<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.3.2" -->
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: if blocking coke isn&#8217;t about nationalism, what is it?</title>
	<link>http://www.chinalawandbusiness.com/2008/09/16/if-blocking-coke-isnt-about-nationalism-what-is-it/</link>
	<description>A China law blog covering issues in Chinese law, business, and society</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 01:51:42 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: T Chow</title>
		<link>http://www.chinalawandbusiness.com/2008/09/16/if-blocking-coke-isnt-about-nationalism-what-is-it/#comment-2262</link>
		<dc:creator>T Chow</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Sep 2008 05:39:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.chinalawandbusiness.com/2008/09/16/if-blocking-coke-isnt-about-nationalism-what-is-it/#comment-2262</guid>
		<description>Will:

I don't disagree that its an effective strategy.  I think it is, though I think much of it is motivated by things other than a duty to shareholders.  (Of course, there is an assumption that this consortium's action is really beneficial for the shareholders, which it may or may not be...  I don't know the books and values of the different assets and IP involved)  

In this day in age, few directors/officers ever really care about the shareholders.  (not much in America, probably less in China)  It's about the bottom line in most cases, as it is here.

So I'd say that this consortium is probably motivated by a mixture of nationalism + opportunism.  But of course, it's only made possible by nationalism.  I'm just looking to call it what it is.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Will:</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t disagree that its an effective strategy.  I think it is, though I think much of it is motivated by things other than a duty to shareholders.  (Of course, there is an assumption that this consortium&#8217;s action is really beneficial for the shareholders, which it may or may not be&#8230;  I don&#8217;t know the books and values of the different assets and IP involved)  </p>
<p>In this day in age, few directors/officers ever really care about the shareholders.  (not much in America, probably less in China)  It&#8217;s about the bottom line in most cases, as it is here.</p>
<p>So I&#8217;d say that this consortium is probably motivated by a mixture of nationalism + opportunism.  But of course, it&#8217;s only made possible by nationalism.  I&#8217;m just looking to call it what it is.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Will Lewis</title>
		<link>http://www.chinalawandbusiness.com/2008/09/16/if-blocking-coke-isnt-about-nationalism-what-is-it/#comment-2224</link>
		<dc:creator>Will Lewis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Sep 2008 21:29:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.chinalawandbusiness.com/2008/09/16/if-blocking-coke-isnt-about-nationalism-what-is-it/#comment-2224</guid>
		<description>If Coke was gonna move into my market in a big way, and I had the opportunity to invoke protections under protectionist legislation to keep them out, would I owe a duty to my shareholders to do just that? If appeals to nationalism could keep a huge competitor out of one's market, then appealing to nationalism regardless of one's actual nationalistic tendencies could prove pretty effective.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If Coke was gonna move into my market in a big way, and I had the opportunity to invoke protections under protectionist legislation to keep them out, would I owe a duty to my shareholders to do just that? If appeals to nationalism could keep a huge competitor out of one&#8217;s market, then appealing to nationalism regardless of one&#8217;s actual nationalistic tendencies could prove pretty effective.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
