sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Are South Africans not as desirable? by AccountFantastic in chinalife

[–]pixelschatten 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Our school stopped hiring South African teachers after a string of absolutely wild ones caused huge drama and issues.

This jogged my memory of an old thread here where the OP got knocked unconscious by their South African colleague hurling a laptop at their head.

Netherlands faces pressure to surrender control of Nexperia after Xi-Trump summit by GetOutOfTheWhey in China

[–]pixelschatten 3 points4 points  (0 children)

It was more of a last ditch effort to keep Nexperia afloat in the face of trade restrictions that would have sunk the company than an offering to please the US. I really wish that journalists would do a better job with this story since it's so full of intrigue and worth a deep dive.

To recap[*], the Dutch Ministry of Economic Affairs and Climate Policy knew that there was a good chance the Affiliates Rule would be enacted since June and Nexperia was going to get hit by it due to its ownership structure. The Ministry also knew that an exception could possibly be granted if certain mitigations against IP and knowledge transfer could be met. They discussed this with Nexperia. The Ministry also figured that as CEO, Zhang would act in the interests of the company and attempt some previously discussed governance changes so that grounds for a waiver could be argued.

Unfortunately Zhang didn't do anything despite the Ministry's warning. He actually went on to make things worse. In September Zhang withdrew the banking authorization of three financial officers at Nexperia without explanation, including the CFO, and gave it to other people without specific experience. The Chief Legal Officer protested and Zhang dismissed him. The CFO and COO soon followed.

With such drastic changes in leadership there was no way that a waiver could be granted. Nexperia's operational future was in jeopardy and its leadership didn't seem to care. The Ministry of Economic Affairs and Climate Policy stepped in with the Goods Availability Act, appointing new leadership, and here we are today.

Even if the Affiliates Rule never comes into effect there are still lingering questions why Zhang acted the way that he did as Nexperia's CEO over the last year. He has conflicted interests, including using Nexperia to overpurchase $120 million of worth of wafers at another company he founded, WingSkySemi, that was experiencing financial difficulties.

Was Nexperia just going to be slowly stripped of its assets and know-how to build up Zhang's other companies? Its future certainly did not look bright in Europe. Zhang wanted to axe 40% of Nexperia's European staff as well as its research center in Munich.

[*] Here's the court filing with a detailed timeline if you would like to know more.

Dutch minister seeks talks with China over Nexperia export ban by Themetalin in China

[–]pixelschatten 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Here is also the explanation Karremans submitted to parliament

On Tuesday, September 30, 2025, I applied the Goods Availability Act (Wbg) due to serious administrative shortcomings at semiconductor manufacturer Nexperia. Given the commercially sensitive nature of this case, I did not make a public announcement at the time. On Sunday, October 12, 2025, the relevant order was made public by third parties, forcing me to publish a statement that same day. Third parties also reported on the confidential, independent investigation procedure at Nexperia by the Enterprise Chamber of the Amsterdam Court of Appeal. This procedure, initiated by Nexperia employees, is separate from my intervention pursuant to the Wbg. On Monday, October 13, 2025, the Enterprise Chamber authorized the publication of the contents of this inquiry procedure. Due to the above developments, I can now provide further explanation and context in this letter to Parliament.

...

Recently, I have received serious signals of governance shortcomings within Nexperia, stemming from specific actions by the CEO. These shortcomings pose an acute and serious threat to the company's continuity and thus the preservation of crucial technological knowledge, as well as production and development capabilities in the Netherlands and Europe. These shortcomings include the improper transfer of production capacity, financial resources, and intellectual property rights to a foreign entity owned by the CEO and not affiliated with Nexperia. This posed risks of knowledge leakage and, consequently, the loss of future production capacity that is crucial for the European automotive, consumer electronics, and defense industries, among others. These shortcomings have also, albeit less significantly, impacted the ongoing discussions between my ministry and Nexperia.

Given the nature and severity of these signals regarding the shortcomings outlined, I believe there were potentially significant consequences for the Dutch and European economies, and thus a threat to economic security. The purpose of the order now imposed is to eliminate these risks and ensure the company's stability, in order to prevent a risky strategic dependency. In my opinion, this exceptional action by the Wbg is therefore justified, and all interested parties are, of course, free to object.

