Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
China Businesses Communications United States

China Telecom Mulls Entry Into US Telecoms Market 161

Posted by timothy
from the let-me-introduce-you-to-the-guys dept.
hackingbear excerpts from a story at Engadget: "Instead of resting on its laurels as China's third-largest wireless provider, China Telecom is now looking to branch out into relatively uncharted waters — namely, the U.S. consumer market. ... The proposed service would provide customers with handsets that could be used in both China and the U.S., theoretically appealing to Chinese-Americans, students or businessmen who travel frequently between the two countries ... and would even consider purchasing or constructing its own network in the States,' with the 'capacity to spend 'hundreds of millions or billions' on stateside acquisitions.' At its home turf, despite being a state-owned company, China Telecom, along with China Unicom, is being investigated over alleged monopolistic practices by the Chinese government. The two companies would face penalties of up to 10 percent of their annual business revenues if they were found guilty of monopolistic practices. This is the first such investigation into China's large enterprises since the Anti-Monopoly Law came into effect in 2008."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

China Telecom Mulls Entry Into US Telecoms Market

Comments Filter:
  • by MrEricSir (398214) on Thursday November 10, 2011 @03:07PM (#38015768) Homepage

    Certainly more competition is good, especially in the mobile phone market where there's barely any.

    But to trust a phone service from a country known for stifling free speech... I think you'd have to be a little crazy.

    • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 10, 2011 @03:09PM (#38015796)

      But to trust a phone service from a country known for stifling free speech... I think you'd have to be a little crazy.

      And to trust the setup and maintenance of a CALEA-compliant (i.e., completely backdoored and eavesdroppable) phone service to a country known for industrial espionage... I'd think we'd also have to be a little crazy.

      • by rickb928 (945187) on Thursday November 10, 2011 @03:41PM (#38016240) Homepage Journal

        So I should be concerned that China telecom might somehow be messin' with my service, but it's tolerable to KNOW that the NSA, CIA, FBI, and my local police can listen in without warrant or my knowledge?

        Frankly, China Telecom will fit right into the U.S. market. Let's see:

        - Accused of monopolistic practices: check!

        - Suspected of or confirmed to be cooperating with government in suppressing free speech, eavesdropping, etc: check!

        - Operates GSM network: check!

        Well, looks like AT&T might find a buyer for the TMO assets they don't need.

        I think CT nails it. GAME OVER!

        • It's not tolerable to KNOW that the NSA, CIA, FBI, and our local police can listen in without warrant or our knowledge.
          It's idiotic to add Chinese espionage to the mix.

        • by Chas (5144)

          Yeah but the NSA, CIA and FBI aren't selling your secrets to your competitors. Or worse, setting a wholly-owned subsidiary up as a knockoff/competitor.

          • by rickb928 (945187)

            So far as you know.

            Wait. You don't know that at all.

          • Yeah but the NSA, CIA and FBI aren't selling your secrets to your competitors. Or worse, setting a wholly-owned subsidiary up as a knockoff/competitor.

            So you're not competing with Halliburton then?

            • by Chas (5144)

              How do you know I don't work for Halliburton?

              No way some code-loving low-number on /, could be a government "shill"?

        • by LordLimecat (1103839) on Thursday November 10, 2011 @05:34PM (#38017272)

          China is a whole different ballgame, and youre naieve if you think otherwise. Try this test-- you and a buddy each get a cellphone, you in the US, him in China. You place a call to him, and start discussing the need for revolution in each country to fix its evils.

          Then see who gets picked up and sent to a labor camp first. Bonus points if your friend is a chinese citizen.

          I get that the US has problems, and (though Im still skeptical and wary of all the wild claims made about the state of interception here) I dont doubt that the FBI and NSA have some rather scary capabilities. But in the US they STILL have about a zillion hoops to jump through to monitor someone, theyre STILL subject to some degree of oversight, and they STILL respect the ability of a citizen to decry their own government (I dare you to find a citizen who was honest-to-goodness incarcerated for protesting the government here).

