24 ms·

I don't really know what I'd do in a leadership role at Blizzard or the NBA. On one hand, both companies have acted with bounded rationality: China is a huge m

I don't really know what I'd do in a leadership role at Blizzard or the NBA. On one hand, both companies have acted with bounded rationality: China is a huge market that can drive major growth. On the other: the more companies develop market share in China, the more the Chinese government can dictate how they act. In some sense, non-Chinese companies become de-facto arms of the Chinese government.

ivalm 7y ago
NBA acted fine. They did not punish or discipline the Rocket's manager.
- cwkoss 7y ago
  On the other hand, Lebron James' statement last week sounded he was reading directly from something written by a CCP propaganda minister. "When you're misinformed or not educated about something, you never know the ramifications of what can happen." https://twitter.com/Rachel__Nichols/status/1183932275072720896 https://twitter.com/Rachel__Nichols/status/11839322750727208...
  - yourbandsucks 7y ago
    Is it within the realm of possibility that the vast majority of Americans are in fact uneducated and misinformed about what daily life in China is like? Or even the broad strokes of history there? What % of Americans could even tell you the names of the last 3 dynasties?
    - kickopotomus 7y ago
      > What % of Americans could even tell you the names of the last 3 dynasties? What percent of Chinese could name the first 3 American Presidents? Who cares and how does that have anything to do with the modern political climate? The average American does not need to be aware of the country's history to disagree with the actions and posturing of the current government.
      - yourbandsucks 7y ago
        I wouldn't say that Chinese should hold strong opinions on how we run our country, either. But for what it's worth, the average educated Chinese knows far more about America than vice-versa. These threads are great evidence.
      - bllguo 7y ago
        You _absolutely_ should have an awareness of culture and history in order to offer meaningful criticism. Flip it around with gun control.. The rest of the world by-and-large does not agree with American gun policy. But how seriously are Americans going to take the criticism of people who don't have an understanding of American revolutionary history? If you actually care about effecting change you definitely need to understand the context.
        kickopotomus 7y ago
        Sure, lets flip it around for gun control. The same argument applies. The rest of the developed world is absolutely correct not to agree with American gun policy. It's dangerously antiquated and has failed to adapt to changing times and improvements in technology. Other western countries have experienced revolutions and years of conflict far exceeding that of the US, yet the US is the only one to cling to guns so tightly. History is meant to be studied so that we do not repeat past mistakes. It is not meant to be used an excuse to continue to make them. Also, you absolutely do not need to be versed in Chinese history to disagree with forced organ harvesting, forced abortion, "re-education" (read internment) camps for Muslims, mass government surveillance, social credit systems, etc.
  - bllguo 7y ago
    what is the rationalization for why that quote is so terrible to you?
    - rkuykendall-com 7y ago
      I believe you're either misinformed or not really educated on the situation. When you say things or do things, you know people that can be affected by it, and the families of those individuals and everyone that can be affected by it. Sometimes things can be challenging as well. ( see, this works as a nonsense dismissive remark to anyone or anything )
      - hurtmyknee 7y ago
        Additionally, it's the hypocrisy of a global icon. There is a cinematic in the video game NBA2k that truly puts it into light [1]. James' production company helped write and produce it, they're his words. It hurts, and is terribly disappointing. [1] https://streamable.com/jxkz0 https://streamable.com/jxkz0
      - bllguo 7y ago
