Posted on 01/24/2005 5:32:08 AM PST by Golden Eagle
IBM-Lenovo (Chinese front) deal faces US security challenge
SAN FRANCISCO, Jan 23 (Reuters) - IBM's proposed $1.25 billion sale of its personal computer business to Lenovo Group of China may be held up by U.S. regulators over national security concerns, Bloomberg reported on Sunday.
The report, citing unnamed sources "familiar with the matter" said members of the Committee on Foreign Investments in the United States, or CFIUS, are concerned that Lenovo employees might be used to conduct industrial espionage.
(Excerpt) Read more at asia.news.yahoo.com ...
Yeah ...
Alex Jones.....is that you?
Nope. Do you work for IBM?
A few points from the article:
"IBM has not manufactured its own PCs for several years. The bulk of its production is done by manufacturing partners, largely in China."
"The company plans to move its PC business headquarters to New York from Beijing."
"The Bloomberg story said members of CFIUS were focusing their attention on an IBM facility in North Carolina."
US National Security Ping
They've been sold out to China for some time.
"The company plans to move its PC business headquarters to New York from Beijing."
Figureheads only. China owns 80% of the operation in the proposed deal.
"The Bloomberg story said members of CFIUS were focusing their attention on an IBM facility in North Carolina."
A current US asset that needs to be protected.
I don't know if Dell ready buy it ?
I don't know either, but it should at least be offered to US vendors instead of IBM rushing off to China and ignoring the US bids as they did.
If IBM sold it to TaiWan PC company , maybe that's a good choose .
So the fact that american workers will be putting to gether the pc's is of no importance?
The fact the the company will be moving it's headquarter (and thus it's tax location) to the US is of no importance?
The fact IBM (as well as a vast majority of PC companies) is /has been reliant on Asia (and, yes, CHINESE) manufacturing FOR YEARS is of no importance?
Come on, IBM wants to sell off a VERY bad department (money wise). The Red Chinese want to buy it. I don't like that either, but demagouging against it won't change things. Besides, since 99% of all of the components are produced overseas (all the chips, etc...) just how much of a security risk can this be?
I would much rather have seen a US company buy this division of IBM - or, at worst, a "friendly" competitor (Siemens & Co.). Unfortunately for the US and IBM - no one was willing to do so (IBM has been trying to dump this for several years now.)
Not in comparison to the dangers. Especially in light of IBM's behavior with regard to other recent givaways to the Chicoms.
Who's side you on, anyway, expatriate?
IBM is doing NOTHING that is not driven by the end consumer at Circuit City or wherever. They're demanding a dirt cheep peecee to compete with Mr. Dell, and China is willing to play that game. IBM is doing the "responsible" thing for its shareholders by selling out America. Unfortunate but true. It is the AMERICAN CONSUMER that is "selling out" America by buying.
I worked at IBM back when they had something called "full employment." Ever heard of that? It was a non-union version of tenure. You got hired, you did good work, you were guaranteed retirement and a pension! Amazing! But then margins on peecees went all to hell, IBM PS/2's were pushed out of the market by cheapo Dells and Compaqs (and by their own tech shortcomings.) So "full employment" became untenable.
Who's fault was that?
If you read my post carefully, you would know that I am on the side of the US.
However, since no one was willing to buy the division after several years of being on the market - IBM settled with the Chinese. I don't like it either.
But, as I pointed out - it's seems that "most" of the worries we might have about this sale (loss of jobs, etc...) are not well founded.
The National Security argument is one which I can relate to, but again, since all of this technology is freely available "everywhere" - I don't forsee a major risk here. I hope that the commission overseeing this does thier job well.
It pains me to see US manufacturing being "exported" - especially when the "new" products are greatly inferior to the old ones.
Just out of curiosity - if Siemens had bought the PC division - would you still be as hostile against it?? [honest question - no offense is intended!!]
I suspect it's THIS fact, among many others, that have the National Security folks nervous. It's hard to spy on us in Beijing . . . but if they're housed in New Yawk they can just join hands with the bullet-proof UN Pukes and spy with impunity.
Hold on frilly nilly! What exactly are the "security" issues here?
An Intel based PC is a commodity. There are no export restrictions on CPUs from Folsom, California, and the Reference designs are available for free on the Intel developer's web site. Or use AMD. Or VIA.
And if you wanna learn all this, plunk down $3000 and go to a Windows Hardware Engineering Conference. Usamma bin Laden could even attend if he wanted!
There are no national security secrets in PC Architecture, friend. And if there are, then you need to be tearing the eyes out of Intel's management and employees first.
China is buying the IBM name. IBM is selling out the IBM name. Buyer. Seller.
You wanna bid?
I agree that there are probably no NS issues involved. It IS proper though that the commission check and insure that.
And so according to you, that's that, without even knowing what you are talking about?
FYI discussions have been going on in the US Congress fro some time about blocking all high performance PC exports to potential adversaries, as they are now used in combinations of them known as "clusters" to build the most powerful systems in the world, perfect for nuclear weapons design and analysis.
The performance limits for exported computers, measured in millions of theoretical calculations per second, or MTOPS, have increased almost annually. Eight times in the last two decades, computer companies have won a relaxation in the Department of Commerce's export limit, which began at less than 160 MTOPS in the mid-1980s and has risen to more than 190,000 MTOPS today. That's far more lenient than the 1,500 MTOPS the Department of Defense has deemed threatening to the United States' military superiority, according to the Defense Department's Militarily Critical Technologies List. A report published in 2002 by the U.S. General Accounting Office found that most military applications of computer technology require less than 20,000 MTOPS, including programs used to design and simulate nuclear weapons. A currently exportable computer, such as a 32-processor Intel Itanium computer, could run 98 percent of the applications used by the Department of Defense, the report said.
Here's some more good reading for you, before you discount the significance even further out of hand.
http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3713194926c5.htm
http://www.nwfusion.com/news/2004/0602compuchi.html
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.