US Forces Smartphone Giant ZTE To Fire Its CEO, Leadership Team (arstechnica.com) 87
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: The Chinese smartphone giant ZTE has completely replaced its corporate leadership, naming new people to be CEO, CTO, CFO, and several vice presidents. The new CEO of ZTE will be Xu Ziyang, a former head of ZTE's German operations who has worked at the company for two decades. The move comes a week after ZTE named a new board of directors. The U.S. government demanded that ZTE make these changes as a condition of lifting a crippling export ban against the company.
Complete leadership change (Score:5, Funny)
Trump Administration: OK, you're good!
Re:Complete leadership change (Score:4, Insightful)
CEO, CTO, CFO, GTFO...
Re: Impersonating me AGAIN? Please, lol... apk (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Holy crap I try to make one stupid joke about acronyms and the whole sub-thread derails into a fight between APK and trolls.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You're "skeptical"? Why just skeptical? Trump basically said it was a favor for Xi and how worried he was about Chinese losing jobs:
Re: (Score:2)
Also, why would you believe Trump when he says that unless you mostly take him at face value? I wouldn't put much stock in anything he says as what he says seems to change every 10 minutes. I don't treat things which he says that confirm to my beliefs any different than anything else he says anymore.
Re: Complete leadership change (Score:1)
Yes of course this was done as part of some international power play exchange. So what?
If the leadership of some random Chinese business is forced out by Trump in exchange for China being useful with something that is actually important like freeing millions of North Koreans from a brutal psychopathic dictator then I say Go Trump!
Re: (Score:3)
There's a part of me that's always skeptical of things like this. For all we know, this was done as part of a favor for someone in the Chinese government in exchange for something else in return, like support for our position against North Korea.
No no, it has to be about Trump's daughter!
Because cool "progressives"!
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
CEO becomes CTO, CTO -> CFO, CFO -> CEO.
. . . and in a further surprising and shocking announcement . . . the new CEO will be . . .
. . . Kim Dotcom!
Why is the government (Score:1)
Why is the government getting directly involved with specific businesses?
Re:Why is the government (Score:4, Informative)
Well, this company did specifically break various embargoes on trading with countries like Iran.
As for why we're specifically doing business with ZTE and agreeing to import their stuff again, that might have something to do with the patents that were issued at the same time for Ivanka's products. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/0... [nytimes.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Err, Trademarks, not patents.
Quid Pro Quo (Score:3)
As for why we're specifically doing business with ZTE and agreeing to import their stuff again, that might have something to do with the patents that were issued at the same time for Ivanka's products.
Trademarks, not patents. Plus you can drop the "might have something to do with" qualifier and replace it with "has a lot to do with".
500MM, Not the trademarks (Score:3)
Ivanka's trademarks came through, sure. Also, the Trump Organization got a 500 million dollar "loan" from Chinese banks.
I doubt the trademarks were anything but the wrapping paper. After all, a lot of her trademarks came through right before the first meeting POTUS and Xi had.
Re:Why is the government (Score:5, Insightful)
1. U.S.A. government demand, backed by crippling export ban
2. China government wants crippling export ban removed
3. China government controls Chinese companies, unlike the U.S.A. where companies control the government
Re: (Score:3)
Point #3 is a distinction without a difference. In both countries, industry interests take center seat in our houses of congress.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The "National Security" Loophole in our legal system.
I am less annoyed with Trump, but the Republican "Leadership" who is looking the other way and explaining away why all good points of the Republican Ideal is systematically being destroyed.
I use to be a Republican, however the party in the past 18 years had slowly empowered the worst in their party, and discredited the moderate voices in the party as not being conservative enough, or American enough.
I am all for Lower Taxes, Religious Liberties, Open Trad
Re:Why is the government (Score:4, Insightful)
The "National Security" Loophole in our legal system.
I am less annoyed with Trump, but the Republican "Leadership" who is looking the other way and explaining away why all good points of the Republican Ideal is systematically being destroyed.
