Huawei To Back Off US Market Amid Rising Tensions (nytimes.com) 91
Huawei is reportedly going to give up on selling its products and services in the United States (Warning: source may be paywalled; alternative source) due to Washington's accusations that the company has ties to the Chinese government. The change in tactics comes a week after the company laid off five American employees, including its biggest American lobbyist. The New York Times reports: Huawei's tactics are changing as its business prospects in the United States have darkened considerably. On Tuesday, the Federal Communications Commission voted to proceed with a new rule that could effectively kill off what little business the company has in the United States. Although the proposed rule does not mention Huawei by name, it would block federally subsidized telecommunications carriers from using suppliers deemed to pose a risk to American national security. Huawei's latest moves suggest that it has accepted that its political battles in the United States are not ones it is likely to win. "Some things cannot change their course according to our wishes," Eric Xu, Huawei's deputy chairman, said at the company's annual meeting with analysts on Tuesday. "With some things, when you let them go, you actually feel more at ease."
Yeah... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Yeah... (Score:4, Insightful)
Seems very bad for trade too. There are two ways to address the trade imbalance with China: reduce overall trade until both sides are down to the same level, or build up US exports to match Chinese imports. It seems like, as usual, this trade war is pushing for the first option.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Sure, but there are better ways to solve those issues. For example, the EU introduces the RoHS rules that limited the amount of harmful substances in products, and started considering carbon emissions from factories in China making products for EU companies. That helped clean up China quite a bit, and the Chinese government is very receptive to such measures because it too is trying hard to improve the environment there.
If you just start a trade war it will only result in more tariffs being put on US produc
Re: (Score:2)
What they don't get is no country can hemorrhage money in trade.
Actually, that's the basis of the Libertarian argument. If you have no trade barriers at all, and no government messing things up, then your trade is naturally limited to your production, that is, you can import as much as you export, because if you have nothing to export, you have no money with which to import anything. As such, want to import more? Ramp up your own internal production so as to have something others are interested in, then trade.
Notice that this isn't a zero-sum game as protectionists like
Re: (Score:2)
You can't "build up" US exports because the Chinese are already spending every dollar they get their hands on, just not on US exports of goods and services. What are they spending their dollars on? US treasury bills and US investments. And that's a system that American politicians like because it allows them to buy votes in the US (wi
Re: (Score:2)
Well European cars are selling really well in China. It's the biggest growth market by far for companies like BMW, Jaguar and Audi. Japanese manufacturers are making inroads too, despite the history of their two countries.
Chinese consumers love western brands too. They aren't dumb either, they know that fakes are fake, and value the real thing if they can afford it. Again, it's a rapidly growing market for Prada and Louis Vitton.
Re: (Score:1)
The EU still has a large trade deficit with China. And, of course, like China, the EU also forcibly redirects money from consumer spending to government investments. That is, the fact that taxes and government spending are about 10-20% higher in the EU than in the US is roughly the equivalent of a 10-20% tariff on US goods. Authoritarian governments like the EU and China can do that sort of thing with impunity; it's not a mark of quality of good government.
Of course, the US plays along with its massive borr
Re: (Score:2)
The EU authoritarian? Okay buddy.
In any case, the EU certainly protects consumers a lot more than the US. That's one of the major reasons why US companies find it so hard to sell stuff here, and the same in Japan where they can't meet the automotive emissions standards, for example.
Re: (Score:3)
Translation: "The EU has a lot of trade barriers."
US standards are much stricter when it comes to NOx and particulates [longtailpipe.com] (the stuff that you need to protect consumers from), while being less strict when it comes to carbon emissions (irrelevant to consumer protecti
Re:Yeah... (Score:5, Interesting)
I don't think Huawei would have let this go so easily if that were the reason. They'd either have inserted the backdoor like presumably the other suppliers, or they'd have let the public know that the NSA wanted them to insert a backdoor into their products but that they refused to do so. I think it's more likely that some of Huawei's products contain PRC backdoors and that they aren't prepared (or legally able) to remove them.
Every Chinese Company has ties to the Chicom Gov (Score:1)
China is still an authoritarian communist regime.
Every fucking company in China is subject top the whims of the government. What fucking morons believe this NOT to be so?
Re: (Score:1)
Only USA USA USA may compromise communication devices sold in the US?
Re: (Score:1)
Mate9 (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Yeah... (Score:5, Insightful)
Huwai and the Chinese govt probably couldnt give a damn about the NSA spying on american citizens anymore than the american govt caring about china spying on chinese citizens. Its only when it crosses the border do govts get anxious.
None of the actors here actually give one knob of goatshit about our rights.
