In the world of investing, rely on the research reports of Golden麒麟 analysts for authoritative, professional, timely, and comprehensive analysis to help you uncover potential thematic opportunities! What goes around comes around. The accumulated grievances from operating in grey areas in the past are now being fully settled.
A tourism promotion agreement with Cambodia, intended to facilitate visa-free travel, backfired spectacularly for Trip.com. Instead of sparking romantic "pack-and-go" adventures, the deal triggered a wave of decisive "click-and-delete" actions from its user base. In recent days, the most spectacular migration observed online wasn't to popular tourist spots, but rather a silent, mass exodus of users fleeing Trip.com with their data in tow. Uninstalling the app, deleting accounts, and unlinking services were done in one swift motion, resembling a silent rebellion in the digital age.
Confronted with this "avalanche of distrust," Trip.com finally issued a "solemn statement." The statement was characteristically "meticulous": the collaboration was purely an advertisement, not involving data; the campaign had been paused, with absolutely no leaks; and the agreement had been submitted for review, with verification welcomed. The wording exuded the calm and procedural rigor typical of a tech giant, seemingly saying, "This is just a misunderstanding, everyone please remain calm." However, users' voting with their feet was far swifter than the statement's dissemination.
Online rumors have circulated figures like a "217% surge in uninstalls within 48 hours" and "3 million clicks on the account deletion option." While these numbers are likely exaggerated, the underlying panic is undoubtedly real and potent. What are users afraid of? On the surface, they fear that their ID numbers and itinerary details might be funneled through some clandestine channel in a cooperation agreement straight to Cambodia, a country frequently in the news for telecom fraud and kidnappings. The sentiment, "I'd rather spend more money than risk getting a scam call from Cambodia," captures a fundamental survival instinct. But looking deeper, this new incident has dredged up old grievances. Past security breaches, like the payment vulnerability in 2014 and the excessive data collection in 2018, have acted like landmines buried within user trust, waiting for just the right trigger to detonate. The cooperation with Cambodia happened to be that trigger.
When users finally decided to leave, they found that the "breakup" wasn't straightforward. While the law states that "account cancellation should be convenient," reality often presents numerous obstacles. Online tutorials have sprung up detailing how to delete a Trip.com account. Various claims are circulating, not all of which are necessarily true. But this is characteristic of online public sentiment; once an entity is deemed "unforgivable," a mix of true and false rumors inevitably emerges.
The crisis is inherently multi-faceted. The cooperation with Cambodia acted like a needle, puncturing multiple weak spots on Trip.com's balloon. Data security anxiety is just one issue. Accusations of monopolistic "pick-one" practices from the Yunnan B&B Association, long-standing criticisms over "dynamic pricing" and "bundled sales," all found a resonant outlet in this collapse of trust. Users suddenly realized they are not just "data-farmed poultry" but also "commercially harvested chives." The panic quickly spread from "will my info be sold to Cambodia?" to "have I been overcharged all along?" and "have my choices been restricted?"
What goes around comes around. The resentment accumulated from navigating grey areas in the past is now being fully settled. A tech giant must act like a tech giant. This "acting" isn't just about glossy financial reports or meticulously worded statements; it's about maintaining a fundamental respect for users. In the realm of the internet, "martial virtue" translates to "data ethics" and "commercial bottom lines." Treating users as assets to be meticulously managed, while forgetting they are living, breathing people capable of fear, anger, and voting by uninstalling, is the Damocles' sword hanging over all platform-based businesses. Trip.com's most urgent task might not be to explain the "safety" of a single agreement, but to re-evaluate how its risk-blind collaborations, monopolistic suspicions, and price-discriminating algorithms have eroded its very foundation. After all, users might grant a platform a second chance, but they can also deliver the final click. Once trust is deleted, it's notoriously difficult to re-register.