Is the US shooting itself in the foot by banning Huawei?

Status
Not open for further replies.
G

gelgoog

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
taxiya said:
First of all, the landscape is:
  1. Qualcomm has just some 15% share of patents in 5G. The rest belongs to Europe, China, SK and Japan.
  2. Some US companies are among the best in making components (ZTE ban exhibited).
  3. US has no system vendor after Lucent (former ATT) was purchased by Alcatel.
  4. Alcatel-Lucent is gradually dying in 4G, and probably dead in 5G.
The first two are the only leverages that US has, and not big leverage. From pure technological perspective, US has not been a major player since long time ago (less than 20% IP in 5G, no major equipment vendors, smaller market than China).

So I think the treacherous plan of Trump in 5G is like this: by blocking Chinese vendors out of US market and the other "five-eyes" market US try to force China to give Huawei and ZTE more preferred position in Chinese market as a compensation. If China does it, Ericsson and Nokia will be the casualties, this will anger the EU even though EU knows well who is the root cause. This is Trump's plan to put a wedge in between EU and China. It is the same act in "Iranian sanction" where US forcing EU to quit the deal or disabling EU's ability to fulfil their obligation to Iran will make Iran angry of EU, another wedge.

Once again, the basic thinking of Trump is a new iron curtain that break the world in two camps so US can remain the King of one camp. The question is who is willing to live in that camp behind the wall.
Click to expand...

There is more to it than that. Huawei surpassed Apple in smartphone sales and is 2nd just behind Samsung. They had a deal with AT&T in the USA to carry their phones but the US government pulled the plug on that.
 
A

ahho

Junior Member
AndrewS said:
Google wasn't blocked. Remember that it was Google that decided to leave China.

On Facebook, they were banned because they wouldn't release communications records in the aftermath of the Urumqi city riots in 2009.

I reckon Tencent would have still won out in China against Facebook, as they were first to pivot from Facebook/QQ to mobile with Weixin.
On Baidu versus Google, it was more evenly balanced. Baidu was still the dominant incumbent at the time, although Google had made significant inroads.
Click to expand...

I think back then, people were still new to the internet in China comparatively to the west so Facebook and QQ social media platform was still something new to the mass. WeChat literally destroyed both Facebook and even QQ itself due to the cellphone age, where WeChat was a light app that does not hog resource. Facebook back then was horrible for android user, and a lot of Chinese back then uses Android as their first smart phone.

Baidu was the best search engine, if you were searching Chinese related search, but Google was better if you were trying to do international search. From my experience when Google was still in China, I think Baidu used a bit of Google search results for international search. Like you said Google made great in-road in China. They were struggling a bit to further expand, but the environment was really advantageous for them. If they have stayed, Google may even be able to "influence" Chinese tech arena, and may give feedback to the government on certain policy that needs improvement.

IMO, Google should return to China no matter what, so many people are using Android Phones. Android phone is known to be insecure because people download app from website and other "app store" that does not really guarantee security even though they could be official apps. If Play store returns, Goggle can raise the banner of security and have people supporting them again.
 
A

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
mr.bean said:
they wouldn't ''ban'' them, they simple don't choose them. the giant Chinese market will be Huawei/and maybe some other Chinese company.
Click to expand...

And the Chinese 5G market is expected to account for more 5G users (and presumably 5G network equipment) than the rest of the world combined by 2023.

China also currently has 10x the number of cell sites as the USA

If the US tries to sanction Huawei, then it makes sense for China to create its own standards and go with China only IP and tech for 2G/3G/4G and 5G

Even if it isn't as good, the sheer scale of the China market plus some overseas sales will make Chinese 5G a defacto global standard.

That would be a case of the US shooting itself in the foot.

At the same time, Huawei would refuse to license its patents to Qualcomm, which will hobble impede 5G development.

And we would see a similar independence thing happen in the overall tech space in China.
 
A

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
localizer said:
imo sanctions dont matter when it comes to things like this
the bsst tech wins in the end
Click to expand...

The issue is that the tech industry in the US and China is intertwined.

Plus the US has proven in previous industries that the best tech doesn't have to win.

What mattered was having the biggest company.

