Meituan: Cooperating with regulatory investigations, all businesses are running

Today, Meituan received a notice from the State Administration of Market Supervision to file an investigation into Meituan’s suspected monopolistic conduct in accordance with the law. The company will actively cooperate with the investigation by the regulatory authorities to further improve the level of business compliance management, protect the legitimate rights and interests of users and all parties, promote the long-term and healthy development of the industry, and earnestly fulfill its social responsibilities. At present, the company’s various businesses are operating normally.

Recently, the State Administration of Market Supervision, based on reports, filed investigations into Meituan’s “choice of two” and other suspected monopolistic behaviors in accordance with the law.

The two chefs of administrative law and civil law are ecstatic, this wave can be called a dream linkage. The recent limelight by the General Administration of Market Supervision is simply unprecedented. First, it announced the penalty decision against Alibaba, ordering the Alibaba Group to stop abusing its dominant market position and imposing a fine of 4% of its 2019 domestic sales of 455.712 billion yuan, totaling 18.228 billion yuan. Now it is because of choosing one of the two, the suspected monopolistic behavior of Meituan has been investigated. Let me first popularize what is one of the two options: “Choose one between the two” refers to abuse of market dominance and constitutes restricted trading behavior. It refers to the use of dominant position and merchant’s dependence on the platform to use improper means to force operators to “two options” between platforms. Choose one”. The concept of choosing one of the two is a black or white relationship. Above the chess game, the white pieces overturned all the black pieces, which is definitely unreasonable. According to our hometown, it’s not atmospheric enough. But do you make money, business, except that it may involve illegality. You talk to it about the rule of law, and the boss tells you the market value. There is only one prerequisite for choosing one of the two. Party A’s market share is high enough, and Party A has the final say. Because of enough confidence, the user’s viscosity is high enough to dare to play such a card. It’s like a canteen outsourced by our previous school, this is the only one, you are hungry if you don’t eat. Why Meituan is the best? The first is that Meituan’s technology is in place, its market share is high, and it is advancing so fast that it is still louder than other companies. The other is that the proportion of food delivery in social life is indeed too large. Whether it is the second-tier, third-tier, or the first-tier, food, drink and housing are just people’s needs. Take-out has become most of the traffic in restaurants and convenience stores. There are even some small shops that rent out shops in residential areas to specialize in take-out business. And Meituan takeaway has a market share of up to 60%, which is undoubtedly a pretty scary figure. It is precisely because of the high viscosity of Meituan’s local life that Meituan has a borderless river. Freedom of transaction is the soul and rule of the market economy. This is a universal truth. The European Union sanctions Google and our antitrust investigation on am is also the same. No matter what industry it is, no matter what platform it is, Xiaoyu Xiaoxia must be given a way to survive and consumers have the freedom to choose. We just hope that when we eat a takeaway, we can not only find a store on a takeaway, but also find a store on b takeaway. We just hope that when shopping, we can not only see the merchants on the a platform, but also on the b platform. And this is exactly what the anti-monopoly law and administrative law should have, and it is also the meaning of the anti-monopoly guidelines. In the light of the rule of law, I hope that every citizen can enjoy the temperature of the rule of law. Ande leaned on the heavenly sword and cut long whales across the sea. The rule of law is the sword of heaven in the operation of our market economy. On February 7 this year, the Anti-Monopoly Commission of the State Council formally formulated and issued the Anti-Monopoly Guidelines of the Anti-Monopoly Commission of the State Council on Platform Economy (hereinafter referred to as the “Guide”), emphasizing that the “Anti-Monopoly Law” and supporting laws and regulations apply to all industries , Treat all types of market entities equally and fairly, aiming to prevent and stop monopolistic behavior in the platform economy, and promote the orderly, innovative and healthy development of the platform economy. The “Guide” is based on the “Anti-Monopoly Law” and consists of six chapters and 24 articles, including general provisions, monopoly agreements, abuse of market dominance, concentration of operators, abuse of administrative power to exclude restrictions on competition, and supplementary provisions. In response to hot issues such as “choose one” and “big data”, which are frequently reflected by all parties in the society, the “Guide” clarifies that to identify the abuse of market dominance in the field of platform economy, it is usually necessary to first define the relevant market and analyze the operator’s Whether the relevant market has a dominant position, and then analyze whether it constitutes an abuse of market dominance based on the individual case. The “Guide” lists in detail the consideration factors for determining or presuming that an operator has a dominant market position, including the operator’s market share, relevant market competition conditions, the operator’s ability to control the market, the operator’s financial and technical conditions, and other operators’ Dependence, difficulty of market entry, etc. At the same time, the “Guide” detailed the manifestations of abuse of market dominance one by one, such as unfair price behavior, selling below cost, refusal to deal, restricted transaction, tie-in sale, or additional treatment of unreasonable trading conditions, etc., to promote various aspects of the platform economy. Such market entities operate in compliance with laws and regulations.

