在新兴市场——首先是亚洲四小龙，然后是中国，现在是金砖四国(Brics)——发展的30年里，前来淘金的西方企业在获得巨大回报的同时也经历了巨大的失望。
金砖四国的吸引力体现在近日卡夫(Kraft)敲定收购吉百利(Cadbury)交易的决定上，因为后者在印度和俄罗斯市场具有很高的增长前景。美国巧克力公司好时(Hershey)曾考虑竞购吉百利，如今它只得去面对成熟、低增长的美国市场。
但谷歌(Google)因受到网络攻击和在线审查而反抗中国政府的举措，无疑也体现出在中国开展业务的企业所遇到的障碍。谷歌如今面临向百度(Baidu)和阿里巴巴(Alibaba)等中国竞争对手拱手让出这个最大潜在市场的风险。
尽管并非所有企业都面临这类道德困境，但许多企业在下列情况中遭遇了更一般性的挫折：试图在海外销售与本国同样的产品；与当地合作者发生纠纷；发现自己遭遇当地法规阻碍。
目前，许多西方企业不仅在打入金砖四国市场时遭遇困难，在本土也面临来自中国或巴西企业的竞争。
巴西航空工业公司(Embraer)和中国海尔(Haier)等一批新兴跨国企业，也像西方企业一样致力于全球的发展。
受到信贷危机打击的汽车业，是金砖四国改变全球产业平衡的缩影。通用汽车(General Motors)在本土陷入困境，而旗下的别克(Buick)和凯迪拉克(Cadillac)品牌却在中国迅速发展；福特(Ford)把旗下沃尔沃(Volvo)品牌出售给中国吉利(Geely)事宜已接近达成协议。
因此，跨国企业大力发展金砖四国业务变得日益重要。如果不这样做，它们就有可能受到增长乏力品牌的拖累，并得到投资者的差评。
但西方企业已从残酷的经历中学到：要想在金砖四国取得成功，它们就必须进行改变。
西方企业必须做出的最明显改变是，能够制造较廉价的产品。尽管到本世纪20年代中国国内生产总值(GDP)可能超过美国，但其人口数量将达到美国的四倍。
波士顿咨询集团(Boston Consulting Group)合伙人哈尔•西尔金(Hal Sirkin)表示：“西方企业如今的潮流是，把与在芝加哥或伦敦销售的相同的产品拿到新兴市场销售。但是，其售价过于高昂。最终，有人将制造出更廉价的山寨版。”西尔金是《全球性》(Globality)一书的作者。
路易威登轩尼诗集团(LVMH Group)和古奇(Gucci)等西方奢侈品企业能够在华扩张，是因为它们的销售对象是这个市场的很小一部分人群。对于面临当地企业竞争的中端市场品牌来说，改造那些在西方畅销的产品则要艰难的多。
西尔金表示：“西方企业的传统做法是，挑选对自己最有利的高端产品。但问题在于，当地竞争对手控制了中端市场，并开始向高端市场进军。”
金砖四国本土企业的优势不仅在于了解当地情况，还在于拥有低成本制造的经验。这使得它们能够开发出相应的产品，比如印度塔塔集团(Tata)生产的Nano汽车，和海尔在国内面向农村家庭销售的系列家电。
与此同时，为了打入市场，在中国和俄罗斯的西方企业被迫与当地企业合作，这可能会制造紧张局面。雅虎(Yahoo)对谷歌反抗中国政府的支持，已导致其与中方合作伙伴阿里巴巴产生不和。金砖四国企业还知道如何有效地与城市和地区的分销商开展业务。而有些西方企业不得不建立自己的分销网络来与之抗衡。不过，历史悠久的西方品牌在新兴市场仍然声望卓著。它们不仅受到追捧——购买合适的西方品牌仍意味着修养和财富——而且还提供了基本的质量和产品检测保障。某些企业已找到办法来生产较西方更为廉价的产品，同时保持品牌的卓越品质，例如占据中国手机市场37%份额的芬兰企业诺基亚(Nokia)。与之类似的是，英国和美国烟草企业开发了新兴市场品牌。
因此，这条道路走得通——这也是卡夫和其它企业继续在金砖四国寻求增长的原因。但这条路不再像以往那么简单：在偏远地区开家分支机构、然后指望品牌认知和西方市场经验就足以应付局面的想法已经过时了。
译者/君悦
In the three decades of the emerging markets – first the Asian tigers, then China and now the Brics – western companies seeking fortunes have experienced big rewards and big disappointments.
