Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Ant Financial is handling ~$4 trillion in payment processing annually. They have about half of the Chinese mobile payments market in Alipay (WeChat has something like 35-40%). They've moved into numerous financial segments.

They had about $9 billion in revenue in 2017, and are nearing a billion users.

The $150b valuation is rich, however it's about 1/3 to 1/4 the PE ratio that Amazon and Netflix are being given currently. At $150b it's trading for ~85 times net profit.

The business is wildly profitable as you might expect. In terms of size, consider how big Visa, Mastercard, PayPal, etc. are.

Visa now has a $294 billion market cap. That's based on $18b in sales and extremely high margins. Mastercard is worth $204 billion. PayPal is worth $100 billion; Ant Financial will be larger than PayPal in terms of sales within 12-24 months (and is comparable now in profit).

The big risk regarding Ant Financial, is that the Chinese authorities are afraid of it and have begun boxing it in with controls. As one might expect, they don't like the idea of a single corporation controlling so much of China's financial flow (unless it's very firmly under the boot of the government).




Why would a company with such massive revenue need to bring in so much external capital? Wouldn't the current stakeholders be better off keeping more of the pie?


Keep in mind $9 billion in sales is not quite massive revenue in the pool that Ant is now swimming. Their financial footing is not nearly so large as their scale of processing, they've only begun generating meaningful profit in the last year or two. Google is at $110 billion in sales, JP Morgan is at $94 billion, those are massive.

The dilution of current stakeholders is intentional. I believe it was required by Chinese authorities (my speculation).

I've been following Ant / Alipay with curiosity ever since Jack Ma stole it from Softbank and Yahoo (along with the rest of Alibaba shareholders). There have been a lot of bizarre things done with the company over time. Jack Ma for example gave himself the large majority share of ownership in the spun off entity, and then proceeded to voluntarily debase his ownership dramatically with no compensation. And now, having screwed Alibaba over with the Ant Financial spin out, Alibaba was recently forced by Jack Ma to buy a chunk of Ant again (33% of it).

My guess on some of these choices, is that it's about nationalism (taking Ant away from foreign owners of Alibaba) and the requirement by Chinese authorities that Jack Ma not have too much power (and that Ant's ownership not be so concentrated in general). If he had held onto the stolen position in Ant Financial + his stake in Alibaba, he'd be closing in on the world's richest person title (~$100b in Ant, ~$30b in Alibaba + cash). That's a spotlight you do not want right now if you're under Xi. I'm certain the Chinese authorities do not want one person owning the majority control of something like Ant Financial, given its size and importance to the economy. There's no other rational reason for Ma to have voluntarily given up so much ownership in Ant, he's shrinking himself as a target (plausibly he was given no choice; I suspect it was always the plan from the moment Ant was taken from Alibaba).

Or put it simply: Ant may end up being worth several hundred billion dollars. Imagine Jack Ma owning 2/3 of something worth $400 billion. Now picture the target on his back, that would go along with such power and control over the Chinese economy. It'd be Jack Ma vs Xi, and Jack Ma would lose; a very dangerous game to play if you're a simple civilian. Better to stay smaller and get to continue doing what you want to do (operate Alibaba and Ant), by giving up some power, ownership, and not being in any way perceived as a meaningful threat to the authorities and their absolute control.


>Or put it simply: Ant may end up being worth several hundred billion dollars. Imagine Jack Ma owning 2/3 of something worth $400 billion. Now picture the target on his back, that would go along with such power and control over the Chinese economy. It'd be Jack Ma vs Xi, and Jack Ma would lose; a very dangerous game to play if you're a simple civilian. Better to stay smaller and get to continue doing what you want to do (operate Alibaba and Ant), by giving up some power, ownership, and not being in any way perceived as a meaningful threat to the authorities and their absolute control.

For a Westerner, you seem to be rather perceptive of such things. The wording for "instant billionaires" among CCP members is "the new class."

It doesn't take long to guess that they freaking hate and loath anybody passing as a successful person and Jack Ma is the prime example of one. Just how full of bile they are.


>JP Morgan is at $94 billion

By the way, their C-Suite has just been to China to attend a humiliating "Handshaking Ceremony" with some "serious official"


Ant Financial has been involved in some very dodgy crowd funding schemes (though it is definitely the least dodgy of the bunch), the government has a right to be weary of them.


Any source? I'm genuinely interested


Ant is effectively a bank, and a huge one at that. The showstopper there is its staggeringly low capital ratio of ~0.5% - this is not a typo.

If it were to be classified as a bank, it will have to be instantaneously closed down for violating just every banking regulation China has.

And this is the true contention point, if they were to close Ant or arrest Ma with his Robin Hood image, it will be extremely unpopular.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: