Here's the most informative article I have seen. Perhaps it would help to
look at all companies as global and there is no such thing as outsourcing.
From http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB107542341587316028,00.html
Wall Street Journal January 30, 2004
"One of Logitech's big sellers is a wireless mouse called Wanda, which
sells to American consumers for around $40. Of this, Logitech takes about
$8, while distributors and retailers take $15. A further $14 goes to
suppliers that provide Wanda's parts: A Motorola Inc. plant in Malaysia
makes the mouse's chips, and America's Agilent Technologies Inc. supplies
the optical sensor. Even the solder comes from a U.S. company, Cookson
Electronics, which has a factory in China's Yunnan province next to
Vietnam.
Marketing is led from Fremont, Calif., where a staff of 450 earns far more
than 4,000 Chinese employed in Suzhou. China's take from each mouse comes
to a meager $3, which covers wages, power, transport and other overhead
costs."
Gene Felder
[log in to unmask]
Entire article:
Trade With China
Wall Street Journal January 30, 2004
As China Surges, It Also Proves
A Buttress to American Strength
Beijing Feeds a Giant Appetite
In U.S. for Low-Cost Goods
And Borrowed Capital
By ANDREW HIGGINS
Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
DONGGUAN, China -- Frank Lin joined fellow Chinese furniture makers at a
hotel here last summer to discuss some alarming news from America: U.S.
furniture companies were asking Washington to investigate "illegal" Chinese
trade practices and restrict Chinese sales to the U.S. Among the
petitioners was one of Mr. Lin's longtime customers, Virginia-based Hooker
Furniture Corp.
Mr. Lin's dismay turned to confusion days later when he received an e-mail
from Hooker's chief executive. Hooker looked forward to an "exciting
future" doing business with China, said the message, and wanted to
"continue the extraordinary growth we have had in the last few years with
Asian imports."
Indeed, thanks largely to the imports, Hooker has boomed. It closed a
factory in North Carolina last summer but has boosted profits and dazzled
investors with a stock that more than quadrupled in two years.
"I just don't understand what they are doing. It makes no sense," Mr. Lin
said after receiving the e-mail in August. On his desk lay designs sent
from America. Lining the wall, newly crafted chairs stood ready for
inspection by U.S. buyers. "If they don't import, they die. They need us.
So why do they want to hurt us?" Mr. Lin wondered.
His bewilderment flows from a much bigger tension besetting U.S. economic
relations with China -- and the economic forces that underpin America's
global hegemony. China's rise both supports the American superpower and
embodies some of its self-generated vulnerabilities.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------
DOW JONES REPRINTS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------
This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. To order
presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or
customers, use the Order Reprints tool at the bottom of any article or
visit: www.djreprints.com. . See a sample reprint in PDF format . Order a
reprint of this article now.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------
Burgeoning business ties with China have become treacherous terrain.
Anxious to calm workers' worries about jobs, and fearful of appearing
unpatriotic, even some U.S. companies that rely on China are joining
industry coalitions clamoring to curb the "China threat."
But there's another side to China's dynamism. China is slotting itself into
the global economic order that America dominates and largely created. As a
critical link in this capitalist chain, nominally communist China helps
enrich companies such as Hooker. At the same time, it supports a central
feature of America's superpower status: its gargantuan appetite for foreign
goods and capital.
Though America is sometimes loosely called an empire, it defies the
imperial economic script described by Lenin (who called imperialism "the
highest form of capitalism"). The U.S. doesn't seek vassal states as
outlets for surplus capital. In an anomaly for such a powerful nation,
America sucks in money from abroad. With its large national debt and trade
deficits, the U.S. binds not by lending but by borrowing and by importing.
Its status as a "hyper-debtor" makes this "hyper-power" oddly reliant on
weaker partners, says Niall Ferguson, a professor at New York University
and scholar of imperial history. "If you are dependent on the willingness
of others to hold your assets, there is a limit to how unilaterally you can
act."
