The United States President can, through proper legal channels, direct a private company on services within the United States. The rest of the world? No.
Now, show some stories of Uyghur families that have been brought back together, or young Uyghur women who weren't sterilized, or those that weren't send to reeducation camps.
Now, show some stories of Uyghur families that have been brought back together, or young Uyghur women who weren't sterilized, or those that weren't send to reeducation camps.
Now, show some stories of Uyghur families that have been brought back together, or young Uyghur women who weren't sterilized, or those that weren't send to reeducation camps.
Things are getting nastier by the day as Trump becomes more desperate and listens to the China hawks.
I mentioned the other day that Spanish media were picking up on the requirement that US software not be made available in AppGallery and today they are reporting that these latest moves could provoke a wide ranging counter attack from China given the amount of investments Tencent has worldwide. They are claiming that the damage would be more than US attempts to derail Huawei.
Mind reading is a sign a person has no argument and no information.
May last year. Non-speculative figure on lost Huawei revenues in the U.S tech sector: 11 billion dollars.
Various US companies seeing share price falls and business lost to competitors.
2019. Announcement of GMS replacement by Huawei. All Google Mobile Services (revenue streams) lost on Huawei phones. Revenue going to non-US competitors.
2019. Announcement of HarmonyOS. Already shipping on TVs, watches, routers, cars and coming to PCs this year. Formal announcement of HarmonyOS 2.0 Sept 5th
The other parts of my post can only be speculation at this point because the US hasn't clarified what this means.
However, the damage is already done.
The market fluctuates for all kinds of reasons, and companies that lose customers generally find other customers in a very short time. Given that Huawei is meeting headwinds in the EU for its Telecom equipment, in a major way, I might add, I'd argue that these same U.S. Companies will benefit from increased sourcing to Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung, and other companies in that pipeline. Then there is also that 5G buildout that is going on in the U.S., which you always denigrate.
More to the point, Huawei is known to use PRC state support to undercut competition, which absolutely has been happening with the knowledge of the EU, and it is illegal. Fortunately, it looks like Huawei is finding increasing resistance in the EU, leaving the 3rd world as it growth base.
Meanwhile, the biggest drag on the U.S. economy has been COVID19, not China, and even as fucked up as the current administration is, the U.S. is a very resilient and innovative country, and still dominates China, and the EU.
Maybe instead of your constant and undying support of Huawei, and the PRC, you might cheer your local teams, Ericsson, Nokia, and Siemens, but whatever.
I support my 'local teams' but as Vodafone's CEO said, having two major 5G players is tantamount to no competition. He said that Huawei was an essential part of keeping competition healthy.
Neither Nokia nor Ericsson have anything like the breadth of Huawei in their business groups and Nokia is on very shaky financial ground. Therefore neither of them even come into consideration in the bigger picture. They just don't have the business or product portfolio that Huawei has.
Huawei has already signed a huge amount of 5G contracts and says it can satisfy them.
Before COVID-19 struck the trade war had decimated US agriculture to the tune of requiring two multi billion dollar hand outs from government. That didn't stop many farms going out of business.
As I said, billions have been lost in revenues to US technology companies (again, pre-COVID) and even if they can recoup some lost business, it is taken away from other companies and directly hits their bottom lines. That, means less to invest in future R&D and less competitiveness against foreign rivals. That is exactly what Qualcomm is claiming in its lobbying efforts.
If Apple were to be forced to remove WeChat access from Chinese phones, it would have a huge impact on iPhone sales and, once again, benefit rivals.
Yet, what I posted about the EU is accurate. Huawei is a unfair competitor due to Government subsidies, so support of Ericsson, Nokia and Samsung is necessary. More to the point, China is an authoritarian state, and what has happened in Hong Kong, the Xinjiang Region, and threats against Taiwan, are turning the West against China.
You might want to note the "National Security" issue that I posted in the link. That you even doubt that there are National Security concerns with Huawei is one of the reasons that I dismiss your POV.
Oh, and of course, there is China's blatant and ongoing influence operations continuing against the West, which belie's "China's Sovereignty" meme.
Heck, China is only using equipment from ZTE and Huawei for its 5G buildout, not because it is better, but because both those companies will support PRC policies.
Huawei is not China.
Huawei is not subsidised by the Chinese government. It receives government incentives in some areas - just like any other company - anywhere.
Huawei also receives grants from other governments, like Spain and the EU. Again, like a ton of other companies.
NOKIA, Ericsson, Cisco etc are all participating in China's 5G although I hear Cisco is being subjected to a rip and replace as a tit-for-tat measure against US actions on Huawei.
Things are getting nastier by the day as Trump becomes more desperate and listens to the China hawks.
I mentioned the other day that Spanish media were picking up on the requirement that US software not be made available in AppGallery and today they are reporting that these latest moves could provoke a wide ranging counter attack from China given the amount of investments Tencent has worldwide. They are claiming that the damage would be more than US attempts to derail Huawei.
Mind reading is a sign a person has no argument and no information.
May last year. Non-speculative figure on lost Huawei revenues in the U.S tech sector: 11 billion dollars.
Various US companies seeing share price falls and business lost to competitors.
2019. Announcement of GMS replacement by Huawei. All Google Mobile Services (revenue streams) lost on Huawei phones. Revenue going to non-US competitors.
2019. Announcement of HarmonyOS. Already shipping on TVs, watches, routers, cars and coming to PCs this year. Formal announcement of HarmonyOS 2.0 Sept 5th
The other parts of my post can only be speculation at this point because the US hasn't clarified what this means.
However, the damage is already done.
The market fluctuates for all kinds of reasons, and companies that lose customers generally find other customers in a very short time. Given that Huawei is meeting headwinds in the EU for its Telecom equipment, in a major way, I might add, I'd argue that these same U.S. Companies will benefit from increased sourcing to Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung, and other companies in that pipeline. Then there is also that 5G buildout that is going on in the U.S., which you always denigrate.
More to the point, Huawei is known to use PRC state support to undercut competition, which absolutely has been happening with the knowledge of the EU, and it is illegal. Fortunately, it looks like Huawei is finding increasing resistance in the EU, leaving the 3rd world as it growth base.
Meanwhile, the biggest drag on the U.S. economy has been COVID19, not China, and even as fucked up as the current administration is, the U.S. is a very resilient and innovative country, and still dominates China, and the EU.
Maybe instead of your constant and undying support of Huawei, and the PRC, you might cheer your local teams, Ericsson, Nokia, and Siemens, but whatever.
I support my 'local teams' but as Vodafone's CEO said, having two major 5G players is tantamount to no competition. He said that Huawei was an essential part of keeping competition healthy.
Neither Nokia nor Ericsson have anything like the breadth of Huawei in their business groups and Nokia is on very shaky financial ground. Therefore neither of them even come into consideration in the bigger picture. They just don't have the business or product portfolio that Huawei has.
Huawei has already signed a huge amount of 5G contracts and says it can satisfy them.
Before COVID-19 struck the trade war had decimated US agriculture to the tune of requiring two multi billion dollar hand outs from government. That didn't stop many farms going out of business.
As I said, billions have been lost in revenues to US technology companies (again, pre-COVID) and even if they can recoup some lost business, it is taken away from other companies and directly hits their bottom lines. That, means less to invest in future R&D and less competitiveness against foreign rivals. That is exactly what Qualcomm is claiming in its lobbying efforts.
If Apple were to be forced to remove WeChat access from Chinese phones, it would have a huge impact on iPhone sales and, once again, benefit rivals.
Yet, what I posted about the EU is accurate. Huawei is a unfair competitor due to Government subsidies, so support of Ericsson, Nokia and Samsung is necessary. More to the point, China is an authoritarian state, and what has happened in Hong Kong, the Xinjiang Region, and threats against Taiwan, are turning the West against China.
