Japs Exclude Gaijins from EXPO tender contracts
thegoons
exchange, yet a look at their website "says it all"
- Tenders for construction services must comply with a specification
document, which they make available only in Japanese language, not English.
- A tender for provision of staff for an international restaurant and stores
facility may only be submitted by hand, mail/fax/e-mail not acceptable; ie:
effectively limiting it to local companies
- Similar tenders for the new Central Japan International Airport
construction and supply of equipment/systems was exactly the same - all
official documentation was provided in Japanese language only.
The Japs are notorious for a closed-door policy. Gaijins can go get stuffed
when there is money or contracts involved, yet they will "make a buck out of
gaijin" by having an International Expo.
Ryan Ginstrom
"thegoons" <theg...@bigpond.com> wrote in message
news:lPzLb.3039$Wa....@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
You're so right! Those Japanese are just ethnocentric, aren't they?
After all, whenever US & European governments contract out construction,
they provide Japanese translations of all the bid specifications and
whatnot, right?
--
Regards,
Ryan Ginstrom
Michael Cash
brought down from the Mount tablets inscribed:
More and more of late I had began to suspect you were a total fuckwit.
None you've just gone and removed all lingering doubt. Thanks for
clearing it up.
--
Michael Cash
"While we thank you for considering our firm, regretfully we have no openings
for a person of your educational background and are returning your resume.
Despite what your academic advisor may have told you, there are, to the best
of our knowledge, no openings in our industry for a person with a degree in
farm ecology."
Dr. Seymore Butts
Human Resources
Acme Pharmeceuticals, Inc.
Eric Takabayashi
> "thegoons" <theg...@bigpond.com> wrote in message
> news:lPzLb.3039$Wa....@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
> You're so right! Those Japanese are just ethnocentric, aren't they?
Yes, they are, particularly as the construction industry is involved. It is
notorious.
> After all, whenever US & European governments contract out construction,
> they provide Japanese translations of all the bid specifications and
> whatnot, right?
Maybe not, but despite any barriers which do exist, Japanese construction
companies are allowed to succeed anyway. For example:
http://www.worldbridgenews.com/links/8.asp
"Kajima U.S.A., USA, 4/6/2002
With over 160 years of experience and over 13,000 employees around the
world, Kajima Corporation is a global leader in the design, construction
and real estate development industries. Traded publicly on the Tokyo and
London exchanges, Kajima reported over $16 billion in revenues in 2000
(year ended March 31, 2000) and is ranked as the third largest global
contractor in the world."
No matter how hard Japanese may work or how good that work allegedly is,
they aren't going to be "THIRD LARGEST global contractor in the world" if
foreign governments behaved like the Japanese regarding construction
contracts.
http://www.jsce-int.org/Publication/CivilEng/2002/1-1.pdf
"Japan's construction industry is characterized by superb technology
without sufficient international competitiveness. Not only are personnel
costs higher than other countries but construction works are also
structurally high cost. Also, when Japanese technical experts go overseas,
not only are there language difficulties but the work culture is differents
so it makes them less effective and when engineers that are successful
overseas return to Japan, they have a hard time adjusting back to the
Japanese way of business."
Overseas Expansion of the Japanese Construction Technology [sic]
- Kinoshita Seiya, Director, International Division for Infrastructure,
Policy Bureau, Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport
http://www.ucpress.edu/books/pages/6490.html
Brian Woodall
Japan under Construction
Corruption, Politics, and Public Works
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Publication Date: April 1996
"I would like to commend Professor Woodall for his in-depth look at the
corrupt dango system that has plagued the public works market in Japan.
Having spent the last ten years trying to pry open the closed Japanese
public works market, I believe that this book lays out clearly the
structural problems that block access for U.S. firms. I hope that this
illuminating look at how the Japanese system operates will lead to further
changes in Japan's public procurement system."--Senator Frank L. Murkowski
"Woodall has done a wonderful job of getting behind the scenes to look at
the preeminent sector where money flows to politicians. This is the richest
and most subtle analysis of this industry to appear in English."--Ezra F.
Vogel, author of Japan as Number One
"An important contribution to our knowledge of Japan. Brian Woodall has dug
up quite a bit of new factual information on this understudied
industry."--Frances Rosenbluth, author of Financial Politics in
Contemporary Japan and coauthor of Japan's Political Marketplace
DESCRIPTION In 1987, Japan excluded American firms from bidding on the
multibillion-dollar New Kansai International Airport, sparking yet another
trade dispute between the United States and Japan. The State Department,
Congress, and the President himself were caught up in the dispute, which
still smolders even after Congress passed a threatening resolution to
retaliate. Scandal after scandal--both domestic and international--splashes
across headlines in Japan, generating wave after wave of attempts at
reform. Why is this industry so rife with bid-rigging, collusion, and
pork-barrel politics? What are the political forces behind the industry?
Brian Woodall answers these questions in this book, based on extensive
research and over one hundred candid and revealing interviews with
contractors, industry association officials, public works bureaucrats,
elected politicians and aides, political party officials, journalists, and
scholars.
This inside view begins with a profile of the institutionalized system of
bid-rigging in the public construction market. It explores the powerful
positions of unelected bureaucrats, who are often hired by private-sector
firms after retirement. Career politicians within the Liberal Democratic
Party are revealed to use the construction industry to exploit party
factions toward their own electoral ends. Recent events--the Sagawa affair
and the massive "general contractors" (zenekon) scandal as well as the
political reform movements that followed them--are examined in detail.
Throughout, Brian Woodall illuminates the construction rift between Japan
and the United States and demonstrates how international pressures were
subverted within the shadowy domestic system.
Japan Under Construction is must reading for anyone interested in Japanese
politics, United States-Japan trade relations, and political corruption and
reform anywhere in the world.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Brian Woodall is Assistant Professor at the School of International
Affairs, Georgia Institute of Technology.
--
http://www.mercycorps.org/
http://www.mercycorps.org/items/1398/
http://www.mercycorps.org/mercykits.php
Mercy Corps' goal in Iraq is to work with conflict-affected communities to
meet their urgent needs while also providing a firm foundation for the
future development of economic opportunities and civil society.
Efficiency
Over 92% of our resources go directly to humanitarian programs.
Excellence
Worth Magazine named Mercy Corps one of America's best charities.
High-Value
Every dollar you give helps us secure $12.71 in donated food and other
supplies.
Drew Hamilton
>- Tenders for construction services must comply with a specification
>document, which they make available only in Japanese language, not English.
But if they made the document in English, then they'd be shutting
out the Germans! But then they could make the document in German
as well, but they'd be shutting out the French! So they could
make the document in French as well...
Anyway, the tenders will have to be written in Japanese anyway (so
that the people in charge can read them), so any company who wants
to bid badly enough will have to shell out for a translator.
What's the big deal?
Oh, right, that tenders have to be hand-delivered. What, a
company can't pick up the phone and find some guy in Japan to
deliver the tender?
--
- awh
http://www.awh.org/
Dethlar2004: Blaq Action Hero
"thegoons" <theg...@bigpond.com> wrote in message
news:lPzLb.3039$Wa....@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
international
> exchange, yet a look at their website "says it all"
Ahhh...kind of how Japanese car companies in the U.S. can't get government
subsidies for developing gasoline alternative technologies in automobiles
and can't present said cars in U.S. environmental auto shows?
Haluk Skywalker
yazdı:lPzLb.3039$Wa....@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> ...
> - A tender for provision of staff for an international restaurant and
stores
> facility may only be submitted by hand, mail/fax/e-mail not acceptable;
ie:
> effectively limiting it to local companies
>
If those foreign companies cannot arrange a single person to hand deliver
their bid, how are they going to provide a restaurant full of staff?
Duke of URL
Dethlar2004: Blaq Action Hero <dethl...@ammodump.com> radiated into
the WorldWideWait:
Ahhh... You mean like the duo-powered Hondas on sale in the U.S.?
vernon...@oyama.ca
theg...@bigpond.com says...
~ Amazing isn't it, the EXPO 2005 in Aichi is supposed to foster international
~ exchange, yet a look at their website "says it all"
~
~ - Tenders for construction services must comply with a specification
~ document, which they make available only in Japanese language, not English.
~
~ - A tender for provision of staff for an international restaurant and stores
~ facility may only be submitted by hand, mail/fax/e-mail not acceptable; ie:
~ effectively limiting it to local companies
~
~ - Similar tenders for the new Central Japan International Airport
~ construction and supply of equipment/systems was exactly the same - all
~ official documentation was provided in Japanese language only.
~
~ The Japs are notorious for a closed-door policy. Gaijins can go get stuffed
~ when there is money or contracts involved, yet they will "make a buck out of
~ gaijin" by having an International Expo.
~
Do American, Canadian, Australian, and British companies issue
specification documents in Japanese?
Verno
thegoons
"Michael Cash" <bugg...@fake.com> wrote in message
news:dtktvv0vn9vcborq3...@4ax.com...
> More and more of late I had began to suspect you were a total fuckwit.
> None you've just gone and removed all lingering doubt. Thanks for
> clearing it up.
Feel free to flame me once you can string a sentence together that makes
sense.
thegoons
but the corruption and closed-door policies make a mockery of the supposed
desire for international involvement and exchange.
And as you say, if foreign governments were the same, then Kajima would be
still building 2LDK's in Chiba.
"Eric Takabayashi" <eta...@yahoo.co.jp> wrote in message
news:3FFED764...@yahoo.co.jp...
John W.
sizeable, successful business in Japan?
John W.
Dethlar2004: Blaq Action Hero
"Duke of URL" <macbenahATkdsiDOTnet> wrote in message
news:vvtup33...@corp.supernews.com...
Apples and Oranges. It still doesn't mean they get susbsidies or are
invited to the show.
Ryan Ginstrom
"John W." <worth...@yahoo.komm> wrote in message
news:3FFF6857...@yahoo.komm...
> Anyone know a major US/European/Australian/(etc.) company that has a
> sizeable, successful business in Japan?
Yes.
--
Regards,
Ryan Ginstrom
Michael Cash
brought down from the Mount tablets inscribed:
>
Feel free to flame me once you can string a post together that makes
sense.
Ryan Ginstrom
> On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 01:20:12 GMT, "thegoons" <theg...@bigpond.com>
> brought down from the Mount tablets inscribed:
>
> >
> >"Michael Cash" <bugg...@fake.com> wrote in message
> >news:dtktvv0vn9vcborq3...@4ax.com...
> >> More and more of late I had began to suspect you were a total fuckwit.
> >> None you've just gone and removed all lingering doubt. Thanks for
> >> clearing it up.
> >
> >Feel free to flame me once you can string a sentence together that makes
> >sense.
>
> Feel free to flame me once you can string a post together that makes
> sense.
Hey, let's not be so hard on the guy -- at least he didn't top post.
--
Regards,
Ryan Ginstrom
Michael Cash
On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 15:02:21 +0900, "Ryan Ginstrom"
<gins...@hotmail.com> brought down from the Mount tablets inscribed:
--
Michael Cash
Michael Cash
<dethl...@ammodump.com> brought down from the Mount tablets
inscribed:
>
They have to crash the gate?
Eric Takabayashi
Fortunately, English is the international working language, not Japanese, and is
also more common than French or German, so no, the US does not have to issue
invitations in all other languages or even every major language. It is however,
peculiar to issue documents only in Japanese, a language mainly used in a single
country.
Eric Takabayashi
> If those foreign companies cannot arrange a single person to hand deliver
> their bid, how are they going to provide a restaurant full of staff?
Did you (arrange to) submit all your resumes to various employers by hand or
in person? If not, how can you be expected to relocate or show up for work?
Did you (arrange to) submit all your applications to universities and grad
schools of your choice by hand? If not, how can you be expected to relocate
or show up for class?
Did you (arrange to) deliver all your love letters to your women by hand? If
not, how can you be expected to show up for a date or commit yourself long
term?
How is a company going to provide staff you ask?