        I don't see.. I genuinely believe that people should not be so eager to form opinions, that issues are always more complex than they seem, and that people should be mindful of the consequences. That's what the quote means to me at face value, so I am interested in seeing why it is being singled out as "something written by a CCP propaganda minister."
        deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
    - hrktb 7y ago
      I guess it comes out so terrible because Lebron has been very vocal on many other civil matters, and has labelled himself as someone who speaks his beliefs. From his past positions people would have expected him to be pro-HK, instead he’s asking people to basically shut up. Him bringing warnings that all of this could hurt financially is the most unexpected angle to most of his followers.
Rebelgecko 7y ago
Honestly I think the NBA bungled their immediate response in the hours right after the tweet but has done a good job making up for it. China put direct pressure on the NBA commissioner to fire Morey, but he's refused to punish him at all, even though it will certainly hurt the NBA's bottom line. Supposedly teams are planning on figuring out how to handle a highly reduced salary cap next year, potentially on the order of 10% less due to lost China revenue
- jimbob45 7y ago
  I would heavily dispute your claim that their refusal to fire has hurt their bottom line. They had two options: fire or don't fire. In both cases, they were going to lose customers for their choice. I would assert that this choice lost them fewer customers than the other choice.
  - Rebelgecko 7y ago
    Firing, sure. But they could have also condemned the comments without firing him which would've helped the Chinese revenues while having less of an impact elsewhere than firing him would have.
- paulddraper 7y ago
  Most people disagree with NBA assuming that players/coaches are explicitly or tactility not allowed by the NBA to support Hong Kong. (Which is why none have, outside the Rockets, manager.) IDK if that is correct or not though.
kulahan 7y ago
I'm curious what actions a government would need to take before you think it's irrational to for a company to support them. Between the reported organ harvesting, re-education camps, and massive invasion of privacy, I'd think it would be an easy call at this point. If you're still holding out, where do you personally draw the line? Or at least, where do you think companies should draw the line?
- SirensOfTitan 7y ago
  I used the term "bounded rationality" deliberately. I think companies, chasing growth, ignore the harsh reality of doing business in China long term. Act as an arm of the Chinese Government or China will block you from competing and will just spawn Chinese competitors in your absence (It doesn't even seem like this is a mutually exclusive outcome). Additionally, for each company that defies the Chinese Government, there are many who are very willing to comply. In that vein, I don't understand how the west responds. As I mentioned, the more companies that comply to the sensitivities of the Chinese government, the more China dictates speech well outside of its borders. I'm personally /very/ against the world the Chinese government is building. I worry that their leadership will gradually erode liberalism all across the world. I also feel powerless to do anything other than boycott services and products that don't align with my worldview.
- paulddraper 7y ago
  On the other hand....what can you as a hypothetical company leader do about it? If you were a U.S. citizen who believed that the U.S. government was involved in severely unethical behavior, would you continue to make income and pay taxes? I have no problem with applying lots of pressure to Blizzard, etc. for siding with China. I agree with grandparent that I can't say my decision as an executive would necessarily be different though.
  - tripzilch 7y ago
