EXCLUSIVE: HD Camera Wars - Prices Could Rocket With New Duty Rises

 

Thomson GV Says Japanese HDV Cameras Are Far Too Cheap in Europe

£4,000 HDV Cameras Could Soon Cost £12,000 With New Import Duty

HDV Importers Alarmed at TGV Price-Dumping Complaint to EU

EXCLUSIVE to Netribution

The cost of a new HDV camera from Sony, JVC or Canon, could double or even treble, if a complaint of dumping by Japanese camera makers is upheld by the European Commission.

 

Europe's only broadcast camera manufacturer, Thomson Grass Valley, says Japanese professional and broadcast video cameras are selling within Europe at lower prices than they can be bought for in Japan. If the complaint is upheld, the European Union could impose an import tariff of up to 200% on camera imports, to protect European manufacturer interests.

This is the second time a complaint of this kind has been lodged with the European Commission. Ten years ago, before Thomson and Philips BTS merged, both companies told the Commission that high-end 2/3" Triax broadcast camera systems were selling in Europe at lower prices than in Japan. The complaint was upheld and import duty on these cameras went up by between 100 and 200%. Those extra duties are still in place now, over ten years later. That's why a current industry standard digibeta camera still costs an arm and three legs.

The latest complaint though, could result in much higher duties being imposed on cameras much lower down the broadcast scale, including DV and HDV cameras as well as digibetas. Camera importers are seriously worried about the possible outcome of the complaint on their market. They say if punitive duty measures were to be brought in, video professionals throughout Europe - and their businesses -  would suffer.

 

With their superior definition to both DV and SD, HDV camera sales have rocketed. Broadcasters have taken readily to the new format for one-man camera operation. BBC Factual made HDV their system of choice for documentaries.

 

The essence of the new Thompson Grass valley complaint is that broadcasters are now willing to accept transmission material from a much broader range of cameras than in the past, so they are all now technically broadcast cameras and are undermining the market for high-end 2/3" Triax camera systems.

 

In their complaint to the Commission Thomson Grass Valley refer to price-dumping activities by Japanese manufacturers relating to "certain camera systems."

 

They say; "it should be underlined that Grass Valley produces cameras in all the traditional segments of the market (ie professional, standard broadcast, hi-definition broadcast, and digital cinematography.)

 

So what systems are Thomson Grass Valley referring to as "certain camera systems" ?

 

The definition they would like to apply is very broad, covering every professional camera and camcorder with CCDs larger than 1/3", with or without a variety of options such as a viewfinder, camera control unit, master set up and so on. Thomson Grass Valley say these cameras are susceptible for use in broadcast, ENG, digital; cinematography and "professional" applications, including but not limited to, "...educational, entertainment, promotional and documentary video"

[Throughout this article, words in italic are direct quotes from the TGV complaint which is a publicly available document]

 

That's a definition of range with parameters so broad that anyone working professionally with videography will fall within it. However, Thomson Grass Valley don't leave it there.

 

Referring back to the previous European import duty that was imposed on Japanese high-end cameras as an anti-dumping measure, TGV claim Japanese manufacturers have deliberately improved the performance of non-broadcast cameras to circumvent the EC's measures. And, they say, this activity has been compounded by the fact that there has been an increase in demand from "low-cost local or regional stations where this product is particularly appealing."

 

TGV also allege that technological advances in high-end broadcast camera systems have also been implemented in "professional" cameras, so making them "more suitable for broadcast applications."

 

TGV goes on to list some of these technology improvements:

• The Move from 700ppl to 1,000ppl CCD devices
• The Move from 4:3 aspect ratio to 16:9/4:3 switchable aspect ratio
• Change from analogue signal processing to digital signal processing
• Advances in analogue to digital conversion quality (10-bit to 14-bit)
• Digital wireless transmission from camera to base station rather than triax
• Remote camera control possible via Ethernet/IP protocols rather than solely via proprietory systems

 

The complainant goes on to argue that advances in technology relating to High Definition mean that there can be very little price difference between HD systems and Standard Definition systems. This means that broadcasters can utilise "professional HD" cameras for SD broadcast applications.

 

According to Thomson Grass Valley, all these industry changes "...make it now impossible to separatethese three segments ( presumably: professional, broadcast and digital cinematography) which form a new, single product spectrum sharing the same basic characteristics and end uses."

 

Thomson Grass Valley maintain that in consequence of the actions JVC, Sony, Ikegami, Hitachi and Panasonic, combined with industry and technology changes, has reduced the TGV market share. Sales revenue and profits have also been adversely affected, the European camera maker says.

 

Although the company says it has an excellent reputation and carries out many marketing activities, "none of these efforts can pay in the context of absurd low prices which aim at driving our company out of business."

 

As a result of the TGV complaint, the European Commission has agreed to initiate an anti-dumping investigation and have invited the Japanese manufacturers named to respond to the complaints. The Commission will continue to collect evidence it will spot check the evidence submitted until 20^th October this year and then consider the evidence in detail. The Commission will make their "Provisional Regulation" in February 2007.

