It goes back to what I've been saying that China didn't start this fight but it absolutely needs to decisively finish it, whether it be in the economic sphere or the military one for that matter.US chip companies probably got 30-40% of their sales from chinese companies. That didn't stop US from banning exports to China.
Huawei was significantly better and cheaper than its competitors, Ericksson also sold a lot of equipment in China. That didn't stop Europeans from banning Huawei. They didn't care about any of those.
We need to understand that we are in a new cold war with one side being europeans and their settler colonies such as US, a group of countries who have dominated the world for the last 3 centuries and do not know anything else other than domination. These people are scared shitless about the rise of China. This is a totally new experience for them. They will stop at nothing to stop China's growth.
German branded cars made in China and also sold in China? Its simply nothing compared to Chinese cars being sold in Europe or US. They will sacrifice in a heart bit. Moreover, China has shown many times, that it simply does not retalite to western sanctions and bans. They might do one or two symbolic actions but they have never taken any substantial actions against them.
Why? Cause China wants to get rich and wants to use US and European markets to make money for as long as possible. They also want US and European investments in China to fuel their growth. China is a rising power, it has less to lose. While US and Europe feel they are losing their way of life of dominating the world. They are desperate and willing to do anything to stop it.
Old ways of thinking using cost and benefit doesn't work when one of the opponents are scared. Europeans and Americans are scared. They will do anything to stop China. No matter the cost.
I have one rule when thinking about the new cold war. Whatever extreme moves anti-China hawks in US and Europe think about, no matter how outlandish or costly it might be, it will happen, guaranteed. Cause there is no one pushing back those ideas. Every single year, more politicians get even more anti-China, the public in the west also get more anti-China. Its just not going to stop. Even Iron Curtain 2.0 is most likely in the future.
Think about how China and Japan blocked contact with all foreigners just to preserve their way of life 3 centuries ago. This is what a dominant culture does when it faces something new that it does not understand. US and EU will completely close themselves off if necessary just to stop Chinese influence.
New Energy Vehicles (NEVs) in China
- Thread starter supercat
- Start date
It goes back to what I've been saying that China didn't start this fight but it absolutely needs to decisively finish it, whether it be in the economic sphere or the military one for that matter.
manqiangrexue
Brigadier
Personally, I would advise against thise, for 2 main reasons:
1. As long as you put factories and technology in the US or other US-aligned countries, you put them in danger of everything up to arbitrary total seizure. Never rely on your enemy's laws to protect you from them. It takes years and billions of dollars to develop the technology and build a factory to produce it. It takes an enemy nation nothing to draft up an order to take everything you've made on their soil for "national security" reasons.
2. From a moralistic standpoint, the US cannot counter technology and development with better technology and development so they fight against it using politics and punitive/coercive bans/laws. You cannot reward this by giving them anything positive, even if it is short of their ultimate goal. To build in the US is a concession and a reward to them for a hostile action (the ban/tariff) they implemented towards you. You don't reward hostility; you only ignore it and give them nothing or you meet it with greater hostility. In this case, it would be par for the course for China to simply say that they don't care for the US market so Americans can continue to drive obsolete shitty cars or foreign cars/Teslas that most people can't afford. China offers the best EVs for the lowest prices; Americans don't deserve to have that option. Europeans have an even weaker hand; they pissed off Russia so they don't have affordable gas so if they don't buy Chinese EVs and can't afford other EVs, Fabio better get up an hour early every day to get the horse fed and stable cleaned from manure before he clippity-claps off to work.
Last edited:
it's simply a waste of time if you are going to write this. You are doing nothing but speculating.
Most of what you write here in fact is completely off topic.
So, I'd suggest that you stop here and actually write on topic
I'll just show not tell:
This is US starting the process of banning Chinese cars using national security, this is how it started for tiktok and now its banned.
Europe is also talking about it, they will most certainly follow US, maybe with a delay of a year or two.
