3 ms·

Completely BS. When I was walking through shopping mall in Beijing, for a moment I thought I’m in New York, all western brands. What are you talking about?

philliphaydon 6y ago
So you see some brands in china and that means that brand’s have 0 issues getting into china market? But ignoring that those brands can’t easily get the money they make out of china, they don’t own the subsidiary in china, and if china decides to boycott the brand, it actually means something compared to boycott in the west which is just something people say and don’t follow through on.
- DiogenesKynikos 6y ago
  You don't just see "some brands" in China. They're everywhere, on a completely different scale than Chinese brands in the US. In practice, American companies have a much larger presence in China than vice versa. > they don’t own the subsidiary in china This is a common misconception. Foreign companies can own their subsidiaries in most sectors of the Chinese economy. > those brands can’t easily get the money they make out of china China has capital flow controls. Foreign companies are still able to expatriate their profits. Apple takes in about $45 billion in revenue per year in China, and there must be a hefty profit associated with that revenue. Do you think Apple's profits get trapped in China?
  - philliphaydon 6y ago
    You cannot just start a WFOE business inm china. You can’t just take money out of china. Apple is a giant company with an insane amount of money to pay off whoever they need to.
    - DiogenesKynikos 6y ago
      > You cannot just start a WFOE business in china Nonsense. WFOEs are common in China. The acronym exists for a reason. > You can’t just take money out of china. There are several channels that companies can use to expatriate profits. > Apple is a giant company with an insane amount of money to pay off whoever they need to. They don't have to pay people off. There are completely legal methods for them to expatriate their profits.
      - philliphaydon 6y ago
        I guess the 50c army is here on HN now trying to defend china. I’ll maintain my opinion from experience of working with people who were not allowed to setup a WFOE business and were forced to give 51% of the business away for the china subsidiary. It’s really strange how people can try defend china when it’s not china that’s the bad guy, it’s the ccp.
        DiogenesKynikos 6y ago
        First off, you're breaking the forum's rules by accusing people of being shills. What sector was that company in, any why were they not able to set up a WFOE? WFOE's have been the most common form of foreign business created in China for decades. The term "WFOE" is specifically a Chinese construct, so the idea that WFOEs are not allowed doesn't even make basic sense. You talked earlier about reciprocity. For most of China's modern history, China hasn't had any capital that it could invest abroad, so any formal access it had to American markets made no difference. American companies invested in China under restrictive rules, while China didn't invest in the US at all. As China has developed, it has eased investment restrictions (for example, recently allowing WFOEs in the auto industry), and it has started investing abroad. But in the last few years, it has become apparent that Chinese tech companies are de facto banned from the US. Not only that, but the US is pursuing major Chinese tech companies through sanctions, trying not only to keep them out of the US market, but to destroy them entirely.

philliphaydon 6y ago

So you see some brands in china and that means that brand’s have 0 issues getting into china market? But ignoring that those brands can’t easily get the money they make out of china, they don’t own the subsidiary in china, and if china decides to boycott the brand, it actually means something compared to boycott in the west which is just something people say and don’t follow through on.

DiogenesKynikos 6y ago
You don't just see "some brands" in China. They're everywhere, on a completely different scale than Chinese brands in the US. In practice, American companies have a much larger presence in China than vice versa. > they don’t own the subsidiary in china This is a common misconception. Foreign companies can own their subsidiaries in most sectors of the Chinese economy. > those brands can’t easily get the money they make out of china China has capital flow controls. Foreign companies are still able to expatriate their profits. Apple takes in about $45 billion in revenue per year in China, and there must be a hefty profit associated with that revenue. Do you think Apple's profits get trapped in China?
- philliphaydon 6y ago
  You cannot just start a WFOE business inm china. You can’t just take money out of china. Apple is a giant company with an insane amount of money to pay off whoever they need to.
  - DiogenesKynikos 6y ago
    > You cannot just start a WFOE business in china Nonsense. WFOEs are common in China. The acronym exists for a reason. > You can’t just take money out of china. There are several channels that companies can use to expatriate profits. > Apple is a giant company with an insane amount of money to pay off whoever they need to. They don't have to pay people off. There are completely legal methods for them to expatriate their profits.
    - philliphaydon 6y ago
      I guess the 50c army is here on HN now trying to defend china. I’ll maintain my opinion from experience of working with people who were not allowed to setup a WFOE business and were forced to give 51% of the business away for the china subsidiary. It’s really strange how people can try defend china when it’s not china that’s the bad guy, it’s the ccp.
      - DiogenesKynikos 6y ago
        First off, you're breaking the forum's rules by accusing people of being shills. What sector was that company in, any why were they not able to set up a WFOE? WFOE's have been the most common form of foreign business created in China for decades. The term "WFOE" is specifically a Chinese construct, so the idea that WFOEs are not allowed doesn't even make basic sense. You talked earlier about reciprocity. For most of China's modern history, China hasn't had any capital that it could invest abroad, so any formal access it had to American markets made no difference. American companies invested in China under restrictive rules, while China didn't invest in the US at all. As China has developed, it has eased investment restrictions (for example, recently allowing WFOEs in the auto industry), and it has started investing abroad. But in the last few years, it has become apparent that Chinese tech companies are de facto banned from the US. Not only that, but the US is pursuing major Chinese tech companies through sanctions, trying not only to keep them out of the US market, but to destroy them entirely.