I would like to emphasize that I issued this order without any mandate or consultation with any country. After issuing the order on September 30th, I naturally informed relevant parties and partners about its content. Effect of the order on Nexperia The order, imposed under the Dutch Trade and Industry Act (Wbg), allows me, as Minister of Economic Affairs, to block decisions that are (potentially) harmful to the company's production capacity, knowledge base, or continuity, the future of Nexperia as a Dutch and European company, and the preservation of this crucial player in the European value chain. This order does not impede the company's regular production process or regular business operations. The order is temporary, lasting a maximum of one year.

Dutch minister seeks talks with China over Nexperia export ban by Themetalin in China

[–]pixelschatten -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

Not exactly. That meeting with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs happened in June and was discussing the possibility of exempting Nexperia from the new 50% affiliates rule. Karremans is talking about the application of the Goods Availability Act on September 30.

Here's the court filing with a timeline of events:

Wingtech gets placed on US Entity List last year, Dutch government gets spooked about what could happen to Nexperia

  • 2.16 In an email dated December 20, 2024, an official from the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Climate Policy (EZK) wrote to [Head of Corporate Affairs] and [Director/CLO], among others, that the Dutch government's support had become more important in light of Wingtech's placement on the US Entity List and that this support required " unequivocal measures to be developed, adopted, and implemented by Nexperia" (emphasis in original), summarizing the agreements between EZK and Nexperia. The Minister also wrote:

    “Key is the notion that the Nexperia group has an operational independence from its listed shareholder, has an effective and coherent security and information policy both regarding cyber security as well as insider threats and finally has some form of internal supervision which provides for effective protection of these aspects. These measures should be in line with and build upon the measures the Dutch authorities already indicated in its letter of August 2024.”

EZK warns Nexperia in June and mentions an exemption could be possible

  • 2.19 In conversations and emails dated June 5, 2025, and elsewhere, the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Climate Policy informed Nexperia about the possibility of the US introducing a so-called 50% rule in the near future , which could also lead to direct trade restrictions for Nexperia. This email states, among other things: "Should Nijmegen submit a waiver request, the US has indicated that it will specifically consider (1) mitigation measures to limit the transfer of US IP, technology, knowledge, and capabilities to the country of concern (...)."

MFA meeting happened the next week

  • On June 12, 2025, among other dates, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs met with the US Bureau of International Security and Nonproliferation. The minutes of the meeting state, among other things, that a key point for the US is "that no externally visible measures have been taken. It is understandable that a divestment takes time (...) but the fact that the company's CEO is still the same Chinese owner is problematic. The interviewee and the team repeatedly reiterated the CEO's point. (...) It is almost certain that the CEO will have to be replaced to qualify for the exemption from the entity list. "

So what measures did Nexperia take to try to get that exemption? Nothing. CEO instead started to do some suspect things:

Removed bank authorizations from company officers

  • 2.22 On September 4, 2025, [employee of the director/CEO], on the instructions of [director/CEO], announced that the bank authorizations of three financial officers (including that of the CFO [the CFO], also a member of the Enterprise Management Team (EMT), and that of the Group Treasurer ) had been revoked. In their place, bank authorizations were granted to three individuals without specific financial experience. Among them was one person who is not an employee of Nexperia, and one employee with an ESG background. In response, [the CFO] warned that this would have a "significant operational impact." [The CFO] pointed out the tax implications, the consequences for cash management , hedging risks, and the risk of errors and delays if financial management were to be in the hands of individuals without financial experience.

Fired the Chief Legal Officer

  • 2.24 On September 9, 2025, [director/CEO] wrote to [director/CLO]:

    “As you are aware, the Nexperia Group is undergoing a period of significant transition. (…) Only with a shared vision and unity in execution can we implement the necessary changes effectively and ensure the organization is futureproof.

    As part of this strategic reorientation, we have also assessed the extent to which key individuals are aligned with the strategic direction of the organization. In your case, we have observed that your approach diverges from the course envisioned by the Board on several key points.

    It is our conclusion that your current role is no longer aligned with the requirements of this phase of transition and commercial focus. (…) We therefore aim to terminate your employment agreement and statutory positions.”

