Chinese Economics Thread

Anlsvrthng

Captain
Registered Member
Regarding the bold part, I think first of all, even though the Chinese are more careful with money and less frivolous that Americans when it comes to luxuries or unneeded purchases, we are still talking about over 4 times the mouths to feed and basic necessities to fulfill in China compared to the US, which would drive basic spending up even if luxury spending is lower. Henrik_2000 posted this,

Correct wording is " I want to see that the Cinese are more careful with money, because it paint a better picture in my mind about the chinese" : )

And what is the reality is diferent.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

Klon

Junior Member
Registered Member
So here's the thing: if what you are saying is true, that this is a mix up and that the US retail market is some 3 times bigger than China's, then PricewaterhouseCoopers (2016) and Mizuho Securities (2018) have both made a huuuggee mistake and declared that China's retail market had surpassed that of the US, and after this huge mistake, no one stood out to challenge them, and to this date, they have not issued a correction. We're talking about huge companies evaluating mountains of global economic data; to make a mistake this big and have no one intuitively smell something off would be like the NBA accidentally publishing an article stating that Isaiah Thomas is taller than Yao Ming and then, 2 years later, Sport Illustrated confirmed it with another article of their own stating the same thing! The unlikelihood of this happening is what makes me think that the chart posted on the Washington Post is correct, BUT it refers to something other than what your World Bank data is showing.
WaPo is quoting Mizuho, while the other two pieces are based on a forecast by eMarketer. PwC is mentioned only in passing in SCMP. If you can find PwC's forecast, I'll be happy to read it. eMarketer was saying that China would overtake the USA in 2016 with 4.9 trillion dollars compared to 4.8 trillion dollars, so not the same thing as (actually contradicting) the Mizuho forecast.

There's no reason to expect anyone to challenge them or for them to issue a correction. Economic forecasts are wrong all the time. These were hardly big stories. Plus, there may be a correction somewhere that we haven't seen. As for "We're talking about huge companies evaluating mountains of global economic data", it's just as likely we're talking about one or two employees writing a report and getting it wrong. I also don't see the point of the analogy, as the height difference of the two players is obvious to everyone, which isn't the case for economic statistics.

Also,
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
is not the same as retail sales.

Here's the link to the latest
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, with 2015 data. If you check section 15-1, Basic Conditions of Wholesale and Retail Trades, the number for Retail trade, Total Sales Value is 11.4 trillion yuan. I don't know if this is the right measure for "retail sales", but it seems plausible. With a 10% percent increase, the number for 2016 would be about 2 trillion dollars, or about half of household final consumption expenditure. Similarly, here's a monthly
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
for "advance monthly sales for retail and food services" in the USA, which were 495 billion dollars in December, or about 5.9 trillion dollars in 2017 (just by multiplying by 12), which is again close to half of household final consumption expenditure. In my opinion, these numbers are plausible and are bolstered by the fact that they generally match.

Regarding the bold part, I think first of all, even though the Chinese are more careful with money and less frivolous that Americans when it comes to luxuries or unneeded purchases, we are still talking about over 4 times the mouths to feed and basic necessities to fulfill in China compared to the US, which would drive basic spending up even if luxury spending is lower. Henrik_2000 posted this, "For 2018, both the US and Chinese annual retail sales are $5.8 trillion. This is an important economic indicator that the US and Chinese economies are roughly the same size." and I posted, "Is it? Because Chinese like the spend WELL within their means while Americans like to accumulate so much debt that their bank is the biggest mourner at their funeral." Both are overtures at the possibility that the Chinese GDP is massively understated and actually equal to or larger than America's. I just hint at the possibility; I don't stand by it, I'm not saying it has to be the case, and I don't want to debate it. It's just for food fun food for thought.
If you don't stand by it, there's nothing to say.
 

manqiangrexue

Brigadier
WaPo is quoting Mizuho, while the other two pieces are based on a forecast by eMarketer. PwC is mentioned only in passing in SCMP. If you can find PwC's forecast, I'll be happy to read it. eMarketer was saying that China would overtake the USA in 2016 with 4.9 trillion dollars compared to 4.8 trillion dollars, so not the same thing as (actually contradicting) the Mizuho forecast.

