Piper: Wall Street underestimates growth potential of Apple's iPhone in China
Sustained growth of the iPhone, especially in China, will help Apple to maintain a 25 to 30 percent growth rate in earnings through 2015, says investment firm Piper Jaffray.
Analyst Gene Munster issued a note to investors on Wednesday expressing the belief that Wall Street currently underestimates Apple's mobile growth potential. Piper Jaffray's 12 month price target for Apple stock is $483. According to Munster, if the iPhone can continue to grow in-line with the smartphone market at a rate of roughly 35 percent in calendar 2011, Apple will sell over 200 million iPhones in 2015.
Given that the iPhone currently comprises 39 percent of Apple's business and that the iPad will likely grow faster than the iPhone, Apple is expected to achieve a sustainable 25 to 30 percent growth rate in earnings.
Piper Jaffray's growth rate estimate runs significantly higher than some of its Wall Street counterparts. "Most investors believe Apple's earnings growth will slow to 15-20% in 2012," said Munster in his note.
With the advent of the iPhone 4 on Verizon, Apple no longer carries any exclusive arrangements with carriers. Munster sees this as a meaningful opportunity for the iPhone maker to add to its addressable subscriber base in "critical markets."
Source: Piper Jaffray estimates
In China, for example, third-place China Telecom has nearly as many subscribers as Verizon, the largest carrier in the U.S., while Indian carrier Reliance, who is also rumored to be in line for the CDMA iPhone, has an impressive 110 million subscribers. Munster believes Apple could initiate a partnership with China Telecom and/or Reliance in 2011.
Apple identified China as a top priority for the company several years ago and has since put "enormous energy" into its expansion there. The strategy is already beginning to pay off, as revenue in Greater China, which includes mainland China, Hong Kong and Taiwan, was up 400 percent year over year in the recent quarter.
Apple's four China-based retail stores are the company's highest traffic and highest revenue stores. As a result, the Cupertino, Calif., company is looking to build bigger stores to accommodate the high number of customers, starting with an upcoming store in Shanghai that will reportedly be the company's largest retail location to date.
Munster, however, is not the only analyst who sees China as critical to Apple's continued growth. According to Ticonderoga Securities analyst Brian White, China is in the early stages of catching "Apple fever."
Katy Huberty with Morgan Stanley is also bullish on Apple's sustained growth in China. The country "could contribute well over half (and as much as 100%) of the total company earnings growth we expect" through fiscal 2012, Huberty wrote in a recent report.
Analyst Gene Munster issued a note to investors on Wednesday expressing the belief that Wall Street currently underestimates Apple's mobile growth potential. Piper Jaffray's 12 month price target for Apple stock is $483. According to Munster, if the iPhone can continue to grow in-line with the smartphone market at a rate of roughly 35 percent in calendar 2011, Apple will sell over 200 million iPhones in 2015.
Given that the iPhone currently comprises 39 percent of Apple's business and that the iPad will likely grow faster than the iPhone, Apple is expected to achieve a sustainable 25 to 30 percent growth rate in earnings.
Piper Jaffray's growth rate estimate runs significantly higher than some of its Wall Street counterparts. "Most investors believe Apple's earnings growth will slow to 15-20% in 2012," said Munster in his note.
With the advent of the iPhone 4 on Verizon, Apple no longer carries any exclusive arrangements with carriers. Munster sees this as a meaningful opportunity for the iPhone maker to add to its addressable subscriber base in "critical markets."
Source: Piper Jaffray estimates
In China, for example, third-place China Telecom has nearly as many subscribers as Verizon, the largest carrier in the U.S., while Indian carrier Reliance, who is also rumored to be in line for the CDMA iPhone, has an impressive 110 million subscribers. Munster believes Apple could initiate a partnership with China Telecom and/or Reliance in 2011.
Apple identified China as a top priority for the company several years ago and has since put "enormous energy" into its expansion there. The strategy is already beginning to pay off, as revenue in Greater China, which includes mainland China, Hong Kong and Taiwan, was up 400 percent year over year in the recent quarter.
Apple's four China-based retail stores are the company's highest traffic and highest revenue stores. As a result, the Cupertino, Calif., company is looking to build bigger stores to accommodate the high number of customers, starting with an upcoming store in Shanghai that will reportedly be the company's largest retail location to date.