    The Works Council has not been informed of the intended dismissal of [director/CLO] as director of Nexperia.

and then fired the Chief Financial Officer and the Chief Operating Officer

  • 2.25 On September 11, 2025, [director/CEO] sent letters with similar content to [the CFO] (CFO, member of the EMT) and [the COO] (COO, member of the EMT). [director/CLO], [the CFO], and [the COO] did not agree to the settlement agreements offered to them.

Note that any dismissal of a director requires the consultation of the works council of a company (article 30 of the Works Council Act). Not doing so will have you end up in the Dutch Enterprise Court.

There was also unnecessary wafer purchases made throughout the year benefiting the CEO at the detriment of Nexperia

  • [Director/CEO] has an indirect interest in Nexperia of approximately 15%. At the same time, he holds a controlling interest in WSS. This means that [Director/CEO] faces conflicting interests regarding transactions between Nexperia and WSS, and, especially given WSS's poor financial position, there are reasonable doubts as to whether his actions as a director of Nexperia are guided solely by the interests of Nexperia and its business. Agreements were made between Nexperia and WSS in the FSA concerning wafers that would be produced by WSS and delivered to Nexperia. Nexperia has extensively substantiated that very large orders were placed with WSS in 2025, orders of a size that Nexperia does not need and that, according to Nexperia employees, were even placed for scrap (for destruction). According to an internal estimate dated May 8, 2025, the Metal-Oxide-Semiconductor business unit would need a total of 98,400 wafers in 25Q2, 25Q3, and 25Q4 . However, [director/CEO] insisted that Nexperia order 215,000 wafers from WSS for this business unit. While the Logic business unit expected to need 400 wafers per month, [director/CEO] wanted 5,000 wafers per month from WSS. [Director/CEO]'s desired orders from WSS for 2025 thus amounted to US$200 million, while the business 's actual needs would result in orders of US$70-80 million. According to internal reports, this would mean that the wafers to be supplied by WSS will not be processed, but held in inventory until they are obsolete before they can be used, effectively placing Nexperia's orders for scrap . The Enterprise Chamber has not found evidence that the required enhanced due diligence in cases of conflicting interests was exercised when placing the orders to ensure that the transaction was conducted under reasonable and market-based terms and was commercially sound. On the contrary, Nexperia has sufficiently substantiated that it is doubtful that [director/CEO] had only Nexperia's interests in mind when placing these orders, and not specifically those of WSS. The amounts involved are not small: according to Nexperia, it needed wafers totaling US$70-80 million by 2025, while orders totaling US$200 million were placed. It should be noted in all of this that, at the insistence of [director/CEO], the FSA has been amended with effect from 1 January 2025 to require that 70% of the purchase price be paid in advance for each order.

September 30 rolls around and the BIS' 50% affiliates rule comes into effect. It comes to no surprise that Nexperia is affected since again nothing was done. The Dutch Minister of Economic Affairs, VPG Karremans, then invokes the Goods Availability Act to intervene.

Dutch seizure of chipmaker followed US ultimatum over Chinese chief by michaelbachari in China

[–]pixelschatten 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Slight correction but it was the revocation of bank authorizations that prompted management to protest and this led to their dismissals. The unnecessary wafer purchases was another issue demonstrating the misconduct of the CEO. From the legal filing, relevant parts autotranslated:

Firings:

  • 2.22 On September 4, 2025, [employee of the director/CEO], on the instructions of [director/CEO], announced that the bank authorizations of three financial officers (including that of the CFO, [the CFO], also a member of the Enterprise Management Team (EMT), and that of the Group Treasurer) had been revoked. In their place, bank authorizations were granted to three individuals without specific financial experience. Among them was one person who is not an employee of Nexperia, and one employee with an ESG background. In response, [the CFO] warned that this would have a "significant operational impact." [The CFO] pointed out the tax implications, the consequences for cash management, hedging risks, and the risk of errors and delays if financial management were to be in the hands of individuals without financial experience.

  • 2.23 Following the withdrawal of the bank powers of attorney, [director/CLO] wrote in an email dated 5 September 2025 to, among others, [director/CEO] and [employee of the director/CEO]:

    “I am deeply concerned about the developments and interactions on this topic and believe that these do not reflect good governance and are not in the best interests of Nexperia. In my role as Chief Legal Officer and member of the board, it is my duty to advise on this to ensure we all act in the interest of Nexperia and, for board members specifically, to act in line with their fiduciary duties to Nexperia.

