Three Chinese Car Companies Logo on GM main page...

[HarryLui]

Communist GM has arrived?

 

[dave_the_nerd]

So does GM own those companies?

 

[LTC8K6]

General Motors produces vehicles in 37 countries under twelve brands: Chevrolet, Buick, GMC, Cadillac, Holden, HSV, Opel, Vauxhall, Wuling, Baojun, Jie Fang, and Ravon.

12 brands according to Wiki. 3 Chinese brands.

 

[master_shake_]

there was a video in 2012 about this.

 

[Pulsar]

The chinese market is already larger than the US market. Chinese protectionism means that if GM goes over just as GM, their products will be stolen, they will be fined and hassled by fake regulatory agencies, and the courts will rule against them because the government has told them to. They are securing a portion of the market the only way they can. But it doesn't matter, because if they ever DO make huge inroads into the market, China will nationalize their holdings just like they've done to other companies in the past.

How's uber doing in china? Google? Ebay?

 

[Meghan54]

So does GM own those companies?

They're all joint ventures with established Chinese auto manufacturers. GM does not own any of those Chinese companies outright.

 

[96Firebird]

Is it a problem that an American company is trying to make money from Chinese customers?

 

[dave_the_nerd]

Is it a problem that an American company is trying to make money from Chinese customers?

Everything is politics.

 

[agent00f]

So does GM own those companies?

The chinese market is already larger than the US market. Chinese protectionism means that if GM goes over just as GM, their products will be stolen, they will be fined and hassled by fake regulatory agencies, and the courts will rule against them because the government has told them to. They are securing a portion of the market the only way they can. But it doesn't matter, because if they ever DO make huge inroads into the market, China will nationalize their holdings just like they've done to other companies in the past.

How's uber doing in china? Google? Ebay?

The basic requirement for foreign corps to establish much of a foothold in china is joint venture with a domestic (to them) partner, ie basically a trade of expertise for access, so everyone goes in with eyes wide open. It's a generally sound strategy for all parties to make some money and move society forward, and GM getting in early is why they're arguably more successful there than here.

 

[Pulsar]

The basic requirement for foreign corps to establish much of a foothold in china is joint venture with a domestic (to them) partner, ie basically a trade of expertise for access, so everyone goes in with eyes wide open. It's a generally sound strategy for all parties to make some money and move society forward, and GM getting in early is why they're arguably more successful there than here.

Bull. Shit. The Chinese modus operandai is to allow that joint partnership up till they acquire the expertise. Then they will immediately sever ties, through government intervention, a corrupt legal system, or simply locking their 'partner' out. The last 20 years has been the biggest theft of expertise, design, and intellectual property in history and the Chinese have proven adept at it.

They have done it over and over and over, and there quite literally hundreds of examples.

I'm curious exactly why you would misrepresent the Chinese business relationship with their partners so badly.

 

[agent00f]

Bull. Shit. The Chinese modus operandai is to allow that joint partnership up till they acquire the expertise. Then they will immediately sever ties, through government intervention, a corrupt legal system, or simply locking their 'partner' out. The last 20 years has been the biggest theft of expertise, design, and intellectual property in history and the Chinese have proven adept at it.

They have done it over and over and over, and there quite literally hundreds of examples.

I'm curious exactly why you would misrepresent the Chinese business relationship with their partners so badly.

That must be why GM is doing so well there, certainly much better than most any domestic competitor. As to your curiosity, the difference is I can think about the world objectively, like with GM case here.

 

[MongGrel]

there was a video in 2012 about this.

Yep, I was going to mention that one.

And it if far from being just GM by a longshot.

 

[Pulsar]

That must be why GM is doing so well there, certainly much better than most any domestic competitor. As to your curiosity, the difference is I can think about the world objectively, like with GM case here.

So your proof that the Chinese aren't systematically stealing technology from every 'partnership' in their country is that GM is currently making money? Your reasoning, as in so many other threads, is highly suspect. I almost wonder if you have an agenda.

