阿里巴巴还是拼多多？中国电商卖家被逼二选一

　　商家表示，如果他们在竞对平台开店，他们的天猫店铺就会被中国电商巨头制裁

　　作者：Ryan McMorrow and Nian Liu

　　胡先生在阿里巴巴和拼多多平台上经营在线商店，每月在他位于华南一座两层楼的工厂中的电脑上，通过在线电商平台销售数千种家用电器。 但是今年6月，这位28岁的年轻人表示，他被迫在二者之间做出选择，阿里巴巴告诉他，除非他关闭在拼多多平台的商店，否则天猫平台上的流量就不会导流到他的产品了。 他表示，阿里巴巴只给了他两天时间做选择。他强调：“拼多多约占我们销售额的三分之一，而天猫则占三分之二。我们是一家工厂，如果我们立即关闭拼多多渠道，那将会有问题。”

　　在中国竞争异常激烈的电商市场上，胡先生的经历越来越普遍。 阿里巴巴正在反击拼多多。拼多多通过大量折扣，活动和团购，迅速建立了5.36亿的年消费客户群，占到阿里巴巴中国6.93亿客户总数的四分之三。 现在，拼多多已经取代了拥有3.34亿客户的京东，成为阿里巴巴的主要竞争对手，

　　对此，商家也表示，阿里巴巴要求他们“二选一” - 这种策略已导致两起反竞争行为诉讼。

　　其中一起来自全球最大的微波炉制造商格兰仕集团，它是为数不多的敢于公开抗议阿里巴巴压力手段的公司之一。

　　该公司在广东省的工厂每天生产超过10万台微波炉，并雇用2万名工人。该公司表示，阿里巴巴的麻烦是从格兰仕总裁梁昭贤访问拼多多总部并签署了合作协议之后开始的。格兰仕集团表示，此后不久，阿里巴巴的算法开始让格兰仕天猫店的购物者访问流量显著减少。在618大促的前一天，越来越火大的格兰仕总部连续发表8个声明和一段视频，谴责阿里巴巴的行为。该视频显示了其最畅销的微波炉是如何从天猫的搜索结果中消失的。

　　很明显，这对格兰仕集团造成了巨大的经济伤害，阿里巴巴显然有能力决定卖家的成败。根据阿里巴巴提供给商家的数据，格兰仕6月份通过其天猫官方旗舰店的销售额仅有去年总额的一半，而店铺访问量则下降了37％。

　　去年11月天猫“双十一”活动落幕时，格兰仕的销售额同比下降了69％。 今年秋天，格兰仕在广州法院提起诉讼。 格兰仕公司发言人表示，天猫正在滥用其市场主导地位，违反了中国的《反垄断法》。 她说：“这对我们公司造成了巨大的经济损失。” 拼多多在11月的一次分析师电话会议中表示，由于竞争对手“强迫商家站队”，其平台上超过10,000名商家受到了影响。

　　阿里巴巴发言人表示：“可以理解的是，资源和服务有限的小型平台，跟不上我们可以提供的基础，会让他们感到不知所措。 一些人选择“哭诉”作为商业策略，呼吁监管机构和法院介入，试图放慢市场步伐。 这样最终是行不通的。“ 发言人说：“如果某个品牌的产品适合消费者需要，并且其价格在阿里巴巴的平台上具有竞争力，那么它自然将会展现出来。这个跟商家有没有在别的平台无关。”

　　然而，空调巨头美的集团选择与拼多多切断了关系，此后该公司在天猫上的销售额持续攀升。 专注科技行业的海豚智库首席执行官李成东表示：“他们绝对受到阿里巴巴的压力，没有其他理由放弃拼多多这样的销售渠道。” 他说：“强制排他性是中国电子商务行业的公开秘密。” 美的一位发言人否认他们受到了阿里巴巴的压力。

　　李成东表示，五年前，阿里巴巴成功利用了同样的手段，阻止服装品牌在京东销售。 他说：“京东的服装业务一直没有完全发展起来。” 2017年，京东对阿里巴巴提起诉讼，指控其滥用职权阻止商家在其平台上出售商品。一位知情人士透露，拼多多和唯品会后来也加入了诉讼。这三家公司都从阿里巴巴最大的竞争对手腾讯那里获得了投资。 但是，由于阿里巴巴的律师花了两年时间争论该案的管辖权应该从北京移交给阿里的家乡杭州，此案一直拖着。去年7月，这项异议被法院驳回。

