Mandelson says China’s reputation at risk (don't say 99% are still safe)

FT ^ | 11/26/07

[TigerLikesRooster]

Ping!

[wrench]

You can get cheap goods, and you can get quality goods, but there is no such animal as “cheap quality goods”.

China is producing what the retailers and consumers want, cheap goods.

[1rudeboy]

Consumers tend to shy away from unsafe goods, however.

[wastedyears]

***unprecedented special action***

I wonder what that means...

[thulldud]

***unprecedented special action***

I wonder what that means...

Maybe, fixing the problems and producing quality stuff?

Not that it's ever gonna happen.

[PugetSoundSoldier]

Positioning to use trade barriers in an effort to stop the economic death of the EU. The high Euro/RMB balance (the RMB is pretty much pegged to the dollar) is killing exports to China. Germany and Italy used to export a lot to China - machinery, tools, etc - but that’s dried up now that the cost is so much higher. So they need to stem the tide of Chinese products coming in to hopefully turn some of that export into domestic consumption and keep their economies running.

Just like Brussels complaining about the high Euro/dollar valuation, this is going to be used as a basis for barriers to prop up their economies. Chinese product quality has been a LONG time issue - ever since the first factory located there. You have to have staff present to maintain quality. Complaining about it now - especially when many of the latest infractions started with self-reported incidents by the Chinese - is simply a justification to implement trade barriers to protect their dwindling manufacturers.

[wrench]

“Consumers tend to shy away from unsafe goods, however.”

Consumers vote with their wallets. Safety is important untill there is an increased price to pay. The reason seatbelts, airbags, and all the other nanny options are mandatory on new cars is because consumers wouldn’t pay for them when they were add on options that cost extra money.

[MichaelP]

Personally, I won't buy any food products that I know contain chinese products. However, labeling doesn't tell you on many products. It might say "distributed by" whoever, but no "made by" or "product of". I'd like to see consise labeling...

Mike

[Neoliberalnot]

You can have cheap, but safe goods. China is the only manufacturing giant I know of that actually intentionally spiked protein additives with toxic compounds (ie melamine and cyanuric acid) in order to command higher prices. This was not an act of carelessness or inattention to good manufacturing processes, but a fraudulent attempt to cheat customers.

[TigerLikesRooster]

You are so right.

[wastedyears]

I wasn’t thinking product quality control...

[1rudeboy]

You are confusing two issues. Let's keep governmental intervention out of this. A consumer is willing to pay more for an assurance that his dogfood contains no melamine, meaning that safety has economic "value." A consumer who doesn't care whether his dogfood contains melamine has valued the assurance at zero.

The facts demonstrate that few people value that assurance at zero (and even those that do ride on dogfood manufacturers valuing the safety aspect as >0).

[353FMG]

“..told China on Monday its reputation was at risk after a series of product safety scandals..”

China has nothing to worry about. In this world of MBAs it is the bottom number on the ledger sheet that counts and as long as China can keep it low enough to prevent competition at home it will have the market cornered. And up to now, no consumers have publicly stated that they would stop byuing Chinese products.

[1rudeboy]

Rubbish. Remember, you are on a forum where people actually follow the news.

[wrench]

"The facts demonstrate that few people value that assurance at zero (and even those that do ride on dogfood manufacturers valuing the safety aspect as >0)."

Please provide a link to these facts.

[1rudeboy]

Sure, as soon as you list the dogfood manufacturers who have continued to allow melamine in their product, and their sales figures.

[wrench]

Dogfood? When did I mention dogfood? The recall on the poisoned dogfood is ongoing (in that there is still some food that is unaccounted for), But I didn't bring that up. BTW the FDA site has current info on dogfood recalls if you need the info.

My subject is the American consumer gives lip service to product sfety, but votes with their wallet. Safety doesn't sell, because the average consumer will not pay more money for safety features.

As evidenced by the auto industry in my above post, safty becomes standard on products only when the government requires it. When left to the consumer to pay for added safety features, they will not shell out the bucks.

As for your dogfood subject, you will find that those name brands that sold poison food are not seeing much if any drop in demand for their product. I do not have a link, but call Purina if you have doubts.

[1rudeboy]

My subject is the American consumer gives lip service to product safety, but votes with their wallet.

And my point is that product safety is a consideration when the consumer votes with their wallet, and when manufacturers compete for their vote.

There's a reason Lawn Darts are only sold on E-Bay as novelty items.

[wrench]

“There’s a reason Lawn Darts are only sold on E-Bay as novelty items.”

They are not being sold retail because of the courts and litigation, not because consumers thought them unsafe. If they were put on sale tomorrow at WalMart, they would sell.