Live data from Hacker News

China Is Nationalizing Its Tech Sector

bloomberg.com

201–210 of 228 posts

Re: China Is Nationalizing Its Tech Sector

#201

The "trade war" thing has been the most/only interesting ideas to come from trump, to me. It was interesting in that he did recognized (fluked into?) an actual shift in public/expert position. China is the pro-trade side. They'll be willing to make concessions, do the work, etc. It's the beijing consensus now, not washington. Large american companies are still on the pro-trade side, being multinationals. They also ha…

Please stop to reconsider reality before labeling China "pro-trade". As a foreigner, China is truly off-limits: * In China, nearly all innovative industries are completely legally restricted from foreigner owned businesses (in contrast, in the US, the lone restricted industry is mortgages). * Likewise, in China, most non-innovative industries require you to setup a company with foreigners as minority shareholders, so…

Serial foreign entrepreneur in China here. Your points are so incorrect I wonder where do you get this information that you feel stating it as fact is acceptable?

I feel compelled to dispel these because it's dangerous and unconstructive for the community to have such completely false information presented as fact. I might actually share a detailed post on this in the near future since I feel people here completely misunderstand China regularly.

As a foreigner, China is truly off-limits

No, it's not. Visas are not easy but they are easier than the US. As a founder, you get infinite renewal on long term business visas instantly, with low capital requirements and essentially no other requirements. I would say that China is very friendly and more welcoming to foreign investment than many other countries in measurable ways. In addition, corruption is very much under control and the business environment is overall pretty advanced. It's not all rainbows and unicorns: documentation and process can be very frustrating, but it's fundamentally an open and welcoming system. Once you're on the books, it's awesome. Digital tax, 100% mobile payment penetration, automated banking APIs, etc. Having been through the experience of applying for a US work visa and many types of Chinese visas, both for myself and employees, I am speaking from direct experience here and therefore feel qualified to comment.

In China, nearly all innovative industries are completely legally restricted from foreigner owned businesses

Absolutely, completely untrue. Restrictions exist only on particular industries (chiefly media, telco and some sectors of finance). Pretty much everything is open. China really likes innovation and key cities such as Shenzhen are actively seeking to bring in more foreigners, with an international entrepreneurial recruitment drive to bring startups to the city underway right now.

Likewise, in China, most non-innovative industries require you to setup a company with foreigners as minority shareholders, so control is never in foreign hands.

Absolutely untrue. You can set up a wholly foreign owned enterprise in almost any sector.

In China, all foreign private investment is also highly restricted with all transactions needing government approval.

Corporate setup requires government stamping, but I have never heard of a rejection of investment. There is an approval process on international corporate transfers and some restrictions on minimum domestic capital maintenance (largely for asset seizure in case of domestic legal concerns) but this is cleared if a company is wound down and there are so many workarounds in place that one could see these processes being streamlined in the near future.

Large foreign-owned businesses operating in China seemingly always lose to local Chinese companies, not on merit, but by red tape or shady government practices: Google, Facebook, Amazon, Uber, and others

The political reality is that it is not in China's national interest to allow the creation of vast databases of its citizens and their movements by foreign companies for storage on foreign ground. As with any market, it is important to understand where the limits are when doing business in China. However, the good news is the government is more likely to come knock on your door and let you know if they are getting uncomfortable with how things are going and offer you an opportunity to correct than outright shut down your business.

My personal experience with Amazon in China was that they had copy-pasted foreign process to China with little thought, and that seriously undermined their offering to the point where, even as a foreign business owner with some international infrastructure requirements, it made no sense to deal with them.

Even small foreign-owned businesses in China get weeded out through dubious enforcement

Food is my industry so I can probably add some context here. While I hadn't heard of this case, it's true to say that Shanghai has been particularly strong on cracking down on food safety related issues recently. This is partly due to the shake-up of food safety regulation which occurred recently at the national level and the evolving enforcement framework trickling down as a result. Frankly some areas are currently inadequately detailed, and it is unclear whether the case mentioned was due to an honest mistake, an upset former employee, or shady business, or some combination all three.

