Category Archives: China

Why are Your Inland Shipping Costs in China so High?

As this recent article over on South China Morning Post on Last Mile Transport’s Heavy Load for Truckers implies, it’s probably poor planning on your part.

Specifically, it’s expecting that China carriers can move your product from A to B as fast as North American carriers can get your product from C to D, where the distance from A to B equals the distance from C to D. Although China’s transportation infrastructure is much better than India’s transportation infrastructure, it’s still not on par with the US which gets a 4.14 ranking (out of 5) compared to China’s 3.61 (as per the World Bank’s Logistics Performance Index).

Not only is transportation infrastructure insufficient in some parts of mainland China, or overcrowded in many of the big urban areas, but there is also the restriction that trucks can’t be on the highways after midnight. (In the US, the worst you have to deal with is speed limits that drop 10 mph at night. As long as the driver hasn’t reached his daily driving limit, that truck can drive all night long.)

As a result, when you insist on unrealistic schedules, with penalties for late delivery, you end up costing the logistics company needed revenue that it needs to cover the highway and first-tier road fees, as 95% of the country’s highways and 61% of it’s first-tier roads are toll roads (and the company has to use these roads to ensure reasonable delivery times as the free roads are typically dirt roads not suitable for transport trucks). As a result, knowing that it’s going to be late on a significant number of deliveries unless it illegally drives on the highway at night (which will result in harsh fines), and, as a result, get hit with a large number of penalties, the logistics company has to increase its base rates to absorb the expected losses to stay in business.

Thus, if you acknowledged the reality of the transportation situation that Chinese logistics companies have to deal with, accepted slightly longer delivery times, and planned accordingly, you could reduce your mainland China logistics costs — especially if, instead of using one of the almost 10,000 small or mid-sized companies that can’t take advantage of economies of scale and end up absorbing a lot of empty miles, you use one of the few large companies that have enough trucks, and warehouses, to minimize empty miles and use their scale to their advantage. (Plus, shifting more to the bigger carriers will allow them to become financially stable enough to acquire some of the smaller carriers where their footprint is weak, and this should further decrease costs in the future. Furthermore, when the market sees consolidation working, some of the mid-sized carriers will likely merge to offer more cost-effective options. China is big enough that it can support dozens of major carriers, not just a handful like some of the smaller global marketplaces. As a result, even with significant consolidation, there should still be ample competition to keep prices low.)

Why Is China Going to Beat the US in GDP Very, Very Soon?

If market trends continue, China is very likely to overtake the US in GDP by 2025. Why is this?

Is it because China has 1,351 Million people compared to the US population of 314 Million?

Is it because the world is still aggressively outsourcing to China?

Is it because China controls 90%+ of the global supply for some of the increasingly important rare earth metals?

Is it because China is effectively balancing socialism with capitalism?

Is it because they have manufacturing plants the size of small cities?

Is it because they run on five-year plans designed to improve the overall state of the country every five years?

Is it because they recognize not only the importance of public health-care but the importance of getting it right?

Is it because they realize that you can effectively defend your country on 6%- of your budget (and 2.2% of their GDP) compared to the US that needs to spend 11%+ of their budget (14% of revenue and 4.4% of their GDP)?

Is it because the populace is actively protesting GM (Genetically Modified) food?

Is it because they are pushing ahead on R&D and exploration (having landed the first spacecraft on the moon on December 13 for the first time since Russia landed Luna-24 in 1976)?

It’s all of these reasons, and more. While the US media is too focussed on the scandal of the day, the Chinese media, while censored, is more focussed on the issues. While the political parties in the US squabble over minutia and blame each other for the government shutdown that just occurred, and the one that is likely to happen in January, the one party system in China is discussing amongst itself how best to move forward (and keep the necessary control). While the US is on the verge of another energy crisis, China is building new power plants, including those that run on renewable energy sources, as fast as it can.

Now, SI will be the first to admit that China is not without its problems. It still has way too many coal-producing power plants, too much smog in its big cities, limited freedoms (especially where the press is concerned), urbanization issues (as it is still building cities it doesn’t yet need to keep people employed), logistics challenges, and so on. But compared to the US, where the republicans and democrats spend all their time blaming each other and fighting instead of working together to advance the country, where the government apparently spends too much time and money spying on its own citizens and pursuing controversial drone technology instead of fostering better inter-agency cooperation, public support for homeland defence initiatives, and scientific research endeavours, and where education spending often gets the shaft (with the Department of Education budget typically clocking in at under 2% of GDP), China is making more progress, and doing so faster, than the US.

If the US wants to retain its top spot on the economic powerhouse rankings, once the elections are over, the elected representatives have to work together to do what’s best for the country, otherwise, despite all of the limitations of socialism that one can identify from a free market perspective, China is going to win, and win big, and do so at the expense of the US.
While it may be an inevitability that China overtakes the US in GDP at some point in the future, it doesn’t have to be the near future, but unless the US makes a concerted effort to shape up from a global perspective, and forces its politicians to grow (the fuck) up, we may all need to start registering in Mandarin classes very soon.

Are American Companies Threatening Their Own Supply Chains?

A recent article over on CNN Money on how Starbucks is in Hot Water over China prices has me wondering. According to the article, Starbucks is charging more in China for a cup of coffee in China than it is in Chicago or London (with a medium size Latte costing $4.40 vs $3,20 and $4.00). Similarly, it is charging as much as $18 in China for its Starbucks Coffee mug, that sells for between $10 and $14 in the US.