　　相关案件在法院进展缓慢，而监管机构在这个问题上一样难以有作为。 去年《电子商务法》生效实施，商家原本希望这部新法律能够遏制他们所依赖的平台实施胁迫的能力，但律师表示该法律在具体实施方面仍不明晰。

　　该法律的起草者之一，北京大学教授薛军表示，有效的监管方法仍然缺位。 薛军说：“在线下，这类独家协议很普遍，但现在我们正处于平台时代。” 到目前为止，因强迫商户在不同平台之间做出选择而受到处罚的只有美团点评的一些本地合作伙伴，他们强迫餐厅撤离阿里巴巴旗下的饿了么平台。

　　据澎湃新闻报道，去年11月，市场监管机构明确表示，他们正将监管重点转移到电子商务领域。 在与阿里巴巴和其他主要电商平台的会晤中，国家市场监管总局网监司司长梁艾福告诉与会者，总局将展开调查。他表示：互联网领域的‘二选一’、‘独家交易’是《电子商务法》明确禁止的行为，也违反《反垄断法》。” 本月，监管机构提出了《反垄断法》的一些修订意见，这可能有助于他们更好地监管在过去10年里迅猛发展的大型互联网公司。

　　胡先生说，两天的选择期过去后，他工厂天猫店的流量开始下降。根据阿里巴巴的数据，6月份该店流量下降了一半。11月份，其销售额同比减少三分之二。该工厂已经被迫减产，胡先生要求不要透露他真实名字，因为担心会引起进一步的报复。 “否则，我们将面临更大的问题。 如果他们再次袭击我们，我们的公司将破产，” 他说。

　　https://www.ft.com/content/b55d0e0a-33a1-11ea-9703-eea0cae3f0de?accessToken=zwAAAW-oNLhokdO1XQ4KM6ER6tOXA-6gyuPw3g.MEYCIQD6R9ts3YxRa8TJcNRwI3RLE2tiCMMkcJi-rZHoJb7Q9gIhALCEQglo9J6cfYJSASED3jeQFDFpuCBsRd8NtE4icQTZ&sharetype=gift?token=5b18ff62-97a7-47a6-9060-1f2d2f30ca52

　　Sellers asked to choose in battle between Alibaba and Pinduoduo

　　Merchants say China’s ecommerce giant pushes them off its Tmall platform if they use rival

　　Ryan McMorrow and Nian Liu in Beijing YESTERDAY

　　Mark Hu sells thousands of household appliances every month from his computer in a two-story factory complex in south China, using online shops run by Alibaba and Pinduoduo. But in June the 28-year-old said he was forced to pick between them, after Alibaba allegedly told him that unless he shut his Pinduoduo site, online shoppers would no longer be directed to his products on its Tmall platform. He said he was given two days to make his choice. “Pinduoduo was around one-third of our sales, while Tmall was two-thirds,” he said. “We are a factory; if we had shut down Pinduoduo immediately, we would have had problems,” he added.

　　In China’s hyper competitive online shopping market, Mr Hu’s experience is increasingly common. Alibaba is fighting back against Pinduoduo, which has rapidly built an annual customer base of 536m people, three-quarters of Alibaba’s 693m total in China, through heavy discounts, games and group-buying promotions. It is now Alibaba’s main competition, displacing JD.com, which has 334m customers. In response, merchants say they are being asked by Alibaba to “erxuanyi”, or “pick one of two”, a tactic that has already drawn two lawsuits for anti-competitive behaviour.