As a foreigner, if you marry a Chinese national, getting a Chinese work visa actually becomes harder

I am on my second marriage to a Chinese national and my second business. The Chinese visa system is not designed for people who cross categories - ie. doing business, also married. That's OK, it just means you have to apply for one category or another. The truth is, it is actually easier for founders to get long term visas than for people married to Chinese citizens. The visa rules are constantly evolving, in short it was very easy pre-2008, now it is a hassle but getting better. Unless you have visited Turkey or Syria, in which case it is very hard.

Sure, China is "pro-trade" in the sense of wanting to making money off the status quo trade imbalance.

Every country's government wants economic fortune.

Re: China Is Nationalizing Its Tech Sector

#202
Public private partnerships are quite de-rigeur in the west, what's so special about China that the same is somehow not-so-subtly construed as a demonic plan to debase capitalism and instill the vicious vector of bogeyman communism in a Chinese community near you? Frankly IMHO the media on China coming out of the US - Bloomberg, NYT and Washington Post especially - reeks of xenophobia and tabloid hype.

America's journalists may do well to visit the museums of Chinese in LA and New York, as I did, and take a long deep look at the China side of their country's nasty and continuous history of whipping up anti-foreign sentiment at all levels of government and society then conveniently sweeping racism under the rug. Disgusting.

Re: China Is Nationalizing Its Tech Sector

#203

And thus the brain drain from China will commence at full speed (more than present). Seems government regulators in China don't understand market forces either. Good to know.

Central planning has always proven to be an inefficient way to allocate resources, so I’m not sure why free markets would be worried about China implementing more central planning.

> Central planning has always proven to be an inefficient way to allocate resources

Capitalism and planning isn't as far apart as it might appear.

What is a large multinational corporation except a centrally planned bureaucracy incentivized to maximize profits to shareholders? And where is the majority of wealth in the West (especially in the tech world), except in the hands of multinationals?

Re: China Is Nationalizing Its Tech Sector

#204
post #4

A picture is worth a thousand words. The sculpture outside the front of Tencents Shenzhen HQ. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DXRIsWrVQAAJgjl.jpg

If you were running the largest network of communications in any country you would also have a political requirement to maintain a public hat-tip to government at all times as well as private cooperation. While the brusque visual nature of this sculpture is admittedly unnerving, I can assure you based on nearly 20 years in the country that it is not some sort of oppressive symbolism but rather more likely a PR designed retro-communique to traditional party socialist mores in order to stave off criticism from party hardliners. Government interface is simply the nature of society and a requirement of big business everywhere. The US included.

Re: China Is Nationalizing Its Tech Sector

#205
post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Here's how the China trade illusion works (and the West keeps falling for it for some reason): Plainly, its because most Western Governments (especially in the US) are heavily influenced by business interests via lobbies, PAC's etc. And Businesses simply want to use cheap labor in China to improve their bottom lines, even if that means the labor force in the US suffers as a result. They do not give a shit if China r…

The US has the most advanced manufacturing sector in the world, while China produces the overwhelming junk you can find at the big-box stores. China's gov is basically one giant corporate lobby on behalf of a single country.

That’s a little disingenuous. Most consumer electronics are created in China. So are many of the largest commercial ships.

Re: China Is Nationalizing Its Tech Sector

#206

The "trade war" thing has been the most/only interesting ideas to come from trump, to me. It was interesting in that he did recognized (fluked into?) an actual shift in public/expert position. China is the pro-trade side. They'll be willing to make concessions, do the work, etc. It's the beijing consensus now, not washington. Large american companies are still on the pro-trade side, being multinationals. They also ha…

Please stop to reconsider reality before labeling China "pro-trade". As a foreigner, China is truly off-limits: * In China, nearly all innovative industries are completely legally restricted from foreigner owned businesses (in contrast, in the US, the lone restricted industry is mortgages). * Likewise, in China, most non-innovative industries require you to setup a company with foreigners as minority shareholders, so…

> * In China, nearly all innovative industries are completely legally restricted from foreigner owned businesses (in contrast, in the US, the lone restricted industry is mortgages).

Umm, what? Airlines must be majority owned by US entities, broadcast is controller (why do you think Murdoch got a US passport), Qualcomm couldn't be sold to a company incorporated in Singapore...I could go on.

