Grab Acquires foodpanda Taiwan: What Delivery Drivers Should Keep an Eye On

Last Updated: June 21, 2026 | This article is compiled from public reports and the site administrator’s personal views. Sections marked “In my opinion” or “My personal speculation” represent subjective judgments and are not definitive conclusions; the progress of transactions, amounts involved, and review results are subject to the Fair Trade Commission’s and official announcements.

Lately, in the admin panel and LINE groups, a lot of people have been asking me the same thing: “Webmaster, is Panda going to be sold? Are we going to have to switch to Grab in the future?” Actually, rumors about this started circulating back in late March, but delivery riders only really started getting nervous recently when everyone realized they were “getting serious”—the financial terms have been agreed upon, the application has been submitted to the Fair Trade Commission, and they’ve even announced a timeline for the merger. In the years I’ve been delivering myself, I’ve seen trip bonuses change over and over again, and the order acceptance rate thresholds get adjusted constantly, but something on the scale of “the entire platform changing hands”—to be honest, that’s pretty rare. So in this post, I’d like to start by explaining “what exactly is happening” from a site administrator’s perspective, and then devote most of the article to discussing “how this will impact the Taiwanese market”—especially those of us on the front lines who rely on it for our livelihoods.

Let me say this up front: Many details haven’t been finalized yet, and the Fair Trade Commission is still reviewing the matter. Whenever I offer my own speculation below, I’ll make it clear that it’s “what I think” rather than “what will definitely happen.” The biggest fear in the food delivery industry is when speculation is passed off as fact, causing everyone to panic and make the wrong decisions. For us delivery riders, the real focus of this post isn’t “whether the logo will change,” but “whether the rules that determine our income will change once the switch happens”—I’ll leave that point here for now and break it down later.

What exactly happened this time?

In short, Singapore-based Grab is set to acquire Taiwan’s foodpanda. On March 23, 2026, Grab announced that it would acquire the company for $600 million in cash, to acquire the subsidiary of Germany's Delivery Hero Group foodpanda's Food Delivery Service in TaiwanDelivery Hero is the parent company behind Pandora; in recent years, it has been selling off its non-core markets around the world, and Taiwan is now on the market. Grab is offering cash, not a protracted share swap, so from a negotiation standpoint, both sides are genuinely committed to closing the deal. Those interested in this aspect can check out Focus Taiwan's report on the transaction at the timeThe

For Grab, this deal is quite significant. Taiwan is itsThe 9th market, and also the first market where it expanded beyond Southeast Asia into other regions. In the past, its main operations were concentrated in Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand, and Vietnam; Taiwan marks its first foray beyond Southeast Asia. In his announcement, Grab CEO Anthony Tan emphasized that the company excels at managing complex delivery logistics in “high-density, high-traffic cities,” and that Taiwan’s environment—with the Taipei and New Taipei metropolitan areas flooded with orders and crisscrossed by numerous alleys—is exactly what they’re looking for. To me, there’s a bit of subtext to this statement—he wasn’t just talking about a business vision; he was actually saying, “We have the capability to make order dispatch and logistics coordination even more precise.” For delivery riders, the term “logistics scheduling” essentially refers to the dispatch algorithms we deal with every day—I’ll come back to this later.

So is this business worth it? Looking at the numbers, foodpanda Taiwan’s GMV (the total transaction value of all orders on the platform) in 2025 is expected to be approximately $1.8 billion...and it was already profitable before allocating the group’s shared costs. So Grab isn’t buying a mess—it’s acquiring a ready-made business in Taiwan that already has scale, a customer base, merchants, and delivery riders. Grab itself estimates that by 2028, this acquisition will generate at least $60 millionThe increase in adjusted EBITDA (simply put, adjusted operating profit). I’m mentioning this to give you a sense of the situation: Taiwan Panda wasn’t sold off at a bargain price because it was losing money left and right; it’s a substantial, profitable asset. And when a buyer spends real money to acquire a profitable business, they’ll certainly look for ways to make it “even more profitable”—I’ll come back to how this affects us later when we discuss commission rates.

