近日，永辉超市北京大兴一调改门店突然停业一事引发关注。 1月26日深夜，北京永辉超市就鸿坤广场店暂停营业一事发布声明称，该店此次暂停营业，系因物业方在未与公司进行有效沟通及达成一致 的情况下，自2026年1月15日起，物业方单方面多次采取断水、断暖等措施，阻碍门店正常营业。1月23日，公司通过水源车运水至收货 口、水桶搬运至门店来恢复生产营业，物业方则采取封闭扶梯、直梯、铁马阻拦等方式关闭所有顾客能进入门店的通道，最终致使门店被 迫闭店。物业方声称"擅自闭店"的说法与上述事实严重不符。 图片来源：北京永辉超市微信公众号截图 就相关费用问题，永辉超市称，物业方声明中所涉款项，其中存在部分缺乏合同及事实依据。此外，因北京鸿坤伟业房地产开发有限公司 对外存在债务纠纷，公司此前已收到法院相关文件，要求公司暂停支付房租以保障债权人利益，此文件内容公司早在收到文件时同步出租 方及相关方，出租方及相关方对此信息已知晓。因此物业方提出的欠缴房租与事实不符。 永辉超市还表示，目前，永辉超市在北京的其他所有门店均正常运营。对于鸿坤广场店，公司仍在积极与相关方沟通，尽最大努力争取门 店早日恢复营业。 当日稍早时候，北京鸿坤广场购物 ...

炒股就看金麒麟分析师研报，权威，专业，及时，全面，助您挖掘潜力主题机会！ //// 亏损21亿、关店381家、资产负债率近90%，永辉"胖改"一年的代价触目惊心。市场质疑声四起，而公 司创始人早已减持套现。 2025年，零售业上演了一幕冰火图景。 永辉超市的胖改之路，正被现实浇下冷水。 一面是"小而美"的极致：盘踞河南的胖东来，仅以13家门店创下超200亿销售、零负债的行业神话。 一面是"大而危"的困境：昔日霸主永辉超市，在轰轰烈烈的学习胖东来（"胖改"）中，交出了亏损超21 亿元、关店381家的成绩单，资产负债率逼近90%，陷入连续第五年亏损。 一场试图用20个月复制别人20年功力的"闪电战"，最终演变成代价沉重的困局。 市场不由观望，说好的2-3年走出"生死线"，到底能否兑现？现实中，创始人兄弟已经准备下车了。 越"胖改"越亏 1月26日，据智通财经报道，北京鸿坤广场的永辉超市大门紧闭，扶梯口围起了"暂停营业"的围栏，地 下直梯通道也被铁链锁住。这家开业十多年的老店，于2025年3月才完成"胖改"，重新开业至今运营不 足一年。 停摆的背后还牵扯出一起千万元级别的欠费纠纷。 据合新闻报道，鸿坤广场称，自门店 ...

近日，知名商超永辉超市（601933.SH）北京一门店暂停营业引发关注，物业方投诉永辉超市欠费超1600万。 1月26日，涉事商场鸿坤广场发文表示，自2025年3月28日永辉超市该门店改造完毕以来，永辉未缴纳任何房租、水电费等，欠费超过1600万元。1月27日， 永辉超市驳斥称，物业方声明中所涉款项，部分存在缺乏合同及事实依据，此外，北京鸿坤伟业房地产开发有限公司对外存在债务纠纷，永辉超市此前收到 法院相关文件，要求公司暂停支付房租以保障债权人利益。 1月27日，鸿坤广场客服向南都湾财社记者表示，目前双方仍在协调，未有确切消息，且暂不接受媒体采访，以官方公告为准。永辉相关负责人回应南都湾 财社记者称，以公告内容为准，在公告中企业都有解释的。 商场方称永辉超市欠费超1600万元 "自改造完毕以来未缴纳任何房租、水电费等" 近日，多位网友在社交平台发文称，永辉超市鸿坤广场店暂停营业。在帖子下方，永辉超市客服和鸿坤广场客服均有留言回应，但双方各执一词，永辉超市 客服表示，因商场物业方相关原因，导致超市主出入口无法正常开启，目前暂不具备正常营业条件，但并非闭店；鸿坤广场客服则表示，永辉超市欠费一千 多万，但商场还在正 ...

| | | | 童公司 宣老板 | 童关系 查风险 | | | | | | | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | | | 都在用的商业童询工具 家中小企业发展子基金旗下机构 | 永辉超市股份有限公司 | | ଞ | 天眼一下 | 器 应用 · | 商务合作 企业级产品 · ★ 开通会员 · ■ 186 ... ▼ | | | | 基本信息 553 | | 上市信息 999+ | 法律诉讼 314 | 经营风险 60 | | 经营信息 999+ | 公司发展 89 | 知识产权 999+ | 历史信息 898 ◎ | | | 商标信息 93 | 历史商标信息 142 | MP | 商标状态 · | 国际分类 · | 申请日期~ | 注册公告日期 · | 胖 | 图 | Q 取消 | 田 음田 | | 序号 | 商标图案 | | 商标名称 | | 国际分类 | 商标状态 | 申请/注册号 | 申请日期÷ | 注册公告日期; | 内容 | | 1 | 超群 | 辉胖 | | | 35类-广告销售 | 等待实质审 ...

