IPVM Implements A &#x27;Not Made In PRC China&#x27; Policy

Good for you! The PRC also unfairly subsidizes PRC based companies, restricts foreign company activity within the PRC and arbitrarily jails foreign employees to use as bargaining chips when a PRC executive is caught breaking US law.

Reactions:

(13)

Undisclosed Integrator #2

You had me until you said no iPhones. I will just pay the 10% to the charity to keep mine. Lol

Reactions:

(4)

(5)

(8)

Brett Hoogland

In reply to Undisclosed Integrator #2

This is a grey area....Even though the production is moving to Vietnam...The manufacturer Foxconn is still the owner of the product. Does this change anything?

Reactions:

John Honovich

In reply to Brett Hoogland

IPVM

Foxconn does not 'own' the products it makes. They are contracted by others to manufacture (e.g., Apple). Also, Foxconn is a Taiwan ROC company, not a China PRC one.

Reactions:

(1)

Undisclosed End User #26

Yes understand they are an OEM provider the manufacture to the specifics that apple and so on send them..

But still a Chinese company that manufacturers everything for those companies is my reference

Reactions:

John Honovich

In reply to Undisclosed End User #26

IPVM

But still a Chinese company

Foxconn is from Taiwan, not the PRC.

Reactions:

(2)

(1)

Undisclosed End User #26

The largest Foxconn factory is located in Longhua Town, Shenzhen, where hundreds of thousands of workers (varying counts include 230,000, 300,000, and 450,000) are employed at the Longhua Science & Technology Park, a walled campus sometimes referred to as "Foxconn City".Number of employees: 1,290,000 (2020)Factory in china

Reactions:

(1)

(2)

Tessa Cui-Thuillier

but it is made in PRC!

Reactions:

Mark Berger

Voting with our wallets to effect change?

Truly the American way.

Bravo John.

Reactions:

(17)

Undisclosed Manufacturer #3

Good start to an effort that needs much more publicity and awareness so others can follow this campaign/initiative started by IPVM.

Will IPVM create a database that Integrators, Manufacturers and all kinds of End Users can reference to check for PRC involvement in the manufacturing or profiting aspect of products in the market?

Reactions:

(8)

Undisclosed Integrator #4

This is an excellent step in the right direction. More of us need to step up and make a stand and an example like this. Our company has had a unpublished policy like this for almost a decade. But its really difficult to avoid PRC products entirely. Perhaps its time for companies like ours to adopt a similar policy.

Reactions:

(10)

Martin Aragon

Great Job! Keep up the fight.

Reactions:

(8)

(1)

Adam Messina

Qumulex

I recognize this would be outside the scope of your daily business, but I would love for you guys to review the non-prc phones and tablets your team is using.

Reactions:

(5)

Undisclosed Integrator #7

In reply to Adam Messina

OMG, whatever you do, don’t do that! John would get so distracted by the sorry state of security of the Android apps and phone vulnerabilities that he’d forget his entire beat-up strategy for Hikuawei!!

Reactions:

(1)

Adam Messina

Qumulex

In reply to Adam Messina

This company seems interesting: Purism

Librem 5 USA (SmartPhone)

From: $1,999.00 Steep price. App support is a concern.

Reactions:

(3)

Nyasha Muzwidziwa

In reply to Adam Messina

Hahaha haha.

Reactions:

(1)

(2)

Undisclosed Manufacturer #5

What brand PCs and servers, monitors, mice, printers, etc. are you using for testing recording, editing, etc?

Most hardware is made in China. If you google non-china laptop, you get crap results. They tell you where ASUS or Apple or Dell is headquartered in, but their hardware is all still made in China, not to mention most of the components are also made in China.

Reactions:

(15)

Undisclosed Manufacturer #8

In reply to Undisclosed Manufacturer #5

I was also curious about this, aren't most motherboards and some other key components almost all made in China?

Reactions:

(1)

Undisclosed Manufacturer #11

In reply to Undisclosed Manufacturer #5

That is not entirely true. While I can't speak to sub-components, Dell has had a manufacturing plant in Mexico for over a decade

Reactions:

(1)

Undisclosed End User #26

In reply to Undisclosed Manufacturer #11

And some assembly is completed in Malaysia for Australian products through Dell

Reactions:

James Friesen

In reply to Undisclosed Manufacturer #5

I think it's worth making a distinction, at least for now between PRC and Taiwan. ASUS and many other PC manufacturers are Taiwanese, and I'm all for supporting our more traditional channels.

Reactions:

(2)

Undisclosed Integrator #6

I visited ADI last week and noticed Turing products on the shelf, so I thought I'd look them up on IPVM. Now, the first thing I want to know is, where it's made. I don't see how anything in the PRC can really be NDAA compliant.

IPVM Image

Reactions:

(1)

(2)

David Choi

I might be mistaken but I believe NDAA forbids products/chipsets from specific companies. So as long as the Turing cameras don't use Hisilicon chips, they could be NDAA compliant? When it comes to TAA, then yes, those cameras would not be compliant.