When it comes to the schedule, I think there are two points that delivery drivers should keep in mind above all else. First, this order is expected to Second half of 2026The transaction will be completed, provided it passes regulatory review; second, Grab’s goal is to Early 2027...to consolidate users, merchants, and delivery riders onto Grab’s own platform. The second point is when our daily operations will actually be affected—not the day of the announcement, but the day “the system is actually migrated.” For delivery riders, this “integration into the Grab platform” is more significant than the $600 million investment, because it means that the Panda app we’re familiar with now, along with its order-assignment rules and bonus structure, may all be replaced in the future.

To put it bluntly, at this stage, the food delivery apps are still up and running as usual—nothing has changed yet. The numbers and timelines mentioned in the news are “plans” and “estimates,” not facts that have already happened. I’ve seen some people in our group chat already saying things like “Panda is going under” or “Switch to Uber quickly.” Honestly, I think it’s too early to say that. Let me break it down step by step below.

Why is this different from that time with Uber?

Those of you who’ve been around for a while will surely remember that this isn’t the first time foodpanda Taiwan has been “up for sale.” Many foreign delivery riders’ first reaction is: “Isn’t this just like when Uber Eats tried to buy Panda last time? Didn’t that deal fall through?” This comparison makes sense, but the two situations are actually very different in nature—and I think this is the most important distinction to understand when looking at the whole situation.

Let's review what we've covered so far.In December 2024, Taiwan's Fair Trade Commission rejected Uber Eats' proposed acquisition of foodpanda Taiwan.The reasoning was very clear: Uber Eats and foodpanda were already the top two players in Taiwan’s food delivery market. If the two companies merged, their combined market share would exceed 90 percent—effectively leaving only one player in the market. This would restrict competition, and the downsides for consumers and delivery riders would outweigh the benefits, so the merger was blocked. Many delivery riders breathed a sigh of relief at the time, because “only one company left” would have meant we’d have absolutely no other platform to switch to and no room to negotiate. The fact that the merger was blocked actually made a real difference for us—with two companies still competing in the market, there’s still some comparison to be made, and there are still bonuses to choose from.

So why is it that this time, with Grab making the bid, the general consensus is that it “has a better chance of succeeding”? The key difference lies in"Who's Going to Buy It?". Uber Eats already operates a food delivery service in Taiwan, and its acquisition of Pandora is a “merger of the two market leaders.” This move will cause its market share to skyrocket overnight—this is known as a horizontal merger, which the Fair Trade Commission is most wary of. But Grab has never offered food delivery or ride-hailing services in Taiwan before....It is a "new entrant from another market" through and through, acquiring an existing player. In other words, Grab’s entry won’t result in “one fewer player” in Taiwan’s food delivery market, and market concentration will theoretically not increase—the market was originally dominated by two major players, Pandora and Uber Eats, and after the acquisition, it will still be dominated by two major players, with Pandora simply having a new owner. The “number” of players in the market has not decreased. Most analysts are focusing on this point and believe the likelihood of this deal being approved is higher than it was for Uber’s previous attempt.

My own understanding is that when the Fair Trade Commission initially blocked Uber, it was because of the “reduction in the number of competitors”; whereas Grab taking over, at least on the surface, did not reduce the number of competitors. However, I must be honest: “more likely to be approved” does not mean “certain to be approved”—these two concepts are often confused in the food delivery industry. This is merely the “surface-level structure”; the devil is in the details—the next section will address the key issues that complicate the entire matter.

Several Variables Stuck at the Fair Trade Commission

If this case were really that straightforward, it would probably have been resolved long ago. In fact, it’s still stalled because there are a few issues that are difficult to resolve. I’ve summarized the key factors I’ve observed and will try to explain them in a way that everyone can understand.

First, let’s discuss the review process itself. Grab officially submitted its application to the Fair Trade Commission on March 27, 2026. After a preliminary review, the Fair Trade Commission requested that it Submit additional materials by May 15, 2026, meaning the information is incomplete and needs to be supplemented. Only after the missing information has been provided will the Fair Trade Commission proceed with the formal review.As of June 2026, this case has neither been approved nor rejected; it is still under review.So any claim that “Panda has become Grab” is premature at this point. The details of this timeline,Economic Daily Report on the Deadline for Submitting Additional DocumentsThat explains it pretty thoroughly.