zhiwo

By zhiwo

0 0 vote
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
11 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
helpmekim
5 months ago

I personally think that it is a blessing to be invited to drink tea by the General Administration of Markets. Except for his predecessor, Ali, many companies want to go to the General Administration to have a drink of 99 years of Pu’er without a chance. In this world, each of us wants to be successful and we all want to live wonderfully. But if you can’t be invited to drink tea when you are young, when will you still have a chance to have a drink? Struggle, young man, how can you drink this good Pu’er without making an effort different from ordinary people?

heloword
5 months ago

The reason behind this is that the competition for exclusive merchants by takeaway platforms in the past two years has never stopped. In different regional markets, platforms that dominate the market often use exclusive strategies to consolidate the “fruits of labor.” An Ele.me agent told Caixin reporters that if a city has a significant market share, it will adopt an exclusive strategy. Industry insiders told Caixin reporters that “pure takeaway merchants” that rely heavily on platforms often have no choice, high commissions and “force independence” (forcing merchants to choose one of the two platforms of Meituan and Ele.me) to cooperate ) The problem often appears in the agent city. “The agent contract period is only one or two years, and the initial promotion costs and rider wages need to be borne by the agent. In order not to make wedding clothes for others, the agent city will often set higher commissions and will not hesitate to kill chickens to get eggs.” During the 2020 epidemic period , The game of interest between catering merchants and platforms has intensified. Because of the epidemic, merchants eager to obtain orders were unable to pay attention to “exclusive agreements” and began to receive orders on multiple platforms. Merchants’ “violation of contract” aroused Meituan’s vigilance, and then upgraded its control of exclusive merchants. In early April, the merchants who signed an “exclusive agreement” with Meituan and quietly opened the Ele.me store found that their Meituan orders had fallen precipitously. The Guangdong Catering Association publicly accused Meituan of violating anti-monopoly regulations in its letter of negotiation on April 10, 2020. Under the epidemic situation, it still strongly requires catering businesses to do “exclusive management”, otherwise they will be forced to cancel and remove the store, suspected of violating the ” The Anti-Unfair Competition Law, the Anti-Monopoly Law, and the Electronic Commerce Law provide relevant provisions on the prohibition of exclusion of competition. After the turmoil, Meituan and the merchant finally reached a settlement, and the word “monopoly” was no longer mentioned in the settlement statement on April 18. After the reconciliation, the owner of a tea restaurant in Guangdong told Caixin reporters that after being restricted by Meituan, he finally chose to give up Ele.me because of the difference in sales between Meituan and Ele.me. In response to the investigation, Meituan responded that the company will actively cooperate with the regulatory authorities to further improve the level of business compliance management, protect the legitimate rights and interests of users and all parties, promote the long-term and healthy development of the industry, and earnestly fulfill its social responsibilities. At present, various business policies of the company are in operation. This matter has attracted great attention because Alibaba has been investigated for suspected monopolistic behavior in the implementation of “choose one out of two”. “After the fall of the Ali’s’choose one’ case, the real anti-monopoly on the Internet platform has just begun.” said a person close to the anti-monopoly supervision of the State Administration of Market Supervision. Before the introduction of the Ali case and the “Platform Antitrust Guidelines”, the Shanghai Market Supervision Bureau had completed an antitrust investigation on a food delivery platform based on existing legal tools. On April 12, the Shanghai Market Supervision Bureau announced the punishment decision for the abuse of market dominance by the foreign sales platform “Shipai” on December 25, 2020. The investigation of this case was initiated in June 2019, and the company was finally imposed on 2018. A fine of 3% of sales amounted to RMB 1,168,600. Du Guangpu, a lawyer from Jingshi Law Firm, believes that a typical significance of the “Shipaishi” case is that it has sounded the anti-monopoly alarm for many “hidden champion” companies in the Internet vertical industry, occupying specific Internet market segments and regional markets. Enterprises with dominant market positions may also face antitrust penalties or lawsuits in the future if they abuse them. Recently, provincial-level law enforcement agencies have successively issued anti-monopoly and competition compliance guidelines. At present, many places have begun investigations into foreign sales and local life markets. Caixin learned from people familiar with the matter that the Jilin City Supervision Bureau filed an investigation into Meituan’s unfair competition in Jilin in July 2020 and made a fine of 700,000 yuan in April 2021. Because the original Meituan Jilin branch was cancelled before the punishment, the Jilin Municipal Supervision Bureau finally took Meituan’s head office as the target of punishment, becoming the first case in which a local market supervision department punishes a national Internet company.

