【新唐人2013年10月23日讯】中共央视之前指责星巴克咖啡定价过高,牟取暴利的长篇报导,遭到了舆论的全面抨击。经济、市场销售等领域的专家发帖反驳央视的说法“不专业”、“有失公允”,网民们也纷纷质问当局为何无视大陆房价、油价、通信等关乎民生的行业暴利和垄断,只会拿外国企业开刀。

10月20号,中共央视在长达20分钟的报导中,通过对比星巴克咖啡在中国北京、英国伦敦、美国芝加哥、印度孟买的销售价格,得出了一款中杯拿铁咖啡在北京的售价最高,为人民币27元人民币,是孟买售价的近一倍,比美国贵了近三分之一。

央视断定星巴克对中国消费者存在“价格歧视”。报导还以每杯星巴克拿铁物料成本不足5元、星巴克在中国的利润率远远高于欧美市场为由,得出了星巴克牟取暴利的结论,而上述观点却遭到了专家学者的批评和反驳。

京华山一证券研究部分析员郭亮:“如果在经济学来看,其实我们不能单单看它的毛利是多少,因为有很多背后的成本,刚才我说的Marketing,就是说它卖广告这些都不算是它的毛利里面的,所以如果你就是看毛利就说它暴利这是不公平的,因为要看它最后一些,店铺的价钱呢、人工、其他广告推广的费用之后是不是还是这么高的利润,才对的。”

据路透社22号引述星巴克中国与亚太区总裁卡尔弗的回应说,星巴克拿铁咖啡在中国售价确实要高于美国,但中国1000家咖啡店的利润率并不比美国利润率高。”  

卡尔弗指出,星巴克在中国咖啡馆的营业面积要远远大于美国,因为大多数中国客户喜欢在店里面逗留,一待就是几小时,而80%的美国客户拿到了咖啡就走。这就导致中国星巴克门店的翻台率远低于欧美地区。

星巴克公司发言人今年9月也曾对《华尔街日报》表示,产品价格因市场而异,在中国,顾客喜欢座位更多、面积更大的门店,这类门店房租成本更高,因此产品价格也更高。

今年7月,正是由于高昂的租金压力,星巴克在大陆的第一家门店——北京国贸店被迫搬迁。因为该店的租金和人力成本超过了700万元,而星巴克2012年在亚洲地区的平均店面营业额仅500万元。

金融分析师任中道:“除了飞涨的门店租金,大陆的沉重的税负也被认为是最大的交易成本,还有层层扒皮的物流运输费、特别繁锁的开店手续,而且其中的黑箱操作还有官僚程序都是中国大陆所特有的。在华的企业都要为此多付出的一些代价,而这些代价最终都会转嫁到消费者身上,这幕后最大的推手,就是中共当局。”

其实不仅仅是星巴克,《华尔街日报》的报导中也指出,中国大陆的很多商品价格远超过其他很多国家,如果考虑到收入差异,这种价格差异就更为明显。

有网民质问中共为何不揭露中国国企垄断,偏要针对外企﹔有网民指责当局不顾社会民生,只会转移民众视线, 更有网民作诗讽刺:“咖啡诚可贵,房子价更高。拿铁非我爱,央视何其讨?”

一位名叫“星巴克Starbucks”的未认证微博账号说:“……如果生活必需品的价格国家可以为老百姓控制调控﹔如果医疗费用国家可以严格管理把控﹔如果贪污受贿能越来越少,如果空气质量越来越好,如果食品安全不再用我们担心……”,“央视太闲的时候再来聊聊苹果和星巴克吧!”

采访编辑/ 张天宇 后制/陈建铭

Which One Do Chinese People Care About More?
Starbuck Or China’s Prices?

CCTV’s lengthy report accusing Starbucks of overpricing
its coffee is being widely criticized by the pubic.
Economic and marketing experts criticized CCTV online
that its argument is “unprofessional and unfair."
Netizens also question why the authorities ignore
overpricing of livelihood items.
Such as housing prices, oil, telecommunications, etc.
and only target foreign enterprises.

On October 20, Chinese Communist Party (CCP)’s CCTV
broadcast a report of up to 20 minutes.
This compared the selling prices of Starbucks coffee in
Beijing, London, Chicago, and Mumbai.
It concluded that the price of a cup of latte is the highest in
Beijing at 27 yuan, nearly double the price in Mumbai,
and nearly a third higher than in the U.S.

CCTV concludes that Starbucks has “price discrimination"
toward Chinese consumers.
The report states the material cost of a cup of Starbucks latte
is less than 5 yuan and that Starbucks’ profit margin
is much higher in China than in Europe and the U.S.
This view is being criticized and refuted by experts.

Pang Core Pacific Yamaichi Securities Research analyst
Guo Liang: “From the economics point of view,
we cannot simply look at its gross margin, because there are
many costs behind the scene, such as marketing.
Advertising cost is not included into gross margin.

So it is unfair to say it seeks high profit based on gross margin.

You need to look at other costs- price of the shops, labor,
advertisement, etc."

On October 22, Reuters quoted Starbucks China and APAC
President Culver’s response: the price of Starbucks latte in
China is indeed higher than in the U.S, but the profit margin
of Starbucks’ 1,000 cafe shops are not higher than in the U.S.

Culver said Starbucks coffee shops in China are much larger
because most Chinese customers stay in for several hours,
while 80% of U.S. customers get their coffee and leave.
So customer turnover rate is much lower than Europe and U.S

Starbucks spokesman spoke to Wall Street Journal
in September 2013 that prices vary by market.
In China, customers like spacious stores with more seating.
The cost of such type of store is high, which pushes up prices.

In July 2013, Starbucks’ first store in China – Beijing
Guomao Store was forced to relocate due to high rent.
The store’s rent and labor costs exceeded 7 million yuan,
while Starbucks average revenue per stores in Asia
is only 500 million yuan.

Financial analysts Ren Zhongdao: “In addition to soaring
rental, China’s heavy tax burden is considered the biggest
transaction costs, on top of layers of logistics and transport
costs, cumbersome procedures to open up a store.
There are also black-box operation and
bureaucratic procedures.
All these additional costs enterprises pay in China
eventually go to the consumers.
The biggest promoter of the high price is the CCP itself."

In fact, not just Starbucks, “Wall Street Journal" reports also
pointed out that a lot of commodity prices in China are far
more than many other countries. Considering the income
differences, this price difference is even more apparent.

Some netizens questioned why CCTV chose foreign
companies instead of state-owned monopoly.
Some netizens accused the authorities of ignoring people’s
livelihoods.
Some even wrote an ironic poem: “Coffee price is indeed
high, house price is much higher; Latte is not what I love,
Why does CCTV choose it as target? “

An unauthenticated online account named “Starbucks" said:

“… if the government can control prices of basic necessities,
if medical costs can be strictly managed, if corruption can be
reduced, if air quality is getting better and better,
if people do not need to worry about food security…”
“When CCTV has too much time, it can talk about Starbucks!"

NTD Reporter Zhang Tianyu

评论