Can China Manufacturers Make the Transition from Products to Services? [View article]
Thank you.
On Aug 05 06:40 PM HaavBline wrote:
> Commenters seem to miss the point. > > "In early 2008, the Chinese government announced plans to invest > in the service sector. This investment involved capital bailouts > and tax breaks, covering everything from professional services though > to IT outsourcing." > > "service sector" in the current context for Chinese goverment, actually > mean any business that offers higher margin than factory manufacturing, > employs knowledge workers, and moved up the value chains. This include > establishing Chinese 'brands' overseas for Chinese manufactured goods, > a 'service' aspect of manufacturing industry. > > China now has the huge surplus of college graduates to pursue major > expansion of more knowledge-intentive survice industry, this will > make Chinese economy more balanced and robust in the future. There > are high end and low end service industries, from investment services, > IT services, healthcare serivce, retirement services to security > serivces etc. Servicng industries are big employers that typically > higher margined.
Can China Manufacturers Make the Transition from Products to Services? [View article]
Coreopsis:
If this article is silly, please answer two questions for me:
1. Why have government officials in the city of Shanghai talked so much becoming more competitve in the financial SERVICES sector?
2. Why have government officials in the city of Hangzhou talked so much becoming more competitve in the global outsoucing of financial SERVICES?
I could cite more examples.
Government officials ARE CERTIANLY NOT making jokes about these questions.
On Aug 05 10:19 AM coreopsis wrote:
> A really silly article which must generate lots of guffahs in Beijing. > As if the Chinese would prefer to build an economy for 1.3 billion > people on 'services', just the recipe for incipient disaster as faces > the US. > > Just because some companies will shift to lower-cost production ex-China > doesn't mean it's a paradigm for an economy. Sheesh, what nonsense. > It's too embarassing to even mention as a joke to my Chinese counterparts.
Sort by:
Latest | Highest ratedCan China Manufacturers Make the Transition from Products to Services? [View article]
On Aug 05 06:40 PM HaavBline wrote:
> Commenters seem to miss the point.
>
> "In early 2008, the Chinese government announced plans to invest
> in the service sector. This investment involved capital bailouts
> and tax breaks, covering everything from professional services though
> to IT outsourcing."
>
> "service sector" in the current context for Chinese goverment, actually
> mean any business that offers higher margin than factory manufacturing,
> employs knowledge workers, and moved up the value chains. This include
> establishing Chinese 'brands' overseas for Chinese manufactured goods,
> a 'service' aspect of manufacturing industry.
>
> China now has the huge surplus of college graduates to pursue major
> expansion of more knowledge-intentive survice industry, this will
> make Chinese economy more balanced and robust in the future. There
> are high end and low end service industries, from investment services,
> IT services, healthcare serivce, retirement services to security
> serivces etc. Servicng industries are big employers that typically
> higher margined.
Can China Manufacturers Make the Transition from Products to Services? [View article]
If this article is silly, please answer two questions for me:
1. Why have government officials in the city of Shanghai talked so much becoming more competitve in the financial SERVICES sector?
2. Why have government officials in the city of Hangzhou talked so much becoming more competitve in the global outsoucing of financial SERVICES?
I could cite more examples.
Government officials ARE CERTIANLY NOT making jokes about these questions.
On Aug 05 10:19 AM coreopsis wrote:
> A really silly article which must generate lots of guffahs in Beijing.
> As if the Chinese would prefer to build an economy for 1.3 billion
> people on 'services', just the recipe for incipient disaster as faces
> the US.
>
> Just because some companies will shift to lower-cost production ex-China
> doesn't mean it's a paradigm for an economy. Sheesh, what nonsense.
> It's too embarassing to even mention as a joke to my Chinese counterparts.