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

For me, there is a deeper issue that threatens the Chinese telecom industry more than tradewars, Huawei bans, etc,. And that is Qualcomm's monopoly. This is bad enough when companies like Apple and Intel has complained about it, Qualcomm getting fined not just in China, but in Taiwan, South Korea and the EU, with a pending investigation in the United States. The more recent company that has complained about Qualcomm is LG.

This is my idea how Huawei can move forward and how the Chinese smartphone industry can deal with the Qualcomm threat.

First, one needs the realization that the smartphone business has become commoditized and has become a thin margin business. So thin, smartphone divisions are either losing money or barely making. Even Samsung makes much more money selling displays and memory ships to smartphones than their smartphones themselves, and lately Samsung's mojo on the smartphone business has changed. Sony's smartphone business is a money loser but the company profits from selling image sensors for smartphone cameras.

The key thing is that there is more business to be made selling components and chips, and its better to leave the smartphone bueinss to nimble, efficient companies like Oppo and OnePlus.

My idea is that Huawei should spin off its smartphone division into a separate company, either by selling it completely or at least keep a minority stake. The new company can be free from the political scrutiny against Huawei. It will have its own independent management.

Instead, Huawei should concentrate on selling semiconductors, namely, its Kirin SOC line and its modem chips, to the smartphone companies, putting it in direct competition with Qualcomm, giving Qualcomm a real competitor. We are talking of companies here that used to compete with Huawei on the smartphone business, like Xiaomi, Oppo, Vivo, OnePlus, Meizu, Lenovo/Motorola, even ZTE's Nubia division. By selling off its smartphone division, Huawei will now look neutral to the smartphone companies. Its spun off smartphone company can still buy Kirin chips, but they're also free to buy Qualcomm if they wish.

One thing to consider is how long the ban will last? If Trump gets impeached or voted out from a second term, considerable changes could take place in American Foreign Policy. Even if the ban does continue over the long term, I am not entirely convinced that current American and Chinese hostilities will continue over the long run.

SlothmanAllen said:

One thing to consider is how long the ban will last? If Trump gets impeached or voted out from a second term, considerable changes could take place in American Foreign Policy. Even if the ban does continue over the long term, I am not entirely convinced that current American and Chinese hostilities will continue over the long run.

Click to expand...

obama started it
xi became paranoid as a result thus obor and scs

As I said before Huawei is the only game in town
“Almost all network customers have indicated they want Huawei, which is currently the market leader with the best equipment and will remain so for at least the next 12 to 18 months, for faster and more cost-effective upgrades to 5G”.


European Operators Still See Huawei as Their Strategic Partner to Play Crucial Role in Advancing the Next Generation of Wireless Technology

Published December 30th, 2018 - 11:21 GMT

Despite external pressure, Huawei is still gaining foreign carriers’ support on 5G.

During a year-end press briefing held yesterday in central Seoul, LG U+ CEO and Vice Chairman Ha Hyun-hwoi has made it clear that the carrier does not think there are any security threats related to its use of Huawei equipment in its 5G infrastructure, rebuffing claims by some lawmakers that there is a risk of security leaks through the use of the Huawei equipment in the network.

LG U+ currently partners with Huawei for its 5G infrastructure. According to Ha, Huawei has already applied for security certification of its 5G network equipment from an international certifying body in Spain, and the public will be able to see how secure the equipment is once the evaluations are complete next year.

“Security concerns apply to every equipment vendor we partner with, not only Huawei, and we need to thoroughly verify all the equipment [we use] is secure,” Ha said. “There are roughly 170 countries that are already using Huawei’s network equipment, and there hasn’t been any security problems reported so far.” He added.

Locally, Huawei has set up equipment that abides by over 70 security guidelines set by the Korea Internet & Security Agency, according to LG U+.

LG U+ has built 5,500 base stations to service the next-generation 5G network as of Wednesday, while its local competitors have reportedly established less than 1,000 5G base stations. The company invested roughly 4 trillion won ($3.6 billion) to set up its 5G infrastructure, including at 5G spectrum auctions.

On a related note, at year-end news conference in Ottawa, Canada prime minister’s Justin Trudeau said: Canada’s decision on whether to allow Huawei access to its next-generation wireless network won’t be a political one”.