You might want to note the "National Security" issue that I posted in the link. That you even doubt that there are National Security concerns with Huawei is one of the reasons that I dismiss your POV.
Oh, and of course, there is China's blatant and ongoing influence operations continuing against the West, which belie's "China's Sovereignty" meme.
Heck, China is only using equipment from ZTE and Huawei for its 5G buildout, not because it is better, but because both those companies will support PRC policies.
Huawei is not China.
Huawei is not subsidised by the Chinese government. It receives government incentives in some areas - just like any other company - anywhere.
Huawei also receives grants from other governments, like Spain and the EU. Again, like a ton of other companies.
NOKIA, Ericsson, Cisco etc are all participating in China's 5G although I hear Cisco is being subjected to a rip and replace as a tit-for-tat measure against US actions on Huawei.
You will balk at this but here you go:
All employee owned companies are controlled by the Chinese Government if they are any size.
Without unfair, mercantilist Chinese government policies and programs for its telecom giants, China would lack a globally competitive telecom equipment industry. Neither Huawei, nor ZTE, would have more than minor market shares, even in China.
Chinese market-share gains have come at the expense of innovative telecom equipment providers in other countries. By artificially taking market share from more innovative companies, the latter have had less revenue to invest in cutting-edge R&D.
As a share of sales, leading non-Chinese equipment companies invest more in R&D, and patent and contribute more to international standards when compared to Huawei and ZTE.
Beijing’s policies dramatically limit foreign access to China’s huge telecom markets, providing them with a guaranteed source of revenue to attack foreign competitors.
We estimate that if Ericsson and Nokia took all of Huawei and ZTE sales, there would be 20 percent more global telecom equipment R&D and 75 percent more essential 5G patents.
Democratic market-based nations should no longer purchase equipment from Huawei and ZTE and should encourage other nations to not buy Chinese telecom gear.
This will send a clear message to China that, going forward, systemic innovation mercantilism that hinders global technological innovation will no longer be tolerated."
Things are getting nastier by the day as Trump becomes more desperate and listens to the China hawks.
I mentioned the other day that Spanish media were picking up on the requirement that US software not be made available in AppGallery and today they are reporting that these latest moves could provoke a wide ranging counter attack from China given the amount of investments Tencent has worldwide. They are claiming that the damage would be more than US attempts to derail Huawei.
Mind reading is a sign a person has no argument and no information.
May last year. Non-speculative figure on lost Huawei revenues in the U.S tech sector: 11 billion dollars.
Various US companies seeing share price falls and business lost to competitors.
2019. Announcement of GMS replacement by Huawei. All Google Mobile Services (revenue streams) lost on Huawei phones. Revenue going to non-US competitors.
2019. Announcement of HarmonyOS. Already shipping on TVs, watches, routers, cars and coming to PCs this year. Formal announcement of HarmonyOS 2.0 Sept 5th
The other parts of my post can only be speculation at this point because the US hasn't clarified what this means.
However, the damage is already done.
The market fluctuates for all kinds of reasons, and companies that lose customers generally find other customers in a very short time. Given that Huawei is meeting headwinds in the EU for its Telecom equipment, in a major way, I might add, I'd argue that these same U.S. Companies will benefit from increased sourcing to Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung, and other companies in that pipeline. Then there is also that 5G buildout that is going on in the U.S., which you always denigrate.
More to the point, Huawei is known to use PRC state support to undercut competition, which absolutely has been happening with the knowledge of the EU, and it is illegal. Fortunately, it looks like Huawei is finding increasing resistance in the EU, leaving the 3rd world as it growth base.
Meanwhile, the biggest drag on the U.S. economy has been COVID19, not China, and even as fucked up as the current administration is, the U.S. is a very resilient and innovative country, and still dominates China, and the EU.
Maybe instead of your constant and undying support of Huawei, and the PRC, you might cheer your local teams, Ericsson, Nokia, and Siemens, but whatever.
I support my 'local teams' but as Vodafone's CEO said, having two major 5G players is tantamount to no competition. He said that Huawei was an essential part of keeping competition healthy.
Neither Nokia nor Ericsson have anything like the breadth of Huawei in their business groups and Nokia is on very shaky financial ground. Therefore neither of them even come into consideration in the bigger picture. They just don't have the business or product portfolio that Huawei has.
Huawei has already signed a huge amount of 5G contracts and says it can satisfy them.
Before COVID-19 struck the trade war had decimated US agriculture to the tune of requiring two multi billion dollar hand outs from government. That didn't stop many farms going out of business.
As I said, billions have been lost in revenues to US technology companies (again, pre-COVID) and even if they can recoup some lost business, it is taken away from other companies and directly hits their bottom lines. That, means less to invest in future R&D and less competitiveness against foreign rivals. That is exactly what Qualcomm is claiming in its lobbying efforts.
If Apple were to be forced to remove WeChat access from Chinese phones, it would have a huge impact on iPhone sales and, once again, benefit rivals.
Yet, what I posted about the EU is accurate. Huawei is a unfair competitor due to Government subsidies, so support of Ericsson, Nokia and Samsung is necessary. More to the point, China is an authoritarian state, and what has happened in Hong Kong, the Xinjiang Region, and threats against Taiwan, are turning the West against China.
You might want to note the "National Security" issue that I posted in the link. That you even doubt that there are National Security concerns with Huawei is one of the reasons that I dismiss your POV.
Oh, and of course, there is China's blatant and ongoing influence operations continuing against the West, which belie's "China's Sovereignty" meme.
Heck, China is only using equipment from ZTE and Huawei for its 5G buildout, not because it is better, but because both those companies will support PRC policies.
Huawei is not China.
Huawei is not subsidised by the Chinese government. It receives government incentives in some areas - just like any other company - anywhere.
Huawei also receives grants from other governments, like Spain and the EU. Again, like a ton of other companies.
NOKIA, Ericsson, Cisco etc are all participating in China's 5G although I hear Cisco is being subjected to a rip and replace as a tit-for-tat measure against US actions on Huawei.
You will balk at this but here you go:
All employee owned companies are controlled by the Chinese Government if they are any size.
This report, released by Professor Christopher Balding and Professor Donald Clarke, was based on unreliable sources and speculations, without an understanding of all the facts. They have not verified the information in the report with Huawei, and their conclusions are completely unsubstantiated. Huawei is a private company wholly owned by its employees. No government agency or outside organization holds shares in Huawei or has any control over Huawei.
Why not say at the outset that the report you are claiming backs up your affirmations, actually, doesn't?
Things are getting nastier by the day as Trump becomes more desperate and listens to the China hawks.
I mentioned the other day that Spanish media were picking up on the requirement that US software not be made available in AppGallery and today they are reporting that these latest moves could provoke a wide ranging counter attack from China given the amount of investments Tencent has worldwide. They are claiming that the damage would be more than US attempts to derail Huawei.
Mind reading is a sign a person has no argument and no information.
May last year. Non-speculative figure on lost Huawei revenues in the U.S tech sector: 11 billion dollars.
Various US companies seeing share price falls and business lost to competitors.
2019. Announcement of GMS replacement by Huawei. All Google Mobile Services (revenue streams) lost on Huawei phones. Revenue going to non-US competitors.
2019. Announcement of HarmonyOS. Already shipping on TVs, watches, routers, cars and coming to PCs this year. Formal announcement of HarmonyOS 2.0 Sept 5th
The other parts of my post can only be speculation at this point because the US hasn't clarified what this means.
However, the damage is already done.
The market fluctuates for all kinds of reasons, and companies that lose customers generally find other customers in a very short time. Given that Huawei is meeting headwinds in the EU for its Telecom equipment, in a major way, I might add, I'd argue that these same U.S. Companies will benefit from increased sourcing to Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung, and other companies in that pipeline. Then there is also that 5G buildout that is going on in the U.S., which you always denigrate.
