![<?echo $_SERVER['SERVER_NAME'];?>](/template/twentyseventeen/skin/images/header.jpg)
On January 4, 2013, the National Development and Reform Commission issued a price monopoly ticket to six international large-scale LCD panel manufacturers including Samsung, LG, Taiwan, Chi Mei, AUO, CPT, and HannStar, including ordering a refund. , confiscation of illegal income and fines, the total amount of 353 million yuan.
In the past few years, with the United States, the European Union, South Korea and other major LCD panel manufacturers such as South Korea, Taiwan, Japan and other anti-monopoly and price manipulation survey results have been released, the main panel makers have suffered heavy penalties. However, after the introduction of the Anti-Monopoly Law in mainland China, the anti-monopoly investigation against the panel has not been heard.
This time, in addition to the sudden announcement of the panel's antitrust investigation results, the industry's accidents, the amount of fines also caused widespread controversy. The National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) conducted a case investigation based on a written report from a domestic company in December 2006, which lasted for six years, but the final result was a far cry from the US fine of $1.215 billion, the EU fine of 684 million euros, and the South Korean fine of 194 billion won.
Tolerate
According to reports, the National Development and Reform Commission initiated anti-monopoly investigations against six panel makers such as Samsung and LG. The main reason was that during the six years from 2001 to 2006, six LCD panel manufacturers such as South Korea’s Samsung had held 53 “crystal conferencesâ€. Negotiate the price of LCD panels and implement price monopoly in mainland China.
This is the same as the previous US Department of Justice, the European Union and the South Korean antitrust agency. The United States, the European Union and South Korea have already made penalties, and companies have already punished them. Even some Taiwan panel makers have already served their sentences in the United States.
Under such circumstances, the anti-monopoly investigation in mainland China has been slow. The explanation given by the National Development and Reform Commission is that “the extraction of relevant evidence is very difficult and requires careful preparation, using the pressure of continuous anti-monopoly investigation and lenient policies to force enterprises to come first.†Therefore, it takes a lot of time.
In contrast, the US Department of Justice involved in the investigation in 2006, in November 2008, LG, Sharp, Huaying and other three companies made a penalty, followed by Samsung, AUO, Chi Mei and other companies to impose a penalty, a shared five years. The EU has spent more than four years.
On January 4th, relevant persons of Changhong Multimedia Industry Co., Ltd. said: "At the internal meeting of China Electronics Video Association in early 2008, the domestic color TV giants participating in the conference had dumped the low-cost and low-cost of the Japanese and Korean flat-panel TV giants in the Chinese market, and The joint bidding price of the panel giants was discussed. At that time, it was decided that each color TV company would spend 500,000 yuan to hire lawyers to collect evidence of foreign brand dumping and monopoly panels." But the matter was finally lost.
At that time, panel makers such as Samsung even made the situation of out-of-stocks and ensured the demand of their own companies, which caused the procurement costs of domestic enterprises to be 5%-10% higher than Samsung and LG Electronics. This made the local color TV enterprises that lost their cost advantage shrink their market share to below 40% in 2007.
Moreover, domestic color TV companies at that time faced greater injustices than companies such as Apple, Philips, and Hewlett-Packard. The president of a color TV company said: "Compared with giants such as Dell and Hewlett-Packard, which have purchased billions of dollars in purchases, Chinese companies have only purchased hundreds of thousands of flat-panel TV panels in the past two years. More treatment."
In the face of all kinds of discrimination, domestic companies still have no complaints. Since the domestic Anti-Monopoly Law was only implemented in August 2008, and there are still no implementation rules, and it is very difficult to investigate and collect evidence from foreign panel giants, the domestic flat-panel TV giants have always felt that there is no complaint.
Some people with color TV companies said: "At that time, local color TV companies first wanted to get the panel, so they were forced to accept high prices, and they did not dare to testify about the monopolistic behavior of foreign panel makers. This also hindered the NDRC's investigation progress. ."
Penalty dispute
Although 353 million yuan has become the highest amount of a fine in China, very colorful electric companies still feel too light.
The official statement of the National Development and Reform Commission is that the United States and Europe are based on the "Anti-Monopoly Law" of the country where the penalty is imposed. The fine is "1% to 10% of the sales of the relevant company in the previous year", so the amount is large. The Chinese Anti-Monopoly Law was officially implemented in 2008, and the law cannot be retroactive. Therefore, it can only be punished according to the Price Law. The basis of the fine is illegal income.
In this regard, the person in charge of the color TV company said: "2007 to 2009 is the golden age of the panel industry, and it is also the biggest damage to local enterprises caused by monopoly. But because the "Anti-monopoly Law" can not be traced, and lack of evidence can not be made Punishment, obviously this is unfair to domestic companies."
