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.
George Santayana wrote: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” This article will help readers avoid repeating mistakes by examining four examples from the civil war between the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) forces and the Republic of China (ROC) forces that involved two city sieges and two island invasions. The city sieges compared are Changchun (May to October 1948) and Beiping (November 1948 to January 1949, renamed Beijing after its capture), and attempts to invade Kinmen (October 1949) and Hainan (April 1950). Comparing and contrasting these examples, we can learn how Taiwan may prevent a war with
A recent trio of opinion articles in this newspaper reflects the growing anxiety surrounding Washington’s reported request for Taiwan to shift up to 50 percent of its semiconductor production abroad — a process likely to take 10 years, even under the most serious and coordinated effort. Simon H. Tang (湯先鈍) issued a sharp warning (“US trade threatens silicon shield,” Oct. 4, page 8), calling the move a threat to Taiwan’s “silicon shield,” which he argues deters aggression by making Taiwan indispensable. On the same day, Hsiao Hsi-huei (蕭錫惠) (“Responding to US semiconductor policy shift,” Oct. 4, page 8) focused on
Taiwan is rapidly accelerating toward becoming a “super-aged society” — moving at one of the fastest rates globally — with the proportion of elderly people in the population sharply rising. While the demographic shift of “fewer births than deaths” is no longer an anomaly, the nation’s legal framework and social customs appear stuck in the last century. Without adjustments, incidents like last month’s viral kicking incident on the Taipei MRT involving a 73-year-old woman would continue to proliferate, sowing seeds of generational distrust and conflict. The Senior Citizens Welfare Act (老人福利法), originally enacted in 1980 and revised multiple times, positions older
Nvidia Corp’s plan to build its new headquarters at the Beitou Shilin Science Park’s T17 and T18 plots has stalled over a land rights dispute, prompting the Taipei City Government to propose the T12 plot as an alternative. The city government has also increased pressure on Shin Kong Life Insurance Co, which holds the development rights for the T17 and T18 plots. The proposal is the latest by the city government over the past few months — and part of an ongoing negotiation strategy between the two sides. Whether Shin Kong Life Insurance backs down might be the key factor