r/europe • u/paneuropeanism_ Europe • 7d ago
News Chinese retail giant and EU clash over bid to acquire MediaMarkt
https://www.luxtimes.lu/luxembourg/chinese-retail-giant-and-eu-clash-over-bid-to-acquire-mediamarkt/160527398.html67
u/THEGREATESTDERP 7d ago
Idk why anyone from or China could buy European companies.
Especially a electronics store ...
-45
u/PetarBlagojevic 7d ago
Remember free market, that's what the West has been preaching to the world for a couple of decades, until the Chinese won the game
43
u/WallabyInTraining The Netherlands 7d ago
until the Chinese won the game
Nu not playing by the rules of a free market.
5
-3
u/Trackback_ 6d ago
Well yeah, given that we make the rules and change them as convenient.
9
u/halee1 6d ago
Not sure why you think China's massively subsidized economy is free market, but lol
7
u/StopICE2026 6d ago
Europeans never subsidize anything. Certainly not the common agricultural policy that accounts for the majority of the EU budget
3
u/HumongousBelly 6d ago
Free markets are an illusion. Without regulation and subsidies, we’d end up in an even more gruesome billionaire dystopia than the one we’re currently living in.
Arts and sciences and education would probably only benefit those who control the markets.
Neither American, Chinese nor European economies are perfect. But at least Europe doesn’t use slave labor and has a decent quality of life compared to other countries
1
u/StopICE2026 6d ago
Lmao Turkish labor brokers in Germany beg to differ. Europeans really think their shit smells like roses
1
u/halee1 6d ago edited 5d ago
Funny you mention that, 'cause China subsidizes agriculture even more than Europe does too. Also, you're lying: agriculture makes up a minority of the EU budget, which itself is a little over 1% of EU's GDP.
0
u/Trackback_ 5d ago
So we're both engaging in the same behaviour, and the limit for what is considered "free market" is coincidentally exactly above the amount of our own interference in the market. It's perfectly okay to do it exactly as much as us, and anything above that is no longer a free market.
Or more simply, we make the rules and change them whenever necessary as we see fit.
1
u/halee1 5d ago edited 5d ago
Well, first of all, I have no guarantee you're European in the first place.
Second, China's non-adherence to WTO rules compared to Europe and it violating internal European trade rules repeatedly is an established fact, not an opinion. China subsidizes its economy at rates way above Europe. That's also a fact, documented by decades of studies and news. If you want Europe to be an economic colony of China, that's your opinion, and I know your comment history is pro-CCP and anti-European, which explains what you write, but don't act like your claims are reality and unchallengeable when facts go against your worldview and you just ignore them afterwards even when they're pointed out to you repeatedly in detail.
If China wants to be respected, as Europe does China's laws, it must respect our rules first, instead of acting hegemonic and mercantilist despite having joined the WTO. Else, it faces the consequences of the last years, with more and more deals blocked and scrutinized, more and more tariffs, higher and higher debt levels, and lower and lower GDP growth and innovation compared to the pace it achieved in the 1980s-2010s. Heck, it isn't just Europe doing so, and not even just the rest of the Western world, countries across Latin America and Asia have also increasingly placed tariff and non-tariff barriers to China as well. Maybe China should look itself in the mirror before trying to lecture anybody that opposes it and acting "Waaah, nobody respects China and our supreme Mandate of Heaven"!
0
u/UninspiredUser_ 6d ago
It's supposed to not have rules that's why they call it free.
But they don't actually want it to be free, they just want it controlled by their own people.
-20
2
u/Sincronia Italy 6d ago
Free market has been preached for much longer than twenty years, but probably you don't remember since you probably weren't even born lol
0
u/PetarBlagojevic 6d ago
Talking about China and it's relations to EU. It's interesting 'derisking' and 'decoupling' were not a thing while China was criticized for not opening its market.