The Brics' lure was on show this week in Kraft's decision to seal its takeover of Cadbury, with its high-growth prospects in India and Russia. Hershey, the US chocolate company that flirted with a counter-bid, is left with the mature, low-growth US market.
But the obstacles to companies doing business in China were also evident in Google's move to defy the Chinese government over cyber-attacks and online censorship. G is risking ceding the biggest potential market to Chinese competitors such as Baidu and Alibaba.
Not all companies face such ethical dilemmas but there are many examples of more prosaic letdowns – companies that tried to sell the same product overseas as at home, or which fell out with local partners, or which found themselves blocked by local regulations.
Now many western companies are not only trying to break into Bric markets but are also facing simultaneous competition from Chinese or Brazilian companies at home.
A wave of emerging multinationals, such
as Brazil's Embraer
and China's Haier, are
as globally focused as
they are.
The auto industry, shaken up by the credit crisis, epitomises how the Brics are changing the balance of global industries. General Motors has struggled at home while its Buick and Cadillac brands have grown rapidly in China; Ford is close to selling
its Volvo brand to Geely
of China.
This is making it increasingly important for global companies to have a strong presence in Bric countries. Without it, they are in danger of being trapped with low-growth brands and being rated poorly by investors.
But western companies have learnt by hard experience that they
must adapt to succeed in the Brics.
The most obvious way
in which western companies have to change is to be able to make cheaper products. Although China's gross domestic product may overtake that of the US by the 2020s, that wealth will be divided among a population more than four times the size.
“The tendency is to bring the same product to these markets that companies sell in Chicago or London but that is way too expensive. Eventually, someone is going to copy it more cheaply,” says Hal Sirkin, a partner in Boston Consulting Group and the author of Globality.
Western luxury goods companies such as LVMH Group and Gucci have been able to expand in China because they are selling to a tiny slice of the market. For mid-market brands that face competition from local companies, it is far harder to transfer products that work in the west.
“The traditional approach of western companies was to cherry-pick the high end but the problem is that local competitors take over the middle market and start pushing upwards,” says Mr Sirkin.
Domestic companies in Bric markets have the advantage not only of knowing local conditions but also experience of low-cost manufacturing. That allows them to develop products such as the Nano car made by Tata of India and the range of Haier domestic appliances sold to peasant families.
Meanwhile, western companies in China and Russia have been forced to partner with local ones to gain access, which can lead to tensions. Yahoo's support for Google defiance of China's government has inflamed a dispute with Alibaba, its partner in China. The Bric companies also know how to operate effectively with distributors in cities and regions. Some western companies have had to establish distribution networks of their own in order to compete. Yet long-established western brands still have cachet in emerging markets. They are not only an aspirational good – buying the right western brands still suggests sophistication and wealth – but also they provide a basic guarantee of quality and product testing. Companies such as Nokia of Finland, which has a 37 per cent share of the mobile handset market in China, have found ways to make cheaper products than in the west, while maintaining a brand premium. Similarly, UK and US cigarette companies have developed emerging market brands.
So it can be done, which is why Kraft and others continue to seek growth in Bric countries. But it is no longer – if it ever was – as simple as opening a subsidiary in a far-flung place and hoping brand recognition and experience of western markets will
be enough.
http://www.ftchinese.com/story/001031133
没有评论:
发表评论