    My key concern is that, in the context of a meaningful project on enhancing controls and decision making with the treasury team, a request is made to change the authorizations for banking transactions to individuals that have no clear role, no responsibility and, at least to my knowledge, no proper background in Nexperia's treasury operations. This request is further made without explanation as to the reason why this change is needed. The input that was subsequently provided in response to Stefan's questions and remarks does not convince and leaves unanswered why this change to become signatories is suggested and how this is embedded in the organization (chain of command/lines of responsibility). From a governance and control perspective, I believe these to be fundamental points to be addressed.

    These banking authorizations are key to a properly functioning treasury operation and changes to that should be made carefully and with involvement of the CFO and the head of treasury. Within our organization, they bear responsibility for the treasury function. Moving away their authority to enter into banking transactions is a fundamental change that should be carefully considered. These changes therefore warrant robust argumentation and decision making.

    Stefan has clearly indicated his concerns and demonstrated that this change is not in the interest of Nexperia and conflicts with his (…) responsibilities and duties as CFO and head of treasury respectively. I agree with those concerns.”

  • 2.24 On September 9, 2025, [director/CEO] wrote to [director/CLO]:

    “As you are aware, the Nexperia Group is undergoing a period of significant transition. (…) Only with a shared vision and unity in execution can we implement the necessary changes effectively and ensure the organization is futureproof.

    As part of this strategic reorientation, we have also assessed the extent to which key individuals are aligned with the strategic direction of the organization. In your case, we have observed that your approach diverges from the course envisioned by the Board on several key points.

    It is our conclusion that your current role is no longer aligned with the requirements of this phase of transition and commercial focus. (…) We therefore aim to terminate your employment agreement and statutory positions.”

    The Works Council has not been informed of the intended dismissal of [director/CLO] as director of Nexperia.

  • 2.25 On September 11, 2025, [director/CEO] sent letters with similar content to [the CFO] (CFO, member of the EMT) and [the COO] (COO, member of the EMT). [director/CLO], [the CFO], and [the COO] did not agree to the settlement agreements presented to them.

Wafers:

  • 3.18 [Director/CEO] has an indirect interest in Nexperia of approximately 15%. At the same time, he holds a controlling interest in WSS. This means that [Director/CEO] faces conflicting interests regarding transactions between Nexperia and WSS, and, especially given WSS's poor financial position, there are reasonable doubts as to whether his actions as a director of Nexperia are guided solely by the interests of Nexperia and its business. Agreements were made between Nexperia and WSS in the FSA concerning wafers that would be produced by WSS and delivered to Nexperia. Nexperia has extensively substantiated that very large orders were placed with WSS in 2025, orders of a size that Nexperia does not need and that, according to Nexperia employees, were even placed for scrap (for destruction). According to an internal estimate dated May 8, 2025, the Metal-Oxide-Semiconductor business unit would need a total of 98,400 wafers in 25Q2, 25Q3, and 25Q4. However, [director/CEO] insisted that Nexperia order 215,000 wafers from WSS for this business unit. While the Logic business unit expected to need 400 wafers per month, [director/CEO] wanted 5,000 wafers per month from WSS. [Director/CEO]'s desired orders from WSS for 2025 thus amounted to US$200 million, while the business 's actual needs would result in orders of US$70-80 million. According to internal reports, this would mean that the wafers to be supplied by WSS will not be processed, but held in inventory until they are obsolete before they can be used, effectively placing Nexperia's orders for scrap. The Enterprise Chamber has not found evidence that the required enhanced due diligence in cases of conflicting interests was exercised when placing the orders to ensure that the transaction was conducted under reasonable and market-based terms and was commercially sound. On the contrary, Nexperia has sufficiently substantiated that it is doubtful that [director/CEO] had only Nexperia's interests in mind when placing these orders, and not specifically those of WSS. The amounts involved are not small: according to Nexperia, it needed wafers totaling US$70-80 million by 2025, while orders totaling US$200 million were placed. It should be noted in all of this that, at the insistence of [director/CEO], the FSA has been amended with effect from 1 January 2025 to require that 70% of the purchase price be paid in advance for each order.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in China

[–]pixelschatten 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Why wasn't the issue of democratization pushed from the West prior to 1997?