          None of that applies in China, they can pick you up for no reason and put you in a labor camp for two years (minus a day) with no trial and no judicial oversight, release you for a day, and then pick you up again. They can, have, and do incarcerate people for simply demanding change. If an Occupy Shanghai movement started up, it would be about 5 hours before there was military rounding all the folks up and shipping them to Inner Mongolia for some ReEducation by Labor.

          So sure, complain about the faults in our system, its what makes us stronger. But comparing us to China? "Youre out of your element, Donny".

          • by victorhooi (830021) on Thursday November 10, 2011 @06:00PM (#38017468)

            heya,

            Yup, I'll have to agree 100% with the parent.

            What really irks me is stupid, affluent, middle-class suburbanites, sitting around sipping their latte decafs, bemoaning the awful, awful state of affairs and how they're "oppressed", and the "Man has them down"...*sigh*.

            Really? Why don't you get off your a*ses and maybe do some travelling and see what the world is really like. In places like China, the CCP can have it's local thugs come and beat you up if you try and stand for election:

            http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2097372,00.html [time.com]

            Heck, in Singapore, supposedly a bastion of "democracy" in Asia - you get hauled in front of a court on trumped up "anti-sedition" laws if you try and start a protest march without a "license".

            I don't know if it's something to do with our Chinese culture or whatever, but it seems we're just not very compatible with democracy. Or if we do, we try to implement it with a "Chinese twist" *rolls eyes*, which basically means that whichever incumbent party is in power wields a iron fist of power and quashes opposition, all in the name of "promoting harmony and social well-being". What a farce.

            And I'm sure many countries in Africa, the Middle-East, you name it, are the same.

            I live in Australia, and I count myself very lucky and very fortunate that our society is open, and respects the rule of law. Sure, I don't agree with everything my government does - and I can vote, protest and file petitions accordingly (or just call our PM a tosser in public), but I never try to erect some ridiculous straw-man argument or spout hyperbole about how my government is "oppressive and tyrannical" and "destroying democracy".

            To generalise, you silly Americans don't actually know how good you have it *sigh*. I'm not saying that you shouldn't protest or challenge your government (in fact, that's my whole point), but you seriously need to get some perspective and open up your eyes to the real world, and countries outside yourselves.

            Cheers,
            Victor

            • by Bucky24 (1943328)

              Heck, in Singapore, supposedly a bastion of "democracy" in Asia - you get hauled in front of a court on trumped up "anti-sedition" laws if you try and start a protest march without a "license".

              It's that way in the US too.... Generally you are supposed to get a license before protesting.

              http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protest_permit [wikipedia.org]

          • (... for protesting, it's a lack of characters folks)

            Though really you're on my list of guys to send a postcard to from State sayin' "Glad you're not here". The US pretends to tolerate a wee bit of grumbling, it's our national circus, but if someone really get rolling, they either need to make a couple friends in high places or a couple dollars in high places to avoid "4th hand retribution".

            • Yes, look at all those Occupy folks we're carting off to internment camps.

              I suppose if you wanted to be really ridiculous you could show me a handful who got arrested for actually breaking the law, and call that free speech supression....

              • Hiya Sir Limecat!

                I mean me as in the "universal me", the non-visible protester. I've done a modest pro-rights campaign here for years now, but I almost always keep the tone down. But medium-soon I'll step on the wrong toe and that's it. That's the threat. It take a Canary Server to help mitigate that.

                "Today I was not carted off to a Gulag by the Government. Today I was not carted off to a Gulag by the Government. Today I was not carted off to a Gulag by the Government. ... " ((Crickets))

                • Except complaining about getting carted off to the Gulag in the US doesnt raise awareness, it just makes everyone think youre a nutcase who lacks perspective.

                  If you want to raise awareness about the worst parts of government try, I dont know, complaining about actual, real problems.

          • by fostware (551290)

            ... not yet

      • Why is this so bad? It doesn't really matter for the little guy, and in fact could really help. For one it's the next logical step in selling out all of North America's industries to China, for a second they won't be eavesdropping any more than the U.S. government already does. One government's secret police over another, what does it matter if you are just a peon in their eyes? And finally, if you can't do anything about how the secret police go about warrantless invasions of privacy and warrantless arres
    • by Compaqt (1758360)

      While at some point that might have been a tenable position, it seems more and more untenable these days with the direction the US is unfortunately going.