The same way you relocate and perform at school or on the job AFTER you know
you have been accepted, and the same you devote yourself to a long term
relationship AFTER you know it is the right time.
Eric Takabayashi
Don't Japanese companies get subsidies in Japan? Do American companies
operating in Japan get subsidies like Japanese companies do in Japan?
> or are invited to the show.
Yes, non tariff barriers and other kinds of obstacles to free trade should
be eliminated.
But we are talking about the Japanese. Speaking of cars, foreign cars
account for only about one percent of sales in Japan, and the most popular
foreign makes are German. In the US the share held just by Japanese brands
accounts for closer to 30 percent. I do not know if it is still true, but
when I was at university, it was Japanese practice to inspect each and
every automobile from the US before accepting them into the country for
sale. Mercedes Benz, on the other hand, was eventually allowed to be
accepted in batches based on a single vehicle inspection, which is more
similar to the American practice. Naturally, the US does not hold up
shiploads of cars from Japan to inspect every single one, rejecting those
with, for example, a one millimeter misalignment of body trim, the way
Japanese inspectors may do with US automobiles to block trade. Japanese car
companies don't have to tie up with rival domestic brands to open up a car
dealership, the way US automakers had to hook up with Japanese car
dealerships, either.
Japanese can no longer make the excuse that American made cars are not
suited for the Japanese driving environment, as Japanese make their own
large size, large displacement performance or luxury automobiles, and US
automakers also make compact and right hand drive cars. And considering the
way Japanese dispose of their (Japanese made) cars within a literal handful
of years (the reason fine, low mileage used cars in Japan may be
ridiculously cheap), they cannot make the argument that (only) US made cars
are unreliable, either.
You are a funny one to point the accusing finger at the US auto industry in
a thread on Japanese trade barriers. Why don't you for example, bring up
the WTO and agriculture instead?
another fool
> exchange, yet a look at their website "says it all"
>
> - Tenders for construction services must comply with a specification
> document, which they make available only in Japanese language, not English.
This would be because 1. thier inspectors don't speak/read english and
2. they expect you to follow their safety requirements. If you can't
understand the fellow saying "don't do that dumbass you're going to
die" you are a bit of an insurance risk.
> - A tender for provision of staff for an international restaurant and stores
> facility may only be submitted by hand, mail/fax/e-mail not acceptable; ie:
> effectively limiting it to local companies
Maybe they get a lot of junk faxes/e-mails/mail and do not want to
miss something important. Maybe they have had problems in the past
with people not sending items or not getting them "on time".
> - Similar tenders for the new Central Japan International Airport
> construction and supply of equipment/systems was exactly the same - all
> official documentation was provided in Japanese language only.
Well duh - you're in Japan. When I worked construction before I was
edumicated we worked DOT contracts. Guess what the regulations and
spec's were written in? Guess what our sub's had to know how to
read/understand? Guess where we were? Of course Florida's "English
Only" rule for government contracts (at least at the time - that might
have changed in the last 15 years) would make the US exclusionairy
right?
> The Japs are notorious for a closed-door policy. Gaijins can go get stuffed
> when there is money or contracts involved, yet they will "make a buck out of
> gaijin" by having an International Expo.
I fail to see anything that says "gaijin's are not welcome to apply" I
simply see that if you are going to do business in a country they
expect you to be able to communicate in the "language of the land".
Hardely exclusionairy.
Eric Takabayashi
> Well duh - you're in Japan. When I worked construction before I was
> edumicated we worked DOT contracts. Guess what the regulations and
> spec's were written in? Guess what our sub's had to know how to
> read/understand? Guess where we were? Of course Florida's "English
> Only" rule for government contracts (at least at the time - that might
> have changed in the last 15 years) would make the US exclusionairy
> right?
No, because English is the language used by people around the world as in business, science and technology,
not Japanese.
> > The Japs are notorious for a closed-door policy. Gaijins can go get stuffed
> > when there is money or contracts involved, yet they will "make a buck out of
> > gaijin" by having an International Expo.
>
> I fail to see anything that says "gaijin's are not welcome to apply" I
> simply see that if you are going to do business in a country they
> expect you to be able to communicate in the "language of the land".
> Hardely exclusionairy.
Is that you say about the Japanese construction industry?
Fabian
> Don't Japanese companies get subsidies in Japan? Do American companies
> operating in Japan get subsidies like Japanese companies do in Japan?
Steel Industry - did you miss the trade war? Agriculture. American
companies DO get subsidies and government support.
--
--
Fabian
Visit my website often and for long periods!
http://www.lajzar.co.uk
Duke of URL
Dethlar2004: Blaq Action Hero <dethl...@ammodump.com> radiated into
the WorldWideWait:
> "Duke of URL" <macbenahATkdsiDOTnet> wrote in message
> news:vvtup33...@corp.supernews.com...
>> In news:8BBLb.1342$dl4....@news1.dion.ne.jp,
>> Dethlar2004: Blaq Action Hero <dethl...@ammodump.com> radiated
>> into the WorldWideWait:
>>> "thegoons" <theg...@bigpond.com> wrote in message
>>> news:lPzLb.3039$Wa....@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>>
>>>> Amazing isn't it, the EXPO 2005 in Aichi is supposed to foster
>>>> international exchange, yet a look at their website "says it all"
>>>
>>> Ahhh...kind of how Japanese car companies in the U.S. can't get
>>> government subsidies for developing gasoline alternative
>>> technologies in automobiles and can't present said cars in U.S.
>>> environmental auto shows?
>>
>> Ahhh... You mean like the duo-powered Hondas on sale in the U.S.?
>
> Apples and Oranges. It still doesn't mean they get susbsidies or
> are invited to the show.
Have you some objection to facts? Honda *does* get gummint subsidies
and *does* get featured at those eco-shows.
I can't be bothered to try to educate you more, but if you take a wee
bit of effort, you will find other companies in the same situation.
Eric Takabayashi
> Eric Takabayashi hu kiteb:
>
> > Don't Japanese companies get subsidies in Japan? Do American companies
> > operating in Japan get subsidies like Japanese companies do in Japan?
>
> Steel Industry - did you miss the trade war?
No. And it's still going on.
> Agriculture.
I am the one who brought up agriculture.
> American companies DO get subsidies and government support.
I know.
Now do US companies get subsidies and government support in Japan, like the
questioner asked regarding Japanese automakers operating in the US in an
attempt to point out US unfairness? Why should Japanese companies get
subsidized twice?
Eric Takabayashi
You mean Japanese companies CAN get subsidized by the US and their own
governments?
Damn. That's kind of the Americans.
Too bad Japan is not so supportive of foreign businesses, as in the auto
industry.
Ryan Ginstrom
"Eric Takabayashi" <eta...@yahoo.co.jp> wrote in message
news:400004E5...@yahoo.co.jp...
> But we are talking about the Japanese. Speaking of cars, foreign cars
> account for only about one percent of sales in Japan, and the most popular
> foreign makes are German. In the US the share held just by Japanese brands
The car thingy is a bit out of date, don't you think? Let's see:
Nissan: Owned by Renault
Mazda (Matsuda): Owned by Ford
Mitsubishi: Alliance with Daimler-Chrysler
Toyota: Alliance with GM
Honda: Alliance with GM
Honda and Toyota are the only two fully Japanese-owned automakers, and both
have foreign alliances.
The German car thingy is pure supply and demand. If Japanese want to buy a
foreign car, they want a German car. Which is only right, anyone in their
right minds would want a German car. If you can't afford a German car, you
buy a Toyota.
--
Regards,
Ryan Ginstrom
Ryan Ginstrom
> No, because English is the language used by people around the world as in
business, science and technology,
> not Japanese.
Dude, the contract is in Japan, being awarded by the Japanese government.
WTF are you talking about?
--
Regards,
Ryan Ginstrom
Eric Takabayashi
> <trimmed scj>
>
> "Eric Takabayashi" <eta...@yahoo.co.jp> wrote in message
> news:400004E5...@yahoo.co.jp...
> > But we are talking about the Japanese. Speaking of cars, foreign cars
> > account for only about one percent of sales in Japan, and the most popular
> > foreign makes are German. In the US the share held just by Japanese brands
>
> The car thingy is a bit out of date, don't you think?
No, as even the Japanese categorize cars that way, despite Nissans, Hondas and
Toyotas manufactured in or even being "reimported" from the US.
> Let's see:
>
> Nissan: Owned by Renault
> Mazda (Matsuda): Owned by Ford
> Mitsubishi: Alliance with Daimler-Chrysler
> Toyota: Alliance with GM
> Honda: Alliance with GM
>
> Honda and Toyota are the only two fully Japanese-owned automakers, and both
> have foreign alliances.
>
> The German car thingy is pure supply and demand.
Because they are brainwashed. Last year's JD Power and Associates survey showed
Lexus (Toyota) and Infiniti (Nissan) at the top, and Benz about number 25.
> If Japanese want to buy a foreign car, they want a German car. Which is only
> right, anyone in their right minds would want a German car.
If they were brainwashed, like Japanese want Louis Vuitton.
> If you can't afford a German car, you buy a Toyota.
Toyota is a fine car. But it's an issue of choice. American customers don't
need much effort to buy a Japanese car. It can be tough as hell to find a local
dealer of American maker cars. Fukuyama doesn't have a GM, Ford, or Chrysler
dealer. They don't even have Benz or BMW, which is a surprise. Just the
Japanese makes, Audi and Volkswagen.
Eric Takabayashi
I have seen contracts and other important documents in English, as have you,
offered by Japanese in Japan, though the language of the document may say that
for legal purposes, the official documents are the Japanese ones.
And speaking of Mazda and Nissan, they operate in English in Japan, too.
If Japanese were open to foreign bidders, there is nothing stopping them from
using English or any other foreign language. But no, the conditions they have
set strongly favor Japanese.
Ken Yasumoto-Nicolson
<eta...@yahoo.co.jp> wrote:
>But we are talking about the Japanese. Speaking of cars, foreign cars
>account for only about one percent of sales in Japan,
Do they?
http://www.jama.org/library/studies051398.htm
Has it dropped from the 9.6% reported here in 1998?
Ken
Eric Takabayashi
Yes.
One percent could have been referring to only US maker imports.
http://www.mofa.go.jp/region/n-america/us/economy/date/22_1.html
But I've read more current data last year which showed how low the total
market share of imported cars (including those manufactured by Japanese
makers) is.
Eric Takabayashi
> Ken Yasumoto-Nicolson wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 22:57:58 +0900, Eric Takabayashi
> > <eta...@yahoo.co.jp> wrote:
> >
> > >But we are talking about the Japanese. Speaking of cars, foreign cars
> > >account for only about one percent of sales in Japan,
> >
> > Do they?
> >
> > http://www.jama.org/library/studies051398.htm
> >
> > Has it dropped from the 9.6% reported here in 1998?
>
> Yes.
Because of the downturn in the economy.
> One percent could have been referring to only US maker imports.
>
> http://www.mofa.go.jp/region/n-america/us/economy/date/22_1.html
>
> But I've read more current data last year which showed how low the total
> market share of imported cars (including those manufactured by Japanese
> makers) is.
Oh, sorry, here's the trick of statistics:
(Source: Japan Automobile Manufacturers Association,
Japan Automobile Importers Association)
Note: EXCLUDING trucks and passenger cars with engine displacement of under
660cc.
So yes, foreign makers, especially US automakers have a much lower market
share than data suggest, such as a claim of 10.2% for all foreign makes in
1995. It is true that the US does not manufacture minis, but they do
manufacture trucks and large vehicles not included in these data.
Michael Cash
<gins...@hotmail.com> brought down from the Mount tablets inscribed:
Remember a few years back when some nutcase Diet Lady from up north
got up and started addressing the Diet in English?
Duke of URL
Eric Takabayashi <eta...@yahoo.co.jp> radiated into the
WorldWideWait:
> Duke of URL wrote:
>> Have you some objection to facts? Honda *does* get gummint
>> subsidies and *does* get featured at those eco-shows.
