Trade tensions aren't stopping Chinese companies from pushing into the US
Chinese companies are so intent on global expansion that even the biggest stock offering to date on Shanghai's tech-heavy STAR board counts the US as one of its biggest markets, on par with China.
Shenzhen-based camera company Insta360, a rival to GoPro, raised 1.938 billion yuan ($417 million) in a Shanghai listing Wednesday under the name Arashi Vision. Shares soared by 274 per cent, giving the company a market value of 71 billion yuan ($15.3 billion).
The US, Europe and mainland China each accounted for just over 23 per cent of revenue last year, according to Insta360, whose 360-degree cameras officially started Apple Store sales in 2018. The company sells a variety of cameras — priced at several hundred dollars — coupled with video-editing software.
Co-founder Max Richter said in an interview Tuesday that he expects US demand to remain strong and dismissed concerns about geopolitical risks.
'We are staying ahead just by investing into user-centric research and development, and monitoring market trends that ultimately meet the consumer['s] needs,' he said ahead of the STAR board listing.
China launched the Shanghai STAR Market in July 2019 just months after Chinese President Xi Jinping announced plans for the board. The Nasdaq-style tech board was established to support high-growth tech companies while raising requirements for the investor base to limit speculative activity.
In 2019, only 12 per cent of companies on the STAR board said at least half of their revenue came from outside China, according to CNBC analysis of data accessed via Wind Information. In 2024, with hundreds more companies listed, that share had climbed to more than 14 per cent, the data showed.
'We are just seeing the tip of the iceberg. More and more capable Chinese firms are going global,' said King Leung, global head of financial services, fintech and sustainability at InvestHK.
Leung pointed to the growing global business of Chinese companies such as battery giant CATL, which listed in Hong Kong last month. 'There are a lot of more tier-two and tier-three companies that are equally capable,' he said.
InvestHK is a Hong Kong government department that promotes investment in the region. It has organised trips to help connect mainland Chinese businesses with overseas opportunities, including one to the Middle East last month.
Roborock, a robotic vacuum cleaner company also listed on the STAR board, announced this month it plans to list in Hong Kong. More than half of the company's revenue last year came from overseas markets.
At the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas this year, Roborock showed off a vacuum with a robotic arm for automatically removing obstacles while cleaning floors. The device was subsequently launched in the US for $US2600 ($4020).
Other consumer-focused Chinese companies also remain unfazed by heightened tensions between China and the US.
In November, Chinese home appliance company Hisense said it aimed to become the top seller of television sets in the US in two years. And last month, China-based Bc Babycare announced its official expansion into the US and touted its global supply chain as a way to offset tariff risks.
Chinese companies have been pushing overseas in the last several years, partly because growth at home has slowed. Consumer demand has remained lackluster since the COVID-19 pandemic.
But the expansion trend is now evolving into a third stage in which the businesses look to build international brands on their own with offices in different regions hiring local employees, said Charlie Chen, managing director and head of Asia research at China Renaissance Securities.
He said that's a change from the earliest years when Chinese companies primarily manufactured products for foreign brands to sell, and a subsequent phase in which Chinese companies had joint ventures with foreign companies.
Insta360 primarily manufactures out of Shenzhen, but has offices in Berlin, Tokyo and Los Angeles, Richter said. He said the Los Angeles office focuses on services and marketing — the company held its first big offline product launch in New York's Grand Central Terminal in April.
Chen also expects the next phase of Chinese companies going global will sell different kinds of products. He pointed out that those that had gone global primarily sold home appliances and electronics, but are now likely to expand significantly into toys.
Already, Beijing-based Pop Mart has become a global toy player, with its Labubu figurine series gaining popularity worldwide.
Pop Mart's total sales, primarily domestic, were 4.49 billion yuan in 2021. In 2024, overseas sales alone surpassed that to hit 5.1 billion yuan, up 373 per cent from a year ago, while mainland China sales climbed to 7.97 billion yuan.
'It established another Pop Mart versus domestic sales in 2021,' said Chris Gao, head of China discretionary consumer at CLSA.
The Hong Kong-listed retailer doesn't publicly share much about its global store expansion plans or existing locations, but an independent blogger compiled a list of at least 17 US store locations as of mid-May, most of which opened in the last two years.
The toy company has been 'very good' at developing or acquiring the rights to characters, Gao said. She expects its global growth to continue as Pop Mart plans to open more stores worldwide, and as consumers turn more to such character-driven products during times of stress and macroeconomic uncertainty.
