Color TV companies compete for monopoly into farce

An anti-monopoly fine led to the game of interest of TV companies.

At the beginning of January, China issued the first fine for the price monopoly of foreign companies. South Korea's Samsung, LG and other six major international panel makers have monopolized the prices of LCD panels and were subject to economic sanctions of 353 million yuan from the National Development and Reform Commission. Among them, 172 million yuan should be returned to domestic color TV companies that are deeply troubled by monopoly.

However, this anti-monopoly "cake" that should have been sweet has now become a magnifying glass that reveals the interest game among color TV companies.

Sudden burst of news cited color companies panic

Since Samsung and other companies were fined, the refund distribution incident has been twisted but has not subsided.

On January 7, the National Development and Reform Commission stated that the anti-monopoly refund had been completed and China's color TV companies had a beautiful anti-monopoly victory. However, the voice of the Development and Reform Commission did not end, there are color television companies broke the news that they "have not got a penny."

Originally, the refund was not returned to the color TV companies and was completely withheld by the China Video Association (hereinafter referred to as China Video) and Shenzhen China Cailian Technology Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as China Cailian). The exposure of this news instantly caused the outside world to question the issue of refunds being intercepted by China Video and China Caidian. Monopoly punishment has become a tool for industry associations to gain private profits and to use the opportunity to collect money.

However, when public opinion pointed to spearheads for the "rejection" of China TV and China Lottery Co., Ltd. for refunds of color TV panels, the attitude of the company that had retained the funds was reversed 180 degrees.

On January 10, nine companies, including TCL and Konka, jointly issued a statement, emphasizing that all refunds were accepted by the company's "voluntarily" commissioned CUP, but not by industry associations.

The strange attitude before and after, so that outsiders can not understand the flaws.

However, an electronics industry analyst, who did not want to be named, told the reporters at the weekend of the rule of law that the response was so rapid that the status quo of listed color enterprises in the past few years can be seen. Most of the color enterprises are already no longer in sight. Of the nine color enterprises, Sichuan Changhong's net profit in the first three quarters of last year fell by 27.03% year-on-year, and only realized profit of 200 million yuan; while TCL Group achieved a net profit of 487 million yuan in the first three quarters of last year. The performance also fell by more than 40% over the same period. The fierce competition in the smart TV market makes the listed color enterprises frightened, and is extremely sensitive to fluctuations in stock prices.

The outbreak of this refund incident has caused many investors to worry that the refund will be intercepted and they will not be able to get into the accounts of listed companies in a timely manner, which will affect the current performance of the company. Based on a rough calculation, the average company’s share of the total amount has reached more than 1900 million yuan. For some color enterprises, this amount can account for 10% or more of the company's net profit, which has a great impact on the annual results. The above analysts believe that.

However, Mr. Wang, a professional accountant, told the Legal Weekend Weekend that payments will not be credited for one day and refunds cannot be incorporated into the financial statements of listed companies.

This means that the financial status of listed companies will indeed be affected. In order to stabilize the stock price and the industry’s confidence, it is indeed wise for nine companies to openly declare their position to expedite this refund event as soon as possible.

Wall fires originate from disagreements

However, the incident itself has not been taken over.

China Caicai, one of the protagonists of the incident, is itself a registered company limited by shares and its shareholders are the nine color TV companies that made the statement. When the China Caicai Co. was established six years ago, Haier, Changhong, Xiamen Overseas Chinese, TCL, Konka, Skyworth contributed 11.5%, and 11% of Hisense, Shanghai Yidian and Jiangsu Xinke each contributed 10%. Therefore, a refund of 172 million yuan was placed under the China Lottery Link, which was actually used and dominated by nine TV companies.

That being the case, why did companies fail to get their share of the news and hit their own family? The reporter then sought confirmation of the relevant companies, but the answers received tend to be uniform.

“Which department you interviewed casually will have the same calibre. It is not to make too many comments on this matter and support the decision of the association.” Internal staff of Xiamen Overseas Chinese Electronics Co., Ltd. revealed to the reporters on the rule of law over the weekend.

The staff of Konka, Skyworth and other manufacturers all said that they have not received this news yet and it is unclear whether the refund has been completed.

The company's indifference has made the incident even more rampant.

A management staff of Xiamen Overseas Chinese Company who participated in a discussion meeting with the company on the issue of refund distribution revealed that, in fact, the refund was eventually applied to the China Caicai Union account. This company not only knew but also reached a consensus. However, there was a disagreement between the companies on how to divide the money. At the time, the video showed that 50% of the association retained and 50% returned to the damaged company. However, no consensus was reached in the end. Some companies think that they should make up for their losses over the years, and some companies think that money should be put in a unified management of industry associations. This disagreement is the fundamental contradiction that exposes this incident.

In the face of disagreements, Wu Xiaoyu, general manager of Konka Shanghai Branch, believes that the fine is actually very easy to allocate. Six companies have sold a total of 5.146 million LCD panels in China, as long as they check the shipment of each company. The NDRC provides a list, which can be allocated according to the proportion of shares. Even if a company intends to leave part of the fine as a fund, it should be decided by the company itself, instead of taking measures by the association unilaterally and without consultation.

In this regard, experts from the State Anti-Monopoly Expert Committee, Jianzhong Shi, believe that in cases where the number of illegal companies and victimized enterprises is small or even single, the victimized enterprises can independently receive refunds from each illegal company. However, in the case of a large number of illegal enterprises and victimized enterprises, it is also possible that a victim company commissions an agency to receive refunds first, and then distribute them again.

Reliance on associations is not the ultimate way out

In fact, when the NDRC issued this anti-monopoly fine, many people in the industry suddenly realized that the Chinese color TV industry that once boasted was not as glamorous as we had imagined. With the lack of core technologies, color TV companies have made huge profits.

This refund of 172 million yuan will not solve the fundamental problem for financial giants of domestic color TV companies.

After years of fierce competition, there are only a dozen remaining domestic brands that are currently competitive in the Chinese color TV market. Among them, only TCL has the upstream LCD panel production capability. Others, such as Hisense, Skyworth, Konka, Haier, and most other domestic color TV brands that do not have upstream LCD panels, are completely in the desperate state of panel makers.

In the current situation where there is no independent intellectual property product and no core technology patent, the Commission and Quoting has become the only way to go. Although from a logical point of view, the panel companies raise the prices, the cost of color TV companies will inevitably be reflected in the products, but in the past decade, the domestic color TV manufacturers still cling to impetuous price wars, advertising campaigns and concept wars, but they are unwilling After investing capital in long-term projects such as LCD panels that may take years to come to fruition, the aforementioned industry analysts told the Rule of Law Weekend reporter.

For TV companies that have become more profitable and hungry, they eventually broke out in the face of a rare anti-monopoly refund “cake”. Wu Xiaoyu told the reporter for the rule of law over the weekend that the anti-monopoly refund would have been a big event, but in the end it has caused our own civil strife, and good things have become a game of greediness and cheapness.

The China Video Association announced that “the use of this money in a unified way, is more conducive to the industry's long-term development,” but since the Development and Reform Commission sanctioned Samsung and other companies to refund color TV companies, then the compensation can only be domestic TV companies, All unauthorized misappropriation should be considered illegal. Even if a company has the intention of using a refund to centralize its use, it must be negotiated after the reimbursement process is completed, rather than sloppy decisions at the time of disagreement. The above industry analysts questioned.