I did not mean to imply otherwise. But if the law isn't specific to the telecoms, but any resellers, then I stand corrected, or rather AppleInsider and the Reuters article it quotes should stand corrected for wording it the way they did. Can you cite a specific reference to this Taiwanese law you described? The issue for me is that the Reuters article does not describe the law in that way, so it appears to contradict your spin.
I don't have the text of the Taiwanese law. I did business in Taiwan some years ago, and my reseller told me exactly the same
I did not mean to imply otherwise. But if the law isn't specific to the telecoms, but any resellers, then I stand corrected, or rather AppleInsider and the Reuters article it quotes should stand corrected for wording it the way they did. Can you cite a specific reference to this Taiwanese law you described? The issue for me is that the Reuters article does not describe the law in that way, so it appears to contradict your spin.
The law that Apple violated is Article 18 of Taiwan's Fair Trade Act. Third party buyers, ie the telecoms in this case, have the right to determine their own selling prices for products purchased from the manufacturer or supplier.
Other companies like Sammy and HTC were also investigated for the same illegal condition of sale and weren't found to be attempting to control prices. Apple can appeal of course and may.
This law is to protect consumers interest by fostering competition. Taiwan has one of the most competitive telco markets in the world. How's right for apple to dictate how telcos should set their price plans?
ah ok - it's a general principle not a telco/carrier specific law. Thanks
I was reading a bit more on this. So it's the Taiwanese FTC that bought the suit to court - the carriers don't appear to be involved. It's also the first time a challenge to Apples pricing model has been successfully upheld. Hmm, over to Apple to return service....
Taiwan Fair trade act Article 19 "An enterprise shall not impose restrictions on resale prices of the goods supplied to its trading counterpart for resale to a third party or to such third party for making further resale."
Carriers in Taiwan bought iPhones from Apple and resale to customers.
An enterprise shall not impose restrictions on resale prices of the goods supplied to its trading counterpart for resale to a third party or to such third party for making further resale.
Wow, so in other words, the carriers in that country have the right to do what they please with the handsets, and set their own prices, and they OWN the devices before being sold to the customer? No, doesn't work that way folks... APPLE owns the devices, as they MADE THEM, until they are purchased by their NEW owner, the customer, hence they have every right to ask certain conditions on the sale of THEIR device! Don't like? Too fucking bad, Apple should just pull out of Taiwan and see what happens next.
My thoughts exactly... Imagine if the carriers in Canada were given that kind of discretionary power, man the consumers up here would seriously be up shit creek!
But what you don't know about the carriers over here is that the subsidized pricing is the same, we don't get charged for incoming text, all our phones are unlocked, and our plans for voice and unlimited LTE is like 43 bucks, tax included. So as a consumer, I'm actually very happy, unless of course Apple was fighting to make this even cheaper, which I'm pretty sure they're not.
While we're on the topic, does Apple really still own the phones that say AT&T stocks? I really didn't know that, learnt something new. :P
I'm not sure if apple fans would be happy if they pulled out of Taiwan especially since the next most popular flagship device is made my samsung, which is sort of sad considering we should by trying to support the home team and buy HTC . Yet here I am with my iphone :P
Comments
I did not mean to imply otherwise. But if the law isn't specific to the telecoms, but any resellers, then I stand corrected, or rather AppleInsider and the Reuters article it quotes should stand corrected for wording it the way they did. Can you cite a specific reference to this Taiwanese law you described? The issue for me is that the Reuters article does not describe the law in that way, so it appears to contradict your spin.
I don't have the text of the Taiwanese law. I did business in Taiwan some years ago, and my reseller told me exactly the same
I see an unexpected price increase coming to Taiwan soon... due to an unexpected cost of doing business...
"... and de wheels on the de bus go round and round."
The law that Apple violated is Article 18 of Taiwan's Fair Trade Act. Third party buyers, ie the telecoms in this case, have the right to determine their own selling prices for products purchased from the manufacturer or supplier.
Other companies like Sammy and HTC were also investigated for the same illegal condition of sale and weren't found to be attempting to control prices. Apple can appeal of course and may.
I was reading a bit more on this.
So it's the Taiwanese FTC that bought the suit to court - the carriers don't appear to be involved.
It's also the first time a challenge to Apples pricing model has been successfully upheld.
Hmm, over to Apple to return service....
"An enterprise shall not impose restrictions on resale prices of the goods supplied to its trading counterpart for resale to a third party or to such third party for making further resale."
Carriers in Taiwan bought iPhones from Apple and resale to customers.
Taiwan Fair Trade Act Article 19
An enterprise shall not impose restrictions on resale prices of the goods supplied to its trading counterpart for resale to a third party or to such third party for making further resale.
Wow, so in other words, the carriers in that country have the right to do what they please with the handsets, and set their own prices, and they OWN the devices before being sold to the customer? No, doesn't work that way folks... APPLE owns the devices, as they MADE THEM, until they are purchased by their NEW owner, the customer, hence they have every right to ask certain conditions on the sale of THEIR device! Don't like? Too fucking bad, Apple should just pull out of Taiwan and see what happens next.
My thoughts exactly... Imagine if the carriers in Canada were given that kind of discretionary power, man the consumers up here would seriously be up shit creek!
But what you don't know about the carriers over here is that the subsidized pricing is the same, we don't get charged for incoming text, all our phones are unlocked, and our plans for voice and unlimited LTE is like 43 bucks, tax included. So as a consumer, I'm actually very happy, unless of course Apple was fighting to make this even cheaper, which I'm pretty sure they're not.
While we're on the topic, does Apple really still own the phones that say AT&T stocks? I really didn't know that, learnt something new. :P
I'm not sure if apple fans would be happy if they pulled out of Taiwan especially since the next most popular flagship device is made my samsung, which is sort of sad considering we should by trying to support the home team and buy HTC
. Yet here I am with my iphone :P