Tweet
A1+
«ARMENTEL» WAS PUNISHED FOR LOW TARIFFS
07:33 pm 10 March, 2006
For the last eight years «ArmenTel» was never
punished for high tariffs. But today the Economic
Competition Defense State Committee punished the
company for establishing low tariffs.
During the Committee sitting the claimant was
«Gh-Telecom», while the respondent was `ArmenTel'. The
respondent was accused of giving all its subscribers a
number of free minutes as bonus which they can use
until April.
`VIvaCell' complained that with this step ArmenTel
created anti-competition conditions. `VivaCell'
claimed that `ArmenTel' made a discount of 95% as a
result of which `VivaCell' was deprived of part of its
income and subscribers. «ArmenTel» proved with
grounded economic calculations that during a year they
made only a discount of 20% the possibility of which
«VivaCell» has too. But the Committee did not take
into account the counter facts of «ArmenTel».
By the final decision of the committee the Company was
fined by 1% of their whole income for the year 2005.
The respondent did not clear out whether they will
appeal the decision or not.
«ARMENTEL» WAS PUNISHED FOR LOW TARIFFS
07:33 pm 10 March, 2006
For the last eight years «ArmenTel» was never
punished for high tariffs. But today the Economic
Competition Defense State Committee punished the
company for establishing low tariffs.
During the Committee sitting the claimant was
«Gh-Telecom», while the respondent was `ArmenTel'. The
respondent was accused of giving all its subscribers a
number of free minutes as bonus which they can use
until April.
`VIvaCell' complained that with this step ArmenTel
created anti-competition conditions. `VivaCell'
claimed that `ArmenTel' made a discount of 95% as a
result of which `VivaCell' was deprived of part of its
income and subscribers. «ArmenTel» proved with
grounded economic calculations that during a year they
made only a discount of 20% the possibility of which
«VivaCell» has too. But the Committee did not take
into account the counter facts of «ArmenTel».
By the final decision of the committee the Company was
fined by 1% of their whole income for the year 2005.
The respondent did not clear out whether they will
appeal the decision or not.