Hope Ford doesn't do this

[coupe3w]

[jpd80]

Ford is already heavily invested in China and is about to invest a further $600 million in plants there.

Lot of money to be made there, would be stupid to let cold war anti-commie rhetoric get in the way of good business..

[GT-Keith]

Containment existed long before the Cold War. I just hope Ford products aren't designed for North America with China's demand in mind.

[Hugh]

Containment existed long before the Cold War. I just hope Ford products aren't designed for North America with China's demand in mind.

Somehow, I don't think this will happen. Although we are at 'One Ford' so far, the 'Foriegn' NA look is in demand. I see a stretched Fusion over there but not here for example.

[jpd80]

Containment existed long before the Cold War. I just hope Ford products aren't designed for North America with China's demand in mind.

Rest assured that Ford's global products are designed with all stake holder regions in mind,

Europe, North America, South America, Africa, India, Asia, Australia and of course, China

 

Somehow, I don't think this will happen. Although we are at 'One Ford' so far, the 'Foriegn' NA look is in demand. I see a stretched Fusion over there but not here for example.

Fusion?

I think you'll find that was Mondeo and the job was done post production for Chinese livery company..

Edited May 20, 2012 by jpd80

[mackinaw]

.........Lot of money to be made there...........

 

 

A lot of money to be made in China? Are you sure of that? Right off the top the Chinese keep 50% of the profits (all of the joint-venture companies). Recently, sales have softened to the point where incentives are now showing up at dealers. We all know how that story ends.

 

And it's just a matter of time before the Chinese market has a major influence on all "world-cars." You just don't ignore the wishes and wants of a 30 million/year market (by 2020).

[Ford Jellymoulds]

Government Motors are a commie outfit, Dan Akerson is the new Mae TseTung.

 

RangerNan will be having a nervous breakdown when he watches this one.

 

I always thought Chevrolet was a Korean company not a Chinese company, all of Europe's Chevys are made in South Korea. It's a shame they are not "Made in the USA" as most Brits are pro-American and that would have been a very good selling point, instead we get vehicles of a very low quality from Korea that no one wants in the UK.

 

Looks like the rot will continue, China owns most of the huge US debt mountain on its books and like this video mentioned China is only now just starting to spend it on buying up purchasing US & European companies. This buying up of US companies is only just starting its gonna get worse from now on, will some of these US companies end up moving there operations back to China as they are brought up by the Chinese?

Edited May 20, 2012 by Ford Jellymoulds

[Hugh]

Rest assured that Ford's global products are designed with all stake holder regions in mind,

Europe, North America, South America, Africa, India, Asia, Australia and of course, China

 

 

Fusion?

I think you'll find that was Mondeo and the job was done post production for Chinese livery company..

Yes of course, I was refering to the upcoming model.

[transitman]

Corporations, including Ford, don't enter new markets if they don't think there's money to be made, if not right away, at least over the long term. Companies aren't like you and me, they don't make huge financial investments over night, they spend months if not years studying trends, the consumer base and their ability to buy a product. Think of China, India and other Countries with a growing middle class the same as America when Henry Ford started Ford Motors, build a car that the worker at the factory can afford. You won't see the same types of cars that Western Europe and NA have to choose from, models, styles, features, overall size and price range will be custom designed for the market and built on Ford's global platform. The Ecosport is a good example and doesn't the factory in India put out a Fiesta (or even smaller) equivalent that's very popular there. I say, why slam GM, Ford or any other American company that wants to build and sell their product in other countries. Maybe the car folks and patriots complain about foreign cars and all the profits leaving the country.

Edited May 20, 2012 by transitman

[jpd80]

A lot of money to be made in China? Are you sure of that? Right off the top the Chinese keep 50% of the profits (all of the joint-venture companies). Recently, sales have softened to the point where incentives are now showing up at dealers. We all know how that story ends.

 

 

And it's just a matter of time before the Chinese market has a major influence on all "world-cars." You just don't ignore the wishes and wants of a 30 million/year market (by 2020).

