Share This

Showing posts with label Trish Regan. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Trish Regan. Show all posts

Sunday, May 26, 2019

Pride and prejudice

https://youtu.be/9JZ_Tej8XfY

https://youtu.be/DVz-DLBl_oQ

https://youtu.be/35qPCFP9nfs

https://youtu.be/I-d7YziXzII

THE United States ranks low in the credibility stakes. It can no longer wax lyrical about free trade and fair play because the world now knows that when it finds itself facing stiff competition, it uses a ruling the magnitude of a nuclear bomb to retaliate.

Firstly, US president Donald Trump declared a national emergency and barred American companies from doing business with companies deemed a national security risk.

Then, companies like Google and Microsoft stopped making software and services available to Huawei, China’s biggest smartphone vendor. The ban essentially means that future Huawei phones will no longer get Google play apps, YouTube, and almost certainly no updates to Android Q or other platform-level upgrades since these would require Google’s sign-off, too.

Sure, you can still make calls or use WeChat and other Chinese platforms, but for users in most parts of the world, the phone is pretty much useless.

Word is that Huawei poses a security risk, but no clarification has been forthcoming to what these threats include exactly.

There is a sense of déjà vu here.

The world was once told by the US and its allies that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, but we learnt in the end there were none. Now, we have the Iran threat, but that’s another story all together.

From what little info has trickled into the worldwide web, the suggestion is that Chinese-manufactured devices have hidden back doors that could potentially allow an attacker to gain special access.

It sounds like a script excerpt from a James Bond movie, with spooks using a master password to break into high security facilities.

But incredibly, Huawei and ZTE Corp, another telecommunications equipment manufacturer, were cleared by the US House of Representatives permanent select committee on intelligence.

The two had been accused of providing “incomplete, contradictory and evasive responses to the committee’s core concerns” during their year-long investigation on the threat they supposedly pose to American interests.

In the end, the committee found no concrete evidence of infringement. But that didn’t stop the two companies from being labelled a national security risk and getting kicked out of the US.

IS, the German internet security watchdog, inspected Huawei laboratories in Germany and found no evidence of espionage, and The New York Times quoted American officials saying that the case against the company had “no smoking gun – just a heightened concern about the firm’s rising technological dominance”.

Rightly or wrongly, in the game of perception, the US has lost its moral ground. Thanks, in many ways, to an impulsive president.

Most of the world’s population thinks the bullying of Huawei is simply Trump’s hallmark. It isn’t about a security risk, but an economic threat.

Outside China, Huawei is arguably the most successful Chinese consumer brand so far. Thanks to a good and relatively cheaper product, it is now the second largest phone vendor in the world.

One strong accusation levelled at Huawei is that it enjoys Chinese government backing, and that China uses its spies to steal US technology for these private companies.

It’s a really warped perspective because, using the same logic, why is the US president taking such a hard line against a private company that’s merely selling phones?

The answer could well lie in the technology race.

Now, it’s about who launches 5G first, the next generation of mobile broadband imminently replacing 4G.

With 5G, we will see exponentially faster download and upload speeds. Huawei is widely renowned for being 12 months ahead of its competitors in the 5G race.

It began to develop its own 5G technology in as early as 2009. In 2013, Huawei hired more than 300 top experts from the wireless industry around the world and announced that they had invested US$600mil (RM2.5bil) in 5G research.

In 2016, Huawei set up a 5G product line for such devices.

What started as a three-man company now has thousands of employees engaged in 5G product development. Following this, in 2017, and then in 2018, Huawei invested almost US$1.4bil (RM5.8bil) in 5G product development.

The South China Morning Post has, however, also reported that apart from its tremendous commercial benefits, 5G – the fifth generation of mobile communication – is revolutionising military and security technology, which is partly why it has become a focal point in the US’ efforts to contain China’s rise as a tech power, and the Western nation’s allegations against Chinese companies is simply symptomatic of its insecurities.

“The future landscape of warfare and cybersecurity could be fundamentally changed by 5G.

“But experts say 5G is more susceptible to hacking than previous networks, at a time of rising security concerns and US-China tensions on various interconnected fronts that include trade, influence in the Asia-Pacific region and technological rivalry.