helpyme
5 months ago

Meituan’s revenue in 2019 was 97.5 billion (Alibaba calculated its sales in 19 years). If it is fined at 4% of Ali’s turnover, it would be 3.9 billion. This amount of money is nothing to Meituan, because Meituan has just raised $10 billion. On the evening of April 19, according to a number of foreign media reports, Meituan planned to raise up to US$10 billion (approximately 65 billion yuan) through the issuance of stocks and convertible bonds, which created the largest increase in the history of the Hong Kong Stock Exchange. In our country, the level of an entrepreneur depends on his understanding of his own success. If he only understands that a person is sure to win, it means that the entrepreneur is still relatively immature and is likely to fall back in the future. Great entrepreneurs will only owe the empowerment of the times, that is to say, they will owe their success to taking advantage of the trend. When Alibaba was fined 18.2 billion, I once commented: Standardizing corporate behavior is more conducive to the development of these leading companies, and it is also conducive to Chinese entrepreneurs to venture out (because there is no need to worry about being bullied by giant companies)! The punished stone hammer of Alibaba shows that the state’s efforts to curb the platform economy and prevent the disorderly expansion of capital are real. This can no longer be said to be “killing the chicken and the monkey.” And also commented: these platform economies may readjust their strategic direction. (Then a few days later, Penguin established a new business unit “Sustainable Social Value Business Unit”, with an initial investment of 50 billion. Tencent still has a keen sense of smell, which is much stronger than other Internet companies.) Ali was fined, others What about the platform economy? For my country’s large Internet companies, they are basically involved in monopoly to some extent. Do you want to say more about the Penguin Empire? I think that this time Alibaba was fined, the most trembling is the Penguin Empire. Then, Didi Taxi, Meituan, Shell, JD.com, ByteDance, Baidu, and Ctrip, which will soon be listed on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange, can all be monopolized. If the country moves really well, it means that the business strategies of these large platforms may have to change, and the previous behavior of using capital to reap the market with huge waves and violence can no longer be used. These platform economies may re-adjust their strategic direction, and they may operate their main businesses honestly and dare not want to expand their businesses. At the same time, these companies may step up internationalization and open up foreign markets because the domestic market is almost squeezed. Even so, I think these platforms will have no problems in the long-term economy, and our country will rely on them to participate in international competition and reap foreign dividends. Moreover, I think that cracking down on the platform economy and eliminating monopoly is a good thing, not only for consumers to choose consumption, but also for entrepreneurs to start their own businesses. Everyone must remember that the country is not trying to kill the platform economy, but to regulate the development of the platform economy, and that the platform economy should conform to the development direction of the country and society. This round of cleaning the platform economy is not an opportunity.

sina156
5 months ago

Oh yeah, it should have come long ago. Meituan’s forcing merchants to stand in line is the standard choice, threatening to stop commenting if any merchants are hungry. Either it is to reduce your traffic and rank, anyway, everything that can disgust you, it is not too troublesome. If Ele.me was not acquired by Ali back then, it might be bankrupt now. Perhaps, people can develop to such a large scale only by engaging in exclusivity. In addition, it feels that Meituan is not only suspected of monopolizing and squeezing businesses, but also suspected of killing familiar with big data and disgusting users. The two Meituan accounts of my friend and I were in the same store, and the discounts were different. It was really shocking.

yahoo898
5 months ago

It’s Tencent and Didi’s turn. Everyone is eager to see through the Weibo comment area. Why did Ali deal with Meituan first? Because anti-monopoly is also easy to start with. Ali forced the merchants to choose one of the two, and the monopoly behavior is very clear. Moreover, online shopping has penetrated into the lives of the people. E-commerce is related to the national economy and people’s livelihood. It is relatively easy and important to start with Ali. Meituan is the same as Ali, but it also forces the merchants to choose one of the two. Therefore, after Ali is Meituan, the experience of handling the case can be copied. I think the next one should be Didi. Because Didi’s monopoly was clear, the facts and evidence were clear when Didi and Kuaidi merged. For Tencent, I don’t think it is easy. Because, it still needs to be clear how to characterize Tencent’s monopoly? Is WeChat blocking Taobao and Douyin links? Or does Tencent directly monopolize domestic social networking? Tencent’s monopoly problem is not qualitative and difficult to deal with. If it is stricter, it is possible to split Tencent directly. If you loosen it up, you can fine more than 10 billion yuan like Ali. Look at the next follow-up. I hope to split Tencent directly. The key is how to split it. I have no experience in this.

