Approximately 40-50% of the overall IF market share in China is held by imported brands. That's hardly a token amount.
You still seem confused about 80% figure that you keep giving. That is for
recipes that have received approvals. For instance, each stage of a formula is one distinct recipe requiring approval. Companies with many IF product lines will have a disproportionately higher number of recipes.
For instance, BUB appear to have its Goat Formula, Supreme, and Grass Fed ranges. 3 product lines with 3 stages each = 9 recipes. Whereas A2M have just one line, A2 Platinum, so just 3 recipes. What the source that
you posted says is that the major Chinese brands tend to have far more recipes than imported brands (e.g. Feihe has 63). This is only because they have more product lines. But much of the approval process is the same for each recipe provided that it is manufactured at the same site.
I'm afraid your friend
@stephencca did not make any coherent points. Apparently he thinks China = bad but is invested in a company that cannot survive without Chinese business.
What you both do not seem to understand is SAMR is biased towards
major IF brands, which includes both domestic and imported brands. American, European and NZ brands have recieved approvals because they actually have large IF brands. Australia does not have any large IF brand.
BUB, like BAL before it, is a small and poorly managed company that lacks both brand recognition, resources, and connections to obtain SAMR. I agree with you it's unlikely they will ever get SAMR, but apparently you must think very highly of BUB and its management if you think they are not part of the reason why.
(20min delay)