Introduction A country s economic performance determines the performance of companies and industries. There are different parameters such as Gross Domestic Product, rate of unemployment and inflation among others, that are used to determine the performance of an economy. Beijing Hyundai is an example of a company that has evaluated the performance of different economies before establishing foreign subsidiaries. For instance, the company had to evaluate the level of optimism of the automotive customers in the country before establishing operations in the country. GDP Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is a parameter that is used to measure the performance of an economy. It measures the value of all products of a country. In addition, the living standards of a country can be determined using the GDP levels. Investors also use GDP to determine the market viability of a country (Nayak, p. 23). Economic Analysis of Neilson s Ratings Figure 1 The Nelson s rating shows that China was affected during the 2008 financial crisis, but the economy improved afterwards. Before the crisis, China had a high economic performance. However, the performance of the economy slowed down from 2007 to the end of 2008. The economy improved in 2008, but a serious crisis affected the country in 2009. The country experienced a bad economic performance in 2009. However, since 2010, the country has improved the economic performance. In 2012, 2013 and 2014, the economy performed better than 2006. Therefore, the government has been successful in promoting economic performance (Figure 1). On the other hand, Nelson s rating shows that Poland has been experiencing economic crisis since 2006. The highest performance was experienced in 2006. However, the performance declined and has never recovered. The country continues to experience very low economic performance (Figure 1). 2006 Towards the end of 2006, Poland had high ratings of 90.1 and 87.2 while China had the highest rating of 82.8 (Table 1). Figure 2 shows that the ratings for Poland were tending towards pessimistic economic performance, while China had a uniform economic performance. The findings show that China was performing better than Poland towards the end of 2006. In 2006, the economic crisis had not affected most economies, and Hyundai had a good opportunity to operate in the two countries. Time Neilson China Neilson Poland Nov 2006 82.8 90.1 Dec 2006 82.8 87.2 Table 1 Figure 2 2007 In 2007, the Neilson s rating indicated a decline in economic performance in China and Poland. China experienced a constant rating of 82.8 from January 2007 to May 2007. However, the economic performance declined in June up to the end of the year. The country had lowest rating of 70.2 in December 2007. Poland experienced the highest rating of 84.3 in January 2007 and the lowest rating in May 2007. The performance of the economy declined steadily from January to May, but a slow positive performance was experienced from June to December (Table 2). Figure 3 shows the changes in economic performance. Therefore, the trend in Neilson s ratings shows that the GDP of the two countries was declining in 2007 compared to 2006. The trend shows the beginning of the financial crisis. However, China was affected more than Poland. Time Neilson China Neilson Poland Jan 2007 82.8 84.3 Feb 2007 82.8 81.4 Mar 2007 82.8 78.5 Apr 2007 82.8 75.6 May 2007 82.8 72.7 Jun 2007 80.8 73.5 Jul 2007 78.9 74.3 Aug 2007 76.9 75.0 Sep 2007 75.0 75.8 Oct 2007 73.0 76.6 Nov 2007 71.1 77.4 Dec 2007 70.2 78.0 Table 2 Figure 3 2008 The two countries experienced the financial crisis, and there was a sharp drop in Neilson s ratings for both countries. China s ratings dropped to 69.3 while Poland had 78.7. However, despite the decline in ratings, the GDP of the two countries was optimistic because all ratings were above 50 (Table 3). Poland had a sharp decline from April to the end of the year. China improved its performance in April but a sharp decline was experienced in October up to the end of the year (Figure 4). Time Neilson China Neilson