>> I can't be bothered to try to educate you more, but if you take a
>> wee bit of effort, you will find other companies in the same
>> situation.
>
> You mean Japanese companies CAN get subsidized by the US and their
> own governments?
> Damn. That's kind of the Americans.
Damfino how they justify it, but then there a LOT of gumming giveaways
that make absolutely NO sense to me. Maybe they created a "Honda USA
Corporation" and finagled it that way. Damned clever, those wogs...
Duke of URL
Ryan Ginstrom <gins...@hotmail.com> radiated into the WorldWideWait:
haRUMPH. Excuse me, would you mind standing over there? Yes, over on
that X in the middle of the parking lot. Now, just stay there while I
rev my GMC half-ton up...
thegoons
Whish was precisely the point I was making in the initial posting. This is
an international Exposition which is held only once ina blue moon - they
should have the tender documentation translated into several languages if
necessary. Otherwise, the claims about international exchange and
co-operation are just crap. The EXPO is just another "kawaii" outing so that
Japanese visitors can keep saying "kawaii" and take another picture of
"henna gaijin".
Ryan Ginstrom
"Duke of URL" <macbenahATkdsiDOTnet> wrote in message
> > The German car thingy is pure supply and demand. If Japanese want
> > to buy a foreign car, they want a German car. Which is only right,
> > anyone in their right minds would want a German car. If you can't
> > afford a German car, you buy a Toyota.
>
> haRUMPH. Excuse me, would you mind standing over there? Yes, over on
> that X in the middle of the parking lot. Now, just stay there while I
> rev my GMC half-ton up...
My first translation gig was as a translator/interpreter at New United
Motors Inc. (NUMI), a joint venture between Toyota and GM in Fremont, CA.
The Japanese engineers were almost fanatical about eliminating baratsuki
(variation). If you couldn't guarantee that every single car that came off
the line had the exact same performance, you lowered the spec until they all
did. This caused constant friction with the American engineers, who just
couldn't seem to understand such (to them) fanatical adherence to
uniformity.
I also personally got the impression that working at Toyota must be a kind
of religion, these guys eat sleep and breathe Just-In-Time and six Sigma.
Shaving a tenth of a yen off the cost of producing a bumper was a career
maker.
I also later had the chance to work with some German engineers. The
impression I got from them was that while Japanese engineers are obsessed
with eliminating baratsuki, German engineers are obsessed with perfection.
So basically, the impression I came away with after working with American,
Japanese, and German auto engineers is that if you buy a German car, you
know you're getting a good car. You buy a Japanese car, you know you're not
getting a lemon. You buy an American car, it's pretty much a crap shoot.
--
Regards,
Ryan Ginstrom
Dethlar2004: Blaq Action Hero
"Duke of URL" <macbenahATkdsiDOTnet> wrote in message
Whatever. I remember reading news stories of Japanese car companies (Toyota
and their Prius Hybrid line were mentioned in the article IIRC) in protest
that they were locked out of a major American expo that showcased cars that
used alternative energy sources.
another fool
> another fool wrote:
>
> > Well duh - you're in Japan. When I worked construction before I was
> > edumicated we worked DOT contracts. Guess what the regulations and
> > spec's were written in? Guess what our sub's had to know how to
> > read/understand? Guess where we were? Of course Florida's "English
> > Only" rule for government contracts (at least at the time - that might
> > have changed in the last 15 years) would make the US exclusionairy
> > right?
>
> No, because English is the language used by people around the world as in business, science and technology,
> not Japanese.
>
And yet, strangely, I work in a research lab with about 35 Japanese.
Of those 2 speak fleunt english, 1 speaks broken english, and 2 can
write a coherent english statement if given several days and a
Japanese/English dictionary. All of them have at least a MS and most
are PhD's in either physics or some field of engineering. I would
imagine that the percentage would be considerably lower in the case we
are discussing. And who should bear the cost of hiring the
translator? The contractor or the contractee (since they will
probably be "bearing" that cost eventually anyway from the winning
contractor if applicable)?
> > > The Japs are notorious for a closed-door policy. Gaijins can go get stuffed
> > > when there is money or contracts involved, yet they will "make a buck out of
> > > gaijin" by having an International Expo.
> >
> > I fail to see anything that says "gaijin's are not welcome to apply" I
> > simply see that if you are going to do business in a country they
> > expect you to be able to communicate in the "language of the land".
> > Hardely exclusionairy.
>
> Is that you say about the Japanese construction industry?
Actually I was saying it about the "International Expo" not the
construction industry per say.
Eric Takabayashi
> Eric Takabayashi <eta...@yahoo.co.jp> wrote in message news:<4000075C...@yahoo.co.jp>...
> > another fool wrote:
> >
> > > Well duh - you're in Japan. When I worked construction before I was
> > > edumicated we worked DOT contracts. Guess what the regulations and
> > > spec's were written in? Guess what our sub's had to know how to
> > > read/understand? Guess where we were? Of course Florida's "English
> > > Only" rule for government contracts (at least at the time - that might
> > > have changed in the last 15 years) would make the US exclusionairy
> > > right?
> >
> > No, because English is the language used by people around the world as in business, science and technology,
> > not Japanese.
>
> And yet, strangely, I work in a research lab with about 35 Japanese.
> Of those 2 speak fleunt english, 1 speaks broken english, and 2 can
> write a coherent english statement if given several days and a
> Japanese/English dictionary. All of them have at least a MS and most
> are PhD's in either physics or some field of engineering.
I am not questioning their intelligence.
However, it would seem they would have some trouble publishing or making presentations and giving speeches for
the international community, like the people I know do, from college students to university professors.
> I would
> imagine that the percentage would be considerably lower in the case we
> are discussing. And who should bear the cost of hiring the
> translator? The contractor or the contractee (since they will
> probably be "bearing" that cost eventually anyway from the winning
> contractor if applicable)?
Both the Japanese and the foreigners would ideally have their own translators or multilingual staff, whom they
pay for themselves.
> > > > The Japs are notorious for a closed-door policy. Gaijins can go get stuffed
> > > > when there is money or contracts involved, yet they will "make a buck out of
> > > > gaijin" by having an International Expo.
> > >
> > > I fail to see anything that says "gaijin's are not welcome to apply" I
> > > simply see that if you are going to do business in a country they
> > > expect you to be able to communicate in the "language of the land".
> > > Hardely exclusionairy.
> >
> > Is that you say about the Japanese construction industry?
>
> Actually I was saying it about the "International Expo" not the
> construction industry per say.
Now what does not explicitly forbidding foreigners from applying have with the actual acceptance or denial of
foreigners? I do not deny that foreign firms who are Japanese savvy can apply or even win contracts, but do you
deny any exclusion on the part of the Japanese?
Ryan Ginstrom
> Ryan Ginstrom wrote:
>
> > My first translation gig was as a translator/interpreter at New United
> > Motors Inc. (NUMI), a joint venture between Toyota and GM in Fremont,
CA.
>
> So were you translating for the Americans into Japanese, or into English
for
> the Japanese, as it was the Americans' home country?
I translated and interpreted. When I interpreted, it was usually for some
Japanese engineer who wanted to bitch at an American worker for performing
shoddy work. When I translated, it was usually things like some process
chart in preparation for a meeting in which the Japanese would bitch at the
Americans for being behind schedule.
> Did the Japanese working
> in the US not have Japanese documents, or were they all expected to speak
and
> write English, as it was the Americans' home country in which the Japanese
were
> doing business and hoping to benefit?
But of course the situation is totally different. In the case of the
banpaku, the cost of entry into the bidding is the ability to do business in
Japanese. If you can't do that, then you don't get to play, sorry.
I would like you to please tell me how it would be in the interest of the
government of Aichi to allow bids to be submitted in English? When you are
going after a government contract, the burdens are on you. You are trying to
sell your services, the prospective buyers aren't going to do your work for
you.
When companies like Toyota go into joint ventures with foreign countries,
they would generally like their interfacing employees to learn English, or
even hope (but not very strongly expect) the foreigners to learn a bit of
Japanese. This would
a) save translator costs (a Toyota employee gets a massive hard on when he
thinks he can save 1,000 yen -- what do you think he would do to save a
$60,000-year translator's salary?)
b) speed the development process (a Toyota employee gets a massive hard on
when he thinks he can get from drawing board to mass production 0.25 days
sooner. How much time do you think is lost waiting to have documents
translated/looking for an interpreter/etc.)
But Toyota has other goals for its employees as well, so generally its
employees go overseas for a year or so, then head back to the hive. The ones
who stay behind long enough to learn English and American/local ways are
generally forlorn losers who have been cast out from the hive.
As a result, they need to use translators/interpreters. Not an ideal
situation, but it pays the salaries of budding translators.
> Guess which language they use in spoken and written communication?
Whichever is most expedient.
I got to speak with the president of Nokia Japan once. He told me he wanted
to do all business in Japan in English. He wanted his (Japanese) engineers
to read his company's English docs, and wanted internal communication to be
in English. Unfortunately, his engineers and other employees weren't up to
the task, so he was having to pay big bucks to get all Nokia documents
translated into Japanese. This was costing him money and time. But there was
no alternative. Had he had an alternative, everything would have been done
in English -- in Japan -- just like he had done during his prior assignment
in Thailand.
> And considering the history of Japan and education of post war Japanese,
it is
> not unreasonable to expect large Japanese companies or the government to
> communicate in English for the convenience or benefit of foreigners.
They will if it is expedient for them to do so. Most of the foreign ministry
boys speak decent English. The problem in their case is that they think
their English is better than it is, and they ensconce the shitty English of
their sempai as "teiyaku," but that's a different story.
> This does not mean that I support the prevalence or dominant position of
> English in the world. It is best to use the native language in each
market, and
> it is I who tell Japanese that they should not place so much importance on
> English and only English, particularly when dealing with people such as in
> China and South Korea.
That is not limited to Japan. When I was traveling in Chile, the Isrealis
used to get royally pissed when hotel staff couldn't speak English (which
was usually), while the sepponians and canuks would good-naturedly get by
with what Spanish they knew.
> > So basically, the impression I came away with after working with
American,
> > Japanese, and German auto engineers is that if you buy a German car, you
> > know you're getting a good car. You buy a Japanese car, you know you're
not
> > getting a lemon. You buy an American car, it's pretty much a crap shoot.
>
> Yes, that's the impression you got, and it is quite common among Japanese
Yes, that's the impression I got. And I would still buy a Mercedes instead
of aToyota if I could afford it and wasn't too damn cheap to pay for it.
--
Regards,
Ryan Ginstrom
Eric Takabayashi
> > Did the Japanese working
> > in the US not have Japanese documents, or were they all expected to speak
> and
> > write English, as it was the Americans' home country in which the Japanese
> were
> > doing business and hoping to benefit?
>
> But of course the situation is totally different. In the case of the
> banpaku, the cost of entry into the bidding is the ability to do business in
> Japanese. If you can't do that, then you don't get to play, sorry.
>
> I would like you to please tell me how it would be in the interest of the
> government of Aichi to allow bids to be submitted in English?
It is not. It is in the interest of the English speaking foreigners wanting to
do business, as it would be in the interest of the Japanese wanting to do
business in the US, to have documents and other communications in Japanese.
> When you are
> going after a government contract, the burdens are on you. You are trying to
> sell your services, the prospective buyers aren't going to do your work for
> you.
>
> When companies like Toyota go into joint ventures with foreign countries,
> they would generally like their interfacing employees to learn English, or
> even hope (but not very strongly expect) the foreigners to learn a bit of
> Japanese. This would
> a) save translator costs (a Toyota employee gets a massive hard on when he
> thinks he can save 1,000 yen -- what do you think he would do to save a
> $60,000-year translator's salary?)
> b) speed the development process (a Toyota employee gets a massive hard on
> when he thinks he can get from drawing board to mass production 0.25 days
> sooner. How much time do you think is lost waiting to have documents
> translated/looking for an interpreter/etc.)
