Neon has bird-dogged a most enjoyable video series on Youtube called BRITS GET RICH IN CHINA.
There are a total of 7 segments, and each feeds the next, so just start with #1 above.
A closer title might be BRITS SPEND A FORTUNE IN CHINA AND GET HOPES IN RETURN, since all three subjects spend massive amounts of money and show no return before the series end. All three are acclaimed successes in the series since they have huge orders.e.
Orders are not sales, sales is not revenue. I hope the producers do a follow up to see if any eventual revenue ultimately covers costs for these businesses.
The film follows three Englishmen in China, two who want the cheapest source for manufactures, one for pillows, one for kitchen and bath fixtures. The third has invented a power saving device, and anticipates US$500 million in sales his first year, each is pursuing “millions in China.”
The delightful part of the film is where we see the interactions and adventures of the Brits in China. It ll rings so true. The films are wonderfully edited and produced, not like some people we know who are putting up hand made films on on youtube.
There are some problems though.
The premise of the film is high risk/ high return... all or nothing. I saw at least three kiss-of-death elements common to all three stories...
a. huge ambitions for specific goals in a fast changing world
b. large sums up front
c. foreignors trying to manage the Chinese
These three elements are unnecessary and none of the players has sufficient resources to execute any of the three let alone all of the three..
The editors assert there are few winners in trade with China... obviously untrue. The vast majority are of those who trade with China are winners. I know thousands personally myself. Apparently there are winners all over the world at the small biz level. By far most of int’l trade is at the small biz level, and in that case it is all low risk, high return. Since these films are premised in “big money up front for bigger profits later” they have no benefit to the small biz international trade. In fact, I’d say they are misleading inasmuch as one may think this is the only way to do biz in China, and the only option is to compete on price. There may be few winners among those who go about it as featured in these films, in fact I would say there are no winners among these types.
Of course, there are others ways to thrive in business besides competing on price, as I outline in m book and classes.
the heroes in the story naturally take on Chinese partners, so to speak. It seems to me the Chinese counterparts in this series are stereotypical of Chinese, but not typical of Chinese. I recognize the kind of biz partner each has acquired, and they are the kind I would run from. But in any event, they are nothing like the vast majority of Chinese I have dealt with in the last 35 years. it is almost as though the producers winnowd through enough stories to get to the kind of Chinese partners prejudiced people might expect. If this series purports to represent typical Chinese at business, then it is a libel.
Of course you get what you deserve in a partner, and please do not view the Chinese in these films as typical. I am afraid that some people may be put off the idea of trading with China given what these films present. (In fact, even with my very limited understanding of chinese culture, I saw so many misunderstandings and missed signals I could write ten pages on those alone. I would l esteem a critique of the films from a Chinese national on this list for what they saw in the films.)
The film covers three biz people Tony, Vance and Peter. The narrator says “Tony Caldera’s business has been ruined by cheap Chinese imports.” This statement is of course nonsense, because Tony Calderas business has been ruined by Tony’s poor management. Countless people have faced cheap imports and thrived nonetheless.. Tony’s response is to move to China where it is harder than England in hopes of doing better. I see problems ahead. Vance expects to get rich knocking off high end fixtures and equipment in China, and get lowest price by opening his own factories. Cecil has an invention, and expect to make billions taking on a Chinese partner who will market his products all over China.
All three make the fundamental mistake of trying to control matters in china. they have neither the skill, nor is the direct intervention necessary to achieve the goals they seek.
All three have partners to who they entrust large amounts of money. The film makes clear in all instance these investors have overpaid for what they get. Not mentioned but inevitable is the question of how the money will be recouped.
(It won’t, these efforts will fail, none of these Brits have any rights in China, the building will go surplus and pass to the Chinese. Same story going on over the last 30 years... why people still fall for it, I don’t know.)