Poland Jan 2008 69.3 78.7 Feb 2008 68.5 79.4 Mar 2008 67.6 80.1 Apr 2008 66.8 80.8 May 2008 65.9 81.5 Jun 2008 69.5 79.8 Jul 2008 73.0 78.0 Aug 2008 76.6 76.3 Sep 2008 80.2 74.6 Oct 2008 83.7 72.8 Nov 2008 87.3 71.1 Dec 2008 81.9 66.1 Table 3 Figure 4 2009 The economic performance continued to decline in 2009, with Poland is experiencing a higher decline than China. Poland had a pessimistic performance in 2009. April was the worst month for the two countries (Table 4; Figure 5). Table 4 Time Neilson China Neilson Poland Jan 2009 76.4 61.1 Feb 2009 71.0 56.1 Mar 2009 65.5 51.1 Apr 2009 60.1 46.1 May 2009 54.7 41.1 Jun 2009 58.2 42.1 Jul 2009 61.7 43.1 Aug 2009 65.3 44.0 Sep 2009 68.8 45.0 Oct 2009 72.3 45.9 Nov 2009 75.9 46.9 Dec 2009 79.0 46.9 Figure 5 2010 Poland continued to experience significant decline in the economic performance. The country had the lowest rating of 25.4 in December 2010. China had a higher economic performance but had a declining trend from January to December (Table 5; Figure 6). Time Neilson China Neilson Poland Jan 2010 82.1 46.9 Feb 2010 85.2 46.9 Mar 2010 85.5 48.8 Apr 2010 85.9 50.8 May 2010 86.3 52.7 Jun 2010 84.2 45.2 Jul 2010 82.2 37.8 Aug 2010 80.2 30.3 Sep 2010 78.2 30.3 Oct 2010 76.3 30.3 Nov 2010 74.3 30.3 Dec 2010 77.9 25.4 Table 5 Figure 6 2011 China had a constant economic performance in 2011, and the ratings did not vary a lot. The ratings were optimistic. However, Poland had a pessimistic performance. The economic performance did not vary a lot (Figure 7; table 6). Time Neilson China Neilson Poland Jan 2011 81.5 20.6 Feb 2011 85.2 15.8 Mar 2011 83.9 15.8 Apr 2011 82.7 15.8 May 2011 81.5 15.8 Jun 2011 81.1 19.5 Jul 2011 80.6 23.2 Aug 2011 80.2 27.0 Sep 2011 81.8 25.9 Oct 2011 83.5 24.9 Nov 2011 85.2 23.8 Dec 2011 85.9 20.4 Table 6 Figure 7 2012 China had a constant economic performance in 2012, and the ratings did not vary a lot. The ratings were optimistic. However, Poland had a pessimistic performance. The economic performance did not vary a lot (Figure 8; table 7). Time Neilson China Neilson Poland Jan 2012 86.6 17.0 Feb 2012 87.3 13.5 Mar 2012 85.4 15.5 Apr 2012 83.4 17.5 May 2012 81.5 19.5 Jun 2012 81.9 19.5 Jul 2012 82.4 19.5 Aug 2012 82.8 19.5 Sep 2012 83.6 21.0 Oct 2012 84.4 22.4 Nov 2012 85.2 23.8 Dec 2012 85.2 20.4 Table 7 Figure 8 2013 China had a constant economic performance in 2013, and the ratings did not vary a lot. The ratings were optimistic. However, Poland had a pessimistic performance. The economic performance did not vary a lot (Figure 9; table 8). Time Neilson China Neilson Poland Jan 2013 85.2 17.0 Feb 2013 85.2 13.5 Mar 2013 85.9 13.2 Apr 2013 86.6 12.8 May 2013 87.3 12.5 Jun 2013 87.3 13.6 Jul 2013 87.3 14.7 Aug 2013 87.3 15.8 Sep 2013 87.6 17.0 Oct 2013 88.0 18.3 Nov 2013 88.3 19.5 Dec 2013 88.3 20.0 Table 8 Figure 9 2014 Both countries have a constant economic performance in 2014. China s Neilson rating is 88.3 in January and February. However, Poland has a very low rating at 20.5 in January and 20.9 in February (Table 9). Figure 10 also shows that Poland had a pessimistic rating in the beginning of 2014. Time Neilson China Neilson Poland Jan 2014 88.3 20.5 Feb 2014 88.3 20.9 Table 9 Figure 10 Conclusion The Nielson s rating shows that China has a sound economic performance unlike Poland. The 2008 financial crisis did have an adverse impact on the economy of China, and has recovered fully. However, Poland was affected by the economic crisis and has not yet recovered. China is while Poland is a pessimistic country. Therefore, Beijing Hyundai should consider investing more resources in China than in Poland. Focusing on Poland may cause huge losses to the company while China has an attractive economy that can benefit the company. Beijing Hyundai should consider working in China because the economy has good performance. The management team should not accept the decision of working in Poland because the country has a poor economic performance.
Use the order calculator below and get started! Contact our live support team for any assistance or inquiry.
[order_calculator]