Reactions:

(2)

Undisclosed Integrator #6

In reply to David Choi

Yes, I understand that the Hisilicon and Hauwei chips are the main issue when discussing NDAA. However, as that issue is addressed in the USA, I think the PRC would realize they need to branch out, find other ways to accomplish their "goals", and what better way to do it than by targeting companies currently manufacturing in China. How difficult would it be for the PRC to make inroads into those manufacturers who are in China, who are not currently banned under the NDAA? Would these smaller China manufacturers be the next to be controlled by the PRC? I'm not so quick to start using another China manufacturer, who are now considered NDAA compliant, only to discover in a few short years that they're no longer NDAA compliant. I think it's better to stay completely away.

Reactions:

(2)

Ross Vander Klok

IPVMU Certified

You ask this like they haven't already done all that at pretty much every single company that manufactures anything and everything in China. The government may not outright own it but they control it all.

Reactions:

(2)

(1)

Undisclosed Manufacturer #18

In reply to Ross Vander Klok

Ross is correct I believe you cannot start or own a company in PRC without the Chinese government being a 51% stakeholder. I can't tell you that this a fact, but I remember seeing that discussion about GM and other US car mfg's. Operating in China.

Reactions:

(1)

(4)

(1)

Dave Gideon

IPVMU Certified

Close- every company in China is required to have a member of the Chinese Communist Party on their board (Source: "Stealth War" a book by Brigadier General Robert Spaulding, US Air Force, Retired)

Highly recommended reading, you can finish it in a weekend. China is far worse than you think.

Reactions:

(2)

(1)

(4)

Wanchai Siriwalothakul

Smart Entry Systems • IPVMU Certified

You cannot register a PRC company without a Chinese citizen / entity owning 51% of said company. They only insert a communist party "advisor" once you are big enough. There are plenty of small companies in the PRC that the communist party won't bother with due to their size, but they do send party members to monitor / extort you for bribes frequently.

This is based on first hand knowledge, my mom used to have a company in the PRC, then she got smart and GTFO.

Reactions:

(1)

(5)

(1)

Undisclosed Manufacturer #10

The 51% applies NOT to the Chinese government but to the Chinese citizens. Most countries and probably all developing countries around the world have a similar requirement to keep legal and tax liabilities with somebody local.

Reactions:

(2)

(1)

Tessa Cui-Thuillier

old stuff. It has been changed since 2019/20. No 51-49 rule any more.

Reactions:

(1)

Undisclosed Integrator #6

In reply to Ross Vander Klok

I'm not that naive to believe that the PRC hasn't planned, long ago, to cajole or already implemented action to have "compliant NDAA" manufacturers, in China, get onboard with their "technology." Or, that the PRC hasn't thought of ways to accomplish "their goals" by manufacturing in other countries, under different names, to side step NDAA. Also, manufacturers outside of China have products that are both compliant and non-compliant NDAA, so the relationship has been there for awhile, is there now, and might continue to be there in the future. So, the first step is to avoid all manufacturers in China.

Reactions:

(1)

Undisclosed Integrator #7

Just so you know the USA’s NSA and CIA has been busted doctoring HDD and reprogramming firmware in American network switch brands - something you think is bad for CN to do, but is it ok for the USA TLA’s?

btw the purpose of the NSA doing this was explicitly for spying!

(Read the Snowden disclosures for more astonishing details!)

Reactions:

(6)

(1)

Undisclosed #25

In reply to Undisclosed Integrator #7

I do not think I have ever heard or read somebody say what the NSA/CIA did was ok. It also does not excuse anything CN does or anybody else for that matter.

Reactions:

(2)

Undisclosed Integrator #7

In reply to Undisclosed #25

I agree, just because the ISA does it, does not make it right.

people in glass houses, shouldn’t throw stones.

When an entity condemns others for something that they already do, without disclosing it, then they’re two faced and calls into question their integrity!

also using ‘friendly nations’ to spy on their own citizens, as a work-around to legal protections such as the US constitution, is down-right underhand!

it’s not right on either count.

to be very clear I’m not defending CN, but the whole ‘holier than thou’ approach is tiresome and misleading

Reactions:

(1)

Undisclosed Integrator #29

In reply to Undisclosed Integrator #7

Cisco routers too. This whole China paranoia is a joke when we're literally doing the exact same things here. Honestly at this point I just don't care. The US is constantly saying other nations are doing this or that to us, and more often than not it ends up being false anyway. I remember the supposed WMDs in Iraq, not falling for the lies any more.

Reactions:

(1)

(3)

John Honovich

IPVM

This whole China paranoia is a joke when we're literally doing the exact same things here

The USA does nothing close to what the PRC does. The USA needs to do a better job of educating Americans on what the PRC is doing.

For example, J. Edgar Hoover and civil rights abuses in the 1960s were terrible, certainly. At the same time, the PRC murdered and tortured millions in the Cultural Revolution.

There's "cancel culture" in the US but the PRC's mass censorship is on a completely another planet compared to any issues in the US.

There's corruption in the US but it's nothing like the mass systematic corruption in the PRC, read the recent book Red Roulette for a first-hand perspective. The author's wife was kidnapped years ago, never charged, just held hostage.

Speaking of hostages, the 2 Canadians held hostage in retaliation for Huawei's CFO and the 2 American citizens held hostage because the PRC was after their parents.

I'd strongly encourage you to better research the depths of horrific abuses the CPC engages in and you will better understand why there is so much concern for supporting them. Does that help?

Reactions:

(5)

(3)

(2)

Undisclosed Integrator #29

The author's wife was kidnapped years ago, never charged, just held hostage.

How many prisoners not charged with crimes still in Gitmo?