>
> But Toyota has other goals for its employees as well, so generally its
> employees go overseas for a year or so, then head back to the hive. The ones
> who stay behind long enough to learn English and American/local ways are
> generally forlorn losers who have been cast out from the hive.
>
> As a result, they need to use translators/interpreters. Not an ideal
> situation, but it pays the salaries of budding translators.
And why should every foreigner or business who comes to Japan be expected to
know Japanese, though it is the ideal?
> > Guess which language they use in spoken and written communication?
>
> Whichever is most expedient.
No, English. It is I who tell them they should communicate with Chinese or
Koreans for example, in their own language, and the Japanese who claim that
English is the most useful.
> I got to speak with the president of Nokia Japan once. He told me he wanted
> to do all business in Japan in English. He wanted his (Japanese) engineers
> to read his company's English docs, and wanted internal communication to be
> in English. Unfortunately, his engineers and other employees weren't up to
> the task, so he was having to pay big bucks to get all Nokia documents
> translated into Japanese. This was costing him money and time. But there was
> no alternative. Had he had an alternative, everything would have been done
> in English -- in Japan -- just like he had done during his prior assignment
> in Thailand.
Then as you say, his staff were not up to the task like Mazda or Nissan
employees are expected to be. They get people like the former presidents of
Mazda in Hiroshima to lead the company, not study or speak Japanese.
> > And considering the history of Japan and education of post war Japanese,
> it is
> > not unreasonable to expect large Japanese companies or the government to
> > communicate in English for the convenience or benefit of foreigners.
>
> They will if it is expedient for them to do so. Most of the foreign ministry
> boys speak decent English. The problem in their case is that they think
> their English is better than it is, and they ensconce the shitty English of
> their sempai as "teiyaku," but that's a different story.
>
> > This does not mean that I support the prevalence or dominant position of
> > English in the world. It is best to use the native language in each
> market, and
> > it is I who tell Japanese that they should not place so much importance on
> > English and only English, particularly when dealing with people such as in
> > China and South Korea.
>
> That is not limited to Japan. When I was traveling in Chile, the Isrealis
> used to get royally pissed when hotel staff couldn't speak English (which
> was usually), while the sepponians and canuks would good-naturedly get by
> with what Spanish they knew.
Again, I am not claiming or promoting English *should* be the dominant or most
prevalent international language. It just is. I don't care if all people have
to learn Esperanto or some other artificial language to communicate
internationally.
> > > So basically, the impression I came away with after working with
> American,
> > > Japanese, and German auto engineers is that if you buy a German car, you
> > > know you're getting a good car. You buy a Japanese car, you know you're
> not
> > > getting a lemon. You buy an American car, it's pretty much a crap shoot.
> >
> > Yes, that's the impression you got, and it is quite common among Japanese
>
> Yes, that's the impression I got. And I would still buy a Mercedes instead
> of aToyota if I could afford it and wasn't too damn cheap to pay for it.
I've been in a top of the line Mercedes, and it was great. But owners of
current models compare it and current Mercedes quality in general unfavorably
to the old (pre 92) S class, for example, which are called "battleships" often
strong for hundreds of thousands of miles. Then there is the matter of last
year's JD Power and Associates survey which was reported in a newspaper, but I
cannot find online. It appears Japanese drivers cast off their Benz cars as
easily as they cast off a Suzuki light truck.
If I were willing to spend the money on a mere car, for my family, I'd get a
pre 2004 BMW 540i. For me, I'd get something like this:
and screw reliability and durability.
You can buy Benz and BMW for considerably less than a million yen, used. I
don't often see Ferrari go under five million.
Ryan Ginstrom
> Ryan Ginstrom wrote:
> > Whichever is most expedient.
>
> No, English. It is I who tell them they should communicate with Chinese or
> Koreans for example, in their own language, and the Japanese who claim
that
> English is the most useful.
Or rather, yes, English. because it is most expedient. You said yourself
below that English is dominant. So rather than have their engineers learn
Chinese, and Malay, and Tagalog, and German, ad nauseum, they are going to
get them to learn English, which is apparently hard enough on its own.
Simple expediency.
How can you compare this to prefectural government lackeys, living and
working in Japan, and inviting contractors to come bid with *them* for
*their* money?
> Again, I am not claiming or promoting English *should* be the dominant or
most
> prevalent international language. It just is. I don't care if all people
have
> to learn Esperanto or some other artificial language to communicate
> internationally.
Compare this repeatedly to what you wrote above , until you have understood.
> > Yes, that's the impression I got. And I would still buy a Mercedes
instead
> > of aToyota if I could afford it and wasn't too damn cheap to pay for it.
>
> I've been in a top of the line Mercedes
Good for you. What do you want, a cookie?
--
Regards,
Ryan Ginstrom
Eric Takabayashi
> "Eric Takabayashi" <eta...@yahoo.co.jp> wrote in message
> news:40015283...@yahoo.co.jp...
> > Ryan Ginstrom wrote:
> > > Whichever is most expedient.
> >
> > No, English. It is I who tell them they should communicate with Chinese or
> > Koreans for example, in their own language, and the Japanese who claim
> that
> > English is the most useful.
>
> Or rather, yes, English. because it is most expedient. You said yourself
> below that English is dominant. So rather than have their engineers learn
> Chinese, and Malay, and Tagalog, and German, ad nauseum, they are going to
> get them to learn English, which is apparently hard enough on its own.
> Simple expediency.
>
> How can you compare this to prefectural government lackeys, living and
> working in Japan, and inviting contractors to come bid with *them* for
> *their* money?
Because prefectural lackeys even in communities considerably smaller than
Fukuyama also use English and other languages such as Korean, Portuguese,
Tagalog, and Chinese. And the Expo is a large project.
> > Again, I am not claiming or promoting English *should* be the dominant or
> most
> > prevalent international language. It just is. I don't care if all people
> have
> > to learn Esperanto or some other artificial language to communicate
> > internationally.
>
> Compare this repeatedly to what you wrote above , until you have understood.
It is not I who decide that English is the language of international
communication, the most expedient, or the language of choice for Japanese. It
just is.
> > > Yes, that's the impression I got. And I would still buy a Mercedes
> instead
> > > of aToyota if I could afford it and wasn't too damn cheap to pay for it.
> >
> > I've been in a top of the line Mercedes
>
> Good for you. What do you want, a cookie?
I prefer Soh ice cream. Chocolate. This caramel chocolate waffle banana roll
from Family Mart kicked ass, too.
vernon...@oyama.ca
says...
~ vernon...@oyama.ca wrote:
~
~ > In article <lPzLb.3039$Wa....@news-server.bigpond.net.au>,
~ > theg...@bigpond.com says...
~ > ~ Amazing isn't it, the EXPO 2005 in Aichi is supposed to foster international
~ > ~ exchange, yet a look at their website "says it all"
~ > ~
~ > ~ - Tenders for construction services must comply with a specification
~ > ~
~ > ~ - A tender for provision of staff for an international restaurant and stores
~ > ~ effectively limiting it to local companies
~ > ~
~ > ~ - Similar tenders for the new Central Japan International Airport
~ > ~ official documentation was provided in Japanese language only.
~ > ~
~ > ~ The Japs are notorious for a closed-door policy. Gaijins can go get stuffed
~ > ~ when there is money or contracts involved, yet they will "make a buck out of
~ > ~ gaijin" by having an International Expo.
~ > ~
~ > Do American, Canadian, Australian, and British companies issue
~
~ Fortunately, English is the international working language, not Japanese, and is
~ also more common than French or German, so no, the US does not have to issue
~ invitations in all other languages or even every major language. It is however,
~ peculiar to issue documents only in Japanese, a language mainly used in a single
~ country.
~
I know the US doesn't have to issue contracts in languages other than
English, but what would compel Japan to issue contracts in languages
other than Japanese? Surely companies from English speaking
countries can afford translators? Shouldn't that be part of the cost
of doing business?
I agree that Japan uses a variety of hurdles as unofficial trade
barriers, and that this may be one of them. But IMHO, this is the
wrong one to focus on since Japan can argue quite rightly that it's
just following the practices of the complaining countries.
Verno
Bryce
"Michael Cash" <bugg...@fake.com> wrote in message
news:6l9vvvgichm2thfr5...@4ax.com...
> Yeah, there is that.
>
> On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 15:02:21 +0900, "Ryan Ginstrom"
> <gins...@hotmail.com> brought down from the Mount tablets inscribed:
>
> ><trimmed scj>
> >"Michael Cash" <bugg...@fake.com> wrote in message
> >news:903vvvk6h9j9advp4...@4ax.com...
> >> On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 01:20:12 GMT, "thegoons" <theg...@bigpond.com>
> >> brought down from the Mount tablets inscribed:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >"Michael Cash" <bugg...@fake.com> wrote in message
> >> >news:dtktvv0vn9vcborq3...@4ax.com...
> >> >> More and more of late I had began to suspect you were a total
fuckwit.
> >> >> None you've just gone and removed all lingering doubt. Thanks for
> >> >> clearing it up.
> >> >
> >> >Feel free to flame me once you can string a sentence together that
makes
> >> >sense.
> >>
> >> Feel free to flame me once you can string a post together that makes
> >> sense.
> >
> >Hey, let's not be so hard on the guy -- at least he didn't top post.
Michelle Vadeboncoeur
http://www.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/02/25/bush.cars/ is what you're
thinking about...
I won't get into the "Freedom Car" movement replacing the PNGV program
(Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles) for "American" car
companies... (lots of US government "research" monies that has
produced
NO cars available for retail sale yet...)
http://www.dieselnet.com/news/0201doe.html
Michelle Vadeboncoeur
http://www.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/02/25/bush.cars/ is what you're
Dethlar2004: Blaq Action Hero
"Michelle Vadeboncoeur" <m...@kluge.net> wrote in message
news:5ce77eb2.04011...@posting.google.com...
Which is the way the Bush family wants it. Being the oil barons they are,
they would stand to lose the most if these cars hit the road. Wonder why
Bush has a 16 year timetable for the cars from 2001? When he leaves office,
they are already grooming Jeb to be the next prez. He steps in, kills
another dictator to stay in office for 2 terms, and the Bushes step out of
the executive spotlight. Sounds like 16 years to me.
another fool
> > And yet, strangely, I work in a research lab with about 35 Japanese.
> > Of those 2 speak fleunt english, 1 speaks broken english, and 2 can
> > write a coherent english statement if given several days and a
> > Japanese/English dictionary. All of them have at least a MS and most
> > are PhD's in either physics or some field of engineering.
>
> I am not questioning their intelligence.
>
> However, it would seem they would have some trouble publishing or making presentations and giving speeches for
> the international community, like the people I know do, from college students to university professors.
Which would explain why 5 people have 90% of the publications and
presentations out of our group. I recently watched while one fellow
spent a week putting together a 3 paragraph abstract for submission
then handed it to me and asked me to proof it (which I don't mind).
Better then the fellow who handed me his data and abstract and asked
if I would write his paper for him (which I do mind). I have yet to
be at a conference attended by the Japanese where someone wasn't
reading thier presentation off a piece of paper. The sad thing being
when they are asked questions and have no idea what they are being
asked or how to answer.
> > I would
> > imagine that the percentage would be considerably lower in the case we
> > are discussing. And who should bear the cost of hiring the
> > translator? The contractor or the contractee (since they will
> > probably be "bearing" that cost eventually anyway from the winning
> > contractor if applicable)?
>
> Both the Japanese and the foreigners would ideally have their own translators or multilingual staff, whom they
> pay for themselves.
Ideally, however, the contractee might not see it that way.
> > Actually I was saying it about the "International Expo" not the
> > construction industry per say.
>
> Now what does not explicitly forbidding foreigners from applying have with the actual acceptance or denial of
> foreigners? I do not deny that foreign firms who are Japanese savvy can apply or even win contracts, but do you
> deny any exclusion on the part of the Japanese?
