LVMH becomes the first European company to surpass $500B in market value(cnbc.com)
cnbc.com
LVMH becomes the first European company to surpass $500B in market value
https://www.cnbc.com/2023/04/24/lvmh-becomes-the-first-european-company-surpass-500-billion-in-value.html
253 comments
These luxury goods companies, particularly the beauty/cosmetics brands such as Sephora, behave much more like software companies than many realize. High upfront capital requirements but extremely high gross margins and recurring business models. The biggest difference is the emphasis on brand, where really only Apple has done an equivalently strong job imo.
Brand is the raison d'être of luxury good companies. No one wants to spend $10k on a random leather bag. On the other hand, people will use whichever digital service offers the best experience. E.g. people use Google because it produces the "best" search results, or they use Amazon because it has the best selection, lowest prices, and fastest delivery time. That's basically the exact opposite of a luxury brand. In tech, the focus is much more on delivering value. Even Apple, which does have a strong brand, has built their brand around having the best products.
The brand and the value are interlinked for these luxury retailers. Like part of the value of having a Louis Vuitton bag is the fact that people see me with a Louis Vuitton bag.
(The same is actually true of an iPhone as well but there are more stats and specs around it)
(The same is actually true of an iPhone as well but there are more stats and specs around it)
> In tech, the focus is much more on delivering value. Even Apple, which does have a strong brand, has built their brand around having the best products.
It looks like their branding is working, if people think this!
It looks like their branding is working, if people think this!
I haven't ever owned an iPhone, but I use an M1 MacBook for work, and it's indeed a very good laptop. Decent performance with a 20-hour battery life for $1k, there really is nothing else like it on the market right now.
> The biggest difference is the emphasis on brand, where really only Apple has done an equivalently strong job imo.
What's easier to develop:
a handbag/sunglasses/perfume/linen/fabric based clothing or R&D on microprocessors to make the world's leading smartphone in terms of innovation, fit + finish, etc.?
What's easier to develop:
a handbag/sunglasses/perfume/linen/fabric based clothing or R&D on microprocessors to make the world's leading smartphone in terms of innovation, fit + finish, etc.?
Developing and selling are two different things.
Developing microprocessors has KPI's. Developing clothing doesn't. The first is technical, the second is social.
Pointing to the apple example, which Steve was more important? The technical one or the social one?
Developing microprocessors has KPI's. Developing clothing doesn't. The first is technical, the second is social.
Pointing to the apple example, which Steve was more important? The technical one or the social one?
> The first is technical, the second is social.
I am extremely interested in stats like:
what percentage of LVMH customers/buyers should be purchasing their products at all from a financial-wellness perspective?
How are they so successful at selling the allure of "our products send a positive message of wealth + status in society"?
Why do people (who common don't actually have wealth of any kind) find themselves victim/attracted to this marketing message?
I am extremely interested in stats like:
what percentage of LVMH customers/buyers should be purchasing their products at all from a financial-wellness perspective?
How are they so successful at selling the allure of "our products send a positive message of wealth + status in society"?
Why do people (who common don't actually have wealth of any kind) find themselves victim/attracted to this marketing message?
> Why do people (who common don't actually have wealth of any kind) find themselves victim/attracted to this marketing message?
Why do people watch tv or movies, or read and post comments on HN? There are very clearly better things to be doing with your time and life. In the end it makes someone feel good for however long.
Why do people watch tv or movies, or read and post comments on HN? There are very clearly better things to be doing with your time and life. In the end it makes someone feel good for however long.
I think you nailed it. These products are about feeling good and honestly I think they do more for humanity than people who sell guns or ads or coal.
There are of course good points above in that the iPhone has significantly more functional utility over replacement than a luxury handbag or luxury spirits (I would argue that some of LVMH's cosmetics products such as those from Sephora or Fenty actually do provide differentiated utility).
Another side of this is that these luxury retail companies are not run by a bunch of silly, unsophisticated people. They have absolutely savage businesspeople at the helm, and they run very sophisticated logistics in addition to the fluffier branding (which I'd argue isn't even fluffy, they are literally the best in the world).
There are of course good points above in that the iPhone has significantly more functional utility over replacement than a luxury handbag or luxury spirits (I would argue that some of LVMH's cosmetics products such as those from Sephora or Fenty actually do provide differentiated utility).
Another side of this is that these luxury retail companies are not run by a bunch of silly, unsophisticated people. They have absolutely savage businesspeople at the helm, and they run very sophisticated logistics in addition to the fluffier branding (which I'd argue isn't even fluffy, they are literally the best in the world).
> honestly I think they do more for humanity
they help poorer people transfer their wealth to Bernard Arnault (who is already worth $240b+)
they help poorer people transfer their wealth to Bernard Arnault (who is already worth $240b+)
It's the same with Tesla.
It's a certain cult of personality that Jobs had and utilizing very suddle things. to great effect. Jobs had miticulous detail when designing thee User interface, font system, layout and every single workflow in the original mac. When they made the Ipod, they used white headphones. Everyone else used black, as that's the natural color of the polimer. These white headphones showed everyone around you that you had an Ipod and was a huge driver of sales. The mac logo is upside down to the user, but rightside up to anyone looking at you on your computer.
Everything was crafted around ease of use, and have always been on the higher end of the market than the market thought possible.
Elon thinks, acts, walks and talks very much like Jobs. i'm sure it's through studied effort, but Tesla has the same brand recognition as early apple did.
It's a certain cult of personality that Jobs had and utilizing very suddle things. to great effect. Jobs had miticulous detail when designing thee User interface, font system, layout and every single workflow in the original mac. When they made the Ipod, they used white headphones. Everyone else used black, as that's the natural color of the polimer. These white headphones showed everyone around you that you had an Ipod and was a huge driver of sales. The mac logo is upside down to the user, but rightside up to anyone looking at you on your computer.
Everything was crafted around ease of use, and have always been on the higher end of the market than the market thought possible.
Elon thinks, acts, walks and talks very much like Jobs. i'm sure it's through studied effort, but Tesla has the same brand recognition as early apple did.
> which Steve was more important? The technical one or the social one?
Without one of them, Apple wouldn't exist today. Without the other one, Apple would have never existed at all!
Without one of them, Apple wouldn't exist today. Without the other one, Apple would have never existed at all!
> R&D on microprocessors to make the world's leading smartphone in terms of innovation, fit + finish, etc.?
Some of this R&D also happens in Europe even if the parent company or ultimate manufacturer is American.
Some of this R&D also happens in Europe even if the parent company or ultimate manufacturer is American.
Isn’t it sad that the first $500b+ company from Europe is a peddler of vanity and overpriced luxury items?
Not a fan of enormously big companies, but at least the U.S. has the likes of Amazon, Tesla, and Microsoft offering much utility.
LVMH, on the other hand, is Europe’s most valuable company? What a sore lack of innovation…I’m not even surprised because it’s from the continent that still has a lot of kings and queens (albeit ceremonial)…still doesn’t change my mind because I believe royals are the biggest grifters on earth.
Not a fan of enormously big companies, but at least the U.S. has the likes of Amazon, Tesla, and Microsoft offering much utility.
LVMH, on the other hand, is Europe’s most valuable company? What a sore lack of innovation…I’m not even surprised because it’s from the continent that still has a lot of kings and queens (albeit ceremonial)…still doesn’t change my mind because I believe royals are the biggest grifters on earth.
This narrative is ridiculous.
Isn’t it sad that USA’s most valuable companies are advertising agencies?
Isn’t it sad that some of the most valuable companies are renting middlemen(AirBnB, Uber)?
I don’t know, it’s a stock market. At some point the market decided that some game CD retail shop is orders of magnitude more valuable than previously thought.
I wouldn’t read much into this and look for metrics which indicate something tangible like.
Isn’t it sad that USA’s most valuable companies are advertising agencies?
Isn’t it sad that some of the most valuable companies are renting middlemen(AirBnB, Uber)?
I don’t know, it’s a stock market. At some point the market decided that some game CD retail shop is orders of magnitude more valuable than previously thought.
I wouldn’t read much into this and look for metrics which indicate something tangible like.
The other problem here is that it doesn't account for differences between industrial sectors. Different industrial sectors have different amounts of consolidation. This lends itself to higher valuations. Certainly European engineering as a sector is worth far more than luxury fashion. But engineering has more resistance to consolidation. Some of this even comes down to how the different sectors are differently regulated. Consolidation in many sectors will face more intense scrutiny than in others. Lastly, we have to account for how global a sector is able to become. Certain sectors like construction, in large struggle to sell their services in a global market this limiting their size. Fashion, like movies is exactly the kind business you would expect to attain a global reach.
I will agree on one point though. As an export, LV demonstrates a grossly uncraftsman-like aptitude. My wife rebuilds and repairs designer bags. Late LV is some of the cheapest and most shoddily made shit she works on. The older bags are great. But since the 90s, the bags have declined tremendously. The same is true of Gucci. I think this is pretty clearly the product of those two brands absolute explosion in demand over the same period. Most other designer brands are tiny in comparison to these two. Except Hermes, which my wife rarely gets hold of so I'm not sure if they've suffered the same decline with scale.
But no joke, if you're looking for quality, Michael Kors is a far better bag.
I will agree on one point though. As an export, LV demonstrates a grossly uncraftsman-like aptitude. My wife rebuilds and repairs designer bags. Late LV is some of the cheapest and most shoddily made shit she works on. The older bags are great. But since the 90s, the bags have declined tremendously. The same is true of Gucci. I think this is pretty clearly the product of those two brands absolute explosion in demand over the same period. Most other designer brands are tiny in comparison to these two. Except Hermes, which my wife rarely gets hold of so I'm not sure if they've suffered the same decline with scale.
But no joke, if you're looking for quality, Michael Kors is a far better bag.
Both LVMH and in some measure Kering somehow managed to keep luxury margins while having their entry-level bags bought by a ton of women especially in China which is an humongous market for them.
As far as I know, Hermes never played fast and loose with quality like the other two but remains considerably more expensive. Note that I mean that in the context of luxury products - quality remains high and I'm not sure I agree that Michael Kors is currently higher quality than Vuitton.
As far as I know, Hermes never played fast and loose with quality like the other two but remains considerably more expensive. Note that I mean that in the context of luxury products - quality remains high and I'm not sure I agree that Michael Kors is currently higher quality than Vuitton.
> Fashion, like movies is exactly the kind business you would expect to attain a global reach.
Why is that so? Fashion is often local to the culture, with different cultures appreciating different, if not opposite things. Eg, tanned skin tone. Tanned skin is popular in America, to the point of having tanning salons - it means you have the leisure time to spend it outside. In China, the opposite is true: tanned skin means you're so poor, you work outside. Fairer skinned people have the money to not go outside to work. Thus, what's fashionable isn't been the two countries isn't going to be the same because of similar differences in culture, so it's hard for me to take that for granted that fashion should be movies. And then even then, movies have the similar problem. How many Bollywood hits are global hits?
Why is that so? Fashion is often local to the culture, with different cultures appreciating different, if not opposite things. Eg, tanned skin tone. Tanned skin is popular in America, to the point of having tanning salons - it means you have the leisure time to spend it outside. In China, the opposite is true: tanned skin means you're so poor, you work outside. Fairer skinned people have the money to not go outside to work. Thus, what's fashionable isn't been the two countries isn't going to be the same because of similar differences in culture, so it's hard for me to take that for granted that fashion should be movies. And then even then, movies have the similar problem. How many Bollywood hits are global hits?
Absolutely, you have to localize or internationalize cultural products. Culture export mostly does the later, relying on the fact that colonialism and international consumer capitalism have created a veneer of "common" culture across many geographies.
I mean that from a physical standpoint it's easier to export these things. This because they can largely be exported without a great deal of material or persons moving across borders. For obvious reasons, it's easier to export a purse than a house.
Also, from a legal perspective it is easier. Cars are a great example of this. Car companies have had to expend an enormous amount of effort and money for even just the opportunity to build cars in another country, much less wholly import them there.
I mean that from a physical standpoint it's easier to export these things. This because they can largely be exported without a great deal of material or persons moving across borders. For obvious reasons, it's easier to export a purse than a house.
Also, from a legal perspective it is easier. Cars are a great example of this. Car companies have had to expend an enormous amount of effort and money for even just the opportunity to build cars in another country, much less wholly import them there.
> Except Hermes, which my wife rarely gets hold of so I'm not sure if they've suffered the same decline with scale.
Hermès keeps very high standards and treats its employees very well. I've got nothing but good to say about this company, really.
Hermès keeps very high standards and treats its employees very well. I've got nothing but good to say about this company, really.
How does Hermès rates in terms of quality ?
I hear still very high. Even Chanel is not handmade anymore.
It is sad that all the big tech companies have basically become advertising companies. That said, I do think those tech companies are still more interesting than a company that makes luxury bags.
So I figured I'd check what the other largest European companies are. In order: LVMH, Novo Nordisk, L'Oréal, ASML.
#4, ASML, is of course the pride of the Dutch tech industry. That's a company that's innovative on tech and making its profits entirely by making the best chip manufacturing machines.
#3 L'Oréal is primarily known for shampoo and cosmetics and that sort of stuff.
#2 I hadn't heard of. Apparently they mostly provide diabetes care. That's awfully specific for such a big company. No idea if they're big because they're incredibly innovative in that field, or that they're monopolising healthcare.