“There are millions of dollars, billions of dollars at stake in technology and in communications infrastructure, there is also the extraordinary imperative that Canadians and people around the world expect to be kept safe and free from interference and cyber attacks,” Trudeau said.

“It shouldn’t at all be a political decision made on how we engage, but a decision made by experts and a decision based on recommendations by our intelligence and security agencies,” he added.

Also in a reversal of its earlier stance, India said is unlikely to ban China’s Huawei from selling 5G equipment in the country, despite the US calling for a boycott over espionage concerns. Indian officials now say the telecom gear maker can’t be singled out in matters of security, especially since its rivals also source key components from China.

Many European operators see Huawei as their strategic partner that will play crucial roles in advancing the next generation of wireless technology. Huawei is still gaining foreign carriers’ support on 5G. Many European telecos are proceeding with 5G implementation with Huawei. The UK mobile operator O2 confirmed that it will continue to deploy Huawei 5G gear in the UK. Huawei has also recently partnered with market-leading Telecommunications Operator Altice Portugal committing to the development and implementation of 5G services in Portugal. Vodafone Italia and Huawei also recently announced the completion of a technique to improve the range of high frequency spectrum as part of their pre-standard 5G trials in Milan.

Orange CEO Stéphane Richard was very clear in his feedback about Huawei in face of the current situation. He said : “Huawei has the best technology in the world. They have the strongest capability and methods for R&D in the industry. So the quality of their products is undoubted”.

Some analysts have already suggested that banning Huawei will create a vacuum that no one can fill in a timely fashion, and may seriously impair 5G deployments worldwide as Huawei has recently announced through its rotating chairman Ken Hu that it has secured 25 commercial contracts, ranking number one among all ICT equipment providers, having already shipped more than 10,000 base stations to markets around the world.

Ken rejected allegations about the company network security saying: No evidence has been presented to back the allegations up, and no one can improve by locking out competition.

“Some security concerns based on the technology for 5G were very legitimate, but able to be clarified or mitigated through collaboration with operators and governments”. Ken added.

“Almost all network customers have indicated they want Huawei, which is currently the market leader with the best equipment and will remain so for at least the next 12 to 18 months, for faster and more cost-effective upgrades to 5G”.

Tam said:

China's response needs to be simple: Ban all foreign equipment, Ericsson, Nokia included, from China's 5G network.

Click to expand...

That is probably what Trump wanted, to put an wedge between China and EU. Obama has done that between China and SK, Japan. It has delayed the FTA between China and Japan for 10 years.

SlothmanAllen said:

One thing to consider is how long the ban will last? If Trump gets impeached or voted out from a second term, considerable changes could take place in American Foreign Policy. Even if the ban does continue over the long term, I am not entirely convinced that current American and Chinese hostilities will continue over the long run.

Click to expand...

You have to be awfully naive to think American leaders will ever see China as anything other than a threat and a foe.

All Trump has done is actually said out loud and publically what all American administrations have always privately believed and did behind the scenes.

If anything, he is a refreshing breath of honesty compared to the pompous fake moral high ground of the likes of Obama and Hillary.

Remember that the troubles in the SCS started with Obama and Hillary, who sabotaged Chinese efforts to reach a peaceful negotiated settledment between all parties; and all but cheered on the land grabbing frenzy by the Vietnamese and Philippines.

Remember all the crazy stunts the Vietnamese were pulling with rammings and harassment of Chinese ships and oil rigs in international waters?

All that crap started under Obama and Hillary, and drastically escalated until China demonstrated its power by building islands in the SCS.

Contrary to all the western SMS propaganda brainwashing, China building the islands in the SCS actually calmed things right down in the region.

I suppose only American media can call going from boats being rammed and sunk and coast guard ships opening fire on fishing boats in international waters killing people to nothing happening ‘destabilising’.

B.I.B. said:

Then what is there to suggest that the Verizon and AT&T system is a inferior to the Chinese one?

Click to expand...

There is no inferior 5G. 5G is a standard that both Chinese and US operator will adhere, it works same way. What the US companies focus (for now, the 1st priority) is the high frequency band (shorter distance, higher speed), China and Europe is focusing on the 4G band (or reusing) meaning longer distance and lower speed. Eventually all markets will move on to the other end of spectrum (high frequency for crowded shopping mall, low frequency for coverage).

