元旦假期将至，辽宁旅游市场已涌动起火热势头。根据在线旅游平台飞猪12月19日发布的《2026元 旦假期出游风向标》，2026年元旦奔赴辽宁的旅游订单预订量同比增长超两倍，辽宁展现出强劲的吸引 力。 随着"请3休8"拼假方式的流行，不少游客拉长了假期，也推动旅游消费向深度与个性并重转变。在 玩法上，游客愈发注重个性化体验与跨年仪式感，宠物随行等主题游热度大幅攀升，跨年演出、烟花 秀、灯光秀等"跨年游"相关搜索持续走高，为全省文旅市场营 造浓厚的节庆氛围。 此外，AI技术逐渐成为游客规划行程的"智慧助手"。不少辽宁游客通过在线旅游平台的AI功能咨询 目的地、推荐玩法，并完成相关预订，智能化工具正悄然改变人们的出行准备方式。 从目的地热度看，沈阳、大连、锦州、丹东、鞍山成为最受游客欢迎的城市；抚顺、葫芦岛、阜新 则增长势头强劲，预订增速名列前茅。 与此同时，辽宁游客出境游热情不减，预订量同比上升98%。其中，"落地自驾"成为越来越多辽宁 游客出境游玩的新选择，自由、深度的旅行方式正蔚然成风。 ...

他还表示，其实佣金在8%到15%之间，很多民宿都没有意见。但真正的问题在于，除却这些显 性成本，行业内还存在着更为隐蔽的平台费用。"有些OTA（在线旅游平台）的综合抽成比例高 达30%到40%。我们不禁要问，在如此高的费率挤压下，民宿真正的市场空间和利润空间在哪 里？"他直言不讳地指出，"我的营业收入在很大程度上被视作平台的收益来源，这导致利润的大 头被分走。很多时候，平台挣得比我们这些实际提供服务的经营者还要多，这确实是在挣'血汗 钱'。" 今日晚间，云南省旅游民宿行业协会会长贺双全通过官方账号直播回应表示，"我们欢迎OTA平 台合理的竞争行为，你可以让你的软件更优化、广告更少、界面更简单、用起来更方便，但凭什 么我喜欢用什么App要由你来决定？必须让我去你的平台买东西？必须让我们民宿来站队？这其 实是我们特别反对的地方，是不是已经牵扯到了垄断？我们其实希望平台越来越规范，也就是说 百花齐放。" 贺双全还表示，"云南省旅游民宿行业协会的第一步动作是收集证据，如果哪家云南民宿受到了 这样的欺压，受到了这样的压迫，受到了这样的霸凌，你把资料提供给我们，我们用隐性埋名的 方式，用集体诉讼的方式，向市场监督管理局去 ...

Core Viewpoint - The Yunnan Provincial Tourism Homestay Industry Association has initiated collective legal action against online travel agencies (OTAs) like Ctrip for alleged abuse of market dominance, including unfair competition practices that harm the rights of homestay operators [1][3]. Group 1: Allegations Against OTAs - The association has received multiple complaints from its members regarding OTAs using their market power to impose "choose one from two" clauses, arbitrary commission increases, unfair trading conditions, and traffic blocking, which severely infringe on the rights of homestay operators [1][3]. - The association has engaged a law firm to collect evidence and analyze the situation, calling for members to provide relevant documentation such as contract terms and communication records [1][3]. Group 2: Investigation and Legal Actions - The association's president emphasized that the investigation is not solely targeting a specific OTA but addressing a broader issue that may involve misunderstandings or mismanagement by regional OTA staff [3][4]. - The law firm confirmed the engagement and highlighted the importance of collective action, stating that if widespread issues are confirmed, it could lead to fundamental changes in regulations [4]. Group 3: Previous Regulatory Actions - In August, the Guizhou Provincial Market Supervision Administration held discussions with Ctrip and other travel platforms regarding potential violations, including "choose one from two" practices and price manipulation [4]. - In September, the Zhengzhou Market Supervision Bureau issued a corrective notice to Ctrip for violating e-commerce laws and engaging in unreasonable restrictions on platform operators [4].