“These tensions provide the backdrop to controversy surrounding Huawei, the world’s largest telecoms equipment supplier.” It’s also a fight between China and the US on who leads the artificial intelligence domain, as with 5G advancements, it means “whereas existing networks connect people to people, the next generation will connect a vast network of sensors, robots and autonomous vehicles through sophisticated artificial intelligence.

“The so-called Internet of Things will allow objects to ‘communicate’ with each other by exchanging vast volumes of data in real time, and without human intervention.

“Autonomous factories, long-distance surgery or robots preparing your breakfast – things that previously existed only in science fiction – will be made possible.

“Meanwhile, though, it is being identified by many military experts as the cornerstone of future military technology,” the newspaper reported.

As TV personality Trevor Noah says, humorously, in his show, the 5G war isn’t just about “loading an entire movie in three seconds but about the Chinese spying – which the US also wants to do.”

He sarcastically added that “the US is losing the 5G race and luckily, we have a maniac in our team who’s willing to play dirty.”

As the battle rages on, spilling into the already acrimonious US-China trade war, the controversy has become more bitter, and complicated, with the US egging its allies to ban Huawei from building its next generation of mobile phone networks. So far, Britain, Germany, Australia, New Zealand and Canada have either banned Huawei or are reviewing whether to do so.

Japan, a US ally, seems to have been dragged into the propaganda of persecuting Huawei, too.

In China, the actions against Huawei have stirred a storm of nationalism, with the Chinese calling for a boycott of iPhone, a reaction which could eventually affect other American and European products, at the rate things are escalating.

Even within the Chinese diaspora, the messages of unequivocal support for Huawei have gone viral in the world’s social media sphere.

The irony is that the iPhone is not only assembled in China, but its very inception starts in that country at a much earlier stage, and from a much deeper part of the earth, too.

At least 90% of rare earth minerals – naturally occurring solids whose combination comprises essential iPhone parts – are mined in China, notably in Mongolia, it’s reported.

“Lanthanides, scandium, yttrium and some other alien-sounding names at the bottom of the periodic table (remember your secondary school?) make the iPhone ‘light, bright and loud.’ Its colour screen, glass polishing, circuitry, speakers and vibration unit come from a mix of these rare earth minerals,” it says in Finances Online.

The report added that where American companies would take months to pool thousands of industrial engineers, and even more months to construct new assembly lines to accommodate a trivial but urgent change in an iPhone spec (say, its glass panel needing to curve to hatch on the body six weeks prior to launching), it only takes 15 days in China to do the same.

“To put it in perspective, one production line in China can assemble 72,000 iPhone 5 back plates daily; one factory can have four to five production lines and China can have as much as a hundred of these factories, opening or closing a few of them depending on the current demand.

“The last part – opening and closing plants like a mom-and-pop store – is almost impossible in an American economy.

“It is no longer a city counting the number of manufacturing plants it has, but the manufacturing plant can be counted as a city in many Asian economic zones.”

And it’s common knowledge that Mickey Mouse merchandise is made in China, and likewise all the branded sportswear sold globally. The profits these companies are raking in are simply down to the low cost of operation.

Trump should know and do better. Instead of threatening and bullying Huawei with trumped up charges, he should urge American companies to be more competitive, make better products and keep prices low.

I am dumping my iPhone, upgrading my South Korean Samsung and for the first time, getting myself a Huawei. I hear the camera is really good, and it doesn’t even need a zoom lens for magnification. And that sophistication comes from a license to thrill.

By Wong Chun Wai

Wong Chun Wai began his career as a journalist in Penang, and has served The Star for over 27 years in various capacities and roles. He is now editorial and corporate affairs adviser to the group, after having served as group managing director/chief executive officer.

On The Beat made its debut on Feb 23 1997 and Chun Wai has penned the column weekly without a break, except for the occasional press holiday when the paper was not published. In May 2011, a compilation of selected articles of On The Beat was published as a book and launched in conjunction with his 50th birthday. Chun Wai also comments on current issues in The Star.

 Source link


Read ,more:

China digs in for protracted trade fight with US - The Sun Daily


Commentary: China fights U.S. trade bullying with "Long March" spiri

 

Trade war gives US unfavorable image

US President Donald Trump on Thursday announced a $16 billion aid package for farmers to offset their losses from the trade war with China. He said the package "will be paid for by the billions of dollars" from tariffs on Chinese imports.