Sorry, there is no difference.

Reactions:

(1)

John Honovich

IPVM

39, according to Wikipedia. Compare that to Xinjiang.

Also, compare that to the very vocal opposition of America's ACLU to Gitmo. And compare to a current Supreme Court case of a prisoner there.

The PRC differs both in terms of the vast scale of abuses they engage in and in their punishment of those who oppose or fight against their abuses.

Reactions:

(5)

Undisclosed Integrator #29

I disagree but there's probably no point in continuing since your mind is obviously made up, as is mine.

One question though - given the great amount of resources that IPVM obviously expends towards reports on Xinjiang and manufacturers of cameras used there, when can we expect a report on who manufactured the CCTV equipment in the US's migrant concentration camps where documented forced sterilizations were occurring as recently as September of 2020?

Reactions:

(1)

Undisclosed Integrator #16

This forum is not going to resolve the injustice, prejudice, or abusive behavior of the world, and for each historical account of wrong doing that may be brought to light, there are always at least two or more opposing perspectives. With so much misinformation each individual has to do there best to sort through the smoke and mirrors, seek out the truth, and then decide for themselves what to believe. Fortunately there is an abundance of information, including no denial of such activity, only righteous indignation that someone would think it was their business to discuss the subject. How dare they take moral high ground when they have dirt or blood on their own hands. There is not doubt that no country in the world, or it’s government is able to say they have not participated in something that was not OK.

Countries and governments and groups of individuals consist of people, and people do things individually that their group may or may not be aware of. It happens, it has happened, and it will continue to happen. One wrong does not justify another.

Everyone does not agree on what is right or wrong. A thief might thing it is ok or right for him to take something he needs from someone else who has it. For the thief it justified, so perhaps not even wrong. For the victim of the crime it would most likely not be ok.

From the point of view of the victims, and most of the worlds population, violations of human rights, including privacy rights, are wrong. This same majority of our fellow human beings in this world would agree that wherever these things happen, they need to be addressed and if possible, fully eliminated. For this to happen, it has to be a cooperative effort. We are individuals living within different countries, with different governments, and different rules by which each operate. So we each have to find our own way to respond or deal with these issues as we become aware of them.

Although not for everyone, each person, company, or organization may carefully choose where and how to invest our money. This choice might exempt financially supporting in any way, those who contribute to, benefit by, or participate in activities we feel are unjust or unfair. Our money, our choice. While it may have little or no impact, it feels better.

In Free economic systems we can unify our position by voting with our money as well as at the polls. It seems you are very passionate about abuses and human rights violations, perhaps you may choose to do the same.

Reactions:

(3)

Charles Rollet

Hi, thanks for your comment - I'll try and clear this up. The reason we report this much on Xinjiang is that most large PRC video surveillance manufacturers are directly involved in the repression of Uyghurs across China (PRC) and the construction of Xinjiang's surveillance state.

A popular misconception is that IPVM unfairly singles them out even though they are 'just selling cameras' and aren't really involved in the installation and operation of rights-abusing projects. This is false: as IPVM has detailed, the Xinjiang police projects are directly won by Hikvision and Dahua who are contracted to build and operate them. See this example of Hikvision's Pishan county project which includes systems for a re-education camp:

IPVM Image

This is why the Norwegian government's Council on Ethics found Hikvision's rights abuses to be "ongoing" and the UK government's Surveillance Camera Commissioner says these projects "connotes" that Hikvision is "actively and willingly working" in what is "very clearly a joint enterprise arrangement".

IPVM's Xinjiang reporting does not mean there are no human rights abuses in US video surveillance or US migrant camps. However, we have not found evidence of large video surveillance manufacturers (US or otherwise) being directly contracted to not only build but also operate wide-ranging surveillance systems in migrant camps.

If you have evidence of this though, I would consider it newsworthy so please feel free to email me anytime at charles@ipvm.com

When it comes to forced sterilization, that is indeed horrific and the FBI is reportedly investigating the Georgia doctor accused of this.

Reactions:

(1)

Undisclosed Integrator #30

In reply to Charles Rollet

Private prison industry

However US CCTV manufacturers like Pelco and Vivian had teams focused on selling to public and private prisons. I remember a complaint of dealers being Vicon selling directly to the contractors building them.

Reactions:

(1)

John Honovich

In reply to Undisclosed Integrator #30

IPVM

#30, Dahua operates China police surveillance.

Have you protested that? Would you?

Reactions:

(1)

Undisclosed Manufacturer #10

•Oct 13, 2021

John, are you aware of the New York company called Clearview.AI, https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/18/technology/clearview-privacy-facial-recognition.html, used by hundreds of law enforcement (and also not law enforcement, such as TSA) agencies, domestic and international? Likely used by secret services of foreign powers too, as long as they pay $100/ month (or whatever it is), as it's an unregulated commercial entity. You don't need millions of video cameras for comprehensive surveillance in the American population - tapping into Facebook/ Instagram/ LI/ etc. accounts is much more cost efficient, and everybody has multiple accounts in those. You don't need to investigate grainy video pictures to locate accomplices - just look at Facebook "friends". A simple click of a button!

Reactions:

Undisclosed #12

Turing = Hikvision 2.0

Reactions:

(3)

(2)

(1)

(2)

Magnus Lundegård

Good effort, great symbolic value. Of course it is a small step, but it is still a small step in the right direction. Cudos!

