【新唐人2013年10月23日訊】中共央視之前指責星巴克咖啡定價過高，牟取暴利的長篇報導，遭到了輿論的全面抨擊。經濟、市場銷售等領域的專家發帖反駁央視的說法「不專業」、「有失公允」，網民們也紛紛質問當局為何無視大陸房價、油價、通信等關乎民生的行業暴利和壟斷，只會拿外國企業開刀。
10月20號，中共央視在長達20分鐘的報導中，通過對比星巴克咖啡在中國北京、英國倫敦、美國芝加哥、印度孟買的銷售價格，得出了一款中杯拿鐵咖啡在北京的售價最高，為人民幣27元人民幣，是孟買售價的近一倍，比美國貴了近三分之一。
央視斷定星巴克對中國消費者存在「價格歧視」。報導還以每杯星巴克拿鐵物料成本不足5元、星巴克在中國的利潤率遠遠高於歐美市場為由，得出了星巴克牟取暴利的結論，而上述觀點卻遭到了專家學者的批評和反駁。
京華山一證券研究部分析員郭亮:「如果在經濟學來看，其實我們不能單單看它的毛利是多少，因為有很多背後的成本，剛才我說的Marketing，就是說它賣廣告這些都不算是它的毛利裡面的，所以如果你就是看毛利就說它暴利這是不公平的，因為要看它最後一些，店舖的價錢呢、人工、其他廣告推廣的費用之後是不是還是這麼高的利潤，才對的。」
據路透社22號引述星巴克中國與亞太區總裁卡爾弗的回應說，星巴克拿鐵咖啡在中國售價確實要高於美國，但中國1000家咖啡店的利潤率並不比美國利潤率高。」
卡爾弗指出，星巴克在中國咖啡館的營業面積要遠遠大於美國，因為大多數中國客戶喜歡在店裡面逗留，一待就是幾小時，而80%的美國客戶拿到了咖啡就走。這就導致中國星巴克門店的翻臺率遠低於歐美地區。
星巴克公司發言人今年9月也曾對《華爾街日報》表示，產品價格因市場而異，在中國，顧客喜歡座位更多、面積更大的門店，這類門店房租成本更高，因此產品價格也更高。
今年7月，正是由於高昂的租金壓力，星巴克在大陸的第一家門店——北京國貿店被迫搬遷。因為該店的租金和人力成本超過了700萬元，而星巴克2012年在亞洲地區的平均店面營業額僅500萬元。
金融分析師任中道：「除了飛漲的門店租金，大陸的沉重的稅負也被認為是最大的交易成本，還有層層扒皮的物流運輸費、特別繁鎖的開店手續，而且其中的黑箱操作還有官僚程序都是中國大陸所特有的。在華的企業都要為此多付出的一些代價，而這些代價最終都會轉嫁到消費者身上，這幕後最大的推手，就是中共當局。」
其實不僅僅是星巴克，《華爾街日報》的報導中也指出，中國大陸的很多商品價格遠超過其他很多國家，如果考慮到收入差異，這種價格差異就更為明顯。
有網民質問中共為何不揭露中國國企壟斷，偏要針對外企﹔有網民指責當局不顧社會民生，只會轉移民眾視線， 更有網民作詩諷刺：「咖啡誠可貴，房子價更高。拿鐵非我愛，央視何其討？」
一位名叫「星巴克Starbucks」的未認證微博賬號說：「……如果生活必需品的價格國家可以為老百姓控制調控﹔如果醫療費用國家可以嚴格管理把控﹔如果貪污受賄能越來越少，如果空氣質量越來越好，如果食品安全不再用我們擔心……」，「央視太閑的時候再來聊聊蘋果和星巴克吧！」
採訪編輯/ 張天宇 後製/陳建銘
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
10月20號，中共央視在長達20分鐘的報導中，通過對比星巴克咖啡在中國北京、英國倫敦、美國芝加哥、印度孟買的銷售價格，得出了一款中杯拿鐵咖啡在北京的售價最高，為人民幣27元人民幣，是孟買售價的近一倍，比美國貴了近三分之一。
央視斷定星巴克對中國消費者存在「價格歧視」。報導還以每杯星巴克拿鐵物料成本不足5元、星巴克在中國的利潤率遠遠高於歐美市場為由，得出了星巴克牟取暴利的結論，而上述觀點卻遭到了專家學者的批評和反駁。
京華山一證券研究部分析員郭亮:「如果在經濟學來看，其實我們不能單單看它的毛利是多少，因為有很多背後的成本，剛才我說的Marketing，就是說它賣廣告這些都不算是它的毛利裡面的，所以如果你就是看毛利就說它暴利這是不公平的，因為要看它最後一些，店舖的價錢呢、人工、其他廣告推廣的費用之後是不是還是這麼高的利潤，才對的。」
據路透社22號引述星巴克中國與亞太區總裁卡爾弗的回應說，星巴克拿鐵咖啡在中國售價確實要高於美國，但中國1000家咖啡店的利潤率並不比美國利潤率高。」
卡爾弗指出，星巴克在中國咖啡館的營業面積要遠遠大於美國，因為大多數中國客戶喜歡在店裡面逗留，一待就是幾小時，而80%的美國客戶拿到了咖啡就走。這就導致中國星巴克門店的翻臺率遠低於歐美地區。
星巴克公司發言人今年9月也曾對《華爾街日報》表示，產品價格因市場而異，在中國，顧客喜歡座位更多、面積更大的門店，這類門店房租成本更高，因此產品價格也更高。
今年7月，正是由於高昂的租金壓力，星巴克在大陸的第一家門店——北京國貿店被迫搬遷。因為該店的租金和人力成本超過了700萬元，而星巴克2012年在亞洲地區的平均店面營業額僅500萬元。
金融分析師任中道：「除了飛漲的門店租金，大陸的沉重的稅負也被認為是最大的交易成本，還有層層扒皮的物流運輸費、特別繁鎖的開店手續，而且其中的黑箱操作還有官僚程序都是中國大陸所特有的。在華的企業都要為此多付出的一些代價，而這些代價最終都會轉嫁到消費者身上，這幕後最大的推手，就是中共當局。」
其實不僅僅是星巴克，《華爾街日報》的報導中也指出，中國大陸的很多商品價格遠超過其他很多國家，如果考慮到收入差異，這種價格差異就更為明顯。
有網民質問中共為何不揭露中國國企壟斷，偏要針對外企﹔有網民指責當局不顧社會民生，只會轉移民眾視線， 更有網民作詩諷刺：「咖啡誠可貴，房子價更高。拿鐵非我愛，央視何其討？」
一位名叫「星巴克Starbucks」的未認證微博賬號說：「……如果生活必需品的價格國家可以為老百姓控制調控﹔如果醫療費用國家可以嚴格管理把控﹔如果貪污受賄能越來越少，如果空氣質量越來越好，如果食品安全不再用我們擔心……」，「央視太閑的時候再來聊聊蘋果和星巴克吧！」
採訪編輯/ 張天宇 後製/陳建銘
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
