BenQ chairman Lee Kun-yao's (李焜耀) announcement last week that BenQ would stop funding its German subsidiary, BenQ Mobile GmbH, took most observers by surprise -- especially since the company only acquired the Siemens handset business last October.
It was a "painful" decision, Lee said, but one that had to be made. BenQ had booked losses of 600 million euros (US$760.8 million) from BenQ Mobile since the takeover of the Siemens unit. These losses had grown unbearably high compared to BenQ's total capital of NT$26.25 billion (US$793 million).
Despite the combination of Siemens' brand recognition and technological know-how with BenQ's manufacturing capabilities and ability to control costs, it was no secret that all was not well at BenQ's handset business. The company announced recently that it would downsize two cellphone plants in Taiwan, and earlier this year said it planned to shut down a cellphone plant in Mexico.
BenQ had hoped to win at least a 10 percent global market share, but only managed to secure 3.2 percent. Siemens effectively paid BenQ 250 million euros to take over its money-losing handset business, and BenQ faced tough challenges. It needed to prop up Siemens' falling handset market share while trimming operating expenses and manufacturing costs.
Worse, delays in handset research and development (R&D) postponed the launch of new products, which only added to the challenges in a market increasingly dominated by larger rivals Nokia and Motorola.
It is sad to see BenQ fail, but Siemens, which had been aspiring to the No. 4 spot for its handset unit, had fared no better. After all, the handset business is a high-volume business, with scale in both sales and R&D a key differentiator in the industry.
A year ago, BenQ had hoped that the takeover of Siemens' unit would help make it one of the world's leading players. But on Friday, BenQ Mobile filed for insolvency protection in a Munich court, a move aimed to protect the interest of creditors. BenQ Mobile will hand over its management to a new team appointed by the German government.
But whether BenQ can retain its ownership of the subsidiary remains questionable. The case is now in the German courts, amid strong protests from German unions and politicians.
Whether the company can continue operating the BenQ-Siemens co-brand is also in doubt, as Siemens said it may take legal steps against BenQ. Siemens said that the continued operations of its facilities in Germany were an important factor in its decision to sell its handset unit to the Taiwanese firm.
Investors are also wondering whether BenQ is just saying goodbye to European markets, or if it may leave the handset business altogether.
But the biggest concern BenQ's move has raised is whether other Taiwanese firms will now be discouraged from trying to become top global brands. If the nation wants to avoid this fate, then Taiwan Inc should look more carefully at what its firms need for success -- beyond strong manufacturing skills, cost control ability and ambition -- before making such a bold leap again.
A response to my article (“Invite ‘will-bes,’ not has-beens,” Aug. 12, page 8) mischaracterizes my arguments, as well as a speech by former British prime minister Boris Johnson at the Ketagalan Forum in Taipei early last month. Tseng Yueh-ying (曾月英) in the response (“A misreading of Johnson’s speech,” Aug. 24, page 8) does not dispute that Johnson referred repeatedly to Taiwan as “a segment of the Chinese population,” but asserts that the phrase challenged Beijing by questioning whether parts of “the Chinese population” could be “differently Chinese.” This is essentially a confirmation of Beijing’s “one country, two systems” formulation, which says that
Taiwan stands at the epicenter of a seismic shift that will determine the Indo-Pacific’s future security architecture. Whether deterrence prevails or collapses will reverberate far beyond the Taiwan Strait, fundamentally reshaping global power dynamics. The stakes could not be higher. Today, Taipei confronts an unprecedented convergence of threats from an increasingly muscular China that has intensified its multidimensional pressure campaign. Beijing’s strategy is comprehensive: military intimidation, diplomatic isolation, economic coercion, and sophisticated influence operations designed to fracture Taiwan’s democratic society from within. This challenge is magnified by Taiwan’s internal political divisions, which extend to fundamental questions about the island’s identity and future
Media said that several pan-blue figures — among them former Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) chairwoman Hung Hsiu-chu (洪秀柱), former KMT legislator Lee De-wei (李德維), former KMT Central Committee member Vincent Hsu (徐正文), New Party Chairman Wu Cheng-tien (吳成典), former New Party legislator Chou chuan (周荃) and New Party Deputy Secretary-General You Chih-pin (游智彬) — yesterday attended the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) military parade commemorating the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II. China’s Xinhua news agency reported that foreign leaders were present alongside Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), such as Russian President Vladimir Putin, North Korean leader Kim
Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) Chairman Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌) is expected to be summoned by the Taipei City Police Department after a rally in Taipei on Saturday last week resulted in injuries to eight police officers. The Ministry of the Interior on Sunday said that police had collected evidence of obstruction of public officials and coercion by an estimated 1,000 “disorderly” demonstrators. The rally — led by Huang to mark one year since a raid by Taipei prosecutors on then-TPP chairman and former Taipei mayor Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) — might have contravened the Assembly and Parade Act (集會遊行法), as the organizers had
RSS