For all their nation's power, many Americans feel an economic insecurity,
for which China is a lightning rod. Its blitzkrieg thrust into U.S. markets
over the past decade, many worry, reveals a soft economic core under the
tough carapace of America's military might. From bed frames to
circuit-boards, the industrial bedrock of American power is crumbling, say
some politicians and pundits. At stake, warns the American Furniture
Manufacturers Committee for Legal Trade, which filed the complaint that
upset Mr. Lin, "is our way of life, our culture and the competitiveness of
America in the world."
China's emergence as a major economic power is beyond doubt. Its $1.2
trillion economy, while far smaller than the $10.4 trillion economy of
America and Japan's $4 trillion output, is on track to catch up with Japan
inside of two decades. Already, China's growing economic weight, including
a voracious consumption of crude oil, is giving Beijing commensurate
influence in geopolitics -- another power center for America to contend
with.
Also undeniable is a painful loss of U.S. manufacturing jobs to a country
where the average plant worker earns around $80 a month, less than an
American on minimum wage makes in two days. Cheap labor pushed China's
trade surplus with the U.S. to $123 billion in a recent 12-month period,
five times the gap a decade ago.
The figures, however, mask the many ways in which the world's two biggest
continental economies complement each other. China's rests heavily on
industry, with manufacturing, mining and related activities accounting for
51% of gross domestic product, by World Bank figures. America generates
only a quarter of its GDP from industry and just 14% from manufacturing.
Services contribute nearly three quarters.
Curbing Chinese imports through tariffs or a stronger yuan would only drive
up imports from other countries, contends Stephen Roach, chief economist at
Morgan Stanley. The only real alternative, he says, is for Americans to
spend less and save more: "When Americans get frustrated with China, they
should look in the mirror."
They could also look inside things they buy from China. Take the 20 million
"made in China" computer mice shipped to the U.S. each year by Logitech
International SA, a Swiss-American company with headquarters in California.
The mice are put together in a six-floor building in Suzhou, a Chinese city
once famous for its Confucian gardens but now better known as a frenetic
manufacturing hub.
Mouse Called Wanda
Logitech's Suzhou parts warehouse is a microcosm of the global economy, and
helps explain why China reinforces America's role as ringmaster. Piled to
the ceiling on blue metal shelves are boxes marked with the logos of
foreign companies, from big U.S. multinationals to a small Belgian billiard
company that makes trackballs.
One of Logitech's big sellers is a wireless mouse called Wanda, which sells
to American consumers for around $40. Of this, Logitech takes about $8,
while distributors and retailers take $15. A further $14 goes to suppliers
that provide Wanda's parts: A Motorola Inc. plant in Malaysia makes the
mouse's chips, and America's Agilent Technologies Inc. supplies the optical
sensor. Even the solder comes from a U.S. company, Cookson Electronics,
which has a factory in China's Yunnan province next to Vietnam.
Marketing is led from Fremont, Calif., where a staff of 450 earns far more
than 4,000 Chinese employed in Suzhou. China's take from each mouse comes
to a meager $3, which covers wages, power, transport and other overhead
costs.
CHINA'S CHANGING PICTURE
The world confronting China, 25 years ago and today.
INDICATOR THEN NOW
Population 975 million 1.3 billion
Leader Deng Xiaoping Hu Jintao
Number of private sedans 0 3 million
Fashion icon Jiang Qing Gong Li
Oil imports 0 2 million barrels a day
Annual U.S.-China trade $2.3 billion $177 billion (a)
Trade balance $1.1 billion surplus for U.S. $123 billion deficit for U.S.