The first variable—and the one I find most nuanced—is a point of contention regarding the equity structure.Here’s a detail that many people overlook:Uber holds approximately 13.1% shares in Grab...is one of Grab’s top institutional shareholders. If you take a step back and look at the bigger picture, you’ll notice something quite paradoxical—Uber Eats will be the only remaining competitor in Taiwan’s food delivery market once this merger is complete; yet Uber is also a major shareholder in Grab, the acquiring company. This leaves the Fair Trade Commission with a mind-bending question: Could Uber, through its stake in Grab, exert some form of “substantial control” or “substantial influence” over Taiwan’s food delivery market? If the answer is yes, it would amount to “one competitor indirectly controlling another competitor,” which is somewhat similar to the rationale behind the initial rejection of Uber’s direct acquisition. INSIDE described this situation as a “multi-layered review dilemma,” and I think that’s a pretty apt description—it’s not simply a matter of looking at market share percentages, but rather dissecting whether the underlying shareholding relationships could amount to a de facto joint venture. This is purely my personal observation: if this point isn’t handled properly, it could be the part of the case most likely to get stuck—even more difficult to resolve than the market share issue.

The second factor is from the perspective of information security and national security.Media reports (Taipei Times, May 2026) have indicated that there is a connection between Grab and WeRide, a Chinese autonomous driving company, and that this connection could trigger a cybersecurity review in Taiwan. Food delivery platforms hold vast amounts of personal data—including consumer addresses, spending habits, merchant business information, and delivery drivers’ routes. Under current circumstances, the flow of this data is naturally subject to heightened scrutiny. I won’t comment on the political aspects; speaking purely from an institutional perspective: it’s still difficult to say whether data security will become one of the hurdles in the review process, but it is indeed a new variable that differs from the Uber case—and it’s not something that the Fair Trade Commission alone can fully decide.

The third variable is time itself.There’s no guarantee how quickly the review will proceed—submitting additional documents, clarifying ownership structures, and assessing cybersecurity—each step could prolong the process. For us delivery riders, this means one thing: in the short term, the Pandora app you’re using and your current terms of partnership are highly unlikely to change anytime soon. Switching platforms is a goal for early 2027—it’s not going to happen tomorrow.

So you see, even though Grab’s structure is a bit “cleaner” than Uber’s was back then, the entanglement over equity stakes, combined with cybersecurity concerns, means this deal can’t be approved without careful scrutiny. I think for delivery riders, there’s only one key point to remember here:This matter hasn't been finalized yet, and everything is still up in the air. There's no need to make any drastic decisions right now about something that hasn't happened yet.

The Actual Impact on Food Delivery Drivers (This section is the most important)

Okay, here’s the main event. Now that we’ve covered the institutional aspects, the following is what I really want to discuss with my fellow delivery riders—assuming this proposal actually passes, what will it mean for us? I’ve been in this business for several years and have seen Panda adjust its commission structure, change its order-acceptance rate algorithm, and tweak its peak-hour bonuses multiple times. Every time the “rules change,” the impact is far more tangible than headlines like “Company Changes Owners.” So I’ll focus on what happens after we switch to Grab,What exactly might change?. And I’ll clearly distinguish between facts and my own speculations, so that people don’t mistake my guesses for certainties.

Platform and System Integration (around early 2027)

The one thing that is most certain to happen—and that we should keep a close eye on—isSystem Migration. Grab’s goal is to consolidate users, merchants, and delivery drivers onto its own platform by early 2027. This means you might have to download a new app, get used to a new interface, a new order-acceptance system, and a new customer service system—and there are even question marks regarding whether your account, ratings, and past order history will be transferred seamlessly. Based on my experience as a delivery driver, platform system transitions have never been seamless. Just consider logging back into the app, syncing account information, payment methods, thermal box regulations, and the check-in logic for going online—each of these could potentially cause issues during the transition period. Glitches in order dispatch, erratic location tracking, unresponsive customer service, and settlement discrepancies are almost certain to occur during the transition.

So I would suggest that everyone,From now on, keep a backup copy of your order history, screenshots of your earnings, and positive reviews.Don’t just rely on the platform to handle everything for you. This is a purely technical precaution to protect yourself—it has nothing to do with whether you think the transaction will be successful or not. More importantly, you need to be mentally prepared: the order-assignment rules, rating system, and order-pickup rate calculation methods originally in the Panda app,It may not necessarily be moved over exactly as it is.Grab is a different system with a different product strategy; it has no obligation to copy Panda’s approach. I mentioned this earlier in that post on the site From Uber’s withdrawal to Grab’s takeover, what delivery drivers really need to watch for is whether the order-assignment rules will changeThis logic is explained in greater detail there, so I won’t go over it again here. Feel free to check it out when you have a chance.

