携程集团-S(09961.HK)公告，本公司收到国家市场监督管理总局（「市监总局」）发出的调查通知书。 根据该通知书，市监总局已根据中华人民共和国反垄断法开始对本公司进行调查。本公司将积极配合有 关调查。目前本公司业务一切正常。 来源：视频滚动新闻 ...

Core Viewpoint - Ctrip Group is under investigation by the State Administration for Market Regulation for alleged monopolistic practices, which has led to a significant drop in its stock price [1][3]. Group 1: Investigation and Regulatory Actions - The State Administration for Market Regulation has initiated an investigation into Ctrip Group for suspected abuse of market dominance under the Anti-Monopoly Law of the People's Republic of China [1]. - Ctrip has acknowledged the investigation and stated it will cooperate with regulatory authorities while ensuring normal business operations [2]. - Ctrip has faced multiple regulatory inquiries in the past, including a meeting in August 2025 with the Guizhou Provincial Market Regulation Bureau, which highlighted various violations such as price manipulation and unfair competition practices [3][4]. Group 2: Allegations and Violations - Ctrip has been accused of using technical means to interfere with merchant pricing and engaging in practices like "choose one from two" and price fraud [3][4]. - In September 2025, the Zhengzhou Market Regulation Bureau found Ctrip in violation of the E-commerce Law and issued a corrective notice due to unreasonable restrictions on transaction prices [4]. - Reports indicate that Ctrip has been involved in practices that undermine fair competition, such as unauthorized price adjustments through a tool called "Price Adjustment Assistant" [4][5]. Group 3: Financial Performance - Ctrip achieved record revenue in 2025, with a total revenue of 47.011 billion yuan, representing a year-on-year increase of 15.93%, and a net profit of 29.013 billion yuan, up 94.59% [5]. - In Q3 2025, Ctrip reported revenue of 18.338 billion yuan, a 15.53% increase year-on-year, and a net profit of 19.890 billion yuan, reflecting a 194.01% growth [5]. Group 4: Future Outlook - Several financial institutions have released optimistic forecasts for Ctrip's performance in 2026, citing recovery in domestic business and strong growth in outbound tourism [6]. - Citic Securities has initiated a "buy" rating for Ctrip with a target price of 660 HKD, anticipating continued growth in the domestic hotel business amid a stabilizing competitive landscape [6].

1月14日，国家市场监督管理总局宣布，根据前期核查，依据《中华人民共和国反垄断法》，对携程集团有限公司（下称"携程集团"）涉嫌滥用市场支配地 位实施垄断行为立案调查。此消息迅速引发市场反应，携程集团当日股价大幅下跌。 三季报显示，携程集团前三季度净营业收入达183亿元，同比上升16%；净利润为199亿元，同比增长192.6%。其中国际业务表现尤为亮眼，入境旅游预订同 比增长超过100%，出境酒店和机票预订已全面超越2019年疫情前同期140%水平。 在业务高速扩张的同时，携程集团面临的消费者投诉也居高不下。据相关平台数据，2025年全年针对携程集团的投诉量近2万件，"大数据杀熟"等问题成为 消费者投诉焦点。此次市场监管总局的立案调查，将重点关注携程集团是否滥用其市场支配地位实施垄断行为，这无疑对携程集团的经营模式提出了重大挑 战。 截至14日港股收盘，携程集团（09961.HK）收报569.5港元/股，跌幅达6.49%，市值为3722亿港元。有趣的是，就在前一日（1月13日），携程集团股价刚刚 触及港股上市以来的新高，最高报613港元/股。 此次立案调查并非携程集团首次面临监管关注。2025年9月，郑州市市场 ...

专题：携程被市场监管总局立案调查 文/新浪财经上海站 途景 1月14日，在携程集团有限公司因涉嫌滥用市场支配地位被国家市场监督管理总局立案调查的消息刷屏 后，当天晚间，追觅科技CEO俞浩发布两条朋友圈称要做对标携程的产品，我们今天就推出，让携程不 再垄断。 另一条则称：那我们成立机票与酒旅事业部吧，响应国家号召。 责任编辑：刘万里 SF014 责任编辑：刘万里 SF014 专题：携程被市场监管总局立案调查 文/新浪财经上海站 途景 1月14日，在携程集团有限公司因涉嫌滥用市场支配地位被国家市场监督管理总局立案调查的消息刷屏 后，当天晚间，追觅科技CEO俞浩发布两条朋友圈称要做对标携程的产品，我们今天就推出，让携程不 再垄断。 另一条则称：那我们成立机票与酒旅事业部吧，响应国家号召。 ...