There's no reason to expect anyone to challenge them or for them to issue a correction. Economic forecasts are wrong all the time. These were hardly big stories. Plus, there may be a correction somewhere that we haven't seen. As for "We're talking about huge companies evaluating mountains of global economic data", it's just as likely we're talking about one or two employees writing a report and getting it wrong. I also don't see the point of the analogy, as the height difference of the two players is obvious to everyone, which isn't the case for economic statistics.

Also,
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
is not the same as retail sales.

Here's the link to the latest
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, with 2015 data. If you check section 15-1, Basic Conditions of Wholesale and Retail Trades, the number for Retail trade, Total Sales Value is 11.4 trillion yuan. I don't know if this is the right measure for "retail sales", but it seems plausible. With a 10% percent increase, the number for 2016 would be about 2 trillion dollars, or about half of household final consumption expenditure. Similarly, here's a monthly
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
for "advance monthly sales for retail and food services" in the USA, which were 495 billion dollars in December, or about 5.9 trillion dollars in 2017 (just by multiplying by 12), which is again close to half of household final consumption expenditure. In my opinion, these numbers are plausible and are bolstered by the fact that they generally match.


If you don't stand by it, there's nothing to say.
OK, here is PwC's article:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


While it's true that economic forecasts are wrong all the time, I don't see how two large global firms could have both erroneously said that A would be larger than B by 2018 while A was much much smaller than B (a third). I've seen 10 year predictions of entire firms not pan out but I haven't seen a mistake quite like that. Generally, if they predict 2018, and it's already 2018 (Mizuho) or 2018 when it's 2015 (PwC), it's because A is very close to B and on the verge of passing it. The basketball player example and this statistic are both obvious; while an unusual definition can confound the layman like us, it cannot confuse all the professional economists at both PwC and Mizuho. I believe if they have made such an obvious mistake, competitor firms would jump on them to discredit them.

I just wanna also add that if you search for "Largest retail market in the world," Google puts the eMarketer article first and even uses its answer of China as the official Google answer. If it was wrong... a lot of people are wrong.

So if you are saying that the World Bank data that you posted is NOT the same as the retails sales that these articles are talking about, then it's an apples-to-oranges comparison. Can you post a source with the correct figures for the retail sales these articles are mentioning so we can get an apples-to-apples comparison showing that these articles are wrong? Because to me, it's apparent that China is catching up to the US on something; I'm just not sure what it is if it isn't what a layman would think retail sales market means.
 
Last edited:

manqiangrexue

Brigadier
Anyway, the reason of mounting debt in US is simply the falling incomes ,due to the chinese cheap workforce, used up by the US companies to make extra profit, that is -- suprise, suprise-- saved.

And generaly, the Chinese central bank wants to load up with debt the Chinese households as well.

Again, house prices in China?

What do you think ,what is the most expensive asset of every household?
I literally don't understand what you're trying to say with your English, "suprise, suprise-- saved." What the hell does that mean? The only surprise here is that you spelled surprise wrong twice in a row. As for the rest of it, are you asking me a question or trying to get me to answer in a way that you'd like? If you have something to say, just say it; nobody wants to play question games with you.
Correct wording is " I want to see that the Cinese are more careful with money, because it paint a better picture in my mind about the chinese" : )

And what is the reality is diferent.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
The Chinese don't care what blind people like you think about them. If you think Chinese people have poor spending habits, that's your own ignorance. And what you wrote is not the "correct wording" for anything. LOL
 

Klon

Junior Member
Registered Member
OK, here is PwC's article:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Thanks. However, that's a press release with very few details. Crucially, it doesn't mention what the total number is or will be (for China) or the methods and assumptions used. If you have the full report, that would be great.


While it's true that economic forecasts are wrong all the time, I don't see how two large global firms could have both erroneously said that A would be larger than B by 2018 while A was much much smaller than B (a third). I've seen 10 year predictions not pan out but I haven't seen a mistake quite like that. Generally, if they predict 2018, and it's already 2018 (Mizuho) or 2018 when it's 2015 (PwC), it's because A is very close to B and on the verge of passing it. The basketball player example and this statistic are both obvious; while an unusual definition can confound the layman like us, it cannot confuse all the professional economists at both PwC and Mizuho. I believe if they have made such an obvious mistake, competitor firms would jump on them to discredit them.
Ok, you can't believe they could be wrong and I can. Like I mentioned above, the eMarketer forecast (overtaking in 2016 at 4.9 trillion dollars) contradicts the Mizuho one (2018 at 5.8 trillion dollars). I don't know what numbers PwC had in mind. Let's drop this part because indirect discussion of the issue won't be able to resolve anything.


