It is said that "brothers are jealous of the wall and resist foreign aggression"
It means that although brothers have differences, they can unite to deal with external aggression
But this sentence is exactly the opposite when used in the domestic communications industry
Now it is The troubled times in the domestic communications industry
Internet giants are eyeing OTT, always thinking about OTT, and completely channelizing operators
And small and medium-sized players in the industry chain are also looking around, trying to steal a piece of meat
The situation faced by telecom operators is actually very tragic.
However, what is even more fierce is the struggle within the industry.
The four major operators, perhaps plus the towers, are like several large meat grinders
As long as they run into each other, it will be a hand-to-hand fight
until the death!
Recently, a super large order worth 550 million yuan has attracted attention both inside and outside the industry.
htmlWhat is the concept of a 1.55 billion yuan project?
Let’s put it this way. In the first half of the year, the four major operators signed a total of 15,032 government and enterprise informatization projects, with a total project value of 35 billion yuan, and the average value of a single project was only 2.33 million yuan.
Taking these large orders of 550 million yuan is equivalent to winning 200 ordinary conventional projects.
Maybe a provincial company has almost completed its one-year target.
And the reason why this project attracts attention is not only The project amount is huge
and the bidding process is tortuous, and there is also a life-and-death "fighting" between brothers.
Let's find out the specific details:
On March 1, 2022, Henan Provincial Department of Natural Resources released the "Henan Provincial Department of Natural Resources" "Sky Eye" System County (City, District) Video Surveillance Service Project" Competitive Consultation Announcement, with a budget of 550 million yuan.
The specific project requirements are:
fully integrate and utilize existing video surveillance resources and build new cameras in blank areas of surveillance across the province to achieve full provincial coverage of video surveillance and ensure real-time discovery of various violations of laws and regulations and emergencies.
requires the supplier to be responsible for the construction, installation, debugging, operation and maintenance of cameras, video storage, aggregation and transmission, etc., and to provide the purchaser with video surveillance services that meet the requirements.
It is estimated that this project will require the purchase of video surveillance services provided by approximately 23,000 new cameras in the province.
The project itself is a traditional large-scale security project
Although the amount is huge, most of it is used to purchase equipment, and the overall profit margin is actually not high
But operators may not necessarily want profits, but revenue may be what they are more concerned about
As a result, the project attracted the participation of four brothers, China Mobile, Telecom, , China Unicom, and China Tower, to participate in the bidding.
The final result was announced. On March 15, 2021, the transaction results were announced, and China Mobile Communications Group Henan Co., Ltd. won the bid. The winning bid amount of
is: 6,576 yuan/road/year, with a total price of 453,744,000 yuan (454 million yuan).
China Mobile was naturally happy to win such a big order.
But not long after being happy, complaints came! Arrived as promised!
On July 13, 2022, the Henan Provincial Department of Finance released 4 complaint handling results.
The complainants are China Unicom Digital Technology Co., Ltd. Henan Branch, China Telecom Group Co., Ltd. Henan Branch, China Tower Co., Ltd. Henan Branch, China United Network Communications Co., Ltd. Henan Branch .
This means that China Telecom, China Unicom and China Tower have all launched complaints
and even China Unicom has also launched complaints in two identities at the same time!
What are they complaining about? Let’s look at them one by one -
Unicom Digital’s complaint is as follows:
1. The procurement documents are biased against China Mobile Communications Group Henan Co., Ltd. and are exclusive to other suppliers.
2. There are major loopholes in the procurement documents, which may not achieve the goal of "full provincial coverage of video surveillance" for this project.
3. The performance provided by the supplier China Mobile Communications Group Henan Co., Ltd. has not gone through the government procurement bidding process and is a performance case contract obtained through illegal channels and abnormal channels.
4. The bid evaluation results are not transparent, and the disclosure information of the transaction results is incomplete.
ruling result: complaint is invalid or not established. Complaint dismissed.
China Telecom complained as follows:
1, the budget of this project is too low, which may cause suppliers to participate in bidding below cost price, which will inevitably lead to a series of quality problems in the subsequent projects.
2. The procurement documents for this project do not provide detailed information about the tower locations, and the supplier cannot estimate the specific cost and construction time.
3, this project construction cycle is not realistic and obviously unreasonable, which will lead to project quality problems in the future.
4. The setting of relevant technical indicators in the procurement documents of this project lacks scientific basis. 5. This project is a government information system project. The project should implement a supervision system, but there is a lack of supervision in the project implementation process.
Ruling result: The complaint is invalid or not established. Complaint dismissed.
The complaint content of China Tower is as follows:
1. This project did not go through a scientific budget before bidding, and the bidding price was lower than the cost, which brought risks to the later implementation of the project and the service quality standards. 2. There are serious loopholes in the description of the construction quantities of this project, which seriously affects the fairness and impartiality of competitive negotiations among potential bidders. 3. This project should disclose procurement intentions 30 days in advance.
Ruling result: The complaint is invalid or not established. Complaint dismissed.
