Indian government denied

India's "Coin News" website reported on the 11th that senior Indian government officials said that the Indian government did not restrict the plan to sell low -end smartphones in the Indian market in the Indian market.

Earlier reports have reported that the Indian government is considering the prohibition of Chinese brands from low -end mobile phones with a sales price of less than 12,000 rupees (about 1016 yuan), but a person who understands the internal affairs of the Indian government said: "Indian electronics and information technology The ministry does not consider such suggestions. "Related data shows that Chinese companies occupy 63%of Indian smartphones, and Chinese brands Xiaomi, Realme, OPPO, and vivo occupy four seats in the five largest mobile phone brands in the Indian market. Among them, mobile phones below 1,000 yuan account for 31%of India's overall smartphone market share; in the mobile phone market below 1,000 yuan, the advantages of Chinese brands are more obvious, and the market accounts for 75%to 80%. Most Chinese brands sell products in India are produced in India, and the suppliers of these Chinese brands are basically Indian suppliers. According to the industry, according to industry people, the Indian government has realized that local mobile phone brands are falling in India's market share, but these local companies are unable to compete with Chinese brands in terms of production scale or marketing strength.

The views of some Indian industry people also confirmed the incomparable nature of the sale of China ’s thousand yuan machine. A consulting company's research executive said that the implementation of restrictions on certain brands in the segmentation field will lead to the unstable ecosystem of the Indian mobile phone market, and the possibility of fully implementing such a ban is unlikely. An executive of the Indian Branch of the United States International Data Group stated that India is a "open market", which is difficult to implement for sale, and the remaining market participants after the ban are difficult to effectively fill the market gap.

- END -