I just wanna also add that if you search for "Largest retail market in the world," Google puts the eMarketer article first and even uses its answer of China as the official Google answer. If it was wrong... a lot of people are wrong.
That's clearly an automated feature, so it really doesn't mean anything. Incidentally, for me the first result was
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
and some others after refreshing.


So if you are saying that the World Bank data that you posted is NOT the same as the retails sales that these articles are talking about, then it's an apples-to-oranges comparison. Can you post a source with the correct figures for the retail sales these articles are mentioning so we can get an apples-to-apples comparison showing that these articles are wrong? Because to me, it's apparent that China is catching up to the US on something; I'm just not sure what it is if it isn't what a layman would think retail sales market means.
I never said that it was the same. I posted the household final consumption expenditure data because, by its definition, it should include retail sales, and other things (at least services).

This means that when the retail sales number is supposed to be much larger, that's a contradiction, and I think the problem is with the retail sales data.

Here are some links.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

My point here is that household final consumption expenditure is a key economic statistic and it's thus unlikely to be wrong. On the other hand, retail sales is a rarely used statistic and I haven't been able to find an international source yet.

I posted what could be the relevant numbers in the end of my previous comment.
 

manqiangrexue

Brigadier
Thanks. However, that's a press release with very few details. Crucially, it doesn't mention what the total number is or will be (for China) or the methods and assumptions used. If you have the full report, that would be great.

Ok, you can't believe they could be wrong and I can. Like I mentioned above, the eMarketer forecast (overtaking in 2016 at 4.9 trillion dollars) contradicts the Mizuho one (2018 at 5.8 trillion dollars). I don't know what numbers PwC had in mind. Let's drop this part because indirect discussion of the issue won't be able to resolve anything.
I don't think that I can find the original report, but I found that this is a highly cited report as there are many articles, both Chinese and English, written based on it. This would be very unusual for an obviously incorrect professional piece.

Both the PwC article that I gave and the Mizuho chart predict that Chinese retail will overtake US retail in 2018. The eMarketer forecast put the number at 2016, but actually US growth was higher than they anticipated as they believed that the US would only be at $5.1T in 2018. Of course the numbers can vary a little because they are predictions but the trend seems to be that this statistic for China is on the cusp of overtaking this statistic for the US. What none of them say is that China is far behind the US here, which seems to be what you're saying by saying that they are flat out wrong.
That's clearly an automated feature, so it really doesn't mean anything. Incidentally, for me the first result was
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
and some others after refreshing.
While that's true, this automated feature means that the article gets an immense amount of exposure, which further means that if it contained such a blatant error it would not take long before someone pointed it out and eMarketer had to recant the article.

The wiki list uses the same statistic as was used on your world bank stat and cites the world bank as its source too. But that is a different statistic than the one mentioned by PwC, Mizuho and eMarketer, and thus, does not necessarily contradict them by nature, but only by deduction, which is limited by the knowledge of the deducer.
I never said that it was the same. I posted the household final consumption expenditure data because, by its definition, it should include retail sales, and other things (at least services).

This means that when the retail sales number is supposed to be much larger, that's a contradiction, and I think the problem is with the retail sales data.

Here are some links.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

My point here is that household final consumption expenditure is a key economic statistic and it's thus unlikely to be wrong. On the other hand, retail sales is a rarely used statistic and I haven't been able to find an international source yet.

I posted what could be the relevant numbers in the end of my previous comment.
For the bold part, yes, the contradiction is what I'm asking you about, and while you think that it means that one statistic must be wrong, I think that the World Bank, Mizuho, PwC, as well as, of course, the China Statistical Yearbook, are all very reliable sources and I think that none of them are wrong and none of them contradict each other (small fluctuations in future prediction not counting as contradictions). I think this "contradiction" is the result of our perception and inability to understand some subtlety in the economics being discussed among these articles.
 
