北大光华管理学院的会计学教授Paul Gillis指出,中国电商公司大多在美国上市,当地的会计法规对商品交易总量的标准定义并无要求。
If the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission has reason to believe that e-commerce companies’ numbers are misleading, they may make them disclose more information, according to Gillis.
Gillis认为,如果美国证券交易管理委员会相信电商的数据有误导性,它将会要求电商公布更多数据。
Currently, Chinese e-commerce site Dangdang, known for its book sales, is one of the few to report transaction volume net of returns and cancellations.
以图书销售闻名的中国电商网站当当网公开除退货、取消订单外的销售额,它是目前为数不多这样做的商家之一。
Meanwhile, Amazon doesn’t disclose GMV at all.
与之相比,亚马逊则选择完全不公开商品交易总量。
Still, some analysts say the lack of a standard definition for GMV hasn’t been an issue for them.
不过部分分析师认为商品交易总量缺少标准定义对他们而言并不是问题。
“The difference in size between Alibaba and JD.com is very big, so even if they have different definitions of GMV, we can have a rough understanding of their transaction scale,” said Vanessa Zeng, a senior analyst at Forrester Research.
弗雷斯特研究公司的高级分析师Vanessa Zeng 说:“阿里巴巴和京东的规模差距非常巨大,即使他们对商品交易总量的定义不同,我们也能对它们的交易规模有大致的了解。”
【缩水的双十一 阿里巴巴销售数据虚高1/4】相关文章:
最新
2020-09-15
2020-09-15
2020-09-15
2020-09-15
2020-09-15
2020-09-15