On the contrary, after the implementation of the Anti-Monopoly Law in 2009, the panel industry has begun to fall into a trough. Liu Yaoping, general manager of Skyworth China Marketing Center, said: "After 2009, the global LCD panel industry over-investment led to a cyclical recession. All panel companies suffered losses, the panel market became the buyer's market, and panel companies wanted to continue to manipulate prices. Maybe again."
At the same time, after the mass production in 2012, Huaxing Optoelectronics and BOE quickly became the major LCD TV panel suppliers in China, which also made it difficult for foreign panel makers to continue to monopolize the price of control panels.
LG Display, who is in charge of the LCD panel business, sent a written explanation to the reporter for the first time: This fine was imposed on the price monopoly of the LCD panel industry from 2001 to 2006, and will not be sold to LG Display and its major customers. The relationship between them has any effect. The company has developed a series of systems to prevent similar incidents from happening again.
In the list of fines, LG's fines amounted to 118 million yuan, Samsung's 101 million yuan, Chi Mei's 94.41 million yuan, AUO 21.89 million yuan, Zhonghua Yingguan 16.2 million yuan, Haoyu Caijing 240,000 yuan, Taiwan AUO was fined for the first time.
The above-mentioned fines include the return of illegal income and the fine. Up to now, TCL, Skyworth, Konka, Sichuan Changhong and other nine major color TV companies in China have received a refund of RMB 172 million. However, due to the small amount involved, each company has indicated that it will not have a significant impact on the current results.
Moreover, Skyworth has formed a strategic partnership with LG Display, TCL and Samsung, Hisense and Chi Mei, so the possibility of continuing to pursue the case is not significant. The National Development and Reform Commission also said that the anti-price monopoly will be further strengthened in the future.
However, some color TV companies are worried: "The shipment of OLED TV panels may gradually replace LCD TVs in the next few years, but only Samsung and LG Display have the ability to industrialize OLED panels. Be wary of Korean companies continue to manipulate prices in the field of OLED panels. The possibility."
(This article is reproduced on the Internet. The texts and opinions expressed in this article have not been confirmed by this site, nor do they represent the position of Gaogong LED. Readers need to verify the relevant content by themselves.)
In the past few years, with the United States, the European Union, South Korea and other major LCD panel manufacturers such as South Korea, Taiwan, Japan and other anti-monopoly and price manipulation survey results have been released, the main panel makers have suffered heavy penalties. However, after the introduction of the Anti-Monopoly Law in mainland China, the anti-monopoly investigation against the panel has not been heard.
This time, in addition to the sudden announcement of the panel's antitrust investigation results, the industry's accidents, the amount of fines also caused widespread controversy. The National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) conducted a case investigation based on a written report from a domestic company in December 2006, which lasted for six years, but the final result was a far cry from the US fine of $1.215 billion, the EU fine of 684 million euros, and the South Korean fine of 194 billion won.
Tolerate
According to reports, the National Development and Reform Commission initiated anti-monopoly investigations against six panel makers such as Samsung and LG. The main reason was that during the six years from 2001 to 2006, six LCD panel manufacturers such as South Korea’s Samsung had held 53 “crystal conferencesâ€. Negotiate the price of LCD panels and implement price monopoly in mainland China.
This is the same as the previous US Department of Justice, the European Union and the South Korean antitrust agency. The United States, the European Union and South Korea have already made penalties, and companies have already punished them. Even some Taiwan panel makers have already served their sentences in the United States.
Under such circumstances, the anti-monopoly investigation in mainland China has been slow. The explanation given by the National Development and Reform Commission is that “the extraction of relevant evidence is very difficult and requires careful preparation, using the pressure of continuous anti-monopoly investigation and lenient policies to force enterprises to come first.†Therefore, it takes a lot of time.
In contrast, the US Department of Justice involved in the investigation in 2006, in November 2008, LG, Sharp, Huaying and other three companies made a penalty, followed by Samsung, AUO, Chi Mei and other companies to impose a penalty, a shared five years. The EU has spent more than four years.
On January 4th, relevant persons of Changhong Multimedia Industry Co., Ltd. said: "At the internal meeting of China Electronics Video Association in early 2008, the domestic color TV giants participating in the conference had dumped the low-cost and low-cost of the Japanese and Korean flat-panel TV giants in the Chinese market, and The joint bidding price of the panel giants was discussed. At that time, it was decided that each color TV company would spend 500,000 yuan to hire lawyers to collect evidence of foreign brand dumping and monopoly panels." But the matter was finally lost.
