Criticism of the traditional economics doesn't hurt Ali, its enemies from within-Alibaba, MA, e-commerce-IT information

Summary: maybe this wave of criticism still will not be much substantial impact, but for Ali, from flow economy to industrial economy, the real building is in the long-term interests of benign cycle of ecological, productivity contribution rose to the company's core considerations goals, rather than merely indulge in PR "smart power", may be the key to long-term value.

Alibaba, was criticized by traditional economy. Ongoing "two sessions", one from traditional sectors Alibaba on behalf of open revolt, that "maybe in the real economy, Ali ' credit '".

Although this is not the company suffered criticism from traditional industries for the first time, but all the past criticism of Ali seems to have had a substantial impact, but this criticism boom occurred in the context and obviously very different from in the past, so investors could hardly fail examine carefully.

Before critics in the traditional retail trade is a central force, such as suning founder Zhang jindong, a few years ago was one of the most active critics, and bases his critique is Ali merchant in fakes and problems in tax, but Alibaba to 28.3 billion yuan cost of its Su Ningyun one of the major shareholders of listed companies.

Since last year, a new wave of criticism, despite his criticism of the basis does not change much, but replaced Zong qinghou, Dong mingzhu, the productive industry benchmarking entrepreneurs become the backbone, this time in two sessions on "blaming" entrepreneurs also belong to the productive sector.

Due to the productive sector is the core strength of China as the world factory, bearing the GDP, exports, employment and other Chinese Government currently focuses on indicators, these critics might be better than the past generates more gaming chips at the Government level.

In addition, tax, and intellectual property these occurred in Ali body of, and for various reasons years failed to get breakthrough solution of "original crime", in current face China and American may outbreak trade war, and economic slowed and drop tax calls Xia need new of tax source of pressure, and entity economic bad of overall situation and China social on Internet produced of wealth concentrated effect of reflection, big situation Xia, may will bear more from policy level of pressure.

Alibaba, it cannot always just like "Ali has made lots of efforts" or "traditional brands should also manage channel", or "they (a European luxury brand) shouldn't have to sell so expensive" such rhetoric to respond to and resolve, as it had to face the fact that:

As the Government of this new population of an enabling policy, it has to some extent been enjoying the "ultra-national treatment", and now it and the e-commerce industry that it represents has grown into a towering tree, become a giant in China's economic and ecological shade.

Cannot be excluded that the Chinese Government the necessary time to prune this shade so that space for other eco members, and those "super national treatment" part, will first of all be the object of pruning.

Next, investors only need to focus on three issues:"ultra-national treatment" will lead to or have led to the decline of population decline or even the whole ecology do? Pruning can save declining? Ali: is there any way to prevent the worst from happening ?

For first a problem, important of may not facts itself, but social of general sense views, that Ali of rise does with with traditional retail of decline, as it on traditional produced sex industry of impact, currently also no too clear of contact, because compared traditional large retailers of peak period productive enterprise for various channel costs complained, Ali currently still played with relative active of role (if alone consider circulation link, and not consider "counterfeiting counterfeit" problem words).

What is real--although the truth sometimes in front of social mood is not important, but it is expected the policy choices of the Government will play a very important role? Reasons for the decline of the traditional retail industry may not be tax or fake issues such "ultra-national treatment", but new technology brings new user habits and ecological changes, until China completely rejected from the very beginning the application of new technologies such as the Internet.

There is no doubt that the use and popularization of technology digestion of asymmetric information, and spatial and temporal barriers on the information asymmetry is built on traditional retail core of the moat, if any product is to connect consumers, must pass through them, this becomes the source of their power.

Of course, Ali's "ultra-national treatment" accelerates the disintegration of traditional retail, so the traditional retail outlet, which requires a policy of fair treatment, but fundamentally, is how to use technology to reshape the competitive advantages, including responding to consumer demand for new.

In other words, just retail industry of against, still insufficient to prompted Government take not conducive to Ali of action, because these policy may does not can solution fundamental problem, instead will produced double lost of concerns, after all Ali hands tens of thousands of of businesses of livelihoods is a not ignored of policy game chips, alone China also need continues to in global technology and new commercial field preemption vantage point, so will special avoid convey any suppressed this industry of signal.

But productive enterprise of rebound lethality to big have more, they in China economic in the of importance not retail industry can than of, despite now also no special "senses" level of contact proved Ali and productive enterprise of dilemma has more big relationship, but any by Ali in "super national treatment" Xia expansion, does may will in circulation cost, and development or production and the brand, link accelerated swallowed production enterprise of value, even led to bad currency expulsion good currency.

Entering the third question: Although you can't predict specific policies of the Government, it is clear that integrated the various possible, accelerate the Elimination of Ali's "ultra-national treatment" may be more than the positive value of the negative effects, sooner or later it will react to policy choices. For investors, perhaps more, is that once this happens, how big is the impact on Ali.