More to the point, Huawei is known to use PRC state support to undercut competition, which absolutely has been happening with the knowledge of the EU, and it is illegal. Fortunately, it looks like Huawei is finding increasing resistance in the EU, leaving the 3rd world as it growth base.
Meanwhile, the biggest drag on the U.S. economy has been COVID19, not China, and even as fucked up as the current administration is, the U.S. is a very resilient and innovative country, and still dominates China, and the EU.
Maybe instead of your constant and undying support of Huawei, and the PRC, you might cheer your local teams, Ericsson, Nokia, and Siemens, but whatever.
I support my 'local teams' but as Vodafone's CEO said, having two major 5G players is tantamount to no competition. He said that Huawei was an essential part of keeping competition healthy.
Neither Nokia nor Ericsson have anything like the breadth of Huawei in their business groups and Nokia is on very shaky financial ground. Therefore neither of them even come into consideration in the bigger picture. They just don't have the business or product portfolio that Huawei has.
Huawei has already signed a huge amount of 5G contracts and says it can satisfy them.
Before COVID-19 struck the trade war had decimated US agriculture to the tune of requiring two multi billion dollar hand outs from government. That didn't stop many farms going out of business.
As I said, billions have been lost in revenues to US technology companies (again, pre-COVID) and even if they can recoup some lost business, it is taken away from other companies and directly hits their bottom lines. That, means less to invest in future R&D and less competitiveness against foreign rivals. That is exactly what Qualcomm is claiming in its lobbying efforts.
If Apple were to be forced to remove WeChat access from Chinese phones, it would have a huge impact on iPhone sales and, once again, benefit rivals.
Yet, what I posted about the EU is accurate. Huawei is a unfair competitor due to Government subsidies, so support of Ericsson, Nokia and Samsung is necessary. More to the point, China is an authoritarian state, and what has happened in Hong Kong, the Xinjiang Region, and threats against Taiwan, are turning the West against China.
You might want to note the "National Security" issue that I posted in the link. That you even doubt that there are National Security concerns with Huawei is one of the reasons that I dismiss your POV.
Oh, and of course, there is China's blatant and ongoing influence operations continuing against the West, which belie's "China's Sovereignty" meme.
Heck, China is only using equipment from ZTE and Huawei for its 5G buildout, not because it is better, but because both those companies will support PRC policies.
Huawei is not China.
Huawei is not subsidised by the Chinese government. It receives government incentives in some areas - just like any other company - anywhere.
Huawei also receives grants from other governments, like Spain and the EU. Again, like a ton of other companies.
NOKIA, Ericsson, Cisco etc are all participating in China's 5G although I hear Cisco is being subjected to a rip and replace as a tit-for-tat measure against US actions on Huawei.
You will balk at this but here you go:
All employee owned companies are controlled by the Chinese Government if they are any size.
This report, released by Professor Christopher Balding and Professor Donald Clarke, was based on unreliable sources and speculations, without an understanding of all the facts. They have not verified the information in the report with Huawei, and their conclusions are completely unsubstantiated. Huawei is a private company wholly owned by its employees. No government agency or outside organization holds shares in Huawei or has any control over Huawei.
Why not say at the outset that the report you are claiming backs up your affirmations, actually, doesn't?
There are no reliable documents available, and you can't prove otherwise that Huawei isn't controlled by the PRC, always relying on Huaweils word, but all employee unions are controlled by the PRC.
Here's the direct link, and a PDF of the report can be downloaded from there, for all of the curious who want to see for themselves,
As Huawei has come under increasing scrutiny over the last several months, the question of who really owns and controls it has come to the fore. Huawei calls itself “employee-owned,” but this claim is questionable, and the corporate structure described on its website is misleading. A number of pertinent facts about Huawei’s structure and ownership are in fact well known and have been outlined many times in the Chinese media, but the myth of Huawei’s employee ownership seems to persist outside of China. This article, drawing on publicly available sources such as media reports, corporate databases, and court cases, aims to refute this myth once and for all.
In summary, we find the following:
• The Huawei operating company is 100% owned by a holding company, which is in turn approximately 1% owned by Huawei founder Ren Zhengfei and 99% owned by an entity called a “trade union committee” for the holding company.
• We know nothing about the internal governance procedures of the trade union committee. We do not know who the committee members or other trade union leaders are, or how they are selected.
• Trade union members have no right to assets held by a trade union.
• What have been called “employee shares” in “Huawei” are in fact at most contractual interests in a profit-sharing scheme.
• Given the public nature of trade unions in China, if the ownership stake of the trade union committee is genuine, and if the trade union and its committee function as trade unions generally function in China, then Huawei may be deemed effectively state-owned.
• Regardless of who, in a practical sense, owns and controls Huawei, it is clear that the employees do not."
And here is some info on Nokia and Ericsson in China;
"As the US maintains its chokehold on Huawei, cutting off the Chinese vendor's supply of vital components, China appears to have telegraphed its latest threat.
Should European authorities fail to comply with its wishes – namely, that no restrictions be imposed on the ailing Huawei – China will push the little red button that stops the European vendors from exporting any goods they make in China, according to a report from the Wall Street Journal.
If this is true, then China's government does not seem to have realized that Ericsson and Nokia have been evacuating the danger zone ever since Trump took a dislike to China-made products. Its supposed counterstrike would do minor damage to the European vendors. Most of the casualties would be Chinese."
"Banning Ericsson and Huawei
China's other option would be to ban Ericsson and Nokia from supplying Chinese operators, just as some other countries are banning Huawei and ZTE. The trouble is that China never allowed the Nordic firms much of a role in the first place.
While Huawei derives nearly a quarter of its revenues from Europe, the Middle East and Africa, and is Europe's biggest mobile infrastructure supplier, Ericsson made just 7% of last year's revenues in China, and for Nokia the figure was only 8%.
When China recently handed out 5G contracts, about 90% of the business went to Huawei and ZTE. Nokia even gave up on 5G radio in China when it missed out entirely in that area.
Banning Ericsson and Huawei would also make Chinese operators reliant on Huawei and ZTE. The same could be said about European dependence on Ericsson and Nokia if regulators exclude Chinese vendors. But the Nordic firms are not about to lose their competitive edge because of US sanctions."
Things are getting nastier by the day as Trump becomes more desperate and listens to the China hawks.
I mentioned the other day that Spanish media were picking up on the requirement that US software not be made available in AppGallery and today they are reporting that these latest moves could provoke a wide ranging counter attack from China given the amount of investments Tencent has worldwide. They are claiming that the damage would be more than US attempts to derail Huawei.
Mind reading is a sign a person has no argument and no information.
May last year. Non-speculative figure on lost Huawei revenues in the U.S tech sector: 11 billion dollars.
Various US companies seeing share price falls and business lost to competitors.
2019. Announcement of GMS replacement by Huawei. All Google Mobile Services (revenue streams) lost on Huawei phones. Revenue going to non-US competitors.
2019. Announcement of HarmonyOS. Already shipping on TVs, watches, routers, cars and coming to PCs this year. Formal announcement of HarmonyOS 2.0 Sept 5th
The other parts of my post can only be speculation at this point because the US hasn't clarified what this means.
However, the damage is already done.
The market fluctuates for all kinds of reasons, and companies that lose customers generally find other customers in a very short time. Given that Huawei is meeting headwinds in the EU for its Telecom equipment, in a major way, I might add, I'd argue that these same U.S. Companies will benefit from increased sourcing to Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung, and other companies in that pipeline. Then there is also that 5G buildout that is going on in the U.S., which you always denigrate.
More to the point, Huawei is known to use PRC state support to undercut competition, which absolutely has been happening with the knowledge of the EU, and it is illegal. Fortunately, it looks like Huawei is finding increasing resistance in the EU, leaving the 3rd world as it growth base.
Meanwhile, the biggest drag on the U.S. economy has been COVID19, not China, and even as fucked up as the current administration is, the U.S. is a very resilient and innovative country, and still dominates China, and the EU.