CNBC
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Age
3 hours ago
- The Age
‘China has Apple by the balls': How the rising superpower captured the tech giant
This story is part of the June 14 edition of Good Weekend. See all 14 stories. Investigative journalist Patrick McGee describes it as the biggest untold story of technology in the 21st century: how, over decades of jaw-dropping investment in China, Apple became one of the world's biggest companies – but in the process helped China become a technology and manufacturing superpower. That power is now being used to challenge the West. You've said that Apple wouldn't be Apple today without China. And China wouldn't be China without Apple. How so? By 2015, Apple was investing $55 billion a year into China, and a lot of that was in training people to assemble iPhones, iMacs and other Apple products – by [Apple CEO] Tim Cook's public estimate, 3 million people were trained. Apple sent planeloads of its best engineers – from MIT, Caltech and Stanford – to train the Chinese on how to produce their products. Overall, it has trained 28 million people in its supply chain since 2008. That's bigger than the labour force of California or the population of Australia. It has had more impact on China than the Marshall Plan on Europe after World War II. In 1999, none of Apple's products was made in mainland China; by 2009, virtually all were, and company profits shot into the stratosphere as a result. Apple was on the brink of bankruptcy in 1996 but within a decade became the richest company on Earth, thanks to sales of its iPhone and iPad. What did China offer that no other country could? China has policies and a population base tailor-made for the electronics industry. They created bonded zones [places offering generous tax breaks and streamlined customs procedures to attract foreign investment] in cities like Shenzhen. Back in the 1980s, Shenzhen was a series of fishing villages. Today, it's a city of 18 million people. We in the West don't understand how easy it is to build a factory in an area like Shenzhen. The government provides you with the labour from the western part of the country, where literally millions are leaving backbreaking agricultural jobs to work 12-hour shifts in factories. Businesses get free land and cutting-edge machinery. Local cadres in the political system are incentivised to build factories and get growth from their region. The bureaucracy is shaped to be more like a venture capitalist. China has invented a new form of capitalism, where instead of having dynamism in the private sector, it's on the public side. 'Apple provided China with the Ivy League equivalent of a hardware engineering education.' You write that Apple essentially cracked the code on how to manufacture the world's best products without doing it itself. In the early 2000s, Apple was figuring out how to manufacture their products in China without owning any of the factories. It was about orchestrating the production of the products rather than building them themselves. But the orchestration they've done is just phenomenally obsessive. This isn't normal outsourcing. They're not just saying, 'Here's a blueprint of what we need; let us know when it's ready.' They're inventing the processes, the components. So by bringing all its technological expertise and sophisticated production methods to China, Apple taught the Chinese how to develop high-level manufacturing … Indeed. Jony Ive [instrumental in the design of the iPhone, iPad, iMac and Apple Watch] came up with some spectacular-looking products. But the only way those designs came into large-scale reality was that China was investing massively in supply chains, in infrastructure and in ports. And as one engineer told me, Apple provided China with the Ivy League equivalent of a hardware engineering education. Because Apple is epic, the technology transfer is also epic. Loading US Vice President J.D. Vance has very patronisingly reduced the Chinese competitive advantage to its having 'millions of peasants' available to work in factories. But its economy has moved far beyond just low-cost labour producing cheaper products, hasn't it? Yes and no. China has robotics and automation on a scale we [the United States] completely lack. But hundreds of millions of people still live in impoverishment, and go to cities like Shenzhen and Guangzhou to work in factories. China has the capacity to move an entire Western city's worth of people, say, up to 500,000, who are willing to relocate for a few months at a time to assemble iPhones and then go someplace else. We have nothing like that. Even if it could, we in the West wouldn't want that to change, because that's not what anybody really wants to do with their life.
Sydney Morning Herald
3 hours ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
‘China has Apple by the balls': How the rising superpower captured the tech giant
This story is part of the June 14 edition of Good Weekend. See all 14 stories. Investigative journalist Patrick McGee describes it as the biggest untold story of technology in the 21st century: how, over decades of jaw-dropping investment in China, Apple became one of the world's biggest companies – but in the process helped China become a technology and manufacturing superpower. That power is now being used to challenge the West. You've said that Apple wouldn't be Apple today without China. And China wouldn't be China without Apple. How so? By 2015, Apple was investing $55 billion a year into China, and a lot of that was in training people to assemble iPhones, iMacs and other Apple products – by [Apple CEO] Tim Cook's public estimate, 3 million people were trained. Apple sent planeloads of its best engineers – from MIT, Caltech and Stanford – to train the Chinese on how to produce their products. Overall, it has trained 28 million people in its supply chain since 2008. That's bigger than the labour force of California or the population of Australia. It has had more impact on China than the Marshall Plan on Europe after World War II. In 1999, none of Apple's products was made in mainland China; by 2009, virtually all were, and company profits shot into the stratosphere as a result. Apple was on the brink of bankruptcy in 1996 but within a decade became the richest company on Earth, thanks to sales of its iPhone and iPad. What did China offer that no other country could? China has policies and a population base tailor-made for the electronics industry. They created bonded zones [places offering generous tax breaks and streamlined customs procedures to attract foreign investment] in cities like Shenzhen. Back in the 1980s, Shenzhen was a series of fishing villages. Today, it's a city of 18 million people. We in the West don't understand how easy it is to build a factory in an area like Shenzhen. The government provides you with the labour from the western part of the country, where literally millions are leaving backbreaking agricultural jobs to work 12-hour shifts in factories. Businesses get free land and cutting-edge machinery. Local cadres in the political system are incentivised to build factories and get growth from their region. The bureaucracy is shaped to be more like a venture capitalist. China has invented a new form of capitalism, where instead of having dynamism in the private sector, it's on the public side. 