Burst! Alibaba, Tencent, and SF Express are all about the big event!

Square matrix three shot first snapdragon 888

spark global limited

According to “anti-monopoly law” provides market supervision bureau on AlibabaInvestment Co., Ltd. acquired the equity of Yintai Commercial (Group) Co., Ltd., Yuewen Group acquired the equity of Xinli Media Holding Co., Ltd., and Shenzhen Fengchao Network Technology Co., Ltd. acquired the equity of China Post Zhide Technology Co., Ltd., and failed to declare illegal implementation according to law. The case of concentration of undertakings was investigated, and a penalty decision was made on December 14, 2020 in accordance with Articles 48 and 49 of the Anti-Monopoly Law. Alibaba Investment Co., Ltd., China Reading Group and Shenzhen Fengchao Network Technology Co., Ltd. The company imposed a fine of RMB 500,000 on administrative penalties.

The main person in charge of the Anti-Monopoly Bureau of the State Administration for Market Regulation on Alibaba’s investment in the acquisition of Yintai Commercial and TencentAnswers to reporters’ questions on the punishment of three cases of non-declaration of cases not declared in accordance with law by the holding company Reading Media’s acquisition of Xinli Media and Fengchao Network’s acquisition of China Post and Smart Delivery

  Today, the State Administration for Market Supervision announced that Alibaba Investment Co., Ltd. (abbreviated as Alibaba Investment) acquired the equity of Yintai Commercial (Group) Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Yintai Commercial), and China Reading Group (hereinafter referred to as Yuewen) acquired Xinli Media Holdings Co., Ltd. ( Hereinafter referred to as Xinli Media) equity, Shenzhen Fengchao Network Technology Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Fengchao Network) acquired equity of China Post Smart Delivery Technology Co., Ltd. for three cases of failing to declare the administrative penalty decision on the illegal implementation of concentration cases. The main person in charge of the Anti-monopoly Bureau of the State Administration for Market Regulation accepted an interview with reporters. 

  Question 1. A few days ago, the General Administration issued the “Guidelines for Anti-Monopoly in the Field of Platform Economy” which aroused widespread concern and discussion in the society. What are the main considerations for publicly imposing administrative penalties on these three cases? 

  Answer: In recent years, my country’s online economy has developed vigorously. New business forms and new models have emerged one after another, becoming a new driving force for economic growth. They have played an important role in promoting high-quality economic development and meeting the needs of the people for a better life. But at the same time, the online economy is showing a trend of increasing market concentration. Market resources are accelerating to concentrate on top platforms. The increasing number of reflections and reports on platform monopoly issues shows that there are some competition risks in the development of the online economy. And hidden dangers. 

  One of the problems is that some Internet platform companies fail to declare the concentration of operators in accordance with the law. According to the “Anti-Monopoly Law” and the “Provisions of the State Council on the Standards for Declaration of Concentration of Undertakings”, the concentration of undertakings meeting the declaration standard should be declared to the State Administration for Market Supervision in advance, and the concentration shall not be implemented if there is no declaration. At present, we have received some complaints and reports, which reflect that some Internet platform companies have reached the reporting standard for their turnover, but they failed to declare to the anti-monopoly law enforcement agency before the implementation of the concentration, and are suspected of violating the relevant provisions of the Anti-Monopoly Law. After receiving the report, the anti-monopoly law enforcement agency will verify it in accordance with the law, and investigate and handle cases of suspected failure to declare illegal undertakings. The public cases are three of them. 

  By disclosing the administrative penalty decision of the above-mentioned cases, we hope that operators realize that the Anti-Monopoly Law applies to all entities, and treats domestic and foreign capital, state-owned enterprises and private enterprises, large and medium-sized enterprises, Internet enterprises and traditional enterprises equally. The purpose of equal treatment is to ensure fair participation of various market entities in market competition and create a business environment for fair competition. Although competition in the field of platform economy presents some new features, the Internet industry is not outside the anti-monopoly law. All companies should strictly abide by anti-monopoly laws and regulations and maintain fair market competition. Only in this way can the entire industry be ensured healthy development. 

  In fact, investigating and dealing with concentrated cases of illegal implementation in accordance with the law has always been one of the important contents of strengthening anti-monopoly law enforcement and market supervision. It is of great significance for protecting fair market competition, safeguarding consumers’ legitimate rights and interests, and creating an internationally competitive business environment. Since its establishment, the State Administration of Market Supervision has consistently performed its duties in accordance with the law, continuously increased its efforts to investigate and deal with cases involving violations of the law, and improved the transparency of law enforcement. Since 2020, the State Administration of Market Supervision has published 11 administrative punishment decisions for failure to declare illegal undertakings of concentration of undertakings in accordance with the law. Through case interpretation and law enforcement, publicity and advocacy have been strengthened to further enhance the perception and recognition of fair competition awareness among all sectors of society and strengthen the market The subject’s awareness of anti-monopoly compliance and the awareness of maintaining fair competition in the market create a good social atmosphere.