Yin Sheng believes that unless the tax and "counterfeit fake" issue two "ultra-national treatment" cancellation or any one is enough to hurt the General Ali :

Canceled tax treatment will increased Ali businesses of cost, to reduced Ali ecological of short-term competitiveness, but consider to consumers habits, and user for logistics paid wishes of rose, and and Taobao of many long tail products online Xia retail stores fundamental buy not to or find up trouble,, so businesses are still has must of price capacity, while, this also may accelerated they to "counterfeiting counterfeit" products transfer, to reduced cost stable profit rate.

If it is a second treatment, so much the better understanding, the problem is not the one or two years, and each year the Government (even the United States Government) will make different levels of pressure profile, but the problem still exists. Unless the Government thinks that Ali must bear joint and several liability of the business, even as the first responsible persons, and determined once not punish Ali's purse does not stop, otherwise short on Ali's injury is still negligible.

Such a possibility does not exist. Ali was not drops, which to a certain extent also benefit from some sort of "ultra-national treatment", because its driver doesn't use huge like traditional rental business licence fees and money, which resulted in the traditional rental industry rebound, turned over to the Government the balance back to the traditional party rental industry.

Drops is a huge funding start-ups attract venture capitalists, and Ali had in the growth of China's economy may be the largest single component, as well as the largest source of incremental, its turnover exceeded 3 trillion Yuan last year, is expected to account for 10% then all of China's total retail sales of consumer goods.

However, this provides another kind of thinking dimensions: Ali still has plenty of game chips even if the policy level, but to the "super national treatment after" transition may be more in line with the long-term benefits of, Ali. When a company is increasingly becoming a pillar of the national economy, and are sensitive to the retail side, it will become more and more in the future and the fate of the country's economy closely .

So, on Ali,, from flow economic steering industry economic mode, real to building conducive to long-term benign cycle of ecological, will productivity contribution rose to company of core considerations target, and non-just meet Yu front of scale and market Carnival, and drunk Yu PR of "skillfully strength", may is long-term value of key, because any not conducive to this a index of behavior, eventually will reflect to long-term performance Shang, and investment not is a items for company future performance of business did?

传统经济的批评伤不了阿里，它的敌人来自内部 - 阿里巴巴,马云,电商 - IT资讯

摘要：也许这波的批评潮仍然不会有太大实质性影响，但对阿里而言，从流量经济转向产业经济模式，真正着手构建有利于长远良性循环的生态，将生产率贡献上升到公司的核心考量目标，而非仅仅沉醉于公关的“巧实力”，可能才是长期价值的关键。

阿里巴巴又被传统经济批评了。正在召开的“两会”上，一名来自传统行业的企业家代表公开向阿里巴巴发难，认为“实体经济搞不好，有阿里的‘功劳’”。

尽管这已经不是阿里巴巴第一次遭受来自传统行业的批评，而且过去所有的批评对阿里似乎并没有造成实质性影响，不过这波批评潮发生的背景与过去显然存在很大不同，因此不能不引起投资人的慎重审视。

在之前的批评者中，传统零售业是中枢力量，比如几年前苏宁创始人张近东就是最活跃的批评者之一，而他批评的依据主要是阿里商家在假货和税收方面存在的问题，不过后来阿里巴巴以283亿元的代价成为其旗下上市公司苏宁云商的主要股东之一。

而从去年开始的这一轮新的批评潮中，尽管批评的依据没有太大变化，但取而代之宗庆后、董明珠这样的生产性行业的标杆企业家成为中坚力量，这次在两会上“发难”的企业家也属于生产性行业。

由于生产性行业是中国作为世界工厂的核心力量，承载了GDP、出口、就业等多重中国政府目前关注的重点指标，因此这些批评之声可能会比过去在政府决策层面产生更多的博弈筹码。

除此之外，税收、知识产权这些发生在阿里身上的、出于各种原因多年未能得到突破性解决的“原罪”，在当前面对中国和美国可能爆发贸易战、经济放缓以及降税呼声下需要新的税收来源的压力、实体经济糟糕的整体处境以及中国社会对互联网产生的财富集中效应的反思等大形势下，可能会承受更多来自政策层面的压力。

对阿里巴巴而言，它不能总是仅仅以类似“阿里已经做了很多积极努力”，或“传统品牌企业也应该管理好自己的渠道”，或“它们（某欧洲奢侈品品牌）本来就不该卖那么贵”这样的说辞来应对和化解，因为它不得不面对这样的事实：

作为政府对电商这个新生种群的一种扶持政策，它在某种程度上一直享受着“超国民待遇”，而现在，它和它所代表的电商行业已经成长为参天大树，成为庞大中国经济生态中一块巨大的绿荫。

