Commentary: Why the cable market in exchange for Japanese abusiveness

An expert of a well-known domestic cable company wants to visit a Sino-Japanese joint venture cable company. The Japanese side is not allowed to. Later, it was said that through a certain leader’s approval of the Chinese officials of the joint venture company, the Japanese officials became aware of the fact that they were furious, snarled, and utterly ugly. After I heard about this incident, my heart has been blocked so far.

We are attracting foreign investment, "for the market for technology", why exchange the verbal abuse of foreigners?

In the wire and cable industry in China, under the banner of “market-for-technology”, there are countless wholly foreign-owned and joint-venture companies established, occupying large areas of the Chinese wire and cable market, and enjoying more domestic capital ratios. Businesses have much more favorable treatment. The unequal treatment of domestic and foreign-funded enterprises makes foreign-funded enterprises arrogant, and domestic-funded enterprises are overshadowed. The domestic-funded enterprises that had hoped to learn technology from foreign-funded enterprises have suffered setbacks and blows again and again. Of course, they have in turn thought and stimulated the determination of domestic-funded enterprises to work hard. This is a follow-up statement.

The point of foreign cable companies’ technology is not to look at how advanced they are at the negotiating table. They are simply a layer of paper and the insiders are breaking. The technology they generously provided to the Chinese is nothing but outdated or outdated technology. Their core technology is absolutely not going to be published, and we are still waiting for the "market-for-technology". In the wire and cable industry, what foreign companies have brought to China? How many technologies have been promoted? I am afraid even those party officials and technical elites in those places are shy to answer.

There are three main reasons why some foreign-funded foreigners dare to abuse Chinese.

First of all, foreigners do not come to sell technology at all. Foreigners are not stupid people. They use technology and funds as chips to disguise themselves, dress up for dinner, invest in China, and benefit, rather than selling technology with sincerity. In almost all wholly foreign-owned enterprises or joint ventures, its core technology is confidential to China. The key technical positions are controlled by foreigners. The so-called technological investment is just that they use their own technology to set up factories to manufacture products here. It can also be said that technical personnel who have worked in foreign-funded enterprises for many years can comprehensively speak about foreign related technologies. In those enterprises, foreigners always treat Chinese as second-class citizens and migrant workers, and will never put the real core technology into your hands. In the wire and cable technical exchanges organized by the Chinese organizations, they hardly participated in the event. Even if they participated, they never introduced themselves to the actual technology. Instead, they sprang a shot, made some advertising, endless craps, and promoted their products. Treat them as guests. Even if China buys technology, it needs to digest and absorb and make innovations. Only when it has vitality can it be its own technology.

Second, local officials contributed to the arrogance of foreigners. It is not uncommon for local governments to invest in capital, expand their performance, and do not hesitate to damage national interests. It has also been heard that foreigners have found the bribe of local officials. Foreign-funded enterprises’ products have defeated domestic-funded enterprises, and local officials have instead congratulated foreign-funded enterprises for creating GDP and taxes for the government and boasting that their investments are successful. The kind of thinking that “all foreign-funded enterprises registered in China enjoy national treatment; independent innovation, government procurement and intellectual property protection will be treated equally and treated equally; the products they manufacture are all made in China, and the innovative products they develop are also The idea of ​​"creating in China" is nothing more than a wishful nightmare and does not conform to international competition practices. Analyzed, one of them is that foreign-funded enterprises in China enjoy far more preferential treatment than domestic-funded enterprises. Foreign-funded enterprises have sufficient resources and capabilities to beat domestic-funded enterprises. The second is in independent innovation and government procurement, as mentioned above, foreign-funded enterprises. The products have always been higher than domestic-funded enterprises, and even forced to stipulate the procurement of foreign-funded products. There is no equality at all. Third, the products of foreign-funded enterprises cannot be regarded as Chinese products, and innovative products of people cannot be counted as Chinese creation. Foreign-invested companies' products are marked with "Made in China" (made in China) instead of "Product of China" (Chinese products). It is not only overbearing that products, technologies, and innovations that are originally owned by others are considered to be their own, but even foreign-funded enterprises have already expressed their dissatisfaction. As the saying goes: "Knocking and selling sugar, each line." The people who control GDP are those who are interested in the development of China's wire and cable technology. They are concerned with technological progress, not with GDP. Foreign investors invest in factories in China, and products made with their technology beat the Chinese. Therefore, they believe that technology is crucial, even if it is a very common technology. It is no wonder that leaders have been stimulating and awakening before they shout loudly that "hi-tech cannot be bought."

Once again, the Chinese cable users' "retrospective disease" is in trouble. Over the years, the number and opportunities for the use of high-end wire and cable in China have increased, and the treatment of domestic and foreign-funded enterprises has been unequal. In the case of ultra-high voltage cables alone, some bidding documents even wrote that “the products provided must be made in foreign countries or made by foreign-owned enterprises or joint ventures in China”, and the purely domestic enterprises should be excluded . In this way, how can domestic-funded companies have the opportunity to demonstrate their capabilities? At present, 110kV and 220kV cross-linked cables have been manufactured and put into the market in China, and 500kV cross-linked cables are also in trial operation. If users do not give domestic companies a market opportunity and how to improve the technical level of the national cable industry, will it always rely on foreigners to live? The Japanese-owned joint venture company mentioned above is also manufacturing 110kV cross-linked cables. It is no longer a high-end technology.

That is the competition in the interests of the product market, not technical confidentiality.

In short, those foreign-funded enterprises in the wire and cable industry in China, who are good and who are inferior, are all aware of it. Those foreign-funded enterprises that are friendly to China are being respected by the industry, and those foreign-funded enterprises that do not talk about people, do not do personnel, and are unsatisfied are bound to be spurned by the entire industry.