SoftBank Group Corp. Chief Executive Officer Masayoshi Son told President-elect Donald Trump he would create 50,000 new jobs in the U.S. through a $50 billion investment in startups and new companies.
The money will come from SoftBank's previously announced $100 billion technology fund, according to a person familiar with the matter. That investment vehicle has a $45 billion commitment from the government of Saudi Arabia and $25 billion from Tokyo-based SoftBank, which operates technology and wireless companies around the world.
[...] Some investments from SoftBank's fund, which was unveiled in October, were probably destined for the U.S. anyway, given the nation's leadership in the global technology industry. But Son hadn't previously committed to creating a specific amount of jobs through the investment vehicle.
More coverage from Washington Post and Reuters.
Related Stories
The New York Times (may be pay-walled) reports that Terry Gou, the CEO of Foxconn has confirmed rumours aired in December to the effect that the company is considering building an additional factory in the United States. Yahoo Finance UK says that the factory, if built, "could create about 30,000-50,000 jobs." The South China Morning Post reports that the facility, expected to cost more than $7 billion, would make dot-matrix displays (such as used in television sets and mobile phones) under the Sharp name. Mr. Gou remarked that:
While it is difficult to have a clear analysis of the economic outlook for this year, due to looming uncertainties, three factors can be seen as clues. First, the rise of protectionism is inevitable. Secondly, the trend of politics serving the economy is clearly defined, and thirdly, the proportion of real economy is getting increasingly bigger.
Speaking in November, Gou had called on the incoming U.S. leaders to refrain from protectionist policies, The China Post had reported.
Additional coverage:
Related:
Foxconn Plans to Replace Nearly All Human Workers With Robots in Some Factories
Foxconn Acquires Sharp at a Lower Price Than Previously Agreed
Sharp Accepts $6.25 Billion Takeover Bid from Foxconn, but Foxconn is Wary of Debt
Softbank to Invest $50 Billion in the US
SoftBank will reportedly sell a 25% stake in ARM ($8 billion) to the ~$100 billion investment fund it has jointly created with Saudi Arabia, Apple, and others. ARM Holdings was bought by SoftBank for around $32 billion last year.
SoftBank Chairman Masayoshi Son met with Saudi King Salman during the King's state visit to Japan. Son gave the King one of his company's humanoid robots. Saudi Arabia is seeking investors as it prepares to launch an initial public offering for Saudi Aramco. Toyota agreed to conduct a feasibility study into the idea of production in Saudi Arabia, the result of one of twenty memorandums of understanding signed by Japanese companies and institutions with Saudi Arabia.
Also at The Telegraph, and Arab News (extra).
Related: Softbank to Invest $50 Billion in the US
Uber board strikes agreement to pave way for SoftBank investment
Uber Technologies Inc's warring board members have struck a peace deal that allows a multibillion-dollar investment by SoftBank Group Corp to proceed, and which would resolve a legal battle between former Chief Executive Travis Kalanick and a prominent shareholder.
Venture capital firm Benchmark, an early investor with a board seat in the ride-services company, and Kalanick have reached an agreement over terms of the SoftBank investment, which could be worth up to $10 billion, according to two people familiar with the matter.
The Uber board first agreed more than a month ago to bring in SoftBank as an investor and board member, but negotiations have been slowed by ongoing fighting between Benchmark and Kalanick. The agreement struck on Sunday removed the final obstacle to allowing SoftBank to proceed with an offer to buy to[sic] stock.
Also at TechCrunch.
Related: Softbank to Invest $50 Billion in the US
SoftBank's $80-100 Billion "Vision Fund" Takes Shape
SoftBank May Sell 25% of ARM to Vision Fund; Chairman Meets With Saudi King
SoftBank Acquires Boston Dynamics and Schaft From Google
Travis Kalanick Appoints Two New Uber Board Members in "Power Play"
Saudi Arabia Planning $500 Billion Megacity and Business Zone
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 07 2016, @03:57PM
If you are aware of Japanese society, you know who Son is. He's kind of a loud-mouth showman with a lot of money that amplifies his hyperbole.
Its obvious he was sitting on this in order to make a splash.
Note too that the details are completely absent.
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Wednesday December 07 2016, @05:04PM
He does sound like the kind of guy who would get along splendidly with Donald Trump, though. But yeah, I'm not expecting anywhere close to 50,000 jobs to actually materialize.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 07 2016, @10:52PM
It looks like Trump sold us out for a press release.
Softbank owns Sprint and they desperately want to acquire T-mobile.
But that merger was blocked for being anti-competitive in 2014 [cnet.com] (thanks Obama!) Back then the offer was $38B and since then T-mobile's value has increased.