不能排除中国政府在必要的时候对这片绿荫进行一些修剪，以便给其他生态成员留出空间，而那些“超国民待遇”的部分，会首先成为修剪的对象。

接下来投资者只需要重点考虑三个问题：“超国民待遇”会导致或已经导致其他种群衰落甚至整个生态的衰落吗？修剪能拯救衰落吗？阿里有什么方法防止最坏情况发生吗？

对于第一个问题，重要的可能不是事实本身，而是社会的普遍感观，即阿里的崛起的确伴随着传统零售的衰落，至于它对传统产生性行业的冲击，目前还没有太明确的联系，因为相比传统大型零售商的巅峰时期生产性企业对于各种渠道费用怨声载道，阿里目前仍然扮演着相对积极的角色（如果单单考虑流通环节，而不考虑“伪冒假劣”问题的话）。

真实的情况是怎样的——尽管真相在社会情绪面前有时并不重要，但预计它对政府的政策选择仍然会发挥相当重要的作用？传统零售业衰退的原因可能不仅仅是税收或假货问题这样的“超国民待遇”，更是新技术带来的新的用户习惯和生态的变化，除非中国从一开始就完全抵制互联网等新技术的应用。

毫无疑问，技术的使用和普及消解了信息不对称，而建立在时空障碍上的信息不对称正是传统零售业最核心的护城河，任何产品若想连接消费者，就必须通过它们，这成为它们权力的来源。

当然，阿里的“超国民待遇”的确加速了传统零售业的瓦解，所以，传统零售业的出路，既需要政策上的公平对待，但从根本上来说，还是如何利用技术来重塑竞争优势，包括对消费者新的需求做出响应。

换句话说，仅仅零售业的反抗，仍不足以促使政府采取不利于阿里的行动，因为这些政策可能并不能解决根本问题，反而会产生双输的顾虑，毕竟阿里手中数以万计的商家的生计也是一个不容忽视的政策博弈筹码，何况中国还需要继续在全球科技和新商业领域抢占制高点，所以会特别避免传达任何打压这个行业的信号。

但生产性企业的反弹杀伤力要大得多，它们在中国经济中的重要性不是零售业可以比的，尽管眼下还没有特别“感官”层面的联系证明阿里与生产性企业的困境有多大关系，但任由阿里在“超国民待遇”下扩张，确实可能会在流通成本、研发或生产及品牌等环节加速吞噬生产企业的价值，甚至导致劣币驱逐良币。

进入第三个问题：尽管无法对政府的具体政策做出预测，但显然综合各种可能，加速取消阿里的“超国民待遇”带来的积极价值可能正在超过带来的消极影响，这迟早会反应到政策选择上来。对投资者而言，也许更应该关系的，是一旦这样的情况发生，对阿里的影响到底有多大。

尹生认为，除非税收和“伪冒假劣”问题两个“超国民待遇”同时取消，否则任何一个都不足以对阿里构成太大伤害：

取消税收待遇会增加阿里商家的成本，从而降低阿里生态的短期竞争力，但考虑到消费者习惯、用户为物流付费意愿的上升、以及淘宝的很多长尾产品在线下零售店根本买不到或找起来麻烦等，因此商家们仍然拥有一定的提价能力，同时，这还可能加速它们向“伪冒假劣”产品转移，以降低成本稳定盈利率。

如果是针对第二项待遇，那更好理解，这个问题的存在已经不是一两年，而且每年政府（甚至包括美国政府）都会做出不同程度的压力姿态，但问题依然存在。除非政府认为阿里必须对商家的行为负连带责任，甚至是作为第一责任人，并决心一旦发现问题不罚到阿里倾家荡产不罢休，否则短期内对阿里的伤害仍然可以忽略不计。

而这样的可能性显然不存在。阿里并非滴滴，后者在某种程度上也受益于某种“超国民待遇”，因为它的司机不用像传统出租业一样背负巨额牌照费和份子钱，这必然招致传统出租业的反弹，最终政府的天平回到了传统出租业一方。

滴滴还只是一个吸纳了风险投资人巨额资金的创业企业，而阿里已经成长为中国经济中可能是最大的单一构成部分，以及最大的增量来源，去年它的交易额超过了3万亿元，预计占到当年全部中国消费品零售总额的10%。

不过，这会提供另一种思考维度：即便政策层面阿里仍然拥有足够的博弈筹码，但逐渐主动向“后超国民待遇”转型也许更符合阿里的长期利益。当一家公司越来越成为一个国家经济的重要支柱，而且又处于敏感的零售端时，它的未来也将越来越和这个国家经济的命运密切相关。

因此，对阿里而言，从流量经济转向产业经济模式，真正着手构建有利于长远良性循环的生态，将生产率贡献上升到公司的核心考量目标，而非仅仅满足于眼前的规模和市值狂欢，以及沉醉于公关的“巧实力”，可能才是长期价值的关键，因为任何不利于这一指标的行为，最终会反映到长期业绩上，而投资不正是一项针对公司未来业绩的生意吗？