[davidu]

Regardless of the legal ownership structure (I believe the SSRN perspective), it is effectively "state directed when needed." That's not a xenophobic perspective, that's a reality of being a company in China and it'd be hard for someone to push back on that based on the last 20 years of game film for Internet related businesses in China.

[chubbyrabbit]

> state directed when needed

Isn't it the same in here in the US? The president said "hey companies, you cannot trade with Huawei" and every company has to follow.

My point is every government has some degree of influence on their companies. How much is another question. However in my opinion Huawei cannot be as innovative as they are with as much influence from their government as people here often suggest.

[wolco]

No, not the same at all. You cannot escape the Chinese government if you reach any kind of national success.

In the US you can fight the government and even side with the other party and try to get the president to lose their job.

Most know it's more profitable to ride a wave rather than to fight it.

[seanmcdirmid]

You could technically do that in China also, just without an independent judiciary you wouldn’t get very far.

[steve19]

Given that most news media, and many CEOs, in the country oppose the President, with impunity, it is hard to argue the government has the same level of control.

[deepVoid]

Every company is "state directed when needed", to some degree. For instance, Google is not allowed to provide Android to Huawei (it is withheld now), even if there is no clear evidence that Huawei threatens national security. Admittedly, it would be harder for Huawei to push back on government directions. However, that still does not make Huawei "state-owned" or "state-directed" in the common sense.

[edoceo]

SSRN: Social Science Research Network

I had to search that acronym. HTH