Tag: Competition

Singapore – The Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) has released a statement on the Allianz-Income Insurance deal following a recent parliamentary query on whether the organisation will be working alongside the Competition and Consumer Commission of Singapore (CCCS) regarding the acquisition deal. It is worth noting that this follows a slew of public outcry regarding the acquisition, stating how it will ‘commercialise’ a brand that Singaporeans trust in the insurance space.

The response, made by Chee Hong Tat, Minister for Transport and Second Minister for Finance, and Board Member of MAS, noted that MAS’ primary role as regulator is to promote a sound and progressive financial sector. For the insurance sector, they want insurers to manage their risks well so that policyholders are assured that their long-term policies are safe and will be adequately protected.

Moreover, Tat noted that when MAS assesses the application for a change in substantial shareholder in an insurer, they will consider a range of criteria, in particular, the applicant’s track record, financial soundness, reputation, as well as fitness and propriety.

“MAS had reviewed and was satisfied with the relevant processes Income’s Board had put in place to address conflicts of interest with respect to the appointment of its financial advisor on this proposed deal, and the decision to enter into the deal with Allianz. In the appointment of the financial advisor for the deal, the Chairman of Income’s Board had recused himself. The decision to enter into the deal was made by the Board, comprising a majority of independent directors,” he stated.

Moreover, Tat also highlighted that fostering a competitive insurance market with financially strong insurers is a key part of MAS’ approach to ensuring that insurers operate sustainably and serve the public well. They believe that a competitive market is the most effective way to meet the insurance needs of Singaporeans, and facilitate access to affordable insurance options and good service over the longer term.

“The insurance market in Singapore is highly competitive. There are currently more than 50 direct insurers in Singapore offering a wide range of insurance products to meet the insurance needs of individuals and businesses. In both life and general insurance, Income has market shares of less than 10% based on written premium. For many insurance products, Income does not always offer the lowest prices compared to other insurers,” he remarked.

Lastly, he stated that he understands the public concerns and even those in the government, assuring them that MAS has regulatory requirements and guidance in place for insurers to maintain sufficient capital reserves, put in place robust governance and risk management frameworks, and also to treat their customers fairly.

“Should the proposed deal be approved, there will be no change to the terms and conditions of existing insurance contracts. MAS expects Income to fulfil its obligations to all policyholders under the terms of its existing insurance contracts. I note that Allianz has also publicly stated its intent for Income to continue to honour the terms of the existing policies underwritten by Income and ensure a seamless transition with no impact to existing policyholders. MAS will hold Income and Allianz to account to these commitments”, he stated.

Jakarta, Indonesia – Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha (KPPU), the country’s antitrust agency has stated that Shopee has violated a monopoly rule for its courier service in Indonesia. It is worth mentioning that Shopee operates in the country through two local subsidiaries: PT Shopee International Indonesia and PT Nusantara Ekspres Kilat.

KPPU had accused Shopee’s local subsidiary of breaking anti-competition regulations by urging customers to use particular delivery firms, one of which had a Shopee Indonesia official on its board of directors.

The agency also noted that Shopee has agreed to make adjustments to its operating practices following a submission on change of behaviour presented to the agency on June 20. KPPU has acknowledged Shopee’s alleged violation of said ruling with talks ongoing on enforcing lawful conditions and behaviours by the company to operate locally.

It is also worth noting that KPPU also recently investigated antitrust violations by rival e-commerce platform Lazada who also operates in Indonesia.

Hong Kong – Hong Kong’s association for public relations and communications professionals, PRHK, has announced the launch of its 2023 PR Young Lions Competition. The competition is open to young professionals in Hong Kong aged 30 and below.

The competition will select a winning team of two to represent Hong Kong at the Global Young Lions Competition which will take place during the Cannes International Festival of Creativity in June. This will be the first competition to take place in person at Cannes in 3 years. 

PR Young Lions Competition will occur from 14 to 15 April this year. The format will follow that of the global Young Lions competition, where entrants will be asked to devise a campaign in response to a brief in 24 hours using their creative and strategic thinking. 

The competition brief will be set in partnership with a local NGO to be revealed at the competition. Criteria include creativity (40%), strategy and insight (30%), tactics and execution (20%), and relevance to the brief (10%)

The winning team will be granted their Cannes Lions International Festival of Creativity experience that includes sponsorship on travel, accommodations and passes in-person in June 2023.

Previously, the association launched a 27-page toolkit to help promote work-life balance amongst industry teams.

Manila, Philippines – The Philippine telecommunications industry is facing new challenges, as telco giant Globe Telecom and new player DITO have exchanged public statements regarding their business operations and performance.

It first started with DITO, who filed two complaints at the Philippine Competition Commission (PCC) against Globe Telecom and Smart Communications for their competitive business behaviour, more specifically during their interconnection agreement.

Said interconnection agreements allow DITO users to send texts and make calls to users of PLDT’s Smart and Globe.