      The mess over WikiLeaks.
      Protect-IP DNS blocks
      US DOJ seizures of websites
      Free speech zones

    • by Oswald McWeany (2428506) on Thursday November 10, 2011 @03:16PM (#38015898)

      I don't trust any telecomminucations company to be honest- but I see no reason why to distrust China Telecom more.

      They'd have to be crazy to try to censor Americans in America on American [Chinese made] phones. They would lose customers pretty quick.

      When In Rome...

      I wouldn't be the first to switch- I'd have to see their costs and quality first. There again, I'm not an early-adopter of anything.

      • The worry is that they'd tap your calls and send everything back to China.

        Yep, I know, the USofA may already be tapping your calls.

        • by IronOxen (2502562)
          All calls will be routed thru the Great Firewall Of China for inspection but bypass our own unamed version that the NSA uses to listen for "terrorist" activity
        • by Grishnakh (216268)

          Who cares if they do? What are they going to do with the information? Blackmail you with it when they find out you're having an affair? Please.

          They're a much smaller threat than the US government, which already has the legal ability to eavesdrop on your conversations without any kind of warrant, and uses this ability all the time. If you do something the USG doesn't like, they can actually arrest you and throw you in jail on trumped-up charges. The Chinese government can't do that (unless you travel th

          • Who cares?

            -People, namely engineers, scientists, and businessmen, discussing any form of their work/research/business might care.
            -People that more vocally discuss negative aspects of the Chinese government.
            -Government employees talking about anything related to work (unclassified).
            -Meta-communication trends among US citizens that might not be as accessible.
            -People involved in forms of security.
            -Military members.

            With quick brainstorm, you might have avoided being naive.

            • by Grishnakh (216268)

              If the US military relied on a Chinese telecom vendor for its communications, that'd be rather dumb.

              Anyone who vocally criticizes the Chinese government doesn't have much to worry about, unless they travel to China. If you do vocally criticize China, using one of these phones, and then travel to China, that'd be rather dumb.

              Any high-level businessmen who discuss their research on these phones wouldn't be too bright either. But as an engineer, I can say that I almost never discuss work stuff on my personal

              • I didn't say that. I said Military members. Servicemen are free to get cellphones and use them in day to day life and in garrison.

                You're so naive its hard to read. You clearly have no idea how small bits of information can amount to a massive intelligence advantage. A quick dig through your garbage can and I can find out deep personal things about you, not only the information available on paper like adresses, accounts, amounts, calculations, etc, but also trends like your interest in non-conflict-zone

            • by Bucky24 (1943328)
              If a government employee is talking about something unclassified then it's already something China can probably get its hands on without too much difficulty. And people discussing research and work already have that problem-cell phone calls can be snooped without too much difficulty.

              http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/07/intercepting-cell-phone-calls/ [wired.com]
              • There is a big difference between the barriers to collection with or without direct access. Dismissing my point for your reason is the same as missing the point altogether.

                There is nothing good to come of letting the current most proliferate information collecting body (by far) emplace major telecommunications infrastructure directly where the majority of their collection efforts are focused.

            • by SeaFox (739806)

              Who cares?

              -People that more vocally discuss negative aspects of the Chinese government.
              -Government employees talking about anything related to work (unclassified).
              -Military members.

              Why would these people care?

              -If I'm not in China, why would I care if the Chinese government hears me disparage them? Or are we now supposed to live our lives according to another country's censorship standards?
              -If it's a risk to have the Chinese listening to Government employees discuss unclassified work, that work should be classified.
              -Military members shouldn't be discussing information that might be sensitive on unsecured public communications networks. And since we're not at war with China, I'm curious

        • Everyone Taps (Score:4, Informative)

          by SuperKendall (25149) on Thursday November 10, 2011 @03:41PM (#38016238)

          The worry is that they'd tap your calls and send everything back to China.