(a)
Currency Nonconvertible Convertible in trade (b)
Stock trading None Two exchanges (c)
Unresolved territorial claims Hong Kong, Macao, Taiwan, Soviet border
region, South China Sea islands Taiwan, South China Sea islands
(a) December 2002 through November 2003
(b) Beijing pegs yuan at 8.28 to a U.S. dollar
(c)Shanghai and Shenzhen, listing 1,287 stocks in all
Source: WSJ research
Other Chinese-made products rely less on U.S. components and use Japanese,
Korean or Taiwanese parts instead. But, in many cases, the upshot for China
is the same: Foreigners get the bulk of the money. They supply many of the
parts, often own the plants in China that assemble them, and get a markup
on sales abroad. Foreign companies account for more than three-quarters of
China's high-tech exports. The Chinese Ministry of Commerce's ranking of
"China's" top 10 exporters includes two American companies -- Motorola and
hard-drive maker Seagate Technology.
Logitech, like most tech, toy and textile companies with plants in China,
employs mostly young women such as Wang Yan, an 18-year-old from the
impoverished rural province of Anhui. She is paid $75 a month to sit all
day at a conveyor belt plugging three tiny bits of metal into circuit
boards. She does this 2,000 times a day. To earn extra money, she gets up
at 6 a.m. to tidy the dormitory space she shares with a dozen fellow
workers.
This is her second stint in a factory. Before coming to Suzhou, she skipped
school to become an underage worker at an electronics plant not far from
Mr. Lin's furniture company in Dongguan. She complains about her salary but
isn't going back to her village. That would mean only "eating bitterness,"
she says.
China's pivotal role in the global supply chain buttresses a pillar of
foreign policy dating all the way back to 1899, when the U.S. pushed for an
Open Door Policy making China's ports available to all. In turn, China's
trade opening to the world in the past two decades softened its
once-antagonistic foreign policy. Last year, as the U.S. prepared to invade
Iraq, Beijing stood aloof from the Paris-Berlin-Moscow axis of outspoken
opposition. It has offered the U.S. some help trying to curb North Korea's
nuclear ambitions.
China's explosive growth as an exporter, though distressing for many
American plants, prods the U.S. in a direction it has been moving for
decades. Hooker furniture, which now imports more than 40% of the furniture
it sells, mirrors this shift, scaling back on domestic manufacturing but
expanding in services such as design, distribution and marketing.
Meanwhile, other American companies, such as Intel Corp., focus on making
high-end products, many of which end up in goods sold in America as "made
in China."
China also does well out of an arrangement that provides millions of jobs,
lets China steadily increase military spending and has created the biggest
foreign-currency reserves after Japan's. Because of the U.S. debt habit,
the arrangement also leaves China with leverage over America.
Borrowing Habit
The U.S. has been a net capital importer since at least the 1980s. This is
in stark contrast to Britain at the height of its imperium before World War
I, when the British had net foreign assets valued at 150% of their own GDP.
America, though often described as Britain's successor as the world's
dominant power, does the opposite. Recent figures from the Commerce
Department's Bureau of Economic Analysis show that foreign holdings of U.S.
stocks, bonds and other assets exceeded America's foreign assets to the
tune of $2.3 trillion -- or 22% of GDP -- at the end of 2002.
"America is certainly a hegemon and may be occupying Iraq but, economically
at least, it does the opposite of what Lenin described as imperialism,"
says Angus Maddison, a British economist whose many books include a survey
of the world economy over the last millennium.
