SEOUL — In the rapidly evolving landscape of South Korea’s e-commerce market, Coupang has cemented its status as an undisputed titan. However, its "Rocket Delivery" success story is increasingly being overshadowed by allegations of heavy-handed negotiation tactics. Major food manufacturers, once the "Goliaths" of the industry, now claim they are being forced into unfavorable contracts, succumbing to Coupang’s demands to protect their market share.
The Leverage of Direct Purchase
At the heart of the dispute is Coupang’s direct purchase (first-party) business model. Unlike open markets where platforms merely provide a storefront, Coupang buys inventory in bulk from suppliers. While this allows for lightning-fast delivery and lower consumer prices, it grants Coupang absolute control over pricing and profit margins.
According to industry sources on December 31, 2025, several large-scale food manufacturers struggled until the final hours of the year to reach agreements on margin rates for 2026. "We held out as long as possible, but in the end, we will likely have to yield," a representative from a major food firm lamented. "If margins exceed 35%, we are essentially selling at a loss."
The Controversy of "Dynamic Pricing"
The most contentious issue is Coupang’s "Dynamic Pricing" policy. Suppliers allege that Coupang monitors the lowest prices across the web—including those from competitors like Naver, Gmarket, or even niche sellers of near-expiry goods—and automatically matches them.
The friction arises when Coupang demands that the manufacturers compensate for the resulting loss in profit. Suppliers claim they are pressured to cover these gaps through "advertising fees" or "incentives." Furthermore, if a manufacturer runs a short-term promotion with a different retailer, Coupang often demands the same low price while insisting on its guaranteed profit margin.
Standard Contracts vs. Practical Coercion
While the Fair Trade Commission (FTC) provides Standardized Supply Agreements to prevent unfair trade, industry insiders suggest these are easily bypassed. Coupang has reportedly sent official notices to suppliers stating that if new terms are not met, contracts will be terminated due to "changing market conditions"—a justification critics call too vague.
"Beyond the standard contract, there are often side agreements or verbal demands for 'sales incentives' during promotional periods," an e-commerce insider explained. "Because Coupang’s purchase volume is so massive, their bargaining power is incomparable to other platforms."
A Global Shift in Power
Some analysts argue that this tension is a natural byproduct of a global shift in the retail power balance. Much like Amazon in the U.S., the "Retailer-Led" era means manufacturers must often sacrifice margins to maintain access to a platform’s vast customer base.
A retail industry official noted, "In events like Black Friday, manufacturers globally accept losses to secure shelf space. The power of the manufacturer is structurally declining."
However, Coupang maintains a different stance, stating that extreme margin demands are outliers and that most adjustments are modest, 1-percentage-point increases that reflect inflation and rising operational costs.
[Copyright (c) Global Economic Times. All Rights Reserved.]