Munster, however, is not the only analyst who sees China as critical to Apple's continued growth. According to Ticonderoga Securities analyst Brian White, China is in the early stages of catching "Apple fever."
Katy Huberty with Morgan Stanley is also bullish on Apple's sustained growth in China. The country "could contribute well over half (and as much as 100%) of the total company earnings growth we expect" through fiscal 2012, Huberty wrote in a recent report.
Comments
With a market of 1.6 billion people, China is definitely a great opportunity for Apple.
Anyone know of a place where one can find historical revenue numbers from Apple in China? Quarter by quarter, or year to year?
Edit OK I did the research on the 10-Qs and here's what I have:
PERIOD.....REVS......YoY Growth....QoQ Growth
Q12008
Q22008
Q32008
Q42008
Q12009.....750
Q22009.....665.....................-11%
Q32009.....703.......................6%
Q42009.....1,061....................51%
Q12010.....1,813........142%........71%
Q22010.....1,886........184%.........4%
Q32010.....1,825........160%........-3%
Q42010.....2,732........157%........50%
Q12011.....4,987........175%........83%
Estimated future numbers below
Q22011.....2,829........150%
Q32011.....2,737........150%
Q42011.....4,098........150%
Q12012.....7,480........150%
So, if you take an annual growth rate below the lowest rate of the past year and apply it equally to each quarter for the next four quarters you get those revenue numbers for Asia ex Japan. Pretty huge. I don't think there is a clear argument that growth rates will be lower than that, as the iPhone expands to more sellers in China and the popularity of Apple computers rises as the trend has been.
Roughly $17 Billion in revenue in Asia ex Japan. We all know about how much profit Apple makes from every dollar of sales and there's no reason this will be significantly different. It hasn't been in the past.
Anyone know of a place where one can find historical revenue numbers from Apple in China? Quarter by quarter, or year to year?
I don't think they are available.
Me thinks Gene is an indirect shareholder.
Why 'indirect'? And, using what means?
I don't think they are available.
I edited my post above to reflect some numbers. The January earnings release stated that sales in China itself, a subset of course of AsiaPac ex Japan, quadrupled to 2.6 billion, from approximately 700 million. If China this year only triples, it will hit 8 billion alone, which will likely result in AsiaPac doing far better than the 150% my post above reflects. Crazy numbers.
Why 'indirect'? And, using what means?
If he has any holdings in blue-chip ETFs or mutual funds, he probably owns AAPL indirectly. Apple is a component of the S&P 500. Their market cap is second only to Exxon-Mobil.
Blue-chip funds that have AAPL include Fidelity Contrafund, Fidelity Growth, Vanguard 500, Vanguard Total Stock, T.Rowe-Price Growth, Growth Fund of America, etc. ETFs that have Apple are usually the S&P 500 or Nasdaq 400 trackers (SPY, QQQQ). The blended investment mutual funds probably have a chunk of AAPL.
Many of the big financial institutions have AAPL holdings, so if you own JP Morgan Chase, State Street, Bank of New York Mellon, etc., you indirectly own AAPL.
If he has any holdings in blue-chip ETFs or mutual funds, he probably owns AAPL indirectly. Apple is a component of the S&P 500. Their market cap is second only to Exxon-Mobil.
Highly unlikely. In fact damned near impossible. If he holds equities it will be an index fund. It's nice to have conspiracy theories, but I'm sorry, stock analysts are not permitted to hold individual stocks anywhere near the industries they ever have contact with or cover.
So, China is populous. And so, China has a good number of affluent people. Munster and Huberty (like almost everyone else who has had only passing exposure to China) have not looked at the number of people who can actually afford an iPhone. Even with a Billion people I doubt Apple will expand in the mainland to more than 20 stores total in 8 to 10 cities. Not a small market, by any means, but greater expansion than that would be a waste of resources for Apple. Affluent Chinese, in other areas, like Americans in many parts of the US, will use Walmart, Costco, mail order, etc. to get their Apple products.
In any case, unless Apple creates some very low end products, the middle class of China will not be buying iPhones or iPads.
But hey, I'm a stock holder, so I hope I'm wrong.
With a market of 1.6 billion people, China is definitely a great opportunity for Apple.
I know in a general idea what population China has and following the future projections. I was surprised by your number -- 1.6 Billion????
If population projections continue to hold, China will never reach a population of 1.6 Billion -- even by 2050. China's 2011 estimated population is about 1.35 Billion. It will peak to about 1.394 Billion around 2025, but China's population is projected to decrease thereafter to about 1.30 Billion around 2050 based on US Census projections.
