KCC會阻斷Agoda在韓國的騰飛之路嗎？
Will the KCC Block Agoda's Takeoff in South Korea?

海擇短評 Haize Comment：

KCC會阻斷Agoda在韓國的騰飛之路嗎？

媒體監管機構韓國通訊委員會(KCC,  Korea Communication Commission)近期表示，根據韓國消費者機構的統計數據， 去年旅遊OTA平台Agoda共被正式提請了324項損害賠償請求，KCC已開始對Agoda的商業行為展開調查，以確認該平台是否對其韓國客戶造成損害，但最後可能以徒勞告終。

Agoda成立於2005年，總部位於新加坡，Agoda是Booking Holdings(NASDAQ: BKNG)集團的子公司之一。Booking Holdings的收入主要來自其幾大品牌，包括Booking.com、Priceline、Agoda、Kayak、OpenTable等，其中 Booking.com是集團的主要收入來源；而Agoda主要專注於亞太地區市場，在該地區具有一定的影響力，特別在東南亞和亞洲其他地區。

Agoda的"最優惠價格保證"等行銷策略，在亞洲市場取得了戰果，在韓國也不例外。事實上，該公司常因為基於"激進"價格政策所引發的問題，在消費者/供應商/政府/同業的層面受到批評，這也不是第一次，本次在韓國被指控的是預訂、支付和退款政策可能對消費者造成損害。據了解，韓國用戶的投訴通常集中在以下幾個方面：

1. 透明度不足：用戶反映在處理預訂和退款時，尤其是關於取消政策和退款資格方面存在混淆，比如用戶在不同酒店或房間類型之間看到的取消政策不同，只有在付款後或收到確認郵件時，才發現預訂是不可取消或不退款，導致用戶權益受到侵害。

2. 退款延遲：用戶反映即使在酒店確認取消預訂後，仍然出現退款延遲的情況，這導致挫折感和不信任感。

3. 不退款政策：Agoda因其嚴格的不退款政策受到了批評，消費者感覺未要求酒店提供服務時，仍被要求退款。

從海擇資本的角度來看，本次事件最後大概率是雷聲大雨點小，最後落地無聲。雖然KCC最高可以對Agoda處以高達年收入1%的罰款，我們推估Agoda的收入大約占Booking Holdings集團總收入的10%左右，那麼按照Booking.com的年報來看，罰款最高可以到21.4億美金。高罰金看起來很嚇人，不過我們從行業的角度來看，其實Agoda的退改條件都規範得很清楚，你可以說它很小人，沒有把關鍵資訊放大、加粗並在所有環節中明確提醒，但你很難說它刻意不提供關鍵資訊，最多只能說它的UI體驗有改善空間。就我們理解，對Agoda最致命的，應該是有沒有證據能證明其對供應商要求的"最優惠價格保證"違反壟斷法，既然KCC沒說要碰這一點，就沒有大問題。

況且，此前韓國個人信息保護委員會(PIPC, Personal Information Protection Commission)才罰過洩露韓國用戶信用卡個人資訊的OpenAI 360萬韓元(2,829美元)，你說KCC會罰Agoda多重？

----

Today's Haize Capital Perspective

Will the KCC Block Agoda's Takeoff in South Korea?

Recently, the Korea Communications Commission (KCC) announced that according to statistics from the Korea Consumer Agency, last year, 324 formal claims for damages were filed against the OTA platform Agoda. The KCC has begun investigating Agoda's business practices to determine whether the platform has caused harm to its South Korean customers.

Founded in 2005 and headquartered in Singapore, Agoda is a subsidiary of Booking Holdings (NASDAQ: BKNG). Booking Holdings’ revenue primarily comes from its key brands, including Booking.com, Priceline, Agoda, Kayak, and OpenTable. Among these, Booking.com is the group's main revenue driver, while Agoda focuses primarily on the Asia-Pacific market, where it holds significant influence, especially in Southeast Asia and other parts of Asia.

Agoda's "Best Price Guarantee" marketing strategy has proven successful in the Asian market, and South Korea is no exception. In fact, the company has often faced criticism from consumers, suppliers, governments, and industry peers for its aggressive pricing policies. This is not the first time, and in this case, Agoda is being accused of booking, payment, and refund policies that may have harmed consumers. Reports suggest that South Korean user complaints generally focus on the following issues:

1. Lack of Transparency: Users report confusion during the booking and refund process, particularly regarding cancellation policies and refund eligibility. For example, users found that cancellation policies differed between various hotels or room types, and only after making payment or receiving a confirmation email did they discover the booking was non-refundable, infringing on their rights.

2. Refund Delays: Users complain about delayed refunds, even after the hotel confirmed the cancellation of their booking, leading to frustration and distrust.

3. No Refund Policies: Agoda has been criticized for its strict non-refundable policies, where consumers feel compelled to pay for services they no longer require, even if the hotel did not provide the service.

From Haize Capital’s perspective, this event is likely to cause a lot of noise but will end quietly with little consequence. Although the KCC can impose fines of up to 1% of Agoda's annual revenue, we estimate that Agoda’s revenue accounts for around 10% of Booking Holdings’ total revenue. Based on Booking.com’s annual report, the maximum fine could reach USD 2.14 billion. While the figure sounds intimidating, from an industry standpoint, Agoda’s terms for booking changes and cancellations are clearly defined. You could argue that the key information is not prominently displayed or highlighted in all stages of the process, but it’s difficult to claim that they intentionally withhold crucial information. At most, there is room for improvement in the UI experience. As we understand, the most critical issue for Agoda would be whether there is evidence that its "Best Price Guarantee" for suppliers violates antitrust laws. Since the KCC hasn’t mentioned this, it’s unlikely to be a major problem.

Furthermore, the Personal Information Protection Commission (PIPC) of South Korea recently fined OpenAI KRW 3.6 million (USD 2,829) for leaking South Korean users' credit card information. Do you think the KCC will impose a harsher penalty on Agoda?

標籤 Label： KCC  Agoda  Booking.com  Trust  Airplane