China’s consumer-tech companies are riding an endless train of trouble. Just as the government seems to be easing its regulatory crackdown, consumer fatigue — even disinterest — is setting in.
At last month’s meeting of the Chinese Communist Party Politburo, the top government policymaking body, Beijing vowed to support the healthy growth of platform companies, a statement interpreted by many analysts as the end of the government’s year-long campaign to rein in big tech across a wide range of issues, from antitrust to data security.
Beijing’s crackdown cost tech companies as much as US$2 trillion of market value, the equivalent of 11 percent of China’s GDP, Goldman Sachs Group Inc said.
However, a potentially bigger threat looms — citywide lockdowns are forcing consumers to seek alternatives and question how useful Big Tech really is.
For years, e-commerce was the crown jewel of the Chinese tech industry, with online shopping accounting for a much bigger share of retail sales than from US companies. Alibaba Group Holding Ltd, JD.com Inc and Meituan invested heavily to build distribution and logistics networks, going as far as sourcing fresh produce directly from farmers and recruiting armies of migrant workers for speedy deliveries.
The Shanghai lockdown, which began on April 1, disrupted the entire business model. The price of hiring riders — scooter delivery drivers — has soared, and a large number of delivery workers are stuck at home.
Many of those who can work cannot go back to their families at the end of the day because the government is minimizing traffic in and out of residential areas. As a result, e-commerce companies must offer free accommodation or risk their riders going homeless.
Last month, Internet companies dispatched about 20,000 riders to fill 2.5 million grocery orders per day to the city of 25 million, the Shanghai government said.
While this number seems sizable, it is only about one-third of pre-lockdown levels, CLSA Ltd said.
So instead of e-commerce, Shanghai residents have turned to analog strategies — their social skills and the kindness of their neighbors — to meet basic needs. Community buying, in which residents at the same address band together to make bulk purchases of groceries in a single order from suppliers and restaurants, has become increasingly popular.
Neighborhood volunteers take it upon themselves to contact merchants and couriers, drop off each order door-to-door, and check on older people who do not know how to use smartphones.
Meanwhile, WeChat, operated by Tencent Holdings Ltd, is no longer serving as the digital town square where users remain endlessly engaged. The social media super-app has been quick to censor criticism and skepticism of President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) “zero COVID” policy, deleting plenty of content — from a six-minute video that documented the pleas of Shanghai residents, to photo blogs of elderly people dragged to makeshift quarantine centers, and even articles on China’s cybersecurity law and censorship regulations.
Nowadays, when one tries to open a link, “unable to view this activity” seems to be the norm. Increasingly, people use code words to describe sensitive topics such as “zero COVID” and emigration out of China, and many who were once chatty on WeChat have gone silent. Some migrated to Telegram. WeChat has become a digital contact list — and nothing more. Many people feel that the user experience has been ruined.
Before the pandemic, tech companies made life easy. Bubble tea could be delivered to your office within 15 minutes, and WeChat messages lit up all day along. Now, COVID-19 lockdowns have left many people with a sour aftertaste. They remember the futile attempts to place online grocery orders at 6am, and the spite that wells up when social media is censored.
So when millions of Chinese re-emerge from their lockdowns — whenever that is — many might find they have broken their addiction, preferring real face-time with humans instead of the virtual kind. Sometimes, to connect with others, people must disconnect from their smartphones, but what does that mean for the business models of Big Tech, which is all about hooking users to their screens?
Shuli Ren is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering Asian markets. A former investment banker, she was a markets reporter for Barron’s. She is a CFA charterholder. This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.
As the Soviet Union was collapsing in the late 1980s and Russia seemed to be starting the process of democratization, 36-year-old US academic Francis Fukuyama had the audacity to assert that the world was at the “end of history.” Fukuyama claimed that democratic systems would become the norm, and peace would prevail the world over. He published a grandiose essay, “The End of History?” in the summer 1989 edition of the journal National Interest. Overnight, Fukuyama became a famous theorist in the US, western Europe, Japan and even Taiwan. Did the collapse of the Soviet Union mark the end of an era as
During a news conference with Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida in Tokyo on Monday, US President Joe Biden for the third time intimated that the US would take direct military action to defend Taiwan should China attack. Responding to a question from a reporter — Would Washington be willing to get involved militarily to defend Taiwan? — Biden replied with an unequivocal “Yes.” As per Biden’s previous deviations from the script of the US’ longstanding policy of “strategic ambiguity” — maintaining a deliberately nebulous position over whether the US would intervene militarily in the event of a conflagration between Taiwan and
Will the US come to the defense of Taiwan if and when China makes its move? Like most friends of Taiwan, I’ve been saying “yes” for a couple decades. But the truth is that none of us, in or out of government, really know. This is precisely why we all need to show humility in our advice on how Taiwan should prepare itself for such an eventuality. After all, it’s their country, and they have no choice but to live with the consequences. A couple weeks ago the New York Times published an article that put this reality in stark relief. As
US President Joe Biden has done it again — for the third time in the past nine months he has stated that the US will defend Taiwan. And for the third time, his administration officials have rushed to “clarify” that US policy toward Taiwan “has not changed” and Washington still follows its “one China policy.” That is the same scenario that played out with two other presidents. When asked the question posed to Biden in 2001, then-US president George W. Bush said Washington would do “whatever it took” to defend Taiwan against Chinese aggression. In 2020, then-US president Donald Trump