"Transfusion" trouble LED subsidies where to go

Whether the financial subsidies really fall into place and raise doubts; Philips peeled off the lighting business and many speculations in the industry; Oppo's IPO suspended its review and watched the upsurge of listing LED lighting; Filament lamps were hot and they should not blindly follow the trend... Aladdin “light” points Will be one by one for your interpretation.

The mainland’s 100 billion LED enterprises to support semiconductor companies are worried about the 100 billion financial support struggle and the gaming sector’s further support of semiconductors in the hundreds of billions of dollars, which can be described as financial and economic. For LED companies in the pillar industry, it is inevitable that they will panic. The development of the LED industry in the Mainland has been prepared, and the next key is technology development. In time, the development of LED technology in the Mainland is bound to take off and catch up with Taiwan.

However, the massive injection of so many funds will inevitably not cause many problems. How does the subsidy system work, how can the company transfusion, how to maintain the hematopoietic function in the follow-up, whether the financial subsidy is really implemented and promote the progress of the developing enterprise?

Assuming a reservoir, while pumping water while pumping water, the time for filling the reservoir will become extremely uncertain. This, it seems, is the current embarrassing state of China's LED lighting industry subsidy environment. This reservoir is China's LED lighting industry. One side of the irrigation is related to the country's relevant financial support departments, while the pumping is a company that enjoys financial subsidy, or it is an external condition that makes the financial subsidy unable to fully function.

One hundred billion support for LED is really attractive to lighting companies. However, in the past, the subsidy policy did not seem to give the policy a “face.” The subsidy plan that has been officially rolled out is increasingly being questioned in the industry because of the deviation of the effect from the original intention of the policy.

And then, perhaps, will once again descend on LED lighting companies.

Behind dangerous subsidies: Where can LED Jun go?

Subsidy is why "sweet" LED companies tasted "bitter"?

Government subsidy enterprises were originally a normal means of macroeconomic control. However, in recent years, government subsidies for LED companies have gradually lost their original meaning. This should be sweet to allow LED companies to "compete for" each other's subsidies, why now let the industry feel "bitter", and even a little "flavored"?

At present, the LED lighting industry is still in a crisis of overcapacity, while government subsidy funds continue to flow in, and its subsidy will only serve as a temporary delay. From the perspective of the country as a whole, it is not conducive to upgrading and optimizing the industrial structure. It is a blind measure, which is inconsistent with the interests of the entire country. Ultimately, the problem of overcapacity needs to be solved through the market. Irrational subsidy disorder is not conducive to fair market competition, disrupting the normal operation of the market. In order to promote the optimization and upgrading of industrial structure, stimulating the vitality of enterprises, and achieving sound and rapid economic development, it is also necessary to rationally use fiscal subsidy policies to solve the problem of government chaos.

To establish a series of indicators, after the financial subsidy, go through a period of time to see if the effect produced can be met. There are also some qualitative evaluations that cannot be measured by indicators. Citizens, companies, experts and scholars can be evaluated together.

Philips will spin off its lighting and medical technology division In July 2014, Philips announced that it has merged its Lumileds LED with the automotive lighting business unit, and the news that it has been set up as an independent subsidiary has raised a lot of discussions in the lighting industry. Philips once again stated that it will spin off its 123-year-old lighting business and merge the medical and consumer electronics divisions into a single company. It has also caused speculation among industry insiders, regardless of whether Philips’ separation is good or bad. At least on the “dispersing risk”, the author believes that instead of sticking to the old money and gaining benefits, it is not as good as competition in front of all fields and development is meticulous. "Before you enter the country, you must first enter the country," and the ultimate goal is to "get out of trouble." However, how to do a good job in "enlightenment." Different companies have different choices. We now see the largest number of mergers and acquisitions, strong alliances, and early Philips. GE has experienced this step, but when the enterprise is "large" and "projects are full," it is better to face the surging external "impact" than to jointly attack. So I believe that regardless of Philips It is worth mentioning to other companies that the first job is to do a good job of "partial internal work" construction so as to be successful at all times.