SAIC Has Tested Taobao'S Genuine Product Rate To Only 30%.

This is not an unexpected result, but the simple figures still give people a lot of startling facts.

First of all, except for the low sample rate (only 3) jumei.com, all the other platforms failed to withstand the test, and there were no genuine products at different levels. Even Jingdong, which had been widely regarded as basically fakes free, were in deep trouble.

This is not a game of 50 steps and a hundred steps. We should go deep into the reasons why some platforms that stick to genuine products are now falling apart.

Second, the proportion of Taobao's non genuine products is frightening, which is far beyond the general recognition.

If only 20% of the non genuine products on the platform can be justified, but up to 62.75% of the proportion of non genuine products not only spooky the general consumers, but also the long-term critics of Taobao fake.

Is this going to be a mistake? Ma Yun said not long ago that Taobao should have 6 or 7 billion pactions per day.

Earlier, Taobao also brought a critic of its counterfeit distribution centre to court, whether it wanted to rentify its own fake goods or to make mistakes by itself.

Of course, non genuine goods are not equal to counterfeit goods in general sense. This general administration directional monitoring gives the definition of non authentic products: fake and shoddy products, refurbished products, and unauthorized formal channels. The contents are inconsistent with propaganda, products without 3C certification, non official products in mainland China, and products that do not meet the requirements of the general label for cosmetics used in consumer goods.

However, non genuine goods are equivalent to counterfeit goods, because there is no grey definition of commodity circulation. There is nothing wrong with collectively referred to as counterfeit goods.

In this regard, the best example is India's imitation anti-cancer drug. Its efficacy is no different from the genuine product. It sells for genuine 1/10. However, because Chinese law does not open the prescription for generic drugs, several people have been sent to prison for the purchase of generic drugs from India to sell them for the sale of counterfeit drugs.

The point is why there are so many bad products on the Taobao platform. This is a topic that has been troubling the public for a long time.

Ma Yun did not admit that Taobao had many fakes, and Taobao probably did not admit it. Even Taobao's lawyers admitted that Taobao only had a small amount of counterfeit goods in court.

SAIC's monitoring results show that all the above statements are wrong, and Taobao's genuine rate is only 37.25%.

I do not want to say this is a slap in the face, just want to say that the problem has existed for a long time. Now it is only an official explanation.

The administrative capacity of the SAIC is convincing, not only giving detailed figures, but also the four major issues mentioned in the official summary, which basically refer to the essence of the problem.

1.

Access control is not strict.

2, commodity information review is inadequate.

3, sales behavior management confusion.

4, credit evaluation is defective.

These four problems refer to the whole platform, not Taobao.

The first three are governance issues, and the latter is mechanism.

Gatekeeper

And chaos can be attributed to the sense of responsibility, the way of work, technical means and other elements are not enough, can allow time to be upgraded through rectification, nor is it too good to assume that the platform is intended for commercial interests.

The General Administration has said that it will normalize the monitoring work. If the situation has not been effectively improved, the face will not be good at the next time.

The voice of big companies can be ignored, media commentary can also be sneezed at, official conclusions are dared to be ignored. The normalization of monitoring work of the General Administration will inevitably change and promote the business mode and regulatory means of some platforms, leaving little time for some people.

Final

The problem, cliche, was kindly reminded by two years ago.

Putting the money in the pockets of the ordinary people and the sales activities on which the business depends is placed on simple good bad reviews. Sooner or later, there will be problems. This is too general and subjective. It is more like a game than a serious business activity.

The reputation of credit rating and the deletion of differential reviews have become so rampant that the grey industrial chain has already formed, and some internal staff members are also involved. This is not a governance issue, but a systemic mechanism.

E-commerce, or Taobao's credit rating system in short, has not changed.

How do I change? I have always thought that the main idea is to change the concept, others can be done.

E-commerce enterprises are rich in financial resources, most of which claim to have superb technical means, how to do many things and undertake big social responsibilities.

But please first use technical means to assume responsibility for yourself, and do not assume responsibility outside the chaos on your platform before it is effectively managed.

In the past, it was understandable that the size of the electricity supplier was small and that it was more relaxed in regulation.

Nowadays, your Internet industry is rapidly becoming a national strategy. If you want to enter the international competition, you will still be so smoky. Anyone with a hint of reason will not be long.

E-commerce is quite proud now. About two hundred billion of Alibaba, about fifty billion of Jingdong, how to be crazy will be applauded.

But when people find that behind your pride are counterfeit goods, credit fraud, fraud everywhere, and black industry expansion, you can only say that you win as a rascal and still like to sell well.

One of the biggest problems of the Internet industry is that it is obviously a great deal of light on its policy. It has almost formed asymmetric competition with traditional industries. It also needs to cry everywhere, say that it is not supported by itself, and is squeezed and excluded by the evil traditional industries.

This is just a round the world, in order to cover up the problems of their platforms and business models, let people do not want to say, do not want to say, dare not say.

But can we solve the problem without saying that those problems will disappear with the passage of time? Of course not, the problems existing in e-commerce will not be changed without profound changes.

Unless these chaos is the important foundation for platform operators to realize their interests, eliminating these chaos is equivalent to destroying ourselves. Then we really have nothing to say.

Then continue covering up, confronting, beating around the Bush, telling the deer to go down, pushing all the blame onto others, including taking the psychology of consumers wanting to buy fake goods as a reason for exemption, and how long it will last.