The funny thing is, if their plans have merit, it could all be accomplished without investing a dime in China. I personally know a pillow importer who is doing quite well in China, without having invested a dime. She has been doing that for the last 20 years selling in usa, and doing exceptionally well at the small biz level. She leaves china to the chinese, and there is more than enough to do dealing with usa markets for her to bother with managing the Chinese.
But fundamentally all the plans are flawed because although they all invest considerable mounts of money, none have the buying power and resources of the big biz who can and will undercut them toot sweet.
Another fundamental error is, upon discovering they have been ripped off, the Chinese persuade each investor their money is being put to good use for the greater good of the poor village, and each succumbs to this argument.
The villagers do not need a English investment in a bathtub factory, the Chinese villagers need freedom and the rule of law.
I watched these films as three lessons on how to do it wrong.
A final point, these are not examples of Brits doing biz in China, these are examples of Brits being filmed doing Biz in China. If the cameras were not rolling, the outcomes may have been very different. Even as it is, the outcome is “much money spent, much hope ahead.”
I would like to see a follow up on all three to see how they fare. The pillow fellow, if the order for 400,000 pillows at $3 million was valid (and not just a clown getting into a video) then $7.50 a pillow, even fob la, will not cover the rising costs that manifest after these films were made.
A better way for these people to trade with China is Vance keeps his money and goes upscale at the small biz level in UK and euro zone. Peter sells his invention in uk, and has the chinese manufacture and sell in china with royalty to Peter. Tony, keep his money and sell upscale pillows in uk, buying pillows from Chinese makers.
I think these films mischaracterize trade with China, and do not claim to explain small business, so I won’t criticize the films for that. But I do not think they represent China and the Chinese well, especially as it pertains to how China is getting rich.
2012 Update:
In fact the BBC did do a follow-up in 2012, and here is a link to my comments on that.
There are a total of 7 segments, and each feeds the next, so just start with #1 above.
A closer title might be BRITS SPEND A FORTUNE IN CHINA AND GET HOPES IN RETURN, since all three subjects spend massive amounts of money and show no return before the series end. All three are acclaimed successes in the series since they have huge orders.e.
Orders are not sales, sales is not revenue. I hope the producers do a follow up to see if any eventual revenue ultimately covers costs for these businesses.
The film follows three Englishmen in China, two who want the cheapest source for manufactures, one for pillows, one for kitchen and bath fixtures. The third has invented a power saving device, and anticipates US$500 million in sales his first year, each is pursuing “millions in China.”
The delightful part of the film is where we see the interactions and adventures of the Brits in China. It ll rings so true. The films are wonderfully edited and produced, not like some people we know who are putting up hand made films on on youtube.
There are some problems though.
The premise of the film is high risk/ high return... all or nothing. I saw at least three kiss-of-death elements common to all three stories...
a. huge ambitions for specific goals in a fast changing world
b. large sums up front
c. foreignors trying to manage the Chinese
These three elements are unnecessary and none of the players has sufficient resources to execute any of the three let alone all of the three..
The editors assert there are few winners in trade with China... obviously untrue. The vast majority are of those who trade with China are winners. I know thousands personally myself. Apparently there are winners all over the world at the small biz level. By far most of int’l trade is at the small biz level, and in that case it is all low risk, high return. Since these films are premised in “big money up front for bigger profits later” they have no benefit to the small biz international trade. In fact, I’d say they are misleading inasmuch as one may think this is the only way to do biz in China, and the only option is to compete on price. There may be few winners among those who go about it as featured in these films, in fact I would say there are no winners among these types.
Of course, there are others ways to thrive in business besides competing on price, as I outline in m book and classes.
the heroes in the story naturally take on Chinese partners, so to speak. It seems to me the Chinese counterparts in this series are stereotypical of Chinese, but not typical of Chinese. I recognize the kind of biz partner each has acquired, and they are the kind I would run from. But in any event, they are nothing like the vast majority of Chinese I have dealt with in the last 35 years. it is almost as though the producers winnowd through enough stories to get to the kind of Chinese partners prejudiced people might expect. If this series purports to represent typical Chinese at business, then it is a libel.
