To be fair, Europe does have ASML which has something like 2/3 market share in DUV and almost monoplistic in EUV.

The moat is enormous, so they are unlikely to face any serious competition for at least a decade if not more.

Sure of course, just like COMAC vs Airbus/Boeing, BYD vs Western EVs etc.

But this is a bit different IMHO.

First there's still a lot of catching-up to do.

And second are they going to be able to gain sufficient marketshare in the Western market ? I am thinking here, both in terms of displacing ASML and in terms of Western companies being willing to depend on Chinese tech for such critical activities.

There's a whole hierarchy of products and services that benefit from this. At any level that there is a ban/preference to not use Chinese products it translates to a lower price for the same technology, which feeds into the domestic market for dependent tech.

Nobody buys their chips? They build data centers and sell computation as service. That does not sell enough? Domestic R&D now has an edge, creating momentum for medicine, agriculture, consumer products, weapons.

You can ban a small country for a long time, or a large country for a small time, but not large for long

Who falls for this crap? An ASML EUV machine costs over $100 million and is delivered in dozens of shipping containers, taking up 2 floors in a fab.

You're going to need really extraordinary evidence that the PRC has a "desktop sized EUV machine" if you want us to believe you.

This is the company/machine: http://lumi-universe.com/?list_27/84.html

You can check the dimensions there, max 80cm. This is only the EUV light source, not an entire wafer fab.

When we say "EUV machine" in the semiconductor context, it's pretty unambiguous that we're talking about a lithography machine using EUV and that can do, at least, ~120 300 mm wafers per hour.

As another comment explained, that machine you linked to is nothing like what we mean by "EUV machine", it's not even attempting to be a lithography tool.

At first I thought you were being willingly misleading but your wording suggests you're not, so I suggest binging Asianometry on YouTube if you'd like to get up to speed on the semi industry.

Not that Japan is much different

Then we can again focus on trade, lowering taxs and creating value. The only thing that is happening now is that the political class has become enormously rich through bribes and by having managed to phase out democracy and enriching themselves.

You are seeing from European perspective but I can assure you that there is people that seeing western country is a "bad guys" from these region because Western power always trying exert their influence via trade deal, regime change, fund armed group etc

You are claiming it has no position while similtaneously using its past position as argument.

That's not possible. There are just too many different parts going into semiconductor production and they're scattered around the world.

Case in point: the source of the best semiconductor-grade quartz is located in Spruce Pine, North Carolina and while there exist alternatives, for cost-competetiveness you want that.

Hilariously enough it belongs to Sibelco, which is a Belgian company, but it's still US territory, so subject to local politics.

Do you have any actual examples of things which could not be in sourced into Europe? I am very aware that for many reasons, among them costs, semiconductor fabrication is spread globally. But is there an actual reason why it would be impossible to have every single one of these pieces in some capacity in Europe?

Europe is continually moving further apart politically from both the US and China. Relying on the US for supplies and betting on Chinese, Taiwanese peace seems increasingly foolish. How can Europe secure itself in such an environment, without its own semiconductor supply chain?

It is possible that the EU could develop their own state-of-the-art lithography light sources but for now ASML is dependent on the US for it.

Japanese cars would also break down much faster than US made cars in the 1950s, but eventually they figured out reliability and overtook US competition. What are the odds Chinese companies can repat this playbook?

They're also a critical player in supplying small drone parts to both sides in Russia Ukraine war. Maybe not the most reliable parts, but the scale is insane.

We quickly improved product quality, and suddenly "Made in Germany" was a sign of quality. The same happened with Japanese products, with Korean products and the same will happen with China.

What do you think the EU is? It's not a country, not a federative union. These things need a lot of discussions and synchronization among member countries, it does not work otherwise, so it takes time. I also hold the opinion that time is a resource the EU does not have, so it badly needs to reform itself - its framework no longer works for this "new age".

The #2 problem is language. Despite what many on HN think, European borders very much exist. They exist via language and bureaucracy.

These two combine to create many problems the EU and Europe in general has. The lack of vision, the excruciatingly slow bureaucracy, both are symptoms of the same underlying problems.