 

[agent00f]

So your proof that the Chinese aren't systematically stealing technology from every 'partnership' in their country is that GM is currently making money? Your reasoning, as in so many other threads, is highly suspect. I almost wonder if you have an agenda.

Seems pretty evident that the proclamations you're bring to this topic are trivially untrue here, almost like you have agenda or something.

 

[Pulsar]

Seems pretty evident that the proclamations you're bring to this topic are trivially untrue here, almost like you have agenda or something.

Any person here can google and find uncountable of incidences of Chinese intellectual property theft. From stolen Russian fighter jets and engines that the chinese 'licensed' to build in country, then stole:

http://nationalinterest.org/feature/china-stole-fighter-russia—-its-coming-the-south-china-sea-17087

to Tesla's:

http://blog.caranddriver.com/ranger...ts-your-big-toy-from-chinas-next-big-startup/

To Ford's:

http://www.foxnews.com/leisure/2014/04/23/chinese-automaker-blatantly-copies-ford-f-150/

But please, by all means, sit there with your thumb up your ass saying "No they don't. Doesn't happen." The knowledge about chinese theft and copy-cat techniques is incredibly wide spread. I'd be shocked to find folks that DON'T already know about it. For you to argue against it...... well that's either total intellectual dishonesty, or an agenda.

Please continue this discussion, but in a civil manner. It appears to be on the verge of insults being tossed back and forth. Lets also try to keep appendages out of orifices.

~DaTT

 

[agent00f]

Any person here can google and find uncountable of incidences of Chinese intellectual property theft. From stolen Russian fighter jets and engines that the chinese 'licensed' to build in country, then stole:

http://nationalinterest.org/feature/china-stole-fighter-russia—-its-coming-the-south-china-sea-17087

to Tesla's:

http://blog.caranddriver.com/ranger...ts-your-big-toy-from-chinas-next-big-startup/

To Ford's:

http://www.foxnews.com/leisure/2014/04/23/chinese-automaker-blatantly-copies-ford-f-150/

But please, by all means, sit there with your thumb up your ass saying "No they don't. Doesn't happen." The knowledge about chinese theft and copy-cat techniques is incredibly wide spread. I'd be shocked to find folks that DON'T already know about it. For you to argue against it...... well that's either total intellectual dishonesty, or an agenda.

Appears you've moved on from pretending how your rants have anything to do with this topic/thread to some broader agenda of intellectual property whatever. Try to keep in mind that any "property" in general is a legal benefit conferred through authority, generally and in this case the gubmint, so charges of "theft" here have substantial less validity than from let's say the RIAA.

There are certainly copycats of name brand western products in China among the tons of new product developed, but much like the actual topic/thread their relative lack of success demonstrates how much people with an agenda overblow the situation. If you cared for the reality of the matter, and that is overly optimistic, mimicking particularly the outward appearance is a way for a podunk generic maker to stand out from a crowd of similar competitors, and their customer base is mostly lower tier consumers attempting to look flash within their budget.

 

[Pulsar]

I'll try this once more. "Joint ventures" in China are not joint ventures. In the end, the Chinese companies end up walking away from their American counterpart and generally do so with the support of their government, courts, and law enforcement. They take the accumulated expertise, machines, and anything else they can and immediately begin producing the same product, or one very similar. In some cases they have literally moved entire factories over the course of a week. I have personally been in a plant that was cleaned out without the American partner knowing anything about it, thinking that the plant was still producing. American companies have repeatedly gone into China naive. They didn't understand what a motivated workforce coupled with a corrupt government can do.

A question was asked where GM owns those companies - and we've provided a pretty clear answer. They don't. They are attempting to make money over there while they can. American companies are smarter now - they know how to grease palms and pay the money they need to pay. But you only 'own' something over there as long as they allow you to.

Intellectual property is a very real thing and enforcement is critical to a country's livelihood. After all, who is going to bother spending years inventing a new battery, or a new fuel cell, all while knowing that the second they are done someone else will copy it and start making it? Your comment blowing off how important intellectual property is just goes to show how little you understand about business in general.

