Is China Facing a Growth and Debt Crisis?

"Will China Shake the World Again?” is a recent article written by Robert Preston. Preston is the Business Editor for the BBC. The piece discusses China’s ability to sustain its growth, manage its heavy debt positions and avoid a disaster equal to or greater than the 2007-2008 financial crisis

Preston believes China has an "unbalanced economy whose recent sources of growth are not sustainable.”

In 2007-2008 “…the Chinese government unleashed a stimulus programme of mammoth scale: £400bn…growth accelerated... But the sources of growth…have a limited life.” “…China's growth rate…really looking at 4%."

 “But what makes much of the spending and investment toxic is the way it was financed: there has been an explosion of lending. China's debts…have increased since 2008 from 125% of GDP to 200%.”

“…investing at that pace…it is a…certainty that much of it will never generate an economic return…debtors unable to meet their obligations…large losses for creditors; the question is not whether this will happen but when, and on what scale.”

Based on my experience working with operating companies in Shanghai and Guangdong, I have to agree. My expectation for China’s future is negative, as their potential for serious growth and continued competitiveness will prove to be very difficult.

Having inspected a number of Chinese owned manufacturing companies in mainland China, it becomes apparent manufacturing knowledge, processes, and systems are woefully behind the times. Contemporary manufacturing in China corresponds to the USA’s 1970 manufacturing capabilities.

Therefore, cost increases from higher wages and inefficient operations are to be expected. Also, unfavorable changes in currency valuation will be a factor. This will result in lower growth, employment and capital availability. This will make it far more difficult to service its debts and fund necessary initiatives.

Judging from my visits, the young and educated Chinese appear much more independent, aggressive and spontaneous. It may make its citizens more difficult to control. Social unrest could be a major issue affecting China's economic development as well.

Click on this link to read Mr. Preston’s article.

Here are some other posts on China:

Is China’s decline permanent?

China to surpass USA as World Leader in manufacturing?

Can Manufacturing Return to the USA?

Is China’s decline permanent?

-->

News reports are replete with China’s struggles and decline. China’s past success is frequently labeled a “Bubble” with the question – Is it bursting?

Yes, China is in decline. But not just due to negative Global economic struggles. China has entrenched problems that are contributing to its decline. Are these problems intractable?

Following are significant but an incomplete list of its problems:

● Manufacturing processes and systems are at the same capability level as were in-place in the USA in the 1970s. Relatively inefficient production operations coupled with the sizable increase in hourly factory labor wages are reducing profit margins and free cash flow. A large percentage of Chinese company owners and managers do not have knowledge of the more productive methods of operating.

● The absence of trucking and freight forwarding capabilities to support expansion into lower labor cost Western China. In addition, it is difficult and costly to get quality managers to move to these remote areas.

● China needs to maintain its historic growth rates to ensure that capital is available to clean up its environmental problems. In addition, high employment levels must be available to mitigate the current increases in social protests and riots.

There are several other negatives for China. Click on these links to see further details:

Where is China Heading?

China’s Achilles’ heel– Obstacles to Low Cost

Will China duplicate Japan’s decline from its 1980s success level?

Not exactly the same as Japan since China’s leaders have a history of responding and changing its formulas. But some of its entrenched problems will not be easily solved and China’s pendulum will swing to the negative side of the ledger.

UPDATES: 

August 23rd New York Times article, Manufacturing in China Slows, reporting on a worsening economy.

Business Week’s November 15 article, “Xi takesChina's helm with many tough challenges”, further documents the serious problems facing China’s new leader. 

Can Manufacturing Return to the USA?

The need to move USA manufacturing operations to competitive economic climates, has been essential for a Company's survival.  This exodus to a number of foreign countries, mainly to China and Mexico, has had a negative impact on the USA – its economy, median incomes, standards of living.

Today, New Balance Inc. is a rather unique exception to the migration trend.  For more than twenty years, this successful Boston manufacturer of athletic shoes, annually produces 7 million pairs of its shoes in the USA.

New Balance CEO, Rob Demartini, admits it's a challenge to stay competitive in the world market but says the company's commitment to domestic manufacturing is firm. It's really part of the fabric of the company. we've been manufacturing athletic shoes since 1938," said DeMartini. "We think in an industry where there a lot of shared manufacturing, knowing how to make the product, helps us. It also gets us a lot closer to the consumer."

This piece, titled “New Balance: U.S. Manufacturing Commitment” lists many of the principal reasons for the impressive ability.  New Balance credits a productive employee base and the use of lean manufacturing protocols.  The New Balance story is admirable, especially in relation to the many challenges faced with US Manufacturing.

There were many understandable reasons for the shift to foreign environments, but in my opinion, a great deal of the losses in US Manufacturing could have been avoided with superior, A-level Management - particularly at the Chief Executive Officer level.