Bannon promotes economic fascism

All Chinese companies wishing to get to the high-tech mountaintop should learn from Huawei's composed example. If only there were a group of Chinese companies sharing intellectual property with foreign partners, then certain malicious forces would hesitate at a crackdown.

Fast economic development best way to deal with security challenge

China's economic potential is far greater than that of the US, the largest economy. There is no doubt that China's economic prospects are the best in the world. These facts drive China's core competitiveness. They will make Washington feel its ability falls short of its wishes when it comes to containing Beijing.

US orchestrates self-defeating maneuvers

Chinese people do not know whether we should call US approaches hegemonic politics or profiteering politics. But in short, they are crooked means. The threat of tariffs will not work. Neither will US threats against Chinese companies create a shock wave against China. The US is picking a wrong opponent at a wrong time. It will find no way of crafting a good result from a strategic mistake.

Growing US pressure won't force China to submit

The US is having a profound effect on the global economic order by abusing national security and trampling on commercial principles. Current US administration is destroying the reputation and national image that generations of Americans have built. Such arrogance and hegemony are by no means good signs for the US.

Thursday, May 23, 2019

China won't accept unequal trade deal

  https://youtu.be/nzhZGUfaZhI


China-U.S. trade tensions | Mideast tensions take turn for worse 
 
https://youtu.be/eQbQbvGBDaM

封杀华为 发难大疆 美滥用国家力量打压中国企业!| CCTV中文国际

https://youtu.be/dtT0rHgJ9-I


Growing US pressure won't force China to submit 


The US Department of Homeland Security warned that drones pose a potential information risk because they contain components that can compromise users' data and share information on servers other than users.

Since nearly 80 percent of the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) drones in North America are produced by China's Dajiang Innovation (DJI), a Shenzhen-based company, analysts generally believe that tarnishing DJI's reputation may be laying the groundwork for taking actionsagainst DJI.

DJI is the world's largest producer of civilian drones and is said to control more than 70 percent of the world's civilian drone market. The drones it produces are not only good in quality but also cheap. Many products are under $1,000, so they are popular and increasingly versatile.

The US military is also a DJI drone user. The use of DJI drones by the US military has not completely stopped following the controversy over its information security. This shows that while the US has real concerns about the information security risks of DJI UAV , there is no real evidence to support such concerns.

The US Department of Homeland Security raised the issue of the information security risks of UAV to increase leverage and pressure on China after the US decision to cut off supplies to Huawei. It seems Washington is in a hurry to press China to make concessions and reach a trade deal at an early date beneficial only to the US.

The vast majority of users in the US use DJI drones in non-classified areas. The airspace over sensitive US institutions is closed to drones and there is another set of security measures that have nothing to do with the use of DJI drones in the US market. The prevention of forest fires, assistance with construction layouts, and the development of express delivery services to remote areas are obviously not the direction that intelligence agencies are aiming for. It is hard to believe that DJI has an incentive to engage in "intelligence activities" at the risk of being shut out of international markets.

The US is abusing the concept of national security. It is the US that was caught a few years ago spying on the leaders of its allies. It is now saying that Beijing's intelligence threat is everywhere. A big part of it is putting on a show. It may be partly because the US does install a lot of "back doors" into its electronic exports, Washington thinks other countries will do the same.

China will not fall into the trap to make unconditional compromises as Washington increases its pressure. If the US cracks down on Chinese companies, American consumers and suppliers will also suffer losses.

The US is having a profound effect on the global economic order by abusing national security and trampling on commercial principles. Current US administration is destroying the reputation and national image that generations of Americans have built. Such arrogance and hegemony are by no means good signs for the US..

Read more: 

US orchestrates self-defeating maneuvers

Chinese people do not know whether we should call US approaches hegemonic politics or profiteering politics. But in short, they are crooked means. The threat of tariffs will not work. Neither will US threats against Chinese companies create a shock wave against China. The US is picking a wrong opponent at a wrong time. It will find no way of crafting a good result from a strategic mistake.


https://youtu.be/QrSXTGDdgh8

世界级影响!封杀华为问题已超过中美经贸问题!美国沉不住气,特朗普后院起火!
  https://youtu.be/h7ACR5g-cKM

华为公开宣布主权!5G不再共享!所有工厂撤离美国,美股瞬间暴跌,特朗普全完了!


https://youtu.be/1rqJg_seI1s

https://youtu.be/r1DPqBtykWk

中國是世界上唯一的文明!
https://youtu.be/XixqLWWTeEw

"What China Will Be Like As A Great Power" : Martin Jacques Keynote (32nd Annual Camden Conference)


https://youtu.be/uBjvklYLShM

http://www.you-books.com/book/M-Jacques/When-China-Rules-the-World


Related post:

华为不惧美国封杀 美式霸凌失道寡助!Huawei's goodwill gesture being treated unscrupulously by the US ! 


