Online platforms in China typically generate revenue by charging businesses and taking commissions, aiming to provide a clean and straightforward experience for consumers. Trip.com Group Ltd (09961) stands out as a platform that aggressively leverages its market position to extract fees directly from users in various subtle ways, particularly in the ticket-booking process, where nearly every step contains potential pitfalls that can lead to unnecessary spending. Individual consumers, unlike large hotel suppliers, often find it difficult to fight for their rights, and their complaints are frequently ignored or lost, especially when the amount involved is only a few hundred yuan, making high-cost legal action impractical. Trip.com must not downplay these issues, and regulatory authorities should not turn a blind eye.
First, it is important to objectively acknowledge the significant social value Trip.com once created. Its emergence not only made booking tickets and hotels convenient but also brought price transparency to the travel and hospitality industry, preventing arbitrary price hikes. For example, in the past, buying a plane ticket depended entirely on the agent's quote, and hotel owners in remote areas could charge whatever they wanted. Since the arrival of Trip.com, travel costs have indeed decreased for many. However, once a company gains market dominance, the "dragon slayer often turns into a dragon," a pattern seen across human societies. Companies that grow large, especially in consumer services, typically gain their monopoly by introducing a more consumer-friendly mechanism, relying on business innovation and the perceived fairness of new rules. But once established, they inevitably seek to strengthen their position and increase profits, abusing their power in ways that can harm consumers and the broader market. Some attribute this to the nature of capital, but it is fundamentally human nature, a pattern visible not only in business but also in culture and politics. For instance, cultural artists who rise as grassroots challengers to old artistic forms can, after gaining fame and a large audience, transform into industry bullies, using their model to exploit others and stifle innovation.
Returning to the main topic, Trip.com recently faced severe penalties. Yesterday, the State Administration for Market Regulation announced that, based on the Anti-Monopoly Law, it had penalized Trip.com Group Ltd for abusing its dominant market position. The penalties include confiscating illegal gains of 1.658 billion yuan, a fine of 3.521 billion yuan, and an order to fully refund 122 million yuan in order deposits forcibly deducted from hotel operators. The company is also required to comprehensively rectify its practices and publicly disclose its corrective measures. Notably, the penalty is for "abusing a dominant market position to implement monopolistic behavior." In response, Trip.com immediately stated it would "sincerely accept and resolutely comply" and proposed 19 rectification measures. While the penalty targets Trip.com's misconduct towards platform merchants, and its proposed measures focus on that area, the experience of millions of consumers over several years suggests the problem extends far beyond this. Trip.com's deceptive and fraudulent sales tactics directed at hundreds of millions of consumers may represent an even more serious issue. As isolated individuals, consumers find it hard to seek redress like large hotel suppliers, and their concerns are often overlooked.
Here are several examples. First, price discrimination against loyal customers. As a V5 Diamond member, I sometimes find hotel rooms more expensive than on accounts my parents almost never use. In June 2025, a well-known lawyer found that when booking the same Beijing-to-Shanghai flight, the price for a Diamond member was 815 yuan, while a higher-level Gold Diamond member was charged 849 yuan, and the top-tier Black Diamond member paid 1,018 yuan—a difference of 203 yuan. This suggests the platform uses data to charge higher prices to loyal or less price-sensitive users. This kind of data-driven exploitation of regular customers is rare among major platforms; for instance, Taobao does not set floating prices based on membership levels.