That $50B? Its going to be spent on buying T-mobile. [pcmag.com]
So Son gets exactly what he wanted all along, Trump gets an empty press release. And we get fucked by reduced competition for mobile carriers.
Welcome to the next 4 years.
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Thursday December 08 2016, @02:52PM
I didn't get played - you only count as getting played if you actually believed anything Trump said about fighting the establishment, draining the swamp, etc. And for the record, I was part of the approximately 25-30% of Americans who had an unfavorable view of both major party candidates.
Trump really only wants 2 things:
1. More money.
2. Love and respect. He hasn't ever really gotten this, as best as I can tell, and is too dumb to realize that the reason he doesn't get this is because he's a complete selfish jerk to everybody around him.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 07 2016, @03:59PM
RoboCop: Isn't the moon wonderful tonight?
Lewis: It's still daytime.
RoboCop: It's the thought that counts
(Score: 5, Informative) by RamiK on Wednesday December 07 2016, @05:12PM
The Reuters article mentions it, but it's worth emphasizing SoftBank recently bought ARM just after Brexit for $30 billion.
compiling...
(Score: 2) by captain normal on Wednesday December 07 2016, @05:15PM
"All your base are belong to us", SoftBank.
When life isn't going right, go left.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by drussell on Wednesday December 07 2016, @05:34PM
Isn't it interesting that Trump thinks it is great when a foreign company invests money in doing business in the US but is supposedly vehemently opposed to US companies doing the same abroad. :)
(Score: 5, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 07 2016, @05:44PM
The great thing about Trump was that he was on every side of just about every issue during the campaign.
But now that his job requires him to do more than just talk, everything he does will be hypocritical.
And it won't make a shred of difference. The people who saw through his talk will see through his hypocrisy. While the people who worship their god emperor and enjoy the delicious taste of liberal tears don't have any position more coherent than politics as a team sport where winning elections is the only goal.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 07 2016, @05:44PM
It's not that interesting.
This is just a nationalist position of supporting your own citizens instead of actively facilitating the transfer of wealth out of the country with trade agreements like NAFTA and the TPP.
This is an anti-suicide policy.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by linkdude64 on Wednesday December 07 2016, @05:58PM
It's very interesting. I believe Trump has said the words, "America first" so it seems to confirm what he has repeatedly stated would be his position.
What I find even MORE interesting is that you seem to hold in contempt the idea that a government funded by citizens should not exist to serve its citizens.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 07 2016, @07:17PM
Saudi is the lead investor [reuters.com] in that softbank fund.
Money that is earned on their investments here will be funneled out of the country and into saudi coffers where it will go to fund radical islamic terrorists, just like they've been doing with oil money for decades.
How is that serving US citizens?
(Score: 2) by Sulla on Wednesday December 07 2016, @09:38PM
So the Saudis have 50b that isn't ours, I could not care any less if the Saudis turn it into 70b that isn't ours if we can siphon off some of that 20b difference.
Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 07 2016, @09:45PM
Apparently you do care enough to studiously avoid answering the question of how using american industry to fund terrorism directed at the US is beneficial for americans.
If we get $5B of that profit and the terrorism ends up costing americans $10B in ancillary costs, where's the value in that?
(Score: 2) by linkdude64 on Thursday December 08 2016, @02:48AM
Your false assumption is that we are going to continue to police the globe for free, as we have been doing, for the same of countries that we do not even share a continent with.
With strong borders, a strong military, and less corruption in our government, I believe we will be relatively secure. Secure, at least, compared to our hypothetical situation where Shillary is President and we have an actively controlled Saudi puppet in charge of the country.
So say this:
Saudi Arabia funds terrorists in the Mid-East, and they start to give another oil country problems. The US Military can be HIRED to protect that country, or we could decline, instead of being compelled to by military-industrial complex campaign donors.
Fun fact: 9 out of 10 major arms manufacturers in the US donated to the Clinton campaign.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 08 2016, @05:23AM
Haha! I see you've been chugging the orange koolaid. And by koolaid I mean the donald's oxycontin tainted piss.
Look at that jackass now -- he's picking a twitter fight [washingtonpost.com] with the local union foreman at carrier who called him out for claiming he "saved" 1100 jobs when carrier themselves confirmed it was only 800 jobs.
That's your brilliant god emperror in all his glory.
I bet he threatens to cancel the carrier "deal" because the union won't suck his dick.
(Score: 2) by rondon on Thursday December 08 2016, @01:40PM
Do you dispute anything Linkdude said, or are you just changing the subject because he is right?