MILESTONES
1979: Deng steers post-Mao China on "capitalist road"
1981: China convicts "Gang of Four" radicals, including Mao's widow, Jiang
Qing
1989: China crushes pro-democracy protest in Tiananmen Square
1990: Reopens Shanghai Stock Exchange, closed since '49 revolution (a)
1997: Deng dies; China regains Hong Kong from British
1999: Regains Macao, enclave Portugal had held since 16th century
1999: Protests as U.S. accidentally bombs Chinese embassy in Belgrade
2000: Cracks down on Falun Gong quasi-religious group
2001: Joins World Trade Organization
2001: Chinese jet collides with U.S. spy plane over South China Sea,
prompting diplomatic standoff
2002: Communist Party says it will admit capitalists
2003: SARS outbreak (b)
2003: U.S., Japan urge China to float yuan; it declines (c)
2003: Mass march for democracy in Hong Kong
(a) Shanghai and Shenzhen, listing 1,287 stocks in all
(b) December 2002 through November 2003
(c) Beijing pegs yuan at 8.28 to a U.S. dollar
Source: WSJ research
Tax cuts, spending in Iraq and other factors have stirred alarm among some
economists that America's debt is getting out of control. A recent
International Monetary Fund report said America's net foreign obligations
could rise in a few years to 40% of GDP, and warned of an "unprecedented
level of external debt for a large industrial country."
China didn't create this potentially unstable edifice, but it does, at
least for the time being, help to keep it upright. China has loans
outstanding to the U.S. government of more than $120 billion, in the form
of Treasury debt that China owns. It holds probably that much again in
Fannie Mae and other dollar-denominated debt securities.
Contrast that with what U.S. companies have invested in Chinese plants and
equipment -- not a direct comparison, by any means, but revealing
nonetheless. This "foreign direct investment" stood at $10.2 billion at the
end of 2002, according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis, about
one-twenty-fifth the level of China's U.S.-securities holdings. The Chinese
government offers a much higher figure for U.S. investment in China but
still far below the value of Chinese holdings of U.S. debt.
America's addiction to foreign money hands China and other potential
adversaries a weapon, some influential voices warn. Among them is Aaron
Friedberg of Princeton University, an authority on Britain's imperial
decline who is now a national security adviser to Vice President Dick
Cheney. Mr. Friedberg wrote in a 2000 article in Commentary that China
could one day dump its dollar assets to "trigger a run on the dollar, an
increase in U.S. interest rates and perhaps a stock-market crash."
But China has reasons of its own to buy dollar assets -- reasons that show
how intricately the officially Marxist country fits into a U.S.-led world
economic order. As China lends to the U.S. by buying U.S. government notes,
it stows in a safe place the vast surplus cash its export economy
generates.
Meanwhile, its buying of dollar assets buttresses another Chinese policy:
keeping the yuan pegged at a low exchange rate against the greenback. Every
time China buys a Treasury note it sells yuan. This selling helps stop the
yuan from rising. By keeping its currency cheap, China keeps its exports
especially inexpensive abroad -- one of the trade policies the U.S.
complains about.
The Chip Trade
What worries some Americans most isn't the loss of menial jobs to tens of
millions of Chinese such as Ms. Wang but a migration of white-collar work
as China moves up the economic ladder. A Godzilla role once played by Japan
is now assigned to China, and sometimes India. "When you hear that Intel,
IBM and Goldman Sachs plan to move high-end jobs to China and India, what's
going to be left here -- restaurants?" asked Democratic Sen. Charles
Schumer of New York at a Banking Committee hearing last year.
A study of the U.S. semiconductor industry's moves abroad, headed by
Democratic Sen. Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut, said, "What is at stake
here is our ability to be pre-eminent in the world of ideas."
Intel now produces more than 50 million chips a year in China. Most end up
in computers and other goods for export.
Yet Intel's main facility, a $500 million plant in Shanghai, doesn't really
make chips: It tests and assembles them from silicon wafers made in Intel
plants abroad, mostly in the U.S. China adds less than 5% of the value. The
U.S. generates the bulk of the value, and the profits.
Motorola, by contrast, does make chips in China, and has been far less
successful. Its $1 billion plant in Tianjin has been plagued by problems.
As part of a strategic rethink, Motorola has announced plans to transfer
the facility to Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corp., a company
based in China but partly owned by non-Chinese.
Attempts by domestic Chinese companies to make sophisticated semiconductors
have a mixed record. Making high-end chips requires hugely expensive,
imported equipment and does not play to China's natural strength in cheap
labor. To try to overcome this, the government has been offering tax and
other incentives in a big push reminiscent of an earlier drive to build up
a large auto industry. This suggests the big competitive advantage China
enjoys in labor-intensive manufacturing isn't easily transferred upward.
