Chapter 22 9. Seven of the Top 10 Surveys: Technology in China

Because of this, when China's influence on the world's manufacturing industry began to increase, many media duly threw out the title of "industrial overlord" with an optimistic attitude. However, what people saw was not all. While enjoying it, the world is quietly changing. When our society transitions into the information age, the standard of measurement quietly undergoes connotational changes. Although the main body of the economy is still composed of various sectors in industrial society, the standard of measurement has changed from production scale to core technology. Introduction to the topic: The Dilemma of Monopolists—Brushing shoulders with history—Technology China Theory—Technology’s road to self-salvation

There is a well-known law in economics - monopoly brings excess profits. However, this seemingly universal law has been subverted quietly by a Chinese company. This company named Shuangtong Straw Factory is located in Yiwu, Zhejiang Province. Compared with its ordinary name, its scale of operation is astonishing, even beyond our imagination-the factory is the world's largest producer of drinking straws The factory, whose annual output alone accounts for a quarter of the global demand for straws. In this factory, 60 production lines are running at full capacity every day, and 90% of the 8 tons of straws produced daily are packed and distributed directly to every corner of the world.

It can be said that in every four people in the world, one mouth is in "intimate contact" with Shuangtong's straw. When an enterprise occupies such a market share, it can be regarded as a well-deserved monopoly operator no matter in theory or in the actual field. So now there is a question: what is the profit status of Shuangtong? The answer may also be beyond our imagination—the total annual profit of such a large company is only 600,000 U.S. dollars, which means that Shuangtong can only earn 0.08 dollars for each straw exported. Penny!And this is still the leader in the industry, and it is a model of profitability among enterprises. The profit margins of other enterprises with smaller scale and lower efficiency can be imagined.

Why is it difficult for monopoly enterprises to achieve excess profits, and why is the living space so sharply compressed? To solve this puzzle, we must look through the phenomenon to find the essence, and look at the major dilemma facing Chinese companies from a new perspective. In fact, among the vast number of enterprises in China, there are many situations similar to Shuangtong Factory. Many enterprises in the southeast coastal area occupy nearly half of the market share in their respective fields, but they have to earn extremely low profit margins, so they have to face price competition from peers in the same industry. The narrowness can almost be described as humble.

There is only one real reason why we have to endure such a situation: that is, we have not yet established a leading position in the manufacturing industry. Here, there must be many people who will raise sharp doubts: the output of various products we currently manufacture has accounted for nearly 30% of the total global products, and we can be called the country with the largest manufacturing scale in the world. This kind of data is enough to deserve the status of the overlord. According to people's usual logic, once a country has such a developed manufacturing capacity, it means that it has the status of industrial hegemony.The reason why people have such a concept is because history has indeed confirmed this point.

As the starting point of the world's first round of industrial revolution, Britain was the first country to become the world's industrial hegemony.Due to the invention and use of the steam engine, Britain made great strides towards industrialization in the late 18th century until it became the first industrialized country in the world. In terms of raw materials, the UK occupies the raw material market in the world. Almost all industrial materials that may be used are continuously exported to the UK from all corners of the world, and the industrial products processed by the UK are sold back to these places. , As a result, during most of the 19th century, half of the world's total industrial production value came from Britain, and its industrial dominance was thus established.

While the United Kingdom ruled the roost, the United States was also completing its transformation from an agricultural country to an industrial country. Unlike the United Kingdom, the United States has a vast territory, and its strategy of vigorously building railways and canals and giving priority to the development of the transportation industry has made its transportation network Across the entire North American continent, it laid the foundation for socialized mass production. While the industrialization process of the United States was developing rapidly, the outbreak of the two world wars provided the broadest market for its manufactured products. At the end of the World War, the United States had replaced the United Kingdom as the new overlord of industry, and Japan followed closely after the war, still importing raw materials from all over the world and providing them with processing services. A lot of profits, aspire to the leader.

Because of this, when China's influence on the world's manufacturing industry began to increase, many media duly threw out the title of "industrial overlord" with an optimistic attitude. However, what people saw was not all. While enjoying it, the world is quietly changing. This change is the progress of social civilization triggered by the technological revolution, and the progress of civilization has brought about changes in the criteria for judging strength. Before the emergence of the Industrial Revolution, the whole world was in an agricultural society. Therefore, the evaluation of a country's strength was based on the level of agriculture. The more cultivated land cultivated and the greater the grain output, the stronger the country's strength.

After the Industrial Revolution, the criteria for judging an industrialized society are naturally measured by the industrial level of a country. The more steel that is smelted, the more manufactured products, and the larger the scale of industrial production, the greater the scale of industrial production. Stand out from the competition. When our society transitions into the information age, the standard of measurement quietly undergoes connotational changes. Although the main body of the economy is still composed of various sectors in industrial society, the standard of measurement has changed from production scale to core technology.

As the economist Friedman said, in a flat world, all people are closely connected due to the advancement of technology, and the whole world has thus become a big factory. To participate in the global division of labor by taking advantage of advantages, thus forming a full-dimensional business model in which each country plays its own role. Unfortunately, in this global division of labor, China is characterized by its cheap labor force and abundant natural resources, thus shouldering the burden of the "assembly workshop", and the most critical and most profitable However, it falls in European and American countries that firmly hold technological advantages.