I don't support The Donald, but I do support discourse that furthers Soylent and the knowledge of Soylentils. Your post does not further that goal, while Linkdude's (if it is true) did.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 08 2016, @02:27PM
> Do you dispute anything Linkdude said, or are you just changing the subject because he is right?
I dispute everything he said because its barely more than rambling incoherent nonsense.
When one person in the debate goes full crazytown, the debate is already over, there's nothing left but to point and laugh.
Nothing linkdude wrote "furthers the goal" of anything but enabling linkdude to let off the mental pressure of his cognitive dissonance.
On the other hand. pointing out trump's insanely disproportionate response to criticism that is (a) accurate and (b) completely to be expected from someone who has spent 30 years working on behalf of his fellow union members shows just how incompetent trump is and why trusting anything he does with respect to jobs is foolhardy.
(Score: 2) by butthurt on Thursday December 08 2016, @10:38AM
What I find even MORE interesting is that you seem to hold in contempt the idea that a government funded by citizens should not exist to serve its citizens.
What?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 08 2016, @02:31PM
Its standard trump-worship deflection.
Turn criticism of trump into being unpatriotic.
As Twain said, "Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel."
(Score: 2) by linkdude64 on Thursday December 08 2016, @03:20PM
Twain also said "Loyalty to the Nation all the time, loyalty to the Government when it deserves it."
USA! USA!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 08 2016, @03:38PM
You seem to think that's endorsement of your argument.
Its an indictment.
(Score: 2) by linkdude64 on Friday December 09 2016, @05:18PM
Confusing the country - and it's people - with the government is common. You are likely one of the people who conflate "white people" and "love of the government."
Do you know which racial group "preps" for all-out war with the government more than any other? Which racial group stockpiles thousands of rounds of ammunition, dozens of weapons, etc., etc., for that sole purpose?
It's white people. Rednecks. People who hate authority, because America was founded on hating authority, but loving the country.
As somebody who is likely a globalist - meaning, somebody who believes borders should not exist, yet, probably locks their door at night - it is going to be difficult for you to understand.
(Score: 2) by linkdude64 on Thursday December 08 2016, @03:16PM
Whoops - used a double negative.
IIRC your comment implied that it is hypocritical for Trump to bring jobs back to the US from other countries, which makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.
(Score: 2) by butthurt on Friday December 09 2016, @12:17AM
Thanks, it makes more sense without the negation.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 07 2016, @05:44PM
Not here to cause trouble...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 08 2016, @05:30AM
While you're joking, that's how the trouble started with the old site.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 07 2016, @06:29PM
Some investments from SoftBank's fund, which was unveiled in October, were probably destined for the U.S. anyway, given the nation's leadership in the global technology industry.
Uh, yeah. When a first-world nation invests billions of dollars in your economically troubled country, it's not because of your leadership. Countries are not CEOs.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by jmorris on Wednesday December 07 2016, @07:43PM
This sort of thing is likely to become a new normal, assuming Trump doesn't get steamrolled by Congress. Something I tend to doubt, considering his record of doing the steamrolling. We have been assured that every obstacle would be the one that finally 'destroyed' Trump... before he rolled right over it, usually with a tweet that enraged his enemies even more. People will be studying this era with great interest but little comprehension I suspect.
The business world likes to think it runs on 'fundamentals' and those do matter. But what matters more is mood and animal spirits. During the misrule of Obama the animal spirits said "Go Galt!" and "profits are not as important as preserving capital for better days". With the election of Trump it is "NOW! GO! GO! GO! Don't miss out!" Whether this is rational isn't important, as it is likely to become self fulfilling. And if Trump only manages to stop the government from heaping new abuse upon the productive forces it is probably justified, and if he succeeds we could have a Golden Age not seen since Reagan.
Real economic activity, real production. Not fake money in silicon valley as .com bullshit creates trillions in virtual money as valuations of companies who have never made a real GAAP profit and even the suggestion they might someday make a profit crashes the market cap.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 07 2016, @07:55PM
Not fake money in silicon valley as .com bullshit
Apple, Google, Oracle, Microsoft, and others would probably disagree?
Golden Age not seen since Reagan
Lol!
(Score: 2) by jmorris on Wednesday December 07 2016, @08:24PM
Yea, about them. Apple still mints money but I wouldn't call a company approaching forty years old a scrappy startup. Oracle has settled down into a dividend paying utility. Microsoft has been stagnant since the .bomb went off in 2000, their valuation only very recently topped their 20th century high point. Google is of course Google. All praise Google for it sees all, knows all. It also produces economic value.
