International Online News (Reporter Zhao Junpeng): Recently, the General Office of the State Council issued the Guiding Opinions on Promoting the Healthy Development of Platform Economic Norms (hereinafter referred to as Opinions), pointing out that we should strengthen policy guidance, support and guarantee, and strive to create a fair competitive market environment.
The Opinion puts forward five policy measures, and points out that it is necessary to maintain fair competition market order, formulate and promulgate relevant regulations on supervision and management of online transactions, investigate and punish illegal acts such as abusing market dominance, restricting transactions and unfair competition in the Internet field according to law, and strictly prohibit platforms from unilaterally signing exclusive service contracts. At the same time, we should ensure that market participants of platform economy participate in market competition fairly. This measure will be implemented by the General Administration of Market Supervision.
In this regard, some professionals said: with the introduction of the Opinion, the growing chaos of two choices one will be effectively curbed.
Competitive Radar covers hundreds of thousands of businesses
Data from the National Bureau of Statistics show that in the first half of 2019, online retail sales grew by 21.6% year-on-year, accounting for 19.6% of the total retail sales of consumer goods. With the emergence of new models and new formats, the pulling effect of e-commerce on the economy is further highlighted.
On the other hand, with the intensification of competition in the industry, some e-commerce platforms continue to take monopoly measures using existing advantages, resulting in heavy losses to businesses and consumers, resulting in extremely bad social impact.
Xinhua News Agency reported on May 31 that on the eve of this years 618, in order to implement a more thorough two choices, a platform was built to compete radar to scan the whole network of similar goods, covering hundreds of thousands of businesses.
According to incomplete statistics, during this period, at least dozens of well-known brands issued official statements that they would withdraw from the new e-commerce platform and sell only on one e-commerce platform. Correspondingly, the well-known electrical brand Granz has repeatedly condemned the two-in-one behavior, and said that due to sanctions such as search shielding and commodity current limitation, the sales of enterprises in an e-commerce platform tend to stagnate, resulting in significant losses.
In this regard, some e-commerce professionals analysis that: with the publication of official statements, periodic Off-Shelf hot commodities and other acts, brand is facing the pressure of two choices one of the self-insurance methods. Brand merchants all hope to develop through multiple channels and do not want to become the chess pieces of monopoly platform, so they often only declare that they do not close their stores. The implementation platform will widely disseminate the brands statements, effectively attacking competitors from the public opinion.
These people further pointed out that only well-known brands have the ability to negotiate, while more small and medium-sized brands can only accept monopoly. During this round of two choices one period, the small and medium-sized enterprises, which lost tens of millions of revenue and were forced to lay off a large number of employees, are not in the minority.
One Platform Benefits Ten Thousands of Businesses Lost
Two choices one is the primary means of commercial competition, essentially by forcing brands to choose only a single channel to influence consumerschoice. The ultimate goal of such monopolies is to make more profits, and these costs are ultimately paid by consumers.
The Internet is considered to have established an open and equal new business environment, and two choices undoubtedly symbolizes closure and retrogression. Compared with business model innovation, technological innovation, organizational change and other ways, two choices one is simpler. Once the means based on dominating the monopoly market position are effective, the platform will be used repeatedly. But on the other hand, in the long run, enterprises will also lose the power of innovation, and can only achieve their own growth by charging higher fees to brand companies constantly.
Despite the extremely bad impact, the large-scale two-in-one is still continuing. Recently, a number of well-known brands have issued statements that they will terminate their cooperation with a new Jin e-commerce platform.
In this regard, the industry said: because 618 two choices one did not achieve the established annihilation target, the implementation platform is planning to take more drastic measures, this round of two choices one is expected to continue to the double eleventh cycle.
Among the brands that issued the statement, there are a number of leading national enterprises with annual revenue of 10 billion. The focus of development of these enterprises is how to lead the industry and become an internationally influential Chinese brand, but now they are forced to put the main force into meaningless saw-pull war. Obviously, some monopolistic platforms have become obstacles to the growth of Chinese brands.
Whether it is a brand trader or a consumer, they have the right to make their own choices. Two choices one not only seriously erodes and damages the rights and interests of Chinese enterprises and consumers, but also directly violates a number of laws and regulations, including Electronic Commerce Law, Anti-Unfair Competition Law, Anti-monopoly Law and Consumer Rights and Interests Protection Law.
The plight of brand merchants is arousing great concern from relevant departments.
Previously, Justice Hu Yunteng of the Supreme Peoples Court had pointed out that some e-commerce entities used their own dominant position, abused market dominant power and forced businesses to choose one from the other cases. Such actions violated the market economy concept of fair competition, and need to be regulated by judgment to safeguard the basis of fair competition. Then.
The Opinions issued by the General Office of the State Council clearly pointed out that illegal acts such as abusing market dominance and restricting transactions and unfair competition in the Internet field should be investigated and punished according to law.
It is believed that with the publication and implementation of Opinion, monopoly and retrogression of one platform benefits and ten thousand enterprises are damaged such as two choices one will gradually withdraw from the historical stage.
Source: International Online Responsible Editor: Qiao Junjing_NBJ11279