LVMH's name suggests it's not a company that grew this big naturally, but it rather the result of several mergers. An artificially inflated moloch.
I think most people here would be happier with ASML in the top spot.
So I figured I'd check what the other largest European companies are. In order: LVMH, Novo Nordisk, L'Oréal, ASML.
#4, ASML, is of course the pride of the Dutch tech industry. That's a company that's innovative on tech and making its profits entirely by making the best chip manufacturing machines.
#3 L'Oréal is primarily known for shampoo and cosmetics and that sort of stuff.
#2 I hadn't heard of. Apparently they mostly provide diabetes care. That's awfully specific for such a big company. No idea if they're big because they're incredibly innovative in that field, or that they're monopolising healthcare.
LVMH's name suggests it's not a company that grew this big naturally, but it rather the result of several mergers. An artificially inflated moloch.
I think most people here would be happier with ASML in the top spot.
Novo Nordisk must be a huge fan of the food pyramid. A company riding the wave of humans eating themselves to death.
The world is an amazing place!
The world is an amazing place!
They do way more than diabetes/insulin medication - they make and R&Ded recombinants, oesteoperosis medication, menopause medication, and hemophilia medication.
They're one of the Big Pharma firms like Pfizer and GSK, and the only reason Denmark (and specifically Aarhaus) is on the map for bioinformatics.
Separately, why are so many new HN commentators snarky asshats.
They're one of the Big Pharma firms like Pfizer and GSK, and the only reason Denmark (and specifically Aarhaus) is on the map for bioinformatics.
Separately, why are so many new HN commentators snarky asshats.
> They're the only reason Denmark (and specifically Aarhaus) is on the map for bioinformatics.
That's a sick burn of the Aarhus University Bioinformatics Research Centre https://birc.au.dk/ but maybe that research is only there because of that company too?
That's a sick burn of the Aarhus University Bioinformatics Research Centre https://birc.au.dk/ but maybe that research is only there because of that company too?
Oh I didn't mean that as a burn!!
Aarhaus has an amazing bioinformatics program thanks to the strong public-private partnership in place between Novo Nordsk, Universitet Aarhaus, and Government intervention.
Denmark's following the same game plan the US applied in the 1970s-80s to the Bay Area, San Diego, and Boston to develop the biotech industry.
Aarhaus has an amazing bioinformatics program thanks to the strong public-private partnership in place between Novo Nordsk, Universitet Aarhaus, and Government intervention.
Denmark's following the same game plan the US applied in the 1970s-80s to the Bay Area, San Diego, and Boston to develop the biotech industry.
Novo Nordisk manufacture insulin; that's an absolutely enormous business!
> Isn’t it sad that USA’s most valuable companies are advertising agencies?
really???
Apple is not an advertising company.
Amazon is primarily AWS, The retail division does have advertising but its not its primary business although it is growing.
Microsoft has Bing but its by no means anywhere close to having revenue close to its other products.
Google is the only company that is advertising focused.
really???
Apple is not an advertising company.
Amazon is primarily AWS, The retail division does have advertising but its not its primary business although it is growing.
Microsoft has Bing but its by no means anywhere close to having revenue close to its other products.
Google is the only company that is advertising focused.
That's not the point. This wasn't a slam against the American economy or something. Obviously the US has some of the greatest tech companies, beyond the "tech" companies.
[deleted]
Advertising is absolutely Amazon retails entire business. They've completely pivoted strategy to being a logistics platform that sells and delivers at cost and makes all the profit on high margin ads 3rd party sellers are forced to buy if they want their page seen.
You're focusing on Amazon's retail side while most of Amazon's profits are from AWS. AWS is not an advertising business
Let's take a step back. How does AWS capture Cloud marketshare today? Advertising.
AWS can push out the newest weird-named redundant product all they want, but no one will even hear of it without Advertising.
AWS can push out the newest weird-named redundant product all they want, but no one will even hear of it without Advertising.
Of the 10 largest US companies, only Google and FB could accurately be described as “advertising agencies”.
For the rest, the bulk of their revenue comes from:
- Apple => hardware sales
- Amazon => e-commerce and cloud services
- Microsoft => windows + office + azure cloud
- Nvidia => semiconductors
- berkshire hathaway => diversified investments
- johnson & johnson => pharmaceuticals
- Tesla => automotive + energy
For the rest, the bulk of their revenue comes from:
- Apple => hardware sales
- Amazon => e-commerce and cloud services
- Microsoft => windows + office + azure cloud
- Nvidia => semiconductors
- berkshire hathaway => diversified investments
- johnson & johnson => pharmaceuticals
- Tesla => automotive + energy
I’m not sure it’s as ridiculous as you seem to say. Apple is the worlds most valuable company, and it is not an advertising company but a pretty straight up technology company. Google is certainly advertising, but the science, math, and technology that go into their product is amazing - and the advertising but subsidizes all its research. Amazon isn’t an advertiser, while it’s a retail and logistics platform, it’s mostly planet scale technology infrastructure company. Then you’ve got Boeing, Tesla, etc.
That the EU doesn’t have a meaningful (in terms of revenue production) technology or engineering industry and the top company is a company that makes money by stamping logos on handbags should be concerning and not dismissed. I wish Europe had more innovation, we would all benefit from more people and more companies innovating.
That the EU doesn’t have a meaningful (in terms of revenue production) technology or engineering industry and the top company is a company that makes money by stamping logos on handbags should be concerning and not dismissed. I wish Europe had more innovation, we would all benefit from more people and more companies innovating.
The EU lags in software R&D, but they are still a massive player in ONG, Energy, Automotive, Pharma, Defense, and Manufacturing R&D.
A lot of this is country dependent though - eg. Denmark/France are big Pharma players, Norway/Netherlands are major energy sector players, Sweden/France/Germany are major Defense Players, etc.
A lot of this is country dependent though - eg. Denmark/France are big Pharma players, Norway/Netherlands are major energy sector players, Sweden/France/Germany are major Defense Players, etc.
Fair enough. I’m also being unfair, Mercedes, BMW, Rolls Royce, et al are also engineering powerhouses. I guess it’s really software, hardware, and technology services that seem to lag. SAP is the only significant European software company that comes to mind, and I can’t think of any Intel, Arm, nvidia, AMD, etc.
Isn't ARM mostly in the UK, which used to be EU?
Also, there's a lot of AMD R&D and production around Dresden, Germany. Right next to Infineon.
Also, there's a lot of AMD R&D and production around Dresden, Germany. Right next to Infineon.
SAP had the benefit of German companies expanding into the US following the example made of Japan after the Plaza Accord.
> That the EU doesn’t have a meaningful (in terms of revenue production) technology or engineering industry
I don't know what definition you're using here, but I think describing e.g. Airbus as "not meaningful revenue" is surprising. What _do_ you mean (not just you but all the "EU has no industry" people) both by "meaningful" and a definition of the industry sector?
I don't know what definition you're using here, but I think describing e.g. Airbus as "not meaningful revenue" is surprising. What _do_ you mean (not just you but all the "EU has no industry" people) both by "meaningful" and a definition of the industry sector?
Not sure why it's sad that LVMH is the largest company in Europe and outstanding that a luxury hardware manufacturer - Apple - is the largest public company in the world (by a decent margin).
[deleted]
My response to a comment that has been deleted while I wrote this:
> One is significantly harder and has more utility than the other, indicating an achievement in knowledge and application of that knowledge rather than using figuring out ways to sell people status signals.
But which is which? Because this could apply in both directions. Bags are undeniably useful, even if LVMH's are ridiculously overpriced. But people have also always complained that Apple is overpriced, and mostly selling people status signals.
And Apple is the most respectable of the Big US companies, because Tesla is all hype, Google blatantly abandoned its "don't be evil" creed, and Amazon is known for its inhuman labour conditions.
I don't think any of these are companies to be proud of. We need better. And better is probably not bigger.
> One is significantly harder and has more utility than the other, indicating an achievement in knowledge and application of that knowledge rather than using figuring out ways to sell people status signals.
But which is which? Because this could apply in both directions. Bags are undeniably useful, even if LVMH's are ridiculously overpriced. But people have also always complained that Apple is overpriced, and mostly selling people status signals.
And Apple is the most respectable of the Big US companies, because Tesla is all hype, Google blatantly abandoned its "don't be evil" creed, and Amazon is known for its inhuman labour conditions.
I don't think any of these are companies to be proud of. We need better. And better is probably not bigger.
Weird how Apple is considered a luxury brand when they have half of the smartphone market in the US.
Is that new, new and used, or total current in-use phones?
I can't find the median, but the average new car price in the US got close to $50k. Which certainly doesn't come close to the average price paid per car currently on the road.
I can't find the median, but the average new car price in the US got close to $50k. Which certainly doesn't come close to the average price paid per car currently on the road.
> Is that new, new and used, or total current in-use phones?
I believe that's both. iPhones seem to be more popular than Android ones on the secondhand market anyway.
'total device shipments':
https://www.counterpointresearch.com/us-market-smartphone-sh...
Statcounter mobile OS (yes, technically tablets and other devices are counted here, too):
https://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-share/mobile/united-sta...
I believe that's both. iPhones seem to be more popular than Android ones on the secondhand market anyway.
'total device shipments':
https://www.counterpointresearch.com/us-market-smartphone-sh...
Statcounter mobile OS (yes, technically tablets and other devices are counted here, too):
https://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-share/mobile/united-sta...
> Isn’t it sad that some of the most valuable companies are renting middlemen(AirBnB, Uber)?
Hum... That one is expected. If you improve commerce, you create a huge amount of surplus, and you will certainly be able to take a bit of it.
What is sad is that the current crop of middlemen is so uncreative and risk-free. That means our commerce is so restricted that anybody bold enough to defy the government makes a revolution.
Hum... That one is expected. If you improve commerce, you create a huge amount of surplus, and you will certainly be able to take a bit of it.
What is sad is that the current crop of middlemen is so uncreative and risk-free. That means our commerce is so restricted that anybody bold enough to defy the government makes a revolution.
That one is expected, but rather than take a negative take on it, they are trumphs of capitalism - the Internet was supposed to get rid of middlemen and optimize selling, but instead it created whole new markets to more efficiently allocate resources. Gone are the days of timeshares. Now it's all AirBNBs.
#1 is Apple, #2 Microsoft, #4 Amazon (most of their profits are from AWS), #5 Berkshire, #6 Nvidia, #8 Tesla, #9 Johnson & Johnson, #10 Visa.
Of the top 10, only #3 Google and #7 Meta could be called "advertising agencies", and even then they do a lot more.
Of the top 10, only #3 Google and #7 Meta could be called "advertising agencies", and even then they do a lot more.
> Isn’t it sad that USA’s most valuable companies are advertising agencies?
Huh? Which ad agencies are among the most valuable companies in the US? There's Omnicom, but they're not even in the top 100.
Huh? Which ad agencies are among the most valuable companies in the US? There's Omnicom, but they're not even in the top 100.
I believe they mean Facebook and Google.
I think they mean Google/Facebook.
edit: jinx
edit: jinx
It's sad because it means most disposable wealth is tied up in the trade of overpriced-just-because fashion products for the hyper wealthy.
> Isn’t it sad that USA’s most valuable companies are advertising agencies?
Google and Meta sure, what about Apple, Microsoft, Tesla and Amazon?
> Isn’t it sad that some of the most valuable companies are renting middlemen(AirBnB, Uber)?
Not at all. They are first and foremost marketplaces that are actually cutting out middlemen from the equation. Remember taxi medallions?
Google and Meta sure, what about Apple, Microsoft, Tesla and Amazon?
> Isn’t it sad that some of the most valuable companies are renting middlemen(AirBnB, Uber)?
Not at all. They are first and foremost marketplaces that are actually cutting out middlemen from the equation. Remember taxi medallions?
Which are advertising agencies? Meta which owns WhatsApp that Europe is entirely dependent on? Or Google that owns Search, YouTube, and Android that Europe is entirely dependent on?
The US could send Europe to the dark ages overnight by turning off all of its software. That’s real value, not luxury handbags.
The US could send Europe to the dark ages overnight by turning off all of its software. That’s real value, not luxury handbags.
> Not a fan of enormously big companies, but at least the U.S. has the likes of Amazon, Tesla, and Microsoft offering much utility.
Tesla is (in)famously overvalued. Their market cap is higher than most other car manufacturers (pumping out many times more vehicles than Tesla is), most of whom have caught up on EVs (is Toyota the only big manufacturer still lagging on EVs? I think they are). It's purely the brand of their CEO which is of course floundering because he's incapable of keeping his mouth shut and first comer advantage, and both of those are disappearing fast.
Microsoft, Apple, Amazon, Google have real utility, true, and they're huge, all across the world.
> What a sore lack of innovation
That's the wrong way of looking at things IMO. Just because the biggest companies are old and in non-tech niches doesn't mean there's no innovation. You can't seriously claim that companies such as VW Group, Stellantis, Airbus don't innovate? Let alone the smaller star/scale-ups (just a few French examples: BackMarket, Doctolib, Ornikar). There's plenty of innovation, it just isn't what's best valued and highest earning. A French innovating startup first has to capture the French market, then expand to neighbouring countries (of course that means legal and translating challenges at the very least) to be able to become big enough for those huge valuations. An American one is starting with a much bigger market to be able to capture, so of course a French innovator will be lagging in terms of global market share and valuation; that doesn't make them any less innovative though.
