'Apple Becomes the Biggest US-China Pawn Yet' (wsj.com) 45
Apple might be the king of tech. But in the growing cold economic war between the world's two biggest economies, it is becoming just another game piece -- albeit a big one. WSJ: Still the world's largest public company by market value, Apple has seen that value take a notable hit this week on increasing signs that its business in China might be coming under threat. The Wall Street Journal reported on Wednesday that the Chinese government is banning the iPhone and other foreign-branded devices from use by workers at central government agencies. Bloomberg reported Thursday that such a ban might also be extended to state-owned enterprises and other government-backed entities. That could amount to a significant swath of people in a state-led economy with a population totaling more than 1.4 billion.
According to China's National Bureau of Statistics, about 56.3 million urban workers were employed by "state-owned units" in 2021. Those jobs commanded an average wage about 8% above the national urban average -- an attractive segment for a company specializing in premium devices. And because Apple now ships roughly 230 million iPhones globally every year, 56 million would be a notable chunk to take out of the pool of potential buyers -- especially in a mature global smartphone market with low growth prospects. [...] Apple's stock price has thus slumped nearly 7% over the past two days, costing the company about $194 billion in market value. That might seem excessive considering the many unknowns about the reported iPhone bans and how they could ultimately play out. Also, China has at least some interest in not overly harming a major local employer during a time of growing unemployment. One Chinese city alone reportedly has more than one million workers building Apple products or employed in related jobs.
According to China's National Bureau of Statistics, about 56.3 million urban workers were employed by "state-owned units" in 2021. Those jobs commanded an average wage about 8% above the national urban average -- an attractive segment for a company specializing in premium devices. And because Apple now ships roughly 230 million iPhones globally every year, 56 million would be a notable chunk to take out of the pool of potential buyers -- especially in a mature global smartphone market with low growth prospects. [...] Apple's stock price has thus slumped nearly 7% over the past two days, costing the company about $194 billion in market value. That might seem excessive considering the many unknowns about the reported iPhone bans and how they could ultimately play out. Also, China has at least some interest in not overly harming a major local employer during a time of growing unemployment. One Chinese city alone reportedly has more than one million workers building Apple products or employed in related jobs.
Because (Score:3, Insightful)
the US made Huawei a pawn in its nationalistic, populistic tech war, like that the Brits used to do to the US [foreignpolicy.com].
Re: (Score:1)
It hurts to remind us of our hypocripsy. Stop doing that!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Yep, pretty much. Artificial trade restrictions are a good indicator the one imposing it has trouble competing.
Human rights? That is just a pretext. If the US cared about human rights, they would have stopped dealing with, for example, the Saudis a long time ago. Also remember that the US is a nation that tortures prisoners.
Re: (Score:2)
Yep, pretty much. Artificial trade restrictions are a good indicator the one imposing it has trouble competing.
Human rights? That is just a pretext. If the US cared about human rights, they would have stopped dealing with, for example, the Saudis a long time ago. Also remember that the US is a nation that tortures prisoners.
Agreed on both points. There's little need to restrain the growth or success of a company or country that isn't competing well. And if the US were truly concerned about human rights abuses in China, they would have acted more forcefully than with the current lip service.
However, there is another motivation for trade restrictions, i.e., military advantage. In the US Civil War, WWI, and WWII, a massive well-functioning industrial base proved to be a significant military advantage. If China has manufacturi
Re: (Score:2)
The Saudis are certainly not the worst foreign power the United States has dealt with over the years.
Re: (Score:2)
Obviously not. They are just an example.
Re: (Score:2)
It's sort of a false equivalence though. The Saudis are a conservative Muslim monarchy, and they behave accordingly.
They had 196 executions in 2022 which is not very many when you consider their legal framework. Nobody would even be talking about them had they not assassinated Jamal Kashoggi.
When it comes to raw humanitarian offenses, they're not even in the same league as China, especially when it comes to killings and abusive incarceration.
Re: (Score:2)
Yep, keep telling yourself that. It makes you complicit. In actual fact, the Saudis are far, far worse, because they oppress everybody and force beliefs on people. It does not get more anti human-rights than a monarchist theocracy.
Re: (Score:2)
the Saudis are far, far worse, because they oppress everybody and force beliefs on people.
Not quite.
If by forced belief you mean maintaining family values, and patriarchy, then probably yes.