Maybe instead of your constant and undying support of Huawei, and the PRC, you might cheer your local teams, Ericsson, Nokia, and Siemens, but whatever.
I support my 'local teams' but as Vodafone's CEO said, having two major 5G players is tantamount to no competition. He said that Huawei was an essential part of keeping competition healthy.
Neither Nokia nor Ericsson have anything like the breadth of Huawei in their business groups and Nokia is on very shaky financial ground. Therefore neither of them even come into consideration in the bigger picture. They just don't have the business or product portfolio that Huawei has.
Huawei has already signed a huge amount of 5G contracts and says it can satisfy them.
Before COVID-19 struck the trade war had decimated US agriculture to the tune of requiring two multi billion dollar hand outs from government. That didn't stop many farms going out of business.
As I said, billions have been lost in revenues to US technology companies (again, pre-COVID) and even if they can recoup some lost business, it is taken away from other companies and directly hits their bottom lines. That, means less to invest in future R&D and less competitiveness against foreign rivals. That is exactly what Qualcomm is claiming in its lobbying efforts.
If Apple were to be forced to remove WeChat access from Chinese phones, it would have a huge impact on iPhone sales and, once again, benefit rivals.
Yet, what I posted about the EU is accurate. Huawei is a unfair competitor due to Government subsidies, so support of Ericsson, Nokia and Samsung is necessary. More to the point, China is an authoritarian state, and what has happened in Hong Kong, the Xinjiang Region, and threats against Taiwan, are turning the West against China.
You might want to note the "National Security" issue that I posted in the link. That you even doubt that there are National Security concerns with Huawei is one of the reasons that I dismiss your POV.
Oh, and of course, there is China's blatant and ongoing influence operations continuing against the West, which belie's "China's Sovereignty" meme.
Heck, China is only using equipment from ZTE and Huawei for its 5G buildout, not because it is better, but because both those companies will support PRC policies.
Huawei is not China.
Huawei is not subsidised by the Chinese government. It receives government incentives in some areas - just like any other company - anywhere.
Huawei also receives grants from other governments, like Spain and the EU. Again, like a ton of other companies.
NOKIA, Ericsson, Cisco etc are all participating in China's 5G although I hear Cisco is being subjected to a rip and replace as a tit-for-tat measure against US actions on Huawei.
You will balk at this but here you go:
All employee owned companies are controlled by the Chinese Government if they are any size.
This report, released by Professor Christopher Balding and Professor Donald Clarke, was based on unreliable sources and speculations, without an understanding of all the facts. They have not verified the information in the report with Huawei, and their conclusions are completely unsubstantiated. Huawei is a private company wholly owned by its employees. No government agency or outside organization holds shares in Huawei or has any control over Huawei.
Why not say at the outset that the report you are claiming backs up your affirmations, actually, doesn't?
There are no reliable documents available, and you can't prove otherwise that Huawei isn't controlled by the PRC, always relying on Huaweils word, but all employee unions are controlled by the PRC.
Here's the direct link, and a PDF of the report can be downloaded from there, for all of the curious who want to see for themselves,
As Huawei has come under increasing scrutiny over the last several months, the question of who really owns and controls it has come to the fore. Huawei calls itself “employee-owned,” but this claim is questionable, and the corporate structure described on its website is misleading. A number of pertinent facts about Huawei’s structure and ownership are in fact well known and have been outlined many times in the Chinese media, but the myth of Huawei’s employee ownership seems to persist outside of China. This article, drawing on publicly available sources such as media reports, corporate databases, and court cases, aims to refute this myth once and for all.
In summary, we find the following:
• The Huawei operating company is 100% owned by a holding company, which is in turn approximately 1% owned by Huawei founder Ren Zhengfei and 99% owned by an entity called a “trade union committee” for the holding company.
• We know nothing about the internal governance procedures of the trade union committee. We do not know who the committee members or other trade union leaders are, or how they are selected.
• Trade union members have no right to assets held by a trade union.
• What have been called “employee shares” in “Huawei” are in fact at most contractual interests in a profit-sharing scheme.
• Given the public nature of trade unions in China, if the ownership stake of the trade union committee is genuine, and if the trade union and its committee function as trade unions generally function in China, then Huawei may be deemed effectively state-owned.
• Regardless of who, in a practical sense, owns and controls Huawei, it is clear that the employees do not."
And here is some info on Nokia and Ericsson in China;
"As the US maintains its chokehold on Huawei, cutting off the Chinese vendor's supply of vital components, China appears to have telegraphed its latest threat.
Should European authorities fail to comply with its wishes – namely, that no restrictions be imposed on the ailing Huawei – China will push the little red button that stops the European vendors from exporting any goods they make in China, according to a report from the Wall Street Journal.
If this is true, then China's government does not seem to have realized that Ericsson and Nokia have been evacuating the danger zone ever since Trump took a dislike to China-made products. Its supposed counterstrike would do minor damage to the European vendors. Most of the casualties would be Chinese."
"Banning Ericsson and Huawei
China's other option would be to ban Ericsson and Nokia from supplying Chinese operators, just as some other countries are banning Huawei and ZTE. The trouble is that China never allowed the Nordic firms much of a role in the first place.
While Huawei derives nearly a quarter of its revenues from Europe, the Middle East and Africa, and is Europe's biggest mobile infrastructure supplier, Ericsson made just 7% of last year's revenues in China, and for Nokia the figure was only 8%.
When China recently handed out 5G contracts, about 90% of the business went to Huawei and ZTE. Nokia even gave up on 5G radio in China when it missed out entirely in that area.
Banning Ericsson and Huawei would also make Chinese operators reliant on Huawei and ZTE. The same could be said about European dependence on Ericsson and Nokia if regulators exclude Chinese vendors. But the Nordic firms are not about to lose their competitive edge because of US sanctions."
Par for the course.
Huawei having better equipment hasn't entered your reasoning, has it?
If the US had the ICT clout of Huawei in one of its national companies, don't you think the situation would be exactly the same?
Nokia withdrew its tender for a key 5G offer in China and Ericsson is making important sales in China even if they are less than Huawei's.
Nokia lost its competitive edge through poor strategic decisions and a lack of R&D in emerging areas.
Once again. There are no national security issues and the so called risks exist for everyone alike. Not that they are relevant for a company that technologically is the most scrutinised ICT operation on the planet.
Let's forget for a second that just ONE incident against Huawei in national security terms would kill the company overnight.
Things are getting nastier by the day as Trump becomes more desperate and listens to the China hawks.
I mentioned the other day that Spanish media were picking up on the requirement that US software not be made available in AppGallery and today they are reporting that these latest moves could provoke a wide ranging counter attack from China given the amount of investments Tencent has worldwide. They are claiming that the damage would be more than US attempts to derail Huawei.
Mind reading is a sign a person has no argument and no information.
May last year. Non-speculative figure on lost Huawei revenues in the U.S tech sector: 11 billion dollars.
Various US companies seeing share price falls and business lost to competitors.
2019. Announcement of GMS replacement by Huawei. All Google Mobile Services (revenue streams) lost on Huawei phones. Revenue going to non-US competitors.
2019. Announcement of HarmonyOS. Already shipping on TVs, watches, routers, cars and coming to PCs this year. Formal announcement of HarmonyOS 2.0 Sept 5th
The other parts of my post can only be speculation at this point because the US hasn't clarified what this means.
However, the damage is already done.
The market fluctuates for all kinds of reasons, and companies that lose customers generally find other customers in a very short time. Given that Huawei is meeting headwinds in the EU for its Telecom equipment, in a major way, I might add, I'd argue that these same U.S. Companies will benefit from increased sourcing to Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung, and other companies in that pipeline. Then there is also that 5G buildout that is going on in the U.S., which you always denigrate.
