Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by adventured 3146 days ago
First, that's not necessarily the case (that they're confused), the parent may simply be referring to that number for scale purposes.

Second, what they said is correct on an annual basis. The value of that merger, at $103 billion, exceeds the annual GDP of numerous nations.

Before you make an absolute statement about their confusion, perhaps you should ask for clarification first. What they said was not strictly wrong.

The economic output of an entire nation can be useful for such comparisons when you're attempting to relate to very large financial figures.

3 comments

Sheesh.. pedantry on HN can be harsh. I remember sparking about 15 cranky comments for calling Milton Friedman “on the Austrian side of economics.”

But, can’t beat em, join em.

Qualcomm is basically Estonia. Qualcomm’s revenue multiple is about 4.25X. Using that multiple, Estonia should have a similar valuation.

Qualcomm has the higher growth rate, but Estonia has been a country for a while with a loyal customer base. Qualcomm’s customers will probably use whatever chips come wired into their phone. Estonia’s are likely to stay Estonian unless a disruptive innovator comes along with a 10X improvement. 10X, not 10%. Think big Putin. If we weigh these against each other, it’s about even.

So… Estonia’s National valuation is about $103.4, based on $24bn in gross stuff (yuck).

Just kidding!. That’s preposterous of course. Qualcomm is investor backed, Like Tesla. Estonia is debt backed, like a country. You can’t compare those either, and you’d know this if you read all the cranky HN pedantry from before! Someone tried to compare Tesla to GM, the fool!

What we need is Estonia’s enterprise value…. Now, that’s apple’s to apple’s. Also, Russia, NATO and stuff.

You simply said something that was flat out wrong, that does not people were 'cranky'.
That was a different individual than was replied to up thread.
I think parent meant this:

> calling Milton Friedman “on the Austrian side of economics.”

Which is pretty laughably wrong for someone at least a bit educated in the area.

You consider him more of a Menshevik?
I did not know that economics was all about Austrian vs Menshiviks.
"The economic output of an entire nation can be useful for such comparisons when you're attempting to relate to very large financial figures."

I repeat: It's comparing a stock and a flow. You cannot compare a stock and a flow because they are different units. 103bn per year vs. 103bn as a volume of wealth. You could compare 103bn to the wealth of a country. Or you could say that it is equal to N empire state buildings, or a number of dollars that goes around the world X times. But if you compare it to GDP, then you're not comparing apples to apples.

The problem is that flows like GDP count the "same dollar" multiple times. When the dollar moves from one place to another, it's counted. (To preempt the pedants: Yes, there are exceptions as to exactly where these counters are. Not every movement is counted.)

That's drastically different from having to have a large pile of "different dollars" to make a large purchase like this.

GDP is a measure of value-added. That's why they net out things like net trade.