this post was submitted on 06 Sep 2023
261 points (98.2% liked)
World News
32315 readers
840 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Huawei is not a publicly traded company. It's a private company wholly owned by its employees.
Huawei may be "owned" by its employees but that isn't the same thing as being controlled by them. Huwaei's structure is extremely unusual and highly opaque.
https://sayari.com/resources/huaweis-ownership-opaque-unusual/
That’s cool as fuck actually
I'm sure the top 0.1% take home 90% of the profits, so likely not cool.
I really don't have any way to disprove this. There have been two English language studies into Huawei's structure. The earlier one by Balding et al tries to claim that it is employee owned in name only but there is a more recent one by a Japanese university that contradicts this fact. Interestingly neither of the studies raise issues about significatly unequitable profit sharing so there's that. The founder of the company owns about 1% of the shares.
As a gross generalisation I think large company management in China is broadly equivalent to provincial management (citizens have a say, but there is a hierarchy that responds to the party), is that what the Japanese report said?
The report says this:
It's a representative system within the company. I think this is what you meant.
Surely quite a lot of it is owned by the Chinese government. I thought that was the point of the ban, in China essentially all companies are controlled in some level by the Chinese government, and so no Chinese company can be trusted.
Perhaps some mom and pop equivalent corner shop isn't controlled by the Chinese government, but certainly anything operating internationally will be.
It's definitely likely that they collaborate with the government in some capacity because of how important Huawei is but that was only one part of why sanctions the enacted. IMO the bigger problem for the US was that Huawei was catching up to western corporations in crucial technologies like 5G so the sanctions were put in place in prevent them from competing. It's just run-of-the-mill protectionism.
They weren't just catching up, the US had nothing, Ericsson had nothing and Huawei had functioning 5G base stations deployed. It took Ericsson another 6? months to get even basic shilled 5G of the ground.