leexin
5 months ago

After all, what should come will come. Don’t have a fluke mentality. The last “choose one” monopoly was Ali. The State Administration for Market Regulation has a very firm and clear attitude: On April 10, 2021, the State Administration for Market Regulation made an administrative penalty decision in accordance with the law, ordering Alibaba Group to stop illegal activities and impose a fine of 4% of its 2019 domestic sales of 455.712 billion yuan. , Totaling 18.228 billion yuan. (From the Economic Observer) As the saying goes, you get melons when you grow melons, and you get beans when you grow beans. The seeds that Ali planted in 2015 will finally be “investigated” in 2021. According to the report from the Economic Observer, the chicken intends to warn the monkey, but knocks the mountain to shock the tiger. The bottom line has been set, knowing that you commit a crime, naturally treat each other according to the law, and will never tolerate it. This can also be enough to see how resolute the State Administration for Market Supervision is towards the “zero tolerance” attitude of monopoly. Fortunately, Meituan has a good attitude, “cooperating with regulatory investigations and normal operations of various businesses”.

greatword
5 months ago

I suggest that you don’t have any expectations for the General Administration of Markets. It is nothing more than a fine of three glasses of wine and sprinkling water to fool the onlookers. That fine is not enough for Meituan to send a bonus. As long as the money is paid, it will pass. Should Meituan have a monopoly or a monopoly, should choose one of the two or choose one of the two, should it be unfair competition or unfair competition, don’t expect them to learn any lessons because they have been fined some money, and their future eating habits will not have any Get better. When will the General Administration of Markets dare to split these monopoly giants, I will send a pennant to Sanlihe East Road.

loveyou
5 months ago

Meituan responded! The response stated that the company will actively cooperate with the regulatory authorities in investigating Meituan’s WeChat official account and issued a document stating: Today, Meituan received a notice from the State Administration of Market Supervision to file an investigation into Meituan’s suspected monopolistic behavior in accordance with the law. The company will actively cooperate with the investigation by the regulatory authorities to further improve the level of business compliance management, protect the legitimate rights and interests of users and all parties, promote the long-term and healthy development of the industry, and earnestly fulfill its social responsibilities. At present, the company’s various businesses are operating normally.

strongman
5 months ago

The way of heaven is reincarnation, who is forgiven by heaven. At 16:30 on April 26, the State Administration of Market Supervision and Administration’s Weibo account, Shishuo Xinyu, released a Weibo: Recently, the State Administration of Market Supervision, based on the report, filed a case for suspected monopolistic behaviors such as “choosing one of two” against Meituan. ​Recently, everyone has read the news: Meituan was fined 100W yuan for unfair competition. This was in 2017. The trial was completed in 2019, and it was uploaded to Wenxue.com only on February 26, 2021. The case number is: (2019) Zhejiang 07 Minchu No. 402, which determined that: Meituan forced merchants to only sign agreements with Meituan. If it is not an exclusive operation, the fee rate is increased to 6% and it is discovered that the merchant has signed an agreement with Ele.me and Baidu to forcibly stop Meituan and restrict its login. The proper thing is to abuse the market position and force the choice of one of the two behaviors, just as Alibaba was fined 18.2 billion last time. “If an operator violates the provisions of this law and abuses a dominant market position, the anti-monopoly law enforcement agency shall order it to stop the illegal act, confiscate the illegal income, and impose a fine of 1% to 10% of the previous year’s sales.” When the Market Supervision Administration filed a case, Meituan couldn’t escape. What I am most concerned about now is the percentage of sales that will be fined. Meituan’s 2020 revenue is 114.8 billion, 4% of which is 4.592 billion. The big knife of supervision has fallen, and none of them can run away. I really hope that the black-hearted goose will be slaughtered as soon as possible, I believe it will not be far away.

stockin
5 months ago

With increased competition, consumers, takeaways, and shops will have more choices and bargaining powers, and companies will also increase R&D investment to cope with competition! In the end we will get better service. Reduce industry volume! Combining that Alibaba was punished for monopoly not long ago, there may be other large companies…I wonder if some companies have set aside “monopoly fines” to be paid in the second half of the year!

11
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x