As a small example, Doctolib have practically revolutionised doctor's appointments in France and are exporting the model to other countries. Innovating in the healthcare space is very difficult due to a variety of reasons (highly sensitive data, lots of incumbents, doctors don't necessarily want to have any tech involved any more than necessary) but they did it with great tech.
Tesla is (in)famously overvalued. Their market cap is higher than most other car manufacturers (pumping out many times more vehicles than Tesla is), most of whom have caught up on EVs (is Toyota the only big manufacturer still lagging on EVs? I think they are). It's purely the brand of their CEO which is of course floundering because he's incapable of keeping his mouth shut and first comer advantage, and both of those are disappearing fast.
Microsoft, Apple, Amazon, Google have real utility, true, and they're huge, all across the world.
> What a sore lack of innovation
That's the wrong way of looking at things IMO. Just because the biggest companies are old and in non-tech niches doesn't mean there's no innovation. You can't seriously claim that companies such as VW Group, Stellantis, Airbus don't innovate? Let alone the smaller star/scale-ups (just a few French examples: BackMarket, Doctolib, Ornikar). There's plenty of innovation, it just isn't what's best valued and highest earning. A French innovating startup first has to capture the French market, then expand to neighbouring countries (of course that means legal and translating challenges at the very least) to be able to become big enough for those huge valuations. An American one is starting with a much bigger market to be able to capture, so of course a French innovator will be lagging in terms of global market share and valuation; that doesn't make them any less innovative though.
As a small example, Doctolib have practically revolutionised doctor's appointments in France and are exporting the model to other countries. Innovating in the healthcare space is very difficult due to a variety of reasons (highly sensitive data, lots of incumbents, doctors don't necessarily want to have any tech involved any more than necessary) but they did it with great tech.
i laughed at doctolib revolutionizing appointments. do you know how they started? by being buddies with the government not byhaving revolutionnary tech. online appointment booking exist for years in some most developped countries. the first time they got lot of user on their platform it went down. thats no revolution that is typical old europe style of innovation where you innovate because u get the market for free thanks to your buddies in the gov. that is also why public it systems suck so much in france, ecause they push for the IT companies giving money to their party and put their buddies in position not to innovate but to get a nice check and bill lot of money for bare maintenance.oh and the platform is awful no way to differentiate a practician from another, no way to give feedback, interactions are limited to robot-like interactions and you cant deviate from the script, id argue it made everything worse because now many doctors dont have assistants as everything is handled by doctolib which reduce the way for normal people and elderly people to interacte with their practitioners office. its typical of the current gov btw, destroying public service, or at best keeping it in life support (ameli) , scrapping its data and allowing a company and its shareholder to maie millions out of it while the company looses millions (obviously except the shareholders that were early enough and are really tight to officials)
That was a wild and complicated read, please consider using paragraphs and better structure next time.
Doctolib have been massive since well before the current government came into power, so what the hell are you blaming them for? The contract for Covid vaccine appointments? If that's the first time you heard of them, you're not representative of the French population at large. And yes, it absolutely made sense to give a contract to a company that can deliver now (with hiccups at the beginning) instead of wasting time on developing something from scratch.
Yes, many doctors don't have assistants nowadays, which makes the experience better for 90%+ of the population and saves on admin costs. The UX of a few clicks in an app (where you can differentiate doctors of course) is much better than calling, waiting for someone to pick up, and then negotiating dates while they're pressed. Also, doctors' offices (where there are a few doctors sharing space) usually still have assistants, as do clinics and the like, so for those that can't use an app there are still alternatives.
As for the public IT systems, you have got to be kidding. I came to France in 2012, and I can tell you that in the last 10 years there have been massive improvements in public IT. Most of it is actually good and usable - France Connect, ANTS, Impots, Ameli, etc. are a breeze. You can schedule appointments, do administrative stuff (like order new documents, submit tax info) quite easily and accessibly.
Urssaf's website for autoentrepreneurs could be better though.
Ah, the good old "the current government is destroying public services". Which services, exactly? Ameli's budget has been steadily increasing every year under the current government, since well before the pandemic. With less than what they ask for, but still increasing.
Doctolib have been massive since well before the current government came into power, so what the hell are you blaming them for? The contract for Covid vaccine appointments? If that's the first time you heard of them, you're not representative of the French population at large. And yes, it absolutely made sense to give a contract to a company that can deliver now (with hiccups at the beginning) instead of wasting time on developing something from scratch.
Yes, many doctors don't have assistants nowadays, which makes the experience better for 90%+ of the population and saves on admin costs. The UX of a few clicks in an app (where you can differentiate doctors of course) is much better than calling, waiting for someone to pick up, and then negotiating dates while they're pressed. Also, doctors' offices (where there are a few doctors sharing space) usually still have assistants, as do clinics and the like, so for those that can't use an app there are still alternatives.
As for the public IT systems, you have got to be kidding. I came to France in 2012, and I can tell you that in the last 10 years there have been massive improvements in public IT. Most of it is actually good and usable - France Connect, ANTS, Impots, Ameli, etc. are a breeze. You can schedule appointments, do administrative stuff (like order new documents, submit tax info) quite easily and accessibly.
Urssaf's website for autoentrepreneurs could be better though.
Ah, the good old "the current government is destroying public services". Which services, exactly? Ameli's budget has been steadily increasing every year under the current government, since well before the pandemic. With less than what they ask for, but still increasing.
the current gov is the previous gov… and macron has been in the,government before the previous one as its economy minister (and he was widely considered as its most important member) and before that he was in the comission atali under sakorzy. so we have the same people and the same school of thought governing france since 2008.
and guess what ? theres a reason our gdp per ppp did not move from 2008 while other countries got wealthier. our wealth got distributed to shareholders of companies like doctolib so that you can praise how good it is to book online a random doctor - again with no way to get feedback or review from patient like in the us system for instance - then struggle even more to get a first appointment because doctors dont take new patients and now that everything is digital you cant even go there or call to discuss your case.
i reckon its better for you as a foreigner that did not live in france to see how it was before. 10 years in france and,you know already what is best for 90% of its people, you either shareholder of doctolib or linked to the gov. every IT person at ameli would tell you they ve been gutted, their data scrapped by doctolib . doctolib only exist because massive money went in so that private shareholder can get wealthy using french citizen health data and you see it as progress?
and guess what ? theres a reason our gdp per ppp did not move from 2008 while other countries got wealthier. our wealth got distributed to shareholders of companies like doctolib so that you can praise how good it is to book online a random doctor - again with no way to get feedback or review from patient like in the us system for instance - then struggle even more to get a first appointment because doctors dont take new patients and now that everything is digital you cant even go there or call to discuss your case.
i reckon its better for you as a foreigner that did not live in france to see how it was before. 10 years in france and,you know already what is best for 90% of its people, you either shareholder of doctolib or linked to the gov. every IT person at ameli would tell you they ve been gutted, their data scrapped by doctolib . doctolib only exist because massive money went in so that private shareholder can get wealthy using french citizen health data and you see it as progress?
> the current gov is the previous gov… and macron has been in the,government before the previous one as its economy minister (and he was widely considered as its most important member) and before that he was in the comission atali under sakorzy. so we have the same people and the same school of thought governing france since 2008.
That's a very big stretch and also false. Macron was only appointed as minister of Finance in 2014, 3 years into Hollande's term, and it only happened because Hollande's initial financial and economic policies were turning out to be disastrous so a change was needed.
> and guess what ? theres a reason our gdp per ppp did not move from 2008 while other countries got wealthier. our wealth got distributed to shareholders
I think you need to update your talking points, GDP PPP has been going up (Covid being an exception) since the Macron years:
https://www.worldeconomics.com/GrossDomesticProduct/Real-GDP...
> then struggle even more to get a first appointment because doctors dont take new patients and now that everything is digital you cant even go there or call to discuss your case
You're confusing problems. There not being enough doctors and them not taking in new patients had nothing to do with "digital" or not. It's just that with "digital" you can actually know in advance when you can get a meeting with which doctor instead of having to make the rounds calling or visiting all doctors in your area. You cannot seriously tell me that this is a bad thing. And again, clinics and cabinets of multiple doctors still have assistants that you can call or visit to talk to if you prefer a slower and suboptimal way of doing things.
> reckon its better for you as a foreigner that did not live in france to see how it was before
When I arrived, universally all public IT systems were just shit. Like from a bad movie, designed by people who hadn't come close to computers, and written by people who won't use them and couldn't care any less. Again, ANTS, Impôts, Ameli, all those are new(or renewed) and with seamless making it easy to do basic administrative stuff without having to get an appointment at an office that only works 10-11:30 on Tuesdays on the third week of months, on a website that falls down every time there are more than 5 people on it (that was the case with my prefecture).
> doctolib only exist because massive money went in so that private shareholder can get wealthy using french citizen health data
They're not "using french citizen data", they're providing a service that uses it. Also, you keep saying "shareholders getting wealthier".. you know that Doctolib is private and thus we don't know about their financials and it's "shareholders", which btw includes Bpifrance (state investment bank), aren't wealthier for it?
That's a very big stretch and also false. Macron was only appointed as minister of Finance in 2014, 3 years into Hollande's term, and it only happened because Hollande's initial financial and economic policies were turning out to be disastrous so a change was needed.
> and guess what ? theres a reason our gdp per ppp did not move from 2008 while other countries got wealthier. our wealth got distributed to shareholders
I think you need to update your talking points, GDP PPP has been going up (Covid being an exception) since the Macron years:
https://www.worldeconomics.com/GrossDomesticProduct/Real-GDP...
> then struggle even more to get a first appointment because doctors dont take new patients and now that everything is digital you cant even go there or call to discuss your case
You're confusing problems. There not being enough doctors and them not taking in new patients had nothing to do with "digital" or not. It's just that with "digital" you can actually know in advance when you can get a meeting with which doctor instead of having to make the rounds calling or visiting all doctors in your area. You cannot seriously tell me that this is a bad thing. And again, clinics and cabinets of multiple doctors still have assistants that you can call or visit to talk to if you prefer a slower and suboptimal way of doing things.
> reckon its better for you as a foreigner that did not live in france to see how it was before
When I arrived, universally all public IT systems were just shit. Like from a bad movie, designed by people who hadn't come close to computers, and written by people who won't use them and couldn't care any less. Again, ANTS, Impôts, Ameli, all those are new(or renewed) and with seamless making it easy to do basic administrative stuff without having to get an appointment at an office that only works 10-11:30 on Tuesdays on the third week of months, on a website that falls down every time there are more than 5 people on it (that was the case with my prefecture).
> doctolib only exist because massive money went in so that private shareholder can get wealthy using french citizen health data
They're not "using french citizen data", they're providing a service that uses it. Also, you keep saying "shareholders getting wealthier".. you know that Doctolib is private and thus we don't know about their financials and it's "shareholders", which btw includes Bpifrance (state investment bank), aren't wealthier for it?
Tesla has a P/E ratio of 50 and annual earnings growth rate of 75%. It's hard to argue that's overvalued.
Due to the reduction in CO2, NOx and SOx, it is estimated that Tesla has prevented over 100,000 premature deaths.
OTOH, Google & Meta are advertising companies. I question their utility to the world.
Due to the reduction in CO2, NOx and SOx, it is estimated that Tesla has prevented over 100,000 premature deaths.
OTOH, Google & Meta are advertising companies. I question their utility to the world.
> Tesla has a P/E ratio of 50 and annual earnings growth rate of 75%. It's hard to argue that's overvalued.
VW Group has had a 5 year maximum P/E ratio of 20.69; for Stellantis it's 4.11 (but they're less than 2 years old). True that Tesla is seeing some very good revenue growth, 51% for 2022 compared to 2021. But that revenue is at $86 billion, meanwhile VW Group are at $307 billion. It is flat out ridiculous how overpriced Tesla are, nothing justifies them having a higher market cap than say VW Group.
VW Group has had a 5 year maximum P/E ratio of 20.69; for Stellantis it's 4.11 (but they're less than 2 years old). True that Tesla is seeing some very good revenue growth, 51% for 2022 compared to 2021. But that revenue is at $86 billion, meanwhile VW Group are at $307 billion. It is flat out ridiculous how overpriced Tesla are, nothing justifies them having a higher market cap than say VW Group.
From my very quick glance at the numbers, they make roughly the same amount of profit. From that starting point, add in Tesla's much more rapid growth. Then add in another factor for VW having products optimized for a rapidly-disappearing era.
TSLA is still overhyped, but I would never invest in VW, unless the stock takes a massive dive, or they spin out Porsche.
TSLA is still overhyped, but I would never invest in VW, unless the stock takes a massive dive, or they spin out Porsche.
Volkswagen has $185B in debt. When your debt is a lot larger then your market cap the ratios get funny. As an enterprise, VW has a lot of value. But almost all of that goes towards covering the debt rather than providing shareholder value.
As a side note for people wondering why they have so much debt, it's mostly from their financing department. The list of most indebted companies is comprised of mostly car makers for that reason: VW, Ford, Toyota and BMW make up half the top 8.
So their debt is almost more like bonds (E: maybe bank loan is a better equivalent) than what most people would think of as debt?
