Tapsi complained to the Competition Council against Snapp Group’s adoption of anti-competitive practices in the online food ordering market.
According to Iran digital economy annotation, according to Tapsi’s public relations announcement, this complaint is based on “creating an obstacle for new competitors to enter the market” by restricting restaurants from cooperating with other platforms. Tapsi company unveiled its super application in August this year and mentioned the provision of online food ordering services as one of the services to be provided in this super application. Until today, the online food ordering service of Tapsi, which started its work under the name “Tapsifood”, has been activated for users in two cities of Mashhad and Shiraz, and it is going to be activated in other cities, including Tehran, soon.
According to the latest news announced by Tapsi company, the restaurant recruitment operation has started in Tehran and this service will soon be available for users in Tehran as well. Now, after more than 3 months have passed since Tapsi entered the online food ordering industry, this company has announced that it has filed a complaint against Snapp due to anti-competitive and monopolistic behavior.
Negin Ansari, legal vice-president of Tapsi, provides more details about this lawsuit and says: “Snappfood’s dominant economic position and even more than that, its pure monopoly in the online food ordering market, put this company in a privileged position to carry out numerous effective anti-competitive measures. Data that we see the results of today to enter the online food ordering market and attract restaurants for Tapsifood.
We have started our measures to attract restaurants in Tehran since September and we see that this company has not only continued its former anti-competitive measures that it was condemned by the Competition Council in a new way but also intensified it. is Explaining that Snapp still maintains exclusive contracts with restaurants, and in the form of these contracts, it is committed to allocating special benefits, including discounts on commissions, advertising and improving performance points, to the restaurants that are parties to the contract in case of exclusive activity with Snappfood.
According to Tapsi’s legal assistant, in global practice, including in the European Union, providing a discount conditional on exclusive cooperation by an player with a dominant position is considered anti-competitive behavior. “Snappfood is not satisfied with concluding exclusive contracts and in order to create an absolute monopoly, it has also greatly increased the cost of exiting exclusive contracts for restaurants and has set heavy fines for them.”
Referring to this issue, Ansari says: “In the case of Chilivery Company against Snappfood in 2019, the Competition Council considered this action as an example of restricting transactions with The competitor had recognized (Article 45, Section 2, Clause A).”
According to Tapsi’s public relations announcement, Tapsi’s complaint against Snapp related to the monopoly in the field of food ordering will be submitted to the competition council in the first week of November and will be reviewed by this council.
No Comment! Be the first one.