4 ms·
Disclaimer: I am neither a supporter of China or CCP. I have my own thoughts on them but they're besides the point for now. I don't mean to attack you but your
by techie128 5y ago
Disclaimer: I am neither a supporter of China or CCP. I have my own thoughts on them but they're besides the point for now.
I don't mean to attack you but your post reeks of American exceptionalism and elitism. Allow me to explain:
Your post is based on an underlying assumption that 'Western companies' lose because CCP / China creates a very uneven playing field. Thats the only reason in your mind that Western companies lose. This is not true. Western companies have lost in foreign markets due to variety of reasons not the least of which is a hostile local government.
The Chinese government's job is to ensure a level playing field for everybody and regulate its market in its own best interests not foreign interests. They're doing exactly what the US government and other Western countries have been doing for a long time. In fact Western companies and countries have had a long head start and several factors in their favor historically. Some that come to my mind are investment capital availability, ability to take on more debt due to different regulatory policies in domiciled country, US government's ability to impose trade sanctions, tariffs, favorable currency exchange rates, etc.
Traditionally the US (and other western countries, Europe included) have used various tactics to gain advantage in foreign markets. When the host government is weak, they have typically won. However in markets such as China (and India to an extent), the local government has created effective competitors that have crushed foreign rivals in some situations. In others their western counterparts have flourished. For example, Coke, Tesla and various companies have done really well as opposed to Google, Uber, etc.
One of the greatest reasons Western companies have failed in markets such as China (and India) is because they enter it with an air of arrogance. They assume the market works in the same way as the rest of the world. Let me cite an example from India which arguably is more open at welcoming Western goods and services than China.
When Dominoes first entered the Indian market, they sold the same pizzas that they sold in the US. Sure, the average Indian consumer would love to eat at Dominoes because of the brand value. However they got 2 things terribly wrong which caused them to wind down operations. First, the pizzas tasted like crap to the average Indian consumer. Even though they had money to spend, American Pizza recipes do not jive well with Indian taste buds. Second, the pricing was all wrong. The Indian market was price sensitive. Nobody was willing to pay for a crappy tasting pizza (to the Indian taste buds) when there were so many other local foods that could be had for lesser price. It wasn't a question of affordability, Dominos simply did not provide enough value for the customer. They eventually failed. Learned from their mistakes, relaunched with better pricing and Indianized their pizza offerings. They're doing pretty well now. Had they done their research well they wouldn't have made the mistake. In case of Dominos they were able to relaunch after taking massive losses. However, many others choose to exit the market. In this specific instance it wasn't the government, but the company's fault for launch such a crappy product at the wrong price.
- aembleton 5y agoNow I want to try an Indianised pizza.
- jollybean 5y ago"The Chinese government's job is to ensure a level playing field for everybody" This is very upside down. The Chinese government actively opposes a 'level playing field and strongly prefers local companies, especially those with deep ties to the state. Even export policy is natinalized. Huawei can offer it's customers internationally amazing financing terms (pay nothing down, and pay small amounts over time) provided by Chinese banks at the behest of the Chinese Government, facilitate by a politicized Central bank. It would be like Biden/Trump ordering JP Morgan to finance Boeing deals, and to coordinate it all with the Treasury and the Central Bank. That's a violation of basic trade norms - and that's just the export stuff. Internally, there's much more control. "One of the greatest reasons Western companies have failed in markets such as China (and India) is because they enter it with an air of arrogance." This is not factual and you've provided no real evidence of that. When US companies have 'hard protections', particularly in Brand, they do very well. Nike, Apple, Pizza Hut etc. all do very well. But trains? China requires that train makers hand over their IP, the IP is given to local companies who then get a head start while the Chinese government holds the foreign company up in red tape. The Chinese government 'role' is to absolutely minimize the amount of success foreign companies have to the extent they can duplicate/copy/reproduce locally, that's what they do. Even foreign initiatives cannot actually be foreign owned: 51% has to be owned by Chinese. The CCP puts a cadre of it's party staff within every company to ensure national guidelines are followed. Your 'Dominos in India' example is countered by 'Yum Brands' i.e. KFC, Pizza Hut who were very successful in China.
- throwaway210222 5y ago> It would be like Biden/Trump ordering JP Morgan to finance Boeing deals, and to coordinate it all with the Treasury and the Central Bank. No need for that - the US government already finances Beoing's deals. There is a reason the US-government owned Export-Import Bank is known world-wide as "Boeing's Bank". https://www.mercatus.org/publications/government-spending/ex-im-still-boeings-bank https://www.mercatus.org/publications/government-spending/ex...