Like, if they stopped selling cars today they would theoretically recoup all of that debt once all the cars they've sold have been fully paid off via financing.
Like, if they stopped selling cars today they would theoretically recoup all of that debt once all the cars they've sold have been fully paid off via financing.
Yes, in a lot of way, modern car companies are actually banks which happen to manufacture cars.
They also have quite a lot of assets though. The shareholder equity is around $190B (for Tesla it's around $45B).
> Due to the reduction in CO2, NOx and SOx, it is estimated that Tesla has prevented over 100,000 premature deaths.
Does the math include the deaths from Tesla selling the permission to pollute to other carmakers? https://www.cnbc.com/2021/05/18/tesla-electric-vehicle-regul...
Does the math include the deaths from Tesla selling the permission to pollute to other carmakers? https://www.cnbc.com/2021/05/18/tesla-electric-vehicle-regul...
> OTOH, Google & Meta are advertising companies. I question their utility to the world.
True, advertising is a huge part of Google and Facebook. However they are so ubiquitous and embedded in our lives via the the Google search engine, WhatsApp, Instagram, YouTube... that you seem to only remember the unpleasant side which is advertising.
Haven't you run thousands of Google searches by now? Sent thousands of WhatsApp messages (i) ? Seen thousands of YouTube videos? Surely that has given you tremendous utility. You may argue that you find the the way Facebook/Google are making money as unattractive, but surely these companies have provided net positive utility to you and the world?
They are also some lovely open source projects that have come out of these companies that are being used by the next wave of startups!
(i) In some countries WhatApps is not dominant so this may not describe you.
True, advertising is a huge part of Google and Facebook. However they are so ubiquitous and embedded in our lives via the the Google search engine, WhatsApp, Instagram, YouTube... that you seem to only remember the unpleasant side which is advertising.
Haven't you run thousands of Google searches by now? Sent thousands of WhatsApp messages (i) ? Seen thousands of YouTube videos? Surely that has given you tremendous utility. You may argue that you find the the way Facebook/Google are making money as unattractive, but surely these companies have provided net positive utility to you and the world?
They are also some lovely open source projects that have come out of these companies that are being used by the next wave of startups!
(i) In some countries WhatApps is not dominant so this may not describe you.
LVMH with their PE of 33x is no less overvalued than Tesla, imo.
> Tesla is (in)famously overvalued.
> Their market cap is higher than most other car manufacturers (pumping out many times more vehicles than Tesla is), most of whom have caught up on EVs (is Toyota the only big manufacturer still lagging on EVs? I think they are)
Tesla is a top 5 car manufacturer by earnings at $14B for 2022. Toyota is next up that list at earnings of $20B.
Tesla sell almost 0.5 million EVs a quarter and has a 60% EV market share in the US, it sells more than everybody else combined currently, and is growing very fast. Hard to know how it will all shake out but so far nobody has caught up. Doesn't mean they can't but they are chasing. EV share of the US market is only 7% but is clearly the future, and again, Tesla has 60% (!) share in that market segment.
Looking forward there is the Gigafactory in Mexico and the Cybertruck release. If that is a hit Tesla will maintain its market leader position in 2024 and surpass Toyota in earnings. And they keep dropping prices. With smaller earnings than Tesla, and no institutional knowledge of making EVs it is hard to come up with a reason how and why Toyota can end up with a larger share of the EV market - suddenly they will find themselves in the position of the scrappy startup and Tesla the incumbant. That is the reason for the market cap, not mean tweets or dank memes - investors don't care about that.
Probably the list of EV leaders will be mostly new companies like Tesla, not legacy brands. Maybe some Chinese companies. Whatever the case it will look very different than today.
> Their market cap is higher than most other car manufacturers (pumping out many times more vehicles than Tesla is), most of whom have caught up on EVs (is Toyota the only big manufacturer still lagging on EVs? I think they are)
Tesla is a top 5 car manufacturer by earnings at $14B for 2022. Toyota is next up that list at earnings of $20B.
Tesla sell almost 0.5 million EVs a quarter and has a 60% EV market share in the US, it sells more than everybody else combined currently, and is growing very fast. Hard to know how it will all shake out but so far nobody has caught up. Doesn't mean they can't but they are chasing. EV share of the US market is only 7% but is clearly the future, and again, Tesla has 60% (!) share in that market segment.
Looking forward there is the Gigafactory in Mexico and the Cybertruck release. If that is a hit Tesla will maintain its market leader position in 2024 and surpass Toyota in earnings. And they keep dropping prices. With smaller earnings than Tesla, and no institutional knowledge of making EVs it is hard to come up with a reason how and why Toyota can end up with a larger share of the EV market - suddenly they will find themselves in the position of the scrappy startup and Tesla the incumbant. That is the reason for the market cap, not mean tweets or dank memes - investors don't care about that.
Probably the list of EV leaders will be mostly new companies like Tesla, not legacy brands. Maybe some Chinese companies. Whatever the case it will look very different than today.
> Tesla is (in)famously overvalued.
Short it then.
Short it then.
"The market can stay irrational for much longer than you can stay solvent", after all.
> LVMH, on the other hand, is Europe’s most valuable company? What a sore lack of innovation…I’m not even surprised because it’s from the continent that still has a lot of kings and queens (albeit ceremonial)…still doesn’t change my mind because I believe royals are the biggest grifters on earth.
I am puzzled. You know that Europe is a big place and that LVMH is from France, the place famous for not having royals?
Also, much of LVMH revenues come from the US and China. Neither place is really known for their fancy royals, either.
Also, market cap says more about the amount of money flowing around than the intrinsic value of the companies. Tesla’s valuation is more correlated with hype (and the status symbol and luxury character of the cars, similar as Apple, which you left out somehow) than innovation.
Your points need a bit of work to be convincing.
I am puzzled. You know that Europe is a big place and that LVMH is from France, the place famous for not having royals?
Also, much of LVMH revenues come from the US and China. Neither place is really known for their fancy royals, either.
Also, market cap says more about the amount of money flowing around than the intrinsic value of the companies. Tesla’s valuation is more correlated with hype (and the status symbol and luxury character of the cars, similar as Apple, which you left out somehow) than innovation.
Your points need a bit of work to be convincing.
Just to back up what you're saying with data:
LVMH - Revenue by key regions - https://www.lvmh.com/investors/profile/financial-indicators/...
- Asia - 23,785 M€ revenue
- United States - 21,542 M€ revenue
- Europe - 12,717 M€ revenue
- Other markets - 9,632 M€ revenue
- France- 6,071 M€ revenue
- Japan - 5,436 M€ revenue
Isn't it funny that the country that supposedly is the biggest innovators in the world, are one of the biggest consumers of luxury goods?
Who is the fool here really, the one who sells the luxury goods, or the ones that buy it?
LVMH - Revenue by key regions - https://www.lvmh.com/investors/profile/financial-indicators/...
- Asia - 23,785 M€ revenue
- United States - 21,542 M€ revenue
- Europe - 12,717 M€ revenue
- Other markets - 9,632 M€ revenue
- France- 6,071 M€ revenue
- Japan - 5,436 M€ revenue
Isn't it funny that the country that supposedly is the biggest innovators in the world, are one of the biggest consumers of luxury goods?
Who is the fool here really, the one who sells the luxury goods, or the ones that buy it?
>Isn't it funny that the country that supposedly is the biggest innovators in the world, are one of the biggest consumers of luxury goods?
Not really. That's exactly what you'd expect, since the ones that innovate have the money to buy luxury goods.
>Who is the fool here really, the one who sells the luxury goods, or the ones that buy it?
Talking about fools, since Tesla is apparently also an overhyped luxury company, who is the real fool here: the ones who make it (the US) or the ones who buy it (Europe)?
Not really. That's exactly what you'd expect, since the ones that innovate have the money to buy luxury goods.
>Who is the fool here really, the one who sells the luxury goods, or the ones that buy it?
Talking about fools, since Tesla is apparently also an overhyped luxury company, who is the real fool here: the ones who make it (the US) or the ones who buy it (Europe)?
"Tesla is apparently also an overhyped luxury company"
From a practical perspective Teslas are simply better daily drivers than other cars.
Whether their price premium, wrt gas powered cars, is justified is a judgement call. I would say yes, but YMMV.
From a practical perspective Teslas are simply better daily drivers than other cars.
Whether their price premium, wrt gas powered cars, is justified is a judgement call. I would say yes, but YMMV.
That would mean that Asia is the greatest innovators, by that metric. Do you agree with that?
Given that 'Asia' is multiple countries and has upwards of 4.7B in population vs the US being a single country and having a population closer to 336M, I'd say that using the raw sales numbers as a measuring stick might be a bit off.
If we substract Japan, which is listed individually, you still have ~4.5B in Asia. That's €5.28/person in Asia (-Japan) vs €64.01/person in United States.
[1] https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/asia-populati...
[2] https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/us-population...
If we substract Japan, which is listed individually, you still have ~4.5B in Asia. That's €5.28/person in Asia (-Japan) vs €64.01/person in United States.
[1] https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/asia-populati...
[2] https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/us-population...
I was going to say... seems like there's a whole lot of LVMH stores in Bellevue. Must be unrelated
Bellevue === Little Peking
Thanks! I did not have the exact numbers on hand.
I'm used to people on here saying "lol europe doesn't make anything", came to comment "look at all this manufacturing happening", and apparently a $500bn business it doesn't count because it's not thing that HN likes? Isn't that also a bit sad?
Isn't the measure of market cap more a measure of how much one company monopolizes? Compared to an environment of, say, German "mittelstand" medium-sized companies (which don't count, apparently?)
Note also that LVMH are one of the places selling into China, rather than the other way round. Got to recycle those dollars somehow.
Isn't the measure of market cap more a measure of how much one company monopolizes? Compared to an environment of, say, German "mittelstand" medium-sized companies (which don't count, apparently?)
Note also that LVMH are one of the places selling into China, rather than the other way round. Got to recycle those dollars somehow.
I wouldn't call luxury good sales "manufacturing", more like "look at all this branding happening" since that's where the vast majority of the value is created.
Especially since EU manufacturing output is significantly bigger than US output.
> Isn’t it sad that the first $500b+ company from Europe is a peddler of vanity and overpriced luxury items?
I used to think this way but no longer do. I mean, the point of being people is to do people things. The point of trying to fix the climate is so people can keep on doing stuff they want (the planet doesn’t care). And so on.
Now indeed, I think ppl should stop doing things that hurt others, but $1,500 scarves aren’t that harmful. And leather is an awful material for most applications these days so these people just hurt themselves :-).
If I were to make a list of useless activities that could safely vanish overnight without me missing them, I would indeed wave my wand at fashion, as well as vehicle racing; all forms of movies, video, YouTube, etc; the music “industry” (not musicians!); motorized watercraft; Internet advertising; fast-food restaurants; celebrities… But some people would (inexplicably to me) not agree. And would make their own lists. Fortunately none of us are dictators, in this regard at least.
> I believe royals are the biggest grifters on earth.
Bad as aristos are, there are even bigger grifters!
I used to think this way but no longer do. I mean, the point of being people is to do people things. The point of trying to fix the climate is so people can keep on doing stuff they want (the planet doesn’t care). And so on.
Now indeed, I think ppl should stop doing things that hurt others, but $1,500 scarves aren’t that harmful. And leather is an awful material for most applications these days so these people just hurt themselves :-).
If I were to make a list of useless activities that could safely vanish overnight without me missing them, I would indeed wave my wand at fashion, as well as vehicle racing; all forms of movies, video, YouTube, etc; the music “industry” (not musicians!); motorized watercraft; Internet advertising; fast-food restaurants; celebrities… But some people would (inexplicably to me) not agree. And would make their own lists. Fortunately none of us are dictators, in this regard at least.
> I believe royals are the biggest grifters on earth.
Bad as aristos are, there are even bigger grifters!
> I would indeed wave my wand at fashion, as well as vehicle racing; all forms of movies, video, YouTube, etc; the music “industry” (not musicians!); motorized watercraft; Internet advertising; fast-food restaurants; celebrities…
It's funny because I have a similar list but fashion would not be something I would want to disappear. Fashion is culture and art. Fast fashion and production that harms people and the planet is not good, but fashion designers can be very much like musicians.
It's funny because I have a similar list but fashion would not be something I would want to disappear. Fashion is culture and art. Fast fashion and production that harms people and the planet is not good, but fashion designers can be very much like musicians.
> If I were to make a list of useless activities that could safely vanish overnight without me missing them, I would indeed wave my wand at fashion, as well as vehicle racing; all forms of movies, video, YouTube, etc; the music “industry” (not musicians!); motorized watercraft; Internet advertising; fast-food restaurants; celebrities… But some people would (inexplicably to me) not agree.
Funny how this works. One of the great premises of the Culture novels, formative for so many nerds, was that material plenty and AI governance would get us to a point where anyone could have as much of those things as they wanted. With none of the downsides.
But given how long the list is I'm baffled at what you and your family might do for entertainment.
Funny how this works. One of the great premises of the Culture novels, formative for so many nerds, was that material plenty and AI governance would get us to a point where anyone could have as much of those things as they wanted. With none of the downsides.
But given how long the list is I'm baffled at what you and your family might do for entertainment.
> But given how long the list is I'm baffled at what you and your family might do for entertainment.
