Chinese Economics Thread

LesAdieux

Junior Member
the economist magazine predicts: China's economy will overtake America's in 2019

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


"CHINA jumped ahead of Japan in 2010 to become the world’s second-biggest economy, but when will it grab the number-one slot? The Economist’s interactive chart allows you to make your own predictions. The relative paths of GDP in dollar terms in China and America depend not only on real growth rates but also on inflation and the yuan’s exchange rate against the dollar. Over the past decade real GDP growth averaged 10.5% a year in China and 1.7% in America; inflation averaged 3.8% and 2.2% respectively. Since Beijing scrapped its dollar peg in 2005, the yuan has risen by an annual average of 4.2%. Our best guess for the next decade is that annual real GDP growth averages 7.75% in China and 2.5% in America, inflation rates average 4% and 1.5%, and the yuan appreciates by 3% a year. Plug in these numbers and China will overtake America in 2019. But if China’s real growth rate slows to an annual average of only 5%, then (leaving the other assumptions unchanged) China would become number one in 2022. Please place your own bets."
 

Maggern

Junior Member
Well I guess that's another argument against China. If you want to be No. 1, you must let the yuan appreciate ;)

(Will make their economy larger in dollar terms)

I find it interesting that they arrive at such an early date while still using fairly conservative numbers. 2.5% growth for the US is relatively high over a long period of time....they managed over 3% for a while, but we all saw what that was built on. 7.5% growth for China is pretty conservative. It's only just above the government's stated minimum tolerable growth rate. Even in the worst of the crisis, China managed to stay above 8%.
 
Last edited:

LesAdieux

Junior Member
the forecast is based on rather moderate assumptions: 7.75% growth, 4% inflation and 3% currency appreciation

exponential growth generates figure that is hard to believe: suppose in 1776 one american put one dollar in a fund which generating the same return as china's average growth rate for the past 30 years, today the worth of that one dollar investment is 1,670,720,830
 
Last edited:

Red Moon

Junior Member
Well I guess that's another argument against China. If you want to be No. 1, you must let the yuan appreciate ;)

(Will make their economy larger in dollar terms)

I find it interesting that they arrive at such an early date while still using fairly conservative numbers. 2.5% growth for the US is relatively high over a long period of time....they managed over 3% for a while, but we all saw what that was built on. 7.5% growth for China is pretty conservative. It's only just above the government's stated minimum tolerable growth rate. Even in the worst of the crisis, China managed to stay above 8%.

Actually, the 3% Yuan appreciation rate is also conservative in that it falls within the actual range of Chinese policy. They have spelled out, I don't remember where, that 3% is acceptable. The reason is that if they can convince the George Soros' of the world, and all those multinational corporations that can move money around the world under the pretext of trading and investing, that appreciation will be no higher than 3%, then these people will conclude that the gamble is not really worth it. Conversely, if they are seen as allowing a faster appreciation, the upward pressure on the Yuan will be much greater than it actually is today, as will bubbles in real estate, stocks and commodities, because "investors" (actually - speculators) will see it as a one way bet. This is what happened to Japan in the late 80's.
 

KYli

Brigadier
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


By SHAI OSTER, NORIHIKO SHIROUZU And PAUL GLADER

BEIJING—Foreign companies have been teaming up with Chinese ones for years to gain access to the giant Chinese market. Now some of the world's biggest companies are taking a risky but potentially rewarding second step—folding pieces of their world-wide operations into partnerships with Chinese companies to do business around the globe.



General Electric Co. is finalizing plans for a 50-50 joint venture with a Chinese military-jet maker to produce avionics, the electronic brains of aircraft. The deal with Aviation Industry Corp. of China would give GE access to a Chinese government project aimed at challenging Boeing Co. and Airbus in the civilian-aircraft market.

General Motors Co. established a joint venture this year with SAIC Motor Corp., its longtime partner in China, to produce and sell their no-frills Wuling-brand microvans in India, and eventually in Southeast Asia and other emerging markets as well.