I use to be a Republican, however the party in the past 18 years had slowly empowered the worst in their party, and discredited the moderate voices in the party as not being conservative enough, or American enough.
I am all for Lower Taxes, Religious Liberties, Open Trade, and reasonable regulations.
I am not for Lowering Taxes without finding a way to pay for needed services.
I am not for allowing for people of different faiths or none to be openly discriminated against, or bullied into thinking they are in the wrong.
I am not for Trading harmful goods, or allowing trading partners to play by a different sets of rules.
I am not for just getting rid of regulations because they are there and may be hard to follow.
The debate has moved from logical reasons for taking policy, to attacking ways of life, that we as Americans should feel feel to follow whatever way of life we feel that we should follow.
I used to be a Republican, I didn't leave the party, the party rejected me and left me on my own. In the two party system right now the Democrats, are no more centrist then the Republicans are. However they are more rational on views. And currently voting for a Democrat means more likly I am going to vote for someone who would be willing to put the greater good in front of their own ego.
All the things you describe make you a Libertarian.
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
In a two party system, the Libertarian falls in the Republican Umbrella.
Re: (Score:1)
> In a two party system, the Libertarian falls in the Republican Umbrella.
Why do you think that? Neither major party is very good on personal liberty issues. But each has a few areas where they support some liberties.
Re: (Score:1)
That mindset benefits Republicans, but I think the individual libertarian really has to look at which portion of the libertarian ideology they think is most important right now. Maybe legalizing marijuana seems immediately doable. Maybe someone is proposing modifying business regulations to encourage competition. Just always voting against incumbents is a great way to reduce consolidation of government power and as an off shoot cronyism.
Re: (Score:3)
Probably not since he doesn't believe in tossing regulations just because they're regulations and he believes there are needed services.
Re: (Score:2)
Do you let your political opponents define you?
Fuck off then.
Re: Why is the government (Score:2)
Open Trade
As a freethinker with a strong libertarian streak, I've always believed that open trade would be great; too bad China and the E.U. will never agree.
Re: Why is the government (Score:1)
Troll. None of the things you claim to profess have been pushed by the D since Kennedy lowered taxes in the 60s. The D of today would NEVER elect Kennedy today. You should either vote R or stay home because you are too ignorant to vote intelligently. Or as first stated, you are just a troll.
Re: (Score:2)
This might sound weird coming from a Democrat, but I'll tell you: don't Jedi Mind Trick yourself into voting for something you don't agree with just because you're mad. Neither of us are really represented by any mainstream party. In our case perhaps it's best to vote for independent-minded individuals when they have a chance, and "lesser evils" when they don't. That doesn't fix anything sure, but the truth is that nothing can fix it.
The American quality of life will continue to deteriorate with the procure
Re: (Score:2)
You don't understand how human perception works.
Re: (Score:2)
Just find a green/libertarian buddy and vote your conscience, knowing you net each other out of the (turd sandwich/giant douche) race.
Re: (Score:2)
So you're neither extremely red, nor extremely blue and really have no place left in America. Consider joining us in the rest of the world where happy middle-grounds exist. :-)
Re: (Score:2)
'Corporation and state'.
In fascist Italy, only government sponsored and owned 'corporations' were legal. Which changes the meaning of what he said to just about the opposite of what people that cite it usually think it meant.
There are arguments about later period Nazis, but Mussolini was a socialist to this dying day. Franco was a 'super catholic' authoritarian. Historic 'fascists' are all over the authoritarian end of the map.
Re: (Score:2)
Why is the government getting directly involved with specific businesses?
China!
Re: (Score:1)
Hopefully this will serve as a lesson to make your company independent of US technology so if the US wants to enforce their wars on others again they can give it the finger.
Bastiat and O'Rourke (Score:3)
When goods do not cross borders, soldiers will. -- Frederic Bastiat
When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators. -- P. J. O'Rourke
delicious fascism (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
This is like ... (Score:4, Informative)
Window dressing... (Score:2)
Why save ZTE? (Score:1)