韓國Timon/WeMakePrice事件官方裁定將衝擊旅遊供應鏈
Official Ruling on Timon/WeMakePrice Incident in South Korea to Impact Tourism Supply Chain

海擇短評 Haize Comment：

韓國Timon/WeMakePrice事件官方裁定將衝擊旅遊供應鏈

2024年下半，韓國發生了一起嚴重影響電商與旅遊行業的"Timon/WeMakePrice事件"，涉及的核心問題是電商平台Timon和WeMakePrice因資金鏈斷裂，未能支付旅行社的訂單結算款項，導致旅行社無法履行訂單，進而發生重大消費者投訴。近期韓國官方當局CDC已做出裁定，雖然法院尚未判定最終責任歸屬，但CDC的裁定必將影響韓國旅遊業的供應鏈合作模式，相關企業開始調整風險管理策略，未來大型旅行社棄電商分銷而更重視直銷的態勢將逐步明朗。

Timon/WeMakePrice事件更新

Timon和WeMakePrice均屬於中型電商平台，由Qoo10持股，在韓國市場的競爭力略遜於Coupang、Gmarket和11st等主要電商。然而，這兩家公司仍是許多旅遊產品供應商的重要銷售渠道，特別是在團隊旅遊與酒店預訂領域，其資金鏈斷裂影響巨大。

根據2025開年的最新進展，韓國消費者爭議調解委員會（CDC, Consumer Dispute Commission）確定了責任分配。PG（Payment Gateway）公司最多需承擔30%退款責任，旅行社最多需承擔90%的退款責任－即便旅行社未曾收到來自電商的應付款項。

值得注意的是，CDC 的決定並不具有法院判決的強制力，而是行政調解機構的裁定，當事人可選擇接受或提起訴訟。因此，KATA（韓國旅行社協會）已表示不接受該決定，案件應會進入法院審理。

判決的不合理性

該判決之所以引起韓國旅行業者的強烈不滿，可以從支付金流的模型推敲。

根據韓國電商的支付金流模型，當消費者在電商平台下單付款（可能是信用卡支付、銀行轉帳或電子錢包支付）後，款項會先進入PG公司的帳戶，然後再轉至電商（如Timon和WeMakePrice），電商再區分預付款（如果有）與應付款給到旅行社。

雖然我們不清楚電商平台與PG公司的具體合約，但我們知道，PG公司與電商之間通常有T+X天的延遲結算週期，即時結算屬少數情況，預扣機制屬特殊情況。這意味著，即便消費者已經支付，但電商可能尚未收到款項。而在Timon/WeMakePrice陷入資金危機後，這些款項可能仍停留在PG公司，或被Timon/WeMakePrice挪作他用，導致旅行社無法收到結算金額。

具體來看，龐大數量的訂單最終可能分屬四種金流方向：

1. PG公司按T+X規則結算，但Timon/WeMakePrice在資金到達前已宣告企業重整，資金停留在PG公司。

2. PG公司因風控問題，暫停或凍結Timon/WeMakePrice資金，資金停留在PG公司。

3. 資金已經到達Timon/WeMakePrice，但無論是否已被挪用，因Timon/WeMakePrice處於企業重整程序，資金無法移動。

4. 資金（可能是部分）已經到達旅行社，但因旅行社處於金流最末端，佔比可能很低。

Timon/WeMakePrice已宣告企業重整，如果政府將全責歸咎於他們，消費者也拿不回款項，而PG公司與旅行社仍在運營，並且有一定的金融流動性，可承擔部分退款責任，CDC的裁定可以理解。但考慮到旅行社在金流鏈中的位置，要求旅行社退款90%的裁定確實不算公平。既然KATA已宣布不接受調解，並表示將提起上訴，這意味最終責任如何分配還未定案。

對韓國旅遊供應鏈的影響

CDC隸屬於韓國消費者保護院（KCA），負責行政調解以減少法院訴訟。即便法院尚未作出最終判決，在韓國，法院通常會參考 CDC 的調解決策。這意味著，CDC的裁定勢必讓旅遊業者提高與電商合作的警覺，開始重新審視金流風控與合約條款。海擇資本認為會發生如下的影響：

