Judging from the Decision of the Yunnan Provincial Tourism Homestay Industry Association on Launching Anti-Monopoly Action Against Unfair Competition by OTAs, the wording is forceful and unambiguous, directly targeting online travel platforms such as Trip.com Group. The allegations are striking, ranging from unfair contract terms and traffic suppression to forcing merchants to choose one platform over another.
At first glance, it appears to be a classic case of the weak pushing back against the strong.
What followed, however, unfolded in a completely unexpected direction.
With the exception of a small number of operators, consumers did not rally in solidarity. Instead, public discussion quickly shifted into a wave of sarcasm and ridicule.
Some users bluntly commented that they simply would not dare book a Yunnan homestay without Trip.com acting as a backstop. Others pointed out that Trip.com is one of the few platforms with customer service that actually works—one that steps in, proactively contacts users, and even offers compensation when issues arise, including hotel problems or cancellations.
Without platforms such as Trip.com, Meituan or Fliggy providing oversight, many consumers would be reluctant to transfer money directly to a landlord they have never met. The cost of trust is simply too high. Once disputes occur, consumers often end up dealing with operators thousands of kilometers away, making it extremely difficult to seek redress.
In this sense, platforms serve as the final layer of trust in the homestay market. Most travelers are pragmatic: they care less about who holds market power than about who takes responsibility when problems arise.
This, ultimately, is why the Yunnan homestay association’s statement has struggled to resonate with the broader public.
