In 2016, Tesla released the Model 3. When Chinese consumers wanted the most advanced electric vehicles, the Chinese government communicated with Tesla in 2017 about building a factory in Shanghai to produce China-made Teslas. Currently, Tesla is the highest-selling pure electric vehicle brand in China ( Model Y sales in China in December last year were 60,055 volumes ) The intense competition in the electric vehicle…
DJI ban passes the House and moves on to the Senate
711–720 of 742 posts
Re: DJI ban passes the House and moves on to the Senate
#712Earlier quoted context omitted.
They competed until they were undercut, and then just didn't bother pursuing more profitable business instead. That is to say, if you can make a drone for $200, and DJI puts one out for $50, you don't really stand chance, so get out of the way and find more profitable businesses. Anyways, DJI seems to just publish its revenue ($3.83b in 2021) but is it actually making money (profit, not revenue)? I'm not finding anyt…
Drones weren't just a commodity to be farmed out to the lowest bidder, though. DJI had significantly better technology in addition to being cheaper. They had better transmitters (with the standalone controllers), redundant sensors, obstacle detection and avoidance, camera sensors and lenses, FLIR, flight time, range, wind correction, gimbals, FPV headsets... all of it. Each year they'd come up with some major innovat…
Re: DJI ban passes the House and moves on to the Senate
#713Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Western drone companies haven't bothered competing in the consumer space This is factually wrong. Most drone companies have tried in the consumer space before pivoting towards the military. The military has been more and more present since around 2019, and most Western drone companies have pivoted to the military since Ukraine. Not because it's more profitable, but really because they failed in the consumer space.…
Military is 100x more profitable than consumer. It isn’t clear they DJI is even making money since all I can find on a Google search is them bragging about revenue. If they made $3.83b in revenue in 2021, what were their expenses on that (or better yet, what is the break down of hardware/assembly costs vs. R&D costs if they aren't profitable yet)?
I don't even want to talk about DJI not being profitable. That's preposterous. It's like if I was claiming that Apple is state-subsidized and not profitable.
Re: DJI ban passes the House and moves on to the Senate
#714Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, that's what we do! But haven't we been saying this in the West forever: "the Chinese copy: they buy our products, take them apart, and just copy "? Now we realize that they actually learned, and it was not straightforward. They are ahead in robotics, and we can't just "copy": we have to learn. And it takes time.
It isn’t clear they aren’t taking a loss on each of their drones. If they are, you c ant really copy it at the price point they are selling it for.
Ignore the price, and the DJI drones are still way better. Even receiving a ton of money from the DoD, Western companies fail to compete with DJI greatly.
Re: DJI ban passes the House and moves on to the Senate
#715Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's just an excuse, after 10 years failing to compete. Western drone companies have received billions in investments to make competing drones, but repeatedly fail, for some reason. Western company can't compete, but that's on them. Banning DJI won't change anything, Western companies have to get their act together.
I mean... 10 years of not being able to compete with companies subsided with a world powers national treasury isn't really saying much of anything
Re: DJI ban passes the House and moves on to the Senate
#716Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was not talking about false equivalence about their economic status; I was talking about falsely equating or 'whatabout-ing' their human rights status. And if you think that polls of life satisfaction are meaningful among a population who are forbidden to criticize their govt except in limited ways (e.g., local officials), I'd like to talk about some fantastic oceanfront land in Kansas... Economy? Of course people…
> China has OFFICIALLY one party, a massive and highly intrusive surveillance and censorship apparatus second to none in the world Second to ours. > mobile execution vans literally seizing and executing people on the street by the tens of thousand or more Absolute nonsense.
Ah, I se you are one of those who chooses to chooses to ignore the facts of the world [0,1,2,3,4,5]. This is just the top results of a 0.1second search
And I notice that you completely avoided my serious question: If it is so much better in China, why are you not moving there?
[0] https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2017/04/China-must-co... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Execution_van [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_in_China [3] https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/inside-chinese-deat... [4] https://panpacificagency.com/news/china/02/19/mobile-death-v... [5] https://www.news.com.au/world/asia/mobile-death-vans-inside-...
Re: DJI ban passes the House and moves on to the Senate
#717In 2016, Tesla released the Model 3. When Chinese consumers wanted the most advanced electric vehicles, the Chinese government communicated with Tesla in 2017 about building a factory in Shanghai to produce China-made Teslas. Currently, Tesla is the highest-selling pure electric vehicle brand in China ( Model Y sales in China in December last year were 60,055 volumes ) The intense competition in the electric vehicle…
Re: DJI ban passes the House and moves on to the Senate
#718Who decided it is a good idea to pass brands / companies specific bills? If DJI is doing nasty things, prohibit the nasty things DJI doing in the law, not the brand. Then condemn DJI if needed. How do this law protect from any DJi competitor doing the same stuff (or even a spinoff company through a complex scheme)?
Re: DJI ban passes the House and moves on to the Senate
#719Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Source? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nomi... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)... > Are you adjusting for cost of living, per capita, and using the median? Yes, yes, and no (irrelevant because it barely shifts the result)
GDP and GDP PPP are almost irrelevant with regards to personal wealth or lack thereof. A factory making billions to its owner doesn't improve the revenues, wealth or standard of living of more than 1 person. A factory producing luxury Louis Vuitton handbags is good for GDP and the wealth of the factory owner, but is irrelevant to the living conditions of the workers. A private equity firm making wild bets is very "pr…
> Come on, this is Econ 101 and basic logic.
You griping about luxury goods on principle isn't "Econ 101" or "basic logic".
You can look at basically any material metric you like (cars owned, house size, etc.) and Americans come out ahead. Nominal GDP numbers are kind of nonsense, but they're directionally the same nonsense everywhere, so they actually work OK as an international comparison.
Re: DJI ban passes the House and moves on to the Senate
#720Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You are poorer than any European ever could be Are you talking about me, personally, or Americans in general? I suppose it doesn't really matter - you'd be wrong in either case. The median person in the poorest US state is richer than the median person in the UK, for example. Most Americans grumble about paying for healthcare, and we are getting ripped off, but it's also very rare for someone to actually die becaus…
> The median person in the poorest US state is richer than the median person in the UK, for example. This is due to the garbage GDP numbers. Based on these, the quality of life in the Mississippi is better than in Japan. Not a single chance. The US numbers are highly inflated by the financial sector and real estate. It'll take a financial crisis and dethroning of US dollar to show how truly poor these places are.