This is despite the fact that it is doing quite well in China, with strong sales contributing to a year-on-year jump in revenues in the Asia Pacific region of 30%.

Is this how you want to be treating a country you rely on for low-cost product production?

In the case of Starbucks, it could be argued that the mugs are not a main source of income, and since the coffee beans are not sourced from China, Starbucks isn’t really relying on China for its supply chain. But consider Apple, which is using refurbished parts to repair products in China and limiting some warranties to one year, as compared to the two and three years it offers in North America.

We all know that Apple relies on Foxconn Technology Group for it’s iPhone and iPad production, and is thus heavily reliant on China in is Supply Chain.

The last thing Apple should want to do is get the attention of China’s government, that recently recorded fines against five international dairy firms after they were accused of fixing the prices of baby formula, and that is currently investigating production costs and price setting practices at 60 pharmaceutical companies as part of a wider anti-corruption crackdown.

But this post isn’t about Starbucks or Apple, but about every company sourcing from China that also does business in China. Considering their dependence on China, shouldn’t they be treating the Chinese market with the fairness that they demanded for years? How many years were we conveying the message that American negotiators shouldn’t stop until they paid China price, as Chinese sellers had a history of charging foreign buyers more than native buyers?

If we want to get China price, shouldn’t we be charging China price, or at least a price that’s fair with respect to what we charge else where? Otherwise, what right do we have to complain about unfair competition or about a government that might respond by slapping fines on us and/or adding new export tariffs to punish us for our relatively un-ethical pricing measures.

PKP Cargo (PKP SA) is Going Public. Will China Get a Bigger Foothold in Europe?

China is riding the rails to riches. As per these recent posts on SI, China is Kicking the USA’s @ss when it comes to rail with its recent launch of the world’s largest high-speed rail route from Beijing to Guangzhou in the world’s third largest rail operation that carry’s over 25% of the world’s total railway workload. Add to this the fact that Laos is committing to invest 6.2 Billion on a new 260-mile passenger and freight railway between Kunming and Vientiane that connects China to Thailand and ports closer to the Suez Canal, and China is riding the rails to riches in a big way.

And now it looks like they get a chance to expand their operations in Eastern Europe. On October 31, Polskie Koleje Panstwowe SA, the Polish state railway, is going IPO on the Warsaw Stock Exchange with the sale of its cargo Europe in an effort to raise as much as 1.6 Billion zloty (approx 518 Million dollars). PKP runs the EU’s second largest freight company after Deutsche Bahn AG and controls 8.5% of rail freight in the EU, and can also arrange transports to and from Asian markets, including countries, such as Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Mongolia and China with licenses to provide services in Slovakia, the Czech Republic, Germany, Austria, Belgium and Hungary. PKP is going to keep at least 50% of cargo, but may be offering close to 50% for sale.

And we know China is interested. China paid a visit to PKP SA last month to determine the investment outlook of the Polish in terms of Chinese relations in the power, telecommunication, and railway industries. An IPO gives China the chance to buy a big stake even if the investment opportunity is otherwise limited. And with a bigger stake in Europe, it makes it easier for China to send goods to the European market (through its new rail line from Zhengzhou to Hamburg). Add a big stake in PKP SA to its DB Schenker (Deutsche Bahn) partnership, and China would be poised to have influence over a rather sizeable chunk of the European rail transport network. It’s the obvious investment for acquisition hungry China.

What Impact Will the SFTZ Have on Trade?

As of September 29, 2013, the Shanghai Free Trade Zone is now open for business, but what impact will it have on trade? Opinions are mixed.

CNBC states that the Shanghai Free Trade Zone is No Match for Hong Kong, even though it is a 28.8 square kilometre district that many hoped would rival Hong Kong. Why? For starters, there will be no special tax treatments while Hong Kong’s 16% personal income tax will continue to retain talent and headquarters of global banks. Secondly, many much-needed* reforms in China, such as reforms on state-owned enterprises, public finance, land ownership, and the Hukou system won’t be part of the FTZ.

KPMG issued a special tax alert when the China (Shanghai) Pilot Free Trade Zone was Officially Launched with their observations. KPMG’s opinion on the zone that was designed to improve investment facilitations to meet international standards, deregulate currency exchange controls, and improve efficiency and flexibility in terms of government regulatory controls and legal environment specification include the following:

  • financial institutions will develop innovative financial services and products to allow China to be more competitive on a global basis once further reforms w.r.t. the convertibility of the RMBi is improved
  • allowed industries will have simplified administrative procedures to provide greater convenience for investors once the filing mechanism is implemented
  • the government may develop preferential policies towards promoted industries
  • breakthrough reforms are required in terms of foreign exchange control

In other words, they expect that, in time the zone, for preferred industries, will simplify and enhance trade while providing companies access to new, and innovative, financial services. However, for now, the benefits are limited.

Time, said that Shanghai has a Free-Trade Zone, so Now What?, noting that there is great concern among Chinese policymakers about opening the inexperienced domestic financial sector too quickly to the global marketplace. As a result, it is therefore hard to gauge at this point how far and how fast the Shanghai free-trade zone will be allowed to develop, and there’s even more uncertainty about when any reforms attempted there will be introduced on a wider scale. In addition, many analysts expect the reforms to come slowly and have doubts about how readily they could be applied to China as a whole.

Conclusion, the zone has great potential, but at the present time, it’s not likely to take off too fast until the reforms are decided and made known. Any differing opinions?


* In the opinions of some.