Core Viewpoint - Ctrip is under investigation by the State Administration for Market Regulation for alleged monopolistic behavior and will cooperate with the authorities [1] Group 1 - Ctrip received a notification from the State Administration for Market Regulation regarding the investigation [1] - The company will actively cooperate with the regulatory authorities and implement their requirements [1] - Ctrip emphasizes that all its business operations are running normally and it will continue to provide quality services to users and partners [1]

Core Viewpoint - Ctrip Group-S (09961) has received a notice of investigation from the State Administration for Market Regulation, indicating that an antitrust investigation has been initiated against the company [1] Group 1 - The company will actively cooperate with the ongoing investigation [1] - The company's business operations remain normal at this time [1]

新浪科技讯 1月14日晚间消息，针对携程集团有限公司涉嫌滥用市场支配地位实施垄断遭市场监管总局 立案调查一事，今日一则流出的截图信息显示，追觅科技创始人俞浩宣称公司对标携程的产品"今天就 推出"，目的在于"让携程不再垄断"。 "那我们成立机票与酒旅事业部吧，响应国家号召。"俞浩表示。 责任编辑：何俊熹 "那我们成立机票与酒旅事业部吧，响应国家号召。"俞浩表示。 责任编辑：何俊熹 新浪科技讯 1月14日晚间消息，针对携程集团有限公司涉嫌滥用市场支配地位实施垄断遭市场监管总局 立案调查一事，今日一则流出的截图信息显示，追觅科技创始人俞浩宣称公司对标携程的产品"今天就 推出"，目的在于"让携程不再垄断"。 ...

首先，携程出的问题大概率不在"贵不贵"，而在"能不能选"。在反垄断调查中，一个常见误区是：只要 平台收费高，就一定有问题。但从近年的执法实践看，监管真正警惕的，并不是"价格高低"，而是：市 场参与者是否还拥有真实、有效的选择权。 携程被立案调查不等于已经认定违法，更不等于"必然重罚"，但它释放的信号非常明确：监 管已经开始重新审视平台规则的边界，而不仅是价格与补贴。 近日，市场监管总局依据《反垄断法》，对携程集团涉嫌滥用市场支配地位行为立案调查。表面看，这 只是又一起"平台被查"的新闻，但如果结合近几年反垄断执法的真实着力点，这次调查真正指向的，很 可能并不是价格，而是规则本身。 当问题不再是"贵不贵"，而是"还能不能选"，平台的市场地位，也就不再只是规模问题，而开始触及规 则边界。 接下来，我们再做一次反垄断结构性推演。 换句话说： · 如果价格高，但商家可以自由去别的平台 · 如果佣金高，但规则透明、可谈、可替代 反而未必构成滥用。 真正危险的，是以下情形： · 看起来有很多选择 · 实际上没有一个"能活"的替代选项 而这，正是在线旅游平台最敏感的结构性问题。 其次，携程的"平台地位"，不只是市场份额问题 ...

智通财经APP讯，携程集团-S(09961)发布公告，公司收到国家市场监督管理总局(市监总局)发出的调查 通知书。根据该通知书，市监总局已根据中华人民共和国反垄断法开始对公司进行调查。公司将积极配 合有关调查。目前本公司业务一切正常。 ...

Core Viewpoint - The State Administration for Market Regulation has initiated an investigation into Ctrip Group for alleged monopolistic behavior related to its pricing tool, "Price Adjustment Assistant" [1][2]. Group 1: Investigation Details - The investigation is based on allegations that Ctrip has abused its market dominance by unilaterally modifying hotel room prices without merchant consent [1]. - Complaints from hotel operators in Zhengzhou indicate that Ctrip's "Price Adjustment Assistant" automatically lowers prices based on competitor pricing, disrupting market pricing and hotel operations [1][2]. - Ctrip has acknowledged the investigation and stated it will cooperate with regulatory authorities while maintaining normal business operations [1]. Group 2: Legal Implications - Legal experts suggest that if Ctrip is found to have abused its market position, it could face administrative penalties, particularly if merchants are unable to set their own pricing strategies [2]. - The use of technology or algorithms as a defense for such practices may not be accepted in legal proceedings [2].