More to the point, Huawei is known to use PRC state support to undercut competition, which absolutely has been happening with the knowledge of the EU, and it is illegal. Fortunately, it looks like Huawei is finding increasing resistance in the EU, leaving the 3rd world as it growth base.
Meanwhile, the biggest drag on the U.S. economy has been COVID19, not China, and even as fucked up as the current administration is, the U.S. is a very resilient and innovative country, and still dominates China, and the EU.
Maybe instead of your constant and undying support of Huawei, and the PRC, you might cheer your local teams, Ericsson, Nokia, and Siemens, but whatever.
I support my 'local teams' but as Vodafone's CEO said, having two major 5G players is tantamount to no competition. He said that Huawei was an essential part of keeping competition healthy.
Neither Nokia nor Ericsson have anything like the breadth of Huawei in their business groups and Nokia is on very shaky financial ground. Therefore neither of them even come into consideration in the bigger picture. They just don't have the business or product portfolio that Huawei has.
Huawei has already signed a huge amount of 5G contracts and says it can satisfy them.
Before COVID-19 struck the trade war had decimated US agriculture to the tune of requiring two multi billion dollar hand outs from government. That didn't stop many farms going out of business.
As I said, billions have been lost in revenues to US technology companies (again, pre-COVID) and even if they can recoup some lost business, it is taken away from other companies and directly hits their bottom lines. That, means less to invest in future R&D and less competitiveness against foreign rivals. That is exactly what Qualcomm is claiming in its lobbying efforts.
If Apple were to be forced to remove WeChat access from Chinese phones, it would have a huge impact on iPhone sales and, once again, benefit rivals.
Yet, what I posted about the EU is accurate. Huawei is a unfair competitor due to Government subsidies, so support of Ericsson, Nokia and Samsung is necessary. More to the point, China is an authoritarian state, and what has happened in Hong Kong, the Xinjiang Region, and threats against Taiwan, are turning the West against China.
You might want to note the "National Security" issue that I posted in the link. That you even doubt that there are National Security concerns with Huawei is one of the reasons that I dismiss your POV.
Oh, and of course, there is China's blatant and ongoing influence operations continuing against the West, which belie's "China's Sovereignty" meme.
Heck, China is only using equipment from ZTE and Huawei for its 5G buildout, not because it is better, but because both those companies will support PRC policies.
Huawei is not China.
Huawei is not subsidised by the Chinese government. It receives government incentives in some areas - just like any other company - anywhere.
Huawei also receives grants from other governments, like Spain and the EU. Again, like a ton of other companies.
NOKIA, Ericsson, Cisco etc are all participating in China's 5G although I hear Cisco is being subjected to a rip and replace as a tit-for-tat measure against US actions on Huawei.
You will balk at this but here you go:
You should move to China. You'll love it!
You'll be surrounded by iPhone knockoffs. iPad knockoffs, Airpod knockoffs, App Store knockoffs, Apple Watch knockoffs, Apple Store knockoffs and even Steve Jobs knockoffs:
Things are getting nastier by the day as Trump becomes more desperate and listens to the China hawks.
I mentioned the other day that Spanish media were picking up on the requirement that US software not be made available in AppGallery and today they are reporting that these latest moves could provoke a wide ranging counter attack from China given the amount of investments Tencent has worldwide. They are claiming that the damage would be more than US attempts to derail Huawei.
Mind reading is a sign a person has no argument and no information.
May last year. Non-speculative figure on lost Huawei revenues in the U.S tech sector: 11 billion dollars.
Various US companies seeing share price falls and business lost to competitors.
2019. Announcement of GMS replacement by Huawei. All Google Mobile Services (revenue streams) lost on Huawei phones. Revenue going to non-US competitors.
2019. Announcement of HarmonyOS. Already shipping on TVs, watches, routers, cars and coming to PCs this year. Formal announcement of HarmonyOS 2.0 Sept 5th
The other parts of my post can only be speculation at this point because the US hasn't clarified what this means.
However, the damage is already done.
The market fluctuates for all kinds of reasons, and companies that lose customers generally find other customers in a very short time. Given that Huawei is meeting headwinds in the EU for its Telecom equipment, in a major way, I might add, I'd argue that these same U.S. Companies will benefit from increased sourcing to Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung, and other companies in that pipeline. Then there is also that 5G buildout that is going on in the U.S., which you always denigrate.
More to the point, Huawei is known to use PRC state support to undercut competition, which absolutely has been happening with the knowledge of the EU, and it is illegal. Fortunately, it looks like Huawei is finding increasing resistance in the EU, leaving the 3rd world as it growth base.
Meanwhile, the biggest drag on the U.S. economy has been COVID19, not China, and even as fucked up as the current administration is, the U.S. is a very resilient and innovative country, and still dominates China, and the EU.
Maybe instead of your constant and undying support of Huawei, and the PRC, you might cheer your local teams, Ericsson, Nokia, and Siemens, but whatever.
I support my 'local teams' but as Vodafone's CEO said, having two major 5G players is tantamount to no competition. He said that Huawei was an essential part of keeping competition healthy.
Neither Nokia nor Ericsson have anything like the breadth of Huawei in their business groups and Nokia is on very shaky financial ground. Therefore neither of them even come into consideration in the bigger picture. They just don't have the business or product portfolio that Huawei has.
Huawei has already signed a huge amount of 5G contracts and says it can satisfy them.
Before COVID-19 struck the trade war had decimated US agriculture to the tune of requiring two multi billion dollar hand outs from government. That didn't stop many farms going out of business.
As I said, billions have been lost in revenues to US technology companies (again, pre-COVID) and even if they can recoup some lost business, it is taken away from other companies and directly hits their bottom lines. That, means less to invest in future R&D and less competitiveness against foreign rivals. That is exactly what Qualcomm is claiming in its lobbying efforts.
If Apple were to be forced to remove WeChat access from Chinese phones, it would have a huge impact on iPhone sales and, once again, benefit rivals.
Yet, what I posted about the EU is accurate. Huawei is a unfair competitor due to Government subsidies, so support of Ericsson, Nokia and Samsung is necessary. More to the point, China is an authoritarian state, and what has happened in Hong Kong, the Xinjiang Region, and threats against Taiwan, are turning the West against China.
You might want to note the "National Security" issue that I posted in the link. That you even doubt that there are National Security concerns with Huawei is one of the reasons that I dismiss your POV.
Oh, and of course, there is China's blatant and ongoing influence operations continuing against the West, which belie's "China's Sovereignty" meme.
Heck, China is only using equipment from ZTE and Huawei for its 5G buildout, not because it is better, but because both those companies will support PRC policies.
Huawei is not China.
Huawei is not subsidised by the Chinese government. It receives government incentives in some areas - just like any other company - anywhere.
Huawei also receives grants from other governments, like Spain and the EU. Again, like a ton of other companies.
NOKIA, Ericsson, Cisco etc are all participating in China's 5G although I hear Cisco is being subjected to a rip and replace as a tit-for-tat measure against US actions on Huawei.
You will balk at this but here you go:
You should move to China. You'll love it!
You'll be surrounded by iPhone knockoffs. iPad knockoffs, Airpod knockoffs, App Store knockoffs, Apple Watch knockoffs, Apple Store knockoffs and even Steve Jobs knockoffs:
Please open a new thread for your claims and I will answer them there. I've already pointed out where you are wrong - many, many times.
Then , I will just link you back to your own thread so it is clear how your claims stand up to scrutiny.
Things are getting nastier by the day as Trump becomes more desperate and listens to the China hawks.
I mentioned the other day that Spanish media were picking up on the requirement that US software not be made available in AppGallery and today they are reporting that these latest moves could provoke a wide ranging counter attack from China given the amount of investments Tencent has worldwide. They are claiming that the damage would be more than US attempts to derail Huawei.
Mind reading is a sign a person has no argument and no information.
May last year. Non-speculative figure on lost Huawei revenues in the U.S tech sector: 11 billion dollars.