Sure the Chinese force car makers to partner 50-50 with their local brands but that doesn't

stop either one of them from selling cars there at increased prices compared to the US market.

Take the Edge export program, I bet it's sold to the Ford JV in China at near US retail prices.

 

And building Global Fords in China is good business because it allows Ford and its partner

to set Chinese patents in place for all of Ford's products and prevent mass copying ....

Take the recent F150 copy drama, without Ford lodging Chinese patents on all of its

products, there wouldn't be a chance in hell of stopping rogue copies..

 

I'm no legal eagle but I think you stand a much better chance of gaining approval for Chinese patents

if you actually build some cars in partnership in China, (something that is probably a prerequisite anyway?)

 

I'm sure that Ford and other car makers hate the idea of sharing intellectual property with China but

what are you gonna do, sit back and just let them take the whole global market without a slice?

That is the only reason any of these car makers like Ford are engaging China,

not doing so puts all of them at a huge disadvantage in the future.

Edited May 20, 2012 by jpd80

[retro-man]

The term "over a barrel" comes to mind. As does the phrase "We did it to ourselves."

 

I might here, repeat what I posted on another thread, as it echos much of what is stated in the film clip:

The advantages of American achievement were in effect extended to non-Americans for the express purpose of creating a competition with American workers. International capital and finance was turned to create the greatest production at the least cost and greatest profit. This has been done through transfer of technology (building efficient plants, and implementing efficient processes, sharing and licensing inventions) in low labor countries - so that those workers are given the advantages of technologies and production methods that were first developed here by an educated and ingenious people, the product of schools and supported by infrastructure paid for by ourtaxpayers through their own hard work. The taxpayers reward for contributing these home-grown developments to the backwards countries of the world? Losing their jobs. Or having their wages run down close to Chinese levels. We can see by census and other statistics who has benefited from this and who has not.

Will Americans ever wake up and call out this travesty? I am doubtful.

[blksn8k2]

I can't speak for the auto companies but I can relate the experience of the company I work for. We have a joint venture with a Chinese manufacturer. This was originally intended to make it possible to sell our technology in China and other Asian markets. As others have said, you have to play the game if you want to sell your product there. However, what it evolved into was that much of our product for the US market was eventually "Made in China". This had at least two unintended results. Number one and the most obvious, it took jobs away from our US workforce. The second result was that our company reputation has suffered due to the piss-poor quality of the product being produced by our "partners". Because our US shops are union shops and we no longer needed the same number of workers the company offered buy-outs, etc. to entice older and higher paid workers to take early retirement. The result of that was that even when we try to return to making our products in the US we now have a less experienced work force which results in lower quality as well. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

[Kev-Mo]

Sure the Chinese force car makers to partner 50-50 with their local brands but that doesn't

stop either one of them from selling cars there at increased prices compared to the US market.

Take the Edge export program, I bet it's sold to the Ford JV in China at near US retail prices.

 

And building Global Fords in China is good business because it allows Ford and its partner

to set Chinese patents in place for all of Ford's products and prevent mass copying ....

Take the recent F150 copy drama, without Ford lodging Chinese patents on all of its

products, there wouldn't be a chance in hell of stopping rogue copies..

 

I'm no legal eagle but I think you stand a much better chance of gaining approval for Chinese patents

if you actually build some cars in partnership in China, (something that is probably a prerequisite anyway?)

 

I'm sure that Ford and other car makers hate the idea of sharing intellectual property with China but

what are you gonna do, sit back and just let them take the whole global market without a slice?

That is the only reason any of these car makers like Ford are engaging China,

not doing so puts all of them at a huge disadvantage in the future.

 

 

How do you put a value on intellectual property? 100% of a company’s value perhaps? A company's intellectual property is its greatest asset. Handing over intellectual property is beyond dangerous, it is business suicide. In 20 years, how is this going to look? The Communist Chinese are so very clever. They are accomplishing what the Soviets so much wanted to, but could not -giving us the rope to hang ourselves.

