Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
In a globalized world, does this even matter? Who cares where the components in your supply chain come from or how far up the value chain producers in your country are as long as you are the leading brand.
The average consumer may not care and even know that the finalized brand has components from other companies (the average consumer only sees the finished product)- in the case of Samsung and Hyundai- they rely on components from non-Korean companies- which is why Willister refers to the Korean companies as being "glossy." But from an economic standpoint, it is still significant that Samsung and Hyundai rely on non-Korean components. If something were to happen to supply chain of their components it could adversely impact Samsung and Hyundai.
In a globalized world, does this even matter? Who cares where the components in your supply chain come from or how far up the value chain producers in your country are as long as you are the leading brand.
The average consumer may not care and even know that the finalized brand has components from other companies (the average consumer only sees the finished product)- in the case of Samsung and Hyundai- they rely on components from non-Korean companies- which is why Willister refers to the Korean companies as being "glossy." But from an economic standpoint, it is still significant that Samsung and Hyundai rely on non-Korean components. If something were to happen to supply chain of their components it could adversely impact Samsung and Hyundai.
Not only that but also better margins if one was to do everything in house and have better technology.
During their heyday, and even to some extent, today, Japanese companies have cross shares in their competitors and have somewhat of a very cozy relationship as well as being technologically much more advanced. Their thinking is they would rather a Japanese competitor share the market than let a European or American company steal that share. During the 90s almost all MiniDisc players were from a Japanese brand (the tech was invented by Sony and licensed to only Japanese brands, ditto for Trinitron monitors, though in that case it did ease a little later on when I saw some Taiwanese brands with themm...like Viewsonic).
Compare Samsung and Sony during their heyday not Sony today...I think a Sony product would pretty much have close to 100% of all Sony components of at least some other Japanese company's....they didn't need European/American companies to fill the tech gap/void. Granted things were much more mechanical back then and easier tech wise nonetheless.
Very few Japanese companies sourced non Japanese components, I can only think one - I owned a 1992 Toyota Camry, where the used a Bosch water pump the the OEM. It's only recently with the Takata Airbags saga that has left Japanese companies changing and "buying the best in the market" instead of "we need to use another Japanese company's components" type strategy.
Contrast this to the middle tech Koreans who make whatever they can themselves and import the rest they can't. The Chinese at the opposite end of the spectrum imported almost every single component...for example the old DVD players - drive was Japanese, mainboard was Taiwanese and chipsets/decoders American the only thing that was Chinese was probably the plastic trim. However, they are gradually moving up the chain. I like though, how the Chinese were able to emulate from the best in the field, they learn pretty quick and basically take "whatever is best / market leader approach"..One example is the Chinese bullet trains basically a good hash of Kawasaki, Alstrom, Bombadier and Siemens.
- Hong Kong - GDP figures have improved since the days of being under the British, but has just shifted from serving the British to serving the emperors now in Beijing. Certainly feels a lot more Chinese since 1995, English standards falling, so does international spark/status.
Will it turn to a B-grade city soon? Shame but it's looking likely!
I think Hong Kong would be fine as long as it can maintain its niche as a financial gateway connecting China to the rest of the world. I think Hong Kong has a lot of potential as a financial hub of APEC; money has no loyalty and the rich and powerful of China would always need a channel and gateway to hide and distribute their money.
I think Hong Kong would be fine as long as it can maintain its niche as a financial gateway connecting China to the rest of the world. I think Hong Kong has a lot of potential as a financial hub of APEC; money has no loyalty and the rich and powerful of China would always need a channel and gateway to hide and distribute their money.
The only real thing it has at the moment left that is an advantage over say Shanghai is the English rule of law - which gives many Westerners the confidence in trading and doing business.
Acer are baddddd.
HTC not too bad
Asus decent. Their motherboards were great.
Just to clear up some smoke and mirrors around here:
HTC's One smartphone line is actually quite good, getting lots of recommendations from knowledgeable smartphone website reviews. I can't say as to the company itself (supposedly financially pretty shaky) but at least one of their products is pretty decent.
ASUS is actually quite a good company in terms of how they manufacture their motherboards (they are moving towards precision robotic manufacturing) and their engineering solutions for "gaming" video cards -- they get top recommendations/awards year after year from expert tech websites like HardOCP, Anandtech, TechPowerUp, etc. If you want to extend this further, the top PC enthusiast/gaming motherboards actually all come from ASUS/MSI/Gigabyte (a few of which are Foxconn designs which are then customized to fit their needs).
You can certainly hold ASUS's customer service to the guillotine, though. Not nearly as good as they claim (or used to be). MSI is doing a much better job in this regard.
Acer is trying to make a big push into the PC gaming market with their "Predator" line of gaming LCDs. They are doing quite well there, from all that I have read and heard -- in fact, they are going head to head with ASUS in this department. (ASUS over the last 3 years has has some really good LCD monitor models, enough to move me from my favored company in this regard, NEC -- one of my monitors is still an NEC model). Acer was, up until recently, very much a "budget brand" like ECS is, but have been pushing hard and innovating (they were already doing this in Taiwan a few years back with some choice items). Not too shabby.