Various US companies seeing share price falls and business lost to competitors.
2019. Announcement of GMS replacement by Huawei. All Google Mobile Services (revenue streams) lost on Huawei phones. Revenue going to non-US competitors.
2019. Announcement of HarmonyOS. Already shipping on TVs, watches, routers, cars and coming to PCs this year. Formal announcement of HarmonyOS 2.0 Sept 5th
The other parts of my post can only be speculation at this point because the US hasn't clarified what this means.
However, the damage is already done.
The market fluctuates for all kinds of reasons, and companies that lose customers generally find other customers in a very short time. Given that Huawei is meeting headwinds in the EU for its Telecom equipment, in a major way, I might add, I'd argue that these same U.S. Companies will benefit from increased sourcing to Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung, and other companies in that pipeline. Then there is also that 5G buildout that is going on in the U.S., which you always denigrate.
More to the point, Huawei is known to use PRC state support to undercut competition, which absolutely has been happening with the knowledge of the EU, and it is illegal. Fortunately, it looks like Huawei is finding increasing resistance in the EU, leaving the 3rd world as it growth base.
Meanwhile, the biggest drag on the U.S. economy has been COVID19, not China, and even as fucked up as the current administration is, the U.S. is a very resilient and innovative country, and still dominates China, and the EU.
Maybe instead of your constant and undying support of Huawei, and the PRC, you might cheer your local teams, Ericsson, Nokia, and Siemens, but whatever.
I support my 'local teams' but as Vodafone's CEO said, having two major 5G players is tantamount to no competition. He said that Huawei was an essential part of keeping competition healthy.
Neither Nokia nor Ericsson have anything like the breadth of Huawei in their business groups and Nokia is on very shaky financial ground. Therefore neither of them even come into consideration in the bigger picture. They just don't have the business or product portfolio that Huawei has.
Huawei has already signed a huge amount of 5G contracts and says it can satisfy them.
Before COVID-19 struck the trade war had decimated US agriculture to the tune of requiring two multi billion dollar hand outs from government. That didn't stop many farms going out of business.
As I said, billions have been lost in revenues to US technology companies (again, pre-COVID) and even if they can recoup some lost business, it is taken away from other companies and directly hits their bottom lines. That, means less to invest in future R&D and less competitiveness against foreign rivals. That is exactly what Qualcomm is claiming in its lobbying efforts.
If Apple were to be forced to remove WeChat access from Chinese phones, it would have a huge impact on iPhone sales and, once again, benefit rivals.
Yet, what I posted about the EU is accurate. Huawei is a unfair competitor due to Government subsidies, so support of Ericsson, Nokia and Samsung is necessary. More to the point, China is an authoritarian state, and what has happened in Hong Kong, the Xinjiang Region, and threats against Taiwan, are turning the West against China.
You might want to note the "National Security" issue that I posted in the link. That you even doubt that there are National Security concerns with Huawei is one of the reasons that I dismiss your POV.
Oh, and of course, there is China's blatant and ongoing influence operations continuing against the West, which belie's "China's Sovereignty" meme.
Heck, China is only using equipment from ZTE and Huawei for its 5G buildout, not because it is better, but because both those companies will support PRC policies.
Huawei is not China.
Huawei is not subsidised by the Chinese government. It receives government incentives in some areas - just like any other company - anywhere.
Huawei also receives grants from other governments, like Spain and the EU. Again, like a ton of other companies.
NOKIA, Ericsson, Cisco etc are all participating in China's 5G although I hear Cisco is being subjected to a rip and replace as a tit-for-tat measure against US actions on Huawei.
You will balk at this but here you go:
You should move to China. You'll love it!
You'll be surrounded by iPhone knockoffs. iPad knockoffs, Airpod knockoffs, App Store knockoffs, Apple Watch knockoffs, Apple Store knockoffs and even Steve Jobs knockoffs:
Please open a new thread for your claims and I will answer them there. I've already pointed out where you are wrong - many, many times.
Then , I will just link you back to your own thread so it is clear how your claims stand up to scrutiny.
And people have pointed out where you are wrong, multiple times, so nothing changes, and it isn't up to us anyway.
You spend your posts, for the most part, defending Huawei. I spend mine, for the most part, posting about all the awful things that the PRC is involved in. Huawei is controlled by the PRC, so you would think I am wasting my time countering you.
You would be wrong. The landscape keeps changing, and it isn't in favor of Huawei, so, I post lots of these changes.
The one common theme is that the West, including the EU, are getting tired of China's brand of authoritarianism, and seasoned pols know that the U.S. can get better politically, but China is on a path that only Mao would approve.
Things are getting nastier by the day as Trump becomes more desperate and listens to the China hawks.
I mentioned the other day that Spanish media were picking up on the requirement that US software not be made available in AppGallery and today they are reporting that these latest moves could provoke a wide ranging counter attack from China given the amount of investments Tencent has worldwide. They are claiming that the damage would be more than US attempts to derail Huawei.
Mind reading is a sign a person has no argument and no information.
May last year. Non-speculative figure on lost Huawei revenues in the U.S tech sector: 11 billion dollars.
Various US companies seeing share price falls and business lost to competitors.
2019. Announcement of GMS replacement by Huawei. All Google Mobile Services (revenue streams) lost on Huawei phones. Revenue going to non-US competitors.
2019. Announcement of HarmonyOS. Already shipping on TVs, watches, routers, cars and coming to PCs this year. Formal announcement of HarmonyOS 2.0 Sept 5th
The other parts of my post can only be speculation at this point because the US hasn't clarified what this means.
However, the damage is already done.
The market fluctuates for all kinds of reasons, and companies that lose customers generally find other customers in a very short time. Given that Huawei is meeting headwinds in the EU for its Telecom equipment, in a major way, I might add, I'd argue that these same U.S. Companies will benefit from increased sourcing to Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung, and other companies in that pipeline. Then there is also that 5G buildout that is going on in the U.S., which you always denigrate.
More to the point, Huawei is known to use PRC state support to undercut competition, which absolutely has been happening with the knowledge of the EU, and it is illegal. Fortunately, it looks like Huawei is finding increasing resistance in the EU, leaving the 3rd world as it growth base.
Meanwhile, the biggest drag on the U.S. economy has been COVID19, not China, and even as fucked up as the current administration is, the U.S. is a very resilient and innovative country, and still dominates China, and the EU.
Maybe instead of your constant and undying support of Huawei, and the PRC, you might cheer your local teams, Ericsson, Nokia, and Siemens, but whatever.
I support my 'local teams' but as Vodafone's CEO said, having two major 5G players is tantamount to no competition. He said that Huawei was an essential part of keeping competition healthy.
Neither Nokia nor Ericsson have anything like the breadth of Huawei in their business groups and Nokia is on very shaky financial ground. Therefore neither of them even come into consideration in the bigger picture. They just don't have the business or product portfolio that Huawei has.
Huawei has already signed a huge amount of 5G contracts and says it can satisfy them.
Before COVID-19 struck the trade war had decimated US agriculture to the tune of requiring two multi billion dollar hand outs from government. That didn't stop many farms going out of business.
As I said, billions have been lost in revenues to US technology companies (again, pre-COVID) and even if they can recoup some lost business, it is taken away from other companies and directly hits their bottom lines. That, means less to invest in future R&D and less competitiveness against foreign rivals. That is exactly what Qualcomm is claiming in its lobbying efforts.
If Apple were to be forced to remove WeChat access from Chinese phones, it would have a huge impact on iPhone sales and, once again, benefit rivals.
Yet, what I posted about the EU is accurate. Huawei is a unfair competitor due to Government subsidies, so support of Ericsson, Nokia and Samsung is necessary. More to the point, China is an authoritarian state, and what has happened in Hong Kong, the Xinjiang Region, and threats against Taiwan, are turning the West against China.