 

They have a track record of taking the engineering, then booting the foreign companies out. Not small companies who can’t stand up, but bit names like Siemens and Kawasaki…

 

In 2005, the China National Railway Signal and Communication Corporation invited Germany’s Siemens to join in building trains for the Beijing-Tianjin high-speed railway. Most of the technology came from Siemens, which trained 1,000 C.N.R. technicians in Germany. But most of the trains were built in China. For the next project — the Beijing-Shanghai high-speed rail — the Ministry of Transportation decided it wanted domestic technology, and C.N.R. bumped Siemens out. CSR Corporation, another Chinese train builder, did the same with Kawasaki Heavy Industries of Japan.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/24/opinion/24fri1.html

[03 LS]

How do you put a value on intellectual property? 100% of a company’s value perhaps? A company's intellectual property is its greatest asset. Handing over intellectual property is beyond dangerous, it is business suicide. In 20 years, how is this going to look? The Communist Chinese are so very clever. They are accomplishing what the Soviets so much wanted to, but could not -giving us the rope to hang ourselves.

 

They have a track record of taking the engineering, then booting the foreign companies out. Not small companies who can’t stand up, but bit names like Siemens and Kawasaki…

 

What are you gonna do? Unless there is a full-on embargo or an international agreement that nobody will give the Chinese any technology in exchange of getting access to their market, the company that does not cave in to their demand (holding a moral high ground, so to speak) stands to lose the most: they will get the technology from somebody else and you don't get any of their market!

 

Do you think GM, Saab, Volvo technologies are that much different from Ford's? If Ford does not bite, then the Chinese will not get the technology?

 

Look, Ford did/had been doing what you are asking them to do for the past 10+ years, in fact they lost out to GM/Buick for the JV deal with SAIC because they were not willing to transfer as much technology as GM did. Well, now they have to spend 5+ billion dollars to play catch up, and still have to give them what they want.

 

IMHO, the smart thing to do is to decide what technology/IP is absolute important to hold on for your survival/future, the rest you can treat them as commodities of technology and use them to get what you want, at a "fair price".

[jpd80]

How do you put a value on intellectual property? 100% of a company’s value perhaps? A company's intellectual property is its greatest asset. Handing over intellectual property is beyond dangerous, it is business suicide. In 20 years, how is this going to look? The Communist Chinese are so very clever. They are accomplishing what the Soviets so much wanted to, but could not -giving us the rope to hang ourselves.

 

They have a track record of taking the engineering, then booting the foreign companies out. Not small companies who can’t stand up, but bit names like Siemens and Kawasaki…

 

In 2005, the China National Railway Signal and Communication Corporation invited Germany’s Siemens to join in building trains for the Beijing-Tianjin high-speed railway. Most of the technology came from Siemens, which trained 1,000 C.N.R. technicians in Germany. But most of the trains were built in China. For the next project — the Beijing-Shanghai high-speed rail — the Ministry of Transportation decided it wanted domestic technology, and C.N.R. bumped Siemens out. CSR Corporation, another Chinese train builder, did the same with Kawasaki Heavy Industries of Japan.

 

http://www.nytimes.c...ion/24fri1.html

 

And we've just seen what happens to an F150 copy when you're part of a JV with chinese partner

and have Chinese patents. Without that important pre-step, the USA would have been flooded

with a 3/4 or 7/8 sized F150 copy in the next few years.

 

Yes it's dangerous dealing with a regime intent on acquiring technology and industry training

but the biggest fear amongst car makers is not being part of Chinese success and then being

sent out of business by their imports flooding the north American and European markets in

about a decade's time.

 

Get in there now because they will wreck global markets in years to come.

[jpd80]

Advanced technology.

Europe and North America fuel economy and emissions targets means that every stick of today's

auto technology will change in the next five or ten years in order to stay in front of those tough

regulations.

 

China , India and Asia in general will be happy to sit on evolutions of the current technology and

vehicles while North America and Europe will adopt next generation vehicles. You can see that

a ready made market for trickle down evolutions of amortized platforms is emerging and that's

exactly what Western car makers are hoping for.

[NickF1011]

Without that important pre-step, the USA would have been flooded

with a 3/4 or 7/8 sized F150 copy in the next few years.