Jeez there’s so much choice! Reading books, making music, backpacking, biking, kayaking, writing code, hanging out with friends… come to think of it, the same stuff our friends like to do too, which I guess shouldn’t surprise me.
Jeez there’s so much choice! Reading books, making music, backpacking, biking, kayaking, writing code, hanging out with friends… come to think of it, the same stuff our friends like to do too, which I guess shouldn’t surprise me.
I think this is an admirable attitude. Hopefully it catches on!
Europe has ASML, without which literally no modern chips could be made. It seems like quite a mistake to equal market cap with importance or innovation.
Not debating that it would be good to see more tech start-ups succeed in Europe. But there are a couple clear differences between Europe and the US.
1. Europe is more linguistically fragmented than the US. For example, the EU has 24 official languages while the US effectively has two. Because of this, in Europe network effects and economies of scale are more difficult to achieve with products that could compete with YouTube, Instagram, and so on. Instead, many European products that are popular are those that don't rely on network effects: cars, appliances, clothing, and food. Meanwhile, because of its more cohesive market, the US has seen higher returns to investment in movies, music, and social networks. Thanks to having more resources, many of those products become enormously successful domestically and end up being exported.
2. The stock market generally plays a smaller role in financing companies in Europe than in the US. For example, the Czech JetBrains is not traded in the stock market at all, and the Swedish Spotify's debt-to-equity ratio is 47% while Meta's is 8%.[1] Two companies with equal future EBITDA streams have different valuations for their stocks if one of them is primarily debt financed and the other is primarily financed through the stock market.
[1] https://ycharts.com/companies/SPOT/debt_equity_ratio https://ycharts.com/companies/META/debt_equity_ratio Although admittedly this is an imperfect comparison.
1. Europe is more linguistically fragmented than the US. For example, the EU has 24 official languages while the US effectively has two. Because of this, in Europe network effects and economies of scale are more difficult to achieve with products that could compete with YouTube, Instagram, and so on. Instead, many European products that are popular are those that don't rely on network effects: cars, appliances, clothing, and food. Meanwhile, because of its more cohesive market, the US has seen higher returns to investment in movies, music, and social networks. Thanks to having more resources, many of those products become enormously successful domestically and end up being exported.
2. The stock market generally plays a smaller role in financing companies in Europe than in the US. For example, the Czech JetBrains is not traded in the stock market at all, and the Swedish Spotify's debt-to-equity ratio is 47% while Meta's is 8%.[1] Two companies with equal future EBITDA streams have different valuations for their stocks if one of them is primarily debt financed and the other is primarily financed through the stock market.
[1] https://ycharts.com/companies/SPOT/debt_equity_ratio https://ycharts.com/companies/META/debt_equity_ratio Although admittedly this is an imperfect comparison.
Europe today seems to be exhausted and resigned to an obscure sideshow. Its material infrastructure outsourced to China/Asia and its digital infrastructure outsourced to the US. There is no shortage of talent ofcourse, but there is no system to tap it in meaningful and future-oriented ways.
True. I believe it shows the weakness in the political landscape of Europe, as many innovative EU-Companies grow first and foremost by supplying big companies in US/Asia.
"Hitting the ground running" with a own launch in Europe is almost impossible due to lack of structural support, investor-mindset and language/market differences. I believe a stronger unification would be needed, but unfortunately there's no sign of improvement, as like in US the political trend in EU is for countries to become MORE nationalist instead of embracing a European Union...
"Hitting the ground running" with a own launch in Europe is almost impossible due to lack of structural support, investor-mindset and language/market differences. I believe a stronger unification would be needed, but unfortunately there's no sign of improvement, as like in US the political trend in EU is for countries to become MORE nationalist instead of embracing a European Union...
I have often thought that the EU is the sleeping giant of world politics if only they could manage to get behind a shared identity as Western Europeans. Unfortunately it seems like you need major galvanizing trauma like a major war to drive disparate tribes of people together like that, and it only seems to last as long as it takes for the population a few generations later to forget that bonding event and revert to typical tribal squabbling (see American politics).
The "problem" (not really a problem in my opinion, but the main contributing circumstance) is that we all speak different languages. We can all communicate with each other using a few common languages but the majority have another native language than English. I don't think true identity-building can happen because of this. We will remain as we are, able to communicate but with distinct nationalities and identities. Not neccessarily a problem, just the way it is.
> Its material infrastructure outsourced to China/Asia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Germany
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Germany
Not sure what the link proves... it is true that Germany still has a substantial and sophisticated manufacturing base, but it does not innovate in ways that would show up in market valuation tables such as the one being discussed here. The panic around the discontinuation of internal combustion tech is case in point.
There are examples of European technological leadership (e.g Dutch ASML) but they are scarce. Many other powerhouse regions (e.g Northern Italy) that used to be important innovators have been hollowed. In critical areas such as the green energy transition (which is a top-priority goal of the EU) the EU as a whole is a net importer from China.
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php...
There are examples of European technological leadership (e.g Dutch ASML) but they are scarce. Many other powerhouse regions (e.g Northern Italy) that used to be important innovators have been hollowed. In critical areas such as the green energy transition (which is a top-priority goal of the EU) the EU as a whole is a net importer from China.
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php...
It proves that Germany still has a massive industrial base, which is contrary to your assertion.
I'm glad the biggest companies in the US still manufacture in the US, like Apple, Nike, etc right?
My hypothesis that the engineering part of Europe isn't focussed on inflated numbers. People who like that are in LVMH's corner.
I read a funny comment - “Europe is becoming Argentina with castles”. Pretty apt really.
Argentina doesn't really export much - Wine, Beef, Lithium, and Footballers. That's it.
Europe produces far more that is of importable and exportable economic importance.
Europe produces far more that is of importable and exportable economic importance.
[deleted]
Have you actually been to Europe lately? It's nothing like that at all.
I have (great prices right now) and although I love the cities and the people are friendly I find the business (and political to an extent) climate extremely myopic. I have little hope for European business relevancy 20,30 years from now based on the seeds I see being planted today.
OK but that has nothing to do with Argentina at all. Your original quote made no sense at all and isn't "apt".
Huh? The joke is that the Euro economy is headed in the same direction as Argentina. Low to no growth into the future. Quite apt.
Huh? But the joke doesn't make sense because Argentina isn't characterised by a lack of growth. It's characterised by repeated defaults and political dysfunction and populism. That doesn't apply to Europe broadly. For example the US is broadly more politically dysfunctional than most European countries. Only in the US for example are random shootings of civilians (and many children) generally accepted and tolerated as part of USA's rich cultural tapestry—which ultimately stems from dysfunctional American political culture. That doesn't really happen in Europe. So in that sense, America is Argentina with school shootings, more so than Europe being Argentina with castles.
If you want to talk about a lack of growth and an ageing population combined with supposed lagging economic dynamism, then call Europe Japan, that would make sense with what you are trying (but sadly failing...) to say, but I guess it wouldn't be as inflammatory.
If you want to talk about a lack of growth and an ageing population combined with supposed lagging economic dynamism, then call Europe Japan, that would make sense with what you are trying (but sadly failing...) to say, but I guess it wouldn't be as inflammatory.
Wow, some of you euro internet defenders are absolutely insane. Dude it’s a joke on how Europe, once a great place (like Argentina economically) is descending into irrelevancy due to a variety of reasons. And it’s mainly true.
Europe is similar to Japan in that it’s full of American military bases. Essentially occupied/conquered land.
Europe is dying and will never be a leader again. Like Argentina. But with castles.
Europe is similar to Japan in that it’s full of American military bases. Essentially occupied/conquered land.
Europe is dying and will never be a leader again. Like Argentina. But with castles.
Hey man I'm joking too! Relax friend. For all the differences, of course there are mostly similarities between Europe and USA. American culture is essentially today a blend of European and African culture, with the great innovation: the invention of the Great American Pastime, going to a nearby school and shooting children. Some of you American ultranationalists really need to learn to take a joke...
But for what it's worth, yes, Europe will never again be as influential as it was 150 years ago. But the US will never again be as influential as it was 30 years ago, or even five years ago, either. Plus ça change!
But for what it's worth, yes, Europe will never again be as influential as it was 150 years ago. But the US will never again be as influential as it was 30 years ago, or even five years ago, either. Plus ça change!
I agree with what you are saying, but overrating is imnsho absolutely why Big Tech is valued at what it is. Magical thinking, signalling isn't exclusive to our outward appearance.
It's difficult for a European company to compete with US tech giants due to the difference in capital. They just get bought up if they're very successful. For example, DeepMind: started in the UK, but acquired by Google. I would say that's a an example of an innovative company, but how are they ever going to grow as big as a US tech giant?
On the other hand, the US tech giants are headquartered in the US, but are very much multinationals, with people working for them across the world.
On the other hand, the US tech giants are headquartered in the US, but are very much multinationals, with people working for them across the world.
>For example, DeepMind: started in the UK, but acquired by Google.
This company was profitable?
This company was profitable?
A deeply foolish comment, completely ignoring the fact that the US has capital markets dwarfing those of all European countries, a single national language, and, so far, a tradition of sucking up talent from the rest of the world, including from Europe.
And... as any girl should have told you by now: size isn't everything. In Europe we prefer to buy locally produced food in local pedestrian districts to driving to giant Walmarts -- and so on across the board.
We'll happily trade 6 weeks annual leave, parental leave, socialized healthcare and many other things (freedom from school shootings, lower child mortality, longer life expectancy, vastly lower inequality etc etc) for your size-based bragging rights.
As for innovation: we're doing fine. The web originated in Europe and so did a lot else, including the world's largest and best regulated market, something Americans can only dream of:
https://fsi.stanford.edu/events/why-europe%E2%80%99s-single-...
And... as any girl should have told you by now: size isn't everything. In Europe we prefer to buy locally produced food in local pedestrian districts to driving to giant Walmarts -- and so on across the board.
We'll happily trade 6 weeks annual leave, parental leave, socialized healthcare and many other things (freedom from school shootings, lower child mortality, longer life expectancy, vastly lower inequality etc etc) for your size-based bragging rights.
As for innovation: we're doing fine. The web originated in Europe and so did a lot else, including the world's largest and best regulated market, something Americans can only dream of:
https://fsi.stanford.edu/events/why-europe%E2%80%99s-single-...
What does this have anything to do with kings or queens? Pretty much none of the EU countries' royalty have any cultural significance anymore. On the other hand, you have the US where the billionaires rule the earth and get to do whatever the fucking feel like. Those are the real grifters.
American companies value is absolutely fake.
There is no way on earth Tesla is worth more than VW or Mercedes.
Company value is dictated by what buyers/sellers of the stock say it is. When you especially consider that part of a company’s stock value comes from what people think their future potential is, it’s much more open ended than a simple formula.
So it doesn’t make sense to say a company’s value is “fake”, what you’re actually saying is that you highly disagree with what the market thinks the value is. You not agreeing with the value doesn’t make the value invalid.
So it doesn’t make sense to say a company’s value is “fake”, what you’re actually saying is that you highly disagree with what the market thinks the value is. You not agreeing with the value doesn’t make the value invalid.
That's the entire stock market. It's what you're willing to pay for a "piece" of a company.
So it's worse than FANG spying on customers and taking privacy data as a joke?
I think what most people were hoping for was a tech company of FAANG relevance for Europe which is representative of some of the values and lifestyle directions that Europeans are so proud of here.
You have to admit, if you told someone in 1923 that 100 years from now, by far the most relevant technology companies will all American or Asian, they’d be a bit surprised.
You have to admit, if you told someone in 1923 that 100 years from now, by far the most relevant technology companies will all American or Asian, they’d be a bit surprised.
> if you told someone in 1923 that 100 years from now, by far the most relevant technology companies will all American or Asian, they’d be a bit surprised.
If you told them that the war which ended five years previously would be repeated, except with greater destructive capability, resulting in the flattening of much of Europe leaving tens of millions of its citizens dead or displaced, while at the same time the Washington Naval Treaty being signed in 1923 ultimately failed to contain the Japanese entering the technological arms race, they might be less surprised about that outcome.
(because I checked: several of the ships involved in Pearl Harbor on both sides were either in service or under construction in 1923)
I'd be very much interested to see if it's possible to compare the wealth gap and the lifestyle gap between the US and Europe to see what its peaks and troughs are over time. It was probably at its widest during the Eisenhower administration.
If you told them that the war which ended five years previously would be repeated, except with greater destructive capability, resulting in the flattening of much of Europe leaving tens of millions of its citizens dead or displaced, while at the same time the Washington Naval Treaty being signed in 1923 ultimately failed to contain the Japanese entering the technological arms race, they might be less surprised about that outcome.
(because I checked: several of the ships involved in Pearl Harbor on both sides were either in service or under construction in 1923)
I'd be very much interested to see if it's possible to compare the wealth gap and the lifestyle gap between the US and Europe to see what its peaks and troughs are over time. It was probably at its widest during the Eisenhower administration.
Well, one could say that Apple sells overpriced luxury items...
And look at the pile of money FAAMG are making, also their products are extremely overpriced.
Running stuff on AWS may even considered a luxury by many.
I'm joking, but not entirely.
> Isn’t it sad that the first $500b+ company from Europe is a peddler of vanity and overpriced luxury items?
