Slashdot Mirror
India Curbs Power of Amazon and Walmart To Sell Products Online (nytimes.com)
The Indian government dealt a surprise blow on Wednesday to the e-commerce ambitions of Amazon and Walmart, effectively barring the American companies from selling products supplied by affiliated companies on their Indian shopping sites and from offering their customers special discounts or exclusive products. From a report: If strictly interpreted, the new policies could force significant changes in the India strategies of the retail giants. Amazon might have to stop competing with independent sellers and end its offerings of proprietary products like its Echo smart speakers in India, its top emerging market. For Walmart, which spent $16 billion this year to buy 77 percent of Flipkart, India's leading online retailer, the new rules could hamper its strategy of selling clothing and other products under its own private brands and prevent it from using its supply-chain expertise and clout with retailers to drive down prices for Indian consumers.
[...] The government posted the changes, which go into effect Feb. 1, without warning on Wednesday evening in New Delhi, while much of the business world in both countries was on vacation. [...] Prime Minister Narendra Modi of India initially courted foreign companies to invest more in the country after his 2014 election victory, but his administration has turned protectionist as his party's re-election prospects have dimmed in recent months. Mr. Modi has increasingly sought to bolster Indian firms and curb foreign ones through new policies, including one that requires foreign companies like Visa, Mastercard and American Express to store all data about Indians on computers inside the country.
[...] The government posted the changes, which go into effect Feb. 1, without warning on Wednesday evening in New Delhi, while much of the business world in both countries was on vacation. [...] Prime Minister Narendra Modi of India initially courted foreign companies to invest more in the country after his 2014 election victory, but his administration has turned protectionist as his party's re-election prospects have dimmed in recent months. Mr. Modi has increasingly sought to bolster Indian firms and curb foreign ones through new policies, including one that requires foreign companies like Visa, Mastercard and American Express to store all data about Indians on computers inside the country.
Mr. Modi has increasingly sought to bolster Indian firms and curb foreign ones through new policies, including one that requires foreign companies like Visa, Mastercard and American Express to store all data about Indians on computers inside the country.
Actually, implementing such a policy isn't protectionist. It is just common sense. After all, as an American living in the US, I wouldn't want my US financial data being stored anywhere else but the US.
The easiest fix is to play the H-1B card.
Don't want American companies as competition in your country ?
No problem, how about we don't allow Indian workers into the H-1B Visa program . . . . at all ?
( It is, pretty much, the only thing we import from India )
Wouldn't want the competition destroying American jobs now would we ? :|
The rules, if applied with strict interpretation, would pretty much shut down any modern retailer of any type, not just the big guys. It essentially bans having fixed arrangements with suppliers - of having supply chains period.
Virtually all chains have deals they've made with suppliers. Enforced strictly, this bans modern commerce.
Therefore, it will not be enforced strictly. It will be enforced selectively.
This is the kind of thing you come up with as a gift to government officials. The public reason is just an excuse. It is a beautiful setup for a graft. Pay the right folks the right amounts, no problems.
The problem with datacenters in India is reliable power. My previous company had the notion several times, but the infrastructure makes that very difficult.
Authoritarian populism has no other tools in its box.
These rules actually seem rather sensible to me.
A) The prohibition against special discounts prevents either company from discounting their merchandise in an anti-competitive manner that would drive out local businesses.
B) The prohibition against selling exclusive products makes it so that if Amazon wants to sell Echo and Fire devices in India, then they have to allow Indian resellers to stock and sell the products as well. The same would apply to any of their other private labels (like Amazon Basics). This prevents them from having a monopoly on sales of anything carrying their brand in India. This is sensible separation that should exist between Amazon's manufacturing business and it's internet storefront business.
We've gotten so used to anti-monopolistic policies not being enforced in the US that we've forgotten what they even are. No company is supposed be allowed to become an Umbrella company that makes, sells and supplies everything.
How much has Amazon's manufacturing arm benefited from the huge exposure platform provided by their storefront? I couldn't tell you the last time I went to Amazon's front page and didn't have a giant Fire or Echo ad shoved in my face.
How many businesses has Walmart put under every time it moves into an area and used anti-competitive price structures built off of paying their employees the least amount possible along with the fewest benefits they can get away with?
China-Japan trade is also high, https://www.bbc.com/news/world...
The top export destinations of South Korea are China ($121B), the United States ($70.1B), https://atlas.media.mit.edu/en...
https://vietnamnews.vn/economy...