“It has become very difficult for our subscribers to interconnect with Globe and Smart,” said Adel Tamano, chief administrative officer at DITO through CNN Philippines.

Meanwhile, the PCC has acknowledged DITO’s complaints, stating that interconnection is an essential component of the telecommunications industry as it allows interoperability and exchange of calls, SMS, and other information from one network to another.

Johannes R. Bernabe, the OIC chairperson at the Philippine Competition Commission, said, “Our Competition Enforcement Office (CEO) is now evaluating the merits of Dito’s complaints. The Commission has 10 days within which to decide whether or not to give due course to the complaint. If given due course, our CEO will proceed to investigate the charges and if it subsequently finds sufficient basis, file with the Commission en banc a Statement of Objections against the allegedly erring entities.”

In response, Globe Telecom has released a statement, asking the country’s National Telecommunications Commission (NTC) to require DITO to pay up to PHP622m in interconnection penalties.

According to Globe’s statement, around 1,000 fraudulent calls– identified as international in origin but masked as local calls– are allowed to pass through DITO’s network to Globe users every day, a clear violation of interconnection deals.

“Clearly, DITO has not only failed to compensate Globe, but it also has not taken any serious actions to curtail bypass activities emanating from its network and terminating in Globe’s. Indeed, these bypass activities have not waned but have in fact continuously increased over the said period. DITO’s twin failures to check these bypass activities and pay Globe what it is justly due have worked on a continuing serious prejudice against Globe,” the telco said.

Globe and DITO have signed an interconnection agreement in February 2021 which covers domestic mobile calls and SMS enabling Globe’s customers to make mobile calls, send SMS with DITO Telecommunity’s customers without additional charges.

Sydney, Australia – The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) has released a report today that has raised concerns on the state of the advertising technology space in Australia, specifically tech giant Google’s dominance of the sector, which may potentially harm advertisers and publishers.

According to their report inquiry, Google has a dominant position in key parts of the adtech supply chain and estimates that more than 90% of ad impressions traded via the adtech supply chain passed through at least one Google service in 2020.

It is estimated that in Australia, at least 27% of advertiser spend on ads sold via the adtech supply chain was retained by adtech providers in 2020.

Furthermore, the report finds that Google has used its position to preference its own services and shield them from competition. For example, Google prevents rival adtech services from accessing ads on YouTube, providing its own adtech services with an important advantage. In addition, Google has also refused to participate in publisher-led header bidding, an industry innovation aimed at increasing competition for publishers’ inventory, and previously allowed its services to have a ‘last look’ opportunity to outbid rivals.

“Google has used its vertically integrated position to operate its adtech services in a way that has, over time, led to a less competitive adtech industry. This conduct has helped Google to establish and entrench its dominant position in the adtech supply chain,” Rod Sims, chair at ACCC, said.

Part of the tech giant’s dominance in the adtech sector are key acquisitions of several companies such as DoubleClick in 2007, AdMob in 2009, as well as YouTube in 2006. In addition, factors such as access to consumer and other data, access to exclusive inventory and integration across its adtech services cemented their dominance in the sector.

“Google’s activities across the supply chain also mean that, in a single transaction, Google can act on behalf of both the advertiser (the buyer) and the publisher (the seller) and operate the ad exchange connecting these two parties. As the interests of these parties do not align, this creates conflicts of interest for Google which can harm both advertisers and publishers,” Sims stated.

He added that the ACCC is concerned with Google’s adtech dominance, noting that the lack of competition has likely led to higher adtech fees. He further stated that an inefficient adtech industry means higher costs for both publishers and advertisers, which is likely to reduce the quality or quantity of online content and ultimately results in consumers paying more for advertised goods.

“The ACCC is considering specific allegations against Google under existing competition laws. However new regulatory solutions are needed to address Google’s dominance and to restore competition to the adtech sector for the benefit of businesses and consumers. We recommend rules be considered to manage conflicts of interest, prevent anti-competitive self-preferencing, and ensure rival adtech providers can compete on their merits,” Sims continued.

They have also noted that many of the concerns they identified in the adtech supply chain are similar to concerns in other digital platform markets, such as online search, social media, and app marketplaces. These markets are also dominated by one or two key providers, which benefit from vertical integration, leading to significant competition concerns. In many cases, these are compounded by a lack of transparency.

“We have identified systemic competition concerns relating to conduct over many years and multiple adtech services, including conduct that harms rivals. Investigation and enforcement proceedings under general competition laws are not well suited to deal with these sorts of broad concerns, and can take too long if anti-competitive harm is to be prevented,” Sims concluded.

Google has access to a large volume and range of first-party data gathered through its customer-facing services, such as Search, Maps, and YouTube. The extent to which Google uses its first-party data to advantage its adtech businesses is not clear and is a source of confusion among industry stakeholders.

The report also recommends that under the proposed new sector-specific rules, the ACCC be given the power to develop and implement special measures to address competition issues caused by an adtech provider’s data advantage, such as data separation or data access requirements to address the competition risks that may arise from the use of first-party data.