The two deals show China Inc.'s growing international ambitions, as well as its increasing leverage over foreign partners. To make the GE deal happen, GE Chief Executive Jeffrey Immelt made an extraordinary concession, agreeing to fold into the venture all of GE's existing world-wide business in nonmilitary avionics. GM, in its deal, contributed technology, its manufacturing facilities in India and use of its Chevrolet brand name in that market.

Several forces are motivating China's foreign partners to strike global deals that would have been unthinkable a few years back. China's big government-backed companies now have enormous financial resources and growing political clout, making them attractive partners outside China. In addition, the Chinese market has become so important to the success of multinational companies that Beijing has the ability to drive harder bargains.



Western companies working on China's C919 jet mostly through joint ventures

General Electric Co.
Avionics, cockpit-display systems, on-board maintenance systems and flight recorders.

Rockwell Collins Inc. Communication, navigation and surveillance systems.

Eaton Corp.
Fuel and hydraulic systems, cockpit-panel assemblies and dimming-control system.

Hamilton Sundstrand Corp.
Electrical power systems.

Honeywell International Inc. Flight-control systems, auxiliary-power unit, wheels and brakes.

Liebherr-Aerospace Toulouse SAS
Landing gear and air-management systems.

Parker Hannifin Corp.
Hydraulics, flight-control and fuel-tank systems.

But such deals also carry risk. Several earlier joint ventures inside China have soured over concerns that Chinese partners, after gaining access to Western technology and know-how, have gone on to become potent new rivals to their partners.

"Foreign partners are seeing they will have to sometimes sacrifice or share the benefits of the global market with the Chinese partner," says Raymond Tsang, a China-based partner at consultancy Bain & Co. "Some of the [multinational corporations] are complaining. But given the changing market conditions, if you don't do it, your competitors will."

Big energy companies, too, have been pursuing international deals with Chinese companies. China has supplanted the U.S. as the world's biggest energy consumer, making access to its market vital for global companies. Foreign firms hope that teaming up with Chinese companies abroad will help on that front. Foreign companies supply technology and experience, and their Chinese partners provide geopolitical clout, low-cost labor, and easy access to credit that China's government-backed companies enjoy.

State-owned China National Petroleum Corp. was one of the first foreign oil companies to sign a major contract in Iraq. BP PLC teamed up with it last year for a $15 billion investment to increase output at the giant Rumaila field. Over the summer, Royal Dutch Shell PLC joined with PetroChina Co., a publicly traded subsidiary of China National Petroleum, on a $3.15 billion acquisition of assets from Australian energy company Arrow Energy Ltd.

China has been gaining clout in some resource-rich parts of the developing world where U.S. companies don't have strong footholds, partly by spending lavishly on infrastructure projects, and it can help broker deals in places like Venezuela and Myanmar, where it has good relations.

In financial services, foreign banks long have coveted access to China's fast-growing securities business. China has allowed a number of companies into the market in recent years through joint ventures, with their stakes capped at about 33%. Chinese regulators also restrict which parts of the securities business they can do.

Crédit Agricole SA already is involved in such a joint venture through its Asian brokerage arm, called CLSA Asia-Pacific Markets, but it is a minor player in China. In May, its investment-banking unit announced a preliminary deal with China's government-owned Citic Securities Co. to form a joint venture beyond China's borders. The French company plans to contribute CLSA and other pieces of its international operation. Citic Securities would throw in its small international unit, based in Hong Kong. Crédit Agricole hopes that helping Citic Securities realize its international ambitions will enable the French bank to expand its business in China.
[CHINAINC]

But talks have gone slower than expected. The two companies said this month that they had agreed on certain key terms, but extended a year-end deadline for a final deal to June 30, without explaining the delay.

Some joint ventures in China have stumbled because of spats with local partners or because the partnerships enable Chinese companies to learn enough about industries to become new competitors to their Western partners.

Kawasaki Heavy Industries Ltd. and Siemens AG, for example, worked with Chinese partners to help build China's high-speed rail network. Now the Chinese companies are bidding against them for international contracts—using products at least partly based on the foreign firms' technology. Last year, France's Groupe Danone SA accepted a cash payment to terminate its joint ventures with China's Hangzhou Wahaha Group Co. after a nasty public feud. The French company had alleged that Wahaha's boss had produced and sold Wahaha-branded beverages supposedly owned by the joint venture through a separate network he owned. Wahaha denied the accusation.