Whose Profits?
How much U.S. multinationals profit from their Chinese operations is hard
to assess. Most book their earnings through Hong Kong or other offshore
locations with low taxes. Bureau of Economic Analysis data, however, give a
rough guide. American companies, after losing money in China in the 1980s
and having minimal earnings for much of the 1990s, reported net income from
their China affiliates of $755 million in 1999 and double that in the first
three quarters of 2003. If income from Hong Kong affiliates is included,
American corporate earnings from greater China totaled $5.16 billion in the
first three quarters of 2003, about the same as earnings from Japan.
"Americans are getting a great deal in China," says Huang Yasheng, a
Massachusetts Institute of Technology professor and critic of a model he
says benefits foreigners and state-owned Chinese concerns at the expense of
Chinese entrepreneurs. China, he says, "produces zillions of
low-value-added things, but this is a miracle of volume, not a miracle of
value. ... Americans get cheap goods and then get to borrow money from
China at pathetic rates."
America's China deal looks pretty good from Frank Lin's furniture factory
in Dongguan, operated by Glory Oceanic Co., a Taiwanese-owned company of
which he is president. Mr. Lin makes low-cost, high-quality furniture that
allows U.S. companies better margins than on their U.S.-made goods. He buys
wood from America and coats it with lacquer from a Dongguan factory that is
run by Americans, uses American chemicals and flies an American flag. (The
lacquer factory, owned by Akzo Nobel of the Netherlands, briefly hoisted a
Dutch flag at the start of the Iraq war.)
Also now benefiting is a group of Americans that Chinese furniture makers
wish they didn't need: Washington trade lawyers. Mr. Lin and fellow factory
bosses -- most from Taiwan -- have chipped in $2 million to defend their
business against complaints of "dumping" -- selling for less than
fair-market value. After preliminary hearings, the U.S. International Trade
Commission ruled this month that domestic furniture makers have been hurt
by imports. The Commerce Department must now decide whether this is due to
illegal pricing by the Chinese, and whether to impose duties, theoretically
as high as 440%.
A Show of Hands
To plan strategy, a "defense committee" set up by Chinese furniture makers
has been holding meetings in the ballroom of Dongguan's Fu Ying Hotel. At
one gathering last year, the chairman read a list of U.S. companies that
initiated the antidumping complaint and asked plant bosses to raise their
hands if they made goods for any of them. Mr. Lin raised his hand four
times. Many other hands also popped up, revealing that more than half of
the U.S. furniture companies claiming concern about Chinese imports were
themselves importers.
U.S. buyers, Mr. Lin said, "come here and go chop, chop, chop on our asking
price and then complain that we are selling too cheaply." His warehouse was
stacked with boxes full of furniture ordered by Hooker and marked with
Hooker's corporate insignia.
Hooker's chief executive, Paul Toms, says he joined the antidumping
petition to be "fair to our employees," and notes that it targets only
bedroom furniture. Hooker and other supporters of the petition make most of
their bedroom furniture in the U.S. "The last thing we want is to have the
Chinese believe we are against them," Mr. Toms says, because imports from
Asia "have been responsible for all our growth and a lot of the profit over
the last few years." China, he says, is "both a threat and a great oppor
tunity."
Mr. Lin and his colleagues said they were considering withholding shipments
to U.S. companies that signed the petition. Scrambling to avoid a disaster
for their businesses, Hooker and other importers rushed executives to China
to try to calm tempers. In his e-mail, Mr. Toms assured Mr. Lin that,
despite Hooker's joining the claims of illegal trade by China, he didn't
think Mr. Lin had done anything "illegal or unethical."