 

If the evidence supplied by Thomson Grass Valley to the Commission is not challenged, the Commission is almost bound to impose an import duty on camera systems cited in the complaint to protect European manufacture, which is now represented by only one company, Thomson Grass Valley.

 

Japanese manufacturers are collecting information which the investigation has asked of them and are also planning to produce evidence of their own in a bid to undermine the case presented by TGV, but of course that is in the manufacturers' own interests and the Commission will receive their evidence in that light, so they will be looking for independent evidence as well, from practitioners inside the industry.

 

That means you the low budget movie mogul or you, the wedding videographer of the year, or you the fly-on-the-wall filmmaker planning the next big thing in observational docs. If you don't want to pay higher import duties for Japanese pro cameras, that is anything from a PD 150 up really and certainly anything that is HDV capable, you will need to do something about it.

 

Ian Scott, UK Director of Pro Video Operation for JVC, one of the companies named by Thompson Grass Valley, says this complaint is of vital importance to all European video professionals. He advises filmmakers to make their views on this potential development known, by writing to

• Your MEP
• Mr Barbosa and Mr Seront at the European Commission

 

Letters can also be copied to

• The Department for Trade and Industry
• The Minister for Trade and Industry
• Jonathan Djanogly - Shadow Minister for Trade and Industry
• Ian Scott Director Pro Video Operation JVC

 

 

If you want access to HDV video  technology in Europe to remain at current budget levels of £4,000 to £5,000 per camera it is important to make your views known to the Commission, showing clearly why you have an interest in this and how punitive import duties would damage your business. With punitive import duty, cameras like this could cost between £12,000 and £15,000.

 

Netribution will shortly publish a suggested letter of complaint showing the form letters of protest should take in order to be effective.

[TO BE TYPED ON YOUR BUSINESS LETTERHEAD ]

 

To Mr Barboas and Mr Seront

The European Commision

Directorate General TRADE

Directorate B3 J-9 5/16

B-1049 Brussels

Belgium

 

Date

 

Dear Sir/Madam

 

Re: Antidumping proceeding AD510 / R395, concerning the import of certain camera systems originating in Japan

 

We have outlined some indicative issues that you might want to raise in your letter to the Commission:

 

• Explain why you are writing to the Commission - ie "I am aware of the details of the complaint made to the European Commission by  Thomson Grass Valley relating to the alleged "dumping " practices of certain Japanese equipment manufacturers and would like to express my opinions regarding this as an interested party."

 

• At the outset, it would be useful to give some information about yourselves, your business and the capacity in which you are writing to the Commission. Eg "I am involved in the professional / broadcast video sector....."

 

• Why does this investigation affect you? For instance, if you are a professional wedding or event videographer you might be concerned about rises in the price of professional cameras and how this might affect the profitability of your business etc. Or, if you run and the broadcast video sector, you might feel that the Thomson of Valley Products are not comparable to the products of Japanese manufacturers. You may indeed have suffered under the duties imposed to broadcasting cameras under their previous investigations. Eg speech marks Open I strongly feel that the complaint made is not only unfounded as it has the as it is based upon false assumptions regarding the professional video market, but it is also professionally very damaging to the livelihoods of thousands of industry professionals in Europe."

 

• What camera model due you currently use?

 

If you use an HDV camera do you consider yourself as a potential client for Thomson at grass valley cameras? If not, why not? Below are some reasons that may apply in your case:

 

• Whilst the specifications and performance may well be excellent, such performance comes at a price which is not appropriate for the majority of professional applications, (eg: "I do not need of that high level of quality at that equally high price."

• Thomson Grass Valley does not have the product range from which the majority of professional users would be likely to select their tools.
• The requirement for small and light weight camcorders for unobtrusive shooting cannot be satisfied with the Thomson Grass Valley product range which focuses on large, heavy and expensive "traditional"cameras.

 

B.  

Xif you're using several different route camera models, explain the differentcunctions and why you need or prefer to use different cameras.

 

• We are aware that professional be geographers and independent small producers cannot operate unless they have access to cost effective tools to use in their productions. How would a significant increase in the price of professional cameras affect your business?

 

• We consider that the swiftness with which the industry as a whole is currently moving towards high-definition (HD) cameras is a direct result of the fact that Japanese manufacturers have developed such low-cost production tools, as the HD capable camcorders that Thomson grass valley is complaining about. If the prices increased, this would immediately put the brakes on the current boom for the majority of European professional video equipment manufacturers. Do you think a significant increase in the price of professional products and in particular of camcorders would drastically slow down the move towards high-definition (HD)? Would you switch to HD cameras if the price was significantly higher?

 

• Request the Commission to take into account that imposition of the duty would harm the community users of the professional cameras and that in the long term it would slow down the transition to new technologies. Finally, suggest that the commission should reject this complaint as unfounded.

 

• It will be useful if you could give contact details so that the Commission's case team may contact you if they have additional questions etc.

 

The list above is a just indicative and is not intended to restrict you in any way. The commission is interested to hear your side of story, based on your individual opinions and experiences of how