I cannot for the life of me think of a single foreign product or company operating in China that China hasn't copied for their own version (or ripped off, like the fake Apple stores). The only exceptions are culture companies, where the brand matters more than the product (Pizza Hut; McDonalds; Starbucks).
China could spend billions at the drop of a hat to create their own Chinese Basketball League, but one cannot mandate a LeBron James.
Edit to add: And there's more to a successful and interesting league than recognizable players; moreso in soccer than basketball (and even moreso in American football).
The ~450 NBA players are set to make more than all the Fortune 500 CEOs combined in salary terms, with the new TV rights. China currently can't replicate everything that goes into paying for that (we're talking about $35 billion in salary in just the next 10 years). Buying a few star players won't elevate the overall league, it'll make the league a joke.
China has an economy that is about to be half the size of the US as they are forced to significantly devalue the yuan in the next 12-18 months, and their economy is sinking under a massive and perpetually expanding load of debt. They can't afford to play the game the way they used to, where they'd foolishly pay N times what something is worth just to make it happen. Those days are over, economic normalization is inbound (if they're lucky).
Are you sure about that? How much do the CEOs make?
After some googling, looks like Nike, Coca-cola, Gillette are all doing reasonably well.
What does Uber have besides boatloads of cash and existing market share? From s consumer perspective Uber's competition works just as well (for the most part), whereas alternatives to windows are Limited to MacOS, Linux.
>Coca-cola The classic soda. Even Pepsi's cutesy challenge barely wobbled Coke's throne.
>Gillette "The best a man can get!" Lovely brand. Before I moved to DSC I used them all the time. But razors are just strips of metal after all.
Basically my point is with enough capital and know-how, anyone can create anything. But without an effective and compelling brand, you're a nobody.
China makes quality hardware these days (Xiaomi for example), but "cheap Chinese crap" is such an entrenched phrase it practically rolls off the tongue.
Tautology. Not having a brand is the definition of being a nobody. That doesn't mean you can't make a LOT of money.
http://www.businessinsider.com/r-naked-pcs-lay-bare-microsof...
You really think Travis is going to lose in China? This isn't Google China in 2009. Travis partnered with the crazy guy who got Google kicked out of China.
I won't speculate that Uber will be dominate in China but there's no way they're going away anytime soon.
Reference to Li (CEO of Baidu), expiring Google in China - https://www.quora.com/Why-is-Google-blocked-in-China
Yea, probably. He's done pretty well in most markets, but China isn't most markets.
You really think the Chinese government is going to hand over the country's taxi market to a foreign led/managed/owned company? LOL
The fact that you are comparing Travis to the CCP in the same sentence is laughable, as if he has some magical power that will allow him to defy papa Xi in his own country!
China is merely allowing Uber to experiment and establish the concept of ride-sharing in China. Once that happens they will steamroll them over using every trick in the book, including ironically, lots of regulation!
To address your second point about regulation, Didi Kuaidi doesn't escape regulation any more than Uber does.
http://qz.com/522056/the-chinese-government-just-issued-a-dr...
Uber raised $2B from Chinese investors and is partnered with Baidu. I never said Uber will win the taxi market in China, because that's incredibly hard, but to "LOL" and call my statement "laughable" I believe is a little off considering their strategy.
MS, Android, etc. those are outliers and every story has one. The reality is, the vast majority of foreign companies looking to dominate Chinese market share have met their demise.
I would say _especially_ so for companies that are displacing local operators.
Just think how mad the US taxi industry is about Uber. Now imagine if Uber is owned/operated by Jose in Mexico City. You think our politicians wouldn't regulate the hell out of it? You expect less from the Chinese?
In regards to Didi Kuaidi. Sure they'll be regulated too, but when it comes down to the wire who do you think the government will side with?
I respect that you have a different opinion but you shouldn't assume so easily.