'Apple provided China with the Ivy League equivalent of a hardware engineering education.' You write that Apple essentially cracked the code on how to manufacture the world's best products without doing it itself. In the early 2000s, Apple was figuring out how to manufacture their products in China without owning any of the factories. It was about orchestrating the production of the products rather than building them themselves. But the orchestration they've done is just phenomenally obsessive. This isn't normal outsourcing. They're not just saying, 'Here's a blueprint of what we need; let us know when it's ready.' They're inventing the processes, the components. So by bringing all its technological expertise and sophisticated production methods to China, Apple taught the Chinese how to develop high-level manufacturing … Indeed. Jony Ive [instrumental in the design of the iPhone, iPad, iMac and Apple Watch] came up with some spectacular-looking products. But the only way those designs came into large-scale reality was that China was investing massively in supply chains, in infrastructure and in ports. And as one engineer told me, Apple provided China with the Ivy League equivalent of a hardware engineering education. Because Apple is epic, the technology transfer is also epic. Loading US Vice President J.D. Vance has very patronisingly reduced the Chinese competitive advantage to its having 'millions of peasants' available to work in factories. But its economy has moved far beyond just low-cost labour producing cheaper products, hasn't it? Yes and no. China has robotics and automation on a scale we [the United States] completely lack. But hundreds of millions of people still live in impoverishment, and go to cities like Shenzhen and Guangzhou to work in factories. China has the capacity to move an entire Western city's worth of people, say, up to 500,000, who are willing to relocate for a few months at a time to assemble iPhones and then go someplace else. We have nothing like that. Even if it could, we in the West wouldn't want that to change, because that's not what anybody really wants to do with their life.
West Australian
4 hours ago
- West Australian
Stirling Street $22 million development of ‘Micro-apartments' are re-shaping Perth as many downsize
Perth, renowned as the world's longest city, has now gone compact with the green light being given to micro-apartments that are a little bigger than a two-car garage. A $22 million upcoming development on Stirling St in Perth has invested in a Japanese-style squeeze, with approved plans for seven floors of flats that are mostly 26sqm and 28sqm in size. While the smaller ones are for short-stay accommodation, the bigger ones are billed as fully self-contained units, available for rent anywhere from three months to three years. A total of 88 apartments, most of them about 7 metres by 4m, will be constructed on a lot that is a little bigger than a quarter acre block. The co-living complex will also include communal amenities like dining and lounge rooms, a co-working office, a gym and a rooftop terrace with a yoga deck. News that the micro-apartments won development approval last week sparked outrage among many local residents and readers, with one commentator claiming Perth was 'being turned into slum ghettos like London. Where does this madness stop?' But James Theodore, from developer Marprop, is unapologetic about the small size. He said the units were 'superior' to standard apartments because they offered close proximity to the city, public transport and the convenience of all-inclusive bills, such as electricity and internet. 'The focus is on 20-35-year-olds who value flexibility and whose biggest possessions are their minds and a laptop,' he said. Mr Theodore said the build-to-rent complex was fully furnished and also offered a range of rental items such as additional storage, electric bikes and scooters, and computer monitors. Each dwelling will include a bedroom, kitchen and living area and most will have balconies. The complex has only 12 residential car bays which come at an additional charge — including four share-cars for hire — and a further five bays for a ground-floor shop. Anticipated parking issues was one of the key complaints from locals at a planning hearing last week when the project was approved, along with complaints the building would overshadow nearby homes and that it was a 'gross over development.' But architecture firm Cameron Chisholm Nichols, which designed the complex, said the housing model 'responds to the way people work, live, play and socialise today'. 'What we are seeing is a move towards more social interaction and connected communities,' said CNN director Dominic Snellgrove. The upcoming complex adds to co-living accommodation called The CBD's Switch skyscraper, and approved plans for another complex at the Sydney Charles quarter in West Perth. While Marprop told planning authorities in a submission that 'the intent is to provide an affordable housing option through greater flexibility in lease arrangements and terms,' it remains to be seen how cheap it will be. Research by The West Australian shows high market rates for co-living apartments. At Perth's Juno House, a 31sqm micro-apartment is $880 a week over six months or $800 a week for a year, inclusive of utility bills, or a more luxurious standard for $850 to $935 a week. Tenants can share a 34sqm apartment with a stranger for $510 a week over six months, or $425 a week for a year. Marprop has nominated UKO — an east-coast based firm which brands itself as a 'lifestyle movement' and 'the future of living' — as a potential operator. UKO charges from $750 a week for a similar sized micro-apartment in Annandale, which is 5km from the centre of Sydney, or $630 a week in central Melbourne. For its part, the City of Vincent enthusiastically supported the project, claiming there needs to be a greater focus on higher-density residential development around public transport nodes, urban corridors and retail and employment centres. WA Planning authorities unanimously approved the project, claiming Perth needs housing diversity. It used its discretion to approve the plans, despite the plot ratio exceeding the R-code requirements on the 1221sqm block. To be compliant, it would require a 4546sqm block.