Japan is a single country with a single government that can unilaterally decide what it wants to do.

That's an especially obtuse way of minimizing the significance of their manufacture of the most complex machine ever made.

Given that our market share on the global economy is dropping steadily, this won't hold forever. By 2040 or so it might be more advantageous for Asian producers to just avoid our bureaucratized space altogether.

Already this year we had a showdown with Qatar over some ESG reporting and we lost handily, because we needed their gas more than they needed our money.

I am sure that some part of the EU establishment is aware of this, but the measure taken are practically laughable compared to the magnitude of the problem. At some future point in time dealing with the EU will just not be worth it, as competitive companies outside the EU, not weighed down by EU regulations, will fill the gaps and entering the EU market will be seen as too toxic.

> in favour of what? Every other large market (China, India, USA) has extreme protectionism in place.

The EU has higher tariffs than the US overall, especially for agriculture and cars. Policy is structured and uniform.

The IS has lower tariffs than the EU overall, but often used as political/economic weapon on specific countries and sectors.

The current administration's tactics notwithstanding.

This region with 500 million people in it will oscillate between Chinese and Indian influence. The Chinese are more powerful and richer, so the only way in which India can compete for influence is being more friendly.

china keep them in check via pakistan

India has been doing some incredible things lately. They just electrified their entire rail network in some five years. That is actually impressive - you need a lot of qualified people and coordination for that.

If they keep up, they will become a strategic adversary of China in Indochina (see the name?) quite soon.

India's promised ascendance to power and influence remain perpetually a few decades away. Meanwhile, the poor continue to lose purchasing power, the rich exploit the entire country, and India's total economic exports are comparable to those of the Netherlands.

And those regulations are, more often than not, for everyone's benefit - at least EU, but often the Brussels effect applies so a lot of the rest of the world benefits too.

Germany's entire industry is currently dying since it is impossible to have a cost competitive manufacturing industry while having some of the highest energy prices in the world.

Your entire comment looks at the current status quo, not at the continuous downward trend or the abyss which awaits if Stellantis or VW Group get pushed out of the market by Chinese competition.

Do you think Germany or France will continue to have a car industry, when China makes cars or the same quality for 70% of the price? Because that is currently the reality.

How exactly is that even remotely relevant? They only sell in select markets, and are killing it in them (best selling EV in the EU, Renault 5). What, if it's not a global behemoth dominating the world, it doesn't count as manufacturing? What exactly is your argument here?

> Within a decade or so COMAC will have a competitive passenger plane, seriously threatening Airbus market share.

Nope. Their own goal is to have, within a decade or so, a fully Chinese plane (their current C919 heavily relies on engines and other critical components from European and American suppliers). Specifically for the engines, they're looking at a comparable to the Leap 1C they were sold by CFM (American General Electric+French Safran joint venture). Those engines are around a generation behind the current best ones (Leap 1A, Pratt&Whitney GTF). In a decade, CFM and Rolls-Royce will have a new generation out, both having new models being tested right now.

So, in around a decade, the Chinese engines will be two generations behind. Efficiency is critical in aviation. And that's just the engines, in a decade Airbus will have a new A320 series replacement out, and Boeing will have one on the way too. And this is just for short to medium haul planes. And both the C919 and the C909 show that it's taking years for production to ramp up to any relevant numbers. Airbus recently opened a second final assembly line in Tianjin for the local market, they wouldn't have done that without being sure they have a market there for at least a decade or more.

> Your entire comment looks at the current status quo, not at the continuous downward trend or the abyss which awaits if Stellantis or VW Group get pushed out of the market by Chinese competition.

This is assuming that the Chinese competition would be allowed to compete on the same terms, which we already know won't happen - both the EU and the US have put in tariffs. And we can see that a low cost Dacia EV is similarly priced to a low cost BYD EV.

Potentially, but previous attempts (like the Xian MA60 and MA600, which are derivatives of the designed in the 1960s An-24) have been very unsuccessful. It made some sales in Southeast Asia and Africa, but a few of those have had accompanying corruption/bribery allegations and investigations, and most have been grounded after serious incidents and troubles keeping them operating at reasonable costs.

