İmtiyazdan Kamulaştırmaya İstanbul Telefon Şirketi: Bir İşletmecilik Tarihi Çalışması (1909-1936)

Year 2021, Issue: 20, 63 - 90, 25.01.2021

Sırrı Emrah Üçer

Abstract

Bu çalışma İstanbul’daki ticari telefon şebekesinin 1913’te yabancı şirketlerden oluşan bir konsorsiyum tarafından kurulmasının işletmecilik tarihini incelemektedir. Makale, on dokuzuncu yüzyılda Osmanlı İmparatorluğu’nun posta ve telgraf politikalarını tanıtan kısa bir giriş yaptıktan sonra, politik ve ekonomik açıdan çalkantılı bir dönemi, 1909’daki ihale süreciyle 1936’daki telefon şebekesinin kamulaştırılması arasında geçen zaman aralığını ele almaktadır. Bu çalışmanın odaklandığı konular, İstanbul Telefon Şirketi ile Osmanlı/Türk hükümetleri arasındaki ilişkiler, şirket tarafından kullanılan finansman mekanizmaları ve kamulaştırmaya kadar İstanbul’da kentsel telefon şebekesine erişim ile teknoloji transferinin seyri şeklinde sıralanmaktadır. Makale, olgusal dayanağını oluşturmak için, Türkçe kaynakların geniş bir seçkisine ek olarak, Londra ve New York gibi şehirlerdeki finansal piyasalara katılan aktörleri takip eden ve bilgilendiren İngilizce gazetelerin kapsamlı bir taramasını kullanmaktadır. Böylece İstanbul Telefon Şirketi’nin 1909 ila 1936 arasındaki işletmecilik tarihini kapitalist dünya ekonomisi ve uluslararası sermaye piyasaları bağlamına oturtarak sunmuş olmaktadır. Bu tarihin modern Türkiye Cumhuriyeti’nde telekomünikasyon politikalarının biçimlenmesine ilişkin de söyleyebileceği çok şey bulunmaktadır.

Keywords

telefon işletmeciliği, imtiyaz, İstanbul, Osmanlı İmparatorluğu, işletme tarihi

Istanbul Telephone Company from Concession to Nationalization: A Study in Business History (1909-1936)

Abstract

I provide a business history study of introduction of commercial telephone network in Istanbul in 1913 by a consortium of foreign companies. After a short introduction of Ottoman post and telegraph policies in the nineteenth century, the timespan of the article covers a politically and economically turbulent historical era, the period between the auction process in 1909 and the nationalization of Istanbul telephone network in 1936. I focus on the relationship of Istanbul Telephone Company to the Ottoman/Turkish governments, financing mechanisms employed by the company, and development of reach of urban telephone network and technology transfer in Istanbul until nationalization. While compiling empirical backbone of the article, I employ a comprehensive search of English language newspapers that monitored and informed actors that participate into the financial markets in cities like London and New York, in addition to a wide array of sources in Turkish language. By doing so I provide a business history of Istanbul Telephone Company between 1909 and 1936 in the context of capitalist world economy and international financial markets. This history also has much to say about shaping of telecommunications policy in modern Turkish Republic.

