Trip.com used exclusive deals and technical measures to limit competition and offer lowest prices. Read more at straitstimes.com. Read more at straitstimes.com.
Trip.com, owner of travel-booking brands Ctrip, Skyscanner and Qunar, said: “We sincerely accept and will fully comply with it, and will strictly follow the regulator’s requirements to systematically implement each rectification measure, ensuring that all measures are carried out effectively.”
That’s one helluva lot of money to be capitulating so completely over. The article doesn’t provide any useful information — such as what their annual revenue is — to help decide how reasonable that judgement actually is. Not saying the company doesn’t deserve a serious smack-down, but that large a hit would be near fatal for all but the largest companies so some context would be nice.
The complete bending over to the government can be read two ways:
The company execs know they don’t have a leg to stand on - meaning the evidence against them is especially egregious, which makes one wonder just how they managed to getthat out of hand to begin with (let alone how they thought they could get away with it).
The government’s power is at such an unreasonable level to the point where they can just impose any “fine” they feel like, and the recipients of said fine are too afraid for their lives to stand up to it and question its validity. Without any additional numbers the article should have provided for context, it’s impossible to gauge the likelihood of this.
The reality is that it’s likely a bit of both. While the anticompetitive behavior certainly deserved a significant punishment, it’s impossible to know just how significant this one is with the (lack of) information provided.
Thank you for this, but my point was the scant information provided by the article leaves too much to the imagination. If this is the standard quality of their reporting, it’s not a very good source.
That’s one helluva lot of money to be capitulating so completely over. The article doesn’t provide any useful information — such as what their annual revenue is — to help decide how reasonable that judgement actually is. Not saying the company doesn’t deserve a serious smack-down, but that large a hit would be near fatal for all but the largest companies so some context would be nice.
The complete bending over to the government can be read two ways:
The company execs know they don’t have a leg to stand on - meaning the evidence against them is especially egregious, which makes one wonder just how they managed to getthat out of hand to begin with (let alone how they thought they could get away with it).
The government’s power is at such an unreasonable level to the point where they can just impose any “fine” they feel like, and the recipients of said fine are too afraid for their lives to stand up to it and question its validity. Without any additional numbers the article should have provided for context, it’s impossible to gauge the likelihood of this.
The reality is that it’s likely a bit of both. While the anticompetitive behavior certainly deserved a significant punishment, it’s impossible to know just how significant this one is with the (lack of) information provided.
China making an example out of AliExpress Jack Ma is probably leaving a lasting effect
They’re a Chinese company, $8.9B revenue: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trip.com_Group
Thank you for this, but my point was the scant information provided by the article leaves too much to the imagination. If this is the standard quality of their reporting, it’s not a very good source.
Oh man, I thought for the longest time Skyscanner was a small independent project. Didn’t know Trip owns them.