At that time, panel makers such as Samsung even made the situation of out-of-stocks and ensured the demand of their own companies, which caused the procurement costs of domestic enterprises to be 5%-10% higher than Samsung and LG Electronics. This made the local color TV enterprises that lost their cost advantage shrink their market share to below 40% in 2007.
Moreover, domestic color TV companies at that time faced greater injustices than companies such as Apple, Philips, and Hewlett-Packard. The president of a color TV company said: "Compared with giants such as Dell and Hewlett-Packard, which have purchased billions of dollars in purchases, Chinese companies have only purchased hundreds of thousands of flat-panel TV panels in the past two years. More treatment."
In the face of all kinds of discrimination, domestic companies still have no complaints. Since the domestic Anti-Monopoly Law was only implemented in August 2008, and there are still no implementation rules, and it is very difficult to investigate and collect evidence from foreign panel giants, the domestic flat-panel TV giants have always felt that there is no complaint.
Some people with color TV companies said: "At that time, local color TV companies first wanted to get the panel, so they were forced to accept high prices, and they did not dare to testify about the monopolistic behavior of foreign panel makers. This also hindered the NDRC's investigation progress. ."
Penalty dispute
Although 353 million yuan has become the highest amount of a fine in China, very colorful electric companies still feel too light.
The official statement of the National Development and Reform Commission is that the United States and Europe are based on the "Anti-Monopoly Law" of the country where the penalty is imposed. The fine is "1% to 10% of the sales of the relevant company in the previous year", so the amount is large. The Chinese Anti-Monopoly Law was officially implemented in 2008, and the law cannot be retroactive. Therefore, it can only be punished according to the Price Law. The basis of the fine is illegal income.
In this regard, the person in charge of the color TV company said: "2007 to 2009 is the golden age of the panel industry, and it is also the biggest damage to local enterprises caused by monopoly. But because the "Anti-monopoly Law" can not be traced, and lack of evidence can not be made Punishment, obviously this is unfair to domestic companies."
On the contrary, after the implementation of the Anti-Monopoly Law in 2009, the panel industry has begun to fall into a trough. Liu Yaoping, general manager of Skyworth China Marketing Center, said: "After 2009, the global LCD panel industry over-investment led to a cyclical recession. All panel companies suffered losses, the panel market became the buyer's market, and panel companies wanted to continue to manipulate prices. Maybe again."
At the same time, after the mass production in 2012, Huaxing Optoelectronics and BOE quickly became the major LCD TV panel suppliers in China, which also made it difficult for foreign panel makers to continue to monopolize the price of control panels.
LG Display, who is in charge of the LCD panel business, sent a written explanation to the reporter for the first time: This fine was imposed on the price monopoly of the LCD panel industry from 2001 to 2006, and will not be sold to LG Display and its major customers. The relationship between them has any effect. The company has developed a series of systems to prevent similar incidents from happening again.
In the list of fines, LG's fines amounted to 118 million yuan, Samsung's 101 million yuan, Chi Mei's 94.41 million yuan, AUO 21.89 million yuan, Zhonghua Yingguan 16.2 million yuan, Haoyu Caijing 240,000 yuan, Taiwan AUO was fined for the first time.
The above-mentioned fines include the return of illegal income and the fine. Up to now, TCL, Skyworth, Konka, Sichuan Changhong and other nine major color TV companies in China have received a refund of RMB 172 million. However, due to the small amount involved, each company has indicated that it will not have a significant impact on the current results.
Moreover, Skyworth has formed a strategic partnership with LG Display, TCL and Samsung, Hisense and Chi Mei, so the possibility of continuing to pursue the case is not significant. The National Development and Reform Commission also said that the anti-price monopoly will be further strengthened in the future.
However, some color TV companies are worried: "The shipment of OLED TV panels may gradually replace LCD TVs in the next few years, but only Samsung and LG Display have the ability to industrialize OLED panels. Be wary of Korean companies continue to manipulate prices in the field of OLED panels. The possibility."
(This article is reproduced on the Internet. The texts and opinions expressed in this article have not been confirmed by this site, nor do they represent the position of Gaogong LED. Readers need to verify the relevant content by themselves.)
In-ear Wired Earphones, they are small and comfortable and simple, fit in just about any pocket,and they provide great sound that literally goes straight into your ears,bring it on your next commute or run, or simply enjoy it in the comfort of your time.
In-ear Wired Earphones
Earbuds With Removable Cable,Earphones With Replaceable Cabl,Stereo In-Ear Earphones,In-Ear Wired Headphones
Dongguang Vowsound Electronics Co., Ltd. , https://www.vowsound.com