Reactions:

(5)

(1)

RICHARD STUART

John,

Thank you for your stand. If our entire industry made a similar stand it would be felt by the PRC.

Reactions:

(3)

(1)

Mike Harpster

Capital Electric Wire & Cable

I love this idea!

Avoiding PRC products will be difficult, but it's worth it. Hopefully, this movement combined with the supply-chain chaos, will force businesses to begin developing non-PRC sources regularly. Good for IPVM for taking a stand!

Reactions:

(3)

Undisclosed Integrator #7

Laudable as a policy, now let’s see how you get on with it on a practical basis!

the $50 limit will probably cover some of the Hik products too!

Reactions:

(3)

John Bredehoft

Bredemarket / Incode Technologies

I was curious about non-China products, and this site reminded me (duh!) that two leading Android phone manufacturers are made in South Korea.

Reactions:

(1)

(4)

John Bredehoft

In reply to John Bredehoft

Bredemarket / Incode Technologies

2021 : U.S. trade in goods with China

NOTE: All figures are in millions of U.S. dollars on a nominal basis, not seasonally adjusted unless otherwise specified. Details may not equal totals due to rounding. Table reflects only those months for which there was trade.

Month	Exports	Imports	Balance
January 2021	12,860.9	39,111.2	-26,250.2

2020 : U.S. trade in goods with China

Month	Exports	Imports	Balance
January 2020	7,153.7	33,173.3	-26,019.6

Imports are UP

Census.gov

Reactions:

(1)

Tessa Cui-Thuillier

In reply to Undisclosed Integrator #15

The figures tell you one thing: how silly trade war launched by D. Trump! That means US consumers pay off tax on imported products! Re-coupling is better than de-coupling.

Reactions:

(1)

Undisclosed #28

•Oct 14, 2021

In reply to Tessa Cui-Thuillier

Now tell us how proud you are of Joe Biden... Geeze.

Reactions:

(1)

(2)

Undisclosed Manufacturer #22

A bold and righteous move but I am getting some Richard Stallman-esque vibes .

Half expecting to see John running IPVM from a command line somewhere in the jungle five years from now. :D

Just kidding John. Good work!

Reactions:

J Robert Burgoyne

In reply to Undisclosed Manufacturer #22

True Blade Systems, Inc.

Good to know there's another RMS supporter in IPVM. .

If you want to learn more about computer ethics and open-source software, there's no person better to learn from than Richard Stallman.

Read what he's written about Facebook, going back to its inception:

I think Facebook should be eliminated entirely and replaced with an index of people.

Reasons not to use (i.e., be used by) Facebook

Reactions:

Wanchai Siriwalothakul

Smart Entry Systems • IPVMU Certified

We have been looking, unsuccessfully, for a US based manufacturer who is able to at least come close to the price point that we are paying the PRC factory to make the stainless steel enclosure for our video intercom system. Including air shipping, we are currently paying approximately $275 each.

If anyone wants to give it a shot, or knows someone, here is what it looks like:

Search eBay

Reactions:

Undisclosed Manufacturer #10

y $275 each. If anyone wants to give it a shot, or k

EVS Metal in New Jersey can make it probably for around $150 (by the looks) as they have a fully automated factory, if they first help you redesign it to reduce the number of weld points (replacing with pem nuts and such) - spot welding is perhaps 10x more expensive here than in China and should be avoided. You need quantity of say 1K+, and you may wait for months due to the current labor shortages.

Reactions:

(4)

Wanchai Siriwalothakul

In reply to Undisclosed Manufacturer #10

Smart Entry Systems • IPVMU Certified

Thank you! I'll contact them immediately.

Reactions:

Wanchai Siriwalothakul

Smart Entry Systems • IPVMU Certified

For some reason I didn't see the part about the 1k+ MOQ. This, unfortunately, is a no-go for us. We only buy 25~50 pieces at a time from China and they make them for us, delivers in 30 days or sooner. Our customers may buy 10~15 Single Entry Controllers but they rarely buy more than 1~2 Video Intercoms, because most apartments and communities only has 1 or 2 designated Visitor Entrances.

Reactions:

Wanchai Siriwalothakul

•Oct 13, 2021

Smart Entry Systems • IPVMU Certified

Well, we tried, and again failed to find a suitable replacement for the PRC.

IPVM Image

Reactions:

Undisclosed #21

•Oct 14, 2021

IPVMU Certified

Well, we tried, and again failed to find a suitable replacement for the PRC.

Maybe the DPRK?

Reactions:

Wanchai Siriwalothakul

Smart Entry Systems • IPVMU Certified

Maybe we can get more suggestions for potential US metal enclosure fabricators for us to try?

Reactions:

John Honovich

IPVM

CBC has a division/business, called Broadsight Systems that makes security enclosures in North Carolina:

IPVM Image

Reactions:

Shannon Davis

IPVMU Certified

There are plenty of custom metal manufacturers in the united states. We have one local, TK Metals we use for custom boxes and mounting hardware. They have a automated plasma cutter which keeps the cost down for the process.

Reactions:

Brian Rhodes

IPVMU Certified

Two additional housing companies come to mind:

Dotworkz (here is their OEM/ODM page)

IPVM Image

Wren Solutions

IPVM Image

While Dotworkz markets the domestic mfgr aspect prominently, Wren does not. I suspect that is because they are relabeling some of their housings and aren't 100% compliant. But I have toured their manufacturing facility and know they do a fair amount/majority in Missouri.