MSI/ASUS/Acer are all going head to head in the super lucrative "gaming laptop" market, given that there are very high profit margin ratios in this area.
LG has a pretty strong hold on the LCD panel market, something which the founder of VIZIO (who had founded Princeton Graphics/MAG Innovision) sidestepped by going to various panel manufacturers in the PRC and getting stuff from them -- that's how VIZIO was, for a time, able to be the LCD TV market share leader in the US for a few years. (It's currently duking it out with Samsung).
Some of you may have seen the Seiki TV brand over the last year or 2. They are basically following a similar model, but with home-grown PRC characteristics in mind. They are probably getting better deals than even VIZIO in terms of manufacturing (with considerable overlap from other Chinese companies). My recently-purchased Seiki 42" 4K@60hz TV uses a panel made by Innolux (formerly Chi Mei Optoelectronics). Sure, it's a S-PVA panel instead of an IPS one, but I really like the blacks on this thing. The setup/layout is easy to use and pretty intuitive. Construction is simple and effective. And the price, of course, was outstanding (not going to argue with $271 USD).
Many of the Japanese companies, once so prominent in the TV world, are now departing (or have already departed) US shores. Toshiba, Hitachi, Sharp, Pioneer, Panasonic, etc. Kind of sad in a way -- my last "regular TV" before embarking on LCDs was a Sony WEGA that had (for its time) good picture and incredible reliability.
The top motherboard manufacturers in the world are all Taiwanese companies. Guess they are going for the low-key approach. Maybe not as "glamorous" and "immediately profitable" but certainly a nice way to make a large and steady profit while remaining (relatively) under the radar (and, for the most part, avoiding liabilities. I'm looking at you, Foxconn).
I know that "gaming" usually isn't taken too seriously as a business for those of a certain mindset, but it is a multi-billion dollar industry which is only likely to get bigger and bigger (just look at the proliferation of "video gaming" amongst youngsters of the 20-and-younger set). This includes smartphones -- I live and work in NYC and on the subway, you will find all sorts of folks indulging in some kind of game, including some of the most "stereotypically" unlikely types. The potential gaming market is unbelievably massive, and in many ways is still in its infancy. You can see this with even the likes of Dell finally (reluctantly) entering the gaming market with (first for them) a specifically gaming-oriented LCD monitor (and it is explicitly marketed as such). A shame it is only a TN panel at a time where ASUS/Acer/(even -gasp- Eizo) are putting out IPS/PLS/PVA panel-based monitors ...
------------------------
But to answer the question: the best economically performing Asian country over the last 20 years is, without a doubt, China. They have successfully leveraged their overwhelming economic rise into very tangible gains politically (just look at their investments in Africa, for starters) -- always the historical benchmark. Look at the Egyptians/Chinese/Mesopotamians of the far past, the Romans/Persians/Greeks/Arabs of the not so far past, the European/Ottoman/Chinese (also Mongolian, to some extent) of the more recent past, and the American/Soviet dominance of the very recent past. The Italian city-states failed to leverage their economic power into a united and cohesive form (unlike their Greek "predecessors" under Alexander the Great), which is why the Renaissance, while a true delight culturally, was a disaster for Italy politically, as other nations intruded in, and eventually imposed "hegemonies" of their own. Spain/France/the Hapsburgs No Second Roma here, no matter what Benito might have dreamed. (And he was wrong, too; arguably Byzantium was the true Second Roma, and the 3rd? Monarchist Russia has the strongest claim to that). Even more distant is the "Megali Idea" of the Greeks (which was really just a rehashing of Byzantium w/it's 1204 CE borders) ...
Most HK people do not work in the financial industry, I am pretty sure Singapore is the same. There are diversification of industries. Macau and Brunei are more concentrated in a few industries, their population are much samller.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tigerbalm1985
I think Hong Kong has a lot of potential as a financial hub of APEC; money has no loyalty and the rich and powerful of China would always need a channel and gateway to hide and distribute their money.
5. Hong Kong
- Low debt, moderate deficits, medium growth, employment rate stable, slightly unstable, salaries down, housing 37x income.
6. Vietnam
- Low debt, high deficits, medium growth, employment rate up, slightly unstable, salaries up, housing 32x income.
7. Japan
- High debt, high deficit, low growth, employment rate down, stable, salaries down, housing 26x income.
Unstable or stable in what sense? Politically? Economically? Socially? Environmentally?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No Second Roma here, no matter what Benito might have dreamed. (And he was wrong, too; arguably Byzantium was the true Second Roma, and the 3rd? Monarchist Russia has the strongest claim to that). Even more distant is the "Megali Idea" of the Greeks (which was really just a rehashing of Byzantium w/it's 1204 CE borders) ...
