乐视再次炮轰熊猫家电 两个边缘玩家纠纷背后是一个时代的落幕

Core Viewpoint - LeTV accuses Nanjing Zhongdian Panda Appliance Co., Ltd. of owing 14.95 million yuan in compensation and evading debts through name changes and bankruptcy, while also facing its own debts of several billion yuan [1][7]. Group 1: Background of the Dispute - LeTV was a pioneer in China's internet TV sector but faced financial difficulties leading to near delisting [2]. - In 2018, LeTV's TV business subsidiary was renamed and received significant investments, but by 2019, it sought stable production partners, turning to Nanjing Zhongdian Panda [2]. - From early 2019 to March 2022, LeTV commissioned Nanjing Zhongdian Panda to manufacture 400,000 TVs, with a procurement amount of nearly 4.5 billion yuan, but faced high defect rates of around 20% [2]. Group 2: Legal Proceedings and Outcomes - LeTV engaged in multiple negotiations regarding quality issues, leading to legal action starting in December 2021, with a court ruling in January 2024 ordering compensation of approximately 13.47 million yuan [3][4]. - Following dissatisfaction with the ruling, both parties appealed, but the higher court upheld the initial decision [3]. - Nanjing Zhongdian Panda changed its name to Nanjing Jingye Appliance Co., Ltd. shortly before the appellate ruling, raising concerns about asset protection [4][5]. Group 3: Current Situation and Market Position - Despite court rulings, LeTV struggles to enforce its claims as Nanjing Jingye was declared bankrupt in September 2025 [5]. - LeTV's current debts amount to several billion yuan, and it has been marginalized in the competitive TV market, failing to appear in the top 20 brands as of October 2025 [7]. - The market has seen a significant concentration of power among the top eight brands, which hold 95% of the market share, leaving LeTV with a negligible presence [7][8]. Group 4: Industry Context - Nanjing Zhongdian Panda has also become a marginal player in the TV manufacturing sector, with its core business shifting away from television and display technologies [8]. - Both companies' struggles reflect the challenges faced by smaller enterprises in asserting their rights and the decline of once-prominent players in the industry [8].