·大型旅行社將重新審視與電商的合作模式。大社（如HanaTour、ModeTour）可能會要求與電商平台修改合作條款，比如要求電商平台"即時付款"或進行"第三方資金托管"，否則不願意上架產品。

·電商如果答應旅行社的要求，創下前例可能會造成麻煩，但大社若全面強化風控，最後電商可能只銷售小供應商/旅行社的產品，最終會影響品牌地位。

·如果風控從團隊遊產品延伸到散客產品，如酒店、機票、門票等散客市場，電商在旅遊品類的競爭力將進一步削弱。

·本地市場影響深遠，旅遊業者應會進一步強化自營與直銷，降低對電商的依賴，進一步限制電商影響力。最後電商在韓國旅遊市場的影響力可能衰退。

國際市場的參考與影響

整體而言，雖然Timon/WeMakePrice事件的影響仍在發酵，但它不僅是一場電商與旅行社的糾紛，更可能促使產業鏈重新調整合作模式，改變韓國電商與旅遊行業的結構性關係。

不過，與此同時，該事件對境外市場的影響相對有限。因為Costco、Sam’s Club等電商巨頭進入旅遊產品多年，增長曲線仍不明朗；Amazon現在甚至也不提供旅遊產品了。市場的經驗表明，電商進入旅遊行業本就不易，主要因為旅遊產品與一般電商產品不同，涉及複雜的金流與履約機制。

倒是中國市場的發展模式值得關注。目前，中國電商與本地生活服務領域的競爭愈發激烈。京東正在積極進軍本地生活，透過京東到家等業務涉足市場；美團早已透過"小象超市"與"閃購"等業務，逐步進入零售與即時電商領域。雖然京東旅行現在還尚未如同京東到家一樣產生殺傷力，不過中國市場的融合模式很可能引領全球，將競品存量轉為己方增量的競爭快速加劇，可能將成為全球市場的重要參考。

------

Haize Capital Insights of the Day

Official Ruling on Timon/WeMakePrice Incident in South Korea to Impact Tourism Supply Chain

Timon/WeMakePrice Incident Overview

In the second half of 2024, South Korea witnessed a significant financial crisis impacting the e-commerce and tourism industries, known as the Timon/WeMakePrice Incident. The core issue lies in the financial collapse of e-commerce platforms Timon and WeMakePrice, which failed to transfer payments to travel agencies for booked orders. This resulted in travel agencies being unable to fulfill reservations, leading to a surge in consumer complaints.

Recently, the Consumer Dispute Commission (CDC) of South Korea issued an official ruling on the matter. While the courts have yet to determine final liability, the CDC’s decision is expected to have a lasting impact on the cooperation model within the South Korean tourism supply chain. As a result, industry players are now actively adjusting their risk management strategies. In the future, major travel agencies are likely to shift away from e-commerce distribution and place greater emphasis on direct sales.

Latest Developments in the Timon/WeMakePrice Case

Both Timon and WeMakePrice are mid-sized e-commerce platforms backed by Qoo10, with lower market competitiveness than industry leaders such as Coupang, Gmarket, and 11st. Despite this, they have been critical distribution channels for many travel product suppliers, particularly in the group tour and hotel booking sectors. The financial collapse of these platforms has caused significant disruption.

As of early 2025, the CDC has determined the allocation of financial responsibility in the case.

· Payment Gateway (PG) companies will bear up to 30% of refund liabilities.

· Travel agencies will bear up to 90% of refund liabilities—even if they have not received payments from the e-commerce platforms.

It is important to note that the CDC’s decision is not legally binding, as it is an administrative mediation ruling. Affected parties can choose to accept it or proceed with litigation. The Korea Association of Travel Agents (KATA) has already expressed opposition to the ruling and is expected to challenge the decision in court.

Unfair Aspects of the Ruling

The ruling has sparked strong dissatisfaction among South Korean travel agencies, primarily due to the payment flow model used in e-commerce transactions.

