Workflow
携程被指“调价助手”后台强改商家价格
新华网财经·2025-06-20 09:47

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the controversy surrounding Ctrip's "Price Adjustment Assistant" feature, which allows the platform to unilaterally change hotel room prices without merchant consent, leading to significant concerns among hotel operators about their pricing autonomy and market position [1][3][11]. Group 1: Price Adjustment Assistant Functionality - Ctrip's "Price Adjustment Assistant" is an automated pricing tool that monitors competitors' hotel prices and adjusts Ctrip's prices accordingly, often without merchant approval [1][3]. - Merchants report that Ctrip can change promotional activities and pricing without their consent, leading to a situation where they feel powerless to resist these changes [3][4]. - The tool is perceived as a form of "forced pricing," as it automatically lowers hotel prices to maintain a competitive edge, which can severely impact the profit margins of hotel operators [3][4][11]. Group 2: Market Position and Merchant Dilemma - Ctrip holds a dominant market share in the OTA sector, exceeding 50% in 2021 and projected to maintain over 56% in 2024, which contributes to the power imbalance between the platform and hotel operators [6][11]. - Many merchants feel trapped in a "cannot exit" situation due to their reliance on Ctrip for customer traffic, despite the adverse effects of the pricing adjustments [6][7]. - The withdrawal process from Ctrip's platform is described as cumbersome, with merchants facing repeated reactivations of the Price Adjustment Assistant even after attempting to opt-out [8][11]. Group 3: Industry Competition and Regulatory Concerns - The article highlights the increasing "involution" within the hotel industry, where major platforms like Ctrip, Meituan, and JD.com are aggressively competing, often at the expense of smaller merchants [10][11]. - Experts suggest that Ctrip's practices may constitute an abuse of market dominance, potentially violating antitrust laws, although the online travel sector has not yet been a primary focus of regulatory scrutiny [11][12]. - The need for merchants to gather evidence and advocate for their rights is emphasized as a way to prompt regulatory attention and action against unfair practices [11].