　　One of those has come from the world’s largest microwave oven maker, Galanz Group, one of the few companies brave enough to speak out publicly against Alibaba’s pressure campaign. The company, whose factories in Guangdong province produce more than 100,000 microwaves a day and employ 20,000 workers, said its troubles with Alibaba began when its president, Liang Zhaoxian, visited Pinduoduo headquarters and signed a co-operation agreement. Alibaba’s algorithms began to divert shopper traffic away from its Tmall store shortly afterwards, the company said. A day before China’s mid-year sales on June 18, Galanz’s increasingly frantic head office began issuing statements denouncing Alibaba — eight altogether — along with a video showing how its top-selling microwaves had disappeared from Tmall’s search results. It’s caused massive economic harm to our company Galanz Group Alibaba’s power to make or break a seller was clear. Galanz’s sales through its official Tmall store in June were half the total compared with the previous year, while visits to the online shopfront fell 37 per cent, according to data Alibaba provides to merchants.

　　During November, when the site’s Singles Day event falls, Galanz sales dropped 69 per cent year-on-year. This autumn Galanz filed a complaint in a court in Guangzhou. A company spokeswoman said that Tmall was abusing its dominant market position and violating China’s antitrust law. “It’s caused massive economic harm to our company,” she said. Pinduoduo claimed in a call with analysts in November that more than 10,000 sellers on its site had seen their business affected by a rival “forcing merchants to take sides”.

　　A spokesperson for Alibaba said: “It’s understandable that smaller platforms with fewer and limited resources and services, who can’t match what we offer, feel overwhelmed. Some have chosen to ‘cry foul’ as a business tactic, appealing to regulators and the courts, trying to slow the market down. That ultimately won’t work.” The spokesperson added: “If a brand’s product offering is relevant, and their price is competitive on our marketplace, it will organically show up. It’s not about other platforms.” Nevertheless, Midea, the air conditioner giant, chose to cut ties with Pinduoduo and has since seen its sales on Alibaba’s Tmall continue to climb. “They were definitely pressured by Alibaba, there is no other reason to offend a sales channel like Pinduoduo,” said Li Chengdong, chief executive of tech-focused think-tank Haitun. “Forced exclusivity is an open secret in China’s ecommerce industry,” he said. A spokesperson for Midea denied it had been pressured by Alibaba.

　　Five years ago, Alibaba successfully leveraged the same playbook to prevent clothing brands from selling on JD.com, Mr Li claimed. “JD’s clothing business never fully developed,” he said. JD.com filed a 2017 lawsuit against Alibaba for abusing its position to prevent merchants from selling on its platform. Pinduoduo and Vipshop later joined the lawsuit according to one person familiar with the process — all three companies have received investment from Alibaba’s biggest rival, Tencent. But the court case has dragged on as Alibaba’s lawyers spent two years arguing that jurisdiction over the case should be moved from Beijing to its hometown of Hangzhou, an argument that was quashed last July.

　　The glacial pace of the courts has been matched by regulators struggling to tackle the issue. Last year a new ecommerce law that sellers had hoped would curb the coercive power of the platforms they depend on went into effect — but lawyers say its implementation remains unclear. One of the law’s drafters, Peking University professor Xue Jun, said an effective regulatory approach remained elusive. “Offline these types of exclusive agreements are very common but now we’re in the platform era,” Mr Xue said. So far the only penalties have been a series of fines against local partners of the food delivery platforms Meituan Dianping and Ele.me for forcing restaurants to choose between the two apps.

　　But in November, market regulators made clear they were turning their focus to ecommerce. In a meeting with Alibaba and other leading platforms, Liang Aifu, head of the State Administration for Market Regulation’s internet arm, told attendees the regulator would launch an investigation and said, “choose one of two and forced exclusivity in the internet arena is expressly prohibited under the ecommerce law and violates the antitrust law”, according to state-owned news outlet The Paper. This month regulators proposed revisions to the antitrust law that could help them better rein in the massive internet companies that have sprouted over the past decade.

　　Mr Hu said traffic to his factory’s Tmall storefront began to fall after the two-day ultimatum passed. In June, traffic dropped by half, according to Alibaba’s numbers. By November, his sales dropped to one-third of the total compared to the previous year. The factory has already been forced to cut back production and Mr Hu asked for its name not to be revealed for fear of inciting further retaliation. “Otherwise we’ll have bigger problems. If they hit us again, our company will go bankrupt,” he said.

相关热词搜索： 阿里巴巴 拼多多