You might want to note the "National Security" issue that I posted in the link. That you even doubt that there are National Security concerns with Huawei is one of the reasons that I dismiss your POV.
Oh, and of course, there is China's blatant and ongoing influence operations continuing against the West, which belie's "China's Sovereignty" meme.
Heck, China is only using equipment from ZTE and Huawei for its 5G buildout, not because it is better, but because both those companies will support PRC policies.
Huawei is not China.
Huawei is not subsidised by the Chinese government. It receives government incentives in some areas - just like any other company - anywhere.
Huawei also receives grants from other governments, like Spain and the EU. Again, like a ton of other companies.
NOKIA, Ericsson, Cisco etc are all participating in China's 5G although I hear Cisco is being subjected to a rip and replace as a tit-for-tat measure against US actions on Huawei.
You will balk at this but here you go:
You should move to China. You'll love it!
You'll be surrounded by iPhone knockoffs. iPad knockoffs, Airpod knockoffs, App Store knockoffs, Apple Watch knockoffs, Apple Store knockoffs and even Steve Jobs knockoffs:
Please open a new thread for your claims and I will answer them there. I've already pointed out where you are wrong - many, many times.
Then , I will just link you back to your own thread so it is clear how your claims stand up to scrutiny.
And people have pointed out where you are wrong, multiple times, so nothing changes, and it isn't up to us anyway.
You spend your posts, for the most part, defending Huawei. I spend mine, for the most part, posting about all the awful things that the PRC is involved in. Huawei is controlled by the PRC, so you would think I am wasting my time countering you.
You would be wrong. The landscape keeps changing, and it isn't in favor of Huawei, so, I post lots of these changes.
The one common theme is that the West, including the EU, are getting tired of China's brand of authoritarianism, and seasoned pols know that the U.S. can get better politically, but China is on a path that only Mao would approve.
But again. China isn't Huawei. Huawei isn't China.
Now, show some stories of Uyghur families that have been brought back together, or young Uyghur women who weren't sterilized, or those that weren't send to reeducation camps.
Generally whenever the US empire is on the warpath it monsters its enemies. None of this stuff was reported in any major fashion until the recent trade war. In the opposite side though, once the US leaves a country in misery the flow of information stops. So nothing about the slave markets in Libya.
Problem here is that China can only be defeated by a nuclear war. Which is what some of the US hawks clearly want.
I hate the Chinese government and their attack on American IP. That has nothing to do with the working citizen earnings his/her hard earned pay.
Yet this hate is very recent. Wasn’t Russia the monster last year? Then Libya before that. Iran all the time. Then Iraq, Syria, Venezuela. Anywhere the empire is challenged.
This time though there are conflicting elite interests. A war against Iraq doesn’t harm US industry all that much or even trade sanctions with Iran or whomever. This trade war could cripple US industry, and the US is also at trade war with the EU. Therefore expect industry pushback.
None of this would bring jobs home. Applying tariffs to Foxconn unless they assemble in the US might have helped but this isn’t about that, it’s about “national security” or sabre rattling.
Things are getting nastier by the day as Trump becomes more desperate and listens to the China hawks.
I mentioned the other day that Spanish media were picking up on the requirement that US software not be made available in AppGallery and today they are reporting that these latest moves could provoke a wide ranging counter attack from China given the amount of investments Tencent has worldwide. They are claiming that the damage would be more than US attempts to derail Huawei.
Mind reading is a sign a person has no argument and no information.
May last year. Non-speculative figure on lost Huawei revenues in the U.S tech sector: 11 billion dollars.
Various US companies seeing share price falls and business lost to competitors.
2019. Announcement of GMS replacement by Huawei. All Google Mobile Services (revenue streams) lost on Huawei phones. Revenue going to non-US competitors.
2019. Announcement of HarmonyOS. Already shipping on TVs, watches, routers, cars and coming to PCs this year. Formal announcement of HarmonyOS 2.0 Sept 5th
The other parts of my post can only be speculation at this point because the US hasn't clarified what this means.
However, the damage is already done.
The market fluctuates for all kinds of reasons, and companies that lose customers generally find other customers in a very short time. Given that Huawei is meeting headwinds in the EU for its Telecom equipment, in a major way, I might add, I'd argue that these same U.S. Companies will benefit from increased sourcing to Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung, and other companies in that pipeline. Then there is also that 5G buildout that is going on in the U.S., which you always denigrate.
More to the point, Huawei is known to use PRC state support to undercut competition, which absolutely has been happening with the knowledge of the EU, and it is illegal. Fortunately, it looks like Huawei is finding increasing resistance in the EU, leaving the 3rd world as it growth base.
Meanwhile, the biggest drag on the U.S. economy has been COVID19, not China, and even as fucked up as the current administration is, the U.S. is a very resilient and innovative country, and still dominates China, and the EU.
Maybe instead of your constant and undying support of Huawei, and the PRC, you might cheer your local teams, Ericsson, Nokia, and Siemens, but whatever.
I support my 'local teams' but as Vodafone's CEO said, having two major 5G players is tantamount to no competition. He said that Huawei was an essential part of keeping competition healthy.
Neither Nokia nor Ericsson have anything like the breadth of Huawei in their business groups and Nokia is on very shaky financial ground. Therefore neither of them even come into consideration in the bigger picture. They just don't have the business or product portfolio that Huawei has.
Huawei has already signed a huge amount of 5G contracts and says it can satisfy them.
Before COVID-19 struck the trade war had decimated US agriculture to the tune of requiring two multi billion dollar hand outs from government. That didn't stop many farms going out of business.
As I said, billions have been lost in revenues to US technology companies (again, pre-COVID) and even if they can recoup some lost business, it is taken away from other companies and directly hits their bottom lines. That, means less to invest in future R&D and less competitiveness against foreign rivals. That is exactly what Qualcomm is claiming in its lobbying efforts.
If Apple were to be forced to remove WeChat access from Chinese phones, it would have a huge impact on iPhone sales and, once again, benefit rivals.
Yet, what I posted about the EU is accurate. Huawei is a unfair competitor due to Government subsidies, so support of Ericsson, Nokia and Samsung is necessary. More to the point, China is an authoritarian state, and what has happened in Hong Kong, the Xinjiang Region, and threats against Taiwan, are turning the West against China.
You might want to note the "National Security" issue that I posted in the link. That you even doubt that there are National Security concerns with Huawei is one of the reasons that I dismiss your POV.
Oh, and of course, there is China's blatant and ongoing influence operations continuing against the West, which belie's "China's Sovereignty" meme.
Heck, China is only using equipment from ZTE and Huawei for its 5G buildout, not because it is better, but because both those companies will support PRC policies.
Huawei is not China.
Huawei is not subsidised by the Chinese government. It receives government incentives in some areas - just like any other company - anywhere.
Huawei also receives grants from other governments, like Spain and the EU. Again, like a ton of other companies.
NOKIA, Ericsson, Cisco etc are all participating in China's 5G although I hear Cisco is being subjected to a rip and replace as a tit-for-tat measure against US actions on Huawei.
You will balk at this but here you go:
You should move to China. You'll love it!
You'll be surrounded by iPhone knockoffs. iPad knockoffs, Airpod knockoffs, App Store knockoffs, Apple Watch knockoffs, Apple Store knockoffs and even Steve Jobs knockoffs:
Please open a new thread for your claims and I will answer them there. I've already pointed out where you are wrong - many, many times.
Then , I will just link you back to your own thread so it is clear how your claims stand up to scrutiny.
And people have pointed out where you are wrong, multiple times, so nothing changes, and it isn't up to us anyway.
You spend your posts, for the most part, defending Huawei. I spend mine, for the most part, posting about all the awful things that the PRC is involved in. Huawei is controlled by the PRC, so you would think I am wasting my time countering you.
You would be wrong. The landscape keeps changing, and it isn't in favor of Huawei, so, I post lots of these changes.