Last edited:

Klon

Junior Member
Registered Member
For the bold part, yes, the contradiction is what I'm asking you about, and while you think that it means that one statistic must be wrong, I think that the World Bank, Mizuho, PwC, as well as, of course, the China Statistical Yearbook, are all very reliable sources and I think that none of them are wrong and none of them contradict each other (small fluctuations in future prediction not counting as contradictions). I think this "contradiction" is the result of our perception and inability to understand some subtlety in the economics being discussed among these articles.
One more time, here is my position.

1.
  • C (consumption) is normally the largest GDP component in the economy, consisting of private expenditures in the economy (household final consumption expenditure). These personal expenditures fall under one of the following categories: durable goods, nondurable goods, and services. Examples include food, rent, jewelry, gasoline, and medical expenses, but not the purchase of new housing.
Retail sales (as generally understood) form a subset of this category and thus cannot be larger than it.

2. The source of the issue is probably the category called "total retail sales of consumer goods", which sounds very much like "retail sales", but is only used in China. It remains unclear to which internationally used category it's supposed to correspond. The value of this category
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
was 36.6 trillion yuan, of which 32.7 trillion yuan was for "the retail sales of goods" (the rest was catering). That is 5.2 trillion dollars at the current exchange rate. Assuming another year of 10% growth, that brings the 2018 number to 5.7 trillion dollars, very close to the Mizuho number. This is why I think those reports are using this statistic.

3. The apparent contradiction is there in the Chinese data; there is no issue of World Bank data being different. For 2015, total retail sales of consumer goods were 30 trillion yuan (click on
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
), while final consumption expenditures were 36 trillion yuan, of which household consumption expenditures were 26 trillion yuan and the rest was government consumption (
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
3-13 and 3-14). Again, I don't know how there could have been more retail sales than there was private consumption, particularly when this also includes services.

4. About the idea that these reports can't be (or are very unlikely to be) wrong, here's a
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
by A.T. Kierney that says that in 2016 China's total retail sales were 3 trillion USD. This does contradict the other reports, yet there have been no call outs or retractions. Furthermore, here's a PwC
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
that measures market size by household consumption (11.5 trillion USD for the USA and 3.4 trillion USD for China in 2013, page 8) and gives the food and grocery sales numbers (page 11) as 854 billion USD for the USA and 318 billion USD for China, with predictions for 2018 of 960 billion USD and 581 billion USD, respectively. This
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
by Deloitte says that American retail sales in 2016 were 3.7 trillion. Basically, the numbers are all over the place and I don't think the ones we're discussing have been shown to be right.

Actually, I found an
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
in Forbes that questions the Mizuho numbers on basically the same grounds as I do, so it's not even true that there's been no skepticism.

5. I already posted what could be the "correct" numbers for retail sales.
Here's the link to the latest
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, with 2015 data. If you check section 15-1, Basic Conditions of Wholesale and Retail Trades, the number for Retail trade, Total Sales Value is 11.4 trillion yuan. I don't know if this is the right measure for "retail sales", but it seems plausible. With a 10% percent increase, the number for 2016 would be about 2 trillion dollars, or about half of household final consumption expenditure. Similarly, here's a monthly
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
for "advance monthly sales for retail and food services" in the USA, which were 495 billion dollars in December, or about 5.9 trillion dollars in 2017 (just by multiplying by 12), which is again close to half of household final consumption expenditure. In my opinion, these numbers are plausible and are bolstered by the fact that they generally match.

I'd appreciate it if any reply would address these points.
 
now I read
Economic Watch: China charts course for modernized economy
Xinhua| 2018-02-03 17:10:32
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

After decades of speedy advances, China is shifting its economic focus to high-quality development, with "developing a modernized economy" high on the agenda.

Now an economic catchphrase, the idea provides a blueprint for the world's second largest economy during the next five years and beyond.

It will be embodied in innovation-driven industries with coordinated development, an open and fair market, efficient and fair income distribution, coordinated urban-rural and regional development, energy conservation and environmental friendliness, and an open economy with higher standards.

Efforts will be made to give full play to the role of the market, while the government is expected to play a better part.

FOCUS ON REAL ECONOMY

The real economy, once outshone by rampant real estate prices and financial speculation, has again gained traction.