Of course you get what you deserve in a partner, and please do not view the Chinese in these films as typical. I am afraid that some people may be put off the idea of trading with China given what these films present. (In fact, even with my very limited understanding of chinese culture, I saw so many misunderstandings and missed signals I could write ten pages on those alone. I would l esteem a critique of the films from a Chinese national on this list for what they saw in the films.)
The film covers three biz people Tony, Vance and Peter. The narrator says “Tony Caldera’s business has been ruined by cheap Chinese imports.” This statement is of course nonsense, because Tony Calderas business has been ruined by Tony’s poor management. Countless people have faced cheap imports and thrived nonetheless.. Tony’s response is to move to China where it is harder than England in hopes of doing better. I see problems ahead. Vance expects to get rich knocking off high end fixtures and equipment in China, and get lowest price by opening his own factories. Cecil has an invention, and expect to make billions taking on a Chinese partner who will market his products all over China.
All three make the fundamental mistake of trying to control matters in china. they have neither the skill, nor is the direct intervention necessary to achieve the goals they seek.
All three have partners to who they entrust large amounts of money. The film makes clear in all instance these investors have overpaid for what they get. Not mentioned but inevitable is the question of how the money will be recouped.
(It won’t, these efforts will fail, none of these Brits have any rights in China, the building will go surplus and pass to the Chinese. Same story going on over the last 30 years... why people still fall for it, I don’t know.)
The funny thing is, if their plans have merit, it could all be accomplished without investing a dime in China. I personally know a pillow importer who is doing quite well in China, without having invested a dime. She has been doing that for the last 20 years selling in usa, and doing exceptionally well at the small biz level. She leaves china to the chinese, and there is more than enough to do dealing with usa markets for her to bother with managing the Chinese.
But fundamentally all the plans are flawed because although they all invest considerable mounts of money, none have the buying power and resources of the big biz who can and will undercut them toot sweet.
Another fundamental error is, upon discovering they have been ripped off, the Chinese persuade each investor their money is being put to good use for the greater good of the poor village, and each succumbs to this argument.
The villagers do not need a English investment in a bathtub factory, the Chinese villagers need freedom and the rule of law.
I watched these films as three lessons on how to do it wrong.
A final point, these are not examples of Brits doing biz in China, these are examples of Brits being filmed doing Biz in China. If the cameras were not rolling, the outcomes may have been very different. Even as it is, the outcome is “much money spent, much hope ahead.”
I would like to see a follow up on all three to see how they fare. The pillow fellow, if the order for 400,000 pillows at $3 million was valid (and not just a clown getting into a video) then $7.50 a pillow, even fob la, will not cover the rising costs that manifest after these films were made.
A better way for these people to trade with China is Vance keeps his money and goes upscale at the small biz level in UK and euro zone. Peter sells his invention in uk, and has the chinese manufacture and sell in china with royalty to Peter. Tony, keep his money and sell upscale pillows in uk, buying pillows from Chinese makers.
I think these films mischaracterize trade with China, and do not claim to explain small business, so I won’t criticize the films for that. But I do not think they represent China and the Chinese well, especially as it pertains to how China is getting rich.
2012 Update:
In fact the BBC did do a follow-up in 2012, and here is a link to my comments on that.
2 comments:
I really enjoyed this series. It was quite entertaining. Vance should run for President, er, PM, whatever. His openness was refreshing and his passion contagious. Loved the Olympic bus!
- Paul
Thanks for the link to the series. You could probably use this as a self-test for your students (i.e. "Find all the egregious errors and suggest a better way.")
I know that, for me, the video set off all sorts of red flags, giving me confidence that I understood and remembered the explanations and cautions you have in your book.
Post a Comment