How might the dispatch algorithm change?

This is the aspect I care about the most, but let me make one thing clear first:This is purely my personal speculation.Since Grab hasn’t taken over yet and the system in Taiwan isn’t live, no one knows what it will actually look like. Grab is well-known in Southeast Asia for integrating “ride-hailing, food delivery, and payments” into a single system. Its dispatch and routing experience is built on the logic that “a single delivery rider may be handling both passenger rides and food deliveries simultaneously.” Looking back at Anthony Tan’s comment about being “skilled at managing complex logistics,” I would reasonably speculate that once Grab takes over, it will likely introduce its own, more aggressive dispatch and route optimization logic—and it’s even possible that it might pool delivery and other business capacities for joint scheduling.

For food delivery riders, a “smarter” algorithm is a double-edged sword: on the one hand, it may reduce empty runs and improve the efficiency of combining orders; on the downside, the more precise the system’s calculations become, the more likely it is to route orders along paths that are “most profitable for the platform”—which may not necessarily be the most profitable routes for you. Based on my experience as a delivery rider, platforms with more sophisticated algorithms typically leave riders less room to “pick and choose” their orders—you should be mentally prepared for this. But the main point I want to make is actually about mindset:Whenever a platform changes its algorithm, it’s usually the people who aren’t paying attention who end up losing out the most.Once the system is fully implemented, instead of rushing to criticize it, everyone should take a week or two to carefully examine whether there have been any changes in their order volume, unit price, and wait times. Use the data to determine whether the new rules are beneficial or detrimental to your specific trading strategy, rather than relying on gut feelings.

Rates, Bonuses, and Trade-offs Following the Increase in Costs Due to the Special Law on Food Delivery

This is what everyone cares about most—and it’s the most practical consideration. As mentioned earlier, Pandora Taiwan is a profitable asset in its own right. Since Grab spent such a large sum to acquire it, it certainly hopes the company will generate even more profits and that the $60 million in incremental profits projected for 2028 will materialize. Where will the money come from? It will inevitably be squeezed out of these three parties: consumers, merchants, and delivery riders.

Here’s a criterion I think is crucial:Special Law on Food Delivery ServicesThe new law protecting food delivery riders, which took effect this year (2026), has effectively increased the platforms’ operating costs—since platforms must now provide additional protections for riders, the cost structure per order has become heavier. Experts share this view. Analyst Li Shizhen pointed out that the Taiwanese market is “small and dense, with high substitutability,” meaning that the market is compact and it is easy for merchants and delivery riders to switch platforms. Coupled with this rise in operating costs, it won’t be easy for Grab to capture market share; it may have to rely on “subsidies,” pouring money into attracting consumers and merchants.

Putting all this together, I suspect that the short-term and long-term outlooks will be two completely different scenarios:

• Short-term (the initial phase after taking over, when the goal is to capture market share and ensure a smooth merger):When a new player enters the market, the most common tactic is to throw money around. For delivery riders, this phase often brings opportunities to see incentives like “order-rush bonuses,” “bonus pay for online hours,” and “platform-switching subsidies,” because Grab needs riders’ capacity to keep the service running and show the market impressive order volumes. I think if the incentives are really good during this period, it’s worth taking full advantage of them—but don’t treat them as the norm.
• Long-term:Once the market stabilizes and the subsidies have largely run their course—coupled with the fact that the cost line mentioned earlier is already fixed—platforms will inevitably have to strike a new balance among “consumer prices, merchant commissions, and delivery rider compensation.” Historical experience tells me that when this balance needs to be readjusted, delivery riders’ pay is often the first to be cut, because consumers are price-sensitive, merchants are likely to switch platforms, and delivery riders have the weakest bargaining power. This is purely my personal speculation, but it follows basic market logic. I’m not trying to be a doomsayer; I’m just reminding everyone not to let short-term benefits cloud their judgment.

