Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Amazon Quits China Market

pandaily.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 316 posts

Re: Amazon Quits China Market

#171

Post by oska »

manigandham wrote: post #124

This has nothing to do with communications or product development. China will not let a non-Chinese company ever gain top position in any sector. That's how the government works. And yes the article is bullshit because this same government won't allow any negative press about their actions either. These Pandaily journalists will have a very hard time if they actually wrote about the real environment there.

What Chinese companies have top position in any sector in the US? And do you think the US government would allow any to get there?

Re: Amazon Quits China Market

#172

Post by parrellel »

chrischen wrote: post #111
lordlimecat wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>This has nothing to with government interference. Local players in China are very strong Why are local players very strong? * Regulatory capture * Government promotion of internal services * IP theft from western countries How about, all of the above?

Without providing sources or proof you’re just regurgitating highly anti-Chinese propaganda.

Since China is also known for all-levels number fudging and revisionism, and state policy and culture has a tendency toward brigading that'd make tumblr blush, the "anti-china propaganda" tends to be a tad more credible, no?

Re: Amazon Quits China Market

#173

Post by nine_k »

CriticalCathed wrote: post #169
tekkk wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While the evidence in this case seems to be against this statement (Amazon indeed offered worse service than competitors) I think it is otherwise valid. Chinese are really driven to become the world's superpower number 1 and give no quarter to Western companies trying to establish themselves in China. So the big dilemma is, do we let them? Or more precisely, do we as the outside world let Chinese stifle all the forei…

Act how? What precisely could be done outside of protectionist policies that seem to be regarded as outmoded, inefficient, and taboo. Are we going to war? Isolationism? React in kind? Simply wait?

Rethink fashions and taboos and check whether these policies have merit?

A market works well when it's not distorted.

Re: Amazon Quits China Market

#174

Post by mahranch »

tekkk wrote: post #164
manigandham wrote: post #124

This has nothing to do with communications or product development. China will not let a non-Chinese company ever gain top position in any sector. That's how the government works. And yes the article is bullshit because this same government won't allow any negative press about their actions either. These Pandaily journalists will have a very hard time if they actually wrote about the real environment there.

While the evidence in this case seems to be against this statement (Amazon indeed offered worse service than competitors) I think it is otherwise valid. Chinese are really driven to become the world's superpower number 1 and give no quarter to Western companies trying to establish themselves in China. So the big dilemma is, do we let them? Or more precisely, do we as the outside world let Chinese stifle all the forei…

> Chinese culture of copy-catting freely doesn't help.

The problem with that, is that it's a vicious circle. Innovation is the foundation for future innovations. It builds on itself. It lays the groundwork and foundation for what comes next. By leapfrogging and cheating its way to the top (or near the top) they are sacrificing that crucial infrastructure for future discoveries and innovations.

China has to copy & steal IPs because it simply doesn't have the culture to compete. They're one of the least innovative countries on Earth, year after year. And the only way to change that is by allowing its citizens to think creatively, outside the box -- to be able to challenge authority. But China doesn't want that; they want conforming little worker bees who follow the party line.

Re: Amazon Quits China Market

#175

Post by 0815test »

mahranch wrote: post #174
tekkk wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While the evidence in this case seems to be against this statement (Amazon indeed offered worse service than competitors) I think it is otherwise valid. Chinese are really driven to become the world's superpower number 1 and give no quarter to Western companies trying to establish themselves in China. So the big dilemma is, do we let them? Or more precisely, do we as the outside world let Chinese stifle all the forei…

> Chinese culture of copy-catting freely doesn't help. The problem with that, is that it's a vicious circle. Innovation is the foundation for future innovations. It builds on itself. It lays the groundwork and foundation for what comes next. By leapfrogging and cheating its way to the top (or near the top) they are sacrificing that crucial infrastructure for future discoveries and innovations. China has to copy & ste…

> China has to copy & steal IPs because it simply doesn't have the culture to compete. They're one of the least innovative countries on Earth, year after year.

Funny thing, that's exactly what people used to say about Japan, and then about South Korea. (And the typical work environments in both countries do not exactly encourage creativity or challenging the status quo, either. So I'm not sure what difference that might make.)

