elitepilot09
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2014
- Messages
- 197
- Reaction score
- 1
- Country
- Location
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
i was not discussing with ACM, so no reason to believe.... i was falsifying him, neither i was falsifying any one else. which, I have made very clear in my reply to araz, same post you have quoted.
This is my way, i always think logically, to any claim or statement from any one, hence my calculation and nor did i find your (above) reply very convincing.
isSir,
No disrespect----You have to look at it this way---are you qualified to make that assessment----. Logical thinking is not enough---. There is more to it that meets the eye.
As for the sale of JF17---pakistan needs to stop talking about it---stop marketing it----. Put a veil on the program for awhile.
Let the THIRSTY COME TO THE WELL----don't go abegging to sell your wares.
In car sales talk---we have a saying for weak sales people who cannot sell anything-----like---" this saleman cannot sell a bottle of water to a thirsty in the middle of sahara desert under a hot blistering sun "-----this is how bad pakistan is.
This is one of the best post i have read. Someone who links two aspects like no other. I agree, paf is not able to do this. If i want to sell Ferrari to a rich man then i do not ask the engineers to do that. Nor would the best f1 driver do that. We might hate car sellers but they do know our psycology and they know how to sell. These kind of talents are what we need in the jf17 team. This is one of the biggest mistakes of the jf17 project.
Sir,
No disrespect----You have to look at it this way---are you qualified to make that assessment----. Logical thinking is not enough---. There is more to it that meets the eye.
As for the sale of JF17---pakistan needs to stop talking about it---stop marketing it----. Put a veil on the program for awhile.
Let the THIRSTY COME TO THE WELL----don't go abegging to sell your wares.
In car sales talk---we have a saying for weak sales people who cannot sell anything-----like---" this saleman cannot sell a bottle of water to a thirsty in the middle of sahara desert under a hot blistering sun "-----this is how bad pakistan is.
Sir,
No disrespect----You have to look at it this way---are you qualified to make that assessment----. Logical thinking is not enough---. There is more to it that meets the eye.
As for the sale of JF17---pakistan needs to stop talking about it---stop marketing it----. Put a veil on the program for awhile.
Let the THIRSTY COME TO THE WELL----don't go abegging to sell your wares.
In car sales talk---we have a saying for weak sales people who cannot sell anything-----like---" this saleman cannot sell a bottle of water to a thirsty in the middle of sahara desert under a hot blistering sun "-----this is how bad pakistan is.
In my opinion, a great portion of the blame also lies in our expectations. Arms deals to the third world aren't like a car sale, unless the Japanese government twists my arm and passively forces me to buy a Honda Civic, as a part of a wider deal in which they rebuild half my house, receive permission to land armed forces in my backyard and gain my support on most political issues and agreement to buy almost exclusively Japanese cars as a means to prop up their automotive industry. As a car buyer, I am not a slave to Japanese policies against other nations and am free to flip flop on which brand to give my business, without having to worry about loosing access to Civic parts and electricity to my house.
Money speaks above all else in arms purchases, but it does not do so at the expense of what a purchase entails for the buying nation. This is magnified in the case of third world nations, because many of these sales are sweeteners to higher level diplomatic and economic dealings and come with favorable financing terms, which are the price for the strings attached. The f-16 was such a success, not simply because it is a great fighter, but because, in the same mold as the mig-21 for the Soviets, it forms a significant part of the American global diplomacy. F-16s and the like are a gift for: surrendering an authentic foreign policy to the American cause, a free pass to use sovereign territory for US power projection, and as a means to support American arms industry.
While this is an exaggerated assumption that doesn't apply to all cases of arms transactions, it highlights the very problem with the jf-17 sales push: the type of nations looking to buy such an aircraft seldom do so based on merit alone. It is a balancing act consisting of which nation a buyer chooses to ally with, the benefits received from the seller's government (financial, economic, diplomatic), the advantages to local industry and, possibly last,how effective the aircraft is in filling it's intended role. The jf-17 may be very cost effective, but Pakistan does not offer a fellow third world nation any overarching protection against potential adversaries, nor does it have funds to invest in local economic projects; as such siding with Pakistan on a geopolitical level brings no advantages of any kind.
The jf-17 sales pitch failed the day Pakistan was attached to the project. It may garner sales at some point, but to expect it to become a volume seller, it will require the Chinese to become active in global politics in the same mold as the Americans are today; at which point the Chinese and all the perks that come with doing business with them, will sell the aircraft. We should be satisfied with what the jf-17 is doing for the PAF, it is unfair to expect anymore.
In my opinion, a great portion of the blame also lies in our expectations. Arms deals to the third world aren't like a car sale, unless the Japanese government twists my arm and passively forces me to buy a Honda Civic, as a part of a wider deal in which they rebuild half my house, receive permission to land armed forces in my backyard and gain my support on most political issues and agreement to buy almost exclusively Japanese cars as a means to prop up their automotive industry. As a car buyer, I am not a slave to Japanese policies against other nations and am free to flip flop on which brand to give my business, without having to worry about loosing access to Civic parts and electricity to my house.
