Hacker Read top | best | new | newcomments | leaders | about | bookmarklet login

> sold a small portion of its equity stake in Tencent in April for $14.6 billion.

Personally I would never use “small” to describe anything worth 15B…

Anyway, Tencent is worth 850B and these guys own approx. 200B of that, so they’re quite large.



sort by: page size:

> Just a year ago, Didi was valuated at only $13B... even then, the $2B would've resulted in a ~13% ownership stake. Last year, they were valuated under $10B. Tencent got a ~20% stake in Didi for just $15M only 3 years ago.

Interesting. Btw, what share did Apple get for their $1B?


>such a small share of such a large market

I think you underestimate the size of the active players in the market, especially considering leverage, which they generally are to the hilt.


> And yet the company was sold at 1 Billion USD, which seemed like short change.

That was 2009 though, was 1B USD small compared to the average corporate acquisitions at the time?

Instagram was also sold for 1B if I recall correctly.


> Had they done that instead they would have been worth multiple trillions now.

They’re very close to being worth multiple trillions right now, their market cap is 5.44% shy of $2T


>I worked for a company that sold for over half a trillion

Que?

There are only a few companies worth that much in the world. The only (well known) company big enough to buy another company for that amount is Saudi Aramco.


> But I do think its fair to say that the scale of Discord is 5x bigger while having 1/10th the employees and the last valuation round was at 2 billion versus slacks 12 billion valuation?

Slack has revenue, probably 100-1000x that of Discord. It's a real business and not burning VC/Tencent money, which is exactly why it (imo correctly) has a much higher valuation.


> a company worth a small fortune Atlassian

Atlassian market cap: 52 billion USD

> a small fortune

> small

What.


> Does that mean the current valuation of the company is $49M?

No.


> That's not even a lot! Apple, Google & FB have $200bn, $140bn & $65bn respectively. Dividends don't seem to be a thing, and it's basically impossible to invest this much cash internally. These companies don't have factories to build, or any kind of hard capital investments to make.

Apple arguably does have factories to build, given how utterly dependent on China it is.


> What did they sell?

1.6% of their address space. For $200k. And they sold it all. That puts an implicit current valuation on the entire Urbit address space of $17M.


> Companies being Ambani owned, while worse than a competitive market, is still much better than being Tencent owned.

But better how, exactly?


> And of course giant investments mean giant valuations. They have to

This reads like satire these days because so many of YC's top companies are exactly that: companies losing hundreds of millions, or even billions of investor money every year, but all having insane valuations [1]

https://www.ycombinator.com/topcompanies/


> All of this is more or less fine while the company is valued at billions of dollars.

It's still valued at billions of dollars. The absolute valuation is irrelevant. As another article I read said, building an $8 billion company out of $10 billion of investment is not an especially great achievement. In particular, it is not similar to building an $8 billion company out of $10 million of investment.


> it would be company with the largest market cap in history, yes bigger than Apple

Apple is not remotely the largest company in history, when adjusted for inflation. The The Dutch East India Company, for instance, was worth over 7 trillion dollars at one point. Likewise, Standard Oil held a monopoly on all the USA's oil at one point and certainly had a several trillion dollar valuation.

Saudi Aramco will be massive, certainly. But not without precedent in history.


> This is bigger than many well-known and long-living companies

And not in any way comparable, as it is merely the spot price multiplied by the supply, not any sort of reflection of total value or productivity.


> The idea that the company would 11x its market cap was called ‘laughable’:

> Revenue ~5x’ed from~ $12 billion to $54 billion.

For every dollar I make for you, you pay me $2. What a deal.


> since when a company capable of routinely acquiring other established companies for tens of billions of dollars a startup

The acquisition was for “several hundred million pounds”, nowhere near tens of billions of dollars.


> “The valuation of $1 billion – not as insane as the [$15 billion] valuation placed by Microsoft on Facebook – was jaw dropping.”

lol


> don't understand why the Meta stock hasn't plummeted even more than it already did.

Because they are still making a lot of money

next

Legal | privacy