Declining population is the natural trend in many countries, especially common now in most European countries, Japan and other developed countries. It usually is associated with increasing number of aging.
It will be India actually that will reach a population exceeding 1.6 Billion but not until around 2043-2045. Right now, China is larger (1.34 Billion) that India (1.19 Billion). However, unlike China which has once had a 1-child policy (although this is relaxed a bit), India's population is increasing at a faster rate than China. If this trend continues, India will overtake China as the most populous country in the world by 2026
China (1.395 Billion) vs India (1.409 Billion)
and India will continue to outpace China to a projected population (India) of 1,657 Billion by 2050.
Not too many Americans know about India; there are many poor people there too, like China and many Asian countries. However, India also has a very rich and educated percentage of its population. The technology and economic base of India also are very advanced. In fact, India is the "health center" for many Westerners who want to save bucks, it is becoming the internet classroom especially of some European countries and it is the favorite regional technology center of many multinational corporations (including many US multinationals).
My impression is that Apple does not pay as much attention to India, as it does with China.
CGC
In case you want to verify your population stats next time, try
Internation Data Base of the US Census
http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/idb/rank.php
Munster and especially Huberty (100% of future growth!?) are crazy.
So, China is populous. And so, China has a good number of affluent people. Munster and Huberty (like almost everyone else who has had only passing exposure to China) have not looked at the number of people who can actually afford an iPhone. Even with a Billion people I doubt Apple will expand in the mainland to more than 20 stores total in 8 to 10 cities. Not a small market, by any means, but greater expansion than that would be a waste of resources for Apple. Affluent Chinese, in other areas, like Americans in many parts of the US, will use Walmart, Costco, mail order, etc. to get their Apple products.
In any case, unless Apple creates some very low end products, the middle class of China will not be buying iPhones or iPads.
But hey, I'm a stock holder, so I hope I'm wrong.
I'm an American who happens to be in Beijing at this moment, and I just had lunch with a group of Chinese. One, decidedly middle class, pulled out her iPhone during the meal. It had cost her about 6,000 RMB =~ $915. (White 3GS, by the way.) And I've seen a fair number of iPhone 4's on the street, although I can't speak to the relative wealth of those folks. But I think it's accurate to say that Apple is gaining mind share and cachet at a steady clip here. My MacBook Air (on which I'm typing right now) gets attention.
I don't know how many stores is the optimum number. Earlier this week I was in Chengdu, a "second-tier" city with a population greater than New York's, and many middle-class high-tech workers (and probably even more low-paid factory workers.) I would guess that it could support an Apple Store, if not now then in a year. In any case, China is an enormous opportunity for Apple.
I'm also a stockholder, so I hope I'm right.
So, China is populous. And so, China has a good number of affluent people. Munster and Huberty (like almost everyone else who has had only passing exposure to China) have not looked at the number of people who can actually afford an iPhone. Even with a Billion people I doubt Apple will expand in the mainland to more than 20 stores total in 8 to 10 cities. Not a small market, by any means, but greater expansion than that would be a waste of resources for Apple. Affluent Chinese, in other areas, like Americans in many parts of the US, will use Walmart, Costco, mail order, etc. to get their Apple products.
In any case, unless Apple creates some very low end products, the middle class of China will not be buying iPhones or iPads.
It gives me the impression that you may be more clueless than Gene Munster, about China and Chinese, or Asia and Asians in general -- not an uncommon failing among many Americans and Westerners (even the most educated and even journalists). I am appalled sometimes by the pontifications of arm chair experts who are actually making decisions about our foreign policy here in the United States.
If you really want to know the potential market in China and many Asian countries, you may want to study the demographic and economic data included in the
International Datab Base (IDB) of US Census
http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/idb/rank.php
beyond population. It is not by accident that students in Beijing has average test scores among students (worldwide) even better than the United States and even many Western countries. If you go to many universities and research institutions in the US (all over), you will find that many of the research and graduate students and even the staff are Chinese and Asians -- that is no accident. This is true in even the most elite schools, like MIT, Harvard, and especially in the West Coast. Even those who graduated in China and other Asian countries, they are very much sought after in biomedical and technology research. I knew a professor who headed a huge federally funded (National Institutes of Health) multi-million dollar biomedical program who rely on his Chinese post docs, not his American or European staff or postdocs to spearhead the most complicated surgical operations in animal research. They graduated in China, not in the US with passable English skills. And, yet even if they are younger, the other postdocs rely on their expertise too. And that is true also in the private sector here in the US.