With regards to this:

a US based manufacturer who is able to at least come close to the price point that we are paying the PRC factory to make the stainless steel enclosure for our video intercom system.

You might try an electrical box manufacturer like Maysteel:

IPVM Image

That price point may be too inexpensive to match, but there are many domestic options for sheet metal bending and fabrication, especially in the fence manufacturing and aviation industries. It might be worth calling some 'local to you' firms to see if there is interest in contract manufacturing for you.

Reactions:

(1)

Brian Rhodes

IPVMU Certified

In reply to Brian Rhodes

We are expanding coverage in this area, and I will reach out to Broadsite and other non-China security accessory manufacturers to develop lists and profiles.

Given current focus of many is to move away from PRC sources, it is timely and valuable to survey the market for these companies. I look forward to it!

If you have a recommendation for me to contact/add to a list, please comment or email me at: brian@ipvm.com.

Reactions:

Wanchai Siriwalothakul

•Oct 16, 2021

Smart Entry Systems • IPVMU Certified

In reply to Brian Rhodes

Thank you all! I will give all of them a call. When we first started we reached out to all of the local metal fabricators. When we said we only wanted 10 boxes as a start, none of them were interested.

Reactions:

Wanchai Siriwalothakul

•Oct 16, 2021

Smart Entry Systems • IPVMU Certified

In reply to Brian Rhodes

We are not asking the US manufacturer to match the PRC price. We are asking them to come close to the PRC price + air shipping, which adds another $125 to the total cost. Almost as much as the product itself.

The PRC product only price is just $150, while we are getting quotes from local companies in the $500+ range and a 1k MOQ.

I don't know why there is such a huge price discrepancy, and how they are surviving only taking orders with a minimum amount of half a million dollars. It's as if they don't really want our business.

Reactions:

(1)

Undisclosed Manufacturer #10

•Oct 16, 2021

In reply to Undisclosed Manufacturer #10

Unfortunately, that's the story of our lives! Add to that local labor shortages. The only reasons to stay local seem to be a) if you have the local company involved in the engineering process so they carefully optimize to their capabilities; b) you deal with bulky items like kiosks which are hard to ship; c) you don't know what you doing and keep tweaking the design and have multiple versions which are hard to manage; d) you don't like receiving WhatsApp texts late in the evening:).

Reactions:

Wanchai Siriwalothakul

•Oct 18, 2021

Smart Entry Systems • IPVMU Certified

This is the typical response we get.

IPVM Image

Reactions:

J Robert Burgoyne

True Blade Systems, Inc.

John - GREAT CONFERENCE, and thanks for taking this position. All of us can make a conscious effort to seek alternatives to Made in PRC products every single day.

"If anyone wants to make a 1-3 minute statement"

I did send in an email request on Sept 30 @ 11:19am to speak, and prepared a brief statement, but... crickets. No problem. IPVM's stance is more important than my prepared statement. And the responses to your decision appear to be almost entirely positive.

A few of you were standing around near the stage, before the cocktail hour, when I gave John an in-person briefing of my PRC observations and beliefs. Everyone should become familiar with how the PRC compromises foreigners. I call it the 大陆方法 (Mainland China method).

Reactions:

Undisclosed #21

IPVMU Certified

My first thought was:

Isn’t the Doubletree’s largest shareholder a Chinese conglomerate (via Doubletree’s parent Hilton)?

My second was:

Ingram Micro is out as well.

However I am happy to report that despite Wikipedia’s stale info, that both are now fully divested from China :)

Reactions:

(1)

John Honovich

IPVM

Related to Hilton and Ingram Micro's former HNA ownership, see how HNA's executives were recently arrested after the company collapsed:

The authorities in China have taken into custody the top two executives of HNA Group, a transportation and logistics conglomerate that bought up businesses around the world before quickly collapsing under heavy debts. The company said late on Friday that the police on Hainan Province, where it is based, had seized its chairman, Chen Feng, and chief executive, Tan Xiangdong.

Both men were detained “in accordance with the law for suspected crimes,” the company said in a statement, without specifying those offenses. HNA did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Reactions:

Undisclosed #24

Platinum Equity » News » Platinum Equity Completes Acquisition of Ingram Micro for $7.2 Billion

Bravo to IPVM for taking this stance!

Reactions:

(1)

J Robert Burgoyne

•Oct 09, 2021

True Blade Systems, Inc.

Ingram Micro was purchased from HNA by a Beverly Hills investment firm, Platinum Equity, in July, 2021:

Platinum Equity today announced that it has completed the acquisition of Ingram Micro Inc. from HNA Technology Co., Ltd, a part of HNA Group, for a total enterprise value of $7.2 billion, in a transaction that includes $5.9 billion of equity value.

Reactions:

(2)

Helen Zheng

IPVM has been controlled by the US goverment ?

Reactions:

(2)

(3)

(2)

John Honovich

IPVM

In reply to Helen Zheng

Helen, thanks for your first comment!

No, IPVM is not controlled by the US government. The ubiquitous role of the CPC / government in the lives and businesses in the PRC and now Hong Kong makes it reasonable for those from there to assume the same of the USA, but the USA is different.