I recently worked for a Chinese software company for over three years. I helped them IPO in China last year before the Chinese stock market collapsed. I know how hard it is to breakthrough in China because my last company had more success in North America and EMEA than APAC. Chinese regulation is hard but I'll side with Uber any day because I believe in Travis and his team, even if you don't.
You are assuming my opinion is easily formed, when it is based off of lots of experience in China and discussions with a wide network of people with even more experience in China.
Uber may succeed in China, but it will be at the blessing of the CCP (another HN commentator raises one possibility: if Chinese investors own a majority of the company). To think "Travis and his team" have any real control in China is - no offense - totally naive.
My statements aren't "laughable" or "totally naive." You just want to be right huh?
The only strategy that matters is how to curry favor with, and kowtow to, the Chinese leadership and central to that strategy, unfortunately, is not being majority foreign owned/operated (especially by Americans).
> My statements aren't "laughable" or "totally naive." You just want to be right huh?
Now you're just projecting.
Your view is in the minority, even here on HN. If you were to take this view to more China-centric online communities, you'll find even fewer supporters.
"Laughable" is mean-spirited, but "naive" is a fitting description.
You know honestly I didn't have an issue with your feedback except that you overreached when you said my comments were "LOL", "naive" and "laughable." That's offensive and arrogant. But you don't stop there, you keep attacking me!
"Your view is in the minority, even here on HN. If you were to take this view to more China-centric online communities, you'll find even fewer supporters."
You don't think I have Chinese friends? You're assuming once again.
And my view is the minority according to YOU! You don't have census data of the world, just your network, so stop attacking every response I have to prove your point!
Wait five years and we'll see who's right about Uber in China. You don't need to keep attacking me every time. It's rude.
Joke's on you, China is the 5th country has Apple Pay. Earlier than most European countries.
http://techcrunch.com/2016/02/17/apple-pay-goes-live-in-chin...
it's confirmed you can withdraw cash from ATM using Apple Pay in China if your UnionPay card has Quickpass enabled.
Rumor says 38 million UnionPay cards added to Apple Pay devices In the first 24 hours.
You really think Uber China is Uber? LOL. It's managed, operated, financed by a Shanghai based independent company called 雾博 infotech.
Who do you think pulls the strings, dictates the strategy, provides the underlying technology?
Saying Uber China is "independent" is even more laughable than "Uber drivers are independent contractors".
I agree that Uber isn't going to lose outright with how they intend to fight in China and I'm actually excited to see how much Uber will change to become CCP acceptable. If Uber wants to win, it will have to sacrifice a lot more than just money.
Call me a jaded person, but Uber shall have learned a lesson.
When they break the law, its distrupty, when someone else does it, its "unfair".
Baidu over Google; Alibaba over Amazon; Renren over Facebook and Twitter (both blocked in China).
Only exception is Apple, but they mostly sell products instead of info (and is fashionable among the Chinese elite). But then, there's always Xiaomi...
Uber is not blocked, for now. That can change in a whim. The Chinese government can simply create regulations that apply to them that do not apply to their local competitors. This has happened many times before in the past....
>Unlike the fact that China still cannot make a smart phone as good as iPhone, or cannot make their own OS like windows, that's they Apple and MS thrived.
While the Chinese did not design the iPhone to say that they "cannot make a smart phone as good" is completely false. For one, the iPhone is largely manufactured in China and has been for a few generations now. Second, some of the best iphone competitors / android devices are being made by Chinese companies.
Such as? Even if true they are running non-chinese OS software...
Making the iPhone in China means they could make iPhones, not necessarily that they can design and build their own full stack phone without "borrowing" heavily from foreign cpetitors.
Huawei M8 is nice and well made.
> Making the iPhone in China means they could make iPhones, not necessarily that they can design and build their own full stack phone without "borrowing" heavily from foreign cpetitors.
I generally agree with this, but you may be underestimating how quickly others can catch up in this globalized world.
Plus the blueprint has been well established by the other big Asian tech companies. Look at how quickly Samsung "caught up".
