RA-麦肯锡报告- Winners and losers in China’s next decade [推广有奖]

21楼

hanxianfeng 发表于 2013-12-29 11:33:11

看看

22楼

karleenchan 发表于 2013-12-29 12:17:25

whwhwh888 发表于 2013-12-28 22:29
thanks for your comment

why did you doubt these two points?

Well, it will take me hours to ans this question, so just brief shortly and list some key points of my views.

1) Prof Michael Pettis's 2nd Predication--Industries that profit from building infrastructure or manufacturing capacity will suffer.
My view:
a) The momentum from China's urbanizaion imperative still supports the growth of China infrastructure even though the rate maybe lower and the targets are more specific than before. Moreover, in the context of transport efficiency, according Mckinsey's research, China is still 50% lower than US, and this significant difference determines of China's investment toward transportation without hesitation--at least in the coming 5 years plan (but with control effort of course--refer to the recent action on anti-corruption). On the other hand, to avoid the clash of China economy, I think it is still too risky to slow down the engines of infrastructure development. Unlike what happened to Japan, the market size and of China and opportunities of market development (i.e. railway in Thailand) can allow infrastructure industries have good years and would not suffer as much as Prof Pettis's prediction. Since the article does not talk too much about manufacturing in this context, I have no comment on it.

2) Prof Michael Pettis's 3rd Predication--Companies that produce consumer goods will be marginally affected overall, while specific sectors will do much better or worse.
My view:
In long run, no one will argue that "specific sectors will do much better or worse". I cannot see any implication for this part, frankly speaking. However, I have different views on the first part of his 3rd prediction he used--"Companies that produce consumer goods will be marginally affected overall". Since it is not a secret that the China government aims to raise household incomes, and the size of China's domestic market size (which is the No.2) cannot allow companies that produce consumer goods be only "marginally affected" as long as the companies are on the right track to do business. Look at the mobile smartphone market in China and how it enables smartphone companies top in the ranking (2013). We can easily understand the power of China's domestic markets. On the other other, China's overreliance on export markets has aggravated its macro-challenges, and therefore, China has no choice but have to get serious in boosting its domestic markets and sales, esp. for consumer goods (note: which is underpinned by the policy of China unrbanization). And it will end up with changing the landscape of consumer markets in China, and companies that producing consumer goods as well. Difficulties not Impossible, I am still optimistic about the changes and believe they will not be affected "marginally overall".