Not being part of thier decision making process I cannot make any
comment on any exclusionairy tendancies on thier part. However, you
cannot also make the statement that they are exclussionairy based
simply on the fact that they are requiring submissions in the language
of the land. (and I have been part of the decision process where
given 2 equal technical proposals and a slightly better cost proposal
from a foriegn bidder the local bidder was given the contract based on
the fact that they were perceived as being able to provide better
service and follow up to problems then the foriegn bidder - would that
be considered exclussionairy?)
thegoons
"Dethlar2004: Blaq Action Hero" <dethl...@ammodump.com> wrote in message
> Whatever. I remember reading news stories of Japanese car companies
(Toyota
> and their Prius Hybrid line were mentioned in the article IIRC) in
protest
> that they were locked out of a major American expo that showcased cars
that
> used alternative energy sources.
>
Correct.
Toyota were locked out under directive of George W. Bush.
thegoons
"another fool" <anoth...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:44845040.04011...@posting.google.com...
No, it is condered as corrpution/fraud.
Silvio Franke
Drew Hamilton schrieb:
> thegoons <theg...@bigpond.com> wrote:
>
>>- Tenders for construction services must comply with a specification
>>document, which they make available only in Japanese language, not English.
>
>
> But if they made the document in English, then they'd be shutting
> out the Germans! But then they could make the document in German
> as well, but they'd be shutting out the French! So they could
> make the document in French as well...
Don't worry about the Germans. A significant number of
the Germans is able to communicate in English. So English
would be just fine.
Silvio
-------------------------------------------------
Sometimes I feel the strong urge to march east...
Eric Takabayashi
> I know the US doesn't have to issue contracts in languages other than
> English,
Why not?
> but what would compel Japan to issue contracts in languages
> other than Japanese?
The fact that Japan is for Japan and Japanese.
> Surely companies from English speaking countries can afford translators?
So can Japan.
> Shouldn't that be part of the cost of doing business?
The same can be said of Japan.
> I agree that Japan uses a variety of hurdles as unofficial trade
> barriers,
That is the point.
> and that this may be one of them. But IMHO, this is the
> wrong one to focus on since Japan can argue quite rightly that it's
> just following the practices of the complaining countries.
Irrelevant.
Repeat: I am against restrictions on free trade. I don't care if it's Japanese,
Americans, or anyone else doing it.
Eric Takabayashi
> Eric Takabayashi <eta...@yahoo.co.jp> wrote in message news:<400146F9...@yahoo.co.jp>...
> > > And yet, strangely, I work in a research lab with about 35 Japanese.
> > > Of those 2 speak fleunt english, 1 speaks broken english, and 2 can
> > > write a coherent english statement if given several days and a
> > > Japanese/English dictionary. All of them have at least a MS and most
> > > are PhD's in either physics or some field of engineering.
> >
> > I am not questioning their intelligence.
> >
> > However, it would seem they would have some trouble publishing or making presentations and giving speeches for
> > the international community, like the people I know do, from college students to university professors.
>
> Which would explain why 5 people have 90% of the publications and
> presentations out of our group.
That's your group. I'm talking about the rest of the people.
How do they do research if they are unable to function in English? Are they the ones making the discoveries for the
first time on the earth?
> I recently watched while one fellow
> spent a week putting together a 3 paragraph abstract for submission
> then handed it to me and asked me to proof it (which I don't mind).
> Better then the fellow who handed me his data and abstract and asked
> if I would write his paper for him (which I do mind). I have yet to
> be at a conference attended by the Japanese where someone wasn't
> reading thier presentation off a piece of paper. The sad thing being
> when they are asked questions and have no idea what they are being
> asked or how to answer.
So they do have trouble without English.
> > > I would
> > > imagine that the percentage would be considerably lower in the case we
> > > are discussing. And who should bear the cost of hiring the
> > > translator? The contractor or the contractee (since they will
> > > probably be "bearing" that cost eventually anyway from the winning
> > > contractor if applicable)?
> >
> > Both the Japanese and the foreigners would ideally have their own translators or multilingual staff, whom they
> > pay for themselves.
>
> Ideally, however, the contractee might not see it that way.
>
> > > Actually I was saying it about the "International Expo" not the
> > > construction industry per say.
> >
> > Now what does not explicitly forbidding foreigners from applying have with the actual acceptance or denial of
> > foreigners? I do not deny that foreign firms who are Japanese savvy can apply or even win contracts, but do you
> > deny any exclusion on the part of the Japanese?
>
> Not being part of thier decision making process I cannot make any
> comment on any exclusionairy tendancies on thier part.
Then you might want to look into the practices of the Japanese construction industry. One professor and a number of
other writers did.
> However, you
> cannot also make the statement that they are exclussionairy based
> simply on the fact that they are requiring submissions in the language
> of the land.
Why not, particularly with the other requirements?
> (and I have been part of the decision process where
> given 2 equal technical proposals and a slightly better cost proposal
> from a foriegn bidder the local bidder was given the contract based on
> the fact that they were perceived as being able to provide better
> service and follow up to problems then the foriegn bidder - would that
> be considered exclussionairy?)
Again, that is you. I am talking about those who are excluded.
thegoons
"Ryan Ginstrom" <gins...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:btrnht$a73rd$1...@ID-101276.news.uni-berlin.de...
>
> "Eric Takabayashi" <eta...@yahoo.co.jp> wrote in message
> news:40015283...@yahoo.co.jp...
> > Ryan Ginstrom wrote:
> > > Whichever is most expedient.
> >
> > No, English. It is I who tell them they should communicate with Chinese
or
> > Koreans for example, in their own language, and the Japanese who claim
> that
> > English is the most useful.
>
> Or rather, yes, English. because it is most expedient. You said yourself
> below that English is dominant. So rather than have their engineers learn
> Chinese, and Malay, and Tagalog, and German, ad nauseum, they are going to
> get them to learn English, which is apparently hard enough on its own.
> Simple expediency.
>
> How can you compare this to prefectural government lackeys, living and
> working in Japan, and inviting contractors to come bid with *them* for
> *their* money?
Then perhaps the Aichi Prefectural Government should never have taken on an
"international" exposition then; and they should immediately crap their
bullshit spiel about them having an open-dorr tendering process and
encouraging international contribution. All lip service.
Michael Cash
brought down from the Mount tablets inscribed:
>
Source of that information?
Eric Takabayashi
> > How can you compare this to prefectural government lackeys, living and
> > working in Japan, and inviting contractors to come bid with *them* for
> > *their* money?
>
> Then perhaps the Aichi Prefectural Government should never have taken on an
> "international" exposition then; and they should immediately crap their
> bullshit spiel about them having an open-dorr tendering process and
> encouraging international contribution. All lip service.
There is that, too. Cities or countries with governments which go on about how
dangerous gaijin are, or how they bring dreaded diseases and crime into Japan,
shouldn't BS about how open they are, or how international they are trying to
be, and not bother with such PR events meant for local benefit.
Dethlar2004: Blaq Action Hero
> On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 08:32:29 GMT, "thegoons" <theg...@bigpond.com>
> brought down from the Mount tablets inscribed:
>
> >
> >"Dethlar2004: Blaq Action Hero" <dethl...@ammodump.com> wrote in
message
> >> Whatever. I remember reading news stories of Japanese car companies
> >(Toyota
> >> and their Prius Hybrid line were mentioned in the article IIRC) in
> >protest
> >> that they were locked out of a major American expo that showcased cars
> >that
> >> used alternative energy sources.
> >>
> >
> >Correct.
> >
> >Toyota were locked out under directive of George W. Bush.
>
> Source of that information?
Read this part in the article:
Still, White House Communications Director Dan Bartlett denied any effort to
intentionally exclude the Japanese automakers.
"It's not a slight of any sort," Bartlett said. "I sat in on several
meetings and I never heard anyone say we should exclude foreign-owned
companies."
Asked if he thought that omitting Toyota and Honda was an oversight,
Bartlett said: "I really can't comment, not without having all the facts."
Translation: I can neither confirm nor deny that foreign (Japanese) cars
were intentionally left out of the expo.....but I know the answer.
Musashi
> Thank yopu Eric. I have nothing against the Japanese at all, love the
place,
Oh really? Then maybe you should not use "JAP" in the subject line
of your posts then.
Bryce
"Musashi" <Miya...@Hosokawa.co.jp> wrote in message
news:E0AMb.56120$cp2....@newssvr31.news.prodigy.com...
Maybe he was referring to Jewish American Princesses?
Musashi
"Bryce" <fuk...@takethisout.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:gtAMb.31$3M1....@news.uswest.net...
Michael Cash
<dethl...@ammodump.com> brought down from the Mount tablets
inscribed:
Equals: George W. Bush locked them out?
Dethlar2004: Blaq Action Hero
Well it was an executive decision, and while W might not have sat in on the
meetings, he probably had to give approval for the thing to happen in the
first place, and who knows how many thins he signs without looking it over.
One of his underlings probably put the list together, "forgot" about the
Japanese cars and then said to him, "sign this". Besides, him being the oil
baron he is, it was probably in his best interest.
another fool
> another fool wrote:
>
> > Eric Takabayashi <eta...@yahoo.co.jp> wrote in message news:<400146F9...@yahoo.co.jp>...
>
> How do they do research if they are unable to function in English? Are they the ones making the discoveries for the
> first time on the earth?
>
Sometimes you would think so. Sometimes they are suprised when they
present something to the group and I point out that yes, that was
already done and here is the followup. It is all rather amusing since
if I miss it usually the group leader (who is very fluent in english)
points it out.
> > However, you
> > cannot also make the statement that they are exclussionairy based
> > simply on the fact that they are requiring submissions in the language
> > of the land.
>
> Why not, particularly with the other requirements?
>
Because that was the original assumption of the original author who
started this discussion. That the lack of english and requirement of
handing in the documents in person were exclusionairy.
If you want to agree that they are not and move into how the
construction industry as a whole is exclusionairy then let`s move on.
vernon...@oyama.ca
~ > I know the US doesn't have to issue contracts in languages other than
~ > English,
~
~ Why not?
~
~ > but what would compel Japan to issue contracts in languages
~ > other than Japanese?
~
~ The fact that Japan is for Japan and Japanese.
~
~ > Surely companies from English speaking countries can afford translators?
~
~ So can Japan.
~
~ > Shouldn't that be part of the cost of doing business?
~
~ The same can be said of Japan.
~
~ > I agree that Japan uses a variety of hurdles as unofficial trade
~ > barriers,
~
~ That is the point.
~
~ > and that this may be one of them. But IMHO, this is the
~ > wrong one to focus on since Japan can argue quite rightly that it's
~ > just following the practices of the complaining countries.
~
~ Irrelevant.
~
~ Repeat: I am against restrictions on free trade. I don't care if it's Japanese,
~ Americans, or anyone else doing it.
I agree with you, but until nations have free trade agreements in
place, they're free to trade as they wish. That's free trade, too.
Verno
Declan Murphy
> Fabian wrote:
>>American companies DO get subsidies and government support.
>
> I know.
>
> Now do US companies get subsidies and government support in Japan, like the
> questioner asked regarding Japanese automakers operating in the US in an
> attempt to point out US unfairness? Why should Japanese companies get
> subsidized twice?
In case you are still wondering, yes there are wholly owned foreign
subsidiaries operating in Japan that receive subsidies from Japanese
national and prefectural governments, just as there are corporate
entities with half or minority foreign shareholdings also receiving the
same.
--
I am not who I think I am
I am not who you think I am
I am who I think you think I am
...or some such shite.
thegoons
"Musashi" <Miya...@Hosokawa.co.jp> wrote in message
news:E0AMb.56120$cp2....@newssvr31.news.prodigy.com...
>
Read separate post re use of "Jap"
Declan Murphy
> Haluk Skywalker wrote:
>
>>If those foreign companies cannot arrange a single person to hand deliver
>>their bid, how are they going to provide a restaurant full of staff?
>
> Did you (arrange to) submit all your resumes to various employers by hand or
> in person? If not, how can you be expected to relocate or show up for work?