There is nothing special or unique about Uber. Yes, their app is pretty. Yes, they are ubiquitous around the world. But there is nothing about it that cannot be copied by a Chinese state-owned enterprise. One could argue Uber's only major advantage is its waterfall of investors.
Uber's most significant long tail value is their heaps of traffic flow and passenger data. Sounds like the exact kind of thing a rich and historically totalitarian regime would want for themselves. And if you want to spot patterns in a potential dissident, it helps to know where they go.
More riders = more drivers. More drivers = more riders opening that app first. I have personally learned to check Uber first before Lyft because I know Uber drivers are closer and the fare estimate will be lower. Uber's advantage is their institutional experience pushing competitors out of markets they want and their cutthroat attitude.
Take Google for example. will it break the copyright law to provide MP3 download for its own survival in USA? I bet yes. But in China, it won't. It's not an issue of morality, or suppression of Chinese Community Party.
Amazon VS. Alibaba. Jack Ma personally visited clients to seal deals, would Jeff Bezos do the same to his Chinese clients? I don't think so.
MSN VS. QQ. In 2005/6, 10m+ Chinese MSN users were assaulted by a social engineering hack. It only took 6 months for MS to recognised the issue. Tencent normally reacts in 48 hours.
Twitter VS. Sina Weibo. When Sina decided to do Weibo, it was a full scale operation with so many functions Chinese users loved that even if Twitter was allowed in Chinese market, it would lose in weeks.
when you are playing a market game in China, facing competitors whose lives are in stake, the result is obvious. Your competitors would do anything to survive, including breaking laws, lobbying/bribing govt./officers.
Another reason foreign social networks tend to be blocked in China: if someone makes a post on Weibo or Renren that the party doesn't like, they can simply have it removed without fanfare...along with the poster...
Global(US) company cant survive in China, a major reason is that their services are not competitive enough(although a few exceptions, e.g. Google Search), comparing to local rivals.
Amazon, for example, their delivery is not working in China. Competitors are offering same-day delivery, or even 3-hour delivery one or two years ago in China, while Amazon is relying on some crappy 3rd party delivery with a high deductible you have to meet before your delivery can be free.
Wechat centers around chatting as a take on SNS, and it works. It is not Facebook, but works like Facebook. While the direct copy of Facbook, Renren is long dying.
So it is really a grey area when we talking about success in China. What you need to realize, Chinese companies are very competitive. Shit tons of money pours to Chinese internet companies over the past decade. Tencent/Alibaba are all 100 billions company, and there are sizable of others worth more than 10 billions. Also, China has good engineers too, might not live up to bay area standard, but they are also much cheaper. Last but not least, I want to point out, a lot of 'tech' companies here are not really tech driven, rather they are just tech users, so their model can be easily copied and recreated, not only in China, but also by other big US companies.
All in all, it is not realistic to expect what work here automatically print money in China. South korea is an interesting example, where GFW doesn't exist, but US companies also have a hard time there, it is just that China is bigger so it gets much more attention.
Claiming the domestic market is better because the CCP basically forced all the competition out by quite publicly asking them all to spy on the chinese citizens, politically unfeasible at the time for the US companies, is not that they 'are not competitive enough'.
It's Chinese protectionism and desire for central control.
I honestly feel like you're trying to rewrite what is very well documented history and very recent history at that. It was widely discussed here at the time.
https://googleblog.blogspot.co.uk/2010/03/new-approach-to-ch...
I dont think you use the Chinese internet product that much either. Ecommerce is pretty open in China, if you can survive.
Uber is going to be more like Amazon than Google. Government wont shut it down for ideological reason.
The Chinese market was also big for Google, but once the government makes a decision, that "market" will either infect you (ie obligate you to follow Chinese government rules when it comes to your operations outside of China as well) or make you re-evaluate why you want to be in China at all. Google pulled out. The market isn't as big as people think because it's not actually a market.
It is a market. Just not a free market.
Letting an American company know who in your country is travelling where and meeting with whom for how long would be a risky national-security move even without the FBI and pals advertising their bulldog mentality.