Hacker News Reader

Comment by rdlecler1 | Hacker News Reader

Any non-Chinese company that insists on tying its fortune to the Chinese market is taking on tremendous risk. The goal posts are always changing , you need to constantly worry about IP theft, you can easily get on the wrong side of the government, and they strongly protect local interests. Investment is welcome, but as soon as you actually start making a lot of money and recouping your investment some barrier of sorts is bound to appear and you'll be phased out in favor of a local player. This is going to come back to haunt China at a time when growth is slowing and when they are going to need investment the most.

View on HN

> "This is going to come back to haunt China at a time when growth is slowing and when they are going to need investment the most."

The market has a short memory. China can act this way for as long as it is profitable. As soon as it starts to hurt them, they can stage a 'revolution' and after a few years of playing nice, all will be forgiven. That's what scapegoats are for, transferring sins.

Not entering the market is also a risk. Say you're an app developer and you don't publish your app on Chinese app stores, chances are someone else will do it anyway and steal the revenue. Good luck finding it and getting it taken down. (Off course chances are it'll still be stolen even if you publish it yourself there)

That's a pretty limited case that doesn't affect 99.9% of economic activity.

Working real hard and getting shut down is more personally-negative than doing nothing and having someone else profit.

Both ways, you get no revenue, but one way, you waste a lot of time first. It's not worth compromising your principles in order to capture 18% of the world market. 82% is a lot bigger than 18%.

How do you think of Google is putting their best effort to head back to China ? They were working real hard and getting shut down.

They are? I thought they left China for good.

No, http://9to5google.com/2016/01/11/google-play-services-in-chi...

I think that one founder had an array of reasons to leave China. This was not the only result of said array of reasons, which infuriated another founder. Regulations were met. Now one founder wants to undo unwelcomed results. It is his doing and what other founders and shareholders think gets circumvented through elegant solution implementation. Be evil by appearing good.

Chinese don't care about the global Capitalist class. Chinese care about China. It's the way it should be. South Koreans also don't care about the foreign Capitalist class and neither do the Japanese. The only reason they allow foreign investment is for market development and perhaps to get some corporate know-how and secrets.

Chinese don't need the money, most Chinese can get the loans from the government based on half-lies according to a Chinese friend of mine.

In America the Capitalist class also plays by its own rules. They will steal an idea, pump it with money, then dump it on the public... and walk away with billions. While the product lasts maybe a year or two. Bad CEOs are blamed and the cycle repeats itself. US government steals secrets and gives them to major corporations, can be proven, etc.

Honestly, people are simply rooting for their own team. The rules that they play with always favor some party which has power in whatever country. If they don't the country is corrupt and not prospering.

This is sad truth, but yet still truth.

> In America the Capitalist class also plays by its own rules. They will steal an idea, pump it with money, then dump it on the public... and walk away with billions. While the product lasts maybe a year or two.

Billions? Billion dollar companies are rare and ones that reach billions and only last a only year are two can be counted on your fingers.

Perhaps it's hyperbole, but it happens. Maybe the losses are smaller maybe the time frame is longer. Whatever, it happens.

I think that quote refers to the cumulative amount swindled by the capitalist class, not the particular amount that an individual member may get away with.

You may search what happened to Microsoft's Chinese business, especially the sales of Windows, and their partnership to China Electronics Corporation. And why companies like NASDAQ: SINA ,NASDAQ: PWRD must use a VIE structure. Whenever there is a rule, there is a way to legally bypass it.

Why not just spell out the companies' names?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com