    So would you do business with North Korea? Iran? Are you evading the question or did you seriously mean to imply that there is literally nothing a country can't do and you'll still go into business with them, no matter how horrendous their actions? I think you might just not realize, or take time to imagine, what these regimes are actually doing to actual human beings. Maybe imagine it's your family, said the wrong thing, gets shackled up, underground, unable to move, injected with weird drugs for a couple of months--just one personal story I heard from an Iran refugee. I asked about his background, I meant engineering or what did he study, got a bit more background than I bargained for. If your decision as an executive would be the same, then I suppose you agree you'd deserve that "applying lots of pressure to" just as much right? Why do it then? So you just get to ignore it and do it regardless? BTW this "pressure" from the other side doesn't quite look like "pressure" but utter disgust in the moral depravity of what people will do for money. If this is your choice, then I know exactly what you are worth as a human being to me. Don't forget to tell your kids their college is paid by torture prisons. oh and IF you were a US citizen who doesn't believe the US government is involved in severely unethical behaviour, gently go fornicate yourself. it's called the CIA Torture Reports, it was a few years ago, and you can't pretend it's optional to believe it exists, because it does. It happened and is happening. I mean seriously, "IF" ??? Are you for real? Sounds like your solution to this ethical dilemma is basically denial.
bsder 7y ago
> I don't really know what I'd do in a leadership role at Blizzard or the NBA. Simple. Keep ... your ... mouth ... shut. Do nothing and let it all pass. Yeah, China gonna China. But if China gets smart, they'll just be quiet and let it pass, too. The fact that everybody has been so heavyhanded has been a wonderful gift to the Hongkongers.
- beart 7y ago
  Are there examples in recent history where China has flipped their stance on something like this? I just feel like they aren't in the business of 'getting smart' in the way you suggest.
  - bsder 7y ago
    > I just feel like they aren't in the business of 'getting smart' in the way you suggest. The problem is that you don't get into Xi Jingping's good graces by being discreetly circumspect. You get into his good graces by being "Decisive!" and "Fixing the problem!" This is almost exactly the wrong thing to do when you are garnering negative PR. So, unless Xi Jingping actively intervenes correctly (and he doesn't seem to understand the correct action, either), the situation is simply going to continue to deteriorate. I've said before, once Xi Jingping took over, I don't fear China as a competitor anymore. China is no longer about "What makes China great." It's about "What make Xi Jingping happy"--those will diverge more and more with time. The worst thing that could happen to China is he lives a long life.
jkachmar 7y ago
I think that these corporate responses can only be thought of as "rational" through a _very_ short-term lens due to the nature of _how_ foreign companies are permitted to operate within China. The CPC explicitly exerts a lot of control over the Chinese market, and they have absolutely no qualms over doing whatever they can to reduce foreign influence and enrich local players (cf. COMAC's C919 development, namely how much of it has been the result of IP theft from foreign partners). So yeah, you can definitely look at "competing" in China as a way to see quarterly growth, but it feels inevitable that any company that gets _real_ traction would be targeted by the CPC in favor of a domestic company that would more directly enrich them/the country. While I can understand the financial motivations for wanting to enter this market, I think this is very different from how most other modern nation-states operate and these responses. Blizzard et al.'s responses definitely smack of corporate greed more than they do of rational action, to me. EDIT: Ah, now that I've posted this I see your comment below where you elucidate a bit on "bounded rationality"; we probably agree, then. I'll leave this up in case it sparks some more interesting commentary from others :)
- plorkyeran 7y ago
  Yeah, the whole notion of "the Chinese market is too big to ignore" carries the assumption that China will allow foreign companies to make money off the Chinese market. It's easy to see why multinationals would assume that as there's been plenty of other markets that were unhappy about American companies pushing their way in but were unable to do anything about that, but China does have a successful track record of pushing back.