 

Eh...just because they almost might have been able to get away with selling that pile of crap in China doesn't mean they'd be able to get away with it in other markets, especially the U.S.

[jpd80]

Eh...just because they almost might have been able to get away with selling that pile of crap in China doesn't mean they'd be able to get away with it in other markets, especially the U.S.

Not right away........... I consider it pest control and a message to others........Do not copy our vehicles Edited May 21, 2012 by jpd80

[fordmantpw]

Not right away........... I consider it pest control and a message to others........Do not copy our vehicles

 

Just because you can copy the looks doesn't mean you can copy the vehicle. If it were that easy, GM and Dodge wouldn't be so far behind Ford in pickup truck sales...

[jpd80]

Just because you can copy the looks doesn't mean you can copy the vehicle. If it were that easy, GM and Dodge wouldn't be so far behind Ford in pickup truck sales...

That's not the point.

This is purely a case of styling looks, the truck looks way too much like a mini version of an F150, how the rest

of it performs is irrelevant to the issue of litigation, cease and desist from making your truck look like ours...

Edited May 22, 2012 by jpd80

[fordmantpw]

That's not the point.

This is purely a case of styling looks, the truck looks way too much like a mini version of an F150, how the rest

of it performs is irrelevant to the issue of litigation, cease and desist from making your truck look like ours...

 

True, but I was more referring to this:

 

And we've just seen what happens to an F150 copy when you're part of a JV with chinese partner

and have Chinese patents. Without that important pre-step, the USA would have been flooded

with a 3/4 or 7/8 sized F150 copy in the next few years.

 

The market wouldn't be flooded with a crappy truck that looks like an F150. The may be there, but nobody very few would buy them.

[Biker16]

at least GM isn't reincorporating in ireland.

 

http://www.businessweek.com/ap/2012-05/D9UT9S7G0.htm

 

Eaton buying Cooper Industries in $11.46B deal

 

CLEVELAND

Eaton Corp. has agreed to purchase Cooper Industries PLC in a cash-and-stock deal valued at about $11.46 billion that is designed to expand its reach in the global electrical power and distribution industry.

The deal announced Monday would create a company that manufactures products for a wide range of electrical uses, from power grids and lighting to electrical, hydraulic and transmission systems for vehicles, the aerospace industry and the military.

The new company, likely to be called Eaton Global Corp. PLC, which will be incorporated in Ireland and headed by Eaton Chairman and CEO Alexander Cutler. The deal needs the approval of shareholders of both companies and the Irish High Court. It is expected to close in the second half of the year.

Cutler told analysts during a conference call that the combination of the two companies will create a business well-positioned for growth in managing power for customers around the world.

[RichardJensen]

JPD, that thing would never see the light of day in any country that recognizes the validity of US patents. It especially wouldn't be on the market in the US in any volume whatsoever. A preemptive injunction against it would be secured so fast it would make your head spin.

[jpd80]

JPD, that thing would never see the light of day in any country that recognizes the validity of US patents. It especially wouldn't be on the market in the US in any volume whatsoever. A preemptive injunction against it would be secured so fast it would make your head spin.

Fortunately, that scenario won't be happening anytime soon, Ford cutting their heads off at the source.

preventing domestic revenue in China and killing any chance to imagine the possibilities....

 

Was it anything more than a concept taking a cheeky poke at Ford?

No doubt, a stronger reaction that they bargained for..LOL

[RichardJensen]

It is a different culture over there. There's a certain notion that, based on the Opium Wars, the carving up of China and a bunch of other stuff that happened over a hundred years ago, the West's IP is fair game, and additionally, that if outsiders want to buy antifreeze that's been fraudulently labeled as glycerine, that's their lookout.

 

It is interesting that very little happened to factory owners found to have shipped mislabeled glycol out of China ("the Chinese drug administration has concluded that it has no jurisdiction in the case because the factory is not certified to make medicine"), but a factory owner who sold glycol that killed Chinese citizens faces the death penalty.

 

http://www.nytimes.c...&pagewanted=all

Edited May 24, 2012 by RichardJensen