Keywords

Telephone business, oncession, Istanbul, Ottoman Empire, business history

References

• Akyıldız, A. (2003). Meclis-i A’yân. In TDV (ed.), TDV İslam Ansiklopedisi, cilt 28 (243-244). Ankara: Türk Diyanet Vakfı.
• Alşan, R. (1990). Cumhuriyetin kuruluşu ve ilk onbeş yılında PTT işletmesi. Atatürk Araştırma Merkezi Dergisi, 4(17), 391-419.
• Anchordoguy, M. (2001). Nippon Telegraph and Telephone Company (NTT) and the building of a telecommunications industry in Japan. The Business History Review, 75(3), 507-541.
• Baker, R. L. (1935). Japanese trade in the Near East-Turkish affairs. Current History, 43(1), 108.
• Barron’s. (1930, April 14). International telephone’s first quarter lower: Net earnings, however, will amply cover dividend requirements. Barron’s.
• Barron’s. (1931, January 26). International Tel. and Tel.’s poor year: Net probably fell short of $2 dividend requirements – mixed trend in foreign business. Barron’s.
• Başbakanlık İstatistik Umum Müdürlüğü. (1935). İstatistik yıllığı cilt 5 1933-1934. İstanbul: Hüsnütabiat Basımevi.
• Başbakanlık İstatistik Umum Müdürlüğü. (1941). İstatistik yıllığı cilt 11 1939-1940. İstanbul: Hüsnütabiat Basımevi.
• Bektaş, Y. (2000). The Sultan’s messenger: Cultural construction of Ottoman telegraphy, 1847-1880. Technology and Culture, 41(4), 669-696.
• Bektaş, Y. (2001). Displaying the American genius: The electromagnetic telegraph in the wider world. The British Journal for the History of Science, 34(2), 199-232.
• Berkes, N. (2002). Türkiye’de çağdaşlaşma. İstanbul: Yapı Kredi.
• Biçen, A. (2020). Bitkileri adıyla çağırmak. Birikim, (376), 10-16.
• BOA (Başbakanlık Osmanlı Arşivleri). (1912). BEO, 4053/303940, Hicri 04.07.1330 (Miladi 20.06.1912).
• BOA (Başbakanlık Osmanlı Arşivleri). (1908). BEO, 3415/256086, Hicri 21.09.1326 (Miladi 17.10.1908).
• BOA (Başbakanlık Osmanlı Arşivleri). (1909a). DH.MKT. 2905/29, Hicri 03.08.1327 (Miladi 20.08.1909).
• BOA (Başbakanlık Osmanlı Arşivleri). (1909b). DH.MUİ. 26/35, Hicri 05.12.1327 (Miladi 18.12.1909).
• BOA (Başbakanlık Osmanlı Arşivleri). (1911). DH.İD. 119/65, Hicri 04.05.1329 (Miladi 03.05.1911).
• Bureau International de L’Union Télégraphique. (1917). Statistique générale de la téléphonie: Année 1915. Berne: Bureau International de L’Union Télégraphique.
• Bureau International de L’Union Télégraphique. (1933). Statistique générale de la téléphonie: Année 1931. Berne: Bureau International de L’Union Télégraphique.
• Bureau International de L’Union Télégraphique. (1934). Statistique générale de la téléphonie: Année 1932. Berne: Bureau International de L’Union Télégraphique.
• Burns, R. W. (2004). Communications: An international history of the formative years. London: The Institution of Engineering and Technology.
• Casson, H. N. (1910). The history of the telephone. Chicago: A. C. McLurg & Co.
• Choo, K. & Kang, M. (1994). South Korea: Structure and change. In Noam, E. M., Komatsuzaki, S. & Conn, D. A. (eds.), Telecommunications in the Pacific basin: An evolutionary approach (286-302). New York: Oxford University Press.
• Clifton, J., Comín, F. & Díaz-Fuentes, D. (2011). From national monopoly to multinational corporation: How regulation shaped the road towards telecommunications internationalisation. Business History, 53(5), 761-781.
• Çetinkaya, Y. D. Osmanlı’yı Müslümanlaştırmak: Kitle siyaseti, toplumsal sınıflar, boykotlar ve Milli İktisat. İstanbul: İletişim.
• Davison, R. H. (1990). The advent of the electric telegraph in the Ottoman Empire. In Davison, R. (ed.), Essays in Ottoman and Turkish history, 1774-1923: The impact of the West (133-165). Austin: University of Texas Press.
• Demir, T. (2005). Türkiye’de posta telgraf ve telefon teşkilatının tarihsel gelişimi (1840-1920). Ankara: PTT Genel Müdürlüğü.
• Detroit Free Press. (1909, June 13). Sultan strives to be up to date: Turkey’s new ruler installs telephones in palace and harem. Detroit Free Press.
• Eroğlu, N. (2002). Mehmed Cavid Bey’in iktisadi görüşleri. Yakın Dönem Türkiye Araştırmaları: İstanbul Üniversitesi Atatürk İlkeleri ve İnkılap Tarihi Enstitüsü Dergisi, 1(2), 163-183.
• Ersoy, Hulusi. (2017). Osmanlı’da telefon hizmeti ve imtiyazı [PhD Dissertation]. Marmara University, Istanbul.
• Es, H. F. (1942, January 28). Medeniyet kurbanları. Akşam.
• Fortna, B. C. (2008). The reign of Abdülhamid II. In Kasaba, R. (ed.), The Cambridge History of Turkey Volume 4: Turkey in the Modern World (38-61). New York, Cambridge University Press.
• Garretson, P. P. (1980). Ethiopia’s telephone and telegraph system, 1897-1935. Northeast African Studies 2(1), 59-71.
• Gopika, G. G. (2014). Growth and development of telecom sector in India – An overview. IOSR Journal of Business and Management (IOSR-JBM), 16(9), 25-36.
• Güzeliş, A. (2010). Telgraftan internete telekomünikasyon. İzmir: EMO.
• Hill, A. & Abdala, M. A. (1993). Regulation, institutions and commitment: Privatization and regulation in the Argentine telecommunications sector. World Bank, Policy Research Working Paper no. 1216, November.
• Holcombe, A. N. (1911). Public ownership of telephones on the continent of Europe. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
• Horwitz, R. B. (2001). Communication and democratic reform in South Africa. New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Ito, Y. & Iwata, A. (1994). Japan: Creating the domestic and international network. In Noam, E. M., Komatsuzaki, S. & Conn, D. A. (eds.), Telecommunications in the Pacific basin: An evolutionary approach (440-457). New York: Oxford University Press.
• İleri, N. (2017). Allure of the night, fear of the dark: Nighttime illumination, spectacle, and order in fin-de-siècle Istanbul. Comparative Studies of South Asia, Africa, and the Middle East, 37(2), 280-298.
• İstanbul Belediyesi Neşriyat ve İstatistik Müdürlüğü. (1940). İstatistik yıllığı cilt 5: 1936-39. İstanbul: İstanbul Belediye Matbaası.
• J. E. K. (1931). Herbert Laws Webb [Obituary]. Journal of the Electrical Engineers, 69(418), 1326-1327.
• Kaçar, M. (1995). Osmanlı telgraf işletmesi. In İhsanoğlu, E. & Kaçar, M. (eds.), Çağını yakalayan Osmanlı! Osmanlı Devleti’nde modern haberleşme ve ulaştırma teknikleri (45-120). İstanbul: IRCICA.
• Karakışla, Y. S. (2014). Osmanlı kadın telefon memureleri (1913-1923). İstanbul: Akıl Fikir Yayınları.
• Kasaba, R. (1993). İzmir. Review, 16(4), 387-401.
• Kingstone, P. R. (2003). Privatizing Telebrás: Brazilian political institutions and policy performance. Comparative Politics, 36(1), 21-40.
• Kubilay, Ç. (2003). Cumhuriyetin kuruluş yıllarında telekomünikasyon politikaları [Master’s thesis]. Ankara University, Ankara.
• Larson, J. F. & Park, J. (2014). From developmental to network state: Government re-structuring and ICT-led innovation in Korea. Telecommunications Policy 38(4), 344-359.
• Levant Trade Review. (1911). Telephones at the Capital. Levant Trade Review, 1(1), 26.
• Los Angeles Times. (1909, June 13). From prison to a throne: Wondrous story of Turkey’s new Sultan; never used a telephone till his accession; his traits, his gardens, and his lost love. Los Angeles Times.
• Love, R. S. (2005). For the general good: The debate over private vs. public ownership of telephones and the Canadian West, 1900–1912. American Review of Canadian Studies, 35(1), 67-97.
• Malhut, M. (2009). Meclis-i Mebusan’da imtiyazlar sorunu ve tartışmaları (1908-1914) [Master’s Thesis]. Dokuz Eylül University, Izmir.
• Milne, G. J. (2007). British business and the telephone, 1878-1911. Business History, 49(2), 163-185.
• New York Herald Tribune. (1930, March 19). International Telephone buys Turkish unit: Also seeks control of company in Stockholm, say reports, but is opposed. New York Herald Tribune.
• New - York Tribune. (1915, May 2). A Turk and a telephone: Why first efforts to interest vizier in it failed. New - York Tribune.
• Noam, E. M. (1992). Telecommunications in Europe. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Noam, E. M. (ed.). (1999). Telecommunications in Africa. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Noam, E. M., Komatsuzaki, S. & Conn, D. A. (eds.). (1994). Telecommunications in the Pacific basin: An evolutionary approach. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Noll, R. G. (2009). Priorities for telecommunications reform in Mexico. In Levy, S. & Walton, M. (eds.), No growth without equity? Inequality, interests and competition in Mexico (365-388). Washington: World Bank & Palgrave MacMillan.
• Önay, A. (1995). Türkiye’de telefon teşkilatının kuruluşu. In İhsanoğlu, E. & Kaçar, M. (eds.), Çağını yakalayan Osmanlı! Osmanlı Devleti’nde modern haberleşme ve ulaştırma teknikleri (121-139). İstanbul: IRCICA.
• Parapak, J. L. (1994). Indonesia. In Noam, E. M., Komatsuzaki, S. & Conn, D. A. (eds.), Telecommunications in the Pacific basin: An evolutionary approach (106-117). New York: Oxford University Press.
• Rachty, G. (1999). Egypt. In Noam, E. M. (ed.), Telecommunications in Africa (39-50). New York: Oxford University Press.
• Rhodes, S. (2006). Social movements and free-market capitalism in Latin America: Telecommunications privatization and the rise of consumer protests. Albany: State University of New York Press.
• Shahvar, S. (2002). Concession hunting in the age of reform: British companies and the search for government guarantees; Telegraph concessions through Ottoman territories, 1855-58. Middle Eastern Studies, 38(4), 169-193.
• Smil, V. (2005). Creating the twentieth century: Technical innovations of 1867-1914 and their lasting impact. New York: Oxford University Press.
• South China Morning Post. (1907, August 27). Telephones for Turkey. South China Morning Post.
• Tanrıkut, A. (1984). Türkiye'de posta ve telgraf ve telefon tarihi ve teşkilat ve mevzuatı. Ankara: Efem Matbaacılık.
• TBBM (Türkiye Büyük Millet Meclisi). (1910). Meclis-i Ayan Zabıt Ceridesi, Cilt 1. Devre 1, İçtima Senesi 2, İnikat 62, 17 Nisan 1326 [April 30, 1910]. Online: https://www.tbmm.gov.tr/tutanaklar/. Accessed January 27, 2019.
• TBMM (Türkiye Büyük Millet Meclisi). (1909). Meclis-i Mebusan Zabıt Ceridesi, Cilt 1. Devre 1, İçtima Senesi 1, İnikat 85, 21 Mayıs 1325 [July 3, 1909]. Online: https://www.tbmm.gov.tr/tutanaklar/. Accessed January 27, 2019.
• TFF (Türkiye Futbol Federasyonu). (1992). Türk futbol tarihi 1904-1991 1. cilt. Ankara: TFF Yayınları.
• The Atalanta Constitution. (1905, October 29). Sultan fears death by ‘phone: All telephone apparatus ordered confiscated at Constantinople. The Atalanta Constitution.
• The Christian Science Monitor. (1909a, September 18). Constantinople wants bids on first telephone Service: Ban on secret communications established by former Sultan Abdul Hamid has been removed under the new regime. The Christian Science Monitor.
• The Christian Science Monitor. (1909b, December 9). American firm gets contract. The Christian Science Monitor.
• The Christian Science Monitor. (1911, April 17). Constantinople telephone plan given approval: Turkish government keeps right to purchase from syndicate in ten years, also sharing in profits. The Christian Science Monitor.
• The Irish Times. (1911, November 20). New issues: The Constantinople Telephone Company. The Irish Times.
• The Irish Times. (1914, February 19). The Constantinople Telephone Company. The Irish Times.