Re: Amazon Quits China Market

#176

Post by munk-a »

manigandham wrote: post #157
munk-a wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly, what? The US props up US corporations all the time... didn't Amazon just pay -$129M (as in, received free money) in taxes to the US government?

Any corporation here can take advantage of tax rules. You can be a Chinese national starting a US company as a subsidiary of a Chinese company and do exactly the same thing.

In the best case that's a misunderstanding of the political situation in the US. As a reference, recall HQ2 where Amazon was negotiating to skirt property taxes for the next infinity years with the local government. All corporations technically have access to these, but regulatory capture is strong in the US and market incumbents tend to have a lot of weight to throw around to make sure they get favorable tax loopholes and exemptions. Access to these sorts of loopholes is also probably influenced by social network strength which a lot of chinese nationals (especially ones openly representing nationalized companies or the subsidiaries thereof) would find difficult to establish.

Re: Amazon Quits China Market

#177

Post by mahranch »

munk-a wrote: post #143
xvector wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> there are major product differences between Amazon and its Chinese competitors, Because the Chinese counterparts are government propped.

Honestly, what? The US props up US corporations all the time... didn't Amazon just pay -$129M (as in, received free money) in taxes to the US government?

Comparing U.S government to the Chinese government here is ridiculous. The Chinese government has absolute and total control of everything within its borders. It could dissolve a company tomorrow if it didn't like it -- or do the reverse and allow it to operate at a loss in order to hurt foreign competitors. The U.S has laws against such practices while China actively engages in those behaviors.

Re: Amazon Quits China Market

#178

Post by nine_k »

oska wrote: post #171
manigandham wrote: post #124

This has nothing to do with communications or product development. China will not let a non-Chinese company ever gain top position in any sector. That's how the government works. And yes the article is bullshit because this same government won't allow any negative press about their actions either. These Pandaily journalists will have a very hard time if they actually wrote about the real environment there.

What Chinese companies have top position in any sector in the US? And do you think the US government would allow any to get there?

I think we can see the recent actions against Huawei partly in this light.

Re: Amazon Quits China Market

#179

Post by yding »

mahranch wrote: post #174
tekkk wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While the evidence in this case seems to be against this statement (Amazon indeed offered worse service than competitors) I think it is otherwise valid. Chinese are really driven to become the world's superpower number 1 and give no quarter to Western companies trying to establish themselves in China. So the big dilemma is, do we let them? Or more precisely, do we as the outside world let Chinese stifle all the forei…

> Chinese culture of copy-catting freely doesn't help. The problem with that, is that it's a vicious circle. Innovation is the foundation for future innovations. It builds on itself. It lays the groundwork and foundation for what comes next. By leapfrogging and cheating its way to the top (or near the top) they are sacrificing that crucial infrastructure for future discoveries and innovations. China has to copy & ste…

This is just wrong. By many measures, China is one of the most innovative countries on earth. Take scientific citations for example: https://www.natureindex.com/news-blog/chinas-citations-catch...

Re: Amazon Quits China Market

#180

Post by manigandham »

ETHisso2017 wrote: post #163
manigandham wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been there, worked with people there, have friends there building businesses for decades. Have you been out there? Companies are allowed to operate and grow, but they are tightly controlled. Apple has strong competition and has already trimmed prices and revenue targets. China just purchased 300 planes from Airbus instead of Boeing. McDonalds sold off 80% of its China operations to a Chinese stated-owned company…

>Apple has strong competition and has already trimmed prices and revenue targets. How is that the government's fault? >China just purchased 300 planes from Airbus instead of Boeing. Airbus is European >McDonalds sold off 80% of its China operations to a Chinese stated-owned company years ago because it had trouble adapting its menu. Again why is McDs inability to serve the Chinese palate the fault of the government?…

Apple's Chinese competitors are helped by the government. China does not have an aviation manufacturer to compete directly (yet) but it ensures that neither Boeing or Airbus get a significant lead over each other in their controlling market.

The parent poster claimed McDonalds was a successful example, however it only successful because it is now led by Chinese-state-owned agency so the real-estate (which is 99% of the value) is not foreign owned. Same with KFC.

What is non-sequitur? That governments exist and have different rules for their businesses and citizens?

Post reply on HN