云南省旅游民宿行业协会发布《关于启动OTA不正当竞争反垄断维权工作的决定》称，近年来，协会接 到多起会员单位投诉，反映携程等个别OTA（在线旅游）平台利用其市场支配地位，对云南民宿行业实 施了包括但不限于"二选一"霸王条款、单方面随意涨佣、设置不公平交易条件、屏蔽流量等不正当竞争 行为。在证据确凿的基础上，协会将代表全体受害会员，向国家市场监督管理总局、云南省市场监督管 理局等相关部门提起集体投诉，并保留提起反垄断诉讼的权利。 请各会员单位积极配合,如实提供相关线索与证据。协会将坚 定站在会员身后,坚决捍卫行业尊严与合法权益。 (包括合同条款、后台截图、沟通录音、处罚通知等)。 的一个人类在法律服务： 授权协会正式聘请 上海锦天城（昆明）律师 新闻： 本条所 提出手位 参考文献 事务所 作为本次维权行动的专项法律顾问,负责对收集的证据进行 法律梳理、公证与分析。 提起集体投诉:在证据确凿的基础上,协会将代表全体受害会 员,向国家市场监督管理总局、云南省市场监督管理局等相关部门 提起集体投诉,并保留提起反垄断诉讼的权利。 线索征集联系人:熊黎 联系电话/邮箱: 18608881205 - 云南省旅游 2025 ...

该协会表示，为维护会员合法权益，保护云南民宿健康发展空间，营造公平、公正的营商环境，经协会 理事会审议通过，决定正式启动反垄断维权工作: 近日，云南民宿协会发布《云南省旅游民宿行业协会关于启动OTA不正当竞争反垄断维权工作的决 定》。 云南民宿协会表示，近年来，协会接到多起会员单位投诉，反映携程等个别 OTA(在线旅游)平台利用其 市场支配地位，对云南民宿行业实施了包括但不限于"二选一"霸王条款、单方面随意涨佣、设置不公平 交易条件、屏蔽流量等不正当竞争行为。上述行为严重侵害了广大民宿经营者的合法权益，破坏了公平 竞争的市场秩序，阻碍了行业的健康发展。 请各会员单位积极配合，如实提供相关线索与证据。协会将坚定站在会员身后，坚决捍卫行业尊严与合 法权益。 委托法律服务：授权协会正式聘请上海锦天城(昆明)律师事务所作为本次维权行动的专项法律顾问，负 责对收集的证据进行法律梳理、公证与分析。 提起集体投诉：在证据确凿的基础上，协会将代表全体受害会员，向国家市场监督管理总局、云南省市 场监督管理局等相关部门提起集体投诉，并保留提起反垄断诉讼的权利。 启动证据收集：授权协会秘书处及安全专委会，即日起面向全省会员单位公开 ...