Actually no, since luxury items sell at highest margin so it makes complete sense that a luxury item company would be valued high, as long as there is a demand for their wares - which at the moment seems to be there.
> What a sore lack of innovation…
Again, not sure what you means since in a way since designers and fashion companies need to keep on innovating new trends and designs and IMHO are one of the most creative and innovative in the true sense.
Actually no, since luxury items sell at highest margin so it makes complete sense that a luxury item company would be valued high, as long as there is a demand for their wares - which at the moment seems to be there.
> What a sore lack of innovation…
Again, not sure what you means since in a way since designers and fashion companies need to keep on innovating new trends and designs and IMHO are one of the most creative and innovative in the true sense.
One's vanity is another's hobby / normal purschase.
Don't forget that Amazon / apple / google make a lot of money off games / useless items or basic advertising.
Don't forget that Amazon / apple / google make a lot of money off games / useless items or basic advertising.
A big part of this is the fact that certain regions just happen to excel at particular industries more than others.
For Europe, it’s luxury goods + cosmetics
For the Middle East, it’s energy
For the US, it’s things like tech + media + finance
It doesn’t mean that Europe lacking in innovation in those other industries, just that the luxury goods market is an outsized one for them.
For Europe, it’s luxury goods + cosmetics
For the Middle East, it’s energy
For the US, it’s things like tech + media + finance
It doesn’t mean that Europe lacking in innovation in those other industries, just that the luxury goods market is an outsized one for them.
Teslas aren't overpriced vanity products?
[deleted]
This is such a hilariously stereotypical HN comment: "Tech is inherently superior to stupid luxury products. Why do people even buy those? We make useful things!"
Another view would be that LVMH make products that people (maybe not SWEs) actually desire. Apart from Apple and Tesla most US tech giants just offer services that people use because they have to, or for mindless entertainment.
Another view would be that LVMH make products that people (maybe not SWEs) actually desire. Apart from Apple and Tesla most US tech giants just offer services that people use because they have to, or for mindless entertainment.
Yes, it is. And their items are status symbols that people in developing countries who come across wealth tend to chase, preventing money from flowing within their own communities. Europe doesn't hold any sort of exclusivity on clothing, bags, etc. There are plenty of artisans outside the region who could meet the same quality standards if new brands arise in these regions.
I suspect Europe’s economy would be larger if it had more real kings and queens. Its share of global output peaked under that system. On the other hand their democracy feels strained and exhausted, which is not helped by the contingent being a US protectorate.
Frankly, I’m not sure why people ignore Aristotle’s idea that the monarch is the people’s best defense against aristocracy/oligarchy.
Frankly, I’m not sure why people ignore Aristotle’s idea that the monarch is the people’s best defense against aristocracy/oligarchy.
Strange take. First of all, since we have this huge wealth disparity in the world, it is not surprising that a company that targets the very rich can make huge profits. Second, what does the most valuable company say about all less valuable companies? Nothing! It is like saying no energy innovation happens at planet Earth because the sun produces so much more energy.
Blame France, with its four most valuable companies being in the frivolity business: https://companiesmarketcap.com/european-union/largest-compan...
Don’t blame the Dutch (ASML), Swiss (Novo Nordisk), Germans (SAP), etc.
Don’t blame the Dutch (ASML), Swiss (Novo Nordisk), Germans (SAP), etc.
Blame no one. The frivolity business means nothing. They are luxury companies making luxury goods at the corresponding very high level of quality and with the know how to market it properly. As they say, if it was easy, everyone would be doing it. For a community constantly bragging about its cleverness, HN can be surprisingly narrow minded and immature sometimes.
France has its fair share of large industrial companies by the way.
France has its fair share of large industrial companies by the way.
> Blame France, with its four most valuable companies being in the frivolity business
What? What about Airbus (not fully French of course), Stellantis, Renault, Faurecia, OVH, Scaleway, STMicro, Doctolib? Just because what markets valuate luxury goods the most doesn't invalidate the existence and innovation of other sectors.
What? What about Airbus (not fully French of course), Stellantis, Renault, Faurecia, OVH, Scaleway, STMicro, Doctolib? Just because what markets valuate luxury goods the most doesn't invalidate the existence and innovation of other sectors.
You could add Dassault Systèmes, Schneider, Safran, Thalès, Dassault Aviation (best fighter plane in the world, sorry Lockheed Martin...), etc...
Novo Nordisk is Danish, not Swiss.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novo_Nordisk
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novo_Nordisk
Personally I'd rather work on "frivolity" than selling ads!
The frivolity business made India and China rich, emptied out the Roman Empire of its precious metals and kickstarted globalism.
Luxury goods are and always have been high margin. Its a great business to be in. All car makers aspire to be Mercedes or BMW. All watchmakers want to be Rolex. Argueably all IT manufacturers want to be Apple, with its fat margins. For a non-tech, non-oil company to reach that valuation is amazing.
LVMH is a conglomeration of a bunch of French brands including distilleries, champagne houses, and vineyards. It has been a republic more or less since 1870 and some time before that also. Many of those brands were founded when it was a monarchy, ironically.
Amazon?
We have ecommerce and delivery too, just splitted into X companies across countries instead of one big
We have ecommerce and delivery too, just splitted into X companies across countries instead of one big
[deleted]
> > Isn’t it sad that the first $500b+ company from Europe is a peddler of vanity and overpriced luxury items?
It's not about the item, it's about what you get after you give the item as a present ;)
It's not about the item, it's about what you get after you give the item as a present ;)
From a peddler of financial gossip, masquerading as 'news'.
Some would say your first paragraph describes Apple.
Aren't most people who work in tech doing so to buy vanity items? Someone needs to do the work of motivating these people.
Ironically, the biggest tech centres in Europe (London by far, Amsterdam and Stockholm are up there) are run by monarchies.
And you think a company scales to this size without any internal (or visible) innovation?
I believe those luxury brands inflated market value is mostly the result of sophisticated money laundering operations by European organized crime. Once you detach an object's value from it's utility and production costs, there's no limit to how much profit you can claim from it. That's a very nice feature if you're looking to reintroduce dirty money into the system.
Interesting assumption, note the US is its biggest market (scroll down) https://www.lvmh.com/investors/profile/financial-indicators/...
Really innovative to sell bags with LV plastered all over the place and those fancy champagnes.
Yes and the bags magically appear at stores, they don't need a supply chain, a manufacturing facility, a logistics supplier, a design office, etc
Innovation is not only the latest js platform or the latest tiktok clone launched
Innovation is not only the latest js platform or the latest tiktok clone launched
Aren’t tesla and apple exactly that, peddlers of vanity and luxury items?
Teslas are a bit too rich for my blood, but the MacBook M1 is a very good laptop for its price, and I'm sure M2 is worth its price too ($1000 and $1200 respectively).
Most Tesla and Apple products aren’t in the luxury market. They have good value in their (high end) segments and many people can afford them and justify the cost.
These days it’s doesn’t make sense to buy a worse and more expensive electric car or laptop unless you really don’t like Tesla or Apple.
These days it’s doesn’t make sense to buy a worse and more expensive electric car or laptop unless you really don’t like Tesla or Apple.
A entry level Tesla Model 3 is in the same ballpark as the quotes I am getting for a Toyota Camry or Honda Accord at dealerships right now in Northern California.
Is that under $30k? I thought the Model 3 was at $43k or so.
A base model Tesla Model 3 comes out to around $44k. When you add the tax refund, it can range from $37k to $40k.
The Honda and Toyota Dealerships I've been going to are selling Model 3 equivalents (Accord and Camry) for around $35-40k (and this if for ICE/Gas versions - their hybrids are just as expensive as the Tesla if not more).
When you factor in California gas prices and gas taxes, a premium/mid-level sedan evens out with a Tesla Model 3, hence why you see Teslas almost everywhere in California now.
The Honda and Toyota Dealerships I've been going to are selling Model 3 equivalents (Accord and Camry) for around $35-40k (and this if for ICE/Gas versions - their hybrids are just as expensive as the Tesla if not more).
When you factor in California gas prices and gas taxes, a premium/mid-level sedan evens out with a Tesla Model 3, hence why you see Teslas almost everywhere in California now.
[deleted]
> I’m not even surprised because it’s from the continent that still has a lot of kings and queens
1. LVMH stems from France, a company famous for not being really friendly to royals.
2. The bulk of LVMH's brands customers are not royals; they're spawns of neo-liberalism and their wives/daugthers/mistresses: US businessmen, Chinese moguls, Russian oligarchs, UK investment bankers, ...
3. Isn't it sad that US top companies are advertising agencies and mind-manipulative megacorps?
1. LVMH stems from France, a company famous for not being really friendly to royals.
2. The bulk of LVMH's brands customers are not royals; they're spawns of neo-liberalism and their wives/daugthers/mistresses: US businessmen, Chinese moguls, Russian oligarchs, UK investment bankers, ...
3. Isn't it sad that US top companies are advertising agencies and mind-manipulative megacorps?
> mind-manipulative megacorps
This is a very open ended description of a company that can be applied to many of them, including LVMH
This is a very open ended description of a company that can be applied to many of them, including LVMH
I don't remember LVMH being considered a risk for national elections or dealing shady propaganda business with Russian agencies or ‶research″ firms, but sure; whatever floats your dictionary.
> Isn’t it sad that the first $500b+ company from Europe is a peddler of vanity and overpriced luxury items?
French top 4 are:
- lvmh $496b
- Loreal $256b
- Hermes $232b
- Dior $172b
https://companiesmarketcap.com/france/largest-companies-in-f...
#9 is EssilorLuxottica (sunglasses), and #11 is a clothing brand.
If this sort of Fashion ever goes out of style does that whole country go bankrupt? I fear what the unstoppable and inevitable ascendance of Balenciaga might do to the French.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iE39q-IKOzA
French top 4 are:
- lvmh $496b
- Loreal $256b
- Hermes $232b
- Dior $172b
https://companiesmarketcap.com/france/largest-companies-in-f...
#9 is EssilorLuxottica (sunglasses), and #11 is a clothing brand.
If this sort of Fashion ever goes out of style does that whole country go bankrupt? I fear what the unstoppable and inevitable ascendance of Balenciaga might do to the French.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iE39q-IKOzA
One of the biggest industry in France is aerospace (might even be the biggest, not by market cap but by revenue/people employed), and yet Airbus (not only French of course, also German, Spanish, etc.) is headquartered in the Netherlands. Car maker Stellantis (far from being only French, maybe mostly Italian?) is also headquartered in the Netherlands. Neither are particularly dutch as far as I know.
I wonder to what extent the list you link to is affected by French companies moving their headquarters to the Netherlands (or sometimes Luxembourg). Either directly, or while merging with other European companies...
Netherlands are a little bit like the European Delaware in that regard... And would you exclude Delaware corps when looking at New York or California?
I wonder to what extent the list you link to is affected by French companies moving their headquarters to the Netherlands (or sometimes Luxembourg). Either directly, or while merging with other European companies...
Netherlands are a little bit like the European Delaware in that regard... And would you exclude Delaware corps when looking at New York or California?
Safran is on this list. Airbus is listed under Netherlands, fair point.
> I wonder to what extent the list you link to is affected by French companies moving their headquarters to the Netherlands (or sometimes Luxembourg). Either directly, or while merging with other European companies...
Well, cross reference the lists and you tell me.
https://companiesmarketcap.com/netherlands/largest-companies...
Stellantis, Airbus, anyone else?
> I wonder to what extent the list you link to is affected by French companies moving their headquarters to the Netherlands (or sometimes Luxembourg). Either directly, or while merging with other European companies...
Well, cross reference the lists and you tell me.
https://companiesmarketcap.com/netherlands/largest-companies...
Stellantis, Airbus, anyone else?
The Dutch top 4 are:
- ASML. $250.35 B
- Prosus. $152.47 B
- Airbus. $109.20 B
- Heineken $65.26 B
Never heard of Prosus, but that's apparently a tech investment group.
ASML is of course a real tech innovator. I'm surprised to see Airbus listed as a Dutch company; isn't their HQ in France? Heineken is beer of course. Not terribly innovative, but a lot of people seem to like it anyway.
- ASML. $250.35 B
- Prosus. $152.47 B
- Airbus. $109.20 B
- Heineken $65.26 B
Never heard of Prosus, but that's apparently a tech investment group.
ASML is of course a real tech innovator. I'm surprised to see Airbus listed as a Dutch company; isn't their HQ in France? Heineken is beer of course. Not terribly innovative, but a lot of people seem to like it anyway.
> Airbus's registered headquarters is in Leiden, Netherlands, but its head office is located in Toulouse, France. The 'SE' in its corporate name means it is a societas Europaea, which enables it to be registered as a European rather than a national corporation. Its shares are traded in France, Germany, and Spain. The company is led by CEO Guillaume Faury and is a component of the Euro Stoxx 50 stock market index.
(from Wikipedia)
Very surprised by that, I thought it was mostly French with some European contributions.