Wednesday, May 23, 2012

Facebook Tumble, blame game begin !

Investors fault everything


Let the Facebook Inc. (FB) finger-pointing begin.



After one of the most anticipated initial public offerings in history, Facebook’s 19 percent drop this week prompted investors to fault everything from Morgan Stanley’s role as lead underwriter, to the company’s greed and the Nasdaq Stock Market.

People walk by the Nasdaq stock market in New York, on May 18, 2012. Photographer: Spencer Platt/Getty Images
KSCA's Corbin on Decline in Facebook Shares  
May 22 (Bloomberg) -- Jeff Corbin, chief  executive officer of KCSA Strategic Communications, talks about the 19 percent decline in Facebook Inc.'s shares following the company's initial public offering. Corbin speaks with Mark Crumpton on Bloomberg Television's "Bottom Line." (Source: Bloomberg) 

May 21 (Bloomberg) -- Paul Kedrosky, author of the Infectious Greed blog and a Bloomberg contributing editor, and Max Wolff, an analyst at Greencrest Capital Management, talk about trading in shares of Facebook Inc. Facebook fell below its $38 offer price in the second day of trading. Kedrosky and Wolff speak with Emily Chang on Bloomberg Television's "Bloomberg West." (Source: Bloomberg) 

May 21 (Bloomberg) -- Darren Chervitz, research director for Jacob Funds, talks about Facebook Inc.'s stock price performance and the outlook for the social network firm. Facebook, the social networking site that raised $16 billion in an initial public offering, fell below its $38 offer price in its second trading day. Chervitz speaks with Trish Regan on Bloomberg Television's "InBusiness." (Source: Bloomberg) 

May 22 (Bloomberg) -- Bloomberg's Dominic Chu reports that after one of the most anticipated initial public offerings in history, Facebook’s 11 percent drop on Monday prompted investors to fault everything from Morgan Stanley’s role as lead underwriter, to the company’s greed and the Nasdaq Stock Market. He speaks on Bloomberg Television's "Inisde Track." (Source: Bloomberg) 

May 22 (Bloomberg) -- Cliff Lerner, chief executive officer of Snap Interactive Inc., talks about the impact of the drop in Facebook Inc.’s shares on Snap's stock. Lerner talks with Trish Regan on Bloomberg Television’s “InBusiness.” (Source: Bloomberg) 

The Facebook Inc. logo is displayed at the Nasdaq MarketSite in New York, on May 18, 2012. Photographer: Scott Eells/Bloomberg 

Facebook 11% Drop Means Morgan Stanley Gets Blame for Flop Enlarge image
A pedestrian walks past the share price for Facebook Inc. displayed at the Nasdaq MarketSite in New York, U.S., on Monday, May 21, 2012. Photographer: Scott Eells/Bloomberg
Facebook Inc. Chief Financial Officer David Ebersman, seen here, was the point person on the deal, while Mark Zuckerberg and Chief Operating Officer Sheryl Sandberg weighed in on major decisions throughout the process, people said. Photographer: Tony Avelar/Bloomberg 

“It was like the gang that couldn’t shoot straight,” said Michael Mullaney, who helps manage $9.5 billion as chief investment officer at Fiduciary Trust in Boston. He said he placed Facebook orders for clients. “The underwriters mis- estimated what actual demand was, and there was pure execution failure coming out of the Nasdaq.”

Taking the most heat is Morgan Stanley, said Mullaney. The bank was lead underwriter among the 33 firms Facebook hired to manage the $16 billion sale of stock. The bank decided with Facebook executives to boost the size and price days before the May 17 IPO, ignoring advice from some co-managers, said people with knowledge of the matter, who declined to be identified because the process was private. Morgan Stanley (MS) talked with few of its fellow underwriters aside from JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) and Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (GS) throughout the IPO, one person said.