          Who cares? Even if the government is not tapping calls already, some network engineer could be listening in for fun on any phone provider you are already using.

          Phone conversations are about the least secure form of communication these days; treat it as such.

        • I feel sorry for the Chinese if they have nothing better to do than listen in on my wife telling me what the kids are up to.

          I can see not giving the police or military Chinese phones- but hearing about my kids is not going to benefit China any.

          The current US telecoms ALREADY track all your calls who- when- and where. I can't see how the Chinese tracking me would be any different.

          • by Grishnakh (216268)

            Exactly right. Heck, even if you're discussing illegal activities, what's going to happen? Why would the Chinese government care if you're going to your dealer's house to pick up a bag of pot? They won't. However, the US government would love to know about that so they can bust the guy, steal^Hconfiscate all his assets, and make the news headlines, and throw both you and the dealer in prison so that Wackenhut Corp. can make tons of money and give some to some friendly politicians.

            • by tsotha (720379)

              Exactly right. Heck, even if you're discussing illegal activities, what's going to happen? Why would the Chinese government care if you're going to your dealer's house to pick up a bag of pot?

              You're assuming you don't know anything they want to know. Well, maybe you don't. But there are a lot of people with access to sensitive information who also have secrets that could be used to blackmail them.

          • Just because your life is not interesting from an espionage point of view does not mean everyone elses' is as well. It just means that you've got nothing people want to know.

      • Most acts of corporate, scientific, and national intelligence espionage against US entities has been associated with China.

    • by Piata (927858)
      You trust US run telecoms and they will just as readily hand over your call and internet history to the US government under the guise of "national security".
      • by jpapon (1877296)
        The difference being that what constitutes a crime in China vs the USA is still very different. You can claim the government shouldn't be able to monitor your communications, but no matter how much you don't like it, they will always have some form of access to communications. They need to prevent crime, that's their job. The difference is that in the US they won't throw you in jail for criticizing the government (yet).
        • by Grishnakh (216268)

          Neither will the Chinese government. In fact, they'd probably be happy to hear you criticizing the US government on their phones. They won't care much about you criticizing their government either, as long as you don't travel to China and do it.

          • by hedwards (940851)

            Of course they care about people outside their country criticizing their nation, that would be a ridiculously huge loophole if they didn't care about it when you left their soil. The difference is that they have limited capacity to end it when it's not in their country.

            Also, the summary suggests that the phones are being targeted at their citizens that go abroad, so there could very well be consequences for offenses that violate Chinese law while abroad.

    • by Zontar_Thing_From_Ve (949321) on Thursday November 10, 2011 @03:22PM (#38015982)
      Americans have consistently demonstrated that EVERYTHING is negotiable if the price is low enough. Certainly some people would have problems with doing business with China Telecom, but if the cost was low enough and the service was good they'd do OK in this market.
      • by Grishnakh (216268)

        If the service was good, they'd be a real stand-out in this market, because all the other ones have shit service.

    • The corporation is not the same as the country it is from. Of course the CCP may be in control of the company. But they would have to obey U.S. laws if they were to operate on U.S. soil. WIth that said, I'll give them a try if they offer $5 unlimited voice and data plans ;-) At lease until other carriers lower their prices. Competition is a good thing.

      • by jpapon (1877296)
        Thing is, the "cheap" model works when you keep your labor in China. Once Chinese companies start having to hire workers and build infrastructure in the US their costs will quickly rise to the level of US providers.
        • by grcumb (781340)

          Thing is, the "cheap" model works when you keep your labor in China. Once Chinese companies start having to hire workers and build infrastructure in the US their costs will quickly rise to the level of US providers.

          Not necessarily:

          1. Because they're not publicly traded, they can strategise and execute their business plan based on much longer time periods;
          2. They are almost certainly willing to accept lower profit margins than US telcos;
          3. When building out their infrastructure, they can quite likely benefit from sweetheart deals with 'cousin' companies like Hua Wei;
          4. They can outsource a very large portion of their operation back home to China;
          5. They don't have a thick layer of vastly over-compensated managers draining the coffer
          • by jpapon (1877296)

            The Chinese may not offer the best quality in the world when it comes to goods and services, but they compete ferociously and, in my experience, fairly[*]. They simply cut your throat on price and wait for you to bleed to death. American consumers shouldn't assume this is entirely a bad thing.

