• Ulrich
    link
    fedilink
    English
    204 months ago

    The financial fuckery is that they’re very heavily subsidized by the CCP. It’s not sustainable.

    • @einkorn@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      374 months ago

      I’d argue it is.

      Just look how Amazon got where it is now: Sell way under market price, till local competition closed shop, then squeeze.

      • Frezik
        link
        fedilink
        English
        114 months ago

        It’s unsustainable to keep prices lower than costs. The Amazon example didn’t have low prices forever.

        • @einkorn@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          114 months ago

          Yes, I know. That’s why BYD is going to then squeeze the customers once they are locked in.

            • @Taldan@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              4
              edit-2
              4 months ago

              It worked for Wal-Mart

              Which isn’t really a sustainable business model, but it’s quite successful

              • Ulrich
                link
                fedilink
                English
                14 months ago

                It didn’t work for Walmart the same way it didn’t work for Amazon

            • @Tiger666@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              34 months ago

              What is sustainable in today’s economy?

              Really, what Western corporation actually base their policies on sustainable growth?

              Take your time. I’ll wait.

              • Ulrich
                link
                fedilink
                English
                1
                edit-2
                4 months ago

                All of them that I know of. Which corporations do you see running unsustainable business models until they fold completely? Take your time, I’ll wait.

                The point is that they eventually change their tactics. In this case, they’ll have to eventually increase their prices.

                • @msage@programming.dev
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  24 months ago

                  Even big companies ran gigantic losses for years, just to undercut the competition and emerge as the only winner.

                  Some do it because they have other cash cows Epic store milking Fortnite), others have VC funding, like Uber.

                  • Ulrich
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    14 months ago

                    Yes but after they win they have to raise prices…

      • @CameronDev@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        3
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        I think your muddying sustainable and successful. It definitely can be successful, but its not sustainable.

        Its also high risk, especially if you can’t crank up the prices enough later

          • @CameronDev@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            44 months ago

            Sustainable implies that they can keep doing it forever without changing. Switching later means what they are doing is not sustainable. It might be successful, but its not sustainable.

            • Optional
              link
              fedilink
              English
              54 months ago

              There’s sustainable practices and sustainable businesses. The latter is what others are arguing. Undercutting competition to take over a market is a sustainable practice IF you can hold out long enough. I’d wager the country of China can hold out longer than General Motors.

              • @CameronDev@programming.dev
                link
                fedilink
                English
                24 months ago

                But the business model has to change in order to survive. The company cannot undercut forever, it actually needs to change in order to survive. The business model of today is not sustainable. They may have a large warchest, they may be able to crush GM, but once they do, or the warchest runs out, the business model must change.

                If you want to make the argument that their overall plan with the later change is sustainable, thats fine, but this current phase is not sustainable.

      • Ulrich
        link
        fedilink
        English
        24 months ago

        You forgot the part where they raised prices on everything.

      • @jaxxed@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        14 months ago

        BYD is already facing scrutiny for running Evergrande like accounting, and a lot of political pressures from other Chinese manufacturers. The risk is that they collapse like Evergrande, and that they drag public debt into it. The CCP might prop them up, so it light be safe. A car is different from a book, because you need lifetime service for it. If they go under, you might lose access to parts.

      • @Gigasser@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        14 months ago

        It might just be that, since BYD is serving such a large domestic market/population, that allows them to have cheaper cars? Something something, economies of scale. I’m no expert though.

        • @einkorn@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          14 months ago

          There is a limit to that effect, though. And most observers agree that the state is subsidizing heavily.

    • @Greyghoster@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      124 months ago

      While they are subsidised, the Chinese are really good at low cost manufacturing. It’s not the cheap labour anymore but factory automation and robotics. They really outclass anyone else.

      • Ulrich
        link
        fedilink
        English
        5
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        the Chinese are really good at low cost manufacturing

        They’re not “good” at it, they just have no minimum wage and no semblance of annoying things like worker protections or unions to be concerned with.

          • Ulrich
            link
            fedilink
            English
            14 months ago

            Like all things in China, this is owned by the government, making it pointless.

        • @Greyghoster@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          14 months ago

          They actually have a problem with workers or the lack of them and they have invested heavily in robotics. They aren’t the China of the 70s and 90s. It’s really something that we need to face up to if we want to compete but our political class isn’t really ready for that sort of reality. Years behind because of smugness.

          • Ulrich
            link
            fedilink
            English
            14 months ago

            We can’t compete with a country that pays their workers $1/hr without doing the same.