Re: China Is Nationalizing Its Tech Sector

#207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is why some strains of socialism advocate a regulated market wherein businesses can freely experiment, then the optimal path is nationalized. Free market or centralized economy, at the end of the day someone is making an executive decision about how resources are allocated. Whether you believe that executive person (or committee) should be acting in the best interests of the public or a group of shareholders is…

This creates exactly the same set of problems. A CEO has to compete with other CEOs, if they don’t do so efficiently they will fail and another will take their place. A government committe doesn’t have to compete with anybody, if they fail, you just end up with a society that gradually deteriorates. A CEO also has to deal with market forces, a government committe does not. A government committe doesn’t have to produc…

> A government committe doesn’t have to compete with anybody

In theory, a failing government is replaced by a different government. In practice, whether voters successfully identify problems and pick a better winner is an open question.

Re: China Is Nationalizing Its Tech Sector

#208
post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I fear it might even be too late. Tech-hotspots like Shenzhen are so highly specialized on producing any kind of tech extremely fast, that the Western world cannot replicate that without massive costs that would instantly double all hardware prices. The kind of expertise needed to create those manufacturing powerhouses might not even be in Western hands anymore. Nowadays, if you are a hardware start-up that needs spe…

It's actually not totally true. There are tons of pcb fabs in NA. But it's a lot cheaper in China. R&D costs are just more expensive here or it takes longer vs in Shenzen. 3d printing has also drastically reduced time to production as you can iterate the design during development.

Tesla has just found out that producing 100 cars a week is absolutely different than producing 5,000 cars a week. The same applies to every other product. A few PCB fans will not have the expertise to build factories that output millions of PCBs a month.

Re: China Is Nationalizing Its Tech Sector

#209
post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In my opinion, the main difference between China and the US is nationalism. And that's also what I think that slogan is indicative of. It also, I think, explains their government actions. Supporting their companies is not about nationalizing them, which implies a motivation of state driven control, but growing and improving Chinese companies on the national scene. I've noticed that a few times recently when compari…

> cargo cult religion Unfairly dismissive of the deep philosophy involved in the founding of this country. There are many solid underpinnings of American individualism, whether you agree the principles or not.

I think the gulf between individualism and collectivism is more similar to what has become of left versus right, which is to say it's completely insufficient by itself. With left versus right it's now also critical to consider libertarian versus authoritarian. So too with individualism and collectivism, I think you need to also factor in nationalism versus globalism.

The US was certainly driven by nationalism, but the individualism vs collectivism component is not clearly individualistic either. For instance in our founding, states were viewed as entities in and of themselves. Institutions like the senate and the electoral college are very clear reminders that the state was seen as more relevant than the individual.

In either case today we've gone more individualistic and globalistic. This diminishes the strength of the state. And I think many see that as a positive today without considering that things we consider rights and privileges we take for granted are not inalienable, but a product of our nation which creates that inalienability. The reason you can burn a flag as a protest without being rounded up and summarily 'removed from society' one way or the other, as would happen in many parts of this world, is because of what that very flag represents.

If we created a nation that was an aggregate of this world, it'd still be quite an awful place. This is in part why, though I'd hardly consider myself nationalistic, I think that keep our nations strong and independent is so crucial. I also find it trite that the push for extremes of globalism is largely coming from corporations and other power non-state entities. Guess who rules a society where the nation or state is secondary? Many would like to think it's the individual, but it's not. Globalism is analogous to union busting on the international scale. Many people were led to believe that unions were not in their best interest. That worked out well...

Re: China Is Nationalizing Its Tech Sector

#210
post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Imagine a Chinese company operating > in the states, with an a fully imported > senior management and all "c-level" > discussions in chinese. In other words, imagine a Chinese company operating in the US the same way US multinationals operate on continental Europe.

I’ve worked for Microsoft in China, our C suite was all Chinese (well, many Taiwanese). The nearest foreigner headed up sales for the region, was a German. Americans were common, but they were almost all Chinese or Taiwanese who naturalized. Our SVP based in Redmond was also a Chinese (In charge of all of Microsoft Research and advanced research). He would try to conduct our meetings in Chinese, and then would demure…

You don't see them as American even though they are American? How strange.
Post reply on HN