Just a placeholder/note to myself to transcribe my notes/points from the panel discussion at “ChIndia Rising“, Cass Business School last month. I hope to get around to doing this in the next few days.
*** PANEL DETAILS ***
Will the Rising Tide Lift All Boats?
Here the panel will explore in an interactive Q&A session the challenge to the developed world, how to participate in Chindian Growth, the investment challenge, the legal challenge and how to create new opportunities
Panel to include:
Professor Jaideep Prabhu
Professor Bradley Barnes
Some excerpts from a great article comparing Indian and Chinese M&A, “Dancing “Dragon” and Running “Elephant” on the Stage of M&A by Mark He at Zero2IPO Research.
*** Excerpts Begin (emphasis mine) ***
An interview by Cherry Zheng from last September (with a nice photograph to boot!):
*** INTERVIEW BEGINS ***
European venture capital firms universally hold a prudent attitude towards the entry into Chinese market. As a result, only a few of them entered China. On the other hand, quite a large number of them, which include Amadeus Capital Partners Limited (“Amadeus”), are always observing the Chinese market actively and forming relationships with local VCs and major corporations
Amadeus invests venture capital in new technologies from offices in London and Cambridge, UK. Since its inception in 1997, Amadeus has backed more than 60 companies in the UK and continental Europe, covering computer hardware and software, mobile and fixed communications technologies and medical technologies. Amadeus manages a total of GBP288 million of assets, raised through five funds including two seed-stage funds.
In his role as Business Development Partner for Asia at Amadeus, Shantanu Bhagwat (“Shantanu”) has 18 years of broad international experience in the broad technology sector, in Europe as well as in Asia, where he once worked in Japan and India. Shantanu has already visited China several times and continues to find opportunities to get familiar with this country and understand the developments even better.
…here it is.
From “Who Captures Value in a Global Innovation System?” – The case of Apple’s iPod, this table that details “the geography of $190 of the captured value in a single $299 video iPod” (Thanks, Jason).
and from “Dreamliner 101: All About the Boeing 787“, this picture showing where the parts for 787 come from.
This is a long overdue post but the points made are, I think, still relevant.
Earlier this year, Richard Wallace, Mike Clendenin and Sufia Tippu writing in the EE Times about India’s potential to become a “silicon superpower” concluded that: “It’s a tall order. India has the brainpower to pull it off, but China won’t easily concede its lead.”
Some excerpts from the original article:
“…Can India, like China, become the next silicon success story? This seemingly simple question has given birth to a debate that’s roared across the global electronics industry since India unveiled broad new financial incentives designed to lure chip makers to the subcontinent last month.
Some call India “the last frontier for semiconductor manufacturing,” and believe it will it be a magnet for companies like TSMC, AMD and Intel, the U.S. semiconductor giant whose fab site decisions–like the recent one to manufacture in China–can turn the fate of an industry.
“No way,” insist other industry watchers, pointing to India’s infrastructure shortcomings and late start in the chip-manufacturing sweeps. As the title of a recent JP Morgan Report puts it, “India and semiconductors: It’s too late; just don’t bother.”
A few weeks back, I came across the second part of Eye on the Tigers series in which Tosh talks about the strikingly different approaches to development/globalization being followed by India and China and how awareness about these changes continues to be very low in Europe.
He starts his analysis by noting that in spite of Indian companies now controlling “three European
Icons” (Arcelor, REpower and Whyte & Mackay), “awareness about India among Europe’s policymakers is feeble”.
But the really interesting bit (IMHO), is the part where Tosh analyses the differences between the Chinese and the Indian approaches to development.
In his own words:
“As perplexing at the Brussels Asia-Europe conference was a pictorial tsunami of Chinese technology parks – sprouting by day, sometimes by night. There was no analysis, for instance, of why China chose an Indian majority partner for its first offshore IT park, or the absence of windows at Intel’s high-security Bangalore operation.
Missing too were numbers, such as the American stock-market capitalisation of the large Indian software firms, each of which outranks ‘giant’US rivals Accenture and EDS, and have revenues higher than China’s entire offshore IT industry.
Though globalisation is principally about India and China, blurring the differences is unwise.
China is driving up the value chain, very visibly, from low-cost, ultra large-scale foreign-invested manufacturing. Its technology parks may well be needed in the future; but they could also share the fate of Malaysia’s much-hyped ‘Multimedia Super Corridor’.
India is driving in the opposite direction – down the value chain from technology services. This ride is carefully calibrated to global market forces. In effect, India is harnessing its technology/management skills to add value to emerging frontiers in manufacturing –such as rapid prototyping and mass customisation.
On the flip side, unlike the US, Europe’s rich but fragmented patchwork of SMEs offers would-be buyers easy targets to ‘plug and play’ in tomorrow’s global supply chains.
… waiting in the wings are others like Tanti (Suzlon’s CEO). India’s bottom-heavy but world-class stock markets already boast 150 companies with over $1 billion valuations.
This is the global/European face of tomorrow’s India Inc., bankrolled byAmerican capital and soldiered by Indian-American managerial Merlins co-opted from McKinsey, Bain and the like.
Such wholly-new trends surely require some assessment….”
Sadly, “the state-of-play within the European Commission, its listening posts and sounding boards, is that of Rip Van Winkle waking up and seeing a new emperor’s new clothes.”
I am very interested in comments – particularly from those with insight into (or experience of) policy-making in Europe and UK.