租一部手机，竟然背上了高利贷

Core Viewpoint - The article highlights the risks associated with the mobile phone rental industry, particularly focusing on the case of Qingyun Rent, which has been accused of operating a high-interest loan scheme disguised as a rental service [3][7]. Company Overview - Qingyun Rent is a platform specializing in the rental of 3C digital products, primarily Apple phones, offering investors annual rental yields of 14.4% to 16.8% through a full-service model [4]. - The company has expanded rapidly, establishing seven branches across major cities in China before its sudden collapse [7]. Operational Issues - Employees reported excessive overtime and restructuring efforts, indicating potential operational strain within the company [5]. - Qingyun Rent ceased operations abruptly, with reports of employees filing for labor arbitration after the company vacated its office [6]. Financial Practices - The company promised high returns to investors, which raised concerns about the sustainability of its business model [4][10]. - Allegations surfaced that the company was involved in deceptive practices, including using duplicate serial numbers for phones sold to different investors [9]. Industry Context - The mobile rental industry has been described as chaotic, with many companies potentially engaging in high-interest lending disguised as rental services [7][16]. - The article discusses the emergence of intermediaries who exploit individuals in debt by encouraging them to rent phones for cash, leading to deeper financial troubles [17]. Legal and Regulatory Concerns - The article references a court case involving mobile rental services being used for disguised high-interest lending, highlighting the legal implications of such practices [18][19]. - Qingyun Rent's operations are under investigation, with indications that the company may have connections to high-interest loan schemes [28]. Shareholder and Management Issues - The company's major shareholder, Bian Wenbin, claimed to be a nominee shareholder, raising questions about the true ownership and management structure [22]. - The rapid changes in ownership and the introduction of new investors shortly before the company's collapse suggest potential financial mismanagement [24][26].