While presiding over a group study of the Political Bureau of the CPC Central Committee, General Secretary of the CPC Central Committee Xi Jinping described the real economy as the foundation of the modernized economy, advocating the use of new technology including the internet, big data and artificial intelligence to boost traditional industries.

To develop a modernized economy, China should channel more energy into improving the quality of supply and grow into a manufacturing powerhouse, said Wang Yiming, deputy director of the Development Research Center of the State Council.

The government has rolled out an array of measures such as "Made in China 2025" and "Internet Plus" strategies.

Funds that used to flow into the virtual economy due to high yields are returning to factories that produce tangible goods. New loans in the real economy rose 11.34 percent to 13.84 trillion yuan (around 2.2 trillion U.S. dollars) last year.

Thanks to rising investment, innovators sprouting up across the country are injecting new vitality into the economy. More homegrown tech firms are transforming from followers to leaders in the international tech community.

Technology is playing a bigger role in driving the economy. Tech is estimated to have contributed 57.5 percent to economic growth last year, up from 56.2 percent in 2016, according to Wang Zhigang, vice minister of science and technology.

OPENING UP OF HIGHER STANDARDS

During the group study, Xi called for a diverse, balanced, secure and efficient system for opening up on all fronts, with better use of global resources and markets and promotion of international cooperation under the Belt and Road Initiative.

As 2018 is the 40th anniversary of China's reform and opening up policy, the country's door to the world will only become more open.

At the World Economic Forum annual meeting in January, senior Chinese official Liu He said more measures are in the pipeline to further open the country's finance, manufacturing and service sectors, and step up protection of intellectual property.

The Chinese government has been striving to ease market access for foreign investment and build a level playing field for players from home and abroad.

Foreign direct investment in the Chinese mainland hit an all-time high of 878 billion yuan last year, with 35,652 foreign-funded businesses established.

China has promised to boost imports, announcing plans to purchase more than 10 trillion U.S. dollars of goods and services in the next five years. The first China International Import Expo will be held in Shanghai in November, which is expected to bring together thousands of enterprises from more than 100 countries.

Liu said China will make more efforts to cut tariffs on products including cars. Import taxes on 187 products were slashed last year, with the average rate down from 17.3 percent to 7.7 percent.

The Belt and Road Initiative is also an important part of China's opening up to the world.

Industrial cooperation under the Belt and Road Initiative will prompt a re-balancing of the world economy, said Zhang Yansheng, researcher at the China Center for International Economic Exchanges.

China's non-financial outbound direct investment (ODI) to countries involved in the Belt and Road Initiative totaled 14.4 billion U.S. dollars last year, 12 percent of the total ODI, up from 8.5 percent in 2016.

LET THE MARKET DECIDE

China's modernized economy will continue to be market-oriented and follow market rules, with stronger reforms to break barriers and bring vitality to the economy.

A market system that is unified, open, competitive and well-ordered is needed, Xi said during the group study, adding that China will give full play to the market and prompt a better role for the government.

One of the major tasks is the consolidation of state-owned enterprises (SOEs).

Debt-ridden and loss making state-owned "zombie companies" are reorganized via mergers and acquisitions or face bankruptcy according to market rules. Some have begun to carry out mixed-ownership reforms to improve competitiveness. Of the 19 state firms piloting the reform, seven have brought in more than 40 investors and the injection of over 90 billion yuan.

Meanwhile, the private sector will receive stronger support. At the 19th CPC National Congress, policy makers pledged to introduce a negative list for market access and do away with regulations and practices that impede fair competition.

The government has rolled out measures to build a sound business environment for the private sector, including less red tape, better services and lower fees and taxes. During the first three quarters of 2017, 4.51 million new businesses were registered, up 12.5 percent from a year ago.

More policies can be expected to protect property and the rights of private businesses, relieve their burdens and allow them to enter more key industries.
 

Anlsvrthng

Captain
Registered Member
I literally don't understand what you're trying to say with your English, "suprise, suprise-- saved." What the hell does that mean? The only surprise here is that you spelled surprise wrong twice in a row. As for the rest of it, are you asking me a question or trying to get me to answer in a way that you'd like? If you have something to say, just say it; nobody wants to play question games with you.