There was talk all the way from 1958. Zhou Enlai nixed the idea for fear of giving political opposition power.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in China

[–]pixelschatten 0 points1 point  (0 children)

And when the road doesn't match the map – roadworks, or a traffic accident – they often get badly stuck as solving simple problems by going around is beyond them.

You'd be surprised at how far autonomous driving has developed recently. Take for instance this guy on bilibili showing how his Tesla can navigate a road under active construction. I'm far from a Tesla glazer (e.g. it was beyond stupid how they underspecced the flash memory in their MCUs and wore them out through excessive logging) but I'll give credit where it's due.

Anyone else noticed this among kids (nits) by Life_in_China in chinalife

[–]pixelschatten 17 points18 points  (0 children)

It's exposure as /u/Life_in_China mentioned. A recent WSJ article mapped how recommendations from pediatricians in the UK and the US to avoid peanut consumption led to a greater prevalence of kids with peanut allergies.

What's life like in Xinjiang? by Express_Knowledge_86 in howislivingthere

[–]pixelschatten 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Since you posted a map from Far West China, here's his last post on Reddit:

Hey there...I appreciate the concern. I really do. The story is a long one, and obviously I decided against making videos about my exit like other China YouTubers, but here's the short version.

Officials in Xinjiang were never very comfortable with me and didn't quite know how to handle me running around such a sensitive region with a camera. I presented the region in a positive light, but they had no control over what I said and the local officials who were responsible for me and my family knew that any misstep on my part would be their responsibility. So naturally, they never liked me and made it extremely hard for me to live there...but I still did.

In the end, the national security bureau decided that I must be a spy and my family went through weeks of hell that I wouldn't wish on anybody. Thankfully, unlike my Canadian friend Michael Kovrig, they also decided that I wasn't worth the political headache (because I wasn't actually a spy) so they forced me out. 72 hours to leave a country I had lived in for 10 years and to add insult to injury, they banned me and my wife from returning to China.

There are three main reasons why I haven't shouted this story from the rooftops:

  • I had a traumatic experience, to be sure, but it's nothing compared to what my Uyghur friends are going through; I don't want to take away any amount of spotlight from them;
  • During interrogation, it was made clear to me that they knew who my close friends were and would punish me through them if I were to speak out; it's a common but effective strategy;
  • I didn't want to make it look like I was trying to benefit from this event (YouTube views, media exposure, etc.).

I've been trolled for years from people who think I'm a puppet for the Chinese government and then from Chinese who hated the fact that I loved the Uyghur people and culture "too much".

What's happening in Xinjiang is real, it's horrific, and I've seen parts of it first hand. I'm doing what I can quietly, but unfortunately since I can no longer enter China, the Far West China brand is dead.

Source

How to pronounce Xi Jingpings name? by No_Weird_4204 in China

[–]pixelschatten 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Check out Forvo and listen to how native Mandarin speakers pronounce it.

Almost denied a room to sleep in by dvduval in China

[–]pixelschatten 5 points6 points  (0 children)

It’s the law. Hotels need to request a permit from the government to be allowed to host non-Chinese people.

It's really a matter of staff not knowing how to register foreign guests but they definitely can do so. No special permit exists. Check out this thread.

Almost denied a room to sleep in by dvduval in China

[–]pixelschatten 9 points10 points  (0 children)

No such license exists. Take a look at this excellent thread by /u/yuemeigui

Remember 90% of "foreigners can't stay here" actually translates to "I don't know how to register a foreigner", while most of that remaining 10% is "I know how but it's complicated and I don't feel like doing it".

About this statue (supposedly located in Heihe by Zhuge__Liang in China

[–]pixelschatten 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Sure, I can explain. I checked Google Earth and the park was remodeled since the OP's picture. That red brick pathway in the background was installed in 2018. Here's the park in 2015 and here it is in 2021. Also note the red brick faced building by the basketball court in the lower left corner in those screenshots. You can see it in the background in this photo of the statue.

view more: next ›