GE's avionics deal with Aviation Industry, or AVIC, also is vulnerable, says Jim Wasson, president of Growth Strategies International LLC, an aerospace and defense consulting firm, and a former GE Aviation executive. The fear is that "once AVIC knows enough about how to do this, they'll kick [GE] out and be on their own," he says.

Lorraine Bolsinger, chief executive of GE Aviation Systems, acknowledges there were concerns within GE about protecting technology. "It was very controversial," she says of the proposed deal. "It was really us knuckle-dragging technology guys that think we had a lot to protect." In the end, she says, "when we and the Chinese together create intellectual property, we are darn right going to protect it."

These days, big Chinese state companies with access to cheap funds and other government support are gunning to dominate some of the same industries that firms like GE have targeted as growth opportunities, from clean technology to turbines.

Even so, GE has such high hopes for China that Mr. Immelt has called it "our second home market." Two years ago, Mr. Immelt said China revenue would double to $10 billion by 2010. But last year it reached just $5.3 billion.

GE saw working with AVIC as a chance to boost its avionics business, which has lagged behind Honeywell International Inc. and Rockwell Collins Inc. The planned venture, to be based in Shanghai, has been chosen to supply China's planned C919 jet, which has the potential to grab a big slice of the Chinese civilian-aviation market. Boeing estimates that market will be worth more than $400 billion over the next 20 years, second only to the U.S.

In negotiations, GE is asking AVIC to match the value of the technology GE is contributing with a cash investment, according to people at GE. If a deal is finalized, all of GE's existing and future civilian avionics contracts will go to the joint venture. Negotiations were supposed to be done by mid-2010, but the parties now hope to finish them by early 2011.

GE executives say the AVIC deal is their closest cooperation ever with a Chinese partner. GE has 45 people in China on the project now, and it is hiring or moving several hundred more people there, even before final terms are hammered out.

AVIC, which makes fighter jets and helicopters in addition to civilian products, has ambitions outside of China. "For the aviation industry, there is no regional market, only the global market," the company said in a statement. "AVIC's strategy is to actively integrate itself into the industrial chain of the world's aviation industry, and to become a truly global company."

Last month, China unveiled the first life-size mock-up of the C919. Other foreign companies have negotiated similar joint ventures to make other parts.

"Our hope and desire is that this joint venture maintains a working-together partnership that benefits both," says Kent Statler, executive vice president at Rockwell Collins, which has a joint venture to supply the C919 with communications systems. "But let's not be naive. We realize that this could turn into a competitor."

For GM, the stakes are especially high: China became the world's largest auto market last year.

Back in 1997, GM decided to plow more than $1 billion into a 50-50 joint venture with SAIC to make Buicks. At the time, it was seen as a risk because car sales had yet to take off in China. This year, GM's China ventures are on track to sell nearly 2.27 million vehicles in the country, compared to 2.18 million sold by GM in the U.S., according to research firm IHS Automotive.

Much of GM's recent growth in China has come through a second joint venture set up in 2002 with SAIC and another Chinese company. The venture, SAIC GM Wuling Automobile Co., makes boxy microvans costing as little as $4,500, which have proven popular in China's smaller cities and towns. Last year Wuling became the first brand in China to sell a million cars in a year. This year, it's expected to account for nearly one-sixth of GM vehicle sales world-wide. Last month, GM reached a deal to buy an additional 10% interest in Wuling for $51 million from the venture's third investor, raising GM's stake to 44%. SAIC owns 50%.

The India joint venture, which began operating in February, is part of GM's effort with SAIC to replicate its China success in other markets. It will produce cars based on its Chinese Wulings, but will sell them under the Chevrolet brand. GM contributed its brand, India factories and dealer network, while SAIC contributed about $300 million to $350 million, a senior GM executive said when the deal was announced.

