True Corp Backs Laws Restricting Foreign Firms

[DaiHard]

This has nothing to do with the 'national interest' & everything to do with the CP/True interest. What they want is another monopoly so they can rip off their mobile customers the same way as they do their cable subscribers.

This company acted the same way over the desire of the likes of Tesco & Big C to open large supermarkets up-country. They cited the damage to small shops, 'forgetting' that CP/7-11 has done more damage than any other company to those small traders.

Actually CP was Tesco's partner in Tesco Lotus and they are still partners in China. Now wouldn't it be interesting to delve into CPs Chinese links.

[Sphere]

Dhanin, is the CEO of Charoen Pokphand Group

"To get rich is glorious. So is helping poor farmers."

That settles it then.

The helping poor farmers afterthought is a bit over the top isn't it.

[KeyserSoze01]

More competition is needed!

Not without Thai majority ownership and management, so at the end of the day, it's business as usual.

[Yme]

This recent maneuvering and willingness to change laws at the drop of a hat, along with changes made several months ago to the arbitration laws sends a very clear and very bad message to foreign investors whether they be investing in residential or commercial projects / properties.

This is xenophobia at it's finest and adequately illustrates the fickleness of doing business - or owning any sort of property in Thailand. The laws can be changed at the stroke of a pen.

Whether this will remain in force or whether it's just a game to force Telenor to negotiate matters, run of expensive legal bills, or just to annoy are yet t be seen.

In any event, the precarious tenure any non-Thai people or companies here has been very adequately illustrated.

Perhaps they'll renovate Don Mueang and put a light rail in between it and Swampy and foreigners can proceed to Don Mueang, where the can deposit cash, empty bank accounts from a garison of ATMs, donate a pint of blood and surrender any valuable personal items before boarding the next rail car back to Swampy where their departing flight will be waiting.

[Oberkommando]

This has nothing to do with the 'national interest' & everything to do with the CP/True interest. What they want is another monopoly so they can rip off their mobile customers the same way as they do their cable subscribers.

This company acted the same way over the desire of the likes of Tesco & Big C to open large supermarkets up-country. They cited the damage to small shops, 'forgetting' that CP/7-11 has done more damage than any other company to those small traders.

Absolutely.

I use the Mom & Pop type shops around where I live now. A far more rewarding experience than dealing with the arrogant sub-80 IQ youths that staff the 7/11s and supermarkets.

Edited December 3, 2011 by Oberkommando

[pmh2009]

Well it is their country!!! So I suppose they can do what they want... I remember once there was an IBC and UBC... and when True was once owned by ORANGE... as for the HBO, CINEMAX really crummy stuff who watches these anyway!!!

Edited December 3, 2011 by pmh2009

[phetaroi]

I use the Mom & Pop type shops around where I live now. A far more rewarding experience than dealing with the arrogant sub-80 IQ youths that staff the 7/11s and supermarkets.

Yeah, right. Several years ago my Thai friend and I wandered into one of those mom and pop stores...although we entered a few seconds apart. I went into buy a few cans of Coke before going back to the condo, and the girl first said a certain price, but then "pop" told her something and the price was higher than the "first" price, and certainly higher than the average cost in Bangkok. Obviously, "pop" didn't know I lived there. I put the Cokes back on the shelf and walked out. After my friend came out he saw I was frustrated, and he said "pop" said, "He is farang, charge him more".

[mca]

I use the Mom & Pop type shops around where I live now. A far more rewarding experience than dealing with the arrogant sub-80 IQ youths that staff the 7/11s and supermarkets.

Indeed. I love playing the games of chance such as " Find the bag of Lays that's not three months out of date ", " Locate the least dusty item on the shelves " or " Pick a can of iced coffee that doesn't have lizard shit on the rim"

[Reasonableman]

1322810311[/url]' post='4886296']

Can you say "Conflict Of Interest".

True should have no say in the matter.

Its a clear statement of commercial self-interest. Where's the conflict?

[Reasonableman]

As with all monopolies, a monopolist who has gained his position through natural monopoly effects may engage in behavior that abuses his market position, which often leads to calls from consumers for government regulation. Government regulation may also come about at the request of a business hoping to enter a market otherwise dominated by a natural monopoly.

Regulatory responses:

• doing nothing
• setting legal limits on the firm's behaviour, either directly or through a regulatory agency
• setting up competition for the market (franchising)
• setting up common carrier type competition
• setting up surrogate competition ("yardstick" competition or benchmarking)
• requiring companies to be (or remain) quoted on the stock market
• public ownership

Since the 1980s there is a global trend towards utility deregulation, in which systems of competition are intended to replace regulation by specifying or limiting firms' behaviour; the telecommunications industry is a leading example.

