Live data from Hacker News

Amazon Quits China Market

pandaily.com

181–190 of 316 posts

Re: Amazon Quits China Market

#181
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?

It seems the parent is suggesting that we block Chinese companies from operating in the USA, basically tit-for-tat retribution. Based on "...while their own companies operate freely in those foreign countries"

This might be applicable for hardware sales, but for service companies (including ecommerce, search, ride hailing, all the big USA tech company niches) it's kind of a moot point. None of the big Chinese companies put any effort into working outside of China. In fact my biggest complaint is they don't do any internationalization at all, so if you don't read Chinese you basically can't use anything. To the extend that services even work outside of China they are mainly only used by Chinese people, see for example WeChat or Taobao or Baidu. So I'm not sure this line of action would have any effect.

If the parent instead meant blocking Americans from doing any business with China (as a manufacturer of smartphones, for example), that's likely to have much more downside to American companies and consumers than to China, so we'd be shooting ourselves in the foot.

But all these points are debatable, see all the back-and-forth about the tariffs/trade war. Some great economic write-ups on all sides.

Re: Amazon Quits China Market

#182

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.

>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.

Do you have any evidence that this is what happened in this situation??

> And yes the article is bullshit because this same government won't allow any negative press about their actions either.

Again. Could be true, but how am I supposed to know that your interpretation is correct?

Re: Amazon Quits China Market

#183
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?

Individual actions to enforce norms often costs more than the individual infringements. Arresting, prosecuting and rehabilitating someone who commits property crime could cost many tens of thousands of dollars. It's worth it in the long-run, though, despite game-theoretic oversimplifications, because it reduces crime in the long run.

(Almost) everyone agrees that protectionist policies are directly harmful to America's economy. I wonder if people might be more willing to accept them as tools to encourage change in other countries behaviour if they were sold better, though, or sold by someone else.

Re: Amazon Quits China Market

#184
post #165

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…

So then what other US company such as KFC, Starbucks, Coach, Tiffany & Co., Estée Lauder and Michael Kors do differently so they allowed to compete and enjoy success in china ?

As I've said, anyone can compete and enjoy success in China. However you must follow their rules and there will be subtle to overt controls placed on your operations and growth if you ever come near risking their political positions or existing monopolies.

Re: Amazon Quits China Market

#185
post #164

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…

Well that's exactly what Trump is doing with his trade war [1].

The goals are: 1) removing trade/current-account imbalance (which has improved on its own due to the massive spike in Chinese tourism [2]), 2) allowing more Western companies enter China without forced technology transfer or other "unfair" practices, 3) reducing the rampant intellectual property violations in China.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China%E2%80%93United_States_tr...

[2] https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2019/03/14/c...

Re: Amazon Quits China Market

#186
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?

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.

The downvotes agree, but the parent comment didn't try to argue against an equal propping - they argued against any propping. The US has quite clearly propped up specific private business in the past - banks that failed to responsibly offer loans were bailed out, the auto industry has been bailed out, defense contractors only exist due to the immense amount of the total tax revenue that gets funneled to them.

Amazon has past the point where vertical integration questions should be raised and a break up should be considered for the public interest - not pursuing it for them (or Walmart, or Google, or many other too-large-to-fail corporations) is another form of assistance the government offers them.

The US is not a free market and participates in private industry subsidization both with and against the public interest but, I agree, it's no where near China's levels - to keep it from getting to those levels we need to acknowledge how bad it has already gotten.

Re: Amazon Quits China Market

#187
post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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...

How much of those are legitimate though? There have been cases of fraud and falsifying information.

"Since 2012, the country has retracted more scientific papers because of faked peer reviews than all other countries and territories put together,..."

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/13/world/asia/china-science-...

Re: Amazon Quits China Market

#188
post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So then what other US company such as KFC, Starbucks, Coach, Tiffany & Co., Estée Lauder and Michael Kors do differently so they allowed to compete and enjoy success in china ?

As I've said, anyone can compete and enjoy success in China. However you must follow their rules and there will be subtle to overt controls placed on your operations and growth if you ever come near risking their political positions or existing monopolies.

Of course, like in anywhere else then.

Re: Amazon Quits China Market

#189
post #164

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…

Hasn't this been obvious for years? Like, centuries? No major power allows other nations, especially nations which are not close military allies, to dominate its economy. China acts in its own self-interest, as does...every other nation in the history of the planet which is able to. The U.K., the U.S., or any other major economic power, will not allow its economy to be dominated by companies from countries that it does not trust as a close military ally. Both the U.K. and the U.S. only became in favor of free trade once they were the dominant economic power of the world, and prior to that was protectionist. Japan and South Korea protected their economies as they grew, to the extent (given their size) that made sense to. If you're the size of Singapore or the Netherlands, of course, things are different, as you simply cannot do everything, however developed your economy. Also, the U.S. allows someone like the U.K. to have a much bigger presence, because of many cultural and military ties.

But the idea that China ever intended to continue to allow western companies to dominate their economy, once they were developed enough to do something about it, is naive. No nation, that can avoid that, allows it.

Re: Amazon Quits China Market

#190
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…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN