If you ever wanted to know how popular Temu, Shein and AliExpress actually are in Australia, Panda Mart is the answer made physical. Panda Mart, the South African-founded ultra-low discount chain, opened its third Australian store in Brisbane on Monday in an ex-Bunnings site.
Related Article Block Placeholder
Article ID: 342509
There’s an irony in trading out of the shell of the brand that topped Australia’s trust rankings for years.
Panda Mart opened in Brisbane with criminal proceedings still on foot in Victoria. Consumer Affairs Victoria laid 147 charges over alleged safety breaches in January, which have since been consolidated into 10 rolled-up charges that Panda Mart has indicated it will plead guilty to in November. Energy Safe Victoria has separately laid 130 charges over allegedly non-compliant electrical products. And there’s been product seizures, public warnings and December’s court-ordered 72-hour shutdown of both Melbourne stores – a step Australian regulators almost never take against a physical retailer.
None of this seemed to dent demand in Brisbane. The queue for the store wound through a gridlocked car park. Inside, aisles were filmed for social media with stock strewn across the floor. It looked more like a warehouse clearance than a traditional retail opening.
Australian retail has traditionally competed on three things: price, convenience and trust. The easy conclusion from Brisbane is that price now beats the other two.
Smarter business news. Straight to your inbox.
For startup founders, small businesses and leaders. Build sharper instincts and better strategy by learning from Australia’s smartest business minds. Sign up for free.
By continuing, you agree to our Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy.
The model isn’t exactly new
Related Article Block Placeholder
Article ID: 342329
The Panda Mart model is based on tens of thousands of low-cost products, sold on volume rather than margin, reportedly sourced from Yiwu, the vast Chinese wholesale hub whose goods also fill the ultra-low discount online marketplaces. And it’s not just novelty items and impulse purchases. There are toys, homewares, electrical and even big-ticket items like furniture.
Those platforms have shipped the same categories into Australian homes for years, a flow of unsafe products Choice says likely runs “into millions of items a year”.
Against Panda Mart: two regulators, 277 charges and a court-ordered shutdown.
Against the ultra-low discount online marketplaces: the ACCC’s 2026-27 product safety priorities, which commit to engaging with them on product safety and to assessing an expansion of the Australian Product Safety Pledge. The pledge is voluntary.
That’s an extraordinary imbalance. Criminal charges for the one with three stores. A voluntary pledge for the ones that ship millions of parcels.
A shelf can be inspected but a parcel can’t
An inspector can walk in, pull a product off a shelf, seize a pallet and serve an injunction on a company with an address and a lease. A cross-border marketplace offers almost none of those surfaces: no shelf, often no local entity to charge, and no practical way to inspect goods arriving one parcel at a time.
That’s not regulatory failure so much as regulatory reach. But the effect is the same. Enforcement intensity tracks visibility, not harm.
Related Article Block Placeholder
Article ID: 339959
None of this means Panda Mart is uniquely unsafe, or that parcels can realistically be inspected one by one. But the imbalance between the two systems is now hard to ignore.
There’s a gap here most shoppers don’t know exists. Australia has no general safety provision, no blanket law that simply says you can’t sell an unsafe product. We regulate category by category, standard by standard. Which is why the Panda Mart charge sheets are overwhelmingly about labelling and standards; alleged missing warnings on strollers, unsecured button batteries, electrical goods without a compliance mark.
Choice’s second designated “super complaint”, lodged with the ACCC in June, campaigns for exactly this provision.
What Australian retail should take from Panda Mart’s Brisbane opening
First, compliance has become a cost that only visible retailers pay. Kmart, Target, Big W and The Reject Shop (soon to be Dollarama) carry the full expense of a safety regime their fastest-growing competitors sit structurally outside. Panda Mart isn’t being pursued because it’s worse; it’s being pursued because it’s catchable.
Related Article Block Placeholder
Article ID: 329039
Second, consumers have quietly outsourced safety to the regulator. Those Brisbane queues weren’t people weighing risk against price. They were people who assume a baseline of safety is guaranteed by law, leaving them free to shop on price alone. No retailer has ever won customers by advertising safety, because shoppers take for granted that anything on an Australian shelf is already safe.
The answer won’t come from shoppers voting with their feet. If established retailers want a level playing field on safety, it has to be won in Canberra, not at the checkout.
Because ultra-low discounting isn’t a passing moment. Panda Mart already runs about 40 stores across a dozen countries, and every packed opening makes the next lease easier to sign. You can’t ask Australians to shop more carefully in a cost-of-living crisis. Brisbane just proved they won’t. The question is whether Australia’s product safety laws catch up before the next store opens.
Australians have been shopping this way for years. Panda Mart just made it visible.