• 160 Posts
  • 111 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: November 17th, 2025

help-circle










  • … to follow Sanchez’s lead …

    Sanchez opposed the US because he thought this would help him personally as he fights for his political survival. I don’t buy into his morality and ethics. Sanchez and his party has been facing a series of corruption scandals in Spain, involving family members and close political allies, and he has no problem to closely engage with China, the largest dictatorship on earth (for example, he contracted China’s Huawei with Spain’s judicial wiretap system, while banning Huawei from the public network over security issues).

    Just this week, another police raid in Spain arrested 6 people close to Sanchez, including one of his former ministers, the minister’s spouse, and Sanchez’s driver.

    The only thing Sanchez has in mind is his re-election and staying in power.











  • This is another sensationalist headline with poor quality. This issue isn’t limited to Tunisia but spans across many other countries. Also, Europe is not the only player in this industry.

    In principle, Tunisia is well-positioned to export renewable energy to Europe through its ELMED interconnector, a submarine power cable between Tunisia and Italy. The problems are that Tunisia still imports a considerable amount of its energy while at the same time suffering from growing public debt pressures. There is a fundamental contradiction: while local conditions still exist, investment flows to infrastructure geared towards external customers. The costs of transition remain local, while many benefits flow globally.

    Another problem is the fragmented global system as the European Union is no longer the only actor attempting to shape hydrogen governance:

    The United States, Japan, and China are each developing their own hydrogen frameworks with different definitions, technologies, and industrial priorities … This does not create a coherent global hydrogen system … Producer countries now face conflicting demands from different importing powers. A project using Chinese electrolysers may face barriers in Europe, while projects designed around EU certification standards may become more expensive elsewhere.

    The costs of this fragmentation fall disproportionately on developing producer countries. Industrial powers possess the capacity to set standards and protect domestic industries. Most exporters do not. This creates a governance asymmetry where industrial powers write the rules while producer nations absorb the compliance costs.

    It is noteworthy that Tunisia, a country that is part of China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) that has been facing a growing trade deficit with China, has been the target of several Chinese companies across many industries. In green hydrogen, companies such as PowerChina, China Sinoma International Engineering, and Goldwind, are known to be pursuing opportunities in Tunisia’s also in green hydrogen sector in recent years.

    The entire issue is much more complex than this sensational hit piece makes one believe imo.



  • The one billion in imports are a small fraction (a low single-digit percentage) of the overall European market.

    Rising imports into Europe are possible because of an open market economy, while the European motorcycle industry has been experiencing major hurdles when it comes to sell their product to Asia due to market protection measures.

    The same report cited in the article also says:

    Trade barriers remain a key constraint [for European motorcycle companies]. Import tariffs in major Asian markets—such as China, India, and Thailand—are significantly higher than in the EU and often non-reciprocal, limiting export opportunities … Reducing these barriers and ensuring more predictable and reciprocal trade conditions would enhance EU competitiveness, support more balanced trade, and strengthen the industry’s resilience.

    Despite these export barriers artificially created by countries like China, around half of Europe’s production gets exported.

    Conclusion: It’s another misleading headline descending into another Chinese propaganda slop.

    [Edit typo.]












  • Wait until you hear what China’s big three airlines do. All three saw record half-year losses in 2026 already. Air China and China Eastern Airlines are heading for a seventh consecutive annual net loss since the COVID-19 pandemic. China Southern Airlines, which returned to the black in 2025 for the first time since 2019, is also set to slip back into the red.

    Air China’s third-quarter net profit fell 92.6% from a year earlier to 270.6 million yuan ($40.62 million). China Eastern posted a net profit of 64 million yuan for the quarter, down 98.2% from 2025. China Southern swung to a third-quarter net loss of 609 million yuan from a net profit of 3.84 billion yuan last year.




  • … companies competing to gain sales rather than a handful of companies with full control of the market jacking prices up together and telling customers “take it or leave it” while pocketing government subsidies.

    The subsidies are paid in China. This is what it means when I said that the Chinese taxpayers pay the bill (and the ones who work under a 996 working culture and even forced labour schemes with a social protection in China much weaker than in Europe). Without public money and state protection, Chinese carmakers wouldn’t be alive (and their managers wouldn’t earn millions).

    Chinese carmakers also benefit from their own supply chains. While European carmakers pay their suppliers within a few weeks, Chinese car manufacturers - particularly BYD - take up to 10 months to pay their bills. There has been another ‘initiative’ last year by the Chinese government urging companies to pay earlier, but so far nothing has changed beyond lip services.

    All analysts, including Chinese firms and its own government, agree that China’s car industry is deep in trouble and is producing overcapacity that they can’t sell.

    And as you mentioned the cost of living in Europe: Chinese carmakers’ losses are covered by Chinese public money while social welfare is practically non-existent as this, in the words of China’s Xi Jinping, would ‘make people lazy.’


  • There has been a fierce price war in China’s domestic market for years. Even the Chinese Communist Party has officially warned about that calling on the companies to end this practice. Some time ago, Elon Musk’s Tesla - which runs a factory in Shanghai as we know - signed a “pledge” with its Chinese rivals committing to China’s “core socialist values” and ending the price war in the country. It had no effect, though, as the price wars have been continuing.

    Chinese carmakers export these price wars to other regions, including Europe. Only three Chinese EV manufacturers are profitable, while some 130 are in the red, benefiting from Chinese subsidies (or Chinese taxpayer’s money if you want to put it that way).

    This is not limited to the EV or car market but is seen in all industries. With weak domestic markets China seeks to sell its overcapacity to foreign markets as it increasingly depends on exports.