For better and sometimes worse, the USA government is relatively removed from the private sector and radically so compared to the PRC.

IPVM does increasingly talk to the US (and other) governments but it is virtually always to inform them of things going on in this industry.

Two things that might help you better understand the US government. One, unlike the PRC, power is fragmented across the US government so there is no US gov entity that would try to control or order private companies like IPVM. Secondly, and perhaps more important, is the US's freedom of press and speech. If the US government was to order IPVM or any other private entity to do something, they risk us exposing it and causing a big problem for the government. In the PRC, such people would disappear.

Here is an example from a fascinating 2016 interview with the Global Times Hu Xijin:

Foreign media sometimes interpret us as China’s official newspaper. This is neither entirely wrong nor entirely right. Does the New York Times represent Barack Obama or the White House? No. Do we represent the Chinese government? No. Our relations with the foreign ministry and the national defense ministry is probably just like the New York Times’ relations with the White House and the State Council. [emphasis added]

This claim seems especially silly now since months later Trump was elected President and the NY Times fought Trump incessantly. The point is while it is understandable from a PRC perspective to think the USA operates similarly, we don't. Does that help, Helen?

Reactions:

(4)

(2)

Helen Zheng

I understand what you say. I don't like talking about politics here just like you will not argue with your colleague which party you support in the workplace.

IPVM is always professional in the security area. Involving politics is not a good way.

Reactions:

(1)

John Honovich

IPVM

In reply to Helen Zheng

Involving politics is not a good way.

Politics involved itself in technology and video surveillance, i.e.:

I understand the desire to not be involved in politics but we don't have that choice. The only choice we have is to accept politics and human rights abuses that were brought in by the PRC or stand up to it. We have chosen the latter.

Reactions:

(1)

Undisclosed Integrator #15

Where do you source information to get facts (proofs) about human rights abuses in China?

Please be specific.

Just curios

Reactions:

(3)

(1)

Charles Rollet

In reply to Undisclosed Integrator #15

Thanks for your question. For PRC video surveillance human rights abuses, we chiefly rely on our own findings which are based on primary documents from the companies themselves, e.g.:

Also note that the Norwegian government's Council on Ethics independently confirmed that Hikvision's human rights abuses are "ongoing".

On human rights in the PRC more generally, we closely follow reporting on China from mainstream news outlets like the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times, Al Jazeera, etc, eg which detail various human rights abuses:

We also follow reports from human rights organizations like Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International:

HRW: Crimes Against Humanity in Xinjiang
Amnesty International: Hong Kong National Security Law has Created A Human Rights Emergency

Finally, there's also various indices indicating the PRC's human rights poor situation:

Reporters Without Borders ranks China (PRC) as 177th out of 180 countries in terms of press freedom
The Economist's Intelligence Unit classifies China PRC as "authoritarian" and ranks it as the 151st most democratic country in the world (out of 167 total)
Freedom House's "Freedom In The World" ranking gives PRC 9/100 points, ranking it "Not Free" and 185 out of 195 countries

We also closely read PRC media like Xinhua, Global Times, CGTN, and others, of course. But PRC media is state-controlled and I have never seen them publish anything about China's human rights abuses.

Instead, the PRC view on human rights is clear: the PRC has its own human rights think tank called the China Society for Human Rights Studies which states in its "On the View on Human Rights with Chinese Characteristics" that economic development "underlies all the other human rights" and the best way to protect human rights is to "adhere to the leadership of the Party as always."

Contrast that to the clear principles in the UN Declaration of Human Rights:

Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion;

No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile;

Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race;

Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression

Reactions:

(1)

Undisclosed Integrator #27

In reply to Helen Zheng

Controlled is a bit harsh but I would say they are aligned with the US foreign policy on China. Which seek to destabilize any market that seems to be doing better than them.

Reactions:

(3)

(1)

Sanford Ivy

As an American I can appreciate freedoms, but I realize those freedoms were paid for with blood spilled by the defenders of the United States of America. Isn't it time that our political leaders realize what IPVM has discovered, namely, that countries such as ROC are NOT America's friends and should NOT have Preferred Nation trade rights with the USA?

IPVM, I commend you on taking a stand, one that will surely bring opposition to your financial well-being in the short run, but should gives others the courage to take a stand with you! THAT is the AMERICAN WAY!

Bravo to IPVM!

Reactions:

(2)

(1)

Undisclosed Integrator #27

Hahaha. Good for you guys. As for us we are not going to buy expensive stuff simply because America is afraid of a little competition.

I will not buy a flir thermal camera that is 3 times with zero analytics more than a dahua equipped with analytics. That does not make any economical sense. Bottom line USA is falling behind on almost everything. You look at the likes of Ebay which has been falling behind to the likes of alibaba. You look at the 5G and the telecoms industry as a whole.

The bottom line is the USA should find better ways of doing business otherwise the reality is that people are starting to wake up and realise they can get better products in other countries.

Reactions:

(3)

(1)

John Honovich

IPVM

As for us we are not going to buy expensive stuff

The bottom line is the USA should find better ways of doing business

This is not about USA vs PRC, this is about the PRC's corrupt and human rights-abusing system and a growing coalition of countries rising to oppose that.

I think our video is quite clear but to make sure you understand we are not saying we are only going to buy USA products, we are aiming to not buy PRC products. Taiwan, South Korea, Vietnam, Mexico, etc., etc. are fine.

