1、1A War Irrelevant to ConsumersThe sword of anti-monop- oly of China has stayed inside its sheath quietly for three years. When it was drawn out, it surprisingly charged at China Telecom and China Unicom.When interviewed by CCTV, Li Qing, deputy director of the Bureau of Price Supervision and Inspect
2、ion and Anti-Monopoly at the National Development and Reform Commission, stated on November 9 that the anti-monopoly department immediately launched the investigations into China Telecom and China Unicom which were doubted to be involved in price monopoly soon after receiving the accusation in the f
3、irst half of 2011. The main goal of this investigation was to make clear whether China Telecom and China Unicom used their own market dominance places to prevent and affect other operators entry into the fields of broadband access and inter-network settlement.According to Li Qing, China Telecom coul
4、d earn 50 billion yuan (USD 7.88 billion) per year from Internet access. For China Unicom, the income from this field could reach 30 billion yuan (USD 4.73 billion). “If their monopolization proved to be true after the investigation, they will be fined about 1%-10% 2of their annual income.”The news
5、shocked the public. Some people applauded for this and claimed that “it is the evangel for the Internet industry”. Some people said that it was a well planned plot and a “show” of contending for profits among different departments under current system.Journalists from Xinhua News Agency tried to tel
6、l the nature of this case technically to the readers after massive interviews.An Ongoing Anti-monopoly InvestigationAccording to confirmed information, the Price Supervision and Inspection Department of the National Development and Reform Commission (its name has been changed to the Bureau of Price
7、Supervision and Inspection and Anti-Monopoly) issued the notice of investigation to China Telecom and China Unicom in the late period of April 2011. About two months later, the National Development and Reform Commission(NDRC) reported the primary investigation result, which confirmed the dominant pl
8、aces of the two companies in relevant market and their possible abuse of their dominant places. The report also included the plan of punishing the two companies with the penalty accounting for 1%-10% of their annual income from cable 3broadband access. Then the two companies submitted their feedback
9、 letters to defend themselves.On October 17, the NDRC inquired the Legislative Affairs Office of the State Council, the Peoples Supreme Court and the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology for their advices. In the meeting, different parties had different advices. They only agreed that such
10、 a big case should be cautiously handled without enough solid proofs. The NDRC said in the meeting that it would collect the advices of the State-owned Assets Supervision so are the prices of penetrating and static prices. In addition to regional factors and the disparity among consumers, the differ
11、ence of prices is inevitable. If the government directly implies price control on the price regardless of products, service and market, the market principle that the government advocates is invalid ?Cthat is the true monopolization. Without a market-based pricing system, the resource allocation in t
12、he market will be twisted, which will affect all the links of the Internet industry. It is not good for the innovation and longterm development of the Internet industry of China,” said 8this professor. Keep Silence on the “Milestone Anti-monopoly Case”By November 11, no government departments or ins
13、titutions made official response to this other than China Telecom and China Unicom, which had published the short escape announcement on November 9. Nearly all relevant experts rejected being in- terviewed.The Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, which should have the biggest voice in an
14、y claims related with technologies, said recently an official response would be available for the public in the future but now it is not ready yet. “I rejected the appeals of interviews of more than 100 journalists,” said an expert working for the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology. It
15、is known that all experts in the ministry were told to reject interviews till the ministry makes a response.People from the State-owned Assets Supervision & Administration Commission said that it was not the right time to reveal their attitudes. Actually, they did not make any moves or comments afte
16、r the case was exposed by the NDRC.It is also known the reports that are to be submitted to various departments are being expressed in Beijing. All these 9made the future of “the war of immortals” become more complex.Experts believe that the antimonopoly investigation is of help for standardizing ma
17、rket order and creating fair environment for competition. For long, it is good for protecting the legal rights of consumers. However, if the anti-monopoly sword is wielded without any orders, it will cause great shake to the capital, which damages the interests of stakeholders and wastes the state-o
18、wned assets. It will also cause meaningless loss of the enterprises and affect their operation. Whats worse is that it may even lead to the increased unbalance in the telecom market situation and cause irreparable damages to the Internet industry of China and multiple stateowned enterprises. Therefore it is necessary to remind the administrators to“be cautious when using the laws and policies”.
