[quote=“Etheorial”]Direct links are not a poison pill or a blessing, they just make sense.
There’s lots of business to be conducted between the mainland and Taiwan, why are people still flying through Hong Kong to Shanghai? Does this make sense? No, and it costs a fortune too.
If they can resolve the issue of the “air space” and just agree not to talk about “domestic” or “international” routes, then all the better.
While we’re on the topic of flights, the PFP’s idea to open up Songshan airport to flights from Hong Kong and Macau is a splendid idea. (the first time I can ever say that about anything the PFP has proposed)
Imagine, fly directly from Songshan to HK and Chiang-Kai Shek International Airport to Shanghai! You know this new airport name, it’s kinda like when the Vietnamese Communists tried to rename Saigon “Ho Chi Minh City.” Most of the locals still call it Saigon…[/quote]
Right on. It costs the Taiwan business man more time and money to transit through HK, money down the drain, and those that need to do it, are going to have to do , no matter it is difficult like now or made simpler. Not to mention the pain in the ass it is for us Brits that dont have multiple entry visa’s to China, who can’t pick one up in Taiwan and need to spend half a day in HK to get it sorted.
[quote=“mr_boogie”]Mick, the 1 month was established by Siemens engineers when working on the new Benq-Siemens EF-71.
The Taiwanese counterpart where surprised to have such a product in such a short period of time.[/quote]
You’re missing the point. While every comapny likes to have quick time to concept to market, and can all show examples of it. It is the mentality that drives Taiwan business men to focus on this quick turnover that estabishes them in the manufacturing mentality mindset, as opposed to the Japanese or the Europeans or the Americans.
It is not the single driving factor for success, far from it, in many cases, it is this very mentality that ensures failure.
The ball has been stuck in Taiwan’s court for quite a while, and not for a lack of acceptable solution – it doesn’t even take that much creativity – as is evidenced by the following quote by Ma Yingjiu when asked by media in May whether direct flights would be domestic or international. He had this to say:
The flights are both domestic and international, but it is best to call them “cross-strait.” For example, from Taipei to Shanghai, if a direct flight were to take place, there would be a handover of flight plan from the Taipei air controller to the Shanghai air controller. Since this is in accordance with the regulations of the International Civil Aviation Organization, then it is “international.” But also, since neither Taiwan nor mainland China wishes to allow another country’s airline to serve the cross-strait route, then this is “domestic.”
So, according to him, the cross strait route will be exclusivity of Taiwanese and Chinese airline companies, and because of it, they will be called “domestic”? I would call it “monopolized”, not “domestic”…
I think they just continued whatever arrangement was in place pre-handover. Evidently, direct flights decisions exhibit hysteresis.
Anyway, nothing has ever been country-to-country on paper, as you can imagine. CSB is trying to strike out on some new path by tying every matter of the cross-strait relationship to the recognition of Taiwan independence, because in his mind, that is the status quo. So far, he has failed miserably. That’s essentially it.
nice choice of words, considering it come from the KMT chairman. But wait, let us look at the past…
the DDP is the new Japan Army, so of course the KMT will join hands with the CCP, and in the end, will end up loosing miserably and will have to escape to another Island (now, we have to see where they will escape)…
It’s all about words, and words only. My company spends hundreds of thousands of NT a month flying people to China via HK. It would be half the price direct. There is nothing substantive being discussed here. We are still going to go to Shanghai. This extra cost is either passed on to the client making us uncompetitive in the product market, or taken out of overall staff costs, making us uncompetitive in the labour market. Or we just move the whole goddam research department to Shanghai as expats or hire PRC locals. Guess which one is happening? Would we all rather live in Taipei and zip over to Shangers for the day? Of course. But it ain’t happening. So the mountain is going to Mohammed. Actually, “gone”. By the time direct links actually come around it’ll be too late. It’s a dead issue. Pity. Still, it makes a lot of politicos feel good about themselves and that’s what matters.
And there’s not a foreign country in the world left hardly that negotiated flight rights with Taiwan on a state-to-state basis. Name one. Even if you’re the Jolly Green Giant and regard the PRC as a different planet let alone country, why would you insist they negotiate at a level you don’t require of any one else? I mean when direct flights from Cuba to Gatwick were set up it’s not like Fidel Castro and the Queen met up for tea. A bunch of civil servants in grey suits signed a piece of paper and then went for lunch. All in a day’s work. The only reason for the brouhaha is that the DPP would slip into total irrelevance if they ceased their objection to it and it actually happened. Fine, so you want to commit economic suicide. Be my guest. Last person to leave don’t forget to turn out the light.
Maybe they should put the Taipei airport only for these “domestic” flights, so that companies would even spend less money in trips to Taoyuan, and Ma would be happy because then he would change the name to Chiang the Second Domestic Airport. Maybe Ma will change is name to Chiang when he is president, and will put everyone calling him Chiang the 3rd. After opening the links and abolishing the investment maximum quota in China, all the companies will move their personel to China for once (and Taiwan will become home for the desperate housewives).
Do you see this happening? Yes, a lot, unfortunatelly. Is it impossible to stop? Yes, unfortunatelly.
All will happen is the Taiwanese companies will move their brain capital to China, where you don’t have to pay 10M to have a shitty apartment. Will people come back, after the relocation? Don’t know, not up to me, but in my POV, Taiwan allready lost all the advantages to China, even without direct links. Will Taiwan become a farm for China? Most probably…
[quote=“Mick”][quote=“mr_boogie”]Mick, the 1 month was established by Siemens engineers when working on the new Benq-Siemens EF-71.
