Molson Hart

False equivalency and incorrect. 你试一试说我不明白中国吗？你说我不明白网店市场吗？ 好运

Perhaps you interpret a 100% extraction of profits in perpetuity differently - that's fair. More to the point, I don't mean the Chinese government can't do exactly what you suggested. I just think its disingenuous to think China is the only one that does it.

Obviously it is not. However it is quite obvious that the chance of this happening in China is significantly higher than in the U.S. therefore whatever you think the company is worth, you must discount it, in my eyes, heavily.

I don't disagree with your broad brush that the probability is higher in China. But a broad brush does not apply well to n=1 situations. Significantly higher than a remote probability (assuming the risk of this happening in US is remote), is still fairly remote.

My brush isn't that broad. 1. PRC has made it clear that it wants ownership in firms like Alibaba, Tencent, and http://JD.com  - which is not par for the course when it comes to stock ownership 2. We are talking about a country where this conversation cannot even exist

3. There is a long history of foreigners learning that what they think they own, what they should own according to "global norms" is not theirs. The semi-legal VIE structure is one such example

4. You're from Singapore. Singapore built an entire city in Suzhou as a model for positive economic development. What happened after that? Chinese local gov't duplicated it next door and undercut it via lower tax rates. Par for the course.