ivalm 7y ago

NBA acted fine. They did not punish or discipline the Rocket's manager.

cwkoss 7y ago
On the other hand, Lebron James' statement last week sounded he was reading directly from something written by a CCP propaganda minister. "When you're misinformed or not educated about something, you never know the ramifications of what can happen." https://twitter.com/Rachel__Nichols/status/1183932275072720896 https://twitter.com/Rachel__Nichols/status/11839322750727208...
- yourbandsucks 7y ago
  Is it within the realm of possibility that the vast majority of Americans are in fact uneducated and misinformed about what daily life in China is like? Or even the broad strokes of history there? What % of Americans could even tell you the names of the last 3 dynasties?
  - kickopotomus 7y ago
    > What % of Americans could even tell you the names of the last 3 dynasties? What percent of Chinese could name the first 3 American Presidents? Who cares and how does that have anything to do with the modern political climate? The average American does not need to be aware of the country's history to disagree with the actions and posturing of the current government.
    - yourbandsucks 7y ago
      I wouldn't say that Chinese should hold strong opinions on how we run our country, either. But for what it's worth, the average educated Chinese knows far more about America than vice-versa. These threads are great evidence.
    - bllguo 7y ago
      You _absolutely_ should have an awareness of culture and history in order to offer meaningful criticism. Flip it around with gun control.. The rest of the world by-and-large does not agree with American gun policy. But how seriously are Americans going to take the criticism of people who don't have an understanding of American revolutionary history? If you actually care about effecting change you definitely need to understand the context.
      - kickopotomus 7y ago
        Sure, lets flip it around for gun control. The same argument applies. The rest of the developed world is absolutely correct not to agree with American gun policy. It's dangerously antiquated and has failed to adapt to changing times and improvements in technology. Other western countries have experienced revolutions and years of conflict far exceeding that of the US, yet the US is the only one to cling to guns so tightly. History is meant to be studied so that we do not repeat past mistakes. It is not meant to be used an excuse to continue to make them. Also, you absolutely do not need to be versed in Chinese history to disagree with forced organ harvesting, forced abortion, "re-education" (read internment) camps for Muslims, mass government surveillance, social credit systems, etc.
- bllguo 7y ago
  what is the rationalization for why that quote is so terrible to you?
  - rkuykendall-com 7y ago
    I believe you're either misinformed or not really educated on the situation. When you say things or do things, you know people that can be affected by it, and the families of those individuals and everyone that can be affected by it. Sometimes things can be challenging as well. ( see, this works as a nonsense dismissive remark to anyone or anything )
    - hurtmyknee 7y ago
      Additionally, it's the hypocrisy of a global icon. There is a cinematic in the video game NBA2k that truly puts it into light [1]. James' production company helped write and produce it, they're his words. It hurts, and is terribly disappointing. [1] https://streamable.com/jxkz0 https://streamable.com/jxkz0
    - bllguo 7y ago
      I don't see.. I genuinely believe that people should not be so eager to form opinions, that issues are always more complex than they seem, and that people should be mindful of the consequences. That's what the quote means to me at face value, so I am interested in seeing why it is being singled out as "something written by a CCP propaganda minister."
      - deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
  - hrktb 7y ago
    I guess it comes out so terrible because Lebron has been very vocal on many other civil matters, and has labelled himself as someone who speaks his beliefs. From his past positions people would have expected him to be pro-HK, instead he’s asking people to basically shut up. Him bringing warnings that all of this could hurt financially is the most unexpected angle to most of his followers.

Rebelgecko 7y ago

Honestly I think the NBA bungled their immediate response in the hours right after the tweet but has done a good job making up for it. China put direct pressure on the NBA commissioner to fire Morey, but he's refused to punish him at all, even though it will certainly hurt the NBA's bottom line. Supposedly teams are planning on figuring out how to handle a highly reduced salary cap next year, potentially on the order of 10% less due to lost China revenue

jimbob45 7y ago
I would heavily dispute your claim that their refusal to fire has hurt their bottom line. They had two options: fire or don't fire. In both cases, they were going to lose customers for their choice. I would assert that this choice lost them fewer customers than the other choice.
- Rebelgecko 7y ago
  Firing, sure. But they could have also condemned the comments without firing him which would've helped the Chinese revenues while having less of an impact elsewhere than firing him would have.
paulddraper 7y ago
Most people disagree with NBA assuming that players/coaches are explicitly or tactility not allowed by the NBA to support Hong Kong. (Which is why none have, outside the Rockets, manager.) IDK if that is correct or not though.

kulahan 7y ago

I'm curious what actions a government would need to take before you think it's irrational to for a company to support them. Between the reported organ harvesting, re-education camps, and massive invasion of privacy, I'd think it would be an easy call at this point. If you're still holding out, where do you personally draw the line? Or at least, where do you think companies should draw the line?

