So Huawei and its hired guns at Bain Capital won’t be able to acquire that controlling stake in 3Com, a leading US telecom equipment manufacturer, after all. Count me as surprised: I really figured that China was due for a “make-up call” after what (many characterized as) protectionist sentiments scuttled CNOOC’s proposed acquisition of UNOCAL, the 8th largest US oil company, in 2005. Huawei, we were told by Bain and its partisans, is a different kind of company – a private one (started by a former PLA officer).
From the outset, US regulators were more than a little suspicious of Huawei’s secretive ownership structure and ongoing commerce with the PLA. But that wasn’t necessarily an insurmountable obstacle to the deal, and most companies in this position would not only realize this fact, but they would do the sensible thing and hire a team of US lobbyists and media consultants to guide them through the rather predictable PR gauntlet that the deal would have to run. I must admit, I have no idea whether or not Huawei did that, but if they did, the consultants weren’t around to handle the Financial Times reporters who ran this on the front page of the US edition of their paper on February 12:
Now, far be it from me to give media and marketing advice to one of China’s largest and most important companies, but it seems to me that – if you’re looking to allay the fears of US lawmakers – telling them that they’re full of crap – and I mean, really telling them just that – isn’t the way to do it.
On that topic – since when does the FT run expletives? Much less, on the front page?
And, while I’m still on the topic, I think the US made the right choice in opposing this deal, for reasons that I wrote about here.
Is it just me or has Shanghai Scrap become a bit more “punchy” over the last couple of weeks?