The Chinese don't care what blind people like you think about them. If you think Chinese people have poor spending habits, that's your own ignorance. And what you wrote is not the "correct wording" for anything. LOL


If there is no spending power, but there is high profit then the companies profit shown as saving in the general ledger of the national economy .


My point is simple: the spending /saving diferences due to different political /economical/development characteristic on the national economy level, NOT due to nationality/skin colour/ language.
 

Hendrik_2000

Lieutenant General
Here is the China statistic which detail Retail sales do rough calc monthly sales is about 3 trillion yuan X12/6.4= 5.7 trillion dollar

Total Retail Sales of Consumer Goods in July 2017
National Bureau of Statistics of China2017-08-15 13:25
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


In July 2017, the total retail sales of consumer goods reached 2,961.0 billion yuan, up by 10.4 percent year-on-year (nominal growth rate. The real growth rate was 9.6 percent. The follows are nominal growth rates if there’s no additional explanation). Of the total, the retail sales of consumer goods of units above designated size was 1,281.3 billion yuan, increased 8.6 percent.


From January to July, the total retail sales of consumer goods reached 20,197.8 billion yuan, up by 10.4 percent year-on-year. Of the total, the retail sales of consumer goods of units above designated size was 8,982.1 billion yuan, increased 8.7 percent.


W020170815484134787814_r75.jpg



In terms of different areas, the retail sales of consumer goods in urban areas was 2,547.4 billion yuan in July, up by 10.2 percent year-on-year; while that in rural areas was 413.6 billion yuan, up by 11.7 percent year-on-year. From January to July, the retail sales of consumer goods in urban areas was 17,325.9 billion yuan, up by 10.1 percent year-on-year; while that in rural areas was 2,871.9 billion yuan, up by 12.2 percent.


In terms of different consumption patterns, the catering services in July gained 320.4 billion yuan, up by 11.1 percent, year-on-year. The retail sales of goods gained 2,640.6 billion yuan, up by 10.3 percent. From January to July, the catering services gained 2,175.0 billion yuan, up by 11.2 percent, year-on-year; the retail sales of goods gained 18,022.8 billion yuan, up by 10.3 percent.


The retail sales amount of goods of units above designated size in July was 1,200.4 billion yuan, up by 8.6 percent year-on-year. From January to July, the retail sales amount of goods of units above designated size was 8,447.8 billion yuan, up by 8.7 percent year-on-year.


From January to July, the national online retail sales of goods and services was 3.661.7 billion yuan, increased 33.7 percent year-on-year. Of which, the online retail sales of physical goods was 2,782.0 billion yuan, increased 28.9 percent, accounting for 13.8 percent of the total retail sales of consumer goods; of the online retail sales of physical goods, food, clothing and other commodities went up by 24.9, 21.9 and 31.7 percent respectively.


Total Retail Sales of Consumer Goods in July

upload_2018-2-3_8-49-17.png

Annotations:



1. Explanatory Notes



Total Retail Sales of Consumer Goods: refers to the sales of physical commodity or the income of catering services sold or provided by enterprises (units) to individuals, social organizations for non-production and non-operation purposes.



Online Retail Sales: refers to the sales of goods and services got through public online trading platform (including self-built websites and third-party platform). Goods and services include physical goods and non-physical goods (such as virtual product, services).



The total retail sales of consumer goods includes online retail sales of physical goods, excludes online retail sales of non-physical goods.



2.Statistical Coverage



The corporate enterprises, industrial activity units or self-employed individuals which retail goods or provide catering services. Enterprises (units) above designated size refer to those wholesale enterprises (units) with an annual revenue from primary business of 20 million yuan and above, those retail enterprises (units) with an annual revenue from primary business of 5 million yuan and above, and those hotel and catering enterprises (units) with an annual revenue from primary business of 2 million yuan and above.



3. Survey Methods



All enterprises (units) above designated size are surveyed, while the data of enterprises (units) below designated size are collected by sampling survey.



4. Month-on-Month Figure Revision



According to the auto-revision function of the seasonal adjustment model, the growth rate of the total retail sales of consumer goods since July 2016 was revised. The revised figures and figures in July 2017 are as follows:
 
Last edited:
Top