Caught in the middle are scores of Americans working in Dongguan's
furniture factories, lacquer-mixing plants and related enterprises. Smeared
with sweat and sawdust after a day of supervising quality at a factory
here, Karen Lanning and Bill Ward, both veteran furniture makers from North
Carolina, swapped theories on what lay behind the importers' anti-import
campaign.
"The whole thing is so goofy it must be politics," said Mr. Ward, aged 52.
"It's a perfect platform: Wave the flag and whip up the crowd." Ms.
Lanning, 49, who moved to China when factories back home began to close,
blamed a failure to face economic reality by American furniture companies.
"It breaks my heart to see workers lose their jobs at home, but we all
picked up in our late 40s and 50s and came over here," she said. "This is
evolution. You can't stop it."
Write to Andrew Higgins at [log in to unmask]
URL for this article:
http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB107542341587316028,00.html
Hyperlinks in this Article:
(1) http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB107533847490914729,00.html
(2) http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB107542194739815989,00.html
(3) http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB107142986284360200,00.html
(4) javascript:
window.open('http://online.wsj.com/documents/info-paxam04-frameset.html'
,'paxam04','toolbar=no,scrollbars=no,location=no,width=400,height=500,le
ft=70,top=30'); void('');
(5) http://online.wsj.com/documents/P1-AB131_DEMOCRACY.pdf
(6) mailto:[log in to unmask]
Updated January 30, 2004 2:34 p.m.
Copyright 2004 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. Distribution and
use of this material are governed by our Subscriber Agreement and by
copyright law. For non-personal use or to order multiple copies, please
contact Dow Jones Reprints at 1-800-843-0008 or visit www.djreprints.com.
-----Original Message-----
From: Roland Jaquet [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2005 10:35 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [TN] Articles on NOT Outsourcing to foreign shores
To me,
COST means urbanization, social, liberty, minimized pollution, human
rights,
decency, etc.. etc..
The Cost is the same everywhere in the World..
The PRICE is the Cost minus :
- pollution control,
- Help to AIDS
- decent living
- working 8 hours a day (we have 24 hours a day everywhere on the planet..
8
to sleep, 8 to work, 8 to Live)
- etc...
You do not want to lose your "quality of life" so why purchasing at a
fraction of the cost = not caring for the value we suppose to respect..
Tomorrow, what will we have left ? what are we letting our kids to live
with?
We have been on growing business for so long, we just don't know what to do
while in decline..
Very Best regards
Rol@nd
www.PCBspecialist.com
-----Message d'origine-----
De : TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] De la part de Phil Nutting
Envoye : mercredi, 11. mai 2005 18:19
A : [log in to unmask]
Objet : Re: [TN] Articles on NOT Outsourcing to foreign shores
With all due respect, people have been outsorcing for some time. It
comes down to the savings in labor and materials added to the cost of
how often you have to check on the supplier and the level of
acceptability of the parts versus doing it locally with higher labor and
material costs, but without the travel cost and presumably fewer
rejected parts. That is not to say that offshore parts are of poorer
quality. (I can already feel the heat of the pending flame e-mails.)
Waiting for 5-10 years in today's business economy could spell death for
a company.
Here is a simple example of comparisons.
A part made locally costs $50. I can buy them in batch sizes from 25 to
10,000. My vendor is within a 2 hour drive.
Part made offshore costs $8.00. I must buy in batch sizes above 2,500.
I have to travel to the offshore company twice a month to keep my finger
on the pulse of the product and I'm gone for a minimum of 4 days. The
container gets stuck due to customs, a labor dispute or worse the boat
sinks. If the part is bad or I have to tweak it I will need to rework
it for some cost that in total is still less than the part I bought
locally. How will this impact my production line if I plan for "Just In
Time" deliveries?
Don't forget the level of "Intellectual Property" you are sending out
beyond your control. Will it be cloned? Will copied products show up
on the market for much less?
Just my view of the issue.