The one common theme is that the West, including the EU, are getting tired of China's brand of authoritarianism, and seasoned pols know that the U.S. can get better politically, but China is on a path that only Mao would approve.
But again. China isn't Huawei. Huawei isn't China.
This trade war could cripple US industry, and the US is also at trade war with the EU. Therefore expect industry pushback. None of this would bring jobs home.
Comments
Now, show some stories of Uyghur families that have been brought back together, or young Uyghur women who weren't sterilized, or those that weren't send to reeducation camps.
https://www.justsecurity.org/71615/chinas-forced-sterilization-of-uyghur-women-violates-clear-international-law/
How about involuntary organ harvesting;
https://www.healtheuropa.eu/forced-organ-harvesting/91152/
You're just like George, presuming I, and others, are right wing because we are against what the PRC is doing in China and the world.
News, I am against Trump as well, another known authoritarian.
This just popped up.
https://www.wired.com/story/chinese-hackers-taiwan-semiconductor-industry-skeleton-key/
Should we just roll over for this as well?
Huawei is not subsidised by the Chinese government. It receives government incentives in some areas - just like any other company - anywhere.
Huawei also receives grants from other governments, like Spain and the EU. Again, like a ton of other companies.
NOKIA, Ericsson, Cisco etc are all participating in China's 5G although I hear Cisco is being subjected to a rip and replace as a tit-for-tat measure against US actions on Huawei.
You will balk at this but here you go:
https://www.gizmochina.com/2019/04/19/huawei-not-owned-by-its-employees-state-ownership-likely-research-paper/
I'll add this;
https://itif.org/publications/2020/06/22/how-chinas-mercantilist-policies-have-undermined-global-innovation-telecom#.XvDraq9_PeA.twitter
"KEY TAKEAWAYS
Chinese market-share gains have come at the expense of innovative telecom equipment providers in other countries. By artificially taking market share from more innovative companies, the latter have had less revenue to invest in cutting-edge R&D.
As a share of sales, leading non-Chinese equipment companies invest more in R&D, and patent and contribute more to international standards when compared to Huawei and ZTE.
Beijing’s policies dramatically limit foreign access to China’s huge telecom markets, providing them with a guaranteed source of revenue to attack foreign competitors.
We estimate that if Ericsson and Nokia took all of Huawei and ZTE sales, there would be 20 percent more global telecom equipment R&D and 75 percent more essential 5G patents.
Democratic market-based nations should no longer purchase equipment from Huawei and ZTE and should encourage other nations to not buy Chinese telecom gear.
This will send a clear message to China that, going forward, systemic innovation mercantilism that hinders global technological innovation will no longer be tolerated."
That in itself is a National Security concern.
Huawei response:
This report, released by Professor Christopher Balding and Professor Donald Clarke, was based on unreliable sources and speculations, without an understanding of all the facts. They have not verified the information in the report with Huawei, and their conclusions are completely unsubstantiated. Huawei is a private company wholly owned by its employees. No government agency or outside organization holds shares in Huawei or has any control over Huawei.
Why not say at the outset that the report you are claiming backs up your affirmations, actually, doesn't?
Here's the direct link, and a PDF of the report can be downloaded from there, for all of the curious who want to see for themselves,
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3372669
"Abstract
As Huawei has come under increasing scrutiny over the last several months, the question of who really owns and controls it has come to the fore. Huawei calls itself “employee-owned,” but this claim is questionable, and the corporate structure described on its website is misleading. A number of pertinent facts about Huawei’s structure and ownership are in fact well known and have been outlined many times in the Chinese media, but the myth of Huawei’s employee ownership seems to persist outside of China. This article, drawing on publicly available sources such as media reports, corporate databases, and court cases, aims to refute this myth once and for all.
In summary, we find the following:
• The Huawei operating company is 100% owned by a holding company, which is in turn approximately 1% owned by Huawei founder Ren Zhengfei and 99% owned by an entity called a “trade union committee” for the holding company.
• We know nothing about the internal governance procedures of the trade union committee. We do not know who the committee members or other trade union leaders are, or how they are selected.
• Trade union members have no right to assets held by a trade union.
• What have been called “employee shares” in “Huawei” are in fact at most contractual interests in a profit-sharing scheme.
• Given the public nature of trade unions in China, if the ownership stake of the trade union committee is genuine, and if the trade union and its committee function as trade unions generally function in China, then Huawei may be deemed effectively state-owned.
• Regardless of who, in a practical sense, owns and controls Huawei, it is clear that the employees do not."
And here is some info on Nokia and Ericsson in China;
https://www.lightreading.com/5g/chinas-feeble-threat-to-ericsson-and-nokia/a/d-id/762550
"As the US maintains its chokehold on Huawei, cutting off the Chinese vendor's supply of vital components, China appears to have telegraphed its latest threat.
Should European authorities fail to comply with its wishes – namely, that no restrictions be imposed on the ailing Huawei – China will push the little red button that stops the European vendors from exporting any goods they make in China, according to a report from the Wall Street Journal.
If this is true, then China's government does not seem to have realized that Ericsson and Nokia have been evacuating the danger zone ever since Trump took a dislike to China-made products. Its supposed counterstrike would do minor damage to the European vendors. Most of the casualties would be Chinese."
"Banning Ericsson and Huawei
China's other option would be to ban Ericsson and Nokia from supplying Chinese operators, just as some other countries are banning Huawei and ZTE. The trouble is that China never allowed the Nordic firms much of a role in the first place.
While Huawei derives nearly a quarter of its revenues from Europe, the Middle East and Africa, and is Europe's biggest mobile infrastructure supplier, Ericsson made just 7% of last year's revenues in China, and for Nokia the figure was only 8%.
When China recently handed out 5G contracts, about 90% of the business went to Huawei and ZTE. Nokia even gave up on 5G radio in China when it missed out entirely in that area.
Banning Ericsson and Huawei would also make Chinese operators reliant on Huawei and ZTE. The same could be said about European dependence on Ericsson and Nokia if regulators exclude Chinese vendors. But the Nordic firms are not about to lose their competitive edge because of US sanctions."
Huawei having better equipment hasn't entered your reasoning, has it?
If the US had the ICT clout of Huawei in one of its national companies, don't you think the situation would be exactly the same?
Nokia withdrew its tender for a key 5G offer in China and Ericsson is making important sales in China even if they are less than Huawei's.
Nokia lost its competitive edge through poor strategic decisions and a lack of R&D in emerging areas.
Just one example:
https://www.bangkokpost.com/business/1947644/nokia-hurt-by-costly-5g-chip-mistake-struggles-to-catch-huawei
Once again. There are no national security issues and the so called risks exist for everyone alike. Not that they are relevant for a company that technologically is the most scrutinised ICT operation on the planet.
Let's forget for a second that just ONE incident against Huawei in national security terms would kill the company overnight.
30 years and not a single major breach.
I hate the Chinese government and their attack on American IP. That has nothing to do with the working citizen earnings his/her hard earned pay.
You should move to China. You'll love it!
You'll be surrounded by iPhone knockoffs. iPad knockoffs, Airpod knockoffs, App Store knockoffs, Apple Watch knockoffs, Apple Store knockoffs and even Steve Jobs knockoffs:
You mean sort of like when Flash wasn’t available on iPhones?
Then , I will just link you back to your own
thread so it is clear how your claims stand up to scrutiny.
You spend your posts, for the most part, defending Huawei. I spend mine, for the most part, posting about all the awful things that the PRC is involved in. Huawei is controlled by the PRC, so you would think I am wasting my time countering you.
You would be wrong. The landscape keeps changing, and it isn't in favor of Huawei, so, I post lots of these changes.
The one common theme is that the West, including the EU, are getting tired of China's brand of authoritarianism, and seasoned pols know that the U.S. can get better politically, but China is on a path that only Mao would approve.
China is China. Huawei is a Chinese company.
That's news.