Apple 'Likely' to Face Sanctions in South Korea Over Unfair Carrier Contracts

Discussion in 'iOS Blog Discussion' started by MacRumors, Apr 9, 2018.

  1. MacRumors macrumors bot

    MacRumors

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2001
    #1
    [​IMG]


    Apple will likely face sanctions from the Korean Fair Trade Commission for unfair iPhone contracts that require local carriers to pay advertising and repair costs, reports The Korea Herald, citing industry sources.

    Apple's Korean division has been criticized for asking carriers to foot the bill for advertising costs, launch events, and iPhone repairs, leading to an investigation from the Fair Trade Commission. The Korean FTC recently agreed to impose penalties on Apple Korea and has contacted the company for an explanation before making a final decision on whether or not to impose sanctions.

    [​IMG]

    According to The Korea Herald, three Korean carriers, SKT, KT, and LG Uplus, were directed by Apple to air TV commercials promoting the iPhone 8 and the iPhone X, but were reportedly required to pay for the commercials.
    Apple Korea has been under investigation in Korea since 2016, with the Korean Federal Trade Commission conducting raids in June 2016 and November 2017. It's not clear what kind of fines the company could be facing in the country should the FTC move forward with sanctions.

    Article Link: Apple 'Likely' to Face Sanctions in South Korea Over Unfair Carrier Contracts
     
  2. Ramchi macrumors 6502

    Ramchi

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2007
    Location:
    India
    #2
    Eat only the profit, rest is footed by everyone in the earth! Nice business model
     
  3. alphaod macrumors Core

    alphaod

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2008
    Location:
    NYC
    #3
    So if you want to advertise your local franchise, the franchisee pays for their own advertising? That's pretty standard.

    Or will car dealers start asking the manufacturer to pay for their advertising too?
     
  4. wesk702 macrumors 68000

    wesk702

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2007
    Location:
    The hood
    #4
    1 Trillion, here we come.
     
  5. macfacts, Apr 9, 2018
    Last edited: Apr 9, 2018

    macfacts macrumors 68020

    macfacts

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2012
    Location:
    Cybertron
    #5
    Those local carriers want to advertise their services and phones they offer. Apple's contracts force them to make (edit: not make, show) "iPhone only commercials" and cover the cost.

    What bizaroo world do you live in where that sounds reasonable.
     
  6. genovelle macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 8, 2008
    #6
    Actually in car adds here the dealerships pay a regional ad fee to be included in manufacturer created regional ads. Nothing is stopping them from doing thier own productions but if the want to look like they are inline with the company, they pay
     
  7. deanthedev Suspended

    deanthedev

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2017
    Location:
    Vancouver
    #7
    Your username doesn’t align with your posts.

    Carriers are free to advertise all the phones and services they sell in any manner they like. Only when they advertise iPhones do they need to stick to approved Apple ads (with carrier branding at the end).

    They aren’t making commercials. They’re using pre-canned Apple spots. This is why the ads look similar, except for carrier branding. So their only costs are the airtime for the commercials.

    The wording of your post is very deceiving.
     
  8. mookc1 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2014
    #8
    Car Manufacturers already do that. Isn't that part of the 'hold back' number?
     
  9. rafark macrumors 6502a

    rafark

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2017
    #9
    In the west. It's called brand guidelines. Every company should have the right to decide how their brand is portrayed.
     
  10. WoodpeckerBaby macrumors regular

    WoodpeckerBaby

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2016
    #10
    The the gist of this is that everyone in the loop think Apple is taking too much of the pie for what they contribute.
     
  11. spyguy10709 macrumors 6502a

    spyguy10709

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2010
    Location:
    One Infinite Loop, Cupertino CA
    #11
    In a world where a carrier can choose to carry the iPhone, or not. Sounds like a mandatory minimum ad spend. Standard practice globally.

    Apple is positioning a premium product, and as a carrier you can be a partner with Apple in carrying and promoting the product, and reap the benefits -- or not. Apple isn't blocking BYOD devices from any networks globally - they're stating if you want to partner with Apple - you have to partner with Apple.

    That option is the same in the US once AT&T lost exclusivity. Verizon joined ranks immediately, but sprint and t-mobile waited - likely because of the significant buy-in (of both inventory and advertising) required. After realizing what offering only BYOD iphone plans means in the US market, the carriers partnered with Apple.

    Apple's an abusive player a fair bit - but I'm not sure how they played unfairly here....
     