What I am doing is not speculation. Its looking at the pattern of how things are progressing and predicting how bad things can get. Its gonna get pretty bad for sure
U.S. and euro are not the same. The current U.S. policies are for direct imports from China, not for possible Chinese JVs in America.
eu banning Chinese automakers from building cars in Europe would be a giant disaster for European companies. And frankly, won’t be a big deal for Chinese automakers.
so it’s a complete waste of time for this thread to discuss it.
Any further posts without additional movement on this front will be deleted.
I highly doubt this. Random Weibo posts aren't really proof of anything.
If we go by random Weibo posts as evidence, half the Chinese restaurants in Toronto are using Customer's discarded Lobster shells to make soup.
One thing we don't consider enough here is the subassemblies of cars. The experience of the foreign JVs in has developed parts suppliers into a globally competitive group (actually always a goal since the 80's, not just the automakers themselves). Since China is no longer a dumping ground for obsolete and/or de-contented models, Chinese parts suppliers are supplying for global automakers' latest models and thus are completely plugged into global quality systems and standards. The side effect is that Chinese parts suppliers are fully able to supply global automakers outside the Chinese market.
There is the famous Fuyao glass from the Netflix documentary. You could see in the doc that they were supplying GM and Honda.
Wanxiang continues to grow it's North American manufacturing footprint (this was back in 2016)
Many others as well:
If American auto sub assembly suppliers are not competitive in China, then they will simply be bought out by Chinese companies who will enjoy a revenue advantage. Then US automakers will be building cars with Made in USA by Chinese companies' parts.
If they start banning Chinese ownership of even parts makers, then the capital will need to come from somewhere. Likely the US government, and if that's the case, then they will have revived the Soviet model. Long live the USSA.
Are you talking about JVs inside or outside China? There is not much JV action inside China nowadays. As I note above, if the American government moves to create such bans, they are basically killing themselves.
Lethe
Captain
I just managed to lose an essay-length post detailing the divergent fortunes of Kia and Jeep in Australia over the past decade and the lessons those two trajectories hold for Chinese brands seeking to establish themselves here. I'm not going to rewrite that lost essay, but here are the core points:
In 2014, Jeep finished in 12th position with 30,408 sales, ahead of Kia in 13th position with 28,005 sales. Significantly, this is roughly where GWM is today, finishing 2023 in 13th position with 36,397 sales. From these similar starting positions, the sales trajectories of Kia and Jeep have diverged sharply over the past decade. Kia finished 2023 in 4th position with 76,120 sales, while Jeep finished in 30th position with 4,634 sales. The trajectories of the two brands are continuing to diverge, with Jeep sales in 2024 down a further 40% YoY, while Kia is likely to strengthen further going forward as it expands into new market segments, most significantly the high-volume ute segment with Tasman from early 2025. Indeed, I suspect that Kia may well emerge as the #2 brand in Australia within the next few years.
How did Kia accomplish this? The foundation of mainstream success is offering compelling vehicles at attractive prices. Yet this by itself is clearly insufficient, because Hyundai sales have historically dominated Kia's in Australia despite their vehicles sharing common engineering underpinnings and similar price points. In 2014 the Hyundai:Kia sales ratio was 3.6:1, which was not an outlier. The major salient difference is that Hyundai entered the market here in the mid-1980s while Kia did not arrive until the late 1990s. Hyundai had simply built up more brand equity here than Kia, such that even those who were prepared to take a gamble on a Korean vehicle were more inclined to choose Hyundai. Kia didn't have a product issue on its hands so much as a brand perception issue. And in 2014 they set out to address that problem by offering a then-unprecedented 7-year comprehensive warranty, and making that warranty the centrepiece of an ongoing national marketing campaign:
Kia also introduced local suspension tuning for Australian road conditions and handling preferences as a point of differentiation from Hyundai, which has never performed local tuning here. And I believe the final piece of the re-branding puzzle was Kia's 2021 decision to discard its old, rather ugly logo in favour of its new, far more attractive one. GWM brands, take note.
