| |
| ▲ | riffraff 7 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > By 2040 or so it might be more advantageous for Asian producers to just avoid our bureaucratized space altogether. in favour of what? Every other large market (China, India, USA) has extreme protectionism in place. | | |
| ▲ | andsoitis 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > > By 2040 or so it might be more advantageous for Asian producers to just avoid our bureaucratized space altogether. > in favour of what? Every other large market (China, India, USA) has extreme protectionism in place. The EU has higher tariffs than the US overall, especially for agriculture and cars. Policy is structured and uniform. The IS has lower tariffs than the EU overall, but often used as political/economic weapon on specific countries and sectors. The current administration's tactics notwithstanding. | |
| ▲ | inglor_cz 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | At least in case of India, it is in their interest to lower their trade barriers against Thailand, Viet Nam, Philippines, Indonesia etc. This region with 500 million people in it will oscillate between Chinese and Indian influence. The Chinese are more powerful and richer, so the only way in which India can compete for influence is being more friendly. | | |
| ▲ | tonyhart7 7 hours ago | parent [-] | | India is too busy fighting on their own sphere of influence (south asian) china keep them in check via pakistan | | |
| ▲ | inglor_cz 7 hours ago | parent [-] | | Now, but we're talking 2040, and the situation may look a lot different. India has been doing some incredible things lately. They just electrified their entire rail network in some five years. That is actually impressive - you need a lot of qualified people and coordination for that. If they keep up, they will become a strategic adversary of China in Indochina (see the name?) quite soon. | | |
| ▲ | eldaisfish 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | India's rail network is not fully electrified, this is false. Even the most popular broad gauge network is not fully electrified. Diesel trains are still very common. Remember also that the Indian government is very skilled at manipulating data without actually delivering results. Just look at the lies they spewed during the pandemic about deaths. India's promised ascendance to power and influence remain perpetually a few decades away. Meanwhile, the poor continue to lose purchasing power, the rich exploit the entire country, and India's total economic exports are comparable to those of the Netherlands. |
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | constantcrying 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Exactly. For the past decades much of the world was entirely dependent on European products. This gave the EU and European countries enormous leverage in setting standards and enforcing their own regulations across the world. This is very clearly changing, in many areas European companies are depending on Chinese technology (e.g. EV batteries). I am sure that some part of the EU establishment is aware of this, but the measure taken are practically laughable compared to the magnitude of the problem. At some future point in time dealing with the EU will just not be worth it, as competitive companies outside the EU, not weighed down by EU regulations, will fill the gaps and entering the EU market will be seen as too toxic. |
|
| |
| ▲ | constantcrying 6 hours ago | parent [-] | | What you are saying is just not true. Frances car industry is dying. Renault is a small company, not even in the top 10 and Stellantis is doing extremely poorly, also affecting Italy's car industry. Within a decade or so COMAC will have a competitive passenger plane, seriously threatening Airbus market share. Germany's entire industry is currently dying since it is impossible to have a cost competitive manufacturing industry while having some of the highest energy prices in the world. Your entire comment looks at the current status quo, not at the continuous downward trend or the abyss which awaits if Stellantis or VW Group get pushed out of the market by Chinese competition. Do you think Germany or France will continue to have a car industry, when China makes cars or the same quality for 70% of the price? Because that is currently the reality. | | |
| ▲ | mono442 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | High energy prices are a self-imposed problem. The price of electricity is heavily dependent on the price of the most expensive energy source. Electricity from fossil fuels is expensive in European Union due to emissions trading system. A coal-fired power plant pays around 2x more for the emissions than for the coal itself. I don't know how the maths work for a natural gas plant but gas is more expensive in Europe anyway compared to the US. | |
| ▲ | sofixa 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | > Renault is a small company, not even in the top 10 How exactly is that even remotely relevant? They only sell in select markets, and are killing it in them (best selling EV in the EU, Renault 5). What, if it's not a global behemoth dominating the world, it doesn't count as manufacturing? What exactly is your argument here? > Within a decade or so COMAC will have a competitive passenger plane, seriously threatening Airbus market share. Nope. Their own goal is to have, within a decade or so, a fully Chinese plane (their current C919 heavily relies on engines and other critical components from European and American suppliers). Specifically for the engines, they're looking at a comparable to the Leap 1C they were sold by CFM (American General Electric+French Safran joint venture). Those engines are around a generation behind the current best ones (Leap 1A, Pratt&Whitney GTF). In a decade, CFM and Rolls-Royce will have a new generation out, both having new models being tested right now. So, in around a decade, the Chinese engines will be two generations behind. Efficiency is critical in aviation. And that's just the engines, in a decade Airbus will have a new A320 series replacement out, and Boeing will have one on the way too. And this is just for short to medium haul planes. And both the C919 and the C909 show that it's taking years for production to ramp up to any relevant numbers. Airbus recently opened a second final assembly line in Tianjin for the local market, they wouldn't have done that without being sure they have a market there for at least a decade or more. > Your entire comment looks at the current status quo, not at the continuous downward trend or the abyss which awaits if Stellantis or VW Group get pushed out of the market by Chinese competition. This is assuming that the Chinese competition would be allowed to compete on the same terms, which we already know won't happen - both the EU and the US have put in tariffs. And we can see that a low cost Dacia EV is similarly priced to a low cost BYD EV. | | |