Regrettably, poor Executive Leadership, bad decisions, deficient strategy, etc., impelled much of the manufacturing exodus.  Reducing labor costs became an easy convenience.  Admittedly, a number of  relocations were necessary, even critical for survival.

However, if a larger number of the CEO's within the USA had greater experience, better insight, the reality would be different.  With more "A-level" Executives in charge, plant operations would probably not have required this level of relocation.

Regardless, the USA can regain a portion of its manufacturing capacity in the next several years, if we see a number of positive developments.

Here are some important factors for success:

• Quality management down through the 3^rd organization tier;
• Disciplined strategic focus – with an honest and periodically updated situation analysis;
• Superior culture with the absence of hubris and politics;
• Best cost manufacturer – utilizing lean, kanban and kaizen protocols;
• Productive, lean salaried employee organization – not just lean for manufacturing;
• Regular Value Analysis of the product lines;
• Effective application of capital spending – which is essential.

Certainly, a growth in a number of negatives encountered in other environments, within China and Mexico for example, will contribute to the desire to return some foreign based operations to the USA.  However,  relocating manufacturing back to this country will remain a very difficult challenge.

In relation to overseas manufacturing competition, see: 

“China to Surpass the USA as World Leader in Manufacturing?”

4 Gloomy Scenarios

The US Economy continues to be unhealthy.  A review of various forecasts, suggests either a painfully slow recovery or future declines should be expected. One can never trust various predictions to be accurate, but there were four experienced voices who provided sincere concern.

Here is the first:

"The Hindenburg Omen reared its ugly head late last week, signaling more doom and gloom as stocks plod along amid the dog days of summer."

“Yes Folks, Hindenburg Omen Tripped Again” - Mr. Steven Russolillo

The second:

"The Dow Jones Industrial Average will lose about half of its value over the next couple of years as it follows a Nikkei-like pattern of several sharp rallies in an overall decline, according to Charles Nenner, founder and president of Charles Nenner research."

“Dow Faces Bouncy Ride to 5,000: Strategist” - CNBC.com

The third:

Some have predicted this continued deterioration of the economic climate.  Mr. David Farr, the Chief Executive Officer of the Emerson Electric Co., referenced a number of the circumstances contributing to this poor economy in an opinion piece from 2009.

Mr. Farr's Op-Ed is referenced here:
"An Op-Ed on Federal Spending and Legislation"

And finally the fourth:

Neuberger Berman’s MLB Group's 2nd quarter 2010 Economic Outlook is very thorough and well conceived.  It contributes positively with global investment opportunities as well as a potential Achilles' heel to the recovery. 

In these challenging economic times, it is worth a reading and can be accessed here:
"The World Is Still Upside Down"

Criticism of GE’s CEO, Jeffrey Immelt

A March Money Watch article on Jeffrey Immelt, titled 'GE Has Been An Investor Disaster Under Jeff Immelt', is strongly critical of his relatively high level of compensation as it relates to GE’s depressed stock price. Mr. Immelt is General Electric Company’s Chief Executive Officer.

An example of the criticism:

"By any measure of shareholder value, GE has been a disaster under Jeffrey Immelt. Investors haven't made a nickel since he took the helm as chairman nine years ago. In fact, they've lost tens of billions of dollars."

There is certainly room to criticize Mr. Immelt’s salary, bonus, common stock grants and retirement plan while GE’s stock price and profit performance are in the doldrums. However the article does not analyze the condition of GE’s operating businesses. Have its divisions deteriorated? Are there market share losses? Are its operating units registering Operating Losses? Or is its poor profit performance related solely to the 2007-2010 financial and economic crisis?

During this crisis most blue-chip, well-run companies have experienced sales and operating profit declines of 20% - 30% with large declines in the price of their common stock. Although slightly improved recently, many prices are still sluggish and down.

This even includes my Alma Mater, Emerson Electric Co., one of the best managed companies in this country. Emerson has registered sales and operating profit declines of 20%-30%. But their operating divisions have continued to perform well.

Chief Executive Officers are responsible for the operating performance of the businesses they manage – this is their primary role. Granted their tenure is also dependent on the stock price. If the performance of GE’s operating businesses has deteriorated, then Mr. Immelt should be criticized and replaced as CEO.

Lenders Change their Treatment of Troubled Loans

An interesting recent Reuters article, titled 'Lenders More Willing To Own Bankrupt Firms', documents a fairly significant change in the distressed and bankrupt marketplace. Lenders, it reports, are no longer selling their delinquent and troubled loans. They are not selling the loans at steep discounts. They are converting loans to equity ownership and managing the companies themselves.

Reportedly lenders are “kicking the proverbial can down the street" by granting waivers. They are no longer forcing companies to default, or marking loans to market. This is quite unusual, as compared to prior practice.

Will this continue? Once the economy improves, will lenders focus on lending money? Or will lenders continue to be owners and manage the operating companies? Or will they return to selling troubled loans?