As for Jeep, some of its declining fortunes can be attributed to the strengthening USD coupled with what I understand is Jeep's push in America to take the brand upmarket, the combination resulting in some eyebrow-raising price increases these last few years. But the real damage runs deeper than that, with a narrative having developed and become entrenched here of Jeep as offering poor reliability and worse support with stratospheric parts pricing. The narrative was clear enough that Jeep Australia sought to address it directly a couple of years ago, announcing new policies regarding the pricing and management of spare parts inventories amidst a general "mea culpa" campaign:
Once narratives have become established, they're difficult to shift, and Jeep's position in 2024 is dire enough that the brand must surely be considering its position in the country. When you're being outsold by Ssanyong, it's probably time to go.
The moral of the story here for Chinese brands seeking to establish themselves in the Australian market is simple: be more like Kia, less like Jeep. Australia is a conservative market, and customer confidence in in the brand is everything. It's not enough to do things right, one has to be seen to be doing things right, which involves marketing. Toyota doesn't dominate the market here because its vehicles are that much better than its competitors, but because people associate the Toyota badge with reliability, capability, and support.
In 2014, Jeep finished in 12th position with 30,408 sales, ahead of Kia in 13th position with 28,005 sales. Significantly, this is roughly where GWM is today, finishing 2023 in 13th position with 36,397 sales. From these similar starting positions, the sales trajectories of Kia and Jeep have diverged sharply over the past decade. Kia finished 2023 in 4th position with 76,120 sales, while Jeep finished in 30th position with 4,634 sales. The trajectories of the two brands are continuing to diverge, with Jeep sales in 2024 down a further 40% YoY, while Kia is likely to strengthen further going forward as it expands into new market segments, most significantly the high-volume ute segment with Tasman from early 2025. Indeed, I suspect that Kia may well emerge as the #2 brand in Australia within the next few years.
How did Kia accomplish this? The foundation of mainstream success is offering compelling vehicles at attractive prices. Yet this by itself is clearly insufficient, because Hyundai sales have historically dominated Kia's in Australia despite their vehicles sharing common engineering underpinnings and similar price points. In 2014 the Hyundai:Kia sales ratio was 3.6:1, which was not an outlier. The major salient difference is that Hyundai entered the market here in the mid-1980s while Kia did not arrive until the late 1990s. Hyundai had simply built up more brand equity here than Kia, such that even those who were prepared to take a gamble on a Korean vehicle were more inclined to choose Hyundai. Kia didn't have a product issue on its hands so much as a brand perception issue. And in 2014 they set out to address that problem by offering a then-unprecedented 7-year comprehensive warranty, and making that warranty the centrepiece of an ongoing national marketing campaign:
Kia also introduced local suspension tuning for Australian road conditions and handling preferences as a point of differentiation from Hyundai, which has never performed local tuning here. And I believe the final piece of the re-branding puzzle was Kia's 2021 decision to discard its old, rather ugly logo in favour of its new, far more attractive one. GWM brands, take note.
As for Jeep, some of its declining fortunes can be attributed to the strengthening USD coupled with what I understand is Jeep's push in America to take the brand upmarket, the combination resulting in some eyebrow-raising price increases these last few years. But the real damage runs deeper than that, with a narrative having developed and become entrenched here of Jeep as offering poor reliability and worse support with stratospheric parts pricing. The narrative was clear enough that Jeep Australia sought to address it directly a couple of years ago, announcing new policies regarding the pricing and management of spare parts inventories amidst a general "mea culpa" campaign:
Once narratives have become established, they're difficult to shift, and Jeep's position in 2024 is dire enough that the brand must surely be considering its position in the country. When you're being outsold by Ssanyong, it's probably time to go.
The moral of the story here for Chinese brands seeking to establish themselves in the Australian market is simple: be more like Kia, less like Jeep. Australia is a conservative market, and customer confidence in in the brand is everything. It's not enough to do things right, one has to be seen to be doing things right, which involves marketing. Toyota doesn't dominate the market here because its vehicles are that much better than its competitors, but because people associate the Toyota badge with reliability, capability, and support.
Last edited:
supercat
Major
The "pre-tariff" on China's nonexistent EV imports to the US is futile and will not help the EV industry in the US.
Fang Cheng Bao Bao 8 has 939 hp, comparable to Yang Wang U8.
Fang Cheng Bao Bao 8 has 939 hp, comparable to Yang Wang U8.
Last edited: