多米街 “消费返补贴” 模式深度剖析：是财富密码还是镜花水月？

Core Insights - The article discusses the innovative marketing model "100 for 100" by Duomi Street, which has gained popularity across China, raising questions about its sustainability and legitimacy as either a lifeline for the real economy or a potential Ponzi scheme [1] Group 1: Operational Mechanism - Duomi Street has created a "value regeneration" system that transforms traditional consumption from a one-time transaction to a continuous cycle, allowing consumers to receive dual returns on their spending [2] - The core mechanism involves a three-tier cycle where consumers benefit from a high-value rebate system, with 82% of users reportedly using rebates for repeat purchases, fostering a positive consumption cycle [2] - Merchants voluntarily contribute a portion of their revenue (3%-20%) to a circular fund, which serves as the initial capital for the value cycle [2] Group 2: Profit Distribution - The platform employs dynamic AI algorithms to amplify the circular fund, potentially increasing a 10 yuan contribution to 50 yuan, creating a distributable "value pool" [2] - The value pool is shared among ecosystem members, with consumers receiving a combination of cash and consumption rights, while merchants retain a significant portion of their revenue and receive additional incentives [2] - Promoters benefit from a tiered reward system, earning a percentage of the revenue generated by merchants they recruit, with some achieving substantial monthly earnings [4] Group 3: Market Dynamics - Duomi Street's rapid rise addresses the dual pain points of consumers seeking savings and merchants facing traffic anxiety, effectively converting consumers into "partners" in consumption [6] - However, the model's reliance on merchant discounts raises concerns about its long-term viability, as it depends entirely on the willingness of merchants to offer rebates [6] - The distribution of funds is structured to favor high-spending and frequent users, creating a potential risk for consumers who may fall into the trap of spending solely for rebates [6]