Chinese Economics Thread

[broadsword]

I am sure Sony Ericcson never made it to the top of the table. Before they merger, Sony was not the top two and they merged only because Ericcson was floundering. But even if Sony was the number one maker before the merger, their combined turnover would still suffer after the introduction of the Iphone.

 

[broadsword]

But just to add, Sony Ericcson has been surviving unlike Nokia and Motorola. I think their selling point is their camera.

 

[PanAsian]

I would not see the decline in the success and prestige of Japanese consumer electronics only as a story about being undercut by increasingly competitive South Korean and now Chinese products. Sony and other Japanese manufacturers missed the boat regarding the PC and software-driven development in the 1990s and never seemed to recover, thereafter they have always been on the defensive.

Note that Japan did not lose its dominance in music (Walkman, CD) to SK or China, but to USA with the iPod -- which in turn laid the foundation for the success of the iPhone, another development that Sony was not ready for, leading it to fall in with Google's Android (like everyone else) and in turn opening the door to commoditisation. There was a cultural blindness here, or inability or unwillingness to adapt fast enough, to get ahead of the curve and dictate the path that others would follow. There are lessons here for China.

I wouldn't say its cultural cultural but rather private capital and consumer market cultural. When it comes to leading consumer innovation there are huge risks starting with whether there will be market adoption, if so then there will likely be competition and fighting over standardization, possibly technological change curveballs and game changers, and an eventual race to the bottom in commoditization. It takes strategic vision, a lot of risk appetite, large investments, leadership persistence and adaptation over a relatively long time. Unless a company is primarily targeting its own country's consumer market where it may have home field advantages, or at least no disadvantages, it may just find the endeavor too risky. Beta vs VHS is the only genuine foreign-domestic competition example I can think of. Depending on the industry China's, as well as India's, companies may have the advantage over Japan or South Korea of targeting their own country's market rather than having to target another country or region.

 

[FirnCavalry]

while looking for the SCS news now
https://www.sinodefenceforum.com/chinas-scs-strategy-thread.t3118/page-393#post-429219
I noticed about "supply-side structural reform" (the first time I've heard of it) in Yearender-Xinhua Insight: From plans to progress: the first year of China's supply-side reform
source is Xinhua | 2016-12-18 17:43:37

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Well. Sorry to bother you with such a tone-twisted phrase. China's official ecnomists created it to avoid using some sensitive phrase like 'Residual Value', 'Over Production', and/or 'Ecnomic Crisis', which should belong to your capitalist countries!

 

[KIENCHIN]

Sony Ericcsson did alright I think?

I don't think so, it was completely outclassed by Nokia back then, which finally led to the break up of the joint venture. The problem with Japanese companies is, it's top down management style when it comes to decision making that is out of the SOPP, it takes so long to get an approval by which time it is usually too late, this all good when it is in a factory set up where a wrong decision can upset production and quality control but out in the field where things are fluid, decisions somtimes has to be made on the go. I used to work for a Japanese company and it is painful getting the go ahead from the top.

 

[broadsword]

Well. Sorry to bother you with such a tone-twisted phrase. China's official ecnomists created it to avoid using some sensitive phrase like 'Residual Value', 'Over Production', and/or 'Ecnomic Crisis', which should belong to your capitalist countries!

You don't think 'economic crisis' and 'over production' are illnesses while 'supply-side structural reform' is the set of measures to cure the illnesses? You think they are the same?

 

[broadsword]

I don't think so, it was completely outclassed by Nokia back then, which finally led to the break up of the joint venture. The problem with Japanese companies is, it's top down management style when it comes to decision making that is out of the SOPP, it takes so long to get an approval by which time it is usually too late, this all good when it is in a factory set up where a wrong decision can upset production and quality control but out in the field where things are fluid, decisions somtimes has to be made on the go. I used to work for a Japanese company and it is painful getting the go ahead from the top.

I was told that was the reason. They were too unwieldy while the cellphone communication standards were in a fluid state, like a moving target. There were CDMA, WCDMA, etc, etc. I mean the industry wheezed past the likes of Japanese electronic giants like Panasonic, NEC, Hitachi and their cohorts.

 

[FirnCavalry]

I do think they are illness and it IS a set of measure, and they are Not the same. I mean those ecnomists created a new concept to make it looks like a 'new' one. Do you know traditionally for a CP, what should he do to handle a ecnomic crisis?

 

[broadsword]

What is a CP?

 

[FirnCavalry]

What is a CP?

Member of the Communist Party.