            Of course this is a very bad thing... what happens when all the American companies have gone under and the Chinese start to raise prices because they no longer have any competitors? In an ideal world, the American companies would start back up... but I'm not sure that's really plausible.

    • by MrMista_B (891430)

      From a country known for stifling free speech, huh?

      You mean like America?

    • T-Com is German. How can you trust Germans, who have been on the other side of 2 world wars in the past century? China Telecom has no incentive to stifle free speech of Americans. Why would they? For shits and giggles? They just want to make money, like every other company, and since America's market is nearly monopolized, there's a good opportunity.
    • by EdIII (1114411)

      OMG.

      I have tears running down my face man. +5 Funny. To say we could trust US telecoms to protect our privacy more than a foreign company is some rich sarcasm.

    • by Jawnn (445279)

      Certainly more competition is good, especially in the mobile phone market where there's barely any.

      But to trust a phone service from a country known for stifling free speech... I think you'd have to be a little crazy.

      Think again. A Chinese telecom is well aware of their role in "playing ball" with government authorities. Not that the domestic crowd have much to brag about ( the late QWest being the exception) when it comes to protecting the privacy of their customers. In other words, they'll fit right in.

    • by jbolden (176878)

      They are known for oppressing their own citizens. I can't think of any incidents of China engaging in activities against foreign newspapers, television stations, writers.... Conversely the US does foreign operations but domestically is extremely free.

    • by Z00L00K (682162)

      If they offer an alternative that doesn't screw over it's customers with braindead phones and stupid agreements then they will draw customers.

      The US telecom market lacks real competition and is instead bound on trying to lock in customers to their services.

    • by evilviper (135110)

      Certainly more competition is good, especially in the mobile phone market where there's barely any.

      There's actually quite a bit of competition, but I can't figure out why so few people make use of it. We have 4 major cell service providers... Verizon, AT&T, T-Mobile, and Sprint/Nextel. Those are listed in order of market share AND service price... Why is that? In addition, those 4 are just the contract providers. They are further broken down into multiple pre-paid service providers.

      On that note,

  • by Anonymous Coward

    Well if you can't conquer them, buy them out. It always works.
    Go China, maybe US customers will have a hint of good competition in the market place for once.

  • T-mobile (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Usefull Idiot (202445) on Thursday November 10, 2011 @03:20PM (#38015950)

    Am I the only one that T-mobile came to mind? I mean if AT&T can't make a deal with them, I'm sure China Telecom would have the $.

    • by rabtech (223758)

      Well T-mobile would be more expensive; they don't have enough spectrum and Deutsche Telekom has left them starved for capital funding for a while so the network isn't in great shape either.

      Sprint might be a better fit either as an investment (since Sprint needs the cash for Network Vision) or as a wholesale customer (since Sprint is already doing that). As a wholesale customer they don't have to worry about any legal questions or other complaints and Sprint could get a nice up-front cash payment that would

  • by jpapon (1877296) on Thursday November 10, 2011 @03:21PM (#38015966) Journal
    So an Authoritarian government is "investigating" a state-owned company for monopolistic practices? Who's doing the "investigation", the son of the company director?

    I'm glad China is trying to clean up the corruption in their system, but there's little point if they don't allow competing political parties. An investigation of a state owned company by the state is somewhat suspicious in a democratic system, but when there's only one party, it's goddamn pointless.

    • by Grishnakh (216268)

      How's this much different from the USA, where there's only one party, but with two faces?

  • well... (Score:2, Funny)

    by demonbug (309515)

    At its home turf, despite being a state-owned company, China Telecom, along with China Unicom, is being investigated over alleged monopolistic practices by the Chinese government.

    Sounds like it would fit right in here.

    The two companies would face penalties of up to 10 percent of their annual business revenues if they were found guilty of monopolistic practices.