It is not an accident that many multinationas chose China as their manufacturing base for the most precised and advanced technologies, including the iPhone. True, that the cost of labor in China is much cheaper than in the US, but that is only part of the reason. Add to these the tech savvy business entrepreneurs backed by a vast base of equally competent science and technology manpower pool.
Worldwide, China has replaced the US, Japan and many advanced European countries in long term investment and gobbling raw materials sources for their inceasing industrialization. I would not be surprised if China would ultimately eclipse the US, as the industrial power by 2050.
So, how many of these tech-savvy and highly educated Chinese in China? More than you might think. There is also an impression that only the middle class and super rich could afford luxury products. Quality and status symbol motivate the purchasing habits even among the less well-off.
And finally, unlike the US and many European countries. China and many Asian countries have not been victims to the financial crisis. This is one reason why China and many Asian countries also are increasing sources of sales for Apple.
CGC
Munster and especially Huberty (100% of future growth!?) are crazy.
So, China is populous. And so, China has a good number of affluent people. Munster and Huberty (like almost everyone else who has had only passing exposure to China) have not looked at the number of people who can actually afford an iPhone. Even with a Billion people I doubt Apple will expand in the mainland to more than 20 stores total in 8 to 10 cities. Not a small market, by any means, but greater expansion than that would be a waste of resources for Apple. Affluent Chinese, in other areas, like Americans in many parts of the US, will use Walmart, Costco, mail order, etc. to get their Apple products.
In any case, unless Apple creates some very low end products, the middle class of China will not be buying iPhones or iPads.
But hey, I'm a stock holder, so I hope I'm wrong.
You couldn't be MORE WRONG! I'm an American living in China and I can assure you that Apple products can be found everywhere and their share is growing among the middle class. With the extremely high savings rate of the Chinese, and their expanding incomes, they are the perfect market. Yes, the total size of the upper and middle class is a small portion of the total population of 1.3+Billion, but it is in the hundreds of millions, probably equaling that of the US in total size. You can buy apple products through many resellers in every major city. They don't need apple's own stores to be hugely successful. They still can't meet the demand for the iphone 4 here, or the ipad. The gray market flourishes as well. So buckle in for the ride.
Right now, China is larger (1.34 Billion) that India (1.19 Billion). However, unlike China which has once had a 1-child policy (although this is relaxed a bit), India's population is increasing at a faster rate than China. If this trend continues, India will overtake China as the most populous country in the world by 2026
China (1.395 Billion) vs India (1.409 Billion)
and India will continue to outpace China to a projected population (India) of 1,657 Billion by 2050.
CGC
Thanks for this info, with numbers and a link; I cetainly would like to see more of these good posts.
Would it be safe to assume that if India were to grow with this trend, they would also get a (similar) 1-child policy? Considering the country is a third the size of China (according to WorldFactBook on my iPad, stats from July 2010)
Cheers,
Phil
Thanks for this info, with numbers and a link; I cetainly would like to see more of these good posts.
Would it be safe to assume that if India were to grow with this trend, they would also get a (similar) 1-child policy? Considering the country is a third the size of China (according to WorldFactBook on my iPad, stats from July 2010)
heh. No.
Also, I have never seen so many iPhones as I did in Hong Kong. It seemed like 85% (if not higher) of people on the subway had an iPhone or sorts.
Thanks for this info, with numbers and a link; I cetainly would like to see more of these good posts.
Would it be safe to assume that if India were to grow with this trend, they would also get a (similar) 1-child policy? Considering the country is a third the size of China (according to WorldFactBook on my iPad, stats from July 2010)
Cheers,
Phil
Different cultures - China (Part I)
More than likely, the Worldfact book relies on the US Census Bureau (that collaborates with its counterparts all over the world, If you prefer primary source, the US Census would be it. There are some disparities though in statistics provided by US agencies and the United Nations, especially in health statistics.
The Draconian 1-child policy was instituted in 1978 during the time of Chairman Mao. I read that during that time, it was enforced very effectively down to the village level. There were supposed to be "village elders" who keep tab of the policy implementation. There were carrots and sticks also that made the implementation very effective.