I'm talking about useless fuckwads with multi-billion dollar fortunes who haven't in fact created a dollar of real wealth, never actually made a profit. And their King is Jeff Bezos. The second they can't cover their losses from selling things with converting some of their ever expanding market cap they are done. It really isn't hard to sell stuff over the Internet if you aren't concerned with details like making money at it. Lots of people will suddenly succeed at it the second Wall Street stops subsidizing the one guy they have picked to be the winner of e-commerce. And social media is a fantasy when it comes to the book valuations of those companies.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 07 2016, @09:24PM
Uh, maybe look at MSFT again, you're requoting the "common knowledge" from about 10 years ago. Quit reading the rest of your post since the statement about MS marked you as ignorant of what you were talking about.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 07 2016, @09:30PM
> And their King is Jeff Bezos.
Of all the poster children for the role of emperor with no clothes in silicon valley you picked the one that's (a) not in silicon valley and (b) has tons of real-world, tangible infrastructure and (c) is cash-flow positive by a million miles. A much better target for your vitriol would be Peter Thiel who got rich on paypal and facebook and blew billions in paper money [businessinsider.com] on a now defunct hedge fund.
But this isn't about reality, is it? Its about you telling stories to yourself in public because the more times you write them out, the more true they feel to you. Like a kind of self-hypnosis.
(Score: 2) by jmorris on Wednesday December 07 2016, @11:36PM
Oh really. Amazon, as of the end of 2015, has a net worth of $9,625,000,000. Contrast to a market valuation at close of trade today of about $366B. Yes they have impressive sales numbers, but it is hard not to when your model is lose money on every sale and make it up with market cap. The question is how much sales volume would exist if they had to book a healthy enough profit margin to maintain a $365B market cap based on actual financial reality, with real GAAP accounting.
When I run a search on "Amazon profits over time" all I get are hits with titles like "Why Amazon has no profits (and why it works)", "Amazon earnings: How Jeff Bezos gets investors to believe in him", "The internal economics of Amazon's No Profit model", etc. Startups aren't expected to turn an immediate profit, but Amazon is entering their third decade now. Yet somehow an endless stream of money is being directed their way to keep anyone else from entering the space. Fake economics.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 08 2016, @12:00AM
> Oh really. Amazon, as of the end of 2015, has a net worth of $9,625,000,000. Contrast to a market valuation at close of trade today of about $366B.
Amazon has a price to book value of about 20.50. [yahoo.com] That's high, but not outrageous.
Boeing's is 45.6 [yahoo.com]
Netflix's is 21.28 [yahoo.com]
> When I run a search on "Amazon profits over time" all I get are hits with titles like
None of us are surprised that your shitty googling skills are your basis for judging amazon's business. Really.
Amazon has deliberately been taking all of that positive cash flow and investing it infrastructure rather than paying it out as dividends, letting it sit unused in the bank or wasting it on stock buybacks. All that money is being re-invested back into the company. That is literally the best possible use for the money if the goal is to create something tangible and long lasting.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by jmorris on Thursday December 08 2016, @12:29AM
The numbers cited are from finance.yahoo.com and, unless they can't even deliver official records anymore, be the actual audited financial records. They can blow smoke about investing in infrastructure but net assets, that is assets minus liabilities, are only about $10B. $365B of market cap buys you about $10B (plus any net assets built up in '16 which aren't on the books yet) plus you are buying their revenue stream, which as I pointed out isn't likely to remain if they want to make a profit.
And you willfully missed the point, I was pointing out that I'm not the only one to notice the conspicuous lack of profits. Contrast to Google, which has a $535B market cap but only a P/E of 28.23. They show net assets of $134B. They are actually a real company earning some real money.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 08 2016, @05:29AM
> The numbers cited are from finance.yahoo.com and, unless they can't even deliver official records anymore, be the actual audited financial records.
Your lead criticisim is the source of the numbers? When you didn't even provide a citation for your numbers?
What are you, twelve years old?
> And you willfully missed the point, I was pointing out that I'm not the only one to notice the conspicuous lack of profits
Oh, is that some kind of argumentum ad populum fallacy?
Because if you had actually read any of those articles you cited you would have seen they said exactly what I said about what Amazon has been doing with their profits.
You really are in high school aren't you? Youngest soybean here. Mentally, at least
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday December 07 2016, @08:56PM
Golden Age not seen since Reagan
Lol!
What happened to all that economic turmoil of the 70s again? 1980-2000 actually was a pretty good run even with that recession in the middle.
(Score: 5, Funny) by Azuma Hazuki on Wednesday December 07 2016, @08:24PM
> if he succeeds we could have a Golden Age not seen since Reagan.