| ▲ | Macha 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Does China need something competitive to an a320neo^2 or is something competitive with a 737ng enough given they can pressure domestic airlines into buying it and undercut their way into more sticker price sensitive markets? That’s already a big loss for the duopoly, and I mean there are 717s and similar still flying | | |
| ▲ | sofixa 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | > or is something competitive with a 737ng enough given they can pressure domestic airlines into buying it and undercut their way into more sticker price sensitive markets Potentially, but previous attempts (like the Xian MA60 and MA600, which are derivatives of the designed in the 1960s An-24) have been very unsuccessful. It made some sales in Southeast Asia and Africa, but a few of those have had accompanying corruption/bribery allegations and investigations, and most have been grounded after serious incidents and troubles keeping them operating at reasonable costs. But my overall point is, it's going to take them more than a decade, probably around two, to be able to churn out fully Chinese passenger jets in any relevant numbers. The Chinese airplane market is massive, so even then they probably won't be able to deliver enough. There also aren't any plans to get the C919, existing or future fully Chinese version, certified by EASA or FAA or anywhere else, so legally the jet can't even fly anywhere else other than China for now. So we have at least 2 decades more of COMAC being very behind and churning planes at a slow rate, at best. And honestly, anyone who thinks they can predict the aviation market 2 decades ahead is out of their mind. We could have hydrogen powered flying wings by then! |
| |
| ▲ | constantcrying 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | >are killing it in them (best selling EV in the EU, Renault 5). What, if it's not a global behemoth dominating the world, it doesn't count as manufacturing? What exactly is your argument here? My argument is that China is producing EVs of the same quality for 70% of the cost. European wealth comes from exports. >This is assuming that the Chinese competition would be allowed to compete on the same terms, which we already know won't happen - both the EU and the US have put in tariffs. And we can see that a low cost Dacia EV is similarly priced to a low cost BYD EV. Exactly. The European car industry only exists because China is not allowed to compete, this is my point. There is no German/French/Italian car export industry anymore. Who is buying a German or French EV when he could be buying a better car for the same price or the same quality car for a lower price. The car market for these companies will shrink from the entire world to Europe, surely you can see that this is an existential threat to European manufacturing. >And we can see that a low cost Dacia EV is similarly priced to a low cost BYD EV. Yes, this is exactly what I am saying. A BYD EV with 27% tariffs applied is cost competitive to the lowest end Renault Platform. In other words, the only reason Dacia is selling any cars is because BYD is not allowed to compete. On the topic of aircraft engines. The Chinese have mastered almost every technology the west has, it is delusional to think that they will never make competitive aircraft engines. You are correct, COMAC will take more than a decade to compete with Airbus, but with the current trajectory it is practically inevitable they will catch up. | | |
| ▲ | sofixa 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | > European wealth comes from exports That's certainly a claim. The EU market is pretty big, and has multiple avenues for growth (the whole of the Balkans is either in the EU but catching up, or outside the EU begging to be let in). It's not axiomatic that the EU needs to export to the whole rest of the world. And even if it is, there are plenty of countries that have an appetite for European goods for a variety of reasons (be it luxury or just quality associations, or innate hatred of China, like in India or South Korea). > Exactly. The European car industry only exists because China is not allowed to compete, this is my point Alternatively, because Chinese dumping is not allowed to destroy the European car industry, if we're only talking in economic terms. But the reality is that cars aren't that simple, as a market. For many cars are a status symbol, or otherwise everyone would be driving Dacias and Skodas and nobody would be buying Porsches vs VWs. > There is no German/French/Italian car export industry anymore. Who is buying a German or French EV when he could be buying a better car for the same price or the same quality car for a lower price. Of course there is. Stellantis, Renault, VW Group are selling well in their local markets, across Europe and various other markets (e.g. the US for Stellantis). > On the topic of aircraft engines. The Chinese have mastered almost every technology the west has, it is delusional to think that they will never make competitive aircraft engines Never said never, said their own timeline is a decade, for something competitive to the previous gen, while in a decade we'll be two generations ahead. Considering Chinese aerospace engineering has been struggling with engines forever, and Russia never managed to get close, ever, I wouldn't bet on China suddenly being able to leapfrog their own timeline. > You are correct, COMAC will take more than a decade to compete with Airbus, but with the current trajectory it is practically inevitable they will catch up. They will catch up to ~previous generation (A320ceo), by then Airbus will already have the replacement to the current gen (A320neo, future gen not named yet). So China will still be ~2 decades behind, in a decade-ish. Yes, they will definitely catch up by some point in the ~2050s, so what? Airbus caught up to Boeing, and there is enough market to go around for both. Embraer is in the process of catching up too. There being one more new entrant on the (again, only short to medium haul) passenger jet market, in a decade, really isn't the end of the world you're making it out to be. | | |
| ▲ | constantcrying 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | You are still arguing the status quo. By export I meant export to countries outside the EU, where Chinese and European EVs compete fairly. To believe that the European car industry will survive purely on brand recognition is foolish and all current trends indicate otherwise. The Chinese are cars at the same quality for 70% if the price. That is obviously not sustainable and no amount of brand loyalty will overcome this. None of your arguments seem convincing at all. Making worse cars at higher prices can not work. It is not a feasible long term strategy in any way. Also, Stellantis is not selling well, they have huge problems with underutilized factories. Porsche is also currently in serious trouble. |
|
|
|
|
|