"We think the business model we have in China with SAIC and the product lineups we have in China are ripe for export to other parts of the world," says Kevin Wale, chief of GM's China operations.

GM and SAIC already have made less ambitious forays abroad together. They export Chevy Sail compacts designed and made in China to Chile and Peru, and are jointly developing more new models to be sold globally, such as the Buick LaCrosse, a sedan designed by teams in Shanghai and Warren, Mich., and sold in China and the U.S.

The India deal takes that cooperation a step beyond shipping jointly produced vehicles overseas. GM and SAIC executives and engineers will be posted in India to design, produce and market cars locally—something SAIC currently has almost no experience with.

One risk to GM is that the venture will better position SAIC to compete abroad on its own—against GM.

Already, SAIC has grown into a powerhouse at home, in part through learning from GM. In 2006, SAIC launched its own solo brand in China, called Roewe. It now competes domestically with the Buicks that SAIC makes with GM. The Roewe brand, which is based it on technology acquired from the now-defunct MG Rover Group Ltd., along with a related nameplate, MG Mingju, sold 146,323 cars in the first 11 months of this year, up 78% from the year-earlier period, according to J.D. Power & Associates. Buick's sales in China, while more than three times as large, grew one-third as fast over the same period.

"Roewe offers comparable products at lower price points and is taking away from GM and others," says Michael Dunne, an auto-industry veteran who heads Hong Kong-based investment advisory firm Dunne & Co.

Last year, GM agreed transfer 1% of its stake in Shanghai GM, its main Chinese joint venture, to SAIC, giving its Chinese partner 51% and effective control. GM said at the time the move would give it better access to credit from Chinese banks, and pave the way for its bigger stake in the Wuling venture.

Last month, GM said the two companies are looking at the possibility of selling SAIC's MG-branded cars through GM's world-wide sales channels. The move could open the door for SAIC's cars to make inroads into Britain, where the MG brand was once based, according to an individual close to GM. Also last month, SAIC paid $500 million for a 1% stake in GM as part of the Detroit auto maker's initial public offering.

SAIC is "very well situated to meet Western [car companies] head on," says Michael Robinet, a U.S.-based senior analyst with consulting firm IHS Automotive. "There's no doubt in my mind, MG and Roewe are going to be both very good launch pads for SAIC to look at new markets beyond China."

Write to Shai Oster at [email protected], Norihiko Shirouzu at [email protected] and Paul Glader at [email protected]

Copyright 2010 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. Distribution and use of this material are governed by our Subscriber Agreement and by copyright law. For non-personal use or to order multiple copies, please contact Dow Jones Reprints at 1-800-843-0008 or visit
 

Martian

Senior Member
Shanghai becomes world's busiest container port

1rjMn.jpg

Cargo ships loaded with containers dock at a port in Shanghai, in this Sept. 17, 2010 file photo. [Photo/Xinhua]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


"Shanghai claims world's busiest container port
13:34, January 09, 2011

Shanghai replaced Singapore as the world's busiest container port in 2010, thanks to the growing Chinese trade and booming business generated by the World Expo held in Shanghai last year, China Daily reported Saturday.

Shanghai's port handled 29.05 million twenty-foot equivalent units (TEUs) in 2010, China Daily cited a statement by the municipal government as reporting.

That compared with the 28.4 million TEUs handled by the Port of Singapore in 2010, which was up 9.9 percent from 2009, according to the Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore.

Shanghai's cargo throughput rose to around 650 million tonnes in 2010, maintaining its top global spot, according to the statement.

China's State Council, or cabinet, has set an aim of making Shanghai a leading shipping center by 2020 -- the same year by which the government hopes the city will become a global financial center.

Shanghai's port is operated by Shanghai International Port (Group) Co.

Source: Xinhua"

Note: Thank you to "Brotherhood" for the newslink.
 

