Two years after my first K5X-pedition, I was back in China for seven days – a week that fundamentally sharpened my perspective on global trade once again and made me realize what the rapid technological developments in Asia specifically mean for European retail.
Following the last part of my China blog series which focused on JD.com's surprising offline pivot and the new strategic importance of physical space, this article addresses what is probably the biggest misunderstanding between Asian and European e-commerce – social commerce. Why are we almost inevitably failing here when we try to copy the Asian live shopping hype?
At a Glance: The Numbers Behind the Social Commerce Hype
- Market Potential: The global social commerce sector is growing rapidly and is projected to reach a volume of over 2.1 trillion US dollars by 2026. (Ringly.io, 2026)
- Asian Dominance: The Asia-Pacific region almost completely dominates the business, accounting for an incredible 90% of the global social commerce market. (Precedence Research, 2026). However, anyone who believes they can simply copy the Chinese "Demand → Supply" model with our Western "Supply → Demand" infrastructure will fail.
- Exploding Acquisition Costs: Customer Acquisition Costs (CAC) are seeing enormous jumps of 60% in global e-commerce, with an average CAC now ranging from 45 to 70 US dollars. (Nova Analytics, 2026)
The Social Commerce Misconception
Fabian Ouwehand's keynote on social commerce in Shenzhen was one of the highlights of my trip to China. As a true pioneer, Fabian has been shaping the global social commerce industry for over ten years. In his session, he hit exactly on the pain point that repeatedly causes discussion in European retail – and among many of my guests on the Kassenzone Podcast – and repeatedly sparks discussion: Why do so many Western brands fail when trying to adapt platforms like TikTok Shop?
The answer is simple: We are merely copying the surface. We see Asian live shopping and believe a new video feature in our own online shop would suffice. In doing so, we completely overlook the fact that we haven't understood the fundamental system logic behind it.
The System Clash: Demand vs. Supply
The core problem lies in the fundamentally opposing e-commerce DNA of our markets. Fabian aptly contrasted this difference in his presentation:
The Chinese System (Demand → Supply)
In Asia, content first creates desire. Product discovery happens seamlessly directly within the social feed. The crucial point: The purchase is made completely seamlessly directly within the app – a seamless customer journey built entirely on the first part of this blog series app infrastructure centered around WeChat described. It is a highly entertainment-driven commerce where customers ultimately control the system. Demand consolidates, and only then does the supply chain align itself accordingly.
The Western System (Supply → Demand)
We operate in the exact opposite way. For us, a finished product exists first, which is then marketed. Social media and the actual purchasing process are usually strictly separated. We push our inventory into the market with increasingly expensive performance marketing, and as brands, we try to control the system.
The Challenge of Rising Customer Acquisition Costs
If we try to operate commerce like in China with our classic, Western merchant margin structure, the inevitable result is that the system crashes.
Fabian's figures speak volumes here: A global increase in Customer Acquisition Costs (CAC) in e-commerce by a massive 60% shows that traditional traffic is becoming unaffordable (Nova Analytics, 2026). Anyone who now forces social commerce as an end in itself or 'at any cost' – without adapting the underlying system – falls into a fatal business trap: The exploding acquisition costs completely devour merchant margins – an industry-wide problem that I have already addressed in the second part of this blog series highlighted.
In the Asian system, this expensive traffic acquisition is circumvented by what is known as 'Social Fission' (social nuclear fission): Users share deals, interact intensively with content, and organically push trends through their own reach. Without this organic leverage, European companies risk cannibalizing their own, otherwise functioning core business with ill-conceived, rigid social commerce experiments.
Platform Fragmentation in Asia
Many of our copy-paste attempts fail due to the Western misconception that social commerce is a single monolithic channel. However, Fabian's keynote impressively demonstrated that social commerce in Asia does not operate on a single platform, but is highly fragmented:
- On Douyin, the algorithm decides what users see – it's all about a pure 'interest graph'. Here, polished, extremely high-quality content for an urban, trend-driven target audience prevails.
- On Kuaishou, however, users see content from their bubble – a true 'social graph'. Here, raw, authentic content performs significantly better than glossy videos, and the connection and thus trust in the creators is extremely high.
Anyone who believes they can deploy the same livestream or creator content across all platforms will fail due to the fundamental code of each network.
What We Must Do Now in Europe
We must not blindly push social commerce in Europe. Before we discuss the 'what,' we urgently need to clarify the 'how' and 'why.'
To truly benefit from social commerce, you can't just add new touchpoints or adapt the same content for all networks. We need to radically rethink our approach – starting with platform-specific strategies that respect the respective algorithms (like the interest or social graph), moving through healthy unit economics, and culminating in the fundamental question of how we create genuine demand in the digital space. We must move away from simply selling existing products towards genuine "Community Commerce," which is built on tailored social mechanisms rather than just performance budgets.
In the next and final blog post of this series, I will share my insights on the premium shift of Chinese brands – stay tuned!
.jpg)
.jpg)
