Chinese ecommerce leaders brush off regulatory risk to continue 'instant retail' price war
Empower your mind, elevate your skills
China's largest ecommerce platforms show no signs of halting an " instant retail " price war, unusual in its resilience to state criticism, indicating the almost existential importance placed on instant retail as the future of ecommerce.Their fight in instant retail, where delivery can be as quick as half an hour, risks the wrath of authorities not averse to crackdowns and wary that aggressive price-cutting could entrench deflationary pressure in an economy already under fire from U.S. tariffs and restrictions on tech exports to China.Alibaba, JD.com and Meituan have pledged almost ¥200 billion ($28 billion) combined to subsidise one-hour delivery in recent months, leading to customers who order beverages, for instance, effectively receiving them for free.So extreme is the strategy that the trio was summoned for the second time last week to the State Administration of Market Regulation which called for "rational competition" aligned with the government agenda, said a person familiar with the matter."It's really a battle that takes place now but is much more related to the expectations for five to 10 years down the road. (The platforms believe this is) life or death, it might mean the future or the lack of a future for their company," said Ed Sander, tech analyst at Tech Buzz China.The adoption of artificial intelligence and automated warehouses will make instant retail increasingly profitable to the extent it will cannibalise conventional e-commerce, he said.Examples of instant retail and attendant price war include coupons from Alibaba covering the cost of breakfast delivered within 60 minutes, or from Meituan offering free tea. JD Takeaway offers ¥10 coupons for orders as little as ¥11.Alibaba, JD.com and Meituan did not respond to requests for comment.Authorities in China typically take a sustained and firm-handed approach toward practices they deem unfavourable to healthy and rational market development, making dissent rare.State media agency Xinhua was unequivocal in a Wednesday editorial about the negative impact of " zero yuan purchases "."On the surface, platform companies engage in 'price wars' to compete for the instant retail market, but their essence is to use subsidies to give birth to a 'bubble market'," the editorial read. "To put it bluntly, there is no winner."China's $19 trillion economy grew 5.3% in the first half of 2025. Hinting at what may be to come, however, retail sales growth slowed to 4.8% in June from 6.4% in May.Moreover, ANZ economists estimated a 0.1% decline this year in the consumer price index and 3% decline in the producer price index, for what would be the first annual deflation since 2009."A price war is never in the interest of businesses. Consumers gain of course, but from a macroeconomic point of view (it leads) price expectations to keep decreasing," said economics professor Bala Ramasamy at the China Europe International Business School in Shanghai."The level of competition we have in China has become unrealistic and at times toxic. Government intervention has become necessary for the sake of the greater good," he said.The regulatory attention is different to that given to the electric vehicle sector, where price wars stemmed in part from overcapacity. One issued raised by the regulator at the Friday meeting was food waste from unconsumed zero-yuan orders, said the person familiar with the matter, who was not authorised to speak with media and so declined to be identified."Everything points in the direction that they (regulators) are not happy with this, definitely not happy with a lot of tech companies just burning money by handing out all of those consumer discounts that will have no long-term effect," Sander said.The appeal of instant retail battle is difficult to ignore for e-commerce firms that have struggled to unlock growth in the consumer spending slowdown since the COVID-19 pandemic.The instant retail sector is growing around 2.5 times faster than conventional e-commerce and is set to surpass ¥2 trillion in sales by 2030, showed data from the Chinese Academy of International Trade and Economic Cooperation.While consumers may enjoy the low prices, merchants complain on social media that price wars all but eliminate profit margins and restaurateurs bemoan a fall in profitable in-person custom."From a regulatory perspective, authorities are generally in favour of competition, what they oppose most is monopoly," said catering industry analyst Wang Hongdong, founder of catering data research institute NCBD. "So, a complete halt to the delivery war is unlikely ... (though) they are likely to address some current issues, such as the impact on dine-in restaurants."($1 = ¥7.1533)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
Chinese retailer JD to launch five discount stores as competition intensifies
Academy Empower your mind, elevate your skills Chinese retailer plans to open five discount superstores in two Chinese cities, marking its latest move into new segments as competition intensifies in its core e-commerce a report in Beijing Business Today, a government-backed newspaper, the company told Reuters on Tuesday that the supermarkets will be in Zhuozhou city in Hebei province and Suqian, Jiangsu first outlet in Zhuozhou will span 5,000 square metres and will carry everything from detergent to chocolate, with prices intended to be below prevailing market first entered the market last year with the opening of two smaller discount stores in Beijing, aiming to tempt cautious shoppers to spend as China's consumption recovery 27-year-old e-commerce retailer launched "instant delivery" services for food and other goods earlier this year, kickstarting a subsidy war between itself and rival platforms such as Alibaba and also announced that it would renew an international push for growth, launching its consumer-focused express delivery service abroad. It also bought Germany's Ceconomy, Europe's largest consumer electronics retailer, for 2.2 billion euros ($2.5 billion) last rivals have been adjusting their bricks-and-mortar retail Tuesday, local newspaper The Economic Observer reported that the final Freshippo X club store, the membership store which is part of Alibaba's grocery chain, will close its doors on August 31, ending an attempt to battle Costco and Sam's Club.
