Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the investigation of a hotel in Jingdezhen, Jiangxi Province, which raised its prices from around 90 yuan to approximately 1000 yuan during the National Day holiday, highlighting public reactions and regulatory responses [3][4]. Summary by Sections Price Increase Incident - The hotel in question listed prices between 970 to 1059 yuan per room for the holiday, a significant increase from the usual 90 yuan [4]. - The hotel staff explained that the high price was not the final charge, as customers could adjust the price based on actual conditions upon check-in, with an estimated final price of around 500 to 600 yuan [4]. Regulatory Response - The local market supervision bureau announced an investigation into the hotel for allegedly violating the Price Law of the People's Republic of China [3][5]. - The Price Law allows for market-driven pricing for most goods and services, with only a few exceptions where government pricing is applicable [5]. Public Reaction - Many consumers expressed support for the hotel’s pricing strategy, arguing that as long as prices are clearly marked, there should be no issue with price increases during peak times [3][6]. - The public's mixed reactions indicate a disconnect between regulatory actions and consumer perceptions, with some feeling that the enforcement was excessive [7]. Legal Framework and Future Considerations - The Price Law outlines eight types of "unfair pricing behavior," but the specific violations by the hotel were not clearly identified in the regulatory announcement [6]. - The current Price Law, established in 1997, is seen as outdated, and a draft for its revision has been released for public feedback, aiming to clarify definitions and enforcement standards [7].

Core Viewpoint - The public reaction to the price increase of a hotel during the National Day holiday reflects a complex relationship between consumers, businesses, and regulatory authorities, where consumers do not oppose price hikes but resist regulatory interventions perceived as excessive or unjustified [1][4]. Group 1: Price Increase Context - A hotel in Jingdezhen, Jiangxi Province, raised its room prices from approximately 90 yuan to between 970 and 1059 yuan during the National Day holiday, a tenfold increase [2]. - The hotel staff explained that the high price listed online was not the final price, as consumers could adjust the payment based on actual pricing upon check-in, which was expected to be around 500 to 600 yuan [2]. Group 2: Regulatory Framework - The current Price Law allows for market-driven pricing for most goods and services, with only a few exceptions where government pricing is applicable [3]. - The law outlines eight types of "unfair pricing behavior," including market manipulation and price gouging, but the specific violations by the hotel were not clearly identified in the regulatory notice [3]. Group 3: Public Sentiment and Regulatory Actions - Many consumers expressed support for the hotel’s pricing strategy, arguing that as long as prices are clearly marked, businesses should have the right to set prices based on market conditions [1][4]. - The regulatory actions taken by the Jingdezhen market supervision authority were met with skepticism, as the public perceived a lack of clear justification for the enforcement measures [4]. Group 4: Legislative Considerations - The existing Price Law, enacted in 1998, is seen as outdated, with calls for revisions to address ambiguities and inconsistencies in enforcement [5][6]. - A draft amendment to the Price Law has been released for public consultation, aiming to clarify standards for identifying unfair pricing practices [6].

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the rise of "involutionary competition" in various industries, particularly in the platform economy, and the regulatory response to mitigate its negative effects through new laws and regulations [1][4][19]. Summary by Sections Involutionary Competition and Price Wars - Involutionary competition is characterized by low-price strategies leading to a race to the bottom, resulting in decreased profit margins and industry stagnation [5][6]. - Price wars, while appearing beneficial in the short term, can create long-term risks and harm the industry ecosystem, as seen in recent high-subsidy practices by food delivery platforms [4][8]. Market Dynamics and Strategic Considerations - Companies engage in price wars as a strategic choice to gain market share, often sacrificing profits for survival in a highly competitive environment [6][7]. - The phenomenon is exacerbated by market homogeneity and the pressure to maintain short-term profits, leading to a "prisoner's dilemma" where individual rational choices result in collective irrational outcomes [7][8]. Legal Framework and Regulatory Changes - New amendments to the Anti-Unfair Competition Law and the Price Law aim to curb malicious price competition and promote a shift from price wars to value competition [10][11]. - The revised laws introduce stricter regulations against below-cost pricing and coercive practices by platforms, aiming to protect smaller businesses and ensure fair competition [12][13]. Challenges in Implementation - Identifying below-cost pricing poses challenges due to hidden and dynamic costs in the platform economy, necessitating more precise regulatory measures [14]. - A multi-faceted governance system is required to ensure the effective implementation of these new regulations, combining legal frameworks, industry self-regulation, and technological support [15][16]. Future Directions for Competition - The transition from price competition to value competition is essential for sustainable industry growth, requiring collaboration among government, industry, and enterprises [17][19]. - It is crucial to distinguish between legitimate competition driven by innovation and harmful involutionary practices, ensuring that regulatory measures do not stifle healthy market dynamics [18][19].