Core Viewpoint - Yonghui Supermarket's recent store closure in Beijing's Daxing district has raised concerns, primarily due to disputes with the property management regarding operational disruptions and unpaid fees [3][5][14]. Group 1: Store Operations and Closure - Yonghui Supermarket confirmed that all other stores in Beijing are operating normally despite the closure of the Hongkun Plaza store [6][11]. - The Hongkun Plaza store was forced to close due to the property management's unilateral actions, including cutting off water and heating, which hindered normal operations [3][11]. - The property management accused Yonghui of closing the store without proper communication, which Yonghui disputes, stating that the management's claims are inaccurate [3][14]. Group 2: Financial Disputes - Yonghui Supermarket stated that the property management's claims regarding unpaid fees lack contractual and factual basis, and the company has received court documents related to a debt dispute that require it to suspend rent payments to protect creditor interests [5][13]. - The property management claims that Yonghui has not paid any rent or associated fees since the store's renovation, while Yonghui asserts that the management continued to provide utilities during this period [14]. Group 3: Business Strategy and Expansion - Founded in 2000, Yonghui Supermarket initially focused on fresh produce and has recently embarked on a transformation journey, adopting the "Fat Donglai" business model [8][16]. - As of November 30, 2023, Yonghui has opened five "Fat Yonghui" stores, with the majority operating normally except for the Hongkun Plaza location [9][17].

Core Viewpoint - The dispute between Yonghui Supermarket and the property management of Beijing Hongkun Plaza has led to the temporary closure of the supermarket, with both parties issuing conflicting statements regarding the reasons and responsibilities for the closure [1][2][3] Group 1: Reasons for Closure - The supermarket was forced to close on January 23, 2026, due to the property management's unilateral actions, including cutting off water and heating, which obstructed normal operations [1] - The property management claims that Yonghui Supermarket closed the main entrance without proper communication, and has not paid any rent or related fees since the store's renovation completion on March 28 [3] Group 2: Financial Disputes - Yonghui Supermarket asserts that the claims regarding unpaid rent and fees lack contractual and factual basis, and that they have received court documents instructing them to suspend rent payments due to the property management's debt disputes [2] - The property management maintains that they have continued to provide utilities despite Yonghui's alleged non-payment of various fees [3] Group 3: Current Operations - All other Yonghui Supermarket locations in Beijing are operating normally, and the company is actively communicating with relevant parties to restore operations at the Hongkun Plaza store [2]

近日，永辉超市北京一调改门店突然停业一事引发关注。 1月26日深夜，北京永辉超市就鸿坤广场店暂停营业一事发布声明称，该店此次暂停营业，系因物业方在未与公司进行有效沟通及达成一致的情况下，自 2026年1月15日起，物业方单方面多次采取断水、断暖等措施，阻碍门店正常营业。1月23日，公司通过水源车运水至收货口、水桶搬运至门店来恢复生 产营业，物业方则采取封闭扶梯、直梯、铁马阻拦等方式关闭所有顾客能进入门店的通道，最终致使门店被迫闭店。物业方声称"擅自闭店"的说法与上 述事实严重不符。 就相关费用问题，永辉超市称，物业方声明中所涉款项，其中存在部分缺乏合同及事实依据。此外，因北京鸿坤伟业房地产开发有限公司对外存在债务 纠纷，公司此前已收到法院相关文件，要求公司暂停支付房租以保障债权人利益，此文件内容公司早在收到文件时同步出租方及相关方，出租方及相关 方对此信息已知晓。因此物业方提出的欠缴房租与事实不符。 永辉超市还表示，目前，永辉超市在北京的其他所有门店均正常运营。对于鸿坤广场店，公司仍在积极与相关方沟通，尽最大努力争取门店早日恢复营 业。 当日稍早时候，北京鸿坤广场购物中心发布声明表示，"1月23日，永辉超市未 ...