Money speaks above all else in arms purchases, but it does not do so at the expense of what a purchase entails for the buying nation. This is magnified in the case of third world nations, because many of these sales are sweeteners to higher level diplomatic and economic dealings and come with favorable financing terms, which are the price for the strings attached. The f-16 was such a success, not simply because it is a great fighter, but because, in the same mold as the mig-21 for the Soviets, it forms a significant part of the American global diplomacy. F-16s and the like are a gift for: surrendering an authentic foreign policy to the American cause, a free pass to use sovereign territory for US power projection, and as a means to support American arms industry.
While this is an exaggerated assumption that doesn't apply to all cases of arms transactions, it highlights the very problem with the jf-17 sales push: the type of nations looking to buy such an aircraft seldom do so based on merit alone. It is a balancing act consisting of which nation a buyer chooses to ally with, the benefits received from the seller's government (financial, economic, diplomatic), the advantages to local industry and, possibly last,how effective the aircraft is in filling it's intended role. The jf-17 may be very cost effective, but Pakistan does not offer a fellow third world nation any overarching protection against potential adversaries, nor does it have funds to invest in local economic projects; as such siding with Pakistan on a geopolitical level brings no advantages of any kind.
The jf-17 sales pitch failed the day Pakistan was attached to the project. It may garner sales at some point, but to expect it to become a volume seller, it will require the Chinese to become active in global politics in the same mold as the Americans are today; at which point the Chinese and all the perks that come with doing business with them, will sell the aircraft. We should be satisfied with what the jf-17 is doing for the PAF, it is unfair to expect anymore.
A really good and comprehensive response. I think one other drawback of the JFT is the lack of a Chinese engine. The day the Chinese cure that deficiency they will probably buy a few and then the sales may pick up. In the current scenario PAF with not having a Chinese engine will not satisfy buyers enough to make the sale. The rest I am really happy with the reply above. I think the above can be the basis of an article for the Board. What are the deficiencies preventing the sale of JFT? Since you have made the start you might as well finish it.In my opinion, a great portion of the blame also lies in our expectations. Arms deals to the third world aren't like a car sale, unless the Japanese government twists my arm and passively forces me to buy a Honda Civic, as a part of a wider deal in which they rebuild half my house, receive permission to land armed forces in my backyard and gain my support on most political issues and agreement to buy almost exclusively Japanese cars as a means to prop up their automotive industry. As a car buyer, I am not a slave to Japanese policies against other nations and am free to flip flop on which brand to give my business, without having to worry about loosing access to Civic parts and electricity to my house.
Money speaks above all else in arms purchases, but it does not do so at the expense of what a purchase entails for the buying nation. This is magnified in the case of third world nations, because many of these sales are sweeteners to higher level diplomatic and economic dealings and come with favorable financing terms, which are the price for the strings attached. The f-16 was such a success, not simply because it is a great fighter, but because, in the same mold as the mig-21 for the Soviets, it forms a significant part of the American global diplomacy. F-16s and the like are a gift for: surrendering an authentic foreign policy to the American cause, a free pass to use sovereign territory for US power projection, and as a means to support American arms industry.
While this is an exaggerated assumption that doesn't apply to all cases of arms transactions, it highlights the very problem with the jf-17 sales push: the type of nations looking to buy such an aircraft seldom do so based on merit alone. It is a balancing act consisting of which nation a buyer chooses to ally with, the benefits received from the seller's government (financial, economic, diplomatic), the advantages to local industry and, possibly last,how effective the aircraft is in filling it's intended role. The jf-17 may be very cost effective, but Pakistan does not offer a fellow third world nation any overarching protection against potential adversaries, nor does it have funds to invest in local economic projects; as such siding with Pakistan on a geopolitical level brings no advantages of any kind.
The jf-17 sales pitch failed the day Pakistan was attached to the project. It may garner sales at some point, but to expect it to become a volume seller, it will require the Chinese to become active in global politics in the same mold as the Americans are today; at which point the Chinese and all the perks that come with doing business with them, will sell the aircraft. We should be satisfied with what the jf-17 is doing for the PAF, it is unfair to expect anymore.
Extremely well said. If I may add something, we need to be aware of the fact that Pakistan itself isn't a fully independent country, i.e. a country that values its own vital interests. We are a nation that took US drone strikes lying down and India's IWT violations bending. In fact, Pakistan might have had a much, *much* better shot selling JF-17s (and other arms) while being under US embargo, genuine governments abroad (e.g. Brazil) could at least be assured of Pakistan's seriousness in trying to build its own bridges (without piggybacking on the 'legitimacy' standards set by the US).
Pakistan would do exponentially better off being independent and considerate of its own vital interests. Will it upset the US and those like them, e.g. Britain, France, KSA, etc? Certainly. Will it earn Pakistan the genuine respect of the likes of China, Brazil, Sweden, Germany, South Africa, and many others? Definitely.
Munir.If you buy 34 years old adf f16's while you want to sell your brand new jf17's... Even an idiot would think twice buying your jf17. Surely those f16's are cheap and will be improved but what message did you send? It is not about f16's but bad marketing of your jf17. It is like France buying us f5 while trying to sell Rafales... But then again... Uk buys jsf while trying to decrease ef2000 as much as possible. The arabs are still buying ef2000 (which cannot even win against paf mlu f16's)... But Arabs have never bought anything based on logic.