You are confusing the requirements of corporation seeking a government
tender with the expectations placed on an individual. With a tender
there is usually also a presentation required - there will be questions
asked and they will need to be answered. I have been looking at several
possible tender opportunities for the expo during the past 2 years
(having observed two committees through the local chamber of commerce
for 4 years now). I have also been looking at tendering for the
Australian pavilion (announced 8 weeks ago). In both cases, the
requirements are quite different to an individual "looking for work".
Declan Murphy
> Anyone know a major US/European/Australian/(etc.) company that has a
> sizeable, successful business in Japan?
Thinking of plants in the Mikawa area, around 10 companies (just off the
top of my head, prolly more if I bothered to do some research).
Up in Tokyo I would assume there would be shitloads more amongst all the
Hewlett Packards, IBMs, Coca Colas etc
Kaz
I think Verno's IQ is less than 30.
Eric Takabayashi
> ou are confusing the requirements of corporation seeking a government
> tender with the expectations placed on an individual. With a tender
> there is usually also a presentation required -
At the same time? That is not what the procedure at the website suggests:
http://www.expo2005.or.jp/en/commercial/#construction
> there will be questions
> asked and they will need to be answered.
As soon as someone submits their application by hand, and not during an appointed
period for presentation and evaluation?
> I have been looking at several
> possible tender opportunities for the expo during the past 2 years
> (having observed two committees through the local chamber of commerce
> for 4 years now). I have also been looking at tendering for the
> Australian pavilion (announced 8 weeks ago). In both cases, the
> requirements are quite different to an individual "looking for work".
Yes, people bringing in applications for work may be interviewed, and a decision
made right away.
Declan Murphy
> Declan Murphy wrote:
>
>>ou are confusing the requirements of corporation seeking a government
>>tender with the expectations placed on an individual. With a tender
>>there is usually also a presentation required -
>
> At the same time? That is not what the procedure at the website suggests:
>
> http://www.expo2005.or.jp/en/commercial/#construction
Pre-Qualification. After which (if the initial application requesting
the opportunity to tender is accepted - screens out the riffraff) there
would be an invitation to tender (in person).
And yes a company representative would need to present in person the
original copies of their CL classification. It would simply not be
possible to tender without at some stage or other being physically on
the ground in Aichi.
>>there will be questions
>>asked and they will need to be answered.
>
> As soon as someone submits their application by hand, and not during an appointed
> period for presentation and evaluation?
Yes. When you present a tender you explain immediately which document is
which. For that reason if my company applies for a tender for the
Australian pavilion for example, then even though all of the actual work
would be performed here in Aichi I will have no alternative except to
fly down there.
>>I have been looking at several
>>possible tender opportunities for the expo during the past 2 years
>>(having observed two committees through the local chamber of commerce
>>for 4 years now). I have also been looking at tendering for the
>>Australian pavilion (announced 8 weeks ago). In both cases, the
>>requirements are quite different to an individual "looking for work".
>
> Yes, people bringing in applications for work may be interviewed, and a decision
> made right away.
In the case solely of an individual. It is never the case with a
government tender.
Eric Takabayashi
> Eric Takabayashi <eta...@yahoo.co.jp> wrote in message news:<4002748...@yahoo.co.jp>...
> > another fool wrote:
> >
> > > Eric Takabayashi <eta...@yahoo.co.jp> wrote in message news:<400146F9...@yahoo.co.jp>...
> > That's your group. I'm talking about the rest of the people.
> >
> > How do they do research if they are unable to function in English? Are they the ones making the discoveries for the
> > first time on the earth?
>
> Sometimes you would think so. Sometimes they are suprised when they
> present something to the group and I point out that yes, that was
> already done and here is the followup.
You see how they are inconvenienced by not knowing English in a field like that? The professionals I know are not so
ignorant of the need to know English for their work, even if they do not actually communicate with speakers of English,
and remain in Japan.
> It is all rather amusing
Yes, it is. Imagine such intelligent people being so ignorant of English or the need for it, or information outside
their own experience as it applies to their own work.
> since if I miss it usually the group leader (who is very fluent in english)
> points it out.
>
> > > However, you
> > > cannot also make the statement that they are exclussionairy based
> > > simply on the fact that they are requiring submissions in the language
> > > of the land.
> >
> > Why not, particularly with the other requirements?
>
> Because that was the original assumption of the original author who
> started this discussion.
I asked, why not make the statement the requirements are exclusionary?
> That the lack of english and requirement of
> handing in the documents in person were exclusionairy.
I have been to a website promoting the expo:
http://www.expo2005.or.jp/language.html
Please observe how the local government is capable of functioning in six foreign languages, despite any doubters here,
for the benefit of foreign visitors to the website, and I am sure that any foreign visitors to the event will also be so
served. Even a much smaller place like where I live is capable of communicating in six or more foreign languages, for
the benefit of foreigners. Fukuyama government offices do not have French or Spanish documents or speakers that I know
of, but they do have Portuguese and Tagalog.
So why is just this part different?
http://www.expo2005.or.jp/en/commercial/
"Guidelines for" "Application for" "input data"
"Japanese only" "Japanese only" "Japanese only"
blah, blah, blah
If the organizers want bidders to be certified according to Japanese standards, that is understandable.. But why do all
prospective bidders also have to be able to communicate in Japanese, when the Japanese can use English and five other
foreign languages perfectly well, or the Japanese already pay money for people like you (as you pointed out)? If the
Japanese did not need you or your skills, you would be out of a job. Why assume that people who can communicate in the
law of the land are the only ones who can do the work or the only ones who should be allowed to even INQUIRE about the
work, as this page suggests?
> If you want to agree that they are not and move into how the
> construction industry as a whole is exclusionary then let`s move on.
I didn't say the requirements aren't exclusionary, and I was indeed responding to the original post.
Eric Takabayashi
> Eric Takabayashi wrote:
> > Declan Murphy wrote:
> >
> >>ou are confusing the requirements of corporation seeking a government
> >>tender with the expectations placed on an individual. With a tender
> >>there is usually also a presentation required -
> >
> > At the same time? That is not what the procedure at the website suggests:
> >
> > http://www.expo2005.or.jp/en/commercial/#construction
>
> Pre-Qualification. After which (if the initial application requesting
> the opportunity to tender is accepted - screens out the riffraff) there
> would be an invitation to tender (in person).
>
> And yes a company representative would need to present in person the
> original copies of their CL classification. It would simply not be
> possible to tender without at some stage or other being physically on
> the ground in Aichi.
How do large international firms like Kajima, third largest global contractor in their
field, do this all over the earth while looking for work?
> >>there will be questions
> >>asked and they will need to be answered.
> >
> > As soon as someone submits their application by hand, and not during an appointed
> > period for presentation and evaluation?
>
> Yes. When you present a tender you explain immediately which document is
> which. For that reason if my company applies for a tender for the
> Australian pavilion for example, then even though all of the actual work
> would be performed here in Aichi I will have no alternative except to
> fly down there.
You would need to go to Australia despite it being all here?
Sounds exclusionary.
Are you talking about your company in Japan, or your Japanese company? Why can they be
in the Australian pavilion?
> >>I have been looking at several
> >>possible tender opportunities for the expo during the past 2 years
> >>(having observed two committees through the local chamber of commerce
> >>for 4 years now). I have also been looking at tendering for the
> >>Australian pavilion (announced 8 weeks ago). In both cases, the
> >>requirements are quite different to an individual "looking for work".
> >
> > Yes, people bringing in applications for work may be interviewed, and a decision
> > made right away.
>
> In the case solely of an individual. It is never the case with a
> government tender.
I was agreeing.
Ryan Ginstrom
> I have been to a website promoting the expo:
>
> http://www.expo2005.or.jp/language.html
>
> Please observe how the local government is capable of functioning in six
foreign languages, despite any doubters here,
A very good friend of mine, both immensely intelligent and dashingly
handsome, did most of that translation. And might I add, he earned a nickel
or two to rub together out of it.
Now riddle me this, batman: Should the government of Aichi pay some other
incredibly handsome, intelligent, and cultured translator a big-ole sack of
nickels SO THAT CONTRACTORS CAN BID WITH THEM?
Or should they let the contractors do their own damn translations if they
want the contract?
--
Regards,
Ryan Ginstrom
Eric Takabayashi
> <riffraff trimmed>
> "Eric Takabayashi" <eta...@yahoo.co.jp> wrote in message
> news:4003E15D...@yahoo.co.jp...
> > I have been to a website promoting the expo:
> >
> > http://www.expo2005.or.jp/language.html
> >
> > Please observe how the local government is capable of functioning in six
> foreign languages, despite any doubters here,
>
> A very good friend of mine, both immensely intelligent and dashingly
> handsome, did most of that translation. And might I add, he earned a nickel
> or two to rub together out of it.
See, just like I was pointing out to the poster. They need people like him,
and he should be thankful for it.
> Now riddle me this, batman: Should the government of Aichi pay some other
> incredibly handsome, intelligent, and cultured translator a big-ole sack of
> nickels SO THAT CONTRACTORS CAN BID WITH THEM?
Yes, Japanese need to be able to function in foreign languages like English,
and that just proves it.
> Or should they let the contractors do their own damn translations if they
> want the contract?
The foreigners can do so if they want, but it shouldn't be a requirement.
Umineko
By your own argument the USA should issue tender documents in all languages
of the countries that may potentially wish to respond. They do not, if a
Japanese company wants to submit a tender proposal they must engage
interpreters to translate the documents into Japanese at their own expense.
why should the Japanese accept the added expense to extend a service to
foreign companies when such is never extended to them?
Declan Murphy
> Declan Murphy wrote:
>
>>Eric Takabayashi wrote:
>>
>>>Declan Murphy wrote:
>>>
>>>>ou are confusing the requirements of corporation seeking a government
>>>>tender with the expectations placed on an individual. With a tender
>>>>there is usually also a presentation required -
>>>
>>>At the same time? That is not what the procedure at the website suggests:
>>>
>>>http://www.expo2005.or.jp/en/commercial/#construction
>>
>>Pre-Qualification. After which (if the initial application requesting
>>the opportunity to tender is accepted - screens out the riffraff) there
>>would be an invitation to tender (in person).
>>
>>And yes a company representative would need to present in person the
>>original copies of their CL classification. It would simply not be
>>possible to tender without at some stage or other being physically on
>>the ground in Aichi.
>
> How do large international firms like Kajima, third largest global contractor in their
> field, do this all over the earth while looking for work?
Kajima has offices and subsidiary companies in many countries, are
licensed in those markets, and in the case of tender processes (not all
contractual work is for the public sector) the ability to be physically
on the ground throughout. I don't understand where the mystery is here.
>>>>there will be questions
>>>>asked and they will need to be answered.
>>>
>>>As soon as someone submits their application by hand, and not during an appointed
>>>period for presentation and evaluation?
>>
>>Yes. When you present a tender you explain immediately which document is
>>which. For that reason if my company applies for a tender for the
>>Australian pavilion for example, then even though all of the actual work
>>would be performed here in Aichi I will have no alternative except to
>>fly down there.
>
> You would need to go to Australia despite it being all here?
>
> Sounds exclusionary.
More a matter of the practicalities involved with a competitive tender,
and the location (until immediately before the event itself) of all of
the decision makers concerned with the pavilion.
> Are you talking about your company in Japan, or your Japanese company? Why can they be
> in the Australian pavilion?
My company in Japan and my Japanese company are the same company. Even
my personal shareholdings are not considered gaishi.
The company can tender for the Australian pavilion because it is invited
to do so. I don't know yet whether we will tender.
Eric Takabayashi
> > ~ Repeat: I am against restrictions on free trade. I don't care if it's
> Japanese,
> > ~ Americans, or anyone else doing it.
> >
> > I agree with you, but until nations have free trade agreements in
> > place, they're free to trade as they wish. That's free trade, too.
> >
> > Verno
>
> By your own argument the USA should issue tender documents in all languages
> of the countries that may potentially wish to respond.
