on a large scale of different technologies. Many of them failed already. Probably they will focus on a few and succeed in a not very long time scale.


I agree, it is hubris and possibly racism that continues to discount Chinese grit and intelligence.


Just FYI the person giving the talk in my YouTube link is Chinese. Nor is the grit and intelligence of the knowledge workers that is being questioned.


To be clear, I wasn't accusing you of this, in general there is a broad sentiment going back all the way to the 80s that espoused a racist view that Asia could copy and produce but could not create. In middle school we were sold the vision that we would design products because of our superior creativity and intellect and people in Asia would make our products.


If a Chinese company isn't directly under US sanctions like Huawei is they can still use TSMC to fab chips.


It's important to also consider how much you trust the CCP to actually pay out your hypothetical shares, should they ever become worth anything. It's possible that they may just confiscate them (or outlaw foreigners from trading or something similar).


Are there precedents in which they didn't pay out?


There are examples where the CCP has materially reduced the stock price (e.g., by forbidding the company from making a profit) after it was marketed to western investors. And the typical ownership structure (VIEs) is incredibly fragile. As an individual I would not concentrate investment in Chinese companies due to CCP risk.

The SEC has this to say: https://www.sec.gov/corpfin/disclosure-considerations-china-...

> Current regulations in China limit or prohibit foreign investment in Chinese companies operating in certain industries. For example, there are restrictions on foreign ownership of telecommunications companies and prohibitions on ownership of educational institutions.[7] To circumvent these restrictions, many China-based Issuers form non-Chinese holding companies that enter into contractual arrangements, intended to mimic direct ownership, with Chinese operating companies. Through these contractual arrangements, the China-based Issuer is generally able to consolidate the Chinese operating company, commonly referred to as a variable interest entity or VIE, in its financial statements, although whether the China-based Issuer maintains legal control of the Chinese operating company is a matter of Chinese law. Under this structure, the Chinese operating company, in which the China-based Issuer cannot hold an equity interest, typically holds licenses and other assets that the China-based Issuer cannot hold directly.

> These China-based Issuer VIE structures pose risks to U.S. investors that are not present in other organizational structures. For example, exerting control through contractual arrangements may be less effective than direct equity ownership, and a company may incur substantial costs to enforce the terms of the arrangements, including those relating to the distribution of funds among the entities. Further, the Chinese government could determine that the agreements establishing the VIE structure do not comply with Chinese law and regulations, including those related to restrictions on foreign ownership, which could subject a China-based Issuer to penalties, revocation of business and operating licenses, or forfeiture of ownership interests.

> Legal claims, including federal securities law claims, against China-based Issuers, or their officers, directors, and gatekeepers, may be difficult or impossible for investors to pursue in U.S. courts. Even if an investor obtains a judgment in a U.S. court, the investor may be unable to enforce such judgment, particularly in the case of a China-based Issuer, where the related assets or persons are typically located outside of the United States and in jurisdictions that may not recognize or enforce U.S. judgments.

And of course, see Levine on the subject:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2021-07-07/money-...

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-08-02/chines...


Even then, you can make some money by indirectly investing in China's tech infrastructure by buying shares in a company that will buy and use hardware made in China.




Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: