As we’ve been saying on this Podcast for a month or so now, China had a really good 2009.  While most of the world is thrilled to send 2009 off to the Group Home for Annoying Old Years and welcome 2010 in diapers, China is still doing victory laps for their 2009 performance, even though it was down severely from previous years.  There is a lesson to be learned here … in a room of ugly people, the average schmuck is a supermodel.  And trust me … I know how to do schmuck.

But as we all know, there is the story of what is happening in China, and then there is the truth.  Not to go all post-modern on everyone here, but the truth – if there is one Truth with a capital T – is probably somewhere in between and pundits aplenty are rushing to fill the blogosphere with their version.   For some reason, every time a talking head heaves an opinion on China into the public sphere, I have this overwhelming need to comment on it, to give the general public the beneficent view of my own brilliance and expert insight.  I know, you don’t have to tell me, I need professional help, I am fully aware of that.  I’ve tried therapy, several mood-altering substances and, as a last gasp effort, producing this Podcast, but I it hasn’t helped much.  The end-of-the-decade articles on China were killers … everywhere I looked there seemed to be an opinion popping up that absolutely REQIRED my commentary!  I consider it a mark of my immense self control and budding maturity that I was actually able to lead a somewhat normal life in the midst of all of that and did not spend all my time blogging back.  Thank you in advance for your kind words of congratulations.  I just live one day at a time.

But there is one article published way last October that I keep coming back to and, finally, cannot help but comment on.  It is by Rana Foroohar in Newsweek International is tantalizingly titled, “Everything You Know About China Is Wrong”.  The title alone compelled me to read and comment on it since, as China market strategy consultants, we go to market with what we call a “correct” view of China based on 25 years of experience so I was anxious to read it.

Ms. Foroohar elucidates several reasons why China is not the economic miracle that everyone seems to think it is.  Her opinions are not rocket science nor are they all that original … over the years there have been China-doubters aplenty who look askance at the phenomenal growth in China and wondered two things: a) is it really possible; and b) is it really sustainable??  But just because something is not original does not mean that it is not worth listening to (I give you anything recently recorded by Lady Gaga and the Jonas Brothers as proof positive of this) and I would encourage you to read her article (those of you listening to this Podcast can go to our blog for the link).  Overall, I agree with most of the statements that Ms. Foroohar makes and, in fact, I think she makes them very well; however, I would like add a couple of perspectives from the cheap-seats…

One of the myths that Ms. Foroohar attempts to deflate is “The Communists are brilliant economic managers”.  The evidence in favor of this belief is that, in 2009, China was able to maintain an 8% growth in the face of what is arguably the world’s worst economic meltdown ever.  The criticism is that this growth is driven by government investment in infrastructure and that, some day, China will have all the roads, bridges, tunnels, telecommunications networks and subways that it needs and won’t be able to make the transition to a privately-driven economy.  And it is argued that this last round of economic stimulus spending in 2009 just further deepened this problem.

This is not a new criticism and, in fact, economists, China watchers and the rabble of doomsday pundits have been making this statement since China first started their massive investment campaign in the early 90s.  For the most part, I would agree … focused investment on infrastructure is, by definition, not sustainable and, someday, China is going to have to broaden their economy to bring in other, more sustainable engines of growth.  However, I would add two caveats that would argue against being too concerned about this right now.

First of all, despite nearly 20 years of infrastructure investment, China has just scratched the surface of their total need.  China is a MASSIVE place and, while the infrastructure in the big cities of Shanghai, Beijing and Guangzhou is quite good, there is SO much more to be done in China’s Tier 2, 3, 4 and smaller cities (remember that China has over 100 cities with over a million population plus a seemingly endless countryside).

What I am saying is that the need for this spending – and the associated support it gives to the broader economy in terms of employment and supply infrastructure – is not going to end any time soon.  In fact, its probably going to continue strong for the next 20 years or more.  Yes, there are many associated problems with such infrastructure investment – the housing and real estate bubble is probably the most concerning – and China is going to have its ups and downs.  But this is not a small country we are talking about where you work hard for 10 years and everything is built.

My friends and colleagues in India only WISH that their government would have a similar commitment and authority to build infrastructure in their country … if they could, then I think India’s growth would quickly catch up to China’s.  But as it stands, there are so many internal politics in India that infrastructure projects often get stalled and never completed (there is a highway construction project in Chennai that I see when visiting clients there … and for over 5 years it has remained in the same state of incompletion.  There are people at the site and they look like they are doing something … but nothing seems to get done!).

Spending on infrastructure is not going to end any time soon … but the government can do something about the types of infrastructure they invest in.  The 2009 economic stimulus package of over $600 billion from the China government earmarked over $100 billion for what is called “social infrastructure” … hospitals, schools, etc. In the long run, the return on this type of infrastructural investment can be huge … and as I’ve addressed many times before in these Podcasts, China healthcare is in desperate need of life support itself and sustained investment here will do wonders.

Secondly, we need to understand – and even appreciate – the investment perspective that the China government takes in these projects.  Ms. Foroohar quotes a business professor who observed that, although there was a nice new highway built between two rural areas in China, there was no traffic on the road.

[let me just stop for a moment and ponder what it would be like to have a road somewhere in China without an immense amount of traffic on it … living in Shanghai where traffic is so bad we actually USE our fenders, that is a nice thought . OK … I am better now.  Thank you].

A couple of quick responses to this: is there infrastructure in China that is built without any thought to its eventual use – what in the U.S. has been called the “bridge to nowhere”?  Yes, definitely.  The number of pork-barrel projects here are directly proportional to the number of people schlepping the barrels … and we have nearly 5 times that number in China than they have in the U.S.  So yes, nosy business professors are going to be able to observe such examples of poor use of capital resources.

However, I think that the professor should relish in the fact that he can stand on that highway in complete safety.  Fast forward 10 years and I would venture to guess that this same professor would not be willing to stand in the middle of that road – there will be SO much traffic on it so as to turn him into a human speed bump.  In any environment, the population expands to fit the capacity provided and in China, this is doubly true.  Where I live in Shanghai, on the Pudong side, this was just rice fields a few years ago and now it is bucking to be a leading financial capital of the world.  There are putting up an 80-story building where just 20 years ago water buffalo grazed (giving a whole new meaning to the phrase “a bullish market”, I suppose).  The primary reason behind the real estate bubble here is that people are SO confident in their speculation that they are willing to bet large sums of money on property that will quote-unquote “some day” actually be worth more than the exorbitant price they just paid for it.  Oh, that and the fact that much of the real estate investment is being driven by people not using their own money but the government’s … but that is an issue for another Podcast.

So we should not be asking the question: “Is China’s spending on infrastructure sustainable in the long term” because it is, by definition, NOT sustainable.  Of course it isn’t.  We should, on the other hand, be asking the more difficult-to-answer question “what do you mean by ‘long term’”?  We are only 20 years into a modern business environment in China, and look how far we’ve come.  Of course, you don’t drive well by admiring the view in your rearview mirror (although that might explain some of the traffic problem here) so we need to look ahead.  My point is that, barring disasters of all types, China’s near to mid term looks pretty good and very sustainable.

Of course, there is a LOT that I do not understand about macro-economics and I am sure that I will get nasty letters from the Association of Super Smart Economists of just how wrong I am.  But to be honest, how accurate are those Super Smart Economists?  They are working off of models developed in other economies in other cultures at other times and have been woefully inaccurate in predicting even the things they supposedly understand well (ala the mortgage crisis).  The fact remains that we don’t have ANY case studies to guide us as to what might happen here in China … there has never been a country in history that is this large and has made this big of an investment in their infrastructure and government spending.  The U.S. and Japan are in the same direction, but they did theirs at very different times in history when the world was a VERY different place.  Yes, China will eventually have to pull out of this model … it cannot continue forever.  But we don’t have any good examples of a situation of this scale where this has happened.  As I have said before, in China, we are working without a script AND we are working without a net!

Twenty five years ago, when I first came to China, if someone were to show me a picture of what Shanghai would look like in 2010, I’d think they were smoking something.  NO ONE could have – or would have – predicted this.  Indeed, there were multiple doomsday preachers talking about the immanent collapse of “Red China” (I love that term, Red China … like it’s a theme color for the day!).  But here we are, still technically “Red” but, so far, no collapse.  Could it happen?  You bet.  But I assume that the only completely untrue statement is “I am 100% right” so it could also not happen.  And I am betting on the latter.

Thanks again for listening.  Remember our motto: “In China, everything is possible but nothing is easy.”  We’ll see you next time on the China Business Podcast

In our recent Podcast series, we have been talking with Bill Powell, senior writer for Time and Fortune magazines, based in Shanghai.  In the last Podcast, we got into, what I thought, was a VERY interesting discussion about the uniqueness of what is going on in China these days.  Literally, what we are seeing in China is unprecedented … never before has an economy (and a society) grown and changed so much in such a short period of time.  Understanding it, let alone predicting it, is very difficult and we are all, in a sense, working without a script.  We talked earlier about what the U.S. and other Western economies could learn from China … to wrap up our conversation, I started by asking Bill what he thought China could (and should) learn from the West …

We are in the middle of a discussion with Bill Powell, senior writer for Time and Fortune magazines.  In the first part, we talked about China and the rest of the world, how we try to make comparisons to what is happening in China with what we have seen in the past.  In this Podcast, I wanted to start off by getting Bill’s take on the challenges of covering China.  I prefaced my question by saying that, in our consulting practice at Technomic Asia, we are very careful not to talk about “THE” China market … there are, in fact, MANY China “markets” taking into account big cities, small cities, northern cultures, southern cultures, urban and rural, etc.  I asked him to talk about the practicalities over covering such a vast subject and the challenges he finds in trying to do so …

U.S. President Barack Obama is in Shanghai and will be coming to Beijing today. He spoke to a “town hall meeting” with young students in Shanghai and Obama took the high road on issues ranging from universal rights to trade to climate change. He also offered to open the U.S. educational system to 100,000 Chinese students, telling the students that “I see China’s future in you.” He pointed out that U.S.-China trade, which totaled just $5 billion in 1979, now exceeds $400 billion a year and constitutes a pillar of the global economy.

Obama’s first China trip is very much focused on “rebalancing the relationship in a thoughtful way” – just as the Obama administration vowed to “push the re-start button” on the relationship with Russia. The “rebalancing” will occur in three arenas of cooperation – climate change, economic recovery, and nuclear proliferation (read North Korea). There is a sense that the U.S.-China agenda is broadening out again from the myopic focus of the George W. Bush administration on terrorism, although terrorism and the Middle East (read Iran) remain very much on the agenda as areas of strategic dialog, but not necessarily consensus between the two countries.

US Commerce Secretary Gary Locke (left) and USTR Ron Kirk (right)

Obama’s economic surrogates are also very much in evidence. I today attended a luncheon of the American Chamber of Commerce in Beijing that featured comments and another highly scripted “town hall meeting” with Commerce Secretary Gary Locke and U.S. Trade Representative Ron Kirk. For me, the highlight of the meeting was Locke’s comment on what he called the “moral imperative for the U.S. and China to work closely together to address climate change.” Locke spoke with evident personal passion as he pointed out that 100 years from now, nobody will remember or care which country was developed and which country was developing, but everyone will care whether or not the problem of climate change was addressed by our generation of Chinese and Americans working together. This problem cannot be resolved without joint global leadership between China and the United States. Climate change is at the top of the agenda for the Obama visit, not a footnote.

Trade Rep Kirk injected a sense of humor into the proceedings by announcing that he was accompanying “President Clinton and Secretary of State… oh oh – that was my You-Tube moment…” But he and Locke worked together to dispel the notion that the U.S. was engaged in increased protectionism through the anti-dumping actions on tires and steel tubes. Locke pointed out that in 2009, anti-dumping cases by the U.S. against China involved just 3.6% of total Chinese exports to the U.S. and Chinese anti-dumping cases against the U.S. involved a matching 4% of U.S. exports to China. The implication – trade is 96% free and open between the two countries. So not to worry – that whiff of gunpowder ain’t a trade war, not just yet.

On another interesting point, Locke and Kirk revealed that in response to Chinese complaints that the U.S. has unnecessarily limited U.S. exports of high-technology products through the export control system, President Obama has ordered a comprehensive interagency review of U.S. export controls. Locke stated flatly that, “the current export control system is broken,” controlling technologies that are not critical to U.S. national security and that are readily available from Europe, Japan, and other global competitors. So perhaps we will see some rationalization and loosening of the U.S. export control regime in coming years.

