Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/UTStarcom (2nd nomination)


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus.  Sandstein  09:52, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

UTStarcom
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

non-notable, and in the style of a promotional web page. , Every reference is either from the company, or a promotional notice.  DGG ( talk ) 17:58, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:02, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hong Kong-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:02, 21 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Articles for deletion/UTStarcom was closed as "keep" four days ago. DGG supported retention in that AfD. Why was this article renominated for deletion four days after a "keep" close? Cunard (talk) 19:23, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.  The book notes on page 12: "UTStarcom. Founded in 1995 through the merger of two telecommunications start-ups headquarted in the United States but focused on the Chinese market, UTStarcom has grown its revenues from $10 million in 1995 to $2 billion in 2003, a performance that landed UTStarcom a place on the 2003 Fortune 1000. UTStarcom achieved its rapid growth by developing and selling its 'Personal Access System,' which enables cordless phones to rove up to 60 miles within a city limit. At the end of 2003, UTStarcom's equipment served over 20 million customers in China, and the company exported telecommunications equipment to emerging markets such as India and to developed countries, including Japan and the United States. The company, which employs approximately 5,000, trades on the NASDAQ exchange and had a market capitalization exceeding $4 billion in September 2004." The book further notes on page 168: "The Foundation of UTStarcom UTStarcom traces its routes back not to one entrepreneur, but to two—Hong Lu and Ying Wu, who independently founded the two companies that would later merge to become UTStarcom." The book further notes on pages 184–185: "Although some constraints, such as cash management, are common across companies, others are company specific and often surprising. When UTStarcom started winning contracts from local operators in the late 1990s, for example, managmenet realized that the high price of Japanese-made handsets—which UTStarcom bought and resold at cost for $215—would dampen end-user demand for PAS systems. If end users couldn't afford the handsets, local telecommunications bureaus would not buy UTStarcom's equipment and the game would be over before it really began. UTStarcom initially tried outsourcing production to a Taiwanese company, but the contract manufacturers could only cut costs by 50 percent. Reluctantly, UTStarcom executives decided to design and manufacture the handsets themselves in China to bring costs below the $55 to $60 price point they felt was required to ensure widespread consumer adoption. UTStarcom's continued growth also depended on continued support (or, at minimum, tolerance) of PAS from the Ministry of Information Industry. Managing this constraint required UTStarcom to devote more attention to lobbying than would be typical for many start-ups." The company is profiled in detail on pages 166–187.  The article notes: "If UTStarcom Inc.'s saga were described with popular catchphrases, it'd go something like this: At the right place at the right time. All good things must come to an end. Been there, done that. Now what? During the late 1990s, the Alameda-based telecommunications equipment maker found an overlooked opportunity in China's emerging telecommunications market: China didn't have the infrastructure to offer reliable landline telephone calls, nor could it depend on cell phones, which were too expensive. Then came UTStarcom, which offered a hybrid: a telephone that acted like a mobile phone and looked like a mobile phone, but was based off of traditional landlines and only operated within city limits. UTStarcom sold the technology, called the Personal Access System, or PAS, to two of China's major carriers, China Netcom and China Telecom, and now has 47.5 million of China's 82.8 million PAS subscribers. The bet paid off: Named one of the nations' fastest-growing businesses by Business Week, Forbes and others, it saw its revenues more than double from $981.8 million in 2002 to nearly $2 billion in 2003."  The article notes: "UTStarcom Inc., the Alameda-based manufacturer of wireless telecommunications gear, posted a big drop in revenues for the first quarter of the year and a net loss — but the loss was not nearly as bad as the troubled company expected. UTStarcom has been in the midst of a major turnaround, both in operations and in products, after a year in which government agencies investigated its finances and customers seemed less interested in its major product. On Wednesday, UTStarcom reported first-quarter revenue of $596.6 million, down more than a third from $901.9 million in the same quarter last year, when it posted a profit. But the quarter’s net loss of 9 cents a share, or $10.6 million, was not nearly as bad as the 65 cents a share loss the company had warned Wall Street analysts was likely. Its cash flow was stronger than it has been and its profit margins higher."  