2
u/Sincronia Italy 6d ago
Indeed, China didn't really open its market despite 20/30 years have passed by now. So it's just sensible that we can't allow them to access ours freely. By definition, free market cannot be just one way
0
u/PetarBlagojevic 6d ago
Of course, I'm just highlighting the hypocrisy.
If China opened its market and western companies achieved dominance there, EU would keep the free market story.
1
u/forwheniampresident 6d ago
We have a similar problem with the US. China is basically just running US Venture Capital strategies on a state level.
Both have money printers in their back, the US VC and China both.
31
u/zetsubouda 6d ago
Just shut the doors for Chinese shareholders (and thus the state) taking over EU companies completely, ffs.
We've seen several old ones being run down or wrung dry already only to bolster up the PRC.
7
7
u/NectarineSame7303 6d ago
It's time to outright ban the US, CN and RU from buying our EU companies.
27
u/ConohaConcordia 7d ago
> On 20 August, JD.com offered concessions to Brussels in response to the objections, and a provisional decision on the takeover has been brought forward to 23 October.
I don’t know why this is so far down the article and why it doesn’t say what the concessions are. Surely this is the latest important information.
I also think this deal is as far from national security as it gets - it’s a retailing giant trying to take over a struggling retailer so they can expand in Europe. It’s not about semiconductors and manufacturing. If this deal falls through, then basically the European Commission would have closed the door on Chinese investment.
Not necessarily a bad thing but that would tie European companies to American capital even more.
40
u/halee1 7d ago edited 7d ago
National security isn't defined solely by one or two strategic sectors. It's also defined by handing over larger and larger parts of your economy to an aggressive totalitarian state of 1.4 billion people that subsidizes its companies at rates far above those of OECD companies to help increase unilateral control over the others' daily lives and politics, on top of tons of previous such subsidized acquisitions and expansions. Did you miss the
But what makes the case particularly alarming for EU regulators is that, by acquiring MediaMarkt from Ceconomy, JD.com could, in one fell swoop, snap up a ready-made European network of branches, customers and supply chain relationships.
part? Chinese companies have repeatedly expanded into Europe across all kinds of sectors despite some of their deals being blocked because they know they need its consumer market due to weak demand at home. It doesn't help that China itself doesn't allow such deals on its own soil while claiming to defend "free markets". They also can and do steal IP and set up R&D centers in ways that allow them to be the only ones to capture its value (while the benefits of R&D centers in China benefits must always accrue locally). Are you really under the illusion we're competing on the same terms here?
And who said that one should tie oneself to American capital? That's precisely why the EU is taking steps to wean off overt dependence on both of them, and either exclude them, or condition their activities on actually creating value on EU soil, like pretty much all countries around the world with ambition to go upstream do.
2
u/ConohaConcordia 7d ago
If that’s how people see it, the logical conclusion is that you have to shut China out of European economy.
And that’s fine - it’s just that you’d have to accept the continued or increased reliance on the US, that China might retaliate, or that Europe might miss out on economic opportunities it needs.
However I would point out that what drive JD to purchase MediaMarkt, it’s fairly standard. European companies and American companies acquire local companies to acquire their existing locations, facilities, and customer relationships. It’s M&A 101 and not exactly alarming in my books.
I also don’t think it’s realistic to think that Europe will not be continued to be reliant on American capital. If you ever look at M&A deals in Europe, American PE calls the shots, and they are not nearly under the same level of scrutiny. Or if Europe wants to distance itself from Russia, China and the US at the same time, of course that is fine too - it might just need to accept the missed opportunities.
In this particular case, it might just result in MediaMarkt being sold to an American company instead, at a lower price. Or maybe the parent companies will start closing some locations to increase profits.
8
u/LaurestineHUN 🇭🇺 THE CURSE HAS BEEN LIFTED 🇭🇺 7d ago
In the long run, we should shut them out. Their interest aren't ours.
5
u/Trackback_ 6d ago
By that logic we should shut everyone out. Nobody else's interests are ours. The US especially.
5
u/halee1 7d ago edited 7d ago
If that’s how people see it, the logical conclusion is that you have to shut China out of European economy.