Core Insights - Ctrip's recent financial report shows a revenue of 18.3 billion and a net profit of 19.9 billion, raising concerns about the sustainability of such high profits in the industry [1] - The hotel industry is experiencing a push to reclaim direct booking power from Online Travel Agencies (OTAs), reminiscent of past movements in Europe [1][3] - The struggle against OTAs has led to significant legal and marketing efforts from major hotel groups, including campaigns to promote direct bookings [2][3] Group 1: Industry Dynamics - The hotel industry in Europe has historically viewed OTAs as detrimental middlemen, with high commissions being a major pain point [3][4] - Major hotel chains formed alliances, such as the Room Key platform, to combat OTAs by consolidating inventory and driving direct bookings [5][6] - Room Key ultimately failed due to internal conflicts and the realization that direct sales come with hidden costs that can rival or exceed OTA commissions [7][9] Group 2: Cost Analysis - Transitioning to direct sales shifted costs from OTAs to hotels, including website maintenance, marketing, and customer service expenses [8][9] - Analysis from 2016 to 2018 indicated that the total cost of direct sales often matched or exceeded OTA commission rates of 15% to 20% [9][10] - The competitive landscape requires hotels to invest heavily in marketing to compete with OTA advertising budgets, leading to a paradox where direct sales become more expensive [10][11] Group 3: Market Trends - The "advertising board effect" shows that hotels benefit from visibility on OTAs, as direct bookings increase when hotels are listed on these platforms [11][12] - Data from 2013 to 2015 revealed a decline in direct bookings from 59.4% to 55.2%, highlighting the challenges faced by hotels in reclaiming market share [14][17] - The current domestic market sees Ctrip as a dominant player, with commission rates ranging from 8% to 15%, leading to mixed feelings among hotel operators [18][19] Group 4: Comparative Analysis - Ctrip's operational costs are rising, with a 20% increase in operating costs and a 24% increase in sales and marketing expenses, outpacing revenue growth [19] - In comparison, Booking's EBITDA margin is significantly higher at 47%, indicating more efficient operations despite similar revenue growth rates [20] - The European hotel groups have adapted to the presence of OTAs, viewing them as necessary partners rather than adversaries, which contrasts with the current sentiment in the domestic market [21][22] Group 5: Strategic Insights - The hotel industry is recognizing the importance of leveraging OTAs for customer acquisition while focusing on converting high-value customers to direct bookings [22][23] - The competitive landscape in China offers various platforms beyond Ctrip, allowing hotels to diversify their distribution strategies [23][24] - The narrative suggests that without Ctrip, the market dynamics would not necessarily improve, as evidenced by the failure of Room Key [27][28]

Core Viewpoint - The regulatory authority in Zhengzhou has conducted an administrative interview with an online travel platform, highlighting unreasonable restrictions on transaction and pricing imposed on platform operators, and mandating revisions to contract terms and pricing tools to ensure compliance with e-commerce laws [1] Group 1: Regulatory Actions - The Zhengzhou Market Supervision Administration has ordered the online travel platform to revise its service agreements and optimize pricing tools within a specified timeframe [1] - The platform's actions were found to violate relevant provisions of the E-commerce Law, indicating a trend of regularized oversight of price manipulation by internet platforms [1][3] - The recent joint release of the "Internet Platform Pricing Behavior Rules (Draft for Comments)" by multiple regulatory bodies aims to standardize pricing-related business behaviors among platform operators and their partners [3] Group 2: Market Dynamics - Online travel platforms have become a primary choice for consumers, with many merchants relying on platform traffic to enhance profitability [1] - Some dominant platforms impose high commissions while simultaneously forcing merchants to lower prices, disrupting normal market pricing order and violating legal boundaries [1][2] - The interference in pricing by platforms can distort price signals, leading to mismatches between merchants' income and costs, ultimately affecting service quality and consumer experience [2] Group 3: Recommendations for Platforms - Platforms are encouraged to strengthen self-regulatory awareness and establish compliance management systems for pricing behavior [4] - The use of algorithms should be transparent, with clear negotiation mechanisms for price adjustments between platforms and merchants [4] - Platforms should also create complaint channels for pricing issues and maintain transaction information to ensure accountability in compliance management [4]