• The Manchester Guardian. (1909, November 27). Constantinople telephone contract. The Manchester Guardian. The Manchester Guardian. (1911, March 29). Constantinople telephone concession. The Manchester Guardian. The Manchester Guardian. (1922, April 28). Constantinople after eight years: A contrast (from a correspondent). The Manchester Guardian. The New York Times. (1909). Phones for Constantinople: American-British-French group selected to install a system. The New York Times.
• The New York Times. (1925a, February 15). Phones for Angora: Swedish company to install system in Turkish capital. The New York Times.
• The New York Times. (1925b, November 25). Turkish girls to strike: Constantinople telephone union seeks 50 per cent. wage rise. The New York Times.
• The New York Times. (1927, February 6). Notes on trade and industry abroad: Telephone service for Smyrna. The New York Times.
• The New York Times. (1930a, March 19). I.T. & T. acquires phones in Turkey: Tenth foreign country where it controls operation of the systems. The New York Times.
• The New York Times. (1930b, March 23). Telephone chain in six continents: American companies and their affiliates to interconnect world divisions, land lines, cable, radio, purchase of Turkish company by I.T. and T. latest move in expansion of system. The New York Times.
• The New York Times. (1930c, June 8). I.T. & T. to observe tenth anniversary. The New York Times.
• The New York Times. (1935, August 15). Turks buy phone system: Accord with British company in Istanbul awaits ratification. The New York Times.
• The Times of India. (1923, December 21). End of Chester Concession: Annuled by Angora, history of a gigantic project (through Reuters Agency). The Times of India.
• The Times of India. (1904, June 30). Capitals of Eastern Europe: Constantinople II. The Times of India.
• The Times of India. (1911, July 14). Telephone for Constantinople. The Times of India.
• Tsigie, A. & Feyissa, G. (1999). Ethiopia: Past, present, and future. In Noam, E. L. (ed.), Telecommunications in Africa (51-78). New York: Oxford University Press.
• Üçer, S. E. (2018a). Alo kapitalizm: Turkish telecommunications policy in the context of an outward oriented development strategy [PhD Dissertation]. Boğaziçi University, Istanbul.
• Üçer, S. E. (2018b). Posta bağımlılığı: Ekonomi-politik perspektifinden Osmanlı İmparatorluğu posta tarihine bakış. Conference presentation at V. Yıldız Uluslararası Sosyal Bilimler Kongresi, Istanbul, Turkey, December 13-14.
• Üçer, S. E. (2019). Türk Telekom özelleştirmesinin istihdam, yatırım ve hizmetlere erişim açısından sonuçları. Finans Politik ve Ekonomik Yorumlar, 56(649), 57-90.
• Üçer, S. E. (2020). Ottoman telegraphic protectionism in comparative perspective. Conference presentation at 4th Annual International Conference on Social Sciences (AICSS ’20), Istanbul, Turkey, September 10-11.
• Ülker, E. (2018). Multinational capital, public utilities, and urban change in late Ottoman Istanbul: Constantinople Tramway and Electric Company. Moderne Stadtgeschichte, (1), 68-80.
• Wall Street Journal. (1910, June 29). Turkish concessions: Franchise for five lines at Constantinople opened to bids by American contractors. Wall Street Journal.
• Wall Street Journal. (1930, March 20). International Tel. & Tel. Wall Street Journal.
• Xiong-Jian, L. & You-Nong, Z. (1994). China. In Noam, E. M., Komatsuzaki, S. & Conn, D. A. (eds.), Telecommunications in the Pacific basin: An evolutionary approach (73-85). New York: Oxford University Press, 1994.
• Yazıcı, N. (1995). Posta Nezareti’nin kuruluşu. In İhsanoğlu, E. & Kaçar, M. (eds.), Çağını yakalayan Osmanlı! Osmanlı Devleti’nde modern haberleşme ve ulaştırma teknikleri (23-43). İstanbul: IRCICA.
• Yıldırım, K. (2013). Osmanlı’da işçiler (1870-1922): Çalışma hayatı, örgütler, grevler. İstanbul: İletişim.