The article notes: "Street sweepers and grandmothers in China are helping a Bay Area telecom company strike it rich. UTStarcom has prospered by selling a low-cost mobile phone system to meet the needs of common people in China. And it has succeeded by blending Silicon Valley smarts, management and money with China's manufacturing ability and insatiable appetite for phone services. The idea behind UTStarcom started when Hong Lu, UTStarcom's chief executive, visited China in 1990 and had to dial 100 times to complete a call from Beijing to Shenzhen. He knew the country's decrepit phone system needed an upgrade. Lu started a company and initially focused on selling fixed-wire equipment but soon found a better option. Reviving a Japanese technology that was all but abandoned, Lu offered a way for Chinese phone companies to make the leap into wireless." The article also notes: "box) When founded: 1991 as Unitech Telecom, which merged with Starcom Networks in 1995 to form UTStarcom. (box) Headquarters: Alameda (box) IPO: March 2000 (box) Employees: 5,500 worldwide, including 4,600 in China and 500 in the United States  (box) CEO: Hong Lu, 49  (box) 2003 profit: $202 million, up 87 percent from 2002  (box) 2003 sales: $1.96 billion, up 100 percent from 2002"  The article notes: "For UTStarcom, which is based in Alameda, Calif., China is a crucial market. One of the company’s founders is a Chinese-born American, and most of the company’s operations and employees are based in China. UTStarcom, which sells networking and broadband equipment, has for the last decade sold large quantities of goods to three of China’s biggest government-owned telecommunications companies: China Netcom, China Telecom and China Mobile. S.E.C. officials said employees from many of the company’s big Chinese clients accepted bribes. ... The settlement comes at a difficult time for UTStarcom. The company is suffering through a sharp downturn in sales. It lost over $185 million in the first three quarters of 2008 and recently sold one of its plants in China."</li> <li> The article notes: "With its corporate headquarters in Alameda, Calif., Lu's company, UTStarcom, made a long-term bet on China, building most of its equipment there. That helped it win goodwill--and its products, which were cheap, smart, and engineered with Chinese users in mind, won customers. The firm has made $2 billion in China since 2000 and now employs 4,700 workers worldwide. And by all accounts, the company is just getting started. Its contrarian formula is easily exportable: Set up shop in-country, partner with the biggest phone company, and above all, make supercheap products that are minutely customized to local needs. Indeed, Lu is using the same business model in India, Indonesia, and Vietnam. It's that kind of thinking--taking calculated risks, going where the opportunities are, thinking about what the market really wants--that took UTStarcom to the top of Business 2.0's annual ranking of the fastest-growing tech companies. Its net income has grown 72 percent annually since 2000; this year alone the firm is expected to report $190 million in net profit on $1.8 billion in revenue. Don't think Wall Street hasn't noticed: UTStarcom's stock is up 112 percent so far this year--four times as much as the average stock on the rocketing Nasdaq--to $42.81 near the end of August."</li> <li> The article notes: "Shares of UTStarcom continue to slide, and the stock now trades in the low $7 range–close to its 52-week low. The news for this once high-flying company, which provides telecom equipment mostly to service providers in China, has been dismal lately. ... While it will take a while for this company to win back investor confidence, it’s important to realize that the bad news is not a death sentence for the technology. PAS remains a low-cost alternative that allows people to use their cordless phones at home and then take them with them no matter where they go within city limits–and still make and receive phone calls. It’s a big business for China’s service providers. UTStarcom’s PAS business will still account for about $1 billion in sales this year, and probably next year, and I wouldn’t be surprised if at some point–maybe a year or two from now–demand from the service providers will pick up again for PAS products."</li> <li> The article notes: "Though UTStarcom is based in the U.S., it is actually a wireless play on the fast-growing market for mobile phones in China. Founded in 1991, this provider of telecom infrastructure, software and handsets operates in a fast-growing market–China. The company does most of its business out of its offices in Beijing. UTSI has three joint ventures that include two manufacturing operations that it owns jointly with the Telecommunications Administrations in Guangdong and Zhejiang provinces. It also operates 12 customer support and sales centers around China. The company is run by two executives that are highly regarded internationally. Its chief executive, Hong Liang Lu Hong Liang Lu, was once the CEO of Kyocera Unison, a subsidiary of Kyocera International. Its vice chairman, Ying Wu Ying Wu, was once a member of the technical staff of Bellcore (now Telcordia ) and was a consultant to AT&T Bell Labs, now part of Lucent Technologies. UTStarcom offers the Chinese an affordable mobile service in nearly 300 cities, from Hangzhou to Xian. In China the prevailing wireless system is known as PAS, for Personal Access System. UTSI’s version of PAS dominates the market with a 60% share. UTSI’s clients include hundreds of small telephone providers in China, who in turn provide service for roughly 5 million people. Lucent Technologies and the Shenzhen, Guangdong-based Zhongxing Telecom sell their own PAS systems. They account for the remaining 40% of the market. At UTStarcom, sales of PAS equipment, service and handsets account for about 85% of its revenue."</li> </ol>There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow UTStarcom to pass Notability, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". Cunard (talk) 19:23, 21 October 2017 (UTC) </li></ul>


 * Pinging Articles for deletion/UTStarcom participants and closer:, , , and.


