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

Status
Not open for further replies.
A

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
taxiya said:
Correction. Making equipment does not exactly tell the leadership. Patents ownership does. Any equipment makers pay high royalties to Patent owners. Royalties is the cash cow, without it makers are only earning the "blood and sweat" money, cheap labours. Chinese companies Huawei included were that cheap labours back in the 3G and partially 4G times. 5G has changed the landscape, but Qualcomm was (is?) still the leader in terms of patents as of early 2017 with 15%, followed by Nokia at 11%, Chinese companies at 10%, Ericsson by 8%. The figures may have changed today, but you get the picture.
Click to expand...


Yes, royalties are a cash cow for the holders of the intellectual property.

But I'm looking at the bigger picture, which are the downstream companies producing building businesses around 5G products/connectivity, which will exist at scale in China first.

The profits from those businesses globally will amount to a lot more than the 5G royalties incurred, or the cost of rolling out a 5G network.
 
T

Tam

Brigadier
Registered Member
AndrewS said:
Yes, royalties are a cash cow for the holders of the intellectual property.

But I'm looking at the bigger picture, which are the downstream companies producing building businesses around 5G products/connectivity, which will exist at scale in China first.

The profits from those businesses globally will amount to a lot more than the 5G royalties incurred, or the cost of rolling out a 5G network.
Click to expand...

All telecom patents are pooled into an association, and this has been accumulative --- 2G + 3G + 4G, and 5G patents added to that. The patent costs are actually low but with each new generation, these costs are going up.

China has no problem with Qualcomm, unlike Apple who has been trying to skirt the patent royalties issue, hence getting sued in the past for basic telecom patents like Samsung and Nokia.
 
localizer

localizer

Colonel
Registered Member
If US keeps threatening companies with the dollar, we're (those in US) going to be in deep shit in the near future if people decide they don't wanna deal with this BS.
 
TerraN_EmpirE

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
localizer said:
If US keeps threatening companies with the dollar, we're (those in US) going to be in deep shit in the near future if people decide they don't wanna deal with this BS.
Click to expand...
Recently the French and Germans claimed to be wanting to do just that over Iran. But their companies decided to side with the U.S..
It's a question of profit. It's easier for business to go with the flow than potentially loose out on what is still the world's first economy.
 
T

Tam

Brigadier
Registered Member
localizer said:
If US keeps threatening companies with the dollar, we're (those in US) going to be in deep shit in the near future if people decide they don't wanna deal with this BS.
Click to expand...

We are already beginning to see currency swaps --- the deal between China and Japan takes things to a whole new level, although it was understandable between China and Russia.

Another is the fast rise of cryptocurrency, and I wonder how in the future this will take us. In our cyberpunk future, we maybe dealing with cryptos as the main currency for such a society.

Going back to telecom patents, lets not forget there are also Samsung, LG, and Japanese telecom patents, such as those from NTT/Docomo. This is truly a global technology --- and global technologies --- like the Internet or open source operating systems like Linux --- are what this future world will be built in. National dominance of technologies are impossible.
 
T

Tam

Brigadier
Registered Member
TerraN_EmpirE said:
Recently the French and Germans claimed to be wanting to do just that over Iran. But their companies decided to side with the U.S..
It's a question of profit. It's easier for business to go with the flow than potentially loose out on what is still the world's first economy.
Click to expand...

The alternative payment system between the EU and Iran is still on and active.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


There is another motivation here, and that is the EU looks to "dedollarize" and seeks to raise the Euro as a global currency.

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

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
Cryptocurrency is having a rocky time right now and if we did move to it it would mean a serious shift for China and everyone.
Tam said:
There is another motivation here, and that is the EU looks to "dedollarize" and seeks to raise the Euro as a global currency.
Click to expand...
They have been saying that for decades.
Tam said:
The alternative payment system between the EU and Iran is still on and active
Click to expand...
And is anyone willing to take the risk for the Iranians?
 
A

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
Tam said:
All telecom patents are pooled into an association, and this has been accumulative --- 2G + 3G + 4G, and 5G patents added to that. The patent costs are actually low but with each new generation, these costs are going up.

China has no problem with Qualcomm, unlike Apple who has been trying to skirt the patent royalties issue, hence getting sued in the past for basic telecom patents like Samsung and Nokia.
Click to expand...

Yes, the costs for 5G patents will add up in the billions. But that won't stop downstream businesses being created that are worth trillions.

In terms of profitability, there is a U-shaped profitability curve. So the best places to be are either:

1. Right next to the customer, capturing the branding profits.
2. Left at the beginning at the IP/component production stage, where there are technology monopoly profits.

The middle manufacturing stage is the least profitable.
 
T

Tam

Brigadier
Registered Member
TerraN_EmpirE said:
Cryptocurrency is having a rocky time right now and if we did move to it it would mean a serious shift for China and everyone.
Click to expand...

It only means bumps on the road on the way up.

They have been saying that for decades.
Click to expand...

I don't think the EU existed for decades.

And is anyone willing to take the risk for the Iranians?
Click to expand...

Seems like this time, they are. Europe has a much different view of the geopolitical importance of Iran than the US.
 
D

Dolcevita

Major
TerraN_EmpirE said:
And that's why when she was arrested she was arrested in Canada not China.
If she violated the laws of the U.S. and a warrant was issued for her in the U.S. then she can be arrested if she lands in the U.S. or a nation with Extradition treaty. US business law is valid in relation to US business. IE if you do business with an American firm that firm has to obay US law. If you do business with an American firm you have to agree to the understanding that you are abiding by the same as long as you are doing business with an American company.
Had she not been in Canada she would likely have not been arrested and the warrent would have been unserved.
You can violate the laws of a mother nation even if you never have been there. That's how drug lords get put on trial in many cases.
Click to expand...

She is not a US person nor does she have any presence in the US and is not required to abide by US law. FYI: The alleged bank in question is HSBC, a foreign bank which also have a presence in US, Regardless, Samsung and Ericsson also sell their wares in Iran. Yet no warrant has ever been issued for any officers for these firm. This has been a questionable and selective application of US law to a non-US person with devious intent.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top