Anyway, my comment was in response to the extreme comment (parent) about how all rich countries became rich using fossil fuels - implying that that's the more or less only way to transition from poor to rich. I think it's important to note that that's not necessarily the case. You don't need to destroy the environment to go from poor to rich, even though a lot of countries historically have done it that way (also noteworthy that they did it without knowing about the consequences for the environment).

A bad manager/boss pressuring the team to make the wrong decisions - yes, in that scenario the main problem is the boss.

Unfortunately, in my experience, there's often talk about one situation without the other (at least portrayed as the only one). Many times it feels like it's too divert blame and guilt, and to defend what is really the opposite situation. Really makes discussing this topic more toxic and a lot less valuable - much more interesting to discuss the nuances!

Är the same time, MS revenues are looking real good, causing the stock price to go up. It's a win win win maybe win huge situation.

2/9 on the board are Chinese (same as Swedes). The rest are westerners.

Volvo produces more cars in Sweden than Apple produces iPhones etc in the US.

But you are correct that ownership of the company is majority Chinese (Li Shufu/Geely specifically) and they can control a lot.

Apple's ownership is more muddy, since the largest owners are big institutional (US) owners - mostly representing owners from who knows where through big funds (including index funds). I think it's fair to say that Apple is owned very globally. In that sense it's not US controlled, but globally controlled.

I think Volvo is still very Swedish, including its products, but also heavily Chinese influenced (and trending up) due to market challenges.

There's probably still some value in associating a large multi national company to a specific country and attributing it certain things due to that, but with these big companies it's becoming less so and definitely more complex. But saying that Volvo is fully Chinese and not Swedish anymore? That seems like fooling oneself.

Source: I know a person who does tech DD for investors, and I've also been asked this question in DD processes.

Quite a challenge with heavy duty trucks shipping tens of tons of stuff, but anyway.

It's sad that so many seems to fall into the trap of 2).

(I've done both types of development for 20+ years)

I guess it's like automated driving a few years back - monitored by humans able to take over control. Step by step it'll become better and better until good enough for handle certain chosen areas.

Funny you mention; There are multiple companies in Sweden working on AI/ML based accounting. It's not so different from AI/ML based automated driving.

I fear this will be more and more of a problem with the TikTok/instant gratification/attention is only good for less than 10 seconds -generation. Deep thinking has great value in many situations.

"Funnily" enough, I see management more and more reward this behavior. Speed is treated as vastly more important than driving in the right direction, long-term thinking. Quarterly reports, etc etc.

According to ChatGPT avg revenue of H&M stores in Sweden is 5.4 MEUR. If I remember correctly from my market research (I co-founded a Swedish SaaS targeting fashion brands) there at least 100 with more revenue then that - and they're definitely making most revenue outside of Sweden. To name a few; Djerf Avenue, Filippa K, Stronger, ICIW, Peak Performance, CHIMI eyewear, Tiger of Sweden, J Lindeberg... Heck, I can even name drop a bunch doing footwear more or less only; Axel Arigato, Icebug, Björn Borg, Eytys...

But yeah, most brands are doing less. It's a pyramid. But no, Swedish fashion brands (excl H&M) are definitely not irrelevant.