Hu Xiu·2025-07-10 11:55Core Viewpoint - The fierce competition in the food delivery market is leading companies to invest heavily, potentially reaching a total of 100 billion yuan for the year, despite regulatory pressures against such practices [1][3]. Group 1: Market Dynamics - Companies are investing real money to reclaim market share in a saturated environment, raising questions about the motivations behind these actions [3][12]. - The current situation is likened to a triathlon where competitors unexpectedly revert to the beginning, indicating a possible misjudgment in strategy [5][6]. - The competition is characterized as a zero-sum game, where losses are evident through declining stock prices and lack of synergy among firms [7][8]. Group 2: Regulatory Context - Regulatory bodies have previously intervened to halt aggressive subsidy practices in the market, yet companies are now re-engaging in similar behaviors [3][14]. - There is a contradiction in the actions of companies, as they engage in subsidy wars while also attempting to align with regulatory expectations [13][14]. Group 3: Strategic Insights - The actions of key players, particularly JD.com, are under scrutiny as they pursue multiple initiatives that require significant policy support, such as applying for stablecoin licenses [10][11]. - The competitive landscape suggests that while some companies may feel compelled to engage in price wars, others, like JD.com, may be acting on a different strategic rationale [12][26]. Group 4: Economic Implications - The current investment in subsidies could be interpreted as a response to government calls for stimulating consumption, positioning these actions as beneficial rather than detrimental [30][32]. - The narrative suggests that these subsidies might be viewed as a form of corporate social responsibility, contributing to economic recovery rather than merely fueling competition [30][31].