If you are responding to me, no the US does not, because English is the most
prevalent language of international communication. Companies and governments
around the world use English. Not so of Japanese or any other language not on
the list of UN working languages, for example.
But yes, Americans do need to be more aware of other languages and cultures.
> They do not, if a
> Japanese company wants to submit a tender proposal they must engage
> interpreters to translate the documents into Japanese at their own expense.
If they do not already function in English, perhaps so.
> why should the Japanese accept the added expense to extend a service to
> foreign companies when such is never extended to them?
Because Japanese is only for Japanese. English is not only for Americans.
Declan Murphy
> Ryan Ginstrom wrote:
>>Or should they let the contractors do their own damn translations if they
>>want the contract?
>
> The foreigners can do so if they want, but it shouldn't be a requirement.
The phrase "the customer is god" never quite made it to Hawaii did it?
Eric Takabayashi
> > How do large international firms like Kajima, third largest global contractor in their
> > field, do this all over the earth while looking for work?
>
> Kajima has offices and subsidiary companies in many countries, are
> licensed in those markets, and in the case of tender processes (not all
> contractual work is for the public sector) the ability to be physically
> on the ground throughout. I don't understand where the mystery is here.
So how do smaller companies like you or yours have a chance? How did Kajima do it before
they were so large? It is not practical.
> > You would need to go to Australia despite it being all here?
> >
> > Sounds exclusionary.
>
> More a matter of the practicalities involved with a competitive tender,
> and the location (until immediately before the event itself) of all of
> the decision makers concerned with the pavilion.
It's practical for them, not people or companies like you and yours, who joke about your
financial situation, or Kajima before they grew.
Doesn't Australia have local organizers or representatives such as at the Consulate?
> > Are you talking about your company in Japan, or your Japanese company? Why can they be
> > in the Australian pavilion?
>
> My company in Japan and my Japanese company are the same company.
OK. Hard to tell because you seem to have at least three.
> Even my personal shareholdings are not considered gaishi.
>
> The company can tender for the Australian pavilion because it is invited
> to do so.
Seems odd. Does it have anything to do with your citizenship or can anyone invited try?
> I don't know yet whether we will tender.
--
Eric Takabayashi
> Eric Takabayashi wrote:
> > Ryan Ginstrom wrote:
>
> >>Or should they let the contractors do their own damn translations if they
> >>want the contract?
> >
> > The foreigners can do so if they want, but it shouldn't be a requirement.
>
> The phrase "the customer is god" never quite made it to Hawaii did it?
Hawaii was famous before workers started speaking other languages like
Japanese for their benefit, and historically, it would appear that other
Japanese appreciate the need for a means of communication other than Japanese,
even just within Japan, for business, government, or any other purpose.
Declan Murphy
> Declan Murphy wrote:
>
>>>How do large international firms like Kajima, third largest global contractor in their
>>>field, do this all over the earth while looking for work?
>>
>>Kajima has offices and subsidiary companies in many countries, are
>>licensed in those markets, and in the case of tender processes (not all
>>contractual work is for the public sector) the ability to be physically
>>on the ground throughout. I don't understand where the mystery is here.
>
> So how do smaller companies like you or yours have a chance? How did Kajima do it before
> they were so large? It is not practical.
As a general rule a company would only tender for a) what they were
actually capable of doing, b) what was worth doing. Put two and two
together and there are usually ample (different) opportunities for firms
of all sizes.
>>>You would need to go to Australia despite it being all here?
>>>
>>>Sounds exclusionary.
>>
>>More a matter of the practicalities involved with a competitive tender,
>>and the location (until immediately before the event itself) of all of
>>the decision makers concerned with the pavilion.
>
> It's practical for them, not people or companies like you and yours, who joke about your
> financial situation, or Kajima before they grew.
They are the customer, its their money and a competitive tender. The
impracticalities for me are irrelevant. White elephant though the site
will probably become, the expo itself isn't a welfare system.
(The main reason why I'm undecided as to whether to pursue a tender is
because I'm not sure if its financially worth the risk)
> Doesn't Australia have local organizers or representatives such as at the Consulate?
I just told you, Oz is "the location (until immediately before the event
itself) of all of the decision makers concerned with the pavilion". In
terms of resource allocation, the consulate is not involved in these
kind of promotions. FWIW, the system they have set up seems quite
appropriate in terms of their objectives.
>>>Are you talking about your company in Japan, or your Japanese company? Why can they be
>>>in the Australian pavilion?
>>
>>My company in Japan and my Japanese company are the same company.
>
> OK. Hard to tell because you seem to have at least three.
Three businesses. Only two are registered companies. Same answers to
both, they are "in Japan" and in terms of their incorporation "Japanese"
despite my persistent gaiginitus.
>>Even my personal shareholdings are not considered gaishi.
>>
>>The company can tender for the Australian pavilion because it is invited
>>to do so.
>
> Seems odd. Does it have anything to do with your citizenship or can anyone invited try?
I believe it is open to any company regardless of the location of its
registration. What matters (I hope) is what quality of service is
provided and at what price.
Eric Takabayashi
> As a general rule a company would only tender for a) what they were
> actually capable of doing, b) what was worth doing. Put two and two
> together and there are usually ample (different) opportunities for firms
> of all sizes.
Not the same opportunity or same level of opportunity. That's part of being exclusionary.
> > It's practical for them, not people or companies like you and yours, who joke about your
> > financial situation, or Kajima before they grew.
>
> They are the customer, its their money and a competitive tender.
And if they want the best work for "their" money, they should be open to the idea that a non
Japanese speaker halfway around the world might be the one to provide it.
> The impracticalities for me are irrelevant.
Is your financial situation which you joke about, also irrelevant?
> White elephant though the site
> will probably become, the expo itself isn't a welfare system.
How is this relevant? I say nothing about a welfare system. It's about opportunity. Who says
the best company for the job is capable of communicating in Japanese, and only those who can
communicate in Japanese should even be allowed to ASK about the work, when it is the Japanese
who already went so far to write or translate that website?
> >>The company can tender for the Australian pavilion because it is invited
> >>to do so.
> >
> > Seems odd. Does it have anything to do with your citizenship or can anyone invited try?
>
> I believe it is open to any company regardless of the location of its
> registration. What matters (I hope) is what quality of service is
> provided and at what price.
Precisely. Why do they have to be able to communicate in Japanese from the very beginning, to
even inquire about the work? They could save themselves a lot of time and trouble responding
to inquiries (Japanese only) if they released more information to the public.
Declan Murphy
> Declan Murphy wrote:
>
>>As a general rule a company would only tender for a) what they were
>>actually capable of doing, b) what was worth doing. Put two and two
>>together and there are usually ample (different) opportunities for firms
>>of all sizes.
>
> Not the same opportunity or same level of opportunity. That's part of being exclusionary.
Good grief.
>>>It's practical for them, not people or companies like you and yours, who joke about your
>>>financial situation, or Kajima before they grew.
>>
>>They are the customer, its their money and a competitive tender.
>
> And if they want the best work for "their" money, they should be open to the idea that a non
> Japanese speaker halfway around the world might be the one to provide it.
Given the lack of time remaining (the whole expo set up was a complete
and utter ballsup until Toyota got on board), is personal view is this:
As far as the overall expo and the oz pavilion organisers are concerned,
they should specify that the only language permitted at all until March
next year is Japanese in the case of the expo and English in the case of
the pavilion. There is *no* time left for translation.
>>The impracticalities for me are irrelevant.
>
> Is your financial situation which you joke about, also irrelevant?
Absolutely.
>>White elephant though the site
>>will probably become, the expo itself isn't a welfare system.
>
> How is this relevant? I say nothing about a welfare system. It's about opportunity. Who says
> the best company for the job is capable of communicating in Japanese, and only those who can
> communicate in Japanese should even be allowed to ASK about the work, when it is the Japanese
> who already went so far to write or translate that website?
That website is basically window dressing, apparently by some low life
hammock dwelling gaigin who left Japan after loosing at least 2 nickels.
The specs have to be in Japanese, the vast number of people who the
winning tender will need to communicate with will almost all be
Japanese, and the bloody thing starts in less than 15 months. Apart from
Toyota's pavilion (lots of cool French dudes) there will be hardly a
gaigin anywhere until immediately before the event (kind of like the
number of non-Germans on site in Hanover prior to the last expo).
(And try doing business with Toyota in Japan without Japanese.....)
>>>>The company can tender for the Australian pavilion because it is invited
>>>>to do so.
>>>
>>>Seems odd. Does it have anything to do with your citizenship or can anyone invited try?
>>
>>I believe it is open to any company regardless of the location of its
>>registration. What matters (I hope) is what quality of service is
>>provided and at what price.
>
> Precisely. Why do they have to be able to communicate in Japanese from the very beginning, to
> even inquire about the work? They could save themselves a lot of time and trouble responding
> to inquiries (Japanese only) if they released more information to the public.
They could have saved themselves a lot of time and trouble not hosting
the damn thing in the first place. There used to be a nice little forest
up there.
Eric Takabayashi
> Eric Takabayashi wrote:
> > Declan Murphy wrote:
> >
> >>As a general rule a company would only tender for a) what they were
> >>actually capable of doing, b) what was worth doing. Put two and two
> >>together and there are usually ample (different) opportunities for firms
> >>of all sizes.
> >
> > Not the same opportunity or same level of opportunity. That's part of being exclusionary.
>
> Good grief.
You're a businessman and company president, but you do not believe in your company getting the
same opportunities as others, or having the same success for the same work? Why should you have to
put out more or work harder for the same level of success others can enjoy? Why should just some
Japanese businesspeople and companies enjoy cozy ties with Japanese government even in these
trying times?
> Given the lack of time remaining (the whole expo set up was a complete
> and utter ballsup until Toyota got on board), is personal view is this:
> As far as the overall expo and the oz pavilion organisers are concerned,
> they should specify that the only language permitted at all until March
> next year is Japanese in the case of the expo and English in the case of
> the pavilion. There is *no* time left for translation.
OK, it's a ballsup. Now that you are here, do you have any comments on the Japanese construction
industry or the practice of dango in general?
> >>The impracticalities for me are irrelevant.
> >
> > Is your financial situation which you joke about, also irrelevant?
>
> Absolutely.
Is this the proper attitude to have for business? Do your employees and other stakeholders feel
the same? I had my wife's approval before choosing my job, setting my work hours, and deciding my
(our) level of income.
> That website is basically window dressing, apparently by some low life
> hammock dwelling gaigin who left Japan after loosing at least 2 nickels.
Which is what the original poster pointed out before others jumped him, and what I also know about
such situations in Japan, even as I have experienced or witnessed them from the Japanese side.
> The specs have to be in Japanese, the vast number of people who the
> winning tender will need to communicate with will almost all be
> Japanese, and the bloody thing starts in less than 15 months. Apart from
> Toyota's pavilion (lots of cool French dudes) there will be hardly a
> gaigin anywhere until immediately before the event (kind of like the
> number of non-Germans on site in Hanover prior to the last expo).
Some world expo.
> (And try doing business with Toyota in Japan without Japanese.....)
Is it different from Mazda which operates in English? Is Toyota too proud of their own success and
reputation? But then since coming to Japan, I've heard the down side of their famed just in time
system. For their own convenience with their money, indeed.
> They could have saved themselves a lot of time and trouble not hosting
> the damn thing in the first place.
Which is similar to what the original poster and I said last night.
> There used to be a nice little forest up there.
Love those Japanese construction industry practices.
Musashi
Like reading some thread on the word "jap" by people who aren't "japs"
themselves
is suppose to teach me something about the word?
Get a grip.
Ryan Ginstrom
> Is it different from Mazda which operates in English?
I won't bother trying to set you straight on your many other gaffes in this
post, but I will tell you unequivocally that Mazda does not operate in
English.
When Ford comes in to start knocking heads, maybe one or two guys on the
Japanese side will use English, everyone else will speak through
interpreters. Sometimes even lowlife gaigin ones, if you can believe that.
Docs are in Japanese too.