But my overall point is, it's going to take them more than a decade, probably around two, to be able to churn out fully Chinese passenger jets in any relevant numbers. The Chinese airplane market is massive, so even then they probably won't be able to deliver enough. There also aren't any plans to get the C919, existing or future fully Chinese version, certified by EASA or FAA or anywhere else, so legally the jet can't even fly anywhere else other than China for now.

So we have at least 2 decades more of COMAC being very behind and churning planes at a slow rate, at best. And honestly, anyone who thinks they can predict the aviation market 2 decades ahead is out of their mind. We could have hydrogen powered flying wings by then!

Or countries could just accept Chinese type certification alongside the FAA, EASE, and TC certificates. Granted, it would only be for domestic or regional flights at most - but that's a lot.

Which is what Nigeria is considering with the C919.

The Dacia Spring is made in China.

My argument is that China is producing EVs of the same quality for 70% of the cost. European wealth comes from exports.

>This is assuming that the Chinese competition would be allowed to compete on the same terms, which we already know won't happen - both the EU and the US have put in tariffs. And we can see that a low cost Dacia EV is similarly priced to a low cost BYD EV.

Exactly. The European car industry only exists because China is not allowed to compete, this is my point. There is no German/French/Italian car export industry anymore. Who is buying a German or French EV when he could be buying a better car for the same price or the same quality car for a lower price.

The car market for these companies will shrink from the entire world to Europe, surely you can see that this is an existential threat to European manufacturing.

>And we can see that a low cost Dacia EV is similarly priced to a low cost BYD EV.

Yes, this is exactly what I am saying. A BYD EV with 27% tariffs applied is cost competitive to the lowest end Renault Platform. In other words, the only reason Dacia is selling any cars is because BYD is not allowed to compete.

On the topic of aircraft engines. The Chinese have mastered almost every technology the west has, it is delusional to think that they will never make competitive aircraft engines. You are correct, COMAC will take more than a decade to compete with Airbus, but with the current trajectory it is practically inevitable they will catch up.

That's certainly a claim. The EU market is pretty big, and has multiple avenues for growth (the whole of the Balkans is either in the EU but catching up, or outside the EU begging to be let in). It's not axiomatic that the EU needs to export to the whole rest of the world. And even if it is, there are plenty of countries that have an appetite for European goods for a variety of reasons (be it luxury or just quality associations, or innate hatred of China, like in India or South Korea).

> Exactly. The European car industry only exists because China is not allowed to compete, this is my point

Alternatively, because Chinese dumping is not allowed to destroy the European car industry, if we're only talking in economic terms. But the reality is that cars aren't that simple, as a market. For many cars are a status symbol, or otherwise everyone would be driving Dacias and Skodas and nobody would be buying Porsches vs VWs.

> There is no German/French/Italian car export industry anymore. Who is buying a German or French EV when he could be buying a better car for the same price or the same quality car for a lower price.

Of course there is. Stellantis, Renault, VW Group are selling well in their local markets, across Europe and various other markets (e.g. the US for Stellantis).

> On the topic of aircraft engines. The Chinese have mastered almost every technology the west has, it is delusional to think that they will never make competitive aircraft engines

Never said never, said their own timeline is a decade, for something competitive to the previous gen, while in a decade we'll be two generations ahead. Considering Chinese aerospace engineering has been struggling with engines forever, and Russia never managed to get close, ever, I wouldn't bet on China suddenly being able to leapfrog their own timeline.

> You are correct, COMAC will take more than a decade to compete with Airbus, but with the current trajectory it is practically inevitable they will catch up.

They will catch up to ~previous generation (A320ceo), by then Airbus will already have the replacement to the current gen (A320neo, future gen not named yet). So China will still be ~2 decades behind, in a decade-ish. Yes, they will definitely catch up by some point in the ~2050s, so what? Airbus caught up to Boeing, and there is enough market to go around for both. Embraer is in the process of catching up too. There being one more new entrant on the (again, only short to medium haul) passenger jet market, in a decade, really isn't the end of the world you're making it out to be.