    Wait, they might actually get punished? Never mind then, won't fit into the U.S. market.

    I was going to say something about not trusting a Chinese-government-owned telecoms company, but then I realized who their competition is.

  • by GameboyRMH (1153867) <gameboyrmh AT gmail DOT com> on Thursday November 10, 2011 @03:23PM (#38016008) Journal

    They'll need to be seriously cheap to overcome the power of Yellow Peril 2.0. Or name themselves Freedom Eagle Bacon Gun-tel.

    • by stms (1132653)

      If a telecom this telecom company is indeed willing to invest billions of dollars into infrastructure in the U.S. it might actually fix our currently broken telecommunications system by creating competition. I'd be willing to buy my phone/internet/whatever service from them just for that reason. At least until AT&T buys them out.

      • The way I see it, a government's going to be spying on your connection either way, and if anything a government with a language barrier that doesn't care about IP issues seems like a better option :-P

    • I notice that you have the same sig as SharkLaser (2495316) and a curiously similar sentence structure pattern.

  • Mitt, is this a war declaration?! Huntsman, no it's business as usual. Cain? 9-9-9! Perry lets combat those Koreans, Vietnamese, and that, err... Palin, Russia! No, that, err, third country.

  • China Telecom, along with China Unicom, is being investigated over alleged monopolistic practices.

    This shows that they are well prepared to be a telecom company in the US.

  • by WindBourne (631190) on Thursday November 10, 2011 @03:36PM (#38016174) Journal
    The idea that China cheats at business and now, they want to use monopoly status in China to come over to the west. This is SUCH a good idea.
  • by Okian Warrior (537106) on Thursday November 10, 2011 @03:39PM (#38016210) Homepage Journal

    When this happens, I'm there. I'll be their first customer.

    This looks to the future where China manages all US infrastructure. Where will it end? One can only imagine.

    Chinese management and control of the power grid? Water/sewer? National highway repair? Health care?

    For all the bad things people will point out, the sum total is that people will get much better services for the money. The Chinese motivation for doing things in an expert, professional manner will more than compensate for the loss of government control.

    Your trade is for a government which grants a lot of freedoms, and a government which curtails some of your freedoms (but generally leaving you alone) in a world where all the services run perfectly. And the freedoms granted in the first case seem to be evaporating in any event.

    The Chinese couldn't be *that* much worse than the US, and for good infrastructure I'm willing to take the chance.

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by fsckmnky (2505008)
      Move to China ... wish granted.
    • The people have the freedom, and grant the government specific powers.

      At least how the system was set up to be. YMMV

    • Your trade is for a government which grants a lot of freedoms, and a government which curtails some of your freedoms (but generally leaving you alone) in a world where all the services run perfectly.

      Okay. I must take issue with "generally leaving you alone." This is utter and complete bullshit. When the recent news is that 39 of the largest companies in China are agreeing to begin their own censorship initiatives under guidance of the Chinese government [bbc.co.uk] I have to ask you one question: If you were to give any political party in America complete control of what comes in and out of our TVs, Radios, Computers, Cellphones, etc how many Americans do you think it is going to affect?

      Let's say you got

      • Okay, you value freedom of speech very highly. It's a fair point.

        Now let's see if your valuation of that right should be applied to everyone.

        1) Would you sign an NDA preventing you from badmouthing a company, in return for universal health care from that company?

        2) Would you sign that NDA if a parent were diagnosed with cancer?

        3) Would you sign that NDA if *you* were diagnosed with cancer?

        4) Would you prevent all others from signing that NDA, in those circumstances?

        It's not quite as cut-and-dried as you mak

        • Hey hey now... Most people that criticize Fox News aren't saying they shouldn't be allowed to lie all day. I think most people, knowing that most Fox viewers think it is real and thus respond in ways that have serious implications, would like Fox to be responsible for making it absolutely clear when they are not presenting hard facts. Akin to yelling 'fire' in a theater --- you can yell fire when there is a fire, and get the social implication response that comes --- but yelling 'fire' in a theater when t

        • by Chris Burke (6130)

          1) Would you sign an NDA preventing you from badmouthing a company, in return for universal health care from that company?