From a socio-economic perspective, the policy checked population growth very effectively and thus allowed better socio-economic planning. Thys, to an extent, it helped made China what it is today, the second highest GDP country in the world, displacing Japan. If trends continue, it can potentially displace the US if not this century, during the next.
There are socio-cultural drawbacks to the 1-child policy. Succession and heritage are key in most Asian cultures, including in the Chinese culture. Thus, to perpetuate the family name, it must be a son for that lone child. [Aborting female fetus was not unheard.]
With preference for male child, this obviously has great impact on male-to-female ratio in the succeeding generations since then. It has only been three decades since the implementation so that the male-to-female ratio disparity may affect the 1-child policy. In fact, it has been eased a bit in mainland China (regions like Hongkong are exempt from the 1-child policy) from what I read. I assume that the US Census projections up to 2050 (although this is readjusted regularly to keep up with chaning trends). Thereafter, I am not sure how the easing up of the 1-child policy impacts mainland China.
One big difference though is that China is more prosperous now than during the time of Chairman Mao. While China remains autocratic, the economic and socio-cultural policies that was first implemented by Mao's successor, Deng Xiaoping, paved the way for the more prosperous China that is emerging today. So, China is more prepared socio-economically to deal with a resurgence in population. Its increase economic prosperity also has created a more robust local market for its own good, even if it still relies heavily on exports at present. Just imagine that just about less than a quarter of the world are in China.
This may be foreign to Western cultures but Asian families do rest their hopes in their children, and a great part of that is perpetuating the family name. The "spoiled child" mindset has been the topic of numerous socio-cultural studies. Even the child of the "poorest" families get spoiled because of this.
From the perspectives of companies, like Apple, if they know this, even the poorest youths of China toda have expectations (within constraints) unheard of in previous generations.
Will China remain autocratic forever? The increasing population of more educated Chinese and greater exposure to the world bring new ideas. Protests and greater liberalization, even among workers, are now more common now than they were during the time of Mao.
At some point in the future, it is possible that China could become like Taiwan, more democratic in an Asian culture kind of way. Not much news is heard worldwide about Taiwan but this "smaller" Chinese country (which is claimed by the Chinese government as part of greater China) has played a major role in the industrialization and technological advances in Mainland China.
CGC
Sustained growth of the iPhone, especially in China, will help Apple to maintain a 25 to 30 percent growth rate in earnings through 2015, says investment firm Piper Jaffray.
Analyst Gene Munster issued a note to investors on Wednesday expressing the belief that Wall Street currently underestimates Apple's mobile growth potential. Piper Jaffray's 12 month price target for Apple stock is $483. According to Munster, if the iPhone can continue to grow in-line with the smartphone market at a rate of roughly 35 percent in calendar 2011, Apple will sell over 200 million iPhones in 2015.
Given that the iPhone currently comprises 39 percent of Apple's business and that the iPad will likely grow faster than the iPhone, Apple is expected to achieve a sustainable 25 to 30 percent growth rate in earnings.
Piper Jaffray's growth rate estimate runs significantly higher than some of its Wall Street counterparts. "Most investors believe Apple's earnings growth will slow to 15-20% in 2012," said Munster in his note.
With the advent of the iPhone 4 on Verizon, Apple no longer carries any exclusive arrangements with carriers. Munster sees this as a meaningful opportunity for the iPhone maker to add to its addressable subscriber base in "critical markets."
Source: Piper Jaffray estimates
In China, for example, third-place China Telecom has nearly as many subscribers as Verizon, the largest carrier in the U.S., while Indian carrier Reliance, who is also rumored to be in line for the CDMA iPhone, has an impressive 110 million subscribers. Munster believes Apple could initiate a partnership with China Telecom and/or Reliance in 2011.
Apple identified China as a top priority for the company several years ago and has since put "enormous energy" into its expansion there. The strategy is already beginning to pay off, as revenue in Greater China, which includes mainland China, Hong Kong and Taiwan, was up 400 percent year over year in the recent quarter.
Apple's four China-based retail stores are the company's highest traffic and highest revenue stores. As a result, the Cupertino, Calif., company is looking to build bigger stores to accommodate the high number of customers, starting with an upcoming store in Shanghai that will reportedly be the company's largest retail location to date.
Munster, however, is not the only analyst who sees China as critical to Apple's continued growth. According to Ticonderoga Securities analyst Brian White, China is in the early stages of catching "Apple fever."
