Live data from Hacker News

iPhone maker Wistron quits, saying Apple didn't let it make a profit

9to5mac.com

161–170 of 170 posts

Re: iPhone maker Wistron quits, saying Apple didn't let it make a profit

#161
post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, mercantilist and imperialist societies (Roman Empire, British Empire) did this long before the modern era of private capital. Capitalism is just another in a long line of systems under which wealth and power concentrates into the hands of a few and the many are disadvantaged. The only new thing here is the degree to which technology can extend lines of communication and trade.

Except mercantilist and imperialist societies got their way through violence. They didn't really have "business partners" to squeeze in a modern sense. They had subjects they would steal from and oppress. Capitalism was supposed to be different. Apple notably doesn't have a standing army bigger than the US like the East India Company did in relation to England. If the results end up looking similar, that is a huge in…

It's cheaper without having a standing army. I wouldn't say that capitalism is another system, i would just say it's an evolution of imperialistic society that reached the equilibrium of most profit and least resistance from the people

Re: iPhone maker Wistron quits, saying Apple didn't let it make a profit

#162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've never understood this. If you're not making enough profit - or even loosing money - selling to a large client, you are better off without them. Profit should come before everything else, including growth.

Then you wouldn't exist. Even the smallest business goes through years of losses before it (hopefully) reaches profitability. Pay to sell is the only way nearly 100% of incumbents have to simply exist. If they don't do it, someone else will Traditionally, businesses build a reputation and customers learn where to find them (a physical location). They then become and stay profitable. Anyone depending on a monopolist f…

There is a real difference between starting a business and running it at a loss before reaching profitability and consciously entering a contract, where you know you are producing at a loss ( and your contract partner benefits ) that only furthers your profitability gap. If this is the opening bid, it is highly unlikely it will get better. If anything, it will only get worse. You don't make it up in volume when you sell at a loss already.

That is the interesting part. The pressure is so high that people are willing to forego their own self-interest and basic critical thinking skills, because someone will do it at or below cost anyway. It is great for Walmart, but it would explain why so many businesses fail so hard. They are way too nice to the other party.

Re: iPhone maker Wistron quits, saying Apple didn't let it make a profit

#163
post #90

Foxconn somehow made $137m profit in the past 12m.

You mean by installing the suicidal protection net, Foxconn barely makes it? Foxconn has 1m3 employees. If they made just 137m in profit - that's just $8 profit per employee a month.

I think those numbers are Taiwan dollars, and "m" is for billions i.e. milliards. So closer to $300 USD per employee per month. For fun, compare to McDonald's.

Re: iPhone maker Wistron quits, saying Apple didn't let it make a profit

#164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've never understood this. If you're not making enough profit - or even loosing money - selling to a large client, you are better off without them. Profit should come before everything else, including growth.

Not enough profit is different from loosing money. Here the vendors are simply making less money because their product is part of a highly competitive marketplace.

Not enough profit is the main reason to shut down a business, unless you have a good and realistic plan on how to reverse that. All that effort and all that risk can be put into more lucrative ventures.

Re: iPhone maker Wistron quits, saying Apple didn't let it make a profit

#165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Globalism prevent wars by making countries dependant to each others (Montesquieu Doux commerce theory). Globalism permits to all countries around the globe to develop. Nobody is preventing these countries to set laws about environment and working condition (which they actually do). And by the way, I invite you to go to these countries and visit the factories there, and you will realize that western companies are rais…

No, it's a race to the bottom. It forces the countries to which manufacturing is outsourced to, to not have strict labour laws, low salaries, lenient pollution control and keep conditions generaly favourable for the company, at the cost of the people working there, or else the multi-billion dollar corpos will turn to another country to get the cheapest manufacturing possible

Unfortunately your theory falls apart once you read literally a single book on macroeconomics.

Re: iPhone maker Wistron quits, saying Apple didn't let it make a profit

#166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> from what I hear in Vietnam, they're jerks to everyone. It seems like the older generation of Taiwanese who came to age in the 70s and 80s have a bit of a superiority complex over the rest of poor Asia. Tbf, Koreans and Japanese do as well (Korean and Japanese investors in ASEAN are total sleezeballs in my experience), but due to manpower constraints they at least try to develop local institutional capacity, while…

Thanks for the insightful write up. I was aware of the IN-US trade war, but I thought American companies would ultimately suck it up like they did in PRC where US goods like vehicles got slapped by heavy duties. PRC agri sector is also protected for national security and to keep 100s millions employed, not a voting block, but similar political considerations. Also won't buy US modified seeds. But they do buy a ton of…

> but I thought American companies would ultimately suck it up like they did in PRC where US goods like vehicles got slapped by heavy duties

The ones with an actual India thesis+strategy have a Singapore subsidiary that owns the India operation, hire local operations, and also have some sort of a competitive edge.