          Um what does "universal health care" mean in the context of an individual signing an NDA? Either universal healthcare is provided or it isn't.... Are you saying the law the government passed to create universal healthcare also prohibits badmouthing the healthcare provider? That law would certainly be unconstitutional. But let's put that aside.

          No, I wouldn't sign and nobody else should either, because just like a software company whose EULA says you can't benchmark their product, or review screenings of a

    • For all the bad things people will point out, the sum total is that people will get much better services for the money. The Chinese motivation for doing things in an expert, professional manner will more than compensate for the loss of government control.

      You're joking, right? You seem to labor under the mistaken impression that the Chinese have replicated and scaled up the Japanese example of the '70's - '90's that you've likely familiar with. In reality, they're emulating the Japanese example of the '00's

    • Please move to China. 10% of Chinese farmland is contaminated with heavy metals.

      Saving money costs you somewhere else. The disgusting thing is that the ridiculously relaxed environmental restrictions in China directly affect everyone else. Not that Joebob McCrandall paying $3 for 10 sets of underwear is even cognate enough to realize anything important like this.

      I'd like to thank Walmart for my talking point.

      I can't wait to hear bought conservatives back this telecom idea and say it will create US jobs a

    • by Clsid (564627)

      Here in Venezuela the Chinese are building apartment blocks that used to be constructed by Venezuelan construction companies, with foreign slave labor and all. It's cheap for the government, gives them results and they don't have to deal with Venezuelan labor laws, Engineering associations and such.

      Some other companies, including the one I sub-contract to, have a better approach. They get the contracts that are paid in US dollars, then hire local Venezuelan companies to do the job. Add to the mix that some

  • by drnb (2434720) on Thursday November 10, 2011 @04:01PM (#38016464)

    China Telecom Mulls Entry Into US Telecoms Market

    No problem. But China Telecom must do so through a joint venture where they only get 49% ownership and their partners with 51% must be domestic US companies. I'm sure China Telecom will understand how this is the manner in which to invest in a foreign country while tailoring operations to the foreign culture and history and thereby maximizing success. A win-win for everyone right?

    • China Telecom Mulls Entry Into US Telecoms Market

      No problem. But China Telecom must do so through a joint venture where they only get 49% ownership and their partners with 51% must be domestic US companies. I'm sure China Telecom will understand how this is the manner in which to invest in a foreign country while tailoring operations to the foreign culture and history and thereby maximizing success. A win-win for everyone right?

      Oops. I forgot. China Telecom must also turn over the designs of their products to their US partners. This will allow for better adaptation and localization to the US market. Another win-win for everyone right?

    • Then they can just control the joint venture through complex license agreements, just like how McDonald's, KFC, baidu.com, and sina.com do in China. We certainly have plenty of lawyers to create the arrangement. Lawyers roam everywhere on earth. Rules, Chinese or American, are only for those who can't afford one.

    • China Telecom Mulls Entry Into US Telecoms Market

      No problem. But China Telecom must do so through a joint venture where they only get 49% ownership and their partners with 51% must be domestic US companies. I'm sure China Telecom will understand how this is the manner in which to invest in a foreign country while tailoring operations to the foreign culture and history and thereby maximizing success. A win-win for everyone right?

      Muahahaha. What's good for the goose. Though I suspect your sarcasm is lost on the wu mao dang who will inevitably post snide replies to this.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/50_Cent_Party [wikipedia.org]

  • Finally a telecom company that has lots of experience working with the government.
  • When I was visiting my brothers in Georgia, we heard a news report that Ashville, NC had been labelled a "Cesspool of Sin" by one of the local legislators due to the large number of "hippies, liberals and textile artists". I can understand a cesspool of sin. I can't understand why a Chinese telecom company operating in the US is a good idea. What could possibly go wrong with tons of Chinese-owned communications equipment scattered around the country?

To avoid criticism, do nothing, say nothing, be nothing. -- Elbert Hubbard

Working...