According to media reports, on May 31, the Chinese anti-monopoly agencies dispatched several working groups to carry out 'raid investigations' and on-site forensics for the offices of Samsung, Hynix, and Micron in Beijing, Shanghai, and Shenzhen, marking China 3. Antitrust agencies formally launched investigations on three companies.
In response, the relevant person in charge of the Samsung China company confirmed the occurrence of this incident.
Most of the anti-monopoly investigations are based on reports. All preliminary investigations must have preliminary evidence. At present, investigations and raid investigations have already been initiated, indicating that there has been some evidence before. 'Director of Beijing Daxiao Law Firm Lin Wei told the Economic Observer Online.
This was not the origin of the incident. Six months before this raid survey, at the end of December 2017, Chinese mobile phone manufacturers reported Samsung Electronics to the National Development and Reform Commission due to rising memory prices and poor supply. Subsequently, the NDRC opened the investigation. Lin Wei’s observation of the economy According to network analysis, the whistleblower may include not only Chinese mobile phone manufacturers, but also similar competitors.
At the end of last year, the Development and Reform Commission first summoned the responsible person of the Samsung Electronics China regional market to understand the situation. In May of this year, the Chinese anti-trust agency interviewed the world's third largest storage company, Micron, and whether it was jointly operated by Samsung Electronics, SK Hynix, and Micron America. DRAM price launch investigation.
The continuous increase in the price of DRAM (memory chip) is an unreasonable market condition. Generally, the price fluctuation cycle is half a year or three quarters. The price rise will generally fall in three quarters. The peaks and troughs are the normal law, that is, supply falls short of demand. Rising – Overcapacity – Prices have fallen, but prices have continued to rise in the two years from 2016 to the present and there are clear signs of manipulation. “Yan Sunyan, dean of the First Mobile Phone Academy, told the Economic Observer Online.
This reporter learned that last year, Samsung Electronics, SK hynix, and Micron of the United States accounted for 96% of the total global DRAM market share. In fiscal year 2017, the revenues of the semiconductor operations of the three companies were US$ 25.386 billion and US$ 8.908 billion, respectively. , $ 103.88 billion, a total of $ 44.68 billion, an increase of 39.16% over the previous fiscal year's $ 32.1 billion.
In the second half of 2016, DRAM prices started to rise continuously. In April and May of this year, a US consumer sue lawsuits such as Samsung Electronics, SK hynix, and American Micron to artificially control retail prices. People said that the actions of the above three companies led to 4G memory prices. From July 1, 2016 to February 1, 2018, the price of DRAM chips increased by 130%.
According to a report released by the China Institute of Information and Communications under the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology on April 9, the shipment of domestic mobile phone brands has plummeted by nearly 28%. This is the data for the first quarter of this year (January to March). Not only that, China’s smartphones. Shipments dropped by 26.1% year-on-year. Not only that, China's mobile phone shipments have entered a decline in 2017.
Under the background of declining mobile phone shipments across the entire Chinese market, China imported storage chips of 88.921 billion U.S. dollars in 2017, an increase of 39.56% year-on-year to US$637.14 billion in 2016.
Sun Yanxi told the Economic Observer Online that the investigation by China’s anti-monopoly agencies was at the gateway to the trade war between China and the United States. Samsung Electronics and SK hynix were both South Korean companies, while Micron was an American company. China’s move was very clever.
At the same time, it is worth noting that if there is a monopoly of prices, domestically, according to the "Anti-Monopoly Law" and "Anti-monopoly Regulations," if we consider the behavior of the operators from 2016 to the present, we will use 2016-2017. The sales are punished, and the three companies will face a fine of 80-80 billion U.S. dollars.