Martian

Senior Member
China surpassed Japan in 2009 GDP

China's revised 2009 GDP is $5.15 trillion. Japan's GDP in 2009 was $5.07 trillion. We now know that China surpassed Japan in GDP at the end of 2009. China's 2009 revision is important because the economic base has now grown bigger. China's 2010 GDP growth of 10 percent will be calculated using the revised GDP figure for 2009.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


"China's 2009 GDP growth rate revised up to 9.2%
By Amy Wong | January 11, 2011 1:11 PM EST

China on Tuesday revised up its gross domestic product (GDP) growth rate in 2009 to 9.2 percent from the previous 9.1 percent.

In a statement on its website, the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) gave no explanation for the revision, but a chart breaking down the output figures indicated all the additional gains came from the tertiary, or service, sector.

After the revision, China's GDP at current price was 34.0903 trillion yuan (5.15 trillion U.S. dollars) in 2009, up by 39.6 billion yuan from the previous figure, the NBS said.

After the verification, the value added output of the service sector was 14.8038 trillion yuan, up 39.6 billion yuan from the figure released in July.

This was the second revision of the 2009 GDP growth figure. The Chinese government in July revised its preliminary verified GDP growth in 2009 to 9.1 percent, up from 8.7 percent due to higher contributions from secondary and service industries.

The NBS will release China's GDP growth figures for the fourth quarter and the whole of last year on January 20."

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


"Japan’s nominal gross domestic product for the second quarter totaled $1.288 trillion, less than China’s $1.337 trillion, the Japanese Cabinet Office said today. Japan remained bigger in the first half of 2010, the government agency said. Japan’s annual [2009] GDP is $5.07 trillion, while China’s [unrevised 2009 GDP] is more than $4.9 trillion."
 

kroko

Senior Member
WSJ article

Here is an news article of WSJ. What do you make of it? for me two things stand out:

- The USA wont be restricted by the OECD rules when dealing with trade with china, challenging china´s trade pratices;

- US Congress´s foreign affairs committe is considering holding hearings about china´s "hot topics" DURING hu´s visit. If that happens, it will be a major embarrassment to hu. IMO, its like saying: we open the doors to you, but your not welcome.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Lets see how all of this turns out.
 
Last edited:

Martian

Senior Member
U.S. and China - a complicated relationship

Here is an news article of WSJ. What do you make of it? for me two things stand out:

- The USA wont be restricted by the OECD rules when dealing with trade with china, challenging china´s trade pratices;

- US Congress´s foreign affairs committe is considering holding hearings about china´s "hot topics" DURING hu´s visit. If that happens, it will be a major embarrassment to hu. IMO, its like saying: we open the doors to you, but your not welcome.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Lets see how all of this turns out.

1. The prospect of the U.S. Congress talking tough about China is nothing new. It has been happening for as long as I can remember. I think the Chinese government is used to it. Look on the bright side, things have improved considerably. Unlike the Korean War in the early 1950s, the U.S. is no longer talking about nuking China.

2. Pakistan is hardly a good test of whether the U.S. can match China's prowess in foreign markets. Pakistan receives billions of dollars in U.S. foreign military and economic aid.

3. The fundamental problem is that the United States cannot match the China Price for expensive and sophisticated industrial goods. If you were the leader of a country, would you pay premium prices for American railcars, construction equipment, highways, dams, etc.? Or would you rather obtain the same products from China at prices that are "30% to 50% cheaper than the GE products?"

Here is the conundrum: How do you compete against a country that possesses first-world technology (e.g. Chinese spacewalk, world's-fastest 380 kph trains, world's-fastest supercomputer, world's-largest Three Gorges Dam, etc.) and can manufacture them at developing-world prices? Quite frankly, I have no idea on how to solve this challenge.

----------

From the Wall Street Journal link that you provided:

"Pakistan had indicated its interest in buying locomotives made by GE if the U.S. matched China's financing terms, which were sweeter than those allowed by the OECD agreement. The Chinese railcars were 30% to 50% cheaper than the GE products, but U.S. officials said Pakistan wanted the American equipment.

"The underlying premise has been that we ought to let products compete on their own merits, their own quality, their own value, and not let financing be a distorting factor," Mr. Hochberg said. China, not an OECD member, has long operated outside the group's agreed-upon terms. "Tolerance of that began to wear thin over the last 18 months," Mr. Hochberg said."
 
Last edited:
Top