“They overplayed the enthusiasm and probably just misread the atmosphere of the marketplace,” said Keith Wirtz, who oversees $15 billion as chief investment officer at Fifth Third Asset Management in Cincinnati and bought some stock in the IPO.

Blame Game


Facebook increased the number of shares being sold in the IPO by 25 percent last week to 421.2 million and raised its asking price to a range of $34 to $38 from $28 to $35. Had Facebook kept the original terms, investors may have had a better shot at a first-day pop. Instead, the stock was little changed in its debut because Morgan Stanley intervened to prevent it from falling below the IPO price.

The shares fell 8.9 percent to $31 at the close today, after an 11 percent drop yesterday.

Just days before Facebook raised the size and price of its IPO, the company began telling analysts to lower their sales forecasts, people familiar with the matter said. Morgan Stanley analysts were among those who cut their projections during the roadshow, said one person. The move also followed a May 9 filing in which Facebook said advertising growth hasn’t kept pace with the increase in users.

Investors Misled?

Some investors say they felt misled by the underwriters. According to one London-based fund manager who asked not to be named, bankers indicated demand was so strong that he placed a bigger order than he thought he would get, leaving him with 40 percent more Facebook shares than anticipated. He sold most of that stock on the first day of trading.

The decision to boost the price range reflected the demand in the market, said a person involved in the process. Michael DuVally, a spokesman for Goldman Sachs, and Pen Pendleton, a spokesman for Morgan Stanley, declined to comment. Jennifer Zuccarelli, a spokeswoman for JPMorgan, declined to comment. Underwriters didn’t say how great demand was.

Morgan Stanley and Facebook consider problems with Nasdaq OMX Group Inc.’s computer systems among the reasons for the IPO’s performance so far, according to people familiar with the matter. Nasdaq’s trading platform was overwhelmed by order cancellations and updates that made the stock-market operator unable to finish the auction required to open trading. The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission said it will review the trading.

Nasdaq Software 


Nasdaq Chief Executive Officer Robert Greifeld said on a call with reporters on May 20 about the glitch that the opening delay “had no apparent impact on the stock price,” noting the share decline began after all brokers had received confirmation about their trades in the opening auction. Robert Madden, a spokesman for Nasdaq OMX, declined to comment beyond Greifeld’s statement.

Nasdaq said in a notice yesterday it delivered all outstanding execution and cancellation messages to brokers for their IPO cross orders at 1:50 p.m. Facebook declined 5.9 percent after 1:50 p.m.

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg and the early backers should be held accountable for the stock drop, said Francis Gaskins, president of researcher IPOdesktop.com in Marina Del Rey, California. Goldman Sachs, Accel Partners, Digital Sky Technologies and other existing holders boosted the number of IPO shares they offered in Facebook on May 16, a day after the company increased its price range.

‘Mispriced’ Market Value 

 

 “It’s a combination of Zuckerberg’s ego for that $100 billion market cap, and the shareholders selling who wanted an exit,” said Gaskins. “Somehow it just missed them that this was mispriced.”

Larry Yu, a spokesman for Menlo Park, California-based Facebook, declined to comment. Rich Wong, a partner at Palo Alto-based Accel Partners, and Yuri Milner, founder of Digital Sky Technologies in Moscow, didn’t respond to requests for comment.

Facebook Chief Financial Officer David Ebersman was the point person on the deal, while Zuckerberg and Chief Operating Officer Sheryl Sandberg weighed in on major decisions throughout the process, people said. At Morgan Stanley, Dan Simkowitz, chairman of global capital markets, was one of the main bankers on the offering. Michael Grimes, global co-head of technology investment banking at Morgan Stanley, also played a key role.

Underwriters did accomplish part of what they set out to do: turn paper into cash for pre-IPO holders.
“It was successful for the liquidating owners, absolutely, because they got all that and then some,” said Peter Sorrentino, a fund manager who helps oversee $14.7 billion at Huntington Asset Advisors in Cincinnati.

For the investors it was a different story.

“I shame the people who were lining up to buy the thing,” said Sorrentino, whose firm didn’t buy stock in the IPO and tried to talk clients out of purchases. “The financials were there, do the math. Everyone wanted to be caught up in the glamour offering of the year. People just had stars in their eyes.”  - Bloomberg



Related posts:

Facebook price falls !

US market ahead: major signs say ‘sell’, the Facebook effect
The Facebook Fallacy