←back to thread

US Intel

(stratechery.com)
539 points maguay | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
monknomo ◴[] No.45028039[source]
the president unilaterally extorting 10% ownership out of a company isn't going to build the kind of system that competes with anyone. Big business can't really thrive under this kind of thing any more than corner stores can thrive under a protection racket.
replies(4): >>45028634 #>>45030689 #>>45032132 #>>45034694 #
AnimalMuppet ◴[] No.45028634[source]
Didn't the US pay $9.8 billion? Intel's market cap is $106 billion, so $9.8 billion for 10% is buying at a slight discount.

If that data is correct, how did the US "extort" ownership?

Look, I'm as terrified of Trump's overreach as the next guy. I could easily see him extorting partial ownership of companies. But I don't see this as being that.

Can you make a convincing argument otherwise?

replies(4): >>45028842 #>>45028898 #>>45029932 #>>45031575 #
1. AnIrishDuck ◴[] No.45028842[source]
What was the legal basis for this "purchase"? Because as I understand it, Trump came in, saw a law he didn't like (CHIPS), and unilaterally "altered the deal"

I don't think it's fair to characterize this as some kind of standard stock sale, as the terms were never set out as such from the start. (And to be fair, there are lots of valid criticisms of CHIPS)

Instead, funding was voted for by Congress... and then a third party came in, threatened to kill it on a dubious legal basis, and extracted protection money (well, shares). That's textbook extortion.