门店的焕新只是"浅水区"，供应链重构、组织文化变革、持续盈利能力，才是传统商超要面对的"深水 区"。 该居民称，现在店很像精品超市，变得干净整洁了，商品的陈列也变得漂亮了，但有些商品不太接地气 了，特别是蔬菜水果。 ▲这是灵兽第1753篇原创文章 "对于我们居住在附近的人来说，最关心的还是方便和商品的价格。但现在店内除了个别的商品，普遍 价格都偏高了，没有性价比可言了。" 同样，在"胖改"后的北京大兴区鸿坤广场的永辉超市店内，一位更像是过来遛弯儿的附近居民对《灵 兽》称，"生鲜区之前的'热闹劲儿'没有了。虽然现在门店内看起来显得很整洁干净，工作人员也显得 热情了不少，但店内却没有了之前的烟火气了。" 该居民称，没调改前，永辉超市的水果蔬菜价格很合理，也经常过来买，周六日时生鲜区经常排起长长 的队，"更不用说遇到过节的时候了，生鲜区的人会更多，拥挤得很。" 作者/晴山 ID/lingshouke 1 消费者变少了 "之前还能被称为是'北京的菜篮子'，来物美超市买菜也是我们家的必然选择，但自从这家店'胖改'升级 后，基本不在这边买菜了。"在北京大兴区黄村物美调改店购买熟食的一位附近居民对《灵兽》表示， 自己偶尔会 ...

Core Viewpoint - Yonghui Supermarket continues to face significant profitability pressure, with a projected net loss of 2.14 billion yuan in 2025, compared to a net loss of 1.47 billion yuan in the previous year, marking the fifth consecutive year of losses [1][5]. Group 1: Store Operations and Challenges - The Yonghui Supermarket store at Hongkun Plaza in Beijing, which underwent a "fat modification" and reopened less than a year ago, has now suspended operations. The store was reported to be closed on January 23, 2025, due to disputes over unpaid rent and other fees [2][3]. - The property management of Hongkun Plaza stated that Yonghui Supermarket had not paid any rent or related fees since the store's renovation was completed on March 28, 2025, and has not communicated with them regarding the closure [3]. - This incident is not isolated, as another Yonghui Supermarket in Fuzhou, which was also modified to follow the "fat model," closed just four months after reopening, indicating ongoing operational challenges [4]. Group 2: Strategic Adjustments and Market Position - The "fat modification" strategy, inspired by the successful model of another supermarket chain, aims to enhance product quality, improve shopping experiences, and optimize store layouts. Yonghui Supermarket has been implementing this strategy since May 2024, with 315 out of 403 stores having completed the modifications by the end of 2025 [4].

Core Insights - The retail industry in China is experiencing a stark contrast, with Yonghui Supermarket forecasting a loss of 2.14 billion yuan for the year, marking five consecutive years of losses exceeding 10 billion yuan, while regional giant Pang Donglai reports impressive revenue of 23.5 billion yuan [1][8] - Yonghui's aggressive transformation attempt, which cost 1.8 billion yuan and involved 315 stores, has been deemed a complete failure, despite initial sales growth of 324% in the first month [1][8] Group 1: Transformation Challenges - Yonghui's transformation strategy, which aimed to replicate Pang Donglai's model, faced fundamental issues due to a conflict in business models, leading to a logistics cost that is 30% higher than regional competitors [3][10] - The company's high employee costs, ranging from 9 million to 18 million yuan per store annually, contributed to a "scale inefficiency" trap, making the national network a burden during the transformation [3][10] - The aggressive strategy resulted in direct losses of 1.8 billion yuan, including 910 million yuan in asset write-offs and 300 million yuan in lost operating profits from store closures [3][10] Group 2: Supply Chain and Operational Issues - Yonghui's shift to a "bare price direct procurement" model, after eliminating supplier backend fees, led to a decline in gross margin to 20.52% and an increase in stockout rates [4][11] - The company's revenue for Q3 2025 was 42.434 billion yuan, a year-on-year decline of 22.21%, indicating a disparity between rising costs and falling revenues [4][11] - Compared to competitors like Bubu Gao and Jiajiayue, which adopted a more cautious approach, Yonghui's rapid transformation exacerbated supply chain disruptions [4][11] Group 3: Employee and Consumer Trust Issues - Yonghui's strategy of high salaries combined with strict performance evaluations resulted in high employee turnover and a decline in service quality, with customers reporting a lack of patience from staff [5][12] - The company's pricing strategy, which raised prices without improving quality, led to a loss of consumer trust, with the repurchase rate dropping below 30% after an initial spike [5][12] - The essence of retail being human-centric was overlooked by Yonghui, which failed to adopt Pang Donglai's employee satisfaction-driven customer service model [5][12] Group 4: Recommendations for Recovery - Yonghui needs to abandon a one-size-fits-all approach and implement regional adaptations, maintaining high-end stores in core cities while focusing on value for money in lower-tier markets [6][13] - The company should establish a "joint procurement alliance" based on regional needs, aiming to reduce fresh produce loss rates from the industry average of 3.5% to below 1.5% within three years [6][13] - Rebuilding consumer trust through profit-sharing models and transparent pricing strategies is essential, with a goal to increase the share of essential goods to over 50% [6][13] Conclusion - Yonghui's 2.1 billion yuan loss serves as a warning to the retail industry that transformation must align with the company's inherent capabilities rather than superficial imitation [7][14] - The future of retail lies not with quick imitators but with those who respect industry dynamics and focus on value creation [7][14]