SirensOfTitan 7y ago
I used the term "bounded rationality" deliberately. I think companies, chasing growth, ignore the harsh reality of doing business in China long term. Act as an arm of the Chinese Government or China will block you from competing and will just spawn Chinese competitors in your absence (It doesn't even seem like this is a mutually exclusive outcome). Additionally, for each company that defies the Chinese Government, there are many who are very willing to comply. In that vein, I don't understand how the west responds. As I mentioned, the more companies that comply to the sensitivities of the Chinese government, the more China dictates speech well outside of its borders. I'm personally /very/ against the world the Chinese government is building. I worry that their leadership will gradually erode liberalism all across the world. I also feel powerless to do anything other than boycott services and products that don't align with my worldview.
paulddraper 7y ago
On the other hand....what can you as a hypothetical company leader do about it? If you were a U.S. citizen who believed that the U.S. government was involved in severely unethical behavior, would you continue to make income and pay taxes? I have no problem with applying lots of pressure to Blizzard, etc. for siding with China. I agree with grandparent that I can't say my decision as an executive would necessarily be different though.
- tripzilch 7y ago
  So would you do business with North Korea? Iran? Are you evading the question or did you seriously mean to imply that there is literally nothing a country can't do and you'll still go into business with them, no matter how horrendous their actions? I think you might just not realize, or take time to imagine, what these regimes are actually doing to actual human beings. Maybe imagine it's your family, said the wrong thing, gets shackled up, underground, unable to move, injected with weird drugs for a couple of months--just one personal story I heard from an Iran refugee. I asked about his background, I meant engineering or what did he study, got a bit more background than I bargained for. If your decision as an executive would be the same, then I suppose you agree you'd deserve that "applying lots of pressure to" just as much right? Why do it then? So you just get to ignore it and do it regardless? BTW this "pressure" from the other side doesn't quite look like "pressure" but utter disgust in the moral depravity of what people will do for money. If this is your choice, then I know exactly what you are worth as a human being to me. Don't forget to tell your kids their college is paid by torture prisons. oh and IF you were a US citizen who doesn't believe the US government is involved in severely unethical behaviour, gently go fornicate yourself. it's called the CIA Torture Reports, it was a few years ago, and you can't pretend it's optional to believe it exists, because it does. It happened and is happening. I mean seriously, "IF" ??? Are you for real? Sounds like your solution to this ethical dilemma is basically denial.

bsder 7y ago

> I don't really know what I'd do in a leadership role at Blizzard or the NBA. Simple. Keep ... your ... mouth ... shut. Do nothing and let it all pass. Yeah, China gonna China. But if China gets smart, they'll just be quiet and let it pass, too. The fact that everybody has been so heavyhanded has been a wonderful gift to the Hongkongers.

beart 7y ago
Are there examples in recent history where China has flipped their stance on something like this? I just feel like they aren't in the business of 'getting smart' in the way you suggest.
- bsder 7y ago
  > I just feel like they aren't in the business of 'getting smart' in the way you suggest. The problem is that you don't get into Xi Jingping's good graces by being discreetly circumspect. You get into his good graces by being "Decisive!" and "Fixing the problem!" This is almost exactly the wrong thing to do when you are garnering negative PR. So, unless Xi Jingping actively intervenes correctly (and he doesn't seem to understand the correct action, either), the situation is simply going to continue to deteriorate. I've said before, once Xi Jingping took over, I don't fear China as a competitor anymore. China is no longer about "What makes China great." It's about "What make Xi Jingping happy"--those will diverge more and more with time. The worst thing that could happen to China is he lives a long life.

jkachmar 7y ago

I think that these corporate responses can only be thought of as "rational" through a _very_ short-term lens due to the nature of _how_ foreign companies are permitted to operate within China. The CPC explicitly exerts a lot of control over the Chinese market, and they have absolutely no qualms over doing whatever they can to reduce foreign influence and enrich local players (cf. COMAC's C919 development, namely how much of it has been the result of IP theft from foreign partners). So yeah, you can definitely look at "competing" in China as a way to see quarterly growth, but it feels inevitable that any company that gets _real_ traction would be targeted by the CPC in favor of a domestic company that would more directly enrich them/the country. While I can understand the financial motivations for wanting to enter this market, I think this is very different from how most other modern nation-states operate and these responses. Blizzard et al.'s responses definitely smack of corporate greed more than they do of rational action, to me. EDIT: Ah, now that I've posted this I see your comment below where you elucidate a bit on "bounded rationality"; we probably agree, then. I'll leave this up in case it sparks some more interesting commentary from others :)

plorkyeran 7y ago
Yeah, the whole notion of "the Chinese market is too big to ignore" carries the assumption that China will allow foreign companies to make money off the Chinese market. It's easy to see why multinationals would assume that as there's been plenty of other markets that were unhappy about American companies pushing their way in but were unable to do anything about that, but China does have a successful track record of pushing back.