Second, numerous hidden service fees during booking. Every step of the flight and train ticket booking process is laden with options for insurance, cancellation packages, and service bundles. Often, these are pre-selected or default options. The ticket price is displayed in large font, while the costs of various add-ons are in tiny, barely noticeable print. A slight mistake leads to unnecessary spending, making the booking process feel like navigating a minefield. For example, booking a flight might automatically include a 38-yuan personal accident insurance or an unwanted business travel package. If you purchase one, you might be offered delay insurance. The cheapest ticket options shown first are often those with hidden charges. A ticket listed at 733 yuan might actually cost 793 yuan and require purchasing an 88-yuan package. For a one-hour train ride from Beijing to Shijiazhuang, the default option might include a 20-yuan accident insurance, a questionable necessity. Trip.com has profited handsomely from such "dark patterns." According to its 2025 financial report, its transportation ticketing revenue was 18.4 billion yuan in 2023, 20.3 billion yuan in 2024, and 22.5 billion yuan in 2025, accounting for 41%, 38%, and 36% of total revenue, respectively. This is nearly as large as its hotel business. The report explains this revenue as "commissions for ticket booking services" and "other related service income," but these descriptions obscure the reality of deceptive sales tactics.
Third, various traps in train ticket booking. Besides bundled insurance, Trip.com's train ticket service has other pitfalls. For example, it used to charge a fee for selecting adjacent seats, even though the official 12306 platform provides this as a default. Booking tickets at night might automatically include an 8-yuan "manual purchase" fee, even though the ticket is obtained through automated technology. Choosing this service not only costs extra but also requires in-person visits to a manual counter for changes or refunds. The "ticket-snatching" service is particularly problematic. In one instance, when booking a weekend ticket from Beijing to Tianjin, I simultaneously used the official 12306 waiting list and paid a high fee for Trip.com's ticket-snatching service. I received a notification from 12306 that my waiting list request was successful, and one minute later, Trip.com called to congratulate me on "securing" the ticket. In reality, it had not performed any magic; it simply claimed credit for the 12306 success while charging a service fee of at least 20-30 yuan per ticket. Tickets obtained through this service are often issued only an hour before departure, making it impossible to reach the station in time. This confirms that Trip.com's ticket-snatching technology is largely fraudulent, profiting from last-minute cancellations rather than any actual effort. Since last year's Spring Festival travel rush, various official media have repeatedly debunked these ticket-snatching claims as scams. If they are indeed scams, why are they still allowed to operate, generating billions of yuan annually from consumers? The official 12306 platform should also improve its user experience.
Fourth, false display of remaining tickets and rooms. According to the "Black Cat" complaint platform under Sina, one consumer reported: "On March 12, 2025, the website showed only 4 tickets remaining for a desired flight, priced at 5,743 yuan per person. Fearing the tickets would sell out, I booked round-trip tickets for two people nearly six months in advance. A week later, checking the same flight, not only was there no 'few remaining' warning, but the price had dropped by nearly 200 yuan. When I contacted the airline, I was told a price difference refund was possible, but Trip.com refused." Such complaints are common, involving both fake flight ticket availability and fake hotel room availability, all designed to create urgency and pressure consumers into purchasing at higher prices.
Fifth, financial service traps. Trip.com offers a credit service called "Take It and Spend" for convenient booking. The downside is that if you forget to repay, it automatically defaults to an installment loan with an annual interest rate several times that of a bank. Early repayment incurs a "service fee." This is not unique to Trip.com; JD.com's customer service often urges users to convert unpaid "IOU" balances into installment plans. It is recommended that regulators force platform companies to remove the default conversion to installment payments, as these platforms already have users' bank account information and could simply deduct payments directly.
In summary, Trip.com is arguably the platform company most adept at using consumer data and algorithms to trap users, especially in the ticket-booking process. Most domestic platforms focus on providing a friendly user experience while charging businesses, rather than directly extracting fees from consumers. If Trip.com's approach became the norm, every tap on Douyin could result in a fee, WeChat could invent thousands of charges, and Taobao could use data for personalized price gouging. This would fundamentally change the nature of technology. Trip.com's high profit margins are not just due to its market share but also its relentless, unscrupulous revenue generation. The company's founder, one of the most educated in China's tech sector, is known for social responsibility. We hope Trip.com will emulate its founder and raise its ethical standards. If a 30% net profit margin is not enough, and the company continues to push further, it will inevitably harm itself in the long run. If any points are inaccurate or exaggerated, Trip.com is welcome to respond. Readers are also encouraged to add any overlooked points.
Comments