Edited December 4, 2011 by Reasonableman

[JohnAllan]

National security? National resource? Bull****! Nationalistic sentiments, pure and simple! Presumably something to ignore - just like the land laws - when True sees a foreign investment opportunity!

[bigbamboo]

National security? National resource? Bull****! Nationalistic sentiments, pure and simple! Presumably something to ignore - just like the land laws - when True sees a foreign investment opportunity!

I suppose after the sale of Shincorp to Singapore True can play the security card. But they are quite astute. Why would any monopoly want foreign competition?

[osiboy]

Is it any surprise a Thai company the likes of True would want to continue to restrict foreign firms doing business here....they would hate to have to compete on a more level playing field and provide value and service to their customers....

Well stated.. These are my thoughts also. I have been thinking of cancelling my gold package for some time (1560thb) because of the terrible programming but have grown lazy and have accepted they are the only game in my part of town. Thanks True it's been nice knowing you. Now with the money l save I can by two bottles of over-taxed Aussie wine. Well I never, mindabenda.

1560b ???,............ OMG, .............. about 20% of a thais min wage !!,..... is there anyone in govt; here interested in giving the people a better quality of life ? , thats the same price as in the UK, ........ MADNESS !!, 4 hrs pay v 4 days pay to have sat TV ,.......... they will be raising the cost just for farang next !

[davehowden]

As with all monopolies, a monopolist who has gained his position through natural monopoly effects may engage in behavior that abuses his market position, which often leads to calls from consumers for government regulation. Government regulation may also come about at the request of a business hoping to enter a market otherwise dominated by a natural monopoly.

Regulatory responses:

• doing nothing
• setting legal limits on the firm's behaviour, either directly or through a regulatory agency
• setting up competition for the market (franchising)
• setting up common carrier type competition
• setting up surrogate competition ("yardstick" competition or benchmarking)
• requiring companies to be (or remain) quoted on the stock market
• public ownership

Since the 1980s there is a global trend towards utility deregulation, in which systems of competition are intended to replace regulation by specifying or limiting firms' behaviour; the telecommunications industry is a leading example.

I have experienced "deregulation" of the water, gas and electricty industries in the UK and seen nothing but price increases and foriegn takeovers, the cost of water and electricty here a is incredibly low, lets keep it that way, as for restrictive trade practices all 3rd world countries employ them to protect there own industries and peoples, including the USA, so why not Thailand? If we don't like it so much why not go home to whence we came?

[marquess]

As with all monopolies, a monopolist who has gained his position through natural monopoly effects may engage in behavior that abuses his market position, which often leads to calls from consumers for government regulation. Government regulation may also come about at the request of a business hoping to enter a market otherwise dominated by a natural monopoly.

Regulatory responses:

• doing nothing
• setting legal limits on the firm's behaviour, either directly or through a regulatory agency
• setting up competition for the market (franchising)
• setting up common carrier type competition
• setting up surrogate competition ("yardstick" competition or benchmarking)
• requiring companies to be (or remain) quoted on the stock market
• public ownership

Since the 1980s there is a global trend towards utility deregulation, in which systems of competition are intended to replace regulation by specifying or limiting firms' behaviour; the telecommunications industry is a leading example.

I have experienced "deregulation" of the water, gas and electricty industries in the UK and seen nothing but price increases and foriegn takeovers, the cost of water and electricty here a is incredibly low, lets keep it that way, as for restrictive trade practices all 3rd world countries employ them to protect there own industries and peoples, including the USA, so why not Thailand? If we don't like it so much why not go home to whence we came?

You can live without a phone or TV, but you might find it hard to live without water, electricity and possibly gas, these are essential public services and should remain within the public domain of ownership. There is no reason why Internet and TV services should be monopolised, let them be deregulated so to speak, the more competition the better the service and the price. I agree with your assessment of the UK essential services situation, in fact in an episode of 'Minder' during the time of the sell offs, Arthur Daley, cleverly remarked that Mrs Thatcher was pretty clever in getting people to buy what they already owned.

[phutoie2]

I use the Mom & Pop type shops around where I live now. A far more rewarding experience than dealing with the arrogant sub-80 IQ youths that staff the 7/11s and supermarkets.

Indeed, worthy of a separate topic on its own!, I recently had to wait an eternity for a toasted sandwich in a 7/11. After informing the young girls behind the counter that the equipment (toaster) would work better if plugged in, lots of giggling & solly mister, sort of made my morning.