Where do we come out on all of this? As Kirk pointed out, much too much global trade over the past couple of decades has been contributed by the propensity of the American consumer to over-indulge at the global trough. Oink! Oink! This has led to trade and financial imbalances that are not sustainable – formerly long term unsustainable, now short term unsustainable. “Chimerica” is the relationship that is at the heart of this problem. Time to “rebalance” the relationship in a “thoughtful way.” Well said. Now, as for well done – let’s wait and see.

Over the past 4 years of the China Business Podcast we’ve done many interviews with business people in China, typically leaders of companies or operations.  We’ve talked about the intricacies of doing business here, the opportunities and challenges, and specific strategies and tactics that have worked for them.

Well, I would like to take a chance to back up a bit and view the China environment from a different perspective through an interview with someone who has been reporting on the action, not only in China but around the world.  Bill Powell is the senior writer for Time and Fortune magazines and is based in Shanghai.  We’ve known each other for a couple of years and he calls every now and then to bounce around some ideas and perspectives.  I have always appreciated his perspective and I thought he would make a great interview … and I was right.

Here is part one of that interview …

But that was yesterday; this is today and all seems clear now.  President Obama will arrive in Shanghai on Monday.  Or maybe it is Sunday.  And he will have a town hall meeting here.  Or maybe he won’t.  He might also visit the new Disney site.  But maybe not.

I’m surprised that he could get a flight at this late date.  Usually I have to make a reservation a year in advance for my trips back to the U.S. to keep from getting stuck in the seat where the guy in front of you leans so far back you could do dental work on him.  But maybe the President has a better travel agent than I do.

Now that the trip is on, I want answers to the really important questions.  Ones like “Will Mr. Obama shoot some hoops while he is here?”  The Chinese LOVE basketball and not just because Yao Ming is their John Lennon minus the guitar and annoying wife.  His O-ness has got some game, or so they say.  Maybe he and President Hu can play a game of H-O-R-S-E to see who gets the comfy chair at the U.S. Security Council.  Or a gimmee on higher emission standards at the Copenhagen conference.  I’ve heard Mr. Hu has a mean skyhook so Mr. Obama should definitely take it downtown on a crucial point.  It looks like Hu has no vertical.

Another question: “Can the President use chopsticks?”  I am not trying to be smarmy here (its natural, I don’t have to try) but if he bellies up to the banquet table and is presented with a slimy plate of sea cucumber or duck tongue, he’s got to bring game there too.  And even more so … a sea cucumber splotch on a nice white shirt will be treated like a Rorshach test by the international media.  Glen Beck will see Elvis telling us to roll back health care reform.  Like The King could even benefit from it now (Elvis would have a hard time too).

But maybe the biggest question is: “What does President Obama’s China trip really mean?”  I’ve been polling my local staff and friends here in Shanghai and the general (yet non statistically-significant) opinion seems to be “so what?”  20 years ago, the President of a Super Power showing up in China gave Chinese leaders the vapors.  Heck, even Gorbachev stopped traffic back in the day, and not just because he was a natty dresser.  Now these trips are more like a weekend event between the Olympics and the Expo.  Most people here just complain that is going to further snarl traffic in a system that already looks like the Indy 500…if bicycles and pedestrians could cross the track at will.

When I ask locals how they think it will impact business, some have quoted the old Chinese saying, 天高皇帝远 (tian1 gao1 huang2 di4 yuan3), “Heaven is high and the Emperor is far away.”  Or “what happens at the seat of power has nothing to do with me down here.”  I would paraphrase (badly) Tip O’Neill, “All business is local” – if you are doing business here, you need to figure out how the game is played in your ‘hood, wherever that happens to be.  What happens in Beijing, stays in Beijing.

So while the China watchers will be analyzing to the nanosecond differences in handshake durations and depth of eye contact to interpret just what is “really going on”, I will continue to advocate that Western businesses spend their time finding out more about the activities of their competitors in China than their political leaders in same.  I am going to choose not read too much into this trip.  As Freud said, “sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.”  Now if Obama and Hu sit down over a Montecristo No. 4 and talk shop, we might have something to analyze!