Thanks for that info I’m not familiar with non tech based firm performance and I should have been more specific. For Tech, the % gap between real and perceived

Thanks for that info I’m not familiar with non tech based firm performance and I should have been more specific. For Tech, the % gap between real and perceived opportunity is far wider than any other country in Asia Pacific. Note that I worked for NASDAQ listed companies with Sarbanes Oxley compliance requirements. A large % of opportunities outright non-compliant (e.g., wanting a Porsche). Another frequent client requirement was warranty terms on consulting engagements. That might expire 12-24 months after service completion. So you can’t recognise revenue until then. And finally a signed SOW and terms carries some legal gravity in countries outside China. Scope creep is a huge problem in China, good luck with change requests or referring them to the SOW. Total opportunities - non compliant deals - delayed revrec deals (or similar issues) - scope creep = minuscule %. Also I’d argue that revenue and EBIT are better indicators of actual opportunity than total foreign investment. In firms like mine, China is a “strategic market” where investments are being made because these conditions may change one day. If your competitor is present when that happens and you are not, then HQ will think you failed.