(from Wikipedia)
Very surprised by that, I thought it was mostly French with some European contributions.
boeingUH60(1)
I can't think of a single major cutting edge tech company in Europe besides Spotify. I know there are money makers like SAP but I don't see them as innovative or cutting edge. I think Europe needs to look long and hard in the mirror and realize that most of its policies are not working. You have sky high cost of living, a failed covid-19 vaccine rollout(due to the EU bureaucracy trying to nickel and dime vaccine makers), one of the biggest falling birth rates in the developed world, a welfare state that will fail in a generation or two due to not enough workers to support it(and too many non working retirees). I know the US and other Asian countries have these issues with birthrates as well but they do have economies that are innovative and build companies and products the world uses, the EU has barely any of these things expect a passion to push useless regulation on people actually doing work across the pond(thanks GDPR and putting out these annoying pop-ups on every site I visit).
Prediction: by 2040 Europe will be in really bad shape, its main industries like automotive will be woefully behind Tesla and a slew of Asian automakers. Its non-existent AI efforts will mean it will be a backwater of technical innovation clinging on to the coattails of US and Chinese technology. Its welfare state will have become insolvent due to too many retirees and not enough workers. I don't see it surviving in its current form for another 20-30 years.
Prediction: by 2040 Europe will be in really bad shape, its main industries like automotive will be woefully behind Tesla and a slew of Asian automakers. Its non-existent AI efforts will mean it will be a backwater of technical innovation clinging on to the coattails of US and Chinese technology. Its welfare state will have become insolvent due to too many retirees and not enough workers. I don't see it surviving in its current form for another 20-30 years.
I shouldn't respond to troll...
> I think Europe needs to look long and hard in the mirror and realize that most of its policies are not working
Because for sure all the policies that lead to people not having any sort of medical coverage, bills $200 for insulin vials that cost a couple $ to make, produces electricity mainly by burning stuff, has one of the highest murdering rate of any develop country, the highest incarceration rate of the world, has police randomly kill people in the street because their color was suspect, has its policies figured out.
> a failed covid-19 vaccine rollout
Wait, are you living in the US? The same US that was for a long time riding the highest part of the COVID train despite being the last to be hit?
> EU bureaucracy trying to nickel and dime vaccine makers
Being pissed at the very same pharmaceutical companies you gave billions to research a vaccine, now trying to pretend it never happened and didn't help, and trying to do something about it, is so 2019.
> The US and other Asian countries have these issues with birthrates as well but they do have economies that are innovative
The only thing that matters is innovation and building Twitter or TickTok. Never-mind other things like making sure people don't die of diabetes, or non-computer related industries like aeronautic, nuclear, automotive, and others in which Europe is still very much relevant.
> Prediction: by 2040 Europe will be in really bad shape [..] I don't see it surviving in its current form for another 20-30 years.
The extreme capitalism going on in the US, on the other hand, is working great, and can last forever. We're not all going to our doom.
> I think Europe needs to look long and hard in the mirror and realize that most of its policies are not working
Because for sure all the policies that lead to people not having any sort of medical coverage, bills $200 for insulin vials that cost a couple $ to make, produces electricity mainly by burning stuff, has one of the highest murdering rate of any develop country, the highest incarceration rate of the world, has police randomly kill people in the street because their color was suspect, has its policies figured out.
> a failed covid-19 vaccine rollout
Wait, are you living in the US? The same US that was for a long time riding the highest part of the COVID train despite being the last to be hit?
> EU bureaucracy trying to nickel and dime vaccine makers
Being pissed at the very same pharmaceutical companies you gave billions to research a vaccine, now trying to pretend it never happened and didn't help, and trying to do something about it, is so 2019.
> The US and other Asian countries have these issues with birthrates as well but they do have economies that are innovative
The only thing that matters is innovation and building Twitter or TickTok. Never-mind other things like making sure people don't die of diabetes, or non-computer related industries like aeronautic, nuclear, automotive, and others in which Europe is still very much relevant.
> Prediction: by 2040 Europe will be in really bad shape [..] I don't see it surviving in its current form for another 20-30 years.
The extreme capitalism going on in the US, on the other hand, is working great, and can last forever. We're not all going to our doom.
I never said anything about the US system being all flowers and roses, my main critique is the EU system is not working in its current form, let me give you citations as you are just throwing unrelated stuff out about the US's shortcomings and not actually citing any of my issues with the EU which are very apparent.
> a failed covid-19 vaccine rollout [1]
[1] - https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/17/opinion/europe-vaccines-c...
and https://www.statista.com/chart/24471/covid-19-vaccine-doses-...
> EU bureaucracy trying to nickel and dime vaccine makers
The effective mrna vaccines(moderna/pfizer), and non-mrna(JnJ) were funded under operation warp speed in the US, and when the vaccine makers were negotiating with the EU, the EU tried to get absolute rock bottom prices which led to shortages and needless deaths[2].
[2] - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8426978/
and https://unherd.com/2021/02/why-the-eu-lost-the-vaccine-war/
> The US and other Asian countries have these issues with birthrates as well but they do have economies that are innovative
Because Germany closing all of its clean nuclear power plants is innovative? [3]
[3] - https://www.cnbc.com/2023/04/18/germany-shuts-down-last-nucl...
You mentioned diabetes like it isn't prevalent in the EU, well lets debunk that quickly[4], the UK, Germany and Italy all had more diabetes deaths than the US(all data from 2021):
[4] - https://www.statista.com/statistics/1081226/diabetes-related...
and for the US - https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/diabetes.htm
> a failed covid-19 vaccine rollout [1]
[1] - https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/17/opinion/europe-vaccines-c...
and https://www.statista.com/chart/24471/covid-19-vaccine-doses-...
> EU bureaucracy trying to nickel and dime vaccine makers
The effective mrna vaccines(moderna/pfizer), and non-mrna(JnJ) were funded under operation warp speed in the US, and when the vaccine makers were negotiating with the EU, the EU tried to get absolute rock bottom prices which led to shortages and needless deaths[2].
[2] - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8426978/
and https://unherd.com/2021/02/why-the-eu-lost-the-vaccine-war/
> The US and other Asian countries have these issues with birthrates as well but they do have economies that are innovative
Because Germany closing all of its clean nuclear power plants is innovative? [3]
[3] - https://www.cnbc.com/2023/04/18/germany-shuts-down-last-nucl...
You mentioned diabetes like it isn't prevalent in the EU, well lets debunk that quickly[4], the UK, Germany and Italy all had more diabetes deaths than the US(all data from 2021):
[4] - https://www.statista.com/statistics/1081226/diabetes-related...
and for the US - https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/diabetes.htm
The average American has the same life expectancy as the people from the shittiest and most impoverished part of my European country. The problem with US health and healthcare is real and much worse than in Europe.
err.. looking at data shows average life expectancy is actually higher in the US than the average in the Europe(not defending the US health care system here!):
US - 79.11 years, source - https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/USA/united-states/life...
Europe - 79.09 years, source - https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/eur/europe/life-expect...
US - 79.11 years, source - https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/USA/united-states/life...
Europe - 79.09 years, source - https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/eur/europe/life-expect...
source: https://www.ft.com/content/653bbb26-8a22-4db3-b43d-c34a0b774...
But yes if we want to strictly compare literally all of Europe with all of the USA then we have to get into the business of debating the merits of the Russian and Azerbaijani healthcare systems. No thanks.
But yes if we want to strictly compare literally all of Europe with all of the USA then we have to get into the business of debating the merits of the Russian and Azerbaijani healthcare systems. No thanks.
ARM Holdings and ASML are both European
Or ASML, or Biontech.
If anything, Spotify is a glorified streaming webapp. I wouldn't call that high tech.
If anything, Spotify is a glorified streaming webapp. I wouldn't call that high tech.
I wonder what % of this value is based on luxury perception versus manufacturing assets, real estate, etc.
Does the idea of luxury ever change rapidly?
Does the idea of luxury ever change rapidly?
A look at some of their financials has the trading at 32 times earnings where Apple trades at 28 and Coca-Cola trades at 29. So for luxury that doesn’t seem too high and from the list I have heard of a number of their brands. There is certainly value in a brand name, which is why I used two examples of other known brands in other industries. This lvmh company though is also growing at almost 20% per quarter. My guess also is during a mild recession luxury goods tend to hold up. While I wouldn’t buy it myself because I know nothing of luxury goods based on the businesses I see listed not all in clothing which I had assumed I would say the brand names may not be as significantly valued as one might think.
> My guess also is during a mild recession luxury goods tend to hold up.
Not sure about this. Luxury goods stocks are famously cyclical, and tends to be something people drop quickly if they cannot afford during business downturns, as other more vital purchases takes preference. At least compared to stocks for big general stores etc.
Not sure about this. Luxury goods stocks are famously cyclical, and tends to be something people drop quickly if they cannot afford during business downturns, as other more vital purchases takes preference. At least compared to stocks for big general stores etc.
LVMH owns literally hundreds of brands, many of them far from luxury (Birkenstock, Sephora, Fenty, etc). If one brand goes out of fashion, they'll have two ready to replace it and the budget to buy three more.
Birkenstock is absolutely a luxury brand, just like Nike.
This could be applied to (some of ?) the tech companies as well.
Meta valuation is strongly associated with the network effect of its apps. The value of the actual assets (technologies, data-centers ...) is far lower than the market cap.
Creating a FB and Instagram 1:1 clone would significantly cost less than the current $500B market value.
Meta valuation is strongly associated with the network effect of its apps. The value of the actual assets (technologies, data-centers ...) is far lower than the market cap.
Creating a FB and Instagram 1:1 clone would significantly cost less than the current $500B market value.
If you want an easy way to go long (or short) increased global economic inequality (Gini index) that seems to be the most liquid option.
It also speaks volumes about the true role of Europe in today's global economic landscape: recycling its long tradition of aristocratic affluence and "bon viveur" know-how to feed the needs of the global nouveau riche.
It also speaks volumes about the true role of Europe in today's global economic landscape: recycling its long tradition of aristocratic affluence and "bon viveur" know-how to feed the needs of the global nouveau riche.
The country I currently live in - the United Kingdom - even got a nickname because of this: The World's Butler.
The reasoning, as far as I understand it, is that the UK gained a notoriety in the 1900's and blair era for always doing (often dirty) favours for the countries that actually do stuff, just like a butler.
The reasoning, as far as I understand it, is that the UK gained a notoriety in the 1900's and blair era for always doing (often dirty) favours for the countries that actually do stuff, just like a butler.
Just read Moneyland and Butler to the World by Oliver Bullough. Nothing to do with the Blair era -- watch the The Spider's Web on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYfnkLurLA8
Using foreign language phrases to show off your knowledge and savvy would work a lot better if you had them right. It's "bon vivant", not "bon viveur".
> It's "bon vivant", not "bon viveur"
According to Wiktionary bon viveur is a valid [English] synonym of bon vivant[0] although noted as "pseudo French" in wiki[1].
[0] https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/bon_viveur
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bon_viveur
Edit: Clarified that this is an English Language synonym after astute observations from Francophone commenters
According to Wiktionary bon viveur is a valid [English] synonym of bon vivant[0] although noted as "pseudo French" in wiki[1].
[0] https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/bon_viveur
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bon_viveur
Edit: Clarified that this is an English Language synonym after astute observations from Francophone commenters
The only reference in that wiktionary article is a Polish dictionary. The Wikipedia one has no references. I'm French, and I can tell you with confidence that someone saying "bon viveur" would be met with laughter and contempt.
The GP is bashing Europe for "recycling its long tradition of aristocratic affluence" but is at the same time using fancy foreign phrases -- "bon viveur", "nouveau riche"... What is be the reason? Well, to show off and lend credibility to the bashing: "see, I'm part of the circle too, I know the shibboleths; my criticism has more weight because it comes from an insider", is the subliminal message. Using the phrase wrong just looks foolish in these circumstances. Like a child who learned a complicated word and tries to impress with it, but uses it wrong.
The GP is bashing Europe for "recycling its long tradition of aristocratic affluence" but is at the same time using fancy foreign phrases -- "bon viveur", "nouveau riche"... What is be the reason? Well, to show off and lend credibility to the bashing: "see, I'm part of the circle too, I know the shibboleths; my criticism has more weight because it comes from an insider", is the subliminal message. Using the phrase wrong just looks foolish in these circumstances. Like a child who learned a complicated word and tries to impress with it, but uses it wrong.
I can't comment to how one would use that phrase in French, but in English it does seem to be a correct synonym of the French loan-phrase [0][1] - especially in British English.
Looking on n-grams it seems to have been used since the mid 19th century. Interestingly in en-GB it was even more popular than bon vivant in the 70s and 80s[2].
I have no opinion on the GP's original use of the phrase, but I don't think noting that a phrase which evolved in a different language to its origin is now different to the original shows too much.
[0] https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bon%20viveur
[1] https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/bon-viv...
[2] https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=bon+viveur%2Cb...
Looking on n-grams it seems to have been used since the mid 19th century. Interestingly in en-GB it was even more popular than bon vivant in the 70s and 80s[2].
I have no opinion on the GP's original use of the phrase, but I don't think noting that a phrase which evolved in a different language to its origin is now different to the original shows too much.
[0] https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bon%20viveur
[1] https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/bon-viv...
[2] https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=bon+viveur%2Cb...
I'm not sure using a dated synonym that was only popular in British English is better.
French here, never heard someone say "bon viveur", pretty sure if you said that in a conversation you would be corrected. "bon vivant" is very common.
The history of LVMH and how Bernard Arnault put the group together is quite fascinating. This is a great book about the modern luxury industry
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deluxe:_How_Luxury_Lost_Its_Lu...