So far you've added nothing to the conversation. You've simply thrown stones. I've produced links and provided a pretty clear picture of the way business functions in China. Do you have anything constructive to add? Or just more stones?

 

[agent00f]

I'll try this once more. "Joint ventures" in China are not joint ventures. In the end, the Chinese companies end up walking away from their American counterpart and generally do so with the support of their government, courts, and law enforcement. They take the accumulated expertise, machines, and anything else they can and immediately begin producing the same product, or one very similar. In some cases they have literally moved entire factories over the course of a week. I have personally been in a plant that was cleaned out without the American partner knowing anything about it, thinking that the plant was still producing. American companies have repeatedly gone into China naive. They didn't understand what a motivated workforce coupled with a corrupt government can do.

A question was asked where GM owns those companies - and we've provided a pretty clear answer. They don't. They are attempting to make money over there while they can. American companies are smarter now - they know how to grease palms and pay the money they need to pay. But you only 'own' something over there as long as they allow you to.

Intellectual property is a very real thing and enforcement is critical to a country's livelihood. After all, who is going to bother spending years inventing a new battery, or a new fuel cell, all while knowing that the second they are done someone else will copy it and start making it? Your comment blowing off how important intellectual property is just goes to show how little you understand about business in general.

So far you've added nothing to the conversation. You've simply thrown stones. I've produced links and provided a pretty clear picture of the way business functions in China. Do you have anything constructive to add? Or just more stones?

Seems completely obvious how convincing these claims are given you can't cite a single instance out of the dozens of substantial/successful auto JVs in china.

 

[Pulsar]

Don't worry man. I'm sure the auto industry is completely different from all the other industries in China.

http://www.chinalawblog.com/2015/04...how-to-give-away-your-ip-in-china-part-2.html

Since foreign companies continue to participate in these ventures, and since the intention of the Chinese side is so transparent, I am forced to conclude either that the foreign companies fully intend to offer their IP to the Chinese side as a gift: a gift Chinese companies are happy to accept.

http://fortune.com/2013/04/15/did-china-steal-japans-high-speed-train/

“Every firm working in China should be aware of the risks related to weak IP protection in the country but often has few choices but to go into these agreements if it wants to gain market share there,”..... Both Japanese and European rail firms now find themselves frozen out and competing with their former Chinese collaborators for new contracts, inside and outside China.

http://www.valuewalk.com/2015/12/what-to-do-when-you-fail-in-china-danone-vs-carlsberg-beer-part-1/

The joint venture grew rapidly and expanded from a small struggling beverage company into a conglomerate of over 40 food joint ventures in milk drinks, soft drinks, bottled water, teas and fruit juices. Over the course of 10 years, Danone and Wahaha built the largest beverage company in China. The joint venture, however, famously fell apart in 2007 — after Wahaha launched its own competing products.

Do you plan on contributing anything? If not, I'm done.

 

[agent00f]

Don't worry man. I'm sure the auto industry is completely different from all the other industries in China.

http://www.chinalawblog.com/2015/04...how-to-give-away-your-ip-in-china-part-2.html

Since foreign companies continue to participate in these ventures, and since the intention of the Chinese side is so transparent, I am forced to conclude either that the foreign companies fully intend to offer their IP to the Chinese side as a gift: a gift Chinese companies are happy to accept.

http://fortune.com/2013/04/15/did-china-steal-japans-high-speed-train/

“Every firm working in China should be aware of the risks related to weak IP protection in the country but often has few choices but to go into these agreements if it wants to gain market share there,”..... Both Japanese and European rail firms now find themselves frozen out and competing with their former Chinese collaborators for new contracts, inside and outside China.

http://www.valuewalk.com/2015/12/what-to-do-when-you-fail-in-china-danone-vs-carlsberg-beer-part-1/

The joint venture grew rapidly and expanded from a small struggling beverage company into a conglomerate of over 40 food joint ventures in milk drinks, soft drinks, bottled water, teas and fruit juices. Over the course of 10 years, Danone and Wahaha built the largest beverage company in China. The joint venture, however, famously fell apart in 2007 — after Wahaha launched its own competing products.