Here, an obvious fact is: China's industrial system, which we are proud of, is quietly falling into a technical dilemma.For a country like China, which was once very backward in science and technology, the process of using technology is actually a process of reviewing common sense. The specific manifestations of this technical dilemma mainly focus on the following three elements. First, the core technology is seriously lacking. Second, the ability to digest imported technologies is lacking. Third, the output of low-tech products is severely oversupplied. The three major elements of the predicament we have proposed here are aimed at the current status of China's industrial system. When we consider the reality, we will find that the phenomena that have emerged in the past 10 years can all be attributed to these factors. within the three elements. The specific characterization of the first element lies in.It is difficult for our enterprises to achieve self-sufficiency in the key technologies of their products. According to incomplete statistics, at least 50% of the core technologies of the various categories that constitute modern industry must rely on external acquisitions.If we continue to explore, we will understand that when a country's invention patents only account for 1.8% of the world's total, there is absolutely no sufficient technical reserve to support industrial development. Because of this, we continue to rely on foreign imports for high-tech, high-value-added industrial products, and important production equipment, which has led to costly incidents in many fields. my country used to have more than 200 DVD manufacturers, whose output accounted for a quarter of the world's total. However, more than 2,300 patents in this industry were basically concentrated in the hands of ten large electrical appliance companies in the world.It is precisely because of the existence of this situation that the occurrence of one event changed the fate of these enterprises in an instant. In 2002, six companies, including Hitachi, Panasonic, JVC, Mitsubishi, Toshiba, and Time Warner, suddenly and unprecedentedly joined together and issued a "DVD Patent Joint Licensing" statement. In the statement, the six companies It is required that all DVD manufacturers in the world must purchase "patent licenses" from them. According to such requirements, Chinese DVD manufacturers have to pay patent royalties as high as US$20 each to six foreign manufacturers.However, in the fierce competition among manufacturers, Chinese companies can only earn a meager profit of US$1 for every DVD player exported for US$30.Therefore, such an ultimatum is tantamount to strangling the throat of 200 Chinese DVD companies. As a result, China's DVD industry, which was once noisy for a while, disappeared almost instantly. Compared with the first factor, our ability to digest technology is more frightening. Modern China in history has always had a strong ability to digest technology. A famous example came from China more than 70 years ago. At that time, the German Nazi government provided us with a considerable number of light weapons, especially Mauser The modification of the 98K rifle is the most famous. Only two years later, German experts were surprised to find that China had successfully developed a counterfeit product based on the Mauser 98K with its own technical reserves, and the mechanical properties of each component were basically the same as those of the prototype gun. The low manufacturing cost allows us to quickly form mass production under the premise of lack of materials to meet the needs of equipped troops, and this "cottage version" of the Mauser 98k is the "Chinese official" rifle that we are familiar with. In contrast to the current situation, our current ratio of technology introduction to digestion and absorption is only 1:0.07, while this ratio is 1:5 in South Korea and 1:8 in Japan.Such a huge contrast is enough to show that the lack of technological digestion and absorption capacity has become another major crux of China's technological dilemma. When we frequently introduced equipment and technology, we lost the magic weapon we were once proud of, and thus suffered from "technology dependence". Backward-reintroduction" vicious circle. If we have a little understanding of industrial manufacturing, we will know such a common sense: in the same manufacturing industry, there are differences between high-end and low-end, and the standard for distinguishing high-end and low-end only depends on the technical content. Therefore, manufacturing industries such as airplanes, ships, and high-tech equipment naturally become high-end. On the contrary, daily small handicrafts such as shoes, socks and clothing represent low-end areas of manufacturing.It is obvious that the profits that an aircraft can bring to an enterprise are by no means comparable to that of footwear. More importantly, high-end manufacturing requires a large amount of raw materials, technology and a complete production chain to support it. For example, Building an airplane involves many industries such as the aluminum alloy industry, the rubber industry, the electronics industry, and the machinery industry. This kind of stimulating effect on the entire industrial system is unmatched by low-end manufacturing industries. In fact, even in low-end manufacturing, we have a pretty tricky situation in technology. In September 2001, many enterprises in Wenzhou became the protagonists of the sensational "China-Europe Trade Dispute Case", and the cause of this trade friction began with a small lighter. As the largest lighter production base in China, Wenzhou exports 500 million lighters every year, and one-third of them are sold to EU countries, and its output value is quite considerable. Therefore, in order to prevent this trend from continuing to expand, and to control the entry of cheap Chinese lighters into the market, the European Union has launched a special technical barrier, stipulating that all low-priced lighters imported to Europe must be equipped with a child-proof device. "Safety lock", however, this technology is all mastered by foreign companies. Thanks to the unremitting efforts of our country, this regulation failed to be implemented in the end. However, it is foreseeable that as long as this kind of behavior similar to "choking the throat" succeeds once, the fate of China's lighters will surely fail again like DVD. Maicheng. In the years to come, the technical difficulties in China's industry will not be resolved in a short period of time. After all, when we fall behind for too long, day-to-day efforts cannot close the gap. However, if any such As the situation continues, China's manufacturing industry, and even the entire industrial system, will face a defeat like "ambush from all sides". With the gradual depletion of resources and the continuous highlighting of the advantages of human resources in some backward countries, our The comparative advantage will gradually be lost, and with it comes a deeper dilemma.