I'm tired of fancy French luxurious stories. Looking at happenings in France, the French are tired of them as well.
Would anybody disagree that LVMH's success is majority (50%+) driven by "cognitive dissonance"?
> One of the key drivers for people from modest financial backgrounds to spend on luxury goods is aspirational buying. Owning an item from a prestigious brand like LVMH is perceived as a status symbol, and it allows individuals to feel like they belong to a higher social class.
If you come from a modest financial background (aka, probably behind the curve on retirement/investment/emergency savings/debt/net worth goals), then dream of an expensive item you can't really afford so that it will make you feel richer than you are, while the cost of the item sets you back FURTHER on a goal you were already behind on...
What % of LVMH buyers have a less than $10k net worth? What's the breakdown of their revenue/sales from "people who are ultra-wealthy and can actually afford a $100k Birkin bag" versus "people who shouldn't be buying any Gucci/LV $300-$1.2k products whatsoever from a financial well-being perspective"
> One of the key drivers for people from modest financial backgrounds to spend on luxury goods is aspirational buying. Owning an item from a prestigious brand like LVMH is perceived as a status symbol, and it allows individuals to feel like they belong to a higher social class.
If you come from a modest financial background (aka, probably behind the curve on retirement/investment/emergency savings/debt/net worth goals), then dream of an expensive item you can't really afford so that it will make you feel richer than you are, while the cost of the item sets you back FURTHER on a goal you were already behind on...
What % of LVMH buyers have a less than $10k net worth? What's the breakdown of their revenue/sales from "people who are ultra-wealthy and can actually afford a $100k Birkin bag" versus "people who shouldn't be buying any Gucci/LV $300-$1.2k products whatsoever from a financial well-being perspective"
Actually rich people probably look down on people with LV bags, so you're really trying to convince people poorer than you that you are richer than you are, to what purpose? Really rich people have tailor made clothes without labels, or so I've heard.
I recently listened to the Acquired episode (a podcast) on LVMH [1] and would recommend it to anybody who knows hardly anything about LVMH (as I did before).
[1] https://www.acquired.fm/episodes/lvmh
[1] https://www.acquired.fm/episodes/lvmh
[deleted]
All that NFT money had to go somewhere...
Stimulus money! Every time you walk past a LMVH store these days, there's a line of people waiting to enter... Maybe the costs of luxury goods hasn't kept up with income growth?
Plug for a fantastic documentary on the rise of LVMH: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt22046582/
A company selling luxury Veblen BS mostly made in sweatshops outside of Europe. Fitting.
Can't vouch for the whole group but the outside Europe part is 100% not true for Louis Vuitton which is by far the biggest brand in the group. Obviously not true for the wines and spirits and retailing too.
> The Louis Vuitton leather goods collections are exclusively produced in our workshops located in France, Spain, Italy and the United States.
https://en.louisvuitton.com/eng-nl/faq/products/eu-where-are...
Edit: Of course my Europe comment is not quite right as some made in the US too.
> The Louis Vuitton leather goods collections are exclusively produced in our workshops located in France, Spain, Italy and the United States.
https://en.louisvuitton.com/eng-nl/faq/products/eu-where-are...
Edit: Of course my Europe comment is not quite right as some made in the US too.
Louis Vuitton brand alone might not, but LVMH is an umbrella brand whose brands do manufacture in China.
Even for Louis Vuitton, having them in Europe is about sweatshop-washing, plus some nice "main" workshops to show to the press, Potemkin village style.
And such wordings "The Louis Vuitton leather goods collections are exclusively produced in our workshops located in France, Spain, Italy and the United States" are worth almost nothing, given how lax the law is for businesses saying such things. There are "percentages" allowed (if X% is being made in Y, you can still call the product made in Z, even if it's the hardest/more work intensive part), there are tricks like naming where you do the final assembly, even mere final packaging in some cases.
And you can always just recreate nice sweatshop style environments domestically, complete with migrant labor, below minimum wage, threats, and so on:
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/boohoo-leice...
https://us.fashionnetwork.com/news/made-in-italy-by-chinese-...
Not that it's better for other brands:
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/04/16/the-chinese-wo...
https://ameli-zurich.com/en/blogs/ameli/made-in-italy-vs-100...
Even for Louis Vuitton, having them in Europe is about sweatshop-washing, plus some nice "main" workshops to show to the press, Potemkin village style.
And such wordings "The Louis Vuitton leather goods collections are exclusively produced in our workshops located in France, Spain, Italy and the United States" are worth almost nothing, given how lax the law is for businesses saying such things. There are "percentages" allowed (if X% is being made in Y, you can still call the product made in Z, even if it's the hardest/more work intensive part), there are tricks like naming where you do the final assembly, even mere final packaging in some cases.
And you can always just recreate nice sweatshop style environments domestically, complete with migrant labor, below minimum wage, threats, and so on:
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/boohoo-leice...
https://us.fashionnetwork.com/news/made-in-italy-by-chinese-...
Not that it's better for other brands:
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/04/16/the-chinese-wo...
https://ameli-zurich.com/en/blogs/ameli/made-in-italy-vs-100...
I personally know some subcontractors for LVMH who work on the pieces with complex perforation. They receive the leather from Italy and everyone handling it is effectively in France with the salary matching a company using state of the art processing. Most of their other customers are actually industrial companies.
What you are peddling in this comment thread is utter garbage and so untrue it’s laughable. It’s clear you have an axe to grind but very little idea of what you are actually talking about.
What you are peddling in this comment thread is utter garbage and so untrue it’s laughable. It’s clear you have an axe to grind but very little idea of what you are actually talking about.
Yes, I'm sure your personal relation to those subcontractors (or specific "complex perforation" parts nonetheless) trumps the New Yorker and Guardian and others reporting.
Thanks for the ad hominem and rude tone by the way.
Here's how "laughable" it is: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/jun/17/revealed-th...
Thanks for the ad hominem and rude tone by the way.
Here's how "laughable" it is: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/jun/17/revealed-th...
They trump nothing. The article you quote merely point that part of the production is done in Romania. I am eagerly awaiting for you to support your claims about sweat shops and South East Asia. That's probably going to be hard of course considering it's complete non sense.
> Thanks for the ad hominem and rude tone by the way.
Entierely deserved. Being an idiot is one thing, insulting an entire industry you clearly have no idea about another. I have no respect for you and you are not showing me anything which would convince me I should.
> Thanks for the ad hominem and rude tone by the way.
Entierely deserved. Being an idiot is one thing, insulting an entire industry you clearly have no idea about another. I have no respect for you and you are not showing me anything which would convince me I should.
None of those articles mention LV at all.
Neither does TFA or my initial comment. This is about LVMH not VH alone.
Not that LV has a much better history:
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/jun/17/revealed-th...
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/20/fashion/italy-luxury-shad...
Bonus LVMH:
"The report also found that the world’s largest luxury brands are among the worst offenders in addressing the worse forms of exploitation in their supply chains, with an average score of 31 out of 100. French luxury goods company Kering (owner of the Alexander McQueen and Gucci labels) scored 41 out of 100, while LVMH (owner of the Christian Dior and Louis Vuitton labels) scored 19 out of 100" https://www.aljazeera.com/economy/2021/7/14/are-your-favouri...
Not that LV has a much better history:
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/jun/17/revealed-th...
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/20/fashion/italy-luxury-shad...
Bonus LVMH:
"The report also found that the world’s largest luxury brands are among the worst offenders in addressing the worse forms of exploitation in their supply chains, with an average score of 31 out of 100. French luxury goods company Kering (owner of the Alexander McQueen and Gucci labels) scored 41 out of 100, while LVMH (owner of the Christian Dior and Louis Vuitton labels) scored 19 out of 100" https://www.aljazeera.com/economy/2021/7/14/are-your-favouri...
> mostly made in sweatshops outside of Europe
Would you like to provide a link to support this claim in your OP rather than links about Europe or supply chain transparency.
Would you like to provide a link to support this claim in your OP rather than links about Europe or supply chain transparency.
There is a whole investigation showing how their workshops are hell for workers.
https://www.challenges.fr/economie/ce-cash-investigation-qui...
rough translation:
> Workers' testimonies of this company, for the most part immigrants, are overwhelming: fingers cut by the machines, work without a break of 13 hours a day, entire months of unpaid salaries, multiplication of work accidents... and a local work inspection who doesn't give a shit.
boycott them
https://www.challenges.fr/economie/ce-cash-investigation-qui...
rough translation:
> Workers' testimonies of this company, for the most part immigrants, are overwhelming: fingers cut by the machines, work without a break of 13 hours a day, entire months of unpaid salaries, multiplication of work accidents... and a local work inspection who doesn't give a shit.
boycott them
Sure, but the comment you're replying to was not saying it's a wonderful place to work, they were saying that the initial statement of "made in sweatshops outside of Europe" isn't true, which it isn't. No matter if the workplace is terrible or not, it's not outside of Europe.
Great consolation.
it's not LVMH in this case but Kering (another French luxury giant)
Not sure if it is still current, but Louis Vuitton has a past: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/jun/17/revealed-th...
Louis Vuitton (the handbag company that composes the L and V in LVMH) runs a 100,000 sq ft factory in Texas: https://www.americanmanufacturing.org/blog/louis-vuitton-ope...
I wonder if they stretch those definitions like many brands do by manufacturing in Guam, Puerto Rico, etc as "made in USA"? (Which are, of course, American territories, but play by very different labor laws, tax regimes, etc.)
What is "fitting"?
The clothes obviously...
Probably that most of Europe’s wealth came from its colonial ambitions of exploitation and extraction and so it’s fitting their largest company continues this European tradition.
Or possibly a comment on how Europe is unable to innovate so it makes sense their largest company relies on old, traditional perceptions of “European luxury” in craftsmanship when in reality it’s just outsourcing to the same factories as everyone else. But vapid people still fall for it.
Or possibly a comment on how Europe is unable to innovate so it makes sense their largest company relies on old, traditional perceptions of “European luxury” in craftsmanship when in reality it’s just outsourcing to the same factories as everyone else. But vapid people still fall for it.
Mostly meant it the latter way, but now that you mention it, the first understanding works too :-)
iPhone?
Most of the stuff you buy is too
I was worried for a moment that the rich weren’t going to get even more obscenely rich this year. Whew! This is great news.
The wealth will trickle down to people suffering 10-40% food and housing inflation any time now.
The wealth will trickle down to people suffering 10-40% food and housing inflation any time now.
The wealth disparity has been absurd for years but after the pandemic, it's become obscene.
Anyone with any kind of asset made out like bandits. Meanwhile, bottom 50%ile without homes or stocks or crypto were told to come into work because their work was "essential" while also watching their purchasing power drop every week.
Anyone with any kind of asset made out like bandits. Meanwhile, bottom 50%ile without homes or stocks or crypto were told to come into work because their work was "essential" while also watching their purchasing power drop every week.
> Anyone with any kind of asset made out like bandits.
Depends entirely on the asset class. A lot of people lost a ton of money on pandemic-related stocks (pharma), crypto, real estate, landlords, banks... the only ones making utter bank are those profiting off the Russian invasion and those who can raise prices at will due to inelastic demand (basically, supermarkets).
Depends entirely on the asset class. A lot of people lost a ton of money on pandemic-related stocks (pharma), crypto, real estate, landlords, banks... the only ones making utter bank are those profiting off the Russian invasion and those who can raise prices at will due to inelastic demand (basically, supermarkets).
Should have clarified - I mean anyone who owned any existing assets before the pandemic.
Though honestly, unless you were buying absolute junk, you’re likely still up a great deal. Bitcoin is up over 20k from the pandemic lows, SPX is up 77%, even stocks that got hammered like Meta are up from the pandemic bottom.
Anyone who lost money during this period likely had themselves to blame for not exercising basic risk management.
Though honestly, unless you were buying absolute junk, you’re likely still up a great deal. Bitcoin is up over 20k from the pandemic lows, SPX is up 77%, even stocks that got hammered like Meta are up from the pandemic bottom.
Anyone who lost money during this period likely had themselves to blame for not exercising basic risk management.
Well, if sales rose 17% and the inflation is 40%, they’re not really getting richer.
It’s also apparently a luxury goods company, so it’s somebody buying a Louis Vutton handbag and paying for somebody else’s salary.
Whether or not you think that situation is fair, this is a clear case of a company facilitating the transfer of money from the well-off to the less well-off via salaries and taxes.
It’s also apparently a luxury goods company, so it’s somebody buying a Louis Vutton handbag and paying for somebody else’s salary.
Whether or not you think that situation is fair, this is a clear case of a company facilitating the transfer of money from the well-off to the less well-off via salaries and taxes.
Of course pension funds are a big part of any large-cap company’s shareholder base. But I wouldn’t be surprised if on a proportional basis LVMH’s customers are less well off than their shareholders.
That’s quite possible, but the stock price rose along with increased revenue. Revenue is used to pay salaries, and it‘s also spent on taxes at a higher rate than in the U.S.
So in this case, consumption by a wealthy customer base benefits a broader population as well. The wealth actually does “trickle down” to an extent.
So in this case, consumption by a wealthy customer base benefits a broader population as well. The wealth actually does “trickle down” to an extent.
[deleted]
You're old and obnoxiously selfish, Europe. Hopefully immigrants from the boats will take care of the elderly, because younger Europeans have enough.