China's Regulatory Crackdown: Opportunities for CCP-Aligned Startups

Recent Shifts in China's Tech Sector

Observing the Chinese technology sector in the past week has proven to be quite insightful. The Chinese government has actively intervened in entire industries, including edtech, and simultaneously imposed restrictions on individual companies like Tencent and Meituan. This represents a widespread initiative to reshape the nation’s technological environment.

The overall financial impact is readily apparent. For instance, the NASDAQ Golden Dragon China Index, which monitors U.S.-listed companies operating within China, experienced a decline from its 52-week peak of 20,893.02 earlier this year to 10,672.37 yesterday.

A comprehensive assessment of the financial repercussions can also be achieved by tracking the diminishing value of various Chinese technology companies, both domestically and on international exchanges.

Regulatory Changes and Their Origins

Many observers and analysts connect the cancellation of the Ant Group IPO last year, the subsequent challenges faced by entrepreneur Jack Ma, and the recent announcements from the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) regulatory agencies. This connection is logical.

The operational environment in China is undergoing transformation, and the regulatory framework governing technology-related activities within the country will not revert to its previous state.

The Exchange provides insights into startups, markets, and finance.

Access it daily on Extra Crunch or subscribe to The Exchange newsletter every Saturday.

We previously examined this development, suggesting last week that investment in edtech might decrease if the government proceeded with its plan to mandate nonprofit status for tutoring companies.

The government subsequently implemented this plan, and went further, prohibiting the formation of new tutoring companies, blocking their ability to go public, and restricting access to foreign capital. The measures were extensive, as detailed by Natasha Mascarenhas.

Implications for Startups

Does this signal unfavorable conditions for startups? If regulatory changes can curtail investment in edtech, what implications might arise for other technology-driven sectors?

Constructing a negative outlook is relatively straightforward. However, a more compelling argument suggests that by addressing the dominance of China’s largest technology firms, opportunities may emerge for smaller companies to gain market share.

This could potentially create a more level playing field and foster increased competition within the Chinese technology landscape.

Addressing Rent-Seeking Behavior

A strategy for curtailing rent-seeking involves breaking up monopolies, or reducing the undue influence of established companies that exploit their market position. Recent developments concerning Tencent Music serve as a pertinent illustration. Facing increased regulatory scrutiny, the company has been directed to relinquish its exclusive music streaming rights.

This action by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has the potential to foster a more competitive music streaming landscape within China. Increased competition is anticipated to result in lower prices for consumers.

For Tencent, this represents a setback, as it will no longer be able to utilize its dominance to control the market. Market control directly opposes market competition, and the latter is demonstrably more beneficial for both economic growth and consumer welfare. This instance highlights how certain of China’s recent regulatory adjustments could contribute to a more competitive marketplace.

KPMG’s Perspective on Venture Capital

KPMG echoes this sentiment in its Q2 2021 venture capital digest, specifically regarding the Chinese startup market.

This situation presents a dual effect. While heightened competition should yield improved results for consumers, as previously mentioned, venture capitalists generally prefer to invest in companies poised for market leadership.

Venture investors typically achieve substantial returns when their investments establish a dominant position within an industry – consider Google in search or Amazon in e-commerce. Investing in a company expected to simply survive amongst numerous competitors is unlikely to generate the significant profits that drive the venture capital model.

The Future of Tech Giants in China

The CCP’s approach to the next wave of emerging technology companies in China will be crucial. Will these new entities be permitted to grow into substantial forces? Or will their growth be deliberately restricted, making them easier to manage but also limiting their potential value?

From a venture capital standpoint, this raises concerns about increased investment risk. This heightened risk is not favorable for overall investment growth, even if opportunities arise from the weakening of existing dominant players.

• Rent-seeking refers to efforts to increase one's share of existing wealth without creating new wealth.
• Breaking up monopolies can foster a more competitive market.
• Venture capitalists favor investments with the potential for market dominance.

Understanding China's Selective Approach to Technology Regulation

The impact of regulatory changes in China isn't uniform across all technology sectors, as highlighted by Noah Smith, a columnist for Bloomberg and writer on Substack. His recent analysis provides valuable insight into this nuanced situation.

Smith references a 2020 letter from Dan Wang of Gavekal Dragonomics and Bloomberg, which identifies “hard tech” as the primary area of focus for China’s strategic shift.

This offers a crucial clarification regarding the current climate.

Evidence suggests the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is prepared to restrict industries deemed misaligned with its objectives, such as edtech. Furthermore, it’s demonstrating a willingness to regulate dominant consumer tech companies, like Tencent, even after previously allowing them substantial market control.

However, there are no indications of impending restrictions on companies specializing in artificial intelligence or semiconductor manufacturing.

Therefore, the CCP’s actions regarding technology aren’t intended to stifle the entire sector, but rather to constrain specific segments. This directly impacts the venture capital landscape in China.

The Chinese venture capital market isn’t facing complete collapse, but investment in certain areas – particularly consumer technology – is likely to diminish. Conversely, “hard tech” and industries aligned with the CCP’s national industrial objectives may remain attractive for investment.

This could lead to a concentration of resources and funding in sectors prioritized by Beijing, while entrepreneurs in regulated industries experience reduced capital and diminished opportunities. Essentially, centralized planning is increasingly influencing business direction.

Whether this situation represents a net benefit is debatable. It appears to be a new operational reality, potentially freezing billions of dollars invested in companies operating in disfavored industries. However, there may be some positive outcomes for consumer choice.

This analysis is an ongoing assessment of a dynamic situation. It appears the Chinese venture capital market, which once surpassed U.S. totals in 2017-2018, has entered a distinct new phase.