--
Regards,
Ryan Ginstrom
Eric Takabayashi
> <riffraff trimmage>
> "Eric Takabayashi" <eta...@yahoo.co.jp> wrote in message
> news:4004075E...@yahoo.co.jp...
> > Is it different from Mazda which operates in English?
>
> I won't bother trying to set you straight on your many other gaffes in this
> post, but I will tell you unequivocally that Mazda does not operate in
> English.
So the media and the people they interview at Mazda and Nissan are telling
lies?
> When Ford comes in to start knocking heads, maybe one or two guys on the
> Japanese side will use English, everyone else will speak through
> interpreters.
Do they by chance, speak English?
> Sometimes even lowlife gaigin ones, if you can believe that.
>
> Docs are in Japanese too.
I'm sure they are.
vernon...@oyama.ca
@hotmail.com says...
~ <vernon...@oyama.ca> wrote in message news:<MPG.1a6d0026f...@shawnews.vc.shawcable.net>...
~ > In article <40027324...@yahoo.co.jp>, eta...@yahoo.co.jp
~ > says...
~ > ~ vernon...@oyama.ca wrote:
~ > ~
~ > ~ > I know the US doesn't have to issue contracts in languages other than
~ > ~
~ > ~
~ > ~ > but what would compel Japan to issue contracts in languages
~ > ~
~ > ~ The fact that Japan is for Japan and Japanese.
~ > ~
~ > ~ > Surely companies from English speaking countries can afford translators?
~ > ~
~ > ~ So can Japan.
~ > ~
~ > ~ > Shouldn't that be part of the cost of doing business?
~ > ~
~ > ~ The same can be said of Japan.
~ > ~
~ > ~ > I agree that Japan uses a variety of hurdles as unofficial trade
~ > ~
~ > ~
~ > ~ > and that this may be one of them. But IMHO, this is the
~ > ~ > just following the practices of the complaining countries.
~ > ~
~ > ~ Irrelevant.
~ > ~
~ > ~ Repeat: I am against restrictions on free trade. I don't care if it's Japanese,
~ >
~ > I agree with you, but until nations have free trade agreements in
~ > place, they're free to trade as they wish. That's free trade, too.
~ >
~ > Verno
~
~ I think Verno's IQ is less than 30.
~
If so, then yours is less than 20, because I *SPANK* you daily on
soc.culture.japan. How does it feel to be outsmarted every day by
someone with an IQ of 30?
Verno
Ryan Ginstrom
> Ryan Ginstrom wrote:
> > I won't bother trying to set you straight on your many other gaffes in
this
> > post, but I will tell you unequivocally that Mazda does not operate in
> > English.
>
> So the media and the people they interview at Mazda and Nissan are telling
> lies?
Depends on what they are saying. If they are saying that all communication
within Mazda happens in English, then yes they are telling lies.
If they are saying that whenever someone from Ford drops by, everybody
switches over to English, then yes they are telling lies.
If they are saying that they don't need to use interpreters, then yes they
are telling lies.
If they are saying that everyone (or even all bucho level or higher) is
capable of communicating in English, then ... well you get the picture.
I suspect they said something else though.
As I said, a few of the (higher-up & non-engineer) folks speak decent
English, a couple well enough to actually hold a natural conversation. Lower
down, often sales folks will speak some decent English. Actually my friend
remembers one bucho-level engineer who spoke decent English (but still used
an interpreter as a crutch, the bastard), but then again he wasn't from
Mazda so never mind.
Of course my friend (the handsome one) didn't get a chance to meet every
employee of Mazda, but he tells me that he was in some fairly high-up
meetings and got to see the top brass & engineers "in action" so to speak.
--
Regards,
Ryan Ginstrom
Eric Takabayashi
> "Eric Takabayashi" <eta...@yahoo.co.jp> wrote in message
> news:40040DF4...@yahoo.co.jp...
> > Ryan Ginstrom wrote:
> > > I won't bother trying to set you straight on your many other gaffes in
> this
> > > post, but I will tell you unequivocally that Mazda does not operate in
> > > English.
> >
> > So the media and the people they interview at Mazda and Nissan are telling
> > lies?
>
> Depends on what they are saying. If they are saying that all communication
> within Mazda happens in English, then yes they are telling lies.
Then no one says either.
> If they are saying that whenever someone from Ford drops by, everybody
> switches over to English, then yes they are telling lies.
The report is English is the language used at meetings when even one foreign
manager is there, which I do consider strange being a Japanese company in
Japan. A lie?
> If they are saying that they don't need to use interpreters, then yes they
> are telling lies.
No one claims that, either.
> If they are saying that everyone (or even all bucho level or higher) is
> capable of communicating in English, then ... well you get the picture.
>
> I suspect they said something else though.
They did not say what you imply they said, but yes, Nissan and Mazda operate in
English. Does that mean they can all have "natural conversations" to you or
that they use English and English documents even between Japanese?
> As I said, a few of the (higher-up & non-engineer) folks speak decent
> English, a couple well enough to actually hold a natural conversation. Lower
> down, often sales folks will speak some decent English. Actually my friend
> remembers one bucho-level engineer who spoke decent English (but still used
> an interpreter as a crutch, the bastard), but then again he wasn't from
> Mazda so never mind.
>
> Of course my friend (the handsome one) didn't get a chance to meet every
> employee of Mazda, but he tells me that he was in some fairly high-up
> meetings and got to see the top brass & engineers "in action" so to speak.
Your friend being there is proof they use English, and for the benefit of
foreigners and English speakers. Did he not process English documents as well?
So why couldn't organizers do the same for the Aichi "World" Expo (also note
that the speakers of the other five languages and dialects need to read
"English only" to be able to see they need to make their inquiries and bids in
"Japanese only"), and time constraints and screwups aside, why do they assume
that those who communicate in Japanese are the only ones worthy or capable of
doing the work or even inquiring about it?
Ryan Ginstrom
> Ryan Ginstrom wrote:
> The report is English is the language used at meetings when even one
foreign
> manager is there, which I do consider strange being a Japanese company in
> Japan. A lie?
Yes. See below.
> Your friend being there is proof they use English, and for the benefit of
> foreigners and English speakers.
Um, no.
You don't say that a meeting is held in English if interpreters are used.
You could equally well say that the meeting is held in Japanese, because
everything the English speakers say is interpreted into Japanese.
The meeting is held in English when everybody speaks in English. Is that
really so hard to understand?
> Did he not process English documents as well?
He did, but mostly Mazda's in-house translators took care of that.
> So why couldn't organizers do the same for the Aichi "World" Expo (also
note
I'll tell you what.
If Ford ever buys Aichi, I guarantee that they'll have an interpreter when a
Ford president visits.
Glad that's solved. Any more pressing issues?
--
Regards,
Ryan Ginstrom
Bryce
> Glad that's solved. Any more pressing issues?
>
> --
> Regards,
> Ryan Ginstrom
>
Yes,.... Japanese dental care. (oh,,, not again!)
Declan Murphy
> Declan Murphy wrote:
>
>>Eric Takabayashi wrote:
>>
>>>Declan Murphy wrote:
>>>
>>>>As a general rule a company would only tender for a) what they were
>>>>actually capable of doing, b) what was worth doing. Put two and two
>>>>together and there are usually ample (different) opportunities for firms
>>>>of all sizes.
>>>
>>>Not the same opportunity or same level of opportunity. That's part of being exclusionary.
>>
>>Good grief.
>
> You're a businessman and company president, but you do not believe in your company getting the
> same opportunities as others, or having the same success for the same work? Why should you have to
> put out more or work harder for the same level of success others can enjoy? Why should just some
> Japanese businesspeople and companies enjoy cozy ties with Japanese government even in these
> trying times?
Does this kind of incoherency come naturally or do you work at it? Your
ability to project and rattle away on inconsequential tangents astounds me.
>>Given the lack of time remaining (the whole expo set up was a complete
>>and utter ballsup until Toyota got on board), is personal view is this:
>>As far as the overall expo and the oz pavilion organisers are concerned,
>>they should specify that the only language permitted at all until March
>>next year is Japanese in the case of the expo and English in the case of
>>the pavilion. There is *no* time left for translation.
>
> OK, it's a ballsup. Now that you are here, do you have any comments on the Japanese construction
> industry or the practice of dango in general?
In a word, nope.
>>>>The impracticalities for me are irrelevant.
>>>
>>>Is your financial situation which you joke about, also irrelevant?
>>
>>Absolutely.
>
> Is this the proper attitude to have for business? <snip>
Of course it is the proper attitude to have. There is absolutely no
requirement for the Expo organizers to select firms with weaker balance
sheets, or bend the rules to make it "more practical" for weaker firms
to tender.
>>The specs have to be in Japanese, the vast number of people who the
>>winning tender will need to communicate with will almost all be
>>Japanese, and the bloody thing starts in less than 15 months. Apart from
>>Toyota's pavilion (lots of cool French dudes) there will be hardly a
>>gaigin anywhere until immediately before the event (kind of like the
>>number of non-Germans on site in Hanover prior to the last expo).
>
> Some world expo.
Exactly the same situation that has occurred with every expo to date.
>>(And try doing business with Toyota in Japan without Japanese.....)
>
> Is it different from Mazda which operates in English? Is Toyota too proud of their own success and
> reputation? But then since coming to Japan, I've heard the down side of their famed just in time
> system. For their own convenience with their money, indeed.
I'm pretty sure that neither Mazda nor Nissan nor any other major
Japanese company (you can include gaishikei such as IBM in that lot too)
can be said to "operate" in English. Toyota's business language is
Japanese. Toyota even communicates with it overseas' entities in
Japanese. Seems to work OK for them too.
vernon...@oyama.ca
says...
~
~ > ~ > I know the US doesn't have to issue contracts in languages other than
~ > ~ > English,
~ > ~
~ > ~ Why not?
~ > ~
~ > ~ > but what would compel Japan to issue contracts in languages
~ > ~
~ > ~ The fact that Japan is for Japan and Japanese.
~ > ~
~ > ~ > Surely companies from English speaking countries can afford
~ > ~
~ > ~ So can Japan.
~ > ~
~ > ~ > Shouldn't that be part of the cost of doing business?
~ > ~
~ > ~ The same can be said of Japan.
~ > ~
~ > ~ > I agree that Japan uses a variety of hurdles as unofficial trade
~ > ~
~ > ~ That is the point.
~ > ~
~ > ~ > and that this may be one of them. But IMHO, this is the
~ > ~ > just following the practices of the complaining countries.
~ > ~
~ > ~ Irrelevant.
~ > ~
~ > ~ Repeat: I am against restrictions on free trade. I don't care if it's
~ > ~ Americans, or anyone else doing it.
~ >
~ > I agree with you, but until nations have free trade agreements in
~ > place, they're free to trade as they wish. That's free trade, too.
~ >
~ > Verno
~
~ of the countries that may potentially wish to respond.
I didn't say anything like that.
~ They do not, if a
~ Japanese company wants to submit a tender proposal they must engage
~ interpreters to translate the documents into Japanese at their own expense.
~ why should the Japanese accept the added expense to extend a service to
~ foreign companies when such is never extended to them?
~
I agree with you completely. I have no problem with Japanese
companies not issuing tender documents or RFPs in the Japanese
language only when English speaking countries do the same. If they
want to do business in Japan, they should pay for translation. And
they should buy a few drinks for salary man Kaz.
Verno
Eric Takabayashi
> >>>>The impracticalities for me are irrelevant.
> >>>
> >>>Is your financial situation which you joke about, also irrelevant?
> >>
> >>Absolutely.
> >
> > Is this the proper attitude to have for business? <snip>
>
> Of course it is the proper attitude to have. There is absolutely no
> requirement for the Expo organizers to select firms with weaker balance
> sheets, or bend the rules to make it "more practical" for weaker firms
> to tender.
Why does "weak" or lacking money mean lack of ability to provide goods and services, or preclude being
even be the best provider? Even Kajima and Toyota started out somewhere.
And why is your own financial situation absolutely irrelevant to you?