Katy Huberty with Morgan Stanley is also bullish on Apple's sustained growth in China. The country "could contribute well over half (and as much as 100%) of the total company earnings growth we expect" through fiscal 2012, Huberty wrote in a recent report.
[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]
This post is about Apple and China for the most part. My question is about Apple's competition from Android(Google). Will the OEM's using Android be welcomed with open arms? I'm dubious.
Harvey
India is culturally diverse, rivaling the ethnic diversity of China. Modern India, as a country, has been shaped partly by its colonial past, under British colonization. Think of Europe not only in terms of land size but also in the diversity of its ethnic populations, except it is almost three times larger than Europe, and exploding in population. Even Pakistan was once the Western part of greater India before it was arbitrarily broken during the demise of the British empire. Bangladesh, was once part of what was then the eastern "Pakistan" (also part of the India-Pakistan solution of the British). Bangladesh has an even higher population growth than India, and one of the highest population growth in the world.
The arbitrary breakup of greater India, by the British, into predominantly Hindu (current India) and a predominantly Muslim (Pakistan) continue to plague the military and social unrest in South Asia. It was not the desire of the "Father of India", Mahatma Gandhi, who preferred co-existence of the Hindus and Muslims, of the past greater India.
While the past "greater India" was a British monarchical colony, what the British empire imparted to the Indian intelligentia (British educated), was the concept of parliamentary system of government that became the political system following the peaceful revolution spearheaded by Mahatma Gandhi. The titular monarch was replaced by the President and the political power is vested on the Parliament, with the Prime Minister as the head.
In this sense, India has been a democratic state since its independence from foreign domination in 1947. [However, while democratic, the Nehru-Ghandi (no relations to Mahatma Ghandi) family --starting with the first Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, the daughter Indira Gandhi, and her and her son Rajiv Gandhi became Prime Ministers -- has been a political dynasty in India. The Congress Party made of the Nehru-Ghandi loyalists reamins a political power in India, although some members.]
Mahatma Ghandi preached "self-reliance", which he asssociated with the Sanskrit term, "Satyagraha", as part of his strategy to defeat the British domination of India.
The concept of "Satyagraha", which translates loosely as "Soul Force", or "truth force" is based on the concept that if the mind is free, it can never be dominated by outside domination, even if the physical body is imprisoned -- an allusion to the foreign colonization of India. Similarly, the individual physical body may be imprisoned or tortured but that would not limit the freed mind of the person. That is central in the stategy of Mahatma Ghandi towards defeating the British Empire.
Part of freeing the mind depends on "self-reliance". Part of this self-reliance is to live simply to avoid reliance from the outside, in this case British goods. To demonstrate this, Gandhi -- who was British educated (law at University College of London), and became a successful lawyer in South Africa (the beginning of his road to "civil disobedience") before he went back to India -- shed most Western trappings and went back to iconic Ghandi image that Westerners are more familiar with. He spun his own loin cloth, and together with his followers, including a few Westerners, grew their own food in their community.
To demonstrate "self-reliance" and "freeing of the mind" even at a higher level, Mahatma Ghandi, defied the "salt tax" imposed by the British empire by producing their own salt directly from the sea. It was a simple act but quite effective, when tens of thousands of Indians followed the Ghandi's march to the sea to the defy the British.
How can the British rulers respond to that disobedience when Ghandi and followers did not resist imprisonment and torture? How can one find prison cells for tens of thousands, and a people who are willing to follow Ghandi's example?
There were a lot of struggles along the way, but faced with such a force, the waning British empire had no choice but to surrender to the force of civil disobedience. India was freed from British colonization in 1947.
The concept of "self-reliance" has fundamental impacts on the socio-economic, cultural and political course of independent India. Technologically, India is not aversed to influences from the West but the mindset is developing and adapting those technologies with intent on local production.
Together with its more democratic parliamentary form of government, the socio-cultural and political conditions that allowed implementation of the 1-child policy in China is difficult to imagine in India.
There are bright sides based from population dynamics observations. Increased economic prosperity is "correlated" with smaller family size. The transition from an agricultural economy, which requires a large "labor force" as well as increased life expectancy have also influenced the downward trend towards fewer children.
Thus, as India prospers, and greater percentages become more educated, including informal "outreach education", not only of the young but also adults, especially Mothers, may contribute to slow if not eventually reverse the increasing population growth of India.
CGC