Who used the arrogance of foreign milk powder?

Recently, six milk companies such as Synbiotics and Abbott have been fined 670 million yuan by the National Development and Reform Commission for violating the Anti-Monopoly Law. Experts said that the large amount of fines is "a record, unprecedented." This undoubtedly highlights China's efforts to investigate and monopolize price monopolies, but on the other hand, we must also think about who actually used the foreign milk powder so arrogant?

The main reason for foreign milk powder fines is unfair profit. The survey results of the National Development and Reform Commission show that foreign milk powder uses price oligopoly through illegal means such as contractual stipulations, direct fines, disguised fines, deduction of rebates, restrictions on supply, and stop of supply. The arrogance of foreign milk powder ignoring Chinese laws was the main cause of this incident, but the domestic milk powder that frequently encountered problems was not upheld and the lack of power from the quality supervision department was more or less an “accomplice” of this incident.

Due to melamine and other incidents, domestic milk powder has not been trusted by all, and customers have turned to foreign milk powder. Even some middle and low-income families tighten their belts and they need to buy imported milk powder. International market research agency ACNielsen released data showing that the Chinese market share of domestic milk powder has dropped from 44% before the melamine incident to the current 30%.

Therefore, although the theory of market economy shows that unilateral price-raising will lead to lower sales, in the face of the domestic milk powder industry's vulnerable opponent, the foreign milk powder enterprises continue to sell after raising prices through the industrial chain. From this perspective, the monopoly price is established by foreign milk powder companies through various illegal methods, but the monopoly status is handed over by domestic milk powder companies. This is the root cause of the foreign milk powder companies.

New Zealand Fonterra's germ milk powder is now widely affected, and Abbott and other milk powder companies issued an announcement recalling the product in question. After the disclosure of the matter, the New Zealand Stock Exchange's share price of Fonterra dropped continuously, while the Mainland China A-share market, Sanyuan, Yili, Guangming and other dairy companies rose sharply. For a time, there is public opinion that the Fonterra poisoned milk incident will be an opportunity for the development of the domestic dairy industry in China.

But is it true? According to Tencent.com, one of China's largest commercial portals, there are still as many as 62% of Internet users still have more trust in the choice of “foreign milk powder”. For many consumers, the Fonterra incident only allows them to choose milk powder, from the several brands of foreign milk powder to several other brands of foreign milk powder only.

Chinese netizens also stated that the Fonterra poisoned milk incident and the monopoly price penalties of six dairy companies also revealed that the relevant agencies are still insufficient in terms of inspection methods and supervision.

Jiang Jianping, director of the National Student Drinking Milk Scheme Experts Committee, believes that to break the "monopoly of confidence" of foreign brands in China, the most important thing is to compete for the upper reaches of the domestic dairy industry. Regulators must place responsibilities in place so that the foreign milk powder companies will be strict. Self-discipline can only promote a homogeneous market environment and a safe food environment. If only relying on fines, scratched the skin but did not go deep inside, it was only a shot of relief or mosquitoes as a moderator.