Tam said:

For me, there is a deeper issue that threatens the Chinese telecom industry more than tradewars, Huawei bans, etc,. And that is Qualcomm's monopoly. This is bad enough when companies like Apple and Intel has complained about it, Qualcomm getting fined not just in China, but in Taiwan, South Korea and the EU, with a pending investigation in the United States. The more recent company that has complained about Qualcomm is LG.

This is my idea how Huawei can move forward and how the Chinese smartphone industry can deal with the Qualcomm threat.

First, one needs the realization that the smartphone business has become commoditized and has become a thin margin business. So thin, smartphone divisions are either losing money or barely making. Even Samsung makes much more money selling displays and memory ships to smartphones than their smartphones themselves, and lately Samsung's mojo on the smartphone business has changed. Sony's smartphone business is a money loser but the company profits from selling image sensors for smartphone cameras.

The key thing is that there is more business to be made selling components and chips, and its better to leave the smartphone bueinss to nimble, efficient companies like Oppo and OnePlus.

My idea is that Huawei should spin off its smartphone division into a separate company, either by selling it completely or at least keep a minority stake. The new company can be free from the political scrutiny against Huawei. It will have its own independent management.

Instead, Huawei should concentrate on selling semiconductors, namely, its Kirin SOC line and its modem chips, to the smartphone companies, putting it in direct competition with Qualcomm, giving Qualcomm a real competitor. We are talking of companies here that used to compete with Huawei on the smartphone business, like Xiaomi, Oppo, Vivo, OnePlus, Meizu, Lenovo/Motorola, even ZTE's Nubia division. By selling off its smartphone division, Huawei will now look neutral to the smartphone companies. Its spun off smartphone company can still buy Kirin chips, but they're also free to buy Qualcomm if they wish.

Click to expand...

Not sure about that, instead of banning Huawei's phone in US market, US will ban any phone that uses Huawei's chip regardless the spin-off or not. Actually US will ban or block any chip made in China, not only Huawei, because the purpose is aiming at China the country not Huawei or ZTE the companies.

I would suggest China stick to targeting US companies or any company with a major US share who holds critical components, limit their access and market share in China.

SlothmanAllen said:

One thing to consider is how long the ban will last? If Trump gets impeached or voted out from a second term, considerable changes could take place in American Foreign Policy. Even if the ban does continue over the long term, I am not entirely convinced that current American and Chinese hostilities will continue over the long run.

Click to expand...

Its clearly part of some long term deep state initiative to remove Huawei and Chinese networking equipment off the global grid, and this is going to go well beyond Trump.

taxiya said:

Not sure about that, instead of banning Huawei's phone in US market, US will ban any phone that uses Huawei's chip regardless the spin-off or not. Actually US will ban or block any chip made in China, not only Huawei, because the purpose is aiming at China the country not Huawei or ZTE the companies.

I would suggest China stick to targeting US companies or any company with a major US share who holds critical components, limit their access and market share in China.

Click to expand...

I don't see the chip level part happening, as Huawei is not blocked for example, selling tablets in the US market that uses Kirin chips.



One of the best Android tablets in the market, great for gaming and video watching.

Theoretically if phones using Kirin chips are going to be blocked from the US market or some other market, it would have to be done in the commercial level, meaning a company like Qualcomm would have to sue Huawei for patent infringement on those chips, and Qualcomm would need to succeed in those case. If Qualcomm could have done that, they would have done this years ago against Huawei phones directly, but Huawei and Qualcomm could already have settled on a cross licensing deal.

A more immediate issue is that how phones without non Qualcomm chips can be vulnerable to patent troll companies in the US. Qualcomm as you see is acting as a sort of patent protection "godfather" from tech patent trolls, which is needed by companies with weak patent portfolios to defend themselves. Huawei has a huge patent portfolio that is ready to go to war --- hence it was able to stave off lawsuits against it by other companies --- but companies like Xiaomi may not. To get a phone like the Poco F1 to the US market, patent umbrella is needed and this is why Xiaomi took so long to get to the US market.

If the US made it so that only Android smartphones with Qualcomm chips can be sold in the US excluding other chips, then they are setting up Qualcomm to become a monopoly, and that would be a big loss for the US market. The US government is in fact, investigating if Qualcomm is acting like a monopoly and is doing monopoly like abuses.

But as we know, the US market isn't the only smartphone market in the world, and you really should not be hampered selling Kirin powered phones from India to Indonesia to Rio de Janeiro and Timbuktu.