So it can either
1. buy their smaller competitors and their tech/market share
2. bankrupt their smaller competitors
3. spend the resources/time to develop their own tech to compete.
 
K

Klon

Junior Member
Registered Member
AndrewS said:
@Klon

Found one of the articles.
Because the telecoms networking industry is so small, we're only going to get a few public articles like this one and from British Telecom.
Click to expand...
It's possible that Huawei has a lead in some or all areas. I certainly don't know enough to decide, so I'll just wait and see.

And you're going to have to argue with American Express (the credit card people) when they say China does 50x more mobile payments than the USA.
Click to expand...
The data is clearly not from American Express. It's also almost guaranteed the two numbers are not directly
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
(not measuring the same thing). Again, it's quite possible that China's numbers are bigger here, even much bigger, but I'd like to have some solid numbers to be sure.

So, the questions are if excluding Huawei will hurt those countries, specifically by delaying 5G deployment, and whether China will be able to use this (hypothetical) advantage, along with its large(st) market, to take the lead globally in related industries. I still think the answer to both questions is no. The nice thing is that we will have the actual answers in the near future.
 
A

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
Klon said:
It's possible that Huawei has a lead in some or all areas. I certainly don't know enough to decide, so I'll just wait and see.


The data is clearly not from American Express. It's also almost guaranteed the two numbers are not directly
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
(not measuring the same thing). Again, it's quite possible that China's numbers are bigger here, even much bigger, but I'd like to have some solid numbers to be sure.

So, the questions are if excluding Huawei will hurt those countries, specifically by delaying 5G deployment, and whether China will be able to use this (hypothetical) advantage, along with its large(st) market, to take the lead globally in related industries. I still think the answer to both questions is no. The nice thing is that we will have the actual answers in the near future.
Click to expand...

Then why did you state categorically that Huawei doesn't have the best tech in the industry?

Remember that the USA is still stuck with expensive credit cards, whilst China has gone straight to mobile payments.
And does it matter if China's numbers are 50x bigger or significantly less 10x bigger? You categorically stated that the US has a bigger and more advanced internet space.

And if you look at the historical perspective in the internet industry, the USA has used the (hypothetical) advantage of its huge domestic market to expand globally.
 
Jura The idiot

Jura The idiot

General
AndrewS said:
For discussion

If Huawei is the world's only 5G supplier in the world, is the US shooting itself in the foot by trying to ban Huawei?



The Canadian telecom companies also estimate that the presence of Huawei has reduced equipment prices by 15%. Otherwise they'd be stuck only with Ericsson, Nokia, Cisco.

1. So the USA will face higher costs for its 5G network when compared to China.
2. The deployment of that 5G network and 5G devices will also be delayed.

Previously the USA could rely on the sheer scale of its domestic market, in order to create companies that could buy or bankrupt their smaller foreign competitors, even if they were more advanced.

But the Chinese market is now bigger than the USA in most respects eg. telecoms, autos, online, etc

In fact, the overall market for Chinese consumer retail goods is projected to be worth $5.8 Trillion in 2018, which is would be larger than the US figure. Note that Chinese retail growth is a lot higher as well.

1. So domestic Chinese companies should have a cost and time advantage in terms of 5G availability.
2. At the same time, Chinese companies will have a larger domestic market for the next generation of businesses based around 5G connectivity. Think self-driving cars, VR, AR, telemedicine, internet of things, retail, etc

That sets the stage for Chinese companies to be first to build new 5G businesses to scale, and then to expand globally. And the value of these businesses should be much greater than Huawei being shut out of the 5G infrastructure rollout in the USA.

Comments?
Click to expand...
there's no occurrence of "Huawei" inside
5G is here. What that means and how you can get it
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
W

weig2000

Captain
Jura said:
there's no occurrence of "Huawei" inside
5G is here. What that means and how you can get it
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Click to expand...

What AT&T and Verizon are rolling out are not real 5G. They're more enhanced 4G. China is planning to build a completely separate 5G network, which is going to be much faster, indeed up to 100x faster than the current 4G network.

The former approach is more cost effective in the short term. Chinese approach is more expensive, clearly.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top