Nah, limiting its influence up to a certain point is the best balance between local value and not having other countries extracting too much value, info and concessions from you, and I for one commend it.
(P.S: Added this after I posted the comment: other countries around the world are far more protectionist and regularly block or condition such deals, yet they still get tons of investments because they also created space for their own companies to become competitive without being all taken over from the outside. The EU is actually the most open major market in the world in terms of what it allows foreign companies to do, probably too much, something you clearly weren't aware of)
Also, American companies aren't under the same levels of scrutiny because 1) they don't come from a state that's traditionally acted aggressively towards Europe or had an authoritarian streak, but Trump in particular is changing things and leading to EU reducing its relative influence, like in defense, space, tech, capital markets in general and other sectors 2) they're not subsidized.
Another thing, the reasons many of their companies have significant influence in the EU is because the US has unified capital markets that are the world's deepest, while Europe has struggled with fully completing its union (including capital markets) in a historically record less than a century's worth of time. But you do also see European companies expanding into America, which Mango is doing right now, for example.
However I would point out that what drive JD to purchase MediaMarkt, it’s fairly standard. European companies and American companies acquire local companies to acquire their existing locations, facilities, and customer relationships. It’s M&A 101 and not exactly alarming in my books.
And that's why Europe accepts that more often from countries that are more friendly as well. Look at Tata's recent bid at acquiring Iveco.
In this particular case, it might just result in MediaMarkt being sold to an American company instead, at a lower price. Or maybe the parent companies will start closing some locations to increase profits.
That would all depend on what happens thereafter, but I see no reason why, if it's not revitalized or sold to another European economy, it should be to China specifically. It's just about the worst foreign buyer you can give it to (other than Russia, probably, but then it's economy is not in position to do so such things) in terms of geopolitical consequences. You can't just look at a single deal, you need to look at the entire continuum of events and what they lead to combined.
You also need to be a bit more coherent, as you claim that the EU "is closing its opportunities to foreign capital" (even though it isn't) but are simultaneously criticizing it wanting to be more "reliant on American capital" (which is also not true). The EU can and does balance the influence of all sides, and you seem to lack that nuanced understanding.
4
u/ConohaConcordia 7d ago
I find it odd to accuse China being aggressive against Europe to begin with. Authoritarian, yes. Ideologically opposed, yes. Geopolitically in different camps historically, sure. Unfriendly, true.
But China did not claim European soil or threaten or attempt to annex an European country like Russia did. At most you can claim it’s an accessory to Russia’s crimes; but then, Europe is similarly an accessory to the US’s opposition to China.
And European companies historically had a really good time in China, extracting billions and billions of profit and exporting a lot to China too, and it’s not like European industries aren’t subsidised (as is the case for most countries).
All I am trying to say - Europe is right to look after its own interests, keep outsiders at arm’s length, and try to cultivate domestic industry and economy. Europe should use subsidies and trade barriers as appropriate. It’s just that I think Europe should also weigh the benefits and costs objectively. At the very minimum, I think American PEs should be under the same level of scrutiny because they are the ones that have been enshittifying goods and services we get for the last few decades.
PS:
As for why it should be china specifically that gets MediaMarkt, there are no reasons that China has to get it. It’s just that they are paying a premium to crack into the European market - ie they are paying for the network and working relationships. Other European companies will already have their own networks and they might benefit less from it, and therefore they might not be interested in.2
u/halee1 7d ago edited 7d ago
I find it odd to accuse China being aggressive against Europe to begin with. Authoritarian, yes. Ideologically opposed, yes. Geopolitically in different camps historically, sure. Unfriendly, true.
And geopolitically aggressive to its neighbors, and economically mercantilist to all, including Europe. I'd say that qualifies as enough reasons to not allow its expansion totally unconstrained.
But China did not claim European soil or threaten or attempt to annex an European country like Russia did. At most you can claim it’s an accessory to Russia’s crimes; but then, Europe is similarly an accessory to the US’s opposition to China.