This is the single most fruitbat-fucking insane thing you have ever said, and that was a stratospherically-high bar to clear in the first place. This not only not right, not only not-even-wrong, it actually proves that there is no just and loving God that intervenes in human affairs in real time, for if there were, you'd have been incinerated by a huge lightning bolt out of the clear blue for that one.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by fubari on Wednesday December 07 2016, @09:45PM
Azuma, as entertaining as your critique was (I did enjoy it :-) ), help me understand what part of the following is actually all that crazy?
JMorris wrote:
Real economic activity, real production. Not fake money in silicon valley as .com bullshit creates trillions in virtual money as valuations of companies who have never made a real GAAP profit and even the suggestion they might someday make a profit crashes the market cap.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 07 2016, @09:48PM
Reagan was the start of republican spend-and-spend economics that created severe debt.
At least the democrats are smart enough to pay for the spending with taxation.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by RedGreen on Wednesday December 07 2016, @10:54PM
"Reagan was the start of republican spend-and-spend economics that created severe debt.
At least the democrats are smart enough to pay for the spending with taxation."
That was the point of reganomics spend until you cannot spend anymore then you have to gut any actual spending that benefits the people. Then you have the big bad government portion of that strategy that they somehow seem to ignore when in power ever increasing the size of it. But still did not stop the propaganda demonizing it to you get to where we are today with an absolute fucking moron at the the head of the US soon to come. It has been a fifty year long play that has come to fruition hopefully the damage is not to great this time around. But pessimist in me says that the coming years are going to make the race riots of the 60s seem like a cake walk.
"I modded down, down, down, and the flames went higher." -- Sven Olsen
(Score: 2) by Joe Desertrat on Wednesday December 07 2016, @11:01PM
Real economic activity, real production.
Because saying it is this does not make it so. We can wait and see, but chances are the sort of "jobs" touted as a result of such business investment will for the most part never materialize. More likely they will be something like Rick Scott's (the governor of Florida, soon to be a presidential candidate near you!) touted "jobs". A tax break for a company holding potentially valuable private property promising construction and creation of new business. Years later, nothing has been built, no jobs have been created, and it is apparent the property is just being held until real estate values rise enough to make a profit selling the land.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Azuma Hazuki on Thursday December 08 2016, @07:40AM
Several people have already said basically what I was going to. Basically, Reagan is the reason we've had 35+ years of this trickle down bullshit. Just about every economic disaster we've had can be laid squarely at the feet of him and his policies continued on by others.
Trickle-down does not work. It never has. It can't. It's based on the idea that the best way to feed the poor is to give the rich ever-more sumptuous feasts, in the hope that some crumbs will fall off the table for the poor to eat. And the analogy doesn't even cover the worst of it, because to work better, the rich would have to also be able to expand their table at will, criminalize the poor taking scraps that fall off it, and actually rip pieces of living flesh off the poor and devour them as they watch.
I really, really wish I could bring that senile fucking clown back from the dead just to be the one to send him to hell personally. In many, many small pieces.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Celestial on Wednesday December 07 2016, @07:55PM
I'd rather Softbank spend the $50 billion improving Sprint's mobile network so it's actually viable.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 07 2016, @10:14PM
And I'd rather they just deposited the money in my money market account.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 07 2016, @11:17PM
i think you cannot invest in america. its like investing in aliens. light years ahead and pinnacle of evolution... or do you see people from 3rd world countries investing in usa?
one could say: in soviet russia america invests in YOU.
this billions won5 go anywhere but is rather sanctioned protection money paid to the really big gorilla in the room.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 08 2016, @12:24AM
> do you see people from 3rd world countries investing in usa?
Yes. The USA is the #1 investment location for people in the 3rd world.
It wasn't supposed to work out that way. The 3rd world was supposed to invest in itself as local production increased.
But for some reason, a lot more money came back to the US markets than was anticipated. Its really stunted the growth of the middle-class in the developing world.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 08 2016, @02:55AM
Yes. And the stated reason is that the USA is the safe haven for investors, most stable place going... So after someone makes some money in a poor third-world country, then they invest it in USA real estate or stock market.
Back to the Reagan years, that was when I drove cross country with a friend who was moving west and we stopped at the Grand Canyon. Got there after dark and the full moon was beautiful. Slept in his truck, woke up the next morning in the park and saw that it was a real mess, filthy, just disgraceful. We had time to explore but were so grossed out that we just left. Does anyone else remember that "austerity measure"? Reagan cut the budgets for maintaining the national parks. Didn't make a dent in the national budget, but sure made me remember him as a jerk.