Trade, industrial restructuring and development in Hong Kong: studies in the economies of East and South-East Asia

1993 ◽  
Vol 69 (4) ◽  
pp. 816-816
Author(s):  
John Thoburn
2019 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 817-829
Author(s):  
Beulah Pereira ◽  
Kevin Teah ◽  
Billy Sung ◽  
Min Teah

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to conduct an in-depth interview with the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of Larry Jewelry, a luxury jeweller with boutiques in Hong Kong and Singapore. Given the ever-evolving luxury jewellery market in South East Asia, it is paramount to understand the success factors of the luxury jewellery sector. Design/methodology/approach An in-depth interview approach is used to understand the antecedents of the success of the luxury jewellery sector. Specifically, this paper presents a complex business model of Larry Jewelry and an in-depth interview with the CEO of Larry Jewelry for current insights in the sector. Findings This paper highlights the history of Larry Jewelry, its product segments and the key elements of its business blueprint. Specifically, the success of Larry Jewelry is attributed to its business model and strong branding on quality, craftsmanship, rarity, human interaction and trust. Originality/value Despite the substantial growth in the luxury jewellery sector, there is relatively little research on the success factors of this industry, especially in South East Asia. The current research provides practical insights into business blueprint of a successful luxury jeweller in Hong Kong and Singapore.


1955 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 535-547 ◽  
Author(s):  
Henry McAleavy

IN October 1948, the Governor of Hong Kong appointed a committee to consider the position of Chinese law and custom in that colony. The report of this committee, which was published in February 1953,1 will have drawn attention to the fact that the old family law of China, quite apart from the limited recognition given to it by the courts, continues to exercise considerable influence on the lives of millions of Chinese, not only in Hong Kong, but in the other British territories of South-East Asia. In China itself, as regards matters of the family, the Civil Code of the former National Government had never, over most of the country and for the mass of the people, any very eifectual force, and the customary law continued to exist in almost undiminished vigour until the establishment of the People's Government in 1949.2 Since then the situation has changed completely. New laws regarding marriage and property are effectively enforced, and have everywhere replaced the old customs and, what is still more important, an extremely efficient system of mass-education in the principles of Communism will before long have expelled from people's minds those beliefs on which the old Chinese law was based. From now on, apart from Formosa, it is only in Hong Kong and among the communities of overseas Chinese throughout South-East Asia that Chinese customary family law will continue to exist, but even with such limitations it is still of sufficient importance to make its study of practical significance.


1984 ◽  
Vol 145 (3) ◽  
pp. 335-335 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. C. Ang ◽  
M. P. I. Weller

‘Koro’ has been described as a culture-bound syndrome with localised depersonalisation confined to the penis, occurring in the context of a panic state with fear of impending disaster (Yap 1965,1969). Because ghosts are not thought to possess genitals, penile shrinkage is believed to be potentially fatal, with the risk that the victim will himself turn into a ghost. Until recently the syndrome was thought to be restricted to Southern Chinese emigres in Hong Kong and South East Asia. We wish to report two such cases, one in a West Indian and the other in a Greek Cypriot, admitted to Friern Hospital.


1966 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 97-110 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicholas Tarling

With the end of the East India Company's monopoly of trade to China in 1834, relations with the Celestial Empire came under the direction of the Foreign Secretary in London, who appointed a Superintendent of Trade, subsequently British Plenipotentiary and also, under the Colonial Office, Governor of Hong Kong. In Southeast Asia, no similar arrangements were made. The three Straits Settlements remained under the Company's administration, with a Governor controlled by the Supreme Government in India, between 1834 and 1851 via the subordinate Bengal Government. The “foreign relations” of the Settlements in regard to indigenous states tended to be handled by the Company's or by naval officers. Relations with the Dutch were handled in London and The Hague by the Foreign Office and its envoys. At various times the appointment was urged of a Superintendent or Plenipotentiary or Commissioner to conduct British diplomacy in South-east Asia, but none ever eventuated. This may seem an unimportant point. But it calls attention to certain basic traditions in British policy in Southeast Asia, as distinct from China, and the fact that the appointment was not made despite pressure for it calls attention to a challenge to these traditions in the little studied mid-century period, a challenge, however, never pressed hard and ultimately only partly successful.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document