Phil
-----Original Message-----
From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jeffrey Bush
Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2005 11:19 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [TN] Articles on NOT Outsourcing to foreign shores
I recommend a long-term study of the issue - possible 5-10 years before
making any move.
Jeffrey Bush
Director, Quality Assurance and Technical Support
VERMONT CIRCUITS INCORPORATED
76 Technology Drive - POB 1890
Brattleboro, Vermont 05302
Voice: 802.257.4571.21 Fax: 802.257.0011
http://www.vtcircuits.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Bev Christian [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2005 9:49 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [TN] Articles on NOT Outsourcing to foreign shores
Greetings,
A acquaintance who is not a TechNetter has asked me if there are any
general articles out there that help a person decide where is the break
point for keeping manufacturing local and when it is the time to
outsource offshore. I know I have read such articles, but cannot
remember when or where. Thanks in advance.
Bev
RIM
---------------------------------------------------------------------
This transmission (including any attachments) may contain confidential
information, privileged material (including material protected by the
solicitor-client or other applicable privileges), or constitute
non-public information. Any use of this information by anyone other than
the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this
transmission in error, please immediately reply to the sender and delete
this information from your system. Use, dissemination, distribution, or
reproduction of this transmission by unintended recipients is not
authorized and may be unlawful.
---------------------------------------------------
Technet Mail List provided as a service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8e
To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text
in
the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Technet
To temporarily halt or (re-start) delivery of Technet send e-mail to
[log in to unmask]: SET Technet NOMAIL or (MAIL)
To receive ONE mailing per day of all the posts: send e-mail to
[log in to unmask]: SET Technet Digest
Search the archives of previous posts at:
http://listserv.ipc.org/archives
Please visit IPC web site
http://www.ipc.org/contentpage.asp?Pageid=4.3.16 for additional
information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-615-7100
ext.2815
-----------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------
Technet Mail List provided as a service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8e
To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text
in
the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Technet
To temporarily halt or (re-start) delivery of Technet send e-mail to
[log in to unmask]: SET Technet NOMAIL or (MAIL)
To receive ONE mailing per day of all the posts: send e-mail to
[log in to unmask]: SET Technet Digest
Search the archives of previous posts at:
http://listserv.ipc.org/archives
Please visit IPC web site
http://www.ipc.org/contentpage.asp?Pageid=4.3.16 for additional
information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-615-7100
ext.2815
-----------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------
Technet Mail List provided as a service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8e
To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in
the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Technet
To temporarily halt or (re-start) delivery of Technet send e-mail to
[log in to unmask]: SET Technet NOMAIL or (MAIL)
To receive ONE mailing per day of all the posts: send e-mail to
[log in to unmask]: SET Technet Digest
Search the archives of previous posts at: http://listserv.ipc.org/archives
Please visit IPC web site http://www.ipc.org/contentpage.asp?Pageid=4.3.16
for additional information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or
847-615-7100 ext.2815
-----------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------
Technet Mail List provided as a service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8e
To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in
the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Technet
To temporarily halt or (re-start) delivery of Technet send e-mail to
[log in to unmask]: SET Technet NOMAIL or (MAIL)
To receive ONE mailing per day of all the posts: send e-mail to
[log in to unmask]: SET Technet Digest
Search the archives of previous posts at: http://listserv.ipc.org/archives
Please visit IPC web site http://www.ipc.org/contentpage.asp?Pageid=4.3.16
for additional information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or
847-615-7100 ext.2815
-----------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------
Technet Mail List provided as a service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8e
To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in
the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Technet
To temporarily halt or (re-start) delivery of Technet send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET Technet NOMAIL or (MAIL)
To receive ONE mailing per day of all the posts: send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET Technet Digest
Search the archives of previous posts at: http://listserv.ipc.org/archives
Please visit IPC web site http://www.ipc.org/contentpage.asp?Pageid=4.3.16 for additional information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-615-7100 ext.2815
-----------------------------------------------------
|