Reactions:

(1)

Undisclosed Integrator #14

Did you actually read the article before posting?

IPVM never said they were making this move for financial or competitive reasons.
They clearly indicated they were making it for ethical reasons - namely human rights violations - something you completely failed to address
They never denied that there will always be a group of people that put profits before ethics.

Reactions:

(1)

Undisclosed Integrator #27

When it comes to human abuse it's a slippery slope. Every American company or European is being forced to boycott Chinese products. The reality is that only a few are blind and cannot see past what's happening.

One of the examples I made a few months back which no one seems to want to address was about Flir. Flir makes thermal cameras used by the United States Airforce on their drones. Which the government bombs unarmed civilians in Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan. I have never heard any of you talking about banning flir products. Why is that?

I can give you a tone of examples but that's not the point of my argument. The point I am making is that leave technology out of politics.

Besides most integrators and Engineers would not fall for such. We actually test the products and buy what works for us, in terms of security, performance, and price.

If you tell me there is vulnerability on a hikvision camera or a dahua camera that is really helpful. If you point out dahua is selling untested fever cameras that do not work according to their spec sheet, we are happy about that.

Reactions:

(1)

John Honovich

IPVM

The point I am making is that leave technology out of politics.

Tell that to Hikvision, please.

The reality is that you can't keep technology out of politics. You know this, admit it.

Which the government bombs unarmed civilians in Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan. I have never heard any of you talking about banning flir products. Why is that?

We have not historically covered drones but as we do expand, I definitely agree with you that we need to look seriously at how drones are misused and the responsibility of companies selling those drones. Keep us honest on this as we expand into drones.

Reactions:

(2)

(1)

Undisclosed Integrator #14

You fail to understand:

1.) that there is a majority (hopefully) of people that care about ethics and don't want to "keep technology out of politics".

2.) this keeps coming up - you assume that if you can't draw a perfect black and white line then you should draw no line at all. If a company promotes lynching a certain ethnic group - you would just say " well, no company is perfect... so let's just look at profits and put politics aside". We should always strive for consistency. But to say we should strive for nothing is a nihilistic view.

Reactions:

(1)

Undisclosed Integrator #27

Guys I am actually starting to believe that you do believe in these things you actually say which is very scary. Look at how many wars America has started, I am from Zimbabwe and my county has been under sanctions for the last 20 years just because we demanded our land back. We cannot trade with any European and American companies. Either you guys are ignorant of what is happening or you are pretending as if you do not know.

This is why I do not believe IPVM should be drawn into such discussions. The USA has their own problems that they need to fix before they try and be the moral compass of the world. I hate politics, all governments are 2 faced . I mean all of them. Some are worse than others.

Reactions:

(2)

Undisclosed Integrator #14

IPVM wasn't trying to be the "moral compass" of the world. Nor did anyone from IPVM say the US was perfect.

You said it correct when you said "some are worse than others". That IS the point. In a world of choices, some prefer to chose better even if better isn't perfect.

Reactions:

(1)

Undisclosed Integrator #27

There is a bigger story happening here. Unfortunately, you need to be open-minded to know what's happening. T

Reactions:

(1)

Undisclosed #21

IPVMU Certified

Unfortunately, you need to be open-minded to know what's happening. T

Is that last letter a typo? Perhaps you meant Q ?

Reactions:

Undisclosed Integrator #27

I did read it. This issue didn't start with this article. There are other articles that came before this one, maybe you need to start looking at the articles before these.

Reactions:

(1)

(2)

Undisclosed Integrator #16

The US is not afraid of lower Chinese prices, or competing with China products. Chinese products would not be less expensive if not subsidized by the PRC. Because of the lower pricing in all market areas, the US has and still uses more Chinese products than any other country in the world. In fact we purchase 3 times as much product from China than we sell. Potential customers for those products have and are justified to have issues with the following well documented items.

1. Chinese network Chipsets which have been used in all kinds of network products have built in features and dangerous behaviors that present real security and privacy risks to any network on which they are installed. The NDAA and FCC have banned only a few. Their testing does not reflect all products, only the ones they specifically identified through use and investigation by Government and private Security experts. It is NOT political to want to protect information on private, business, and government networks from access without the knowledge of the users, or full knowledge of the extent of that access. These are not exploits due to errors in original design, but deliberate weaknesses which place every network with one of these products sitting on them at risk.

2. The technology being used to monitor and identify individuals by cultural, race, gender, and other features are a matter of record in patents applied for by numerous Chinese corporations. This has been documented clearly in world media as well as by IPVM. That technology has been and continues to be used for purposes which the majority of individuals in the world consider violations of human rights and privacy.

3. Manufacturers like HikVision, Dahua, and others manufacture those products and clearly understand their purpose. Considering they are partly owned by the PRC may mean they have no choice, but there is no doubt they are doing so. The PRC does not deny these things. Instead they complain that it is not anyone’s business what happens in their country, and just to be sure, their news agencies assure that the general pubic in their country are kept in the dark. It is an interesting fact, that throughout history, light has a way of illuminating the darkness.

4. Today it is highly likely that these issues may not be of concern to those who want to be able to sell the least expensive product, or those who only wish to purchase the least expensive product. It is their right to sell or purchase whatever they wish.

However, for those individuals, companies, and governments for whom security, privacy, and human rights are important, they are free to not to purchase or support products that place themselves and others at risk. We applaud you for using your purchasing power to express your opinion.