The Taiwanese counterpart where surprised to have such a product in such a short period of time.[/quote]
You’re missing the point. While every comapny likes to have quick time to concept to market, and can all show examples of it. It is the mentality that drives Taiwan business men to focus on this quick turnover that estabishes them in the manufacturing mentality mindset, as opposed to the Japanese or the Europeans or the Americans.
It is not the single driving factor for success, far from it, in many cases, it is this very mentality that ensures failure.[/quote]
mr_boogie,
I was hoping by this point you would ask the “right” question. I’ll help you, consider this.
Steve Jobs is no slouch when it comes to business stategy. The half a dozen companies you named , if you were to look up MP3 player, would have 20, 30 or 40 products. Benq, the company you use has 30 - 50 products in the same line as the example you give. Yet Apple has something like 2 products for the ipod, a nano and an ipod the others get discontinued and has been a long time since a new iPod was released (yet account for around 80% market share in the hard disk portable audio market). They come with different hard disk sizes but thats about it.
Why?
Long time means yesterday? Or you missed the “It’s Showtime”?
Anyway, now that Apple will get fierce competition from Microsoft, we will see how the dices will roll. You just have to consider that Apple was the one who put more into creating the “hype” around the Ipod. Anyway, just considering how Apple is turning into a patent holding company more than anything else (gosh, you should spend sometime reading the engadget, by example), I wonder what the future will bring. Also, the not so nice way of work of Apple is the reason why so many of the other manufacturers hate them, starting by Creative (just look at all the Apple+Samsung deals).
[quote=“mr_boogie”]Long time means yesterday? Or you missed the “It’s Showtime”?
Anyway, now that Apple will get fierce competition from Microsoft, we will see how the dices will roll. You just have to consider that Apple was the one who put more into creating the “hype” around the Ipod. Anyway, just considering how Apple is turning into a patent holding company more than anything else (gosh, you should spend sometime reading the engadget, by example), I wonder what the future will bring. Also, the not so nice way of work of Apple is the reason why so many of the other manufacturers hate them, starting by Creative (just look at all the Apple+Samsung deals).[/quote]
mr_boogie,
I wouldn’t have pushed this as long as I have on a political forum if you hadn’t said you were an IT product manager.
I'm trying to exapnd your mind, think a little more out of the box. It is a perception, even CEO's of large and succesful comapnies are not always able to perceive this angle. I can show you the door, but you must open it. The answers to the question above are already in my previous posts. Please, consider my lst post, and give it a shot.
[edit] the comment on microsoft, they will know full well there is no serious challenge, yet. However they can see the potential 5 years down the road, and how being developers of the most popular operating system comes into play [edit]
Apple tries to be minimalist as to reduce the cost (too many different products means too many products that might end up not being sold, and there is no Outlet (as far as I know) to send them there). While it is true that Apple has only a few products, it is also true that the other brands (how many does Creative have?) are downsizing to what is the real deal. Only manufacturers and traders have huge list of mp3 players because they do it JIT.
HK and Taiwan had to renew their agreement a couple of years ago, and they reused the same formula used before the reunification. Civil aviation agencies + airlines got together, worked out technical details, and then they were done. No one’s ever confused air route agreements for “peace treaties” between sovereign nations before… Beijing has said in the past that they would like to adopt the HK model for mainland/Taiwan traffic as well.
The CSB administration, on the other hand, insists that Beijing and Taipei must “hold official talks” before giving Chen Yunlin (the senior mainland Taiwan hand) an entry visa. Kind of hard to get anything done when your bureaucrats aren’t even allowed in the country.
mr_boogie: as far as the doomsday prediction for Taiwan, well, Hong Kong is (finally) doing very well economically… despite being a short 30 minute drive away from Shenzhen/Dongguan/Guangdong. I know numerous people who choose to live in HK and commute to Shenzhen for work, or vice versa. That’s exactly the scenario that Taiwan could preserve for itself, if only this wasn’t against the core ideologies of the folks in charge.
Every passing day, Taiwan further relegates itself to the eventual role of insignificant, rural village.
30 minutes drive away is not 1:30 flight. A lot of people would get fed up of doing these trips every weekend and they would end up abandoning Taiwan. The difference here is too big to even being comparable. While 30 minutes is something you can even do daily, try the 1:30 flight (and that is plus 2 hours for checkins and everything) every weekend and you’ll get tired quickly.
If Taiwan plays the cards right, they can become an island of excelence, but only after a totally cleansing of the people’s minds on what is excelence. And they can start by demolishing half of Taipei to create a real city, with real transportation and real quality of life.
Apple tries to be minimalist as to reduce the cost (too many different products means too many products that might end up not being sold, and there is no Outlet (as far as I know) to send them there). While it is true that Apple has only a few products, it is also true that the other brands (how many does Creative have?) are downsizing to what is the real deal. Only manufacturers and traders have huge list of mp3 players because they do it JIT.[/quote]
you’re right if we may define minimalist as focus and a policy of KISS (keep it simple stupid).
but this is not about investment cost. Make no mistake that Apple only have 2 models on the market because they are minimizing costs. This is strategy.
Where should the focus be vertical integration or horizontal development ?
You’re not seeing the big picture. By your logic, all of the residents of Manhattan would’ve moved to mainland China long ago.
The HK message is that lower costs isn’t the only consideration. Despite the substantial cost savings just across the border, many choose to work and/or live in Hong Kong.
I have no idea what you have in mind when you say Taiwan can be an island of “excellence”. But in my ideal scenario, Taiwan could be China’s Silicon Valley. Excellent universities combined with efficient, agile financial/legal institutions… with their services feeding into the huge mass of enterprises mostly located on the mainland.