Under the South Korean e-commerce payment structure, when a consumer makes a payment (via credit card, bank transfer, or e-wallet), funds first enter the PG company’s account before being transferred to the e-commerce platform (Timon/WeMakePrice), which then settles payments to travel agencies based on prepayment agreements or outstanding dues.

While the exact contractual terms between PG companies and e-commerce platforms remain unclear, it is widely known that:

· T+X delayed settlements are the norm, while real-time settlements are rare.

· Withholding mechanisms (where funds are frozen before disbursement) apply only in special circumstances.

This means that even if consumers have made payments, the e-commerce platform may not have received the funds yet. When Timon and WeMakePrice faced financial distress, these funds could have remained with PG companies or been misappropriated by the e-commerce platforms, leaving travel agencies without their due payments.

The financial flow for a large number of transactions likely falls into four scenarios:

1. PG companies follow the T+X settlement rule, but Timon/WeMakePrice filed for corporate rehabilitation before receiving the funds, causing the money to remain with PG companies.

2. PG companies, citing risk concerns, froze or withheld Timon/WeMakePrice’s funds, preventing settlement.

3. Some funds reached Timon/WeMakePrice, but due to corporate rehabilitation proceedings, they are inaccessible—regardless of whether they were misused.

4. Some funds (likely a small portion) reached travel agencies, but as the last link in the payment chain, their share remains minimal.

Since Timon/WeMakePrice has filed for corporate rehabilitation, the government cannot assign them full liability, as consumers would have no way to recover their payments. Given that PG companies and travel agencies remain operational and have financial liquidity, the CDC’s ruling that assigns them partial refund responsibility is understandable.

However, considering travel agencies' position in the payment chain, requiring them to refund 90% is clearly unfair. Since KATA has formally rejected the mediation and intends to appeal, the final allocation of liabilities remains undecided.

Impact on the South Korean Tourism Supply Chain

The CDC operates under the Korea Consumer Agency (KCA), acting as a mediation body to reduce litigation. While its decisions are not legally binding, South Korean courts often reference CDC rulings in their judgments.

As a result, the CDC’s decision has already influenced travel agencies’ risk perception regarding e-commerce partnerships. Many industry players are reassessing payment security measures and contractual terms to mitigate future risks. Haize Capital predicts the following industry shifts:

· Major travel agencies will reassess their e-commerce collaborations. Companies like HanaTour and ModeTour may demand real-time payments or third-party escrow accounts before agreeing to list their products.

· If e-commerce platforms comply with these demands, it may set a precedent that creates challenges in future negotiations. If major agencies implement strict risk controls, e-commerce platforms may be left with only smaller suppliers, ultimately impacting their brand reputation.

· If risk control policies extend beyond group tour products to independent traveler products—such as hotels, flights, and attraction tickets—e-commerce players will face even greater disadvantages in the tourism sector.

· The South Korean tourism landscape will shift toward direct sales. Agencies will reduce dependence on e-commerce platforms, further limiting the latter’s influence on the travel market.

Implications for the Global Market

Overall, while the Timon/WeMakePrice Incident is still unfolding, it is more than just a dispute between e-commerce platforms and travel agencies. It may fundamentally reshape industry cooperation models and alter the dynamics between South Korean e-commerce and tourism sectors.

However, the global impact remains limited. Major international e-commerce players such as Costco and Sam’s Club have been selling travel products for years but have not achieved significant growth in this segment. Even Amazon has withdrawn from the travel sector entirely. Market trends suggest that the travel industry is fundamentally different from traditional e-commerce, given the complexities of payment flows and service fulfillment.

China’s market, however, presents an intriguing case study. Competition between e-commerce platforms and local lifestyle services is intensifying.

· JD.com is aggressively expanding into local services through its JD Daojia platform.

· Meituan has gradually entered the retail and instant delivery space through initiatives like Xiaoxiang Supermarket and Meituan Flash Sales.

While JD Travel has yet to make a significant impact akin to JD Daojia, China’s integrated e-commerce-lifestyle model could set a global precedent. As competition intensifies in an increasingly saturated market, the ability to convert competitors’ market share into one’s own growth could become a critical strategy for industry players worldwide.