So my advice to my colleagues is very practical:Take advantage of short-term market opportunities whenever you can, but don’t factor them into your long-term income plan.Don’t quit your full-time job or take out a bigger loan to buy a new car just because you’re making good money for two or three months. Hourly wages during promotional periods cannot be used as a benchmark for long-term financial planning—this is the most basic red line in income analysis. Treat it as a transitional bonus, not the new normal. What truly determines your long-term income is the base rate once the system stabilizes—and since that hasn’t been established yet, anyone claiming to know for sure right now is just guessing.

A "Cross-Platform Watch List" That I Keep an Eye On

Instead of worrying about it now, you’d be better off jotting these down. I’ve put this list right at the beginning so you can check each item off as soon as the new platform goes live—don’t just focus on complaining; make sure to write down the numbers first to see if it’s a real perk or just a case of watered-down benefits:

• Order Assignment Rules: Once the new platform goes live, the top priorities to monitor are how orders are assigned, whether users can choose which orders to accept, and whether orders will be automatically grouped.
• Base Rate per Order: Has the calculation method for the basic delivery fee changed? Is it based on distance or time, or has it been changed to their own system?
• Bonus Structure: Have the per-trip bonuses, peak-hour bonuses, and completion rate bonuses actually increased, or have they been reduced in disguise (e.g., by raising the thresholds)?
• Order Acceptance Rate/Completion Rate Thresholds: It affects whether you'll get good assignments and whether you'll be demoted.
• Billing and Customer Service: How often are payments made, and can you reach someone if there’s a problem? The transition period is when things are most likely to go wrong.

My long-term stance is one of “cautious neutrality”: Grab taking over isn’t necessarily a bad thing—a new owner with money, technology, and a commitment to running the business seriously is always better than a parent company that’s been looking to offload its Taiwan operations; but it’s not a gift from heaven either. Rather than joining the collective anxiety right now, it’s better to focus your energy on “cultivating good data habits.” That way, when the rules change, you’ll be in a position to immediately decide whether to stick with what you have or switch to something else.

Ripple Effects on Consumers, Retailers, and the Competitive Landscape

The food delivery ecosystem has never been about just the delivery riders. Changes in consumer and merchant behavior ultimately affect our order volume, so we need to pay attention to this as well; by understanding how merchants and consumers are affected, we can better understand our own situation.

Consumers: Sweet in the short term, but the long-term outlook is uncertain

As competition intensifies, the most immediate response is promotional offers. Analyst Li Shizhen also noted that in the short term, as competition heats up, consumers can expect a flood of discounts, coupons, and free shipping—because Grab wants to capture market share and get people accustomed to the new platform, and the fastest way to do that is to lure customers in with low prices. For consumers, there are definitely bargains to be had right now. But the long term is another story: once the subsidies dry up and the market returns to rationality—and given that someone will eventually have to absorb the costs mentioned earlier—I’m personally taking a conservative view on where delivery fees, platform service fees, and minimum order thresholds are headed. Simply put: it’s sweet in the short term, but the long-term service quality and fees remain to be seen.

Business Owner: Commission and Exposure—How Long Will the Funds Last?

The commission fees that platforms charge merchants have long been a thorn in the side of the restaurant industry. In theory, if Grab really wants to attract merchants and expand the variety of options on its platform, merchants would actually have relatively strong bargaining power at the negotiating table in the early stages—they might be able to secure better commission terms or exposure opportunities. But in the long run, since the market is still effectively split between the two major platforms, the number of options available to merchants hasn’t actually increased. I have my doubts as to whether their bargaining power can be sustained. This also has an indirect impact on delivery riders—if merchants feel the commission is too high and leave the platform, the number of restaurants on the platform will decrease, which will naturally affect the variety and volume of orders we can accept.The three sides really are like grasshoppers on the same string.To put it bluntly, once Grab burns through all its money, who’s going to foot the bill?—I’d bet that in the long run, it’ll be the delivery riders who end up bearing the brunt of it, but that’s a story for another time.

Competitive Landscape: Still a Two-Horse Race, but the Strategies Have Changed

Many people have asked me whether this change will lead to another major shift in Taiwan’s food delivery industry. My view is:On the surface, it’s still a two-horse race between “foodpanda (Grab) and Uber Eats”—that hasn’t changed.This deal won’t result in one fewer platform on the market, so we still have at least two platforms to choose from, compare, and switch between. This is actually a good thing for delivery riders—as long as there are still two companies competing for our business, we’ll still have room to negotiate.

