China's three major telecom companies have doubled down on the wireline broadband business, as they look to offset declines in landline services while leveraging the government's Internet Plus policy, which aims to speed up the adoption of broadband services via improved broadband speeds and lower pricing. The three largest players - China Telecom ( CHA ), China Unicom ( CHU ) and China Mobile ( CHL ) - together control more than 90% of the market. Below we take a look at how they fared over the first nine months of 2016.
- China Mobile added about 19 million new subscribers (65% share of the net adds for tier-1 carriers) during the 9 month period. While the carrier was a relatively late entrant into the wireline broadband space (it ramped up operations only in 2015, post its acquisition of telecoms operator TieTong), it has been adding customers at a rapid clip, driven by competitive pricing as well as scope for providing bundled services to its 840 million strong wireless subscriber base. That said, the carrier's ARPU remains the lowest among tier-1 players, at about RMB 33 ($5) - roughly 40% below China Telecom.
- China Telecom, which primarily provides services in the southern part of the country, continues to lead the market with roughly 121 million subscribers. The carrier's ARPU is higher compared to its peers, owing to a relatively high mix of fiber-to-the-home users and an increasing emphasis on value-added services such as IPTV and Video-On-Demand.
- China Unicom's net adds were the weakest among major players, amid stronger competition. The firm added just 2.7 million customers over the period, accounting for just 9% of the total net adds for tier-1 carriers. The carrier's ARPU has also seen a slight decline year-over-year, amid price cuts and a move to increase broadband speeds for mainstream customers for free.
View Interactive Institutional Research (Powered by Trefis):
Global Large Cap | U.S. Mid & Small Cap | European Large & Mid Cap
The views and opinions expressed herein are the views and opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Nasdaq, Inc.
The views and opinions expressed herein are the views and opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Nasdaq, Inc.