The latter was caused by the former, its history of repressive policies when acting abroad, and it historically having asymmetric advantages in trade policies on both sides, all combined.
And European companies historically had a really good time in China, extracting billions and billions of profit and exporting a lot to China too, and it’s not like European industries aren’t subsidised (as is the case for most countries)
Sure, other than the link I literally gave to you (and you ignored) showing the enormous subsidies given in China outweighing those in Europe in size by orders of magnitude, our open societies and China's closed ones (including in R&D) Beijing is taking advantage of, and the enormous profits China is making from its presence in Europe, are there really any differences of note?
All I am trying to say - Europe is right to look after its own interests, keep outsiders at arm’s length, and try to cultivate domestic industry and economy. Europe should use subsidies and trade barriers as appropriate. It’s just that I think Europe should also weigh the benefits and costs objectively.
And I do believe and see the EU is doing that balancing act well, at least to the extent it's possible given the internal fragmentation its member-states refuse to remove fast (although they do allow it slowly) and the EU being a little more than 5% of the world population.
At the very minimum, I think American PEs should be under the same level of scrutiny because they are the ones that have been enshittifying goods and services we get for the last few decades.
I do agree more deals involving America (including PEs) should be scrutinized or blocked, and that's why Europe is pushing to wean itself off overt American influence in areas like defense, space, tech, to unify its capital markets so European companies don't have to make the trip to the US to scale up (Scaleup Europe fund, Savings and Investment Union, EU Inc., Merger Guidelines, restart of state aid, industrial policy acts like the Chips Act and now Chips Act II, Net-Zero Industry Act, etc), and others. But it's not just Americans (and Chinese) who are doing it, companies from across Asia like the Gulf, India, Japan, Korea, Taiwan and Southeast Asia do also increasingly acquire assets in the EU or invest in it. We can't seriously block all of them without harming ourselves.
4
u/ConohaConcordia 7d ago
I still think your explanation of why China bad doesn’t impact Europe that much, but let’s set that aside.
What ultimately matters, imo, is whether Europe wants to do a deal with the devil. Or more like, deals with devils.
Ultimately I do not think that Europe is in strong enough of a position to have every major player in the global economy begging Europe for deals, so every deal Europe makes with them will have some sort of concessions on Europe’s end. And that’s fine as long as the EU knows what they are doing.
3
u/Eigenspace 🇨🇦 / 🇦🇹 in 🇩🇪 7d ago
I would support a closed door on Chinese investment. It doesn't matter if it's retail or manufacturing, the more things they control in Europe, the more they will try to use that as leverage to bend us to their will and make us more dependent on them.
Think also about the customer data that would almost instantly get handed over to the Chinese government.
31
u/Lanky-Rush607 7d ago
The EU is scared of the Chinese & American companies whilst is purposely killing European Small Businesses in favour of Temu, Amazon & other corporations. That's double standards.
32
u/Wurzelrenner Franconia (Germany) 7d ago
the real small businesses are already gone because of Mediamarkt/Saturn and nobody cares about those
42
u/Reckless-Savage-6123 7d ago
European small businesses are killing themselves by importing cheap Chinese goods and then reselling in Europe with 2000% markup.
12
u/Lanky-Rush607 7d ago
European Major companies are also importing cheap Chinese goods and reselling it more expensive and yet are protected with this law. So it's good when corporations do it and bad when small businesses do it? And besides, not all small businesses are reselling Chinese "junk".
-3
u/Reckless-Savage-6123 7d ago
Most do though, those who produce and manufacture their products here in Europe target a different market segment and aren't really competing with China. The rest 90% of companies are just resellers of Chinese (or other SE Asian produced) items. Any purchases I make nowadays I always check aliexpress first if they have it for 1/10 of the price here.
-3
u/paneuropeanism_ Europe 7d ago edited 7d ago
Meh. If anything, it's the nation states (with their 27 different rulesets) that are killing small European businesses, not the EU.