But I believe the real change lies not in quantity, but in “strategy.” I largely agree with the perspective of Jamie Lin, General Manager of Taiwan Mobile: He points out that Grab’s true strength isn’t simply fast delivery, but rather its integration of “food delivery, ride-hailing, and digital payments” into a single ecosystem. As a result, the competitive landscape will shift from the past focus on “speed and price” to a comparison of “platform ecosystems.” In other words, future competition may shift from the past focus on “who delivers faster and who is cheaper” to a comparison of “whose ecosystem is more user-engaging”—when you hail a ride, order food, and pay all within the same app, the platform’s control over users is entirely different. This expert market analysis,This article from the Taipei TimesIt goes into more depth.

From a delivery rider’s perspective, this is how I see it: If Grab really does bring its ecosystem-based approach to Taiwan (this is just my personal speculation; the current deal itself pertains to the food delivery business), then its logic regarding the demand for delivery capacity may differ from that of platforms focused solely on food delivery— —it wouldn’t just be about “delivering this meal,” but ensuring the smooth operation of the entire ecosystem. In theory, there could even be an opportunity to “use a single account to do both food delivery and passenger rides,” which is standard practice for Grab in Southeast Asia. Whether this will happen in Taiwan, and whether it will run up against Taiwan’s regulations governing taxis and motor vehicle transportation, is another major issue entirely. It’s still too early to say, but I’m just raising this possibility here so everyone is aware of it. The competitive landscape has shifted, and the rules of the game we operate under may naturally change as well. This is a trend worth monitoring over the long term.

Webmaster's Take: Follow the Rules, Don't Panic

Having said all that, I’ll wrap things up from a webmaster’s perspective.

First,Don't panic.I think the atmosphere in the group chat—with people saying things like “Panda is about to go under, run for your lives!”—is way over the top. Panda wasn’t sold because no one wanted it; it was sold because people were fighting over it—that’s a completely different story from “about to go under.” A platform that’s been acquired as an asset, with a new owner who’s serious about running it, is a world away from “going under.” The app is up and running as usual, and orders are being processed as normal. Panicking about quitting or transferring orders right now is just scaring yourself.

Second, the key point can be summed up in one sentence—I’ve rambled on enough already—It doesn't matter whether the sign changes colors; what matters is the billing rules that will apply after the 2027 merger.None of this has been finalized yet; we’ll only see how things really play out once the merger actually begins and the new platform goes live. Until that day arrives, the smartest approach isn’t to worry, but to keep careful track of your order volume, unit price, wait times, and costs—that way, when the rules change, you’ll have the data you need to make informed decisions.

Third,Take a rational, wait-and-see approach and keep some capital in reserve.I’ve actually touched on the specifics here and there throughout my previous posts—keep working as usual, keep your own records, try not to put all your eggs in one basket, and take advantage of market incentives when you can, but don’t rely on them as your main source of income. That’s it—you can remember these points without me having to list them out. As for how rates will trend in the long term, we’ll have to wait until the subsidy boom subsides and the system stabilizes to get a clear picture. Right now, all predictions about the long term—including this one—are still just speculation. I’ll also be posting more updates on the food delivery industry like this on the site.Food Delivery NewsI'll keep following this in the category and update everyone when there's new progress.

Finally, let me emphasize once more the most important prerequisite:The whole matter hasn't been settled yet.The case is still pending a final decision by the Fair Trade Commission due to disputes over Uber’s ownership structure—specifically its holding of approximately 13.1% shares in Grab—as well as cybersecurity concerns. As of June 2026, the Commission has neither approved nor rejected the proposal. Until the Fair Trade Commission makes its final decision, all timelines and implications remain merely “plans” and are subject to change at any time depending on the outcome of the review. Various market rumors—such as “the landscape has already changed” or “we’ll be switching platforms next month”—are currently exaggerated. Our approach is to clarify the known facts; as for the rest, we’ll take it one step at a time.

Disclaimer: This article is a compilation of general information and reflects the website administrator’s personal views; it does not constitute investment, legal, or professional advice. Any statements in the text marked as “I think” or “I speculate” are subjective judgments and do not represent facts. Whether a transaction can be completed, the terms thereof, and the results of any review shall be determined solely by the Fair Trade Commission and relevant official announcements.