We support IPVM for providing the truth and information discovered in plain sight, much of which was boldly provided in manufacturers marketing and technical documentation, and government patents.

We also support IPVM’s use of free enterprise as a means to support their opinion in a visible and public action.

It is not surprising that the only defense is to point out others doing things perceived to be as bad or worse. Anywhere that security, privacy, or human rights are being violated should have light shined upon it. We all have to share this world, and the rights, safety, and privacy of individuals has to be for most.

It also has nothing to do with competition, as no one can compete with subsidized Chinese products. It IS about safety, security, privacy, and genocide, and something that an industry subscription publication is doing to shed light on, and attempt to have an impact on these problems.

If you do not agree, and support or are not concerned about such things, you are free to purchase, use, support and disseminate these products to your customers.

For those of us who have concerns, we are free to use our capital to purchase other products, even if at a higher cost. We and most of our customers believe the additional cost is justified for the peace of mind. By the way, Ninety five percent of these other products are NOT made in the US.

Reactions:

(1)

(2)

Undisclosed #21

In reply to Undisclosed Integrator #16

IPVMU Certified

The US is not afraid of lower Chinese prices, or competing with China products. Chinese products would not be less expensive if not subsidized by the PRC.

How can the PRC afford to subsidize the US consumer?

Reactions:

(1)

Undisclosed Integrator #16

They have plenty of money, and they are subsidizing Chinese manufacturers not the US or any consumer.

The PRC becomes partial owners (limited to 49%), of selected Chinese manufacturers. As partners or stock holders they infuse them with additional capital. This infusion or subsidy allows them to sell their finished products at often less than it costs to produce that product.

It provides quite a stimulus and has been a key element in supporting the growth of Chinese manufacturers in various market segments for many years. Technology, electronic based products, and electronic components have been a primary emphasis.

It has been a great way to help their manufacturers get a foothold in world markets. It encourages private Chinese companies that wish to be competitive to accept PRC investment, and it makes it almost impossible for privately owned Chinese manufacturers to compete.

It also of course makes it difficult if not impossible for companies to compete in countries where their government does not provide subsidies.

Government subsidized manufacturing has successfully helped Chinese/PRC partnered manufacturers capture entire major markets, including network components and chipsets. It also affords the PRC excellent influence over this manufacturers.

Can you think of any reasons those particular markets might be valuable? Ask Great Britain why they had to change 5G manufacturers.

Reactions:

Undisclosed #21

In reply to Undisclosed Integrator #16

IPVMU Certified

They have plenty of money, and they are subsidizing Chinese manufacturers not the US or any consumer.

Yes, but you are saying that they subsidize Chinese manufacturers who in turn pass that along to the consumer as lower prices. Or am I misunderstanding?

Reactions:

Undisclosed Integrator #7

•Oct 18, 2021

In reply to Undisclosed Integrator #16

UK 5G swap outs from Huawei were caused by pressure from the US, who suggested carrier grade Cisco products… (Source: sec consultant for Vodaphone and Telefonica O2)

whilst Huawei have a documented history of sloppy coding (in the past) they have met stringent requirements to vet source code in person at their secret technology centre in Banbury. This in theory means that the code and hardware is fully vetted for national infrastructure projects.

Funny that the USA were championing Cisco that they have previously been caught tampering with firmware for spying and that on top of the high numbers of hard coded passwords and back doors that were ‘found’ in their code review!

there are two things I’m going to leave here…

1. corruption takes many forms

2. one man’s freedom fighter is another man’s terrorist. Or translated as we don’t want them to be able to do what we are already doing and if they put their kit in, we will go dark and not be able to spy on our own citizens and those of fellow 5 eyes countries!

Reactions:

Undisclosed #28

Great! Now do vaccine tyranny and civil rights abuses.

Reactions:

(3)

(6)

Undisclosed #28

In reply to Undisclosed #28

Unhelpful? No. Just inconvenient.

Reactions:

(2)

(3)

Undisclosed #21

In reply to Undisclosed #28

IPVMU Certified

Unhelpful? No.

I agree, they’re helpful.

Just inconvenient.

Definitely, to get a Flu shot this year took 2 hours.

Reactions:

(4)

(5)

Undisclosed #28

That's not what I meant, but you know that.

I was referring to my comment and the related votes.

But misrepresentation surrounding the "vaccine" is not surprising.

Reactions:

(3)

(2)

Undisclosed #21

In reply to Undisclosed #28

IPVMU Certified

I was referring to my comment and the related votes. But misrepresentation surrounding the "vaccine" is not surprising.

Nor is the misrepresentation about “voting irregularities” :)

Reactions:

(1)

Ernest DiNardo

Good for you, we are trying to do the same and have a couple of customers who also feel the same about PRC products. We always look for alternatives and hope everyone else will do the same. Why support a regime that whats to cripple us!

Reactions:

(1)

Undisclosed Integrator #27

In reply to Ernest DiNardo

That's exactly what I was talking about. This has nothing to do with human rights abuse.

Reactions:

(1)

(2)

Undisclosed Integrator #31

IMO it would be interesting to chronicle the challenges in meeting this goal and the steps made to meet it. Products are so intentionally deceptive and muddled in the marketplace that I am not certain this goal is even feasible.

Reactions:

John Honovich