 * , perhaps you will care to enter these into the article so we can judge it better The point of looking for sources at WP is not to argue at afd, but to improve articles.  DGG ( talk ) 22:14, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Notability was already established at Articles for deletion/UTStarcom, where you supported retention. The point of looking for sources at WP is not to argue at afd, but to improve articles. – the point of AfD is to establish whether a subject is notable, which already has been done. If you want the article to be rewritten, please do so yourself instead of taking it to AfD to try to push other editors to do so. That is extremely poor and disruptive behavior from an admin.  Cunard (talk) 00:25, 22 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete/draftify - has sources they aren't putting in. I propose if Cunard expresses interest in actually editing the article, then draftify, and no one is willing, then delete. The article's notability is semi-questionable even with the sources, and I'll note that in the many days since I nominated the article for the first AfD, nothing has changed. Further, the article even with the sources added would still border on advert-y and not nearly as encyclopedic as standards would warrant. Sometimes it's best to delete stuff that's not very good and start over. This is one of those cases. It would take, I think, more work to salvage than to just rewrite from scratch. If Cunard wants to do either, let it be moved to draft space. If no one is willing, again, delete. --Nerd1a4i (talk) 22:20, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
 * The article's notability is semi-questionable even with the sources – the company was profiled in a Harvard Business Publishing book. It is clearly notable. Per Editing policy and Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions, deletion is the wrong approach. Cunard (talk) 00:25, 22 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep The role of AfD is primarily to test is the topic meets the criteria for notability. This topic meets these criteria as (at least) two references were found. And while editors may bemoan the quality of this article, we don't delete articles on notable topics just because an article is poorly written (there are no arguments that this article is in breach of other policies or guidelines such as being spammy or promotional). Leaving all that aside, I have now taken a copyeditting chainsaw/axe to the article and reformatted it to include some of Cunard's references and I've removed sections which were overly-technical or unnecessary. [edit] The article should no longer read as spammy or promotional. -- HighKing ++ 12:58, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
 * You say "there are no arguments that this article is in breach of other policies or guidelines such as being spammy or promotional". Did you read the nomination? If so you will see that it says "in the style of a promotional web page., Every reference is either from the company, or a promotional notice". The king of the sun (talk) 15:51, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I've fixed the above. -- HighKing ++ 12:41, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

<div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete Promotional, and not demonstrating notability. The references include a couple of books which contain several brief mentions of the company, but no substantial coverage, and other references are things like the company's own web site, promotional notices, or just inclusion in business listing site. The king of the sun (talk) 15:51, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment, perhaps you missed the bit above where I said I chopped the article. I've removed a lot of the spammy/promotional pieces people were complaining above in this AfD and the previous one. You say it is still promotional? Can you please point out to me the parts you believe are promotional. I've tried to simply leave the minimum information that is supported by references. You also say that the references include "a couple of books which contain brief mentions of the company". The first book "The New Argonauts" provides an in-depth history of the company starting on page 249 and continuing to page 251. It is also discussed on page 273. Nearly two pages of in-depth information. The second book "Innovation Spaces in Asia" introduces UTStarcom on page 172 and continues with a page and a half on the company, starting on page 180 and finishing on page 181. Nearly two pages of in-depth information here also. I disagree that the books are "brief mentions of the company". Both books easily meet the criteria for establishing notability. -- HighKing ++ 12:41, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 01:26, 28 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Speedy Keep - frivolous nomination, opened merely four days after the first AfD was closed as Keep. Please stop wasting people's time. Besides, this is a NASDAQ listed company and a pioneer in the Chinese telecom industry, notable per WP:LISTED and WP:NCORP. -Zanhe (talk) 06:45, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep. The only valid argument for deletion in the nomination is 'non-notable' and this has been countered by identifying sufficient sources. The other points are article quality issues. --Michig (talk) 08:39, 4 November 2017 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.