The companies listed in the article such as Harley-Davidson and Citibank were very late entries (late 2000s and early 2010s) in very competitive and mature industries (Motorbikes and Banking), and had negative reputations (bad quality at the price point w/ Harley-Davidson and Ford, part of banking scandals w/ regards to Citibank ans RBS

A good example of a foreign company actually succeeding is John Deere India - they worked on building a strong local operation with local staff and training in the 1990s, and now John Deere is one of the major agtech brands in India, and the India operation is used in turn to export John Deere products to other parts of South Asia, ASEAN, MENA, and East Africa.

In India, being an American brand isn't enough of a differentiator, simply because by the time American companies began entering the India market in the late 90s/early 2000s, Japanese, Korean, and European (French+Italian) corporations such as Suzuki, Daewoo, Honda, Unilever, etc had an established presence and 30-50 years of India operations knowledge.

When India forced American companies to divest in the late 1970s, the Indian government invited Japanese, Korean, Italian, and French companies to help manage those nationalized companies and make 50-50 Foreign-Local partnerships. (Btw, those same American companies that were kicked out of India in the 1970s moved operations to a newly opening developing market called the People's Republic of China).

That's why you companies like Honda, Suzuki, Daewoo, Fiat have/had a massive presence in India but American companies outside of High Value industries don't.

In China in the same period on the other hand, American brands were invited with open arms so it was much easier for them to establish a presence as there wasn't as much competition, whereas India in the 70s/80s/90s already had established European, Japanese, and Korean competitors. This is starting to change since the 2010s, but will take some time as you need a Singapore operation, and most junior American companies have used a HK one.

> they do buy a ton of bulk agri products, and farm equipment... when not sanctioned

A lot of American agtechs entering the Indian market are competing with Israeli, French, Italian, Japanese, and Indigenous companies.

Israeli, French, Japanese, and Italian agtech R&D is quite strong, especially when dealing with water constrained agriculture (like a large portion of India is) plus companies in those countries are fine knowledge transferring to India (Indian corporations will manufacture and repair the previous generation model, while the French/Israeli/Italian/Japanese company sells the latest and greatest). And India has always had a strong indigenous Agtech R&D capacity, which has allowed Indian companies to become competitors of American companies as well.

For example, in Ethiopia 70% of all land acquired by Foreigners since 2008 was by Indian corporations [0] until Ethiopia nationalized Indian companies land grants in 2017. Similar stories exist across Eastern Africa such as Tanzania, Mozambique, Kenya, etc.

Also, American trade relations with India have grown leaps and bounds better since 2019, due to regulatory harmonization as well as American companies increasingly leaving China due to similar pressures that American companies faced in India in the 70s and 80s.

[0] - https://theconversation.com/the-lesser-known-story-of-indias...

Re: iPhone maker Wistron quits, saying Apple didn't let it make a profit

#167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it's a race to the bottom. It forces the countries to which manufacturing is outsourced to, to not have strict labour laws, low salaries, lenient pollution control and keep conditions generaly favourable for the company, at the cost of the people working there, or else the multi-billion dollar corpos will turn to another country to get the cheapest manufacturing possible

Unfortunately your theory falls apart once you read literally a single book on macroeconomics.

My theory that multi billion dollar companies base decisions like where to manufacture on costs? Or my theory that this set up forces lenient labour laws? I really do not know anything about economics, so would love to hear what you have to say. Would be helpful if you could link some things too

Re: iPhone maker Wistron quits, saying Apple didn't let it make a profit

#168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately your theory falls apart once you read literally a single book on macroeconomics.

My theory that multi billion dollar companies base decisions like where to manufacture on costs? Or my theory that this set up forces lenient labour laws? I really do not know anything about economics, so would love to hear what you have to say. Would be helpful if you could link some things too

> would love to hear what you have to say

What he said, by implication, was "read a book on macroeconomics".

Re: iPhone maker Wistron quits, saying Apple didn't let it make a profit

#169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for the insightful write up. I was aware of the IN-US trade war, but I thought American companies would ultimately suck it up like they did in PRC where US goods like vehicles got slapped by heavy duties. PRC agri sector is also protected for national security and to keep 100s millions employed, not a voting block, but similar political considerations. Also won't buy US modified seeds. But they do buy a ton of…

> but I thought American companies would ultimately suck it up like they did in PRC where US goods like vehicles got slapped by heavy duties The ones with an actual India thesis+strategy have a Singapore subsidiary that owns the India operation, hire local operations, and also have some sort of a competitive edge. The companies listed in the article such as Harley-Davidson and Citibank were very late entries (late 20…

Again thanks for taking the time. No follow up questions!

Re: iPhone maker Wistron quits, saying Apple didn't let it make a profit

#170
post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The book The United States of Wal-Mart by John Dicker laid this all out pretty clearly nearly 20 years ago. * corrected spelling the author's name. ** https://www.amazon.com/United-States-Wal-Mart-John-Dicker/dp...

also another story: https://www.fastcompany.com/47593/wal-mart-you-dont-know-2

Wow that was a oldie. Great link.
Post reply on HN