To believe that the European car industry will survive purely on brand recognition is foolish and all current trends indicate otherwise. The Chinese are cars at the same quality for 70% if the price. That is obviously not sustainable and no amount of brand loyalty will overcome this.

None of your arguments seem convincing at all. Making worse cars at higher prices can not work. It is not a feasible long term strategy in any way.

Also, Stellantis is not selling well, they have huge problems with underutilized factories. Porsche is also currently in serious trouble.

Yes, we're talking about the current reality and trends about the future. Which is it, are EU manufacturers at large on the decline, or am I too focused on the current reality that they're doing okay, with exceptions?

> Making worse cars at higher prices can not work.

Who is talking about worse cars or brand loyalty?

A Renault 5 or Renault 4 are objectively good cars that sell well based on their performance and looks. Cars aren't bought only on the basis on cost, which is why premium or even just any other brand other than the lowest cost Skoda or Dacia exist in the first place.

> None of your arguments seem convincing at all.

It's not very convincing to say that manufacturing in the EU is on a death bed when its double the % of GDP as in the US, and has multiple domains where there are good performances. And then get extremely hung up that EU manufacturers must export, and that somehow cost is the only metric by which people buy stuff. And then get extremely hung up on car manufacturing in particular. But also somehow that EU manufacturing is worse quality, which you don't even attempt to prove. Yeah, when you put down the wrong conditions, you're going to get the wrong conclusions. And repeating them again and again doesn't make them more convincing.

Most best selling EV models in the EU are Tesla, from Renault or VW Group. Practically all of them are manufactured in the EU. This is not a declining trend.

And of course you're completely ignoring the reality that tariffs against Chinese dumping are a reality and here to stay in many markets. Manufacturers that relied a lot on e.g. the Chinese car market, like VW, will suffer. Others that didn't, like Renault, are doing just fine.

I believe that a Chinese car of the same quality, sold for 70% of the price of a European made car, will outperform the European car in every market, where those cars compete on equal footing. You disagree with that for reasons unfathomable to me.

I believe that the European export economy is vital for its prosperity. 45% of Germany's 1 trillion+ exports are to countries outside of the EU. You believe that loosing that economy can be made up in other ways, again for reasons which are unfathomable to me.

I do not think any evidence I could provide to you could convince you otherwise. That you are lying about what I said (e.g. that cost is the only thing that matters for cars or that European products are of lower quality) makes me not want to talk to you at all.

I disagree with that for pretty obvious reasons. The fact that companies like GM and Ford still exist, and not everyone has been buying the cheapest car that fits their needs, unquestionably proves that buying cars is more than just price. Quality is hard to directly compare, but you also have maintenance needs/availability, brand recognition, design.

But anyways, you're talking about manufacturing more widely, and we spent too much time talking about cars. 20% of the EU GDP that are in manufacturing really aren't all about cars.

> I do not think any evidence I could provide to you could convince you otherwise

That's an almost smart way of getting out of having to provide any.

> That you are lying about what I said (e.g. that cost is the only thing that matters for cars

How else would I interpret your incessant attempts to try to convince me that a Chinese car at 70% the cost of an European one would always win? The fact that you're completely ignoring the presence of brand or the importances of marketing and design on car buying choices clearly indicates you only think of cars as their cost to buy. Which is really not what most people's first consideration is, otherwise, again, we wouldn't have Tesla, VW, Audi, Porsche, GM, Ford, Lexus, etc etc existing.

Most European governments are for a long time now pushing migration hard overtly or subversively(since it's unpopular) arguing as if they're importing tools for the economy.

https://www.americanchemistry.com/chemistry-in-america/chemi...

As for the Japanese professional classes, environmental issues are always an afterthought. Don't let the "harmonious" design philosophy of the fab fool you..that's tatemae. (Remember Jobs and pancreatic cancer? There's the price to pay for the shiny toys)

I wont be eating from Hokkaido if this pans out (their milk is overrated imho, but the seafood is top)

Maybe I'll get to eat more Austrian millet in the near future..

Google deepmind headquarter is located in Europe, US tech dominance just that good to attract talent all of europe

You can see list of AI researcher that comes from europe+asia