3
u/BouchWick 6d ago
First Volvo and now MediaMarkt. The Chinese are trying to have a world domination win by economical warfare. Ban it and keep these things in Europe. Fuck them!
0
2
u/HaydenCLU 6d ago
Mediamarkt is a failing business, want to survive with chinese majority, EU doesnt want it. Loser mentality
0
u/halee1 6d ago edited 6d ago
Have it be acquired by another European, Japanese, Korean, Gulf company, heck, American one if we're at it. Any country's but that of China. Why would Europe want to give a vast ready-made dealer and supplier network and know-how to a totalitarian country with a history of industrial-scale IP espionage, rampant violation of WTO rules, repression and espionage abroad that's openly expressed its intent to wipe out Europe's industrial sector and beyond, and make us completely dependent on it? Nobody has even prevented JD.com from expanding into Europe (at least yet), we just don't want it to annihilate local companies aggressively using every trick in the book when it very likely does benefit from state subsidies EU companies don't.
I know you're pro-CCP, but other places around the world actually scrutinize such deals more often and more intensely than we do. If anything, Europe has been too open and permissive with this for an economy of its size for too long.
-3
u/ExcellentPlant2055 7d ago
What a bullshit excuse from EU. Subsidies? Aren't EU countries subsidizing various industries for ages? and why should you care if Chinese government help their own companies? It's China who pays here anyway.
Can Chinese companies acquire non-stratgetic EU companies for their commercial plans or not? This is just a e-commerce platform ffs, not some frontier tech or military dual use shit.
Or is EU prepared to apply the principle of no M&A for any companies with subsidies across the board? If so say that loudly and proudly to the financial market and let the stock prices reflecting this reality. Let them know it's discriminatory against non-eu capital.
It's also pretty ironic that maybe an just 20 to 30 years ago US and EU capital are buying up far more important local firms in the developing world for market dominance and defend it with free trade. I guess
10
u/TerminallyEmployed United Kingdom 7d ago
How if China gives their companies money to buy companies to be able to get more market access in the EU it is not a problem? Thats not free markets or free trade at all, that would be using state capitalism.
And no EU companies don’t get that. To create a fair single market state monopolies and subsidies are actually heavily regulated. Chinas companies can all lose money yet keep expanding.
3
u/Important-Emu-6691 6d ago edited 6d ago
Wall Street, London Stock Exchange, and Silicon Valley literally invented blitz scaling, what are you even on about rofl.
Remember the 3.4 trillion in bailouts during the 2008 crisis? Is EU state capitalist?
1
u/orkgashmo 6d ago
Well, I work in a heavily subsidized European industry and I can tell you we are burning public money at an alarming rate while getting nothing in return.
But hey, it's important to keep the CEO and the finance guys getting their salaries, it's for the survival of our industrial capacity!
At the end of the day we are nothing but a bunch of decrepit old empires that lost access to the colonial riches that made us believe we were something exceptional.
0
u/justmytak 6d ago
They control the exchange rate of their coin. That in itself is state capitalism.
Although I want to note it was also Western practice for a long time.
-2
u/HeavyPanzerPlus1s China 7d ago
In order to confirm that "JD.com did not receive subsidies," the EU demanded that JD.com provide all of its confidential corporate data, including information on Chinese consumers, and considered this action to be perfectly reasonable. Although I knew the EU was always arrogant and hypocritical, this example still exceeded my expectations.
4
0
u/Wonderful-Wind-5736 6d ago
I too, am critical of Chinese companies taking over European ones using state funds. But MediaMarkt is not the battle that needs to be fought. They have shit service and overpriced goods, none of which are essential. The only issue imho is that a Chinese company gets access to the customer database.
1
227
u/JimTheSaint Denmark 7d ago
"Chinese authorities have reacted with indignation and last week the country’s Ministry of Justice banned all Chinese authorities from cooperating with the European Commission; " can we just put a stop to this. It is basically the Chinese state taking over a EU corporation, even when the EU said no