Grow up, or get out.

> The West is afraid of China taking over the world.

The West isn’t afraid of China taking over the world. If you thought the word “China” inspires fear in Westerner’s mind, you are sadly mistaken. It’s not fear, but something else that I cannot mention.

> The Whites don’t see India as a threat to their world dominance as yet, thus no current smearing campaign on India from the western media.

Because there is nothing to smear. India is a democratic country with innovative engineering. India doesn’t harm anyone else on earth.

> If Korea was a larger and more powerful country, don’t you think the western media would have already started its Korean-bashing attacks long ago?

No. Western media doesn’t attack Japan; even Japanese whaling and blue fin tuna fishing is overlooked, and Toyota still sells in spite of current massive controversy. Why? Because Japan’s image is extremely positive. The other extreme end of this is China, which probably has the worst reputation of all.

> I would not consider as trustable any information coming from USA Press.

Even if you don’t believe in articles of US press, you should be aware of them since those are indicative of how the US sees China. Any negative images of China overseas hurts China itself, not foreign countries.

Take the following example. Volvo brand has been synonymous with safety for four decades now, but people are now looking at Volvo in different colors and question its safety once Volvo brand got associated with Geely. Why? The brand “China” registers so negatively within the minds of foreign consumers so that anything even remotely associated with China is automatically seen negatively, and Volvo dealers worry that Volvo brand may get damaged if it is taken over by Geely. By contrast, Tata take-over of Land Rover/Jaguar produced no similar effect, because India is not seen as negatively as China in the minds of western consumers. The biggest beneficiary of this country branding has been “Japan”, where all things from Japan are seen positively and this benefits Japanese companies greatly.

So if China actually hopes to move past selling $10 shoes to start selling $20K cars, $200 million jets, and $20 billion bullet trains, then China needs to start improving its country’s image greatly, but I can see that you and Chinese public just don’t care how they are seen outside.

Firstly: I do not believe anymore in Santa Clauss, therefore I would not consider as trustable any information coming from USA Press.

Since one guy from NYT called our President as an over-dranked man, by even never had the opportunity to met him. Believe they are basters like George W. Bush, who said that Iraq have chemical warpons.

Secondly: China has today 130 brands or even a little more and not less than 147 production plants. Independently from being begginers or experienced companies they have grown on a competitive market.

Thirdly: Government in China, makes a huge and deep report, which I have written a few years ago, called Prospects for the Chinese Car Industry a simple copy of their speach. Believe me that Chinese Government is acting well and is knowing exactly how to shift the pieces on the game´s square, depends therefore, exclusively on producers action to follow these indications. Internacionalization and control of production works for the stability of a healthy industry.

Fourthly: Copies and failures exists everywhere in the automotive industry, it happened in Brazil and also in Europe and USA. Suggest not to fail into the mistake to consider Chinese the real copy industry, because Ford, for example bought a Brazilian Producer called Troller (which produced a very good JEEP, which third companies supplied technologies) and a completely body style based on the Wrangler from Chrysler. And from here we can list many other cases. About the failures, is just to see my recent comments here and also to the press to become to a simple conclusion, no one is free to face the situation Toyota faced, but the worse is to wait the cort to order the recalls and corrections.

Fifthly: Why to desclassify the level of Chinese workers, You should have a walk around the world before. Look the very nice products some industry have introduced in the market during the last 6 years and maybe everyone here will agree that most of the products are becoming argly and not exactly evoluting in terms of design. Worth is the fact that in some markets people are not anymore comeeted with the companies they work for, than we could say that the so called Third World Countries (Emmerging Countries) become in much better condition than the First World Countries (Developed Countries).

Sixthly: Again, but again I will repeat: ” – KNOW HOW IS JUST A COMMODITY, IF YOU PAY FOR IT YOU WILL GET IT!!! ”

Best regards,

J.I.Hosang

> Chinese automakers’ problems are nothing compared to GM and Chrysler.

Actually it is the other way around.

> So why is a BYD E6 a “hell no”?

Some, including Wall Street Journal, have already test-drove one; their impression is that “I can’t believe BYD really plans to sell this half-baked car in the US”.

BYD E6 is not ready to come to the US. Heck, I don’t think any of BYDs are ready for the US market. If BYD does, then they stand to ruin their brand from the start, and ruin “China” brand for all other comers.

After they leave school is when they start to think more for themselves and some do become innovators but most do not although that is changing but it will take time. Most Chinese do not like criticism especially when it could lead to them losing face and that contributes to the lack of creativity. Copying something is easy when it’s all you have been taught right through your life at school and breaking that mold and learning new things is difficult. The uni students from poorer and undeveloped places who worked their butts off to get to uni are more likely to be the ones who will become the innovators in the future, not the spoilt little brats who don’t turn up to class.

Ed, If you can give us some examples of Chinese being truly creative and world leading it would put a lot more weight into your argument and not just sound petty like IHC is most of the time with no facts to back himself up.

I have 10 engineers at my factory and I will give them an idea and they come back with exactly the same thing at the same quality until I go out there and give them ideas on other ways to do it. You really do have to look hard to find a creative engineer. Maybe 1 in 40 or 50 from the interviews and hiring we have done.

> China could also argue that the US and Germany giving a bailout to its car firms (and others) is also against WTO rules

China’s got even bigger problems, with all the government ownership of automakers.

> The best outcome is the Chinese government forcing everyone to boost up quality and engineering.

The problem is that there are always going to be a few bad apples to cheat and ruin the image and reputation of all Chinese brands. SAIC maybe trying to do it the legal way(let’s ignore Ssangyong case for a while), but it is still hampered by being a Chinese car.

If you don’t believe this, then look at the latest melamine tainted milk scandal in China; you would think melamine-tainted milk is gone from China for good after the scandal of 2008, but no, it’s back.

Then what does China have to do? Chinese central government must get involved and certify what model could be exported and what not. Roewe 550? Yes. BYD E6? Hell no. You get the picture.

As I said, don’t just give them money. Make all government purchases meet certain emission and safety criteria thus raising the standard of vehicles available.

Well, Wall Street Journal disagrees.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704454304575080792207769522.html?mod=WSJ_latestheadlines

Wall Street Journal is repeating exactly what I have said about problems of Chinese automakers in the past.

> All it needs is a few more policies aimed at certain buyers and also that all cars purchased with government money must be from local manufacturers.

That’s against WTO rule and would cause a massive trade friction with Germany and US. Governments can require certain percentage of domestic content to receive auto subsidy and government purchases, but not domestic brands.