HOW ŠOLAK BECAME THE RICHEST SERB: Highly developed models of machinations aimed at increasing revenues (10)
In a special series, Kurir reveals how exactly this controversial billionaire fulfilled his 'American dream' in the murky waters of the Balkan transition
The case of the Unifi network, which Dragan Šolak directly benefits from financially even as its users are burdened with its cost of operation, best illustrates the extent to which SBB and other companies owned by the controversial Serbian billionaire have developed the mechanisms for making excess profits.
Unifi fraud for making excess profits
SBB has for a number of years been offering its internet users the option of utilizing the Unifi network at many public locations covered by their signal. This functionality is offered even to those using SBB's cable internet in their apartments.
The Unifi network is set up by installing more powerful amplifiers in a user's apartment, which consume even more electricity than the run-of-the-mill Wi-Fi devices used in households.
This is how SBB – a company with over 880,000 users – utilizes electricity without their users' consent, installing amplifiers in their apartments to ensure that the company has a more powerful network, which it offers at many locations across the region. Šolak's company has direct financial benefits from this as using the Unifi network comes at an extra cost. In this way, SBB has created an internet network using which allows it to make extra profit, while the cost of the electricity needed for the network to operate is paid for by the users, who have not been asked whether they want it or not. This constitutes consumer fraud and deceptive behaviour on the part of the provider.
The main difference between a modem (router) operating in regular (home use) mode and special (UniWiFi) mode is the length of operation of the WF gateways. A modem operating in home use mode enters "sleep mode" in the absence of active Wi-Fi network clients. A modem servicing UniWiFi has to be permanently active in order to maintain its connections to the adjacent "links in the chain". This means greater electricity consumption. Furthermore, what needs to be taken into account is the amount of electromagnetic radiation that the tenants/users get exposed to as a result of uninterrupted operation of the modem nearby – users' health may be adversely affected on top of incurring additional electricity costs.
Monopoly in new buildings
Abusing its dominant position in the market for many years, SBB made agreements with a significant number of investors who construct buildings, ensuring that the telecommunications infrastructure in these buildings is based on cable technology (which no one else had except for SBB). This prevented connecting to the Telekom network, which had long been based on IPTV technology. Pointing out that this practice violated market competition principles, Telekom warned that it was in possession of a list of several hundred new buildings where this illegal anti-competitive practice was implemented.
Network of illegally fixed cables
The very centre of Belgrade is a case in point that illustrates well the fact that SBB did not care about permits or urban-planning rules in mounting its cabling, and calls into question the legality of the company's network. For example, cables running from one building to the next, as well as those fixed on streetlights, can be seen in Vračar, in the vicinity of the Cathedral Church of Saint Sava.
Similar sights can be seen at nearly any location where SBB is doing business, in Belgrade as well as other cities across Serbia.
Bearing in mind that the laws were near-irrelevant for SBB in the field, a question can be raised about whether there was market competition or equal business opportunities in such circumstances in the first place. A privately-owned company was able to reach consumers in every conceivable way, sidestepping and violating the law in the process, while the state-owned Telekom had to follow all the rules in running its business operation, obtain all the permits, and conduct works in the field in full compliance with all the legally defined procedures
In addition to the anti-competitive practices, the situation that Telekom was in was made more difficult by the authorities, passing laws that favoured its competitors and tying the state-owned operator's hands in business.
COMING UP NEXT: Following its owner's early works, UG has perfected the practice of infringing copyright