  12. Tivoli_ macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2017
    #12
    I don't know what the fuss is about because whether the carrier pays for the ads or Apple does, all costs will be part of the companies doing business, and it will always, at the end, be paid by the consumers.
     
  13. Mousse macrumors 68000

    Mousse

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2008
    Location:
    Flea Bottom, King's Landing
    #13
    I see nothing wrong with having the carrier pay for advertising and events, but making them pay for phone repair?
     
  14. theheadguy macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2005
    Location:
    california
    #14
    You think they run a franchise or are you purposefully using a poor example?
     
  15. gnasher729 macrumors P6

    gnasher729

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2005
    #15
    When you sell an iPhone, you pay money to Apple for the phone, you pay whatever cost is part of contract, and you get the money the consumer pays. The difference is your profit. How the money is distributed between the cost of the phone and other costs is up to negotiations.
    --- Post Merged, Apr 9, 2018 ---
    Well, what do they really contribute other than the iPhone? Sellers are free to sell iPhones or to not sell them. As long as Apple finds sellers willing to sell under the current terms, the sellers will have to accept those terms. If not, Apple has to offer better terms, or sell the phones themselves.
     
  16. Brandhouse macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2014
    #16
    I don't see the fuss over the advertising and asking carriers to pay for the TVC spots. Paying the repairs is a different thing.
     
  17. TheColtr macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2014
    Location:
    California
    #17
    South Korea? The home of Samsung? The country with the corrupt government? The country that is run by Samsung?

    Who woulda thunk it?
     
  18. kdarling, Apr 9, 2018
    Last edited: Apr 9, 2018

    kdarling macrumors demi-god

    kdarling

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2007
    Location:
    First university coding class = 47 years ago
    #18
    :D

    Says a guy with California in his signature, home of the few court wins Apple managed to get with patents that were quickly invalidated in other countries.

    Accusations of hometown prejudice can be made all over the world.
     
  19. Solomani macrumors 68040

    Solomani

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2012
    Location:
    Alberto, Canado
    #19
    I'm surprised Samsung hasn't already run Apple out of town. It's like Samsung is already the local sheriff, judge, and jury. So many of SK's Parliament members are under Samsung pay, no secret there. Much in the same way that American Senators have been "bought out" by powerful American lobbies.
     
  20. gnasher729 macrumors P6

    gnasher729

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2005
    #20
    Well, from time to time the government there sticks some Samsung executives in jail, so that probably slows them down.
     
  21. deanthedev Suspended

    deanthedev

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2017
    Location:
    Vancouver
    #21
    Please. What he said is true. Samsung has had not one, but two CEOs sentenced to prison. Along with dozens of other executives over the years. Can you name any Apple CEOs or executives that have gone to prison (and then released much earlier than they should have)?

    Whether the poster lives in California is irrelevant, so why did you bother to bring it up?
     
  22. justperry macrumors G3

    justperry

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2007
    Location:
    In the core of a black hole.
    #22
    You missed the smiley, @kdarling is correct, as in, what does @TheColtr actually bring up, it has nothing to do with the issue at hand, so he did the same.
     
  23. deanthedev Suspended

    deanthedev

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2017
    Location:
    Vancouver
    #23
    South Korea being protectionist isn’t relevant to a foreign company possibly getting sanctions?
     
  24. kdarling, Apr 10, 2018
    Last edited: Apr 10, 2018

    kdarling macrumors demi-god

    kdarling

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2007
    Location:
    First university coding class = 47 years ago
    #24
    That's a good thing, as it shows that South Korea is going through a dismantling of old ways. Paying a friend of a friend to help you with government red tape is common all over the planet. In the US we still do it, but semi-hide it by hiring people into civilian lucrative jobs afterwards.

    In any case, it has zero to do with Apple and its carrier contracts.

    That might just show that the US still protects Apple execs even more than Korea used to protect Samsung execs.

    Some think Jobs should've gotten jail time for his stock scandal, same as other less fortunate execs of smaller companies. Others think he should've gone to trial for his secretive anti-poaching and other anti-trust plots.

    But, just like used to happen with Samsung execs, Jobs was deemed too valuable to charge with anything. There's very little difference in the types of influence going on in both cases. Well, except Samsung actually is critical to South Korea's economy and defense, unlike Apple.
     
  25. justperry macrumors G3

    justperry

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2007
    Location:
    In the core of a black hole.
    #25
    The topic/issue is carrier contract, it has nothing to do with what you said/say.
     

Share This Page