Despite having underground homosexual bars and alcohol consumption being rampant in non-Muslim areas (compounds maintained by the US/UK).
Your statement mostly applies to Iran, although China is arguably worse not only because of the well-documented [theguardian.com] genocide [bbc.co.uk] of the Uyghur people and countless UN human-rights abuses [npr.org] (although not as bad as the apartheid regime), but China also tracks every citizen [wired.co.uk] using countle
Re: (Score:2)
In China, most people can just do what they want. Unless they agitate politically, they are pretty safe. Your whole "argument" is invalid and flawed. The US claim that it does a trade-war because of "human rights" is simply a "Big Lie" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_lie) in the best tradition of that form of dishonesty. It does work on those of weaker minds as you stance nicely shows.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: Because (Score:1, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Apple is the pawn? They got China to mass produce their products and got Asia to buy most of it. Products that sell because you are supposed to look more attractive while using them..... and don't do much else.
My opinion.
Imagine if Apple lost 20% of their market. That's would lead to mass layoffs and tank AAPL stock, which would roil US stock markets and nudge the US toward recession. Certainly Biden before an election year would do all he could to avoid this scenario. The Republican incumbents would also be worried about an election in a climate of a recession.
Apple employees and stockholders care a lot about Apple's success. However, they could quickly become pawns in an geopolitical game that is controlled by entitie
Re:Because (Score:4, Funny)
The right and the left in the US agree on nothing. Except that Huawei needs to be banished from the world.
We cannot even agree on beer brands or not to burn books, or any other single topic that should be otherwise uncontroversial or obvious. But we agree Huawei is a state sponsored spy agency and needs to go. You can blame government propaganda, or you can ask any engineer in the field: we all refuse to have anything to do with them. We have reasons.
Re: (Score:1)
The right and left also agree on a few more things.
H1B is another.
Do I need to give you a few more examples before you start seeing the pattern?
Re: (Score:2)
It will be very interesting to see what happens when Huawei produces 6G equipment. They already have 5.5G on the market.
Will the West wait for Western manufacturers to catch up before deploying 6G, or will they be unable to resist? I can't see them deploying Huawei and then ripping it out again.
Well, hopefully the trade war will be over by then anyway.
So will Apple Pull out of China (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Why would they pull out of a significant market? I think you do not understand capitalism.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe Apple's privacy really does work, and this makes the Chinese government mad that it can't spy on gov. employees?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
What withdrawal? China remains a huge and expanding market for Apple.
The US government banned Huawei, Hikvision, and DJI for itself and critical infrastructure only, but that didn't stop some consumers/businesses adopting the policy too.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: So will Apple Pull out of China (Score:1)
You mean like why the USA banned huawei?
Apple used to complain (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You think the average Chinese citizen gives two shits about their government? That's definitely not how that works, they're substantially less governable than we are in the US, they just have a very passive-agressive approach. As you would, if you lived in a dictatorship.
Much like the hilariously ineffective great firewall, most citizens view their government as an obstacle, not an authority. For certain, businesses in government related industry will ask employees not to bring them to work, but we'll have
Re: Apple used to complain (Score:1)
The GFW is extraordinarily effective. It totally prevents externally hosted Internet services from being viable inside China, and enforces Chinese sovereignty. They actually have to host them inside China and obey Chinese laws, or leave. They can't simply rely on servers located outside China.
Well, at least they use good-sized pawns.... (Score:1)
In other news, those starting a trade-war are the most likely to lose it. Trade-wars do not make sense, except as a lie for domestic politics (were you always find tons of clueless nil-wits) to give the impression of "doing something" and to fuel dangerous nationalism. In other words, it is a strategy to win elections at the cost of significant, sometimes massive, economic damage.
The same nil-wits will for sure claim that I am wrong on this. That is because they do not know history and do not understand tra
Re: (Score:2)
Anybody can see that relying on communications devices supplied by an adversary - should it come to that - is an extremely dangerous proposition. Not just in terms of losing further supply at some point (like the aluminum example) but in the existing installed base being used against you.
Nevertheless it is also true that this economic distancing is going to
cold economic war (Score:3)
More like propaganda war first.
Just say China and Americans will get emotionally agitated.
China China China
I can sense the clenching of fists and gritting of teeth and emotional dial going off the charts.
Re: (Score:1)
Apple is NOT a pawn (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)