d Dacom invested a combined $5.7 billion in network assets, or almost as much as Korea Telecom. 37 The result has been aggressive facilities-based competition among these companies. This competition has developed without government regulators requir- ing the incumbent to unbundle its facilities. The Korean government waited until December 2001 to announce a network unbundling policy because it wanted to encourage investment. The Ministry of Information and Communications acknowledged this strategy in its 2002 information technology report: "It is noteworthy that Korea enacted its statutory and regulatory requirements for incumbent facilities-based suppliers (KT, Hanaro, and Thrunet) to provide unbundled network elements to their competitors when the country was well on its way to leading the world in broadband access penetration rates."33 "38 Korea had twenty-five broadband lines per 100 persons in December 2003. 39 By comparison, the United States had just under ten broadband lines per 100 persons, and the European Union had less than six. Clearly, Korea's policy of encouraging broadband facilities deployment, in part through government subsidies, has worked, but it is not clear how much of the difference between Korea and the rest of the world is due to these policies and how much should be attributed to differences in consumer tastes. 40 Telecom Reform in Other Countries Table 9-5. Broadband Competition in Korea, December 2003 Number of subscribers LAN in Cable apartment Carrier modem building Satellite Total Korea Telecom 5,230,342 353,580 4,836 5,589,058 Hanaro 1,093,261 1,290,190 342,152 2,725,563 Thrunet 1,287,502 5,862 1,293,364 419,293 3,769 423,082 Dreamline 56,178 89,546 3,874 149,598 Dacom 135,884 65,820 201,704 Value-added carriers 3,382 605,791 9,950 619,103 Resellers 52,812 124,235 177,047 Total 6,435,955 3,828,166 909,542 4,836 11,178,499 Source: Korea Ministry of Information and Communication, White Paper Internet Korea 2004 (www.mic.go.kr/index.jsp [August 19, 2004]). Comparing the United States