Re: (Score:1)
"suppliers deemed to pose a risk to American national security" == "suppliers do not accept to sell products with NSA backdoors"
or restated, the Chinese will do to us what we do to them
Re: (Score:2)
As opposed to Chinese government backdoors? No thanks.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
So no more Cisco gear? (Score:3, Insightful)
Although the proposed rule does not mention Huawei by name, it would block federally subsidized telecommunications carriers from using suppliers deemed to pose a risk to American national security.
Oh yeah? So that means they're going to stop buying equipment from Cisco [infoworld.com], right?
Re:In completely unrelated news (Score:4, Insightful)
Apple's stock goes up on their ability to be complacent. Tim Cook announces another great leap in innovation by Apple since Jobs' passing. The next iPhone is going have more RAM and a slightly different camera!!!!
And Apple's political contributions just went up. Again.
WTF, does any of this have to do with Apple?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I think everyone missed my point. Huawei makes some very good phones. Phones that will take away market share from Apple. Apple must be trilled that Huawei can't sell in volume in the USA. Stepping back, if Huawei can't sell here, Apple wins, but Samsung is biggest winner.
It's not surprising that they'd give up (Score:2)
Huawei's market share in the US is microscopic at best. Most carriers don't offer their products and Congress has recommended against working with them for years. With the FTC looking to block subsidized carriers from working with them, the US market simply isn't worth the effort and expense anymore.
Re: (Score:3)
Huawei's market share in the US is microscopic at best. Most carriers don't offer their products and Congress has recommended against working with them for years. With the FTC looking to block subsidized carriers from working with them, the US market simply isn't worth the effort and expense anymore.
Who cares about 'facts' when this plays well with the base. Just like those steel tariffs the White House justified by citing Chinese steel dumping, China accounts for 2.9 percent of US steel imports, ... but who cares about 'facts', tariffs on China play well with the base. I don't think US politicos, and particularly the ones in charge at the moment, really think much beyond what will 'play well with the base'.
Re:It's not surprising that they'd give up (Score:5, Insightful)
Just like those steel tariffs the White House justified by citing Chinese steel dumping, China accounts for 2.9 percent of US steel imports, ... but who cares about 'facts', tariffs on China play well with the base
Then why would this result in a trade war if it doesn't actually effect anything?
Re: (Score:2)
10% worldwide:
https://www.statista.com/stati... [statista.com]
I don't think that's "microscopic" but it's hard to nail down stats for the US on its own.
That's literally hundreds of millions of devices, though, so I don't think we're talking about something that can just disappear overnight without anyone noticing.
Re: (Score:2)
Re-read my comment. I said. "Huawei's market share in the US is microscopic" not that their global market share is small.
Huawei is a successful global company and the US is a microscopic part of their global sales. We don't add enough to their bottom line for them to continue bothering with us if we're just going to keep adding obstacles to prevent them from growing their business here.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, and it's hard to nail down the stats for the US.
I read everything from 0.1% to 5% and at those margins of error anything could be true.
But even 1% isn't insignificant. However, if a company owns 10% of the world market, it makes me wonder why you'd want to exclude them without some incredibly good reason. For example, all the US's European allies are quite happy using their kit.
It seems to me to be nothing more than hyperbole, while they're using Cisco electronics and Chinese-built Apple devices, etc
Re: (Score:2)
Well carriers' deals on phones suck now, so I just buy them outright. I have a Huawei phone and it's the best smart phone I've ever had.
Re: (Score:2)
paywalled (Score:5, Insightful)
Please stop posting paywalled links. No one here wants to read them. No one here wants paywalled sites to get any traffic.
Re: (Score:1)
And how exactly are sites supposed to make money?
They have the option of selling their buttholes to the highest bidder just like every other artist does, they aren't special because they write for the NYT.
Re: (Score:1)
Americans had better get used to paying more. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
I think the American public is going to be in for a rude awakening about just how much of what they buy comes from China.
Taiwan, South Korea, Malaysia, and The Philippines have got us covered.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: Americans had better get used to paying more. (Score:2)
Re: Americans had better get used to paying more. (Score:1)
Re: Americans had better get used to paying more. (Score:1)
Shades of NSA vs Kaspersky (Score:2)
Let's call it even, then (Score:1)
So, the only winning move is not to play.
Besides, we get to keep Hawaii, the state out there in the Pacific. Nya nya
good (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Excerpt:
Huawei classifies itself as a "collective" and does not refer to itself as a private company. Richard McGregor, author of The Party: The Secret World of China's Communist Rulers, said that this is "a definitional distinction that has been essential to the company's receipt of state support at crucial points in its development
Shame (Score:2)