Henan Unicom's complaint content is as follows:
1. The procurement documents are biased towards China Mobile Communications Group Henan Co., Ltd. and are exclusive to other suppliers.
2. The budget of this project is too low and the budget preparation lacks scientific basis, which leads the suppliers to participate in the bidding with unreasonable quotations below the cost, which may lead to subsequent quality problems in the project.
3. The content regarding the scoring method in the procurement documents is unclear.
4. The procurement documents do not provide project location information, and the supplier cannot estimate the cost and project implementation time.
5. This project lacks a project proposal, feasibility study report and preliminary design.
6. This procurement did not disclose government procurement intentions in advance as required.
Ruling result: The complaint is invalid or not established. Complaint dismissed.
Judging from the complaints from the above-mentioned companies,
is really complaining for the sake of complaining, which is purely unreasonable.
The project budget is too low. You don’t have to participate in the bidding. If you participate in the bidding, others will win the bid with a lower price than you.
You jump out. Said, the budget is too small, someone won the bid at a low price
The law does give you the right to question and complain, but isn't this just making trouble?
It stands to reason that these four companies have a close relationship.
China Mobile, China Telecom and China Unicom are shareholders of the tower, and are also the parties to the tower.
China Mobile and China Telecom are shareholders of China Unicom.
China Telecom and China Unicom are allies of joint construction and sharing.
China Mobile and China Telecom They are brothers from the same family.
Not long ago, the chairman of the three major operators went on the same stage to call on the entire industry to jointly safeguard the value of the industry.
But behind the scenes, there is endless internal fighting. How to maintain the value of the industry?
Of course, this does not mean that the winning bid is clean and noble. For example, for a project that requires the purchase of a large number of monitoring equipment, its quotation is nearly 20% lower than the budget. Is this quotation reasonable?
When can the communications industry return to healthy competition? !
3. The performance provided by the supplier China Mobile Communications Group Henan Co., Ltd. has not gone through the government procurement bidding process and is a performance case contract obtained through illegal channels and abnormal channels.
4. The bid evaluation results are not transparent, and the disclosure information of the transaction results is incomplete.
ruling result: complaint is invalid or not established. Complaint dismissed.
China Telecom complained as follows:
1, the budget of this project is too low, which may cause suppliers to participate in bidding below cost price, which will inevitably lead to a series of quality problems in the subsequent projects.
2. The procurement documents for this project do not provide detailed information about the tower locations, and the supplier cannot estimate the specific cost and construction time.
3, this project construction cycle is not realistic and obviously unreasonable, which will lead to project quality problems in the future.
4. The setting of relevant technical indicators in the procurement documents of this project lacks scientific basis. 5. This project is a government information system project. The project should implement a supervision system, but there is a lack of supervision in the project implementation process.
Ruling result: The complaint is invalid or not established. Complaint dismissed.
The complaint content of China Tower is as follows:
1. This project did not go through a scientific budget before bidding, and the bidding price was lower than the cost, which brought risks to the later implementation of the project and the service quality standards. 2. There are serious loopholes in the description of the construction quantities of this project, which seriously affects the fairness and impartiality of competitive negotiations among potential bidders. 3. This project should disclose procurement intentions 30 days in advance.
Ruling result: The complaint is invalid or not established. Complaint dismissed.
Henan Unicom's complaint content is as follows:
1. The procurement documents are biased towards China Mobile Communications Group Henan Co., Ltd. and are exclusive to other suppliers.
2. The budget of this project is too low and the budget preparation lacks scientific basis, which leads the suppliers to participate in the bidding with unreasonable quotations below the cost, which may lead to subsequent quality problems in the project.
3. The content regarding the scoring method in the procurement documents is unclear.
4. The procurement documents do not provide project location information, and the supplier cannot estimate the cost and project implementation time.
5. This project lacks a project proposal, feasibility study report and preliminary design.
6. This procurement did not disclose government procurement intentions in advance as required.
Ruling result: The complaint is invalid or not established. Complaint dismissed.
Judging from the complaints from the above-mentioned companies,
is really complaining for the sake of complaining, which is purely unreasonable.
The project budget is too low. You don’t have to participate in the bidding. If you participate in the bidding, others will win the bid with a lower price than you.
You jump out. Said, the budget is too small, someone won the bid at a low price
The law does give you the right to question and complain, but isn't this just making trouble?
It stands to reason that these four companies have a close relationship.
China Mobile, China Telecom and China Unicom are shareholders of the tower, and are also the parties to the tower.
China Mobile and China Telecom are shareholders of China Unicom.
China Telecom and China Unicom are allies of joint construction and sharing.
China Mobile and China Telecom They are brothers from the same family.
Not long ago, the chairman of the three major operators went on the same stage to call on the entire industry to jointly safeguard the value of the industry.
But behind the scenes, there is endless internal fighting. How to maintain the value of the industry?
Of course, this does not mean that the winning bid is clean and noble. For example, for a project that requires the purchase of a large number of monitoring equipment, its quotation is nearly 20% lower than the budget. Is this quotation reasonable?
When can the communications industry return to healthy competition? !