Economic Times
2 hours ago
- Economic Times
Chinese retailer JD to launch five discount stores as competition intensifies
The first outlet in Zhuozhou will span 5,000 square metres and will carry everything from detergent to chocolate, with prices intended to be below prevailing market levels. JD first entered the market last year with the opening of two smaller discount stores in Beijing, aiming to tempt cautious shoppers to spend as China's consumption recovery stalls. Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Chinese retailer plans to open five discount superstores in two Chinese cities, marking its latest move into new segments as competition intensifies in its core e-commerce a report in Beijing Business Today, a government-backed newspaper, the company told Reuters on Tuesday that the supermarkets will be in Zhuozhou city in Hebei province and Suqian, Jiangsu first outlet in Zhuozhou will span 5,000 square metres and will carry everything from detergent to chocolate, with prices intended to be below prevailing market first entered the market last year with the opening of two smaller discount stores in Beijing, aiming to tempt cautious shoppers to spend as China's consumption recovery 27-year-old e-commerce retailer launched "instant delivery" services for food and other goods earlier this year, kickstarting a subsidy war between itself and rival platforms such as Alibaba and also announced that it would renew an international push for growth, launching its consumer-focused express delivery service abroad. It also bought Germany's Ceconomy, Europe's largest consumer electronics retailer, for 2.2 billion euros ($2.5 billion) last rivals have been adjusting their bricks-and-mortar retail Tuesday, local newspaper The Economic Observer reported that the final Freshippo X club store, the membership store which is part of Alibaba's grocery chain, will close its doors on August 31, ending an attempt to battle Costco and Sam's Club.
Time of India
4 hours ago
- Time of India
Why the Delhi School Education Bill is facing sharp criticism: A closer look at the 15% clause
The Delhi School Education (Transparency in Fixation and Regulation of Fees) Bill, 2025, introduced during the Monsoon Session of the Delhi Assembly, proposes a new legal framework to regulate fee hikes in private unaided schools. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now The bill claims to promote transparency and accountability in fee fixation, but several provisions, especially the controversial '15% clause', have triggered opposition from both parents' associations and political leaders. Key provisions of the bill The proposed legislation seeks to formalise fee regulation through a three-tier regulatory structure: School-Level Committee: The first layer includes a fee committee within each private school, comprising members of the management, teachers, and parents. Zonal Fee Regulatory Committee : This second tier will act as an appellate body for grievances against fee proposals or disputes raised at the school level. State-Level Regulatory Authority : A centralised authority empowered to ensure uniform implementation of the law across Delhi and to resolve complex cases. The bill also mandates schools to submit detailed fee structures and financial statements annually, allowing for greater oversight of revenue and expenditure. The Controversial 15% Clause At the heart of the backlash is a clause that allows schools to increase fees up to 15% annually without prior approval from the zonal or state authorities, provided the hike is cleared by the school-level committee. This provision is being criticised as a loophole that may enable private schools to continue unchecked fee escalation under the guise of internal approval. While the government argues that such a cap introduces predictability and restricts arbitrary hikes, parent groups contend that a 15% annual increase is substantial, especially when compounded year-on-year. Critics have also raised concerns that the school-level committees may lack independence, as they include members nominated by school managements. In effect, the same entities that propose the hike are also empowered to approve it—undermining the intended transparency and regulation. Wider criticism and demand for amendments Several stakeholders argue that the bill fails to address existing grievances related to fee exploitation and lacks provisions for the rollback of already increased fees. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now The absence of retrospective applicability, coupled with the timing of the bill, brought months after schools had already raised fees for the academic session, has further fuelled scepticism. Parents' associations have demanded a rollback of the 15% clause or, at a minimum, the requirement of independent external approval for any hike above inflation-linked thresholds. They have also sought greater representation in the committees to ensure genuine accountability. Conclusion While the Delhi government positions the bill as a long-awaited step towards regulating private school fees, many believe that the current draft leaves too much discretion in the hands of school managements. Unless the contentious provisions—particularly the 15% clause—are re-evaluated, the legislation risks reinforcing the very commercialisation it seeks to curb.