Do you plan on contributing anything? If not, I'm done.

Your contribution here appears some personal committed political rant which has nothing to do with cars or the topic, unfortunately thrusted on any audience you can.

 

[Torn Mind]

There is more than to interpret things here. One such thing is that GM trying to be the Apple of cars. The level of quality depends on whether the Chinese company has a master and what that master demands from the Chinese company. In fact, they already have brand respect. Buicks are far more popular over there and treated as a real luxury marque while the name is still associated with a stigma of "OLD PEOPLE ONLY" over here. It's probably easier to argue "BUY AMERICAN" to the Chinese than it is to an American because they didn't go through the trauma of decades of underwhelming, problematic offerings GM put out after the Japanese gained a competitive foothold in the USA.

I wouldn't put it past the Chinese to be thieves and counterfeiters there either though. A black market transfer of capital is just another way to enrich themselves further.

 

[Pulsar]

Your contribution here appears some personal committed political rant which has nothing to do with cars or the topic, unfortunately thrusted on any audience you can.

So you got nothing, and are just trolling. Thanks for the confirmation.

 

[agent00f]

So you got nothing, and are just trolling. Thanks for the confirmation.

It's trivial to cherry pick unrelated business cases, let's say the american president's involvement in the failure of Atlantic City, and proclaim some extrapolated trend to domestic/Detroit auto futures. They both involve the US after all. Of course that would be an incredibly stupid argument, except to the comically inept.

 

[1prophet]

China, the woe behind our diminishing lifestyle or the great equalizer, easy to blame but who is really at fault?

My fellow Americans, Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country.
John F. Kennedy

Today just empty words to most and a dangerous phrase to the neo liberals and the globalization movement where people are resources, commodities if you will to be exploited and discarded and nationalism and borders just get in the way.

Greed is good, ends justify the means, profits only matter, a companies only purpose is to make money for the shareholders, etc., etc. also know as the root of all evil, the love of money.

Those are the principles and guiding words most of the corporate elite follow, because it has been drilled into them like religious dogma that few if any realize and fewer are capable of questioning.

In America we did question those beliefs through labor laws, environmental rules, safety rules, tax policies, etc which resulted in prosperity for many not just the few and kept big business in check instead of running rampant like some weed choking the very country that provided that prosperity.


But there were those that believed they deserved more of the economic pie while investing less in the country that provided those profits, and one way to do that was with free trade agreements that allowed them to bypass all those rules, regulations, and of course higher wages that got in the way of what they believed to be rightfully theirs.

If free trade agreements were rainbows then China was the pot of gold at the end of those rainbows, a billion plus serf like human automatons ready to be exploited by multinational corporations allowing them to make incredible profits without all those rules, regulations, workers rights as well as higher labor costs that they had to deal with stateside.

These companies took a page out of the financial sector and wanted to skim the profits off the top and let someone else deal with the responsibility and burdens that came with labor laws, safety rules, environmental rules, as well as wage and benefit costs.

The Chinese weren't stupid, they knew that the Achilles heel of these multinationals was their own greed and they played along like the good serf in order for them to build China up to western standards in manufacturing while borrowing their IP and now slowly one by one they are letting these companies know they really don't need them anymore and if they want to do business its going to be the Chinese way and the Chinese way alone.

 

[agent00f]

China largely uses a modified version of the asian economic "miracle" model, to similar successes as japan/korea/etc. The major modification is much less import restrictions in exchange for IP/expertise sharing; just try selling an american car in those others. For the host it has the benefit of great development speed at the risk of foreign brand/market dominance, which is obvious enough to anyone who's been there. Again, everyone knows the deal going in; well, except for dummies feinting surprise after the fact.

---

More specific to this subject, GM's competitors here are hardly the gubmint or whatever but the literally dozens of other auto manufacturers fighting for their piece of the pie. There's more competition in that market than pretty much any other, so of course there's going to be plenty of failure and the excuses losers make that the disgruntled latch onto.