Core Insights - The report highlights the overall high consumer satisfaction in the online travel sector, but identifies significant issues affecting consumer experience that need attention [1][2][3] Group 1: Contract Issues - Satisfaction score for contract services is the lowest at 81.71, with 80.14% of related complaints involving unfair terms [1][2] - Online travel platforms often use standard contracts that inadequately disclose key service details such as cancellation policies and penalties [2] Group 2: Data Protection and False Advertising - Satisfaction score for personal information protection is 81.87, with 77.30% of complaints related to "data killing" practices [2] - Despite a relatively high satisfaction score of 83.71 for marketing, 72.90% of complaints pertain to false advertising [2] Group 3: After-Sales Service - After-sales service satisfaction score is 82.58, ranking lower among experience dimensions, with 85.58% of complaints focused on refund issues [2] - Complaints regarding refund processes significantly outnumber those related to complaint handling [2] Group 4: Regulatory Recommendations - The report suggests that regulatory bodies should enhance oversight and penalties for violations such as false advertising and unfair terms [3] - It recommends innovative regulatory methods, including data sharing and real-time monitoring of promotional practices to improve compliance [3] - A "white list" system is proposed to encourage businesses that comply with regulations and effectively handle consumer disputes [3]

Core Viewpoint - The Guizhou Provincial Market Supervision Administration has conducted a centralized interview with five online travel platforms (OTAs) to address potential monopolistic practices and other irregularities, marking a shift from post-event penalties to proactive compliance guidance [1][5][6]. Summary by Relevant Sections Regulatory Actions - The interview targets prominent violations such as forced "choose one" behavior, price intervention through technology, order cancellation with price hikes, and price fraud [2][3][5]. - Platforms are required to strictly adhere to laws including the Price Law and the Anti-Monopoly Law, with immediate self-inspection mandated [5][6]. Market Irregularities - Common issues include forced "choose one" practices that limit merchants' autonomy, price intervention through automated systems leading to non-transparent pricing, and unilateral order cancellations that harm consumer rights [2][3][4]. - Price fraud and misleading promotions, such as fictitious original prices and "yin-yang menus," are also prevalent [3][4]. Consumer Complaints - Data from the "Electric Complaint Treasure" platform indicates a significant rise in complaints against OTAs, with issues primarily related to refunds, online fraud, and service quality [3][7]. - The increase in complaints correlates with peak travel periods, highlighting the urgency for regulatory intervention [7]. Industry Challenges - The emergence of price irregularities is attributed to market monopolies, the power dynamics between merchants and platforms, and information asymmetry faced by consumers [8]. - Recommendations for healthy industry development include strict self-regulation by platforms, enhanced law enforcement, and the establishment of a robust credit evaluation system [8].

Core Viewpoint - The acquisition of Dalian Shengya by Tongcheng Travel for 956 million yuan is facing market skepticism, as evidenced by the declining stock prices of both companies following the announcement [1][5]. Group 1: Acquisition Details - Tongcheng Travel's subsidiary, Shanghai Tongcheng, plans to acquire 23.08% of Dalian Shengya's shares, which will give it a total voting power of 30.88% after signing a voting rights delegation agreement with major shareholders [2]. - The acquisition is seen as a strategic move to integrate online and offline tourism resources, potentially enhancing Tongcheng's operational capabilities in the tourism sector [2][3]. Group 2: Market Reaction - Following the announcement of the acquisition, both Tongcheng Travel and Dalian Shengya experienced a decline in stock prices, with cumulative drops of 2.85% and 8.89%, respectively, leading to a combined market value loss of 1.751 billion yuan [1][5]. - Investor sentiment is divided, with some questioning the wisdom of investing in a company with a history of losses, while others see potential in acquiring a shell company for future operations [1]. Group 3: Financial and Governance Issues - Dalian Shengya has a high debt ratio exceeding 80% and is under pressure to resolve short-term debt obligations, with plans to use the funds raised from the acquisition to pay off debts and improve liquidity [3][5]. - Governance issues persist, as evidenced by the abstention of a key shareholder during board votes, raising concerns about potential conflicts among shareholders following the acquisition [6]. Group 4: Strategic Expansion - Tongcheng Travel's acquisition of Dalian Shengya is part of a broader strategy to expand its presence in the tourism industry through various acquisitions, including travel agencies and hotel management companies [8][10]. - The company has reported significant revenue growth, with 2024 revenues reaching 17.341 billion yuan, a 45.77% increase year-on-year, indicating a strong operational performance [10].