2025年盛夏，中国外卖市场的"硝烟"愈发浓烈。在这场看似繁荣的盛宴背后，部分餐饮商家却承受着前 所未有的压力。 7月14日晚间，嘉和一品创始人刘京京公开发声，揭开了这场"补贴大战"的另一面。她向《BUG》栏目 表示"平台现在精准的发券，运用大数据直接拦截顾客，又引导商家补贴配送费，实际上构成了不正当 竞争，（导致）堂食的竞争处于劣势。大家都去点外卖了，堂食的客流量会越来越少。" 文 | 《BUG》栏目 罗宁 她直言，不同的平台，补贴比例不一样——饿了么和京东，承担的相对会多一些。美团市占率有优势， 所以它的补贴是少的，商家反而要出得更多，要配合它的游戏规则。 刘京京还预言"当他们（外卖平台）停止补贴时，整个价格体系都已经被摧毁了。" 以下为对话刘京京的核心内容，经过不改变原意的精简： 《BUG》：你为什么会突然选择发声？ 刘京京：我呼吁停止内卷式补贴、停止不公平竞争。我知道人微言轻，但如果发声能够唤起大家的共鸣 和对市场现状的关注，也是值得的。我看到了大家在留言中的支持，和朋友圈的转发，也了解到相关部 门在行动，接到了平台希望沟通的信息。 我相信曙光就在前面，大家一起努力，构建一个公平公正，放心消费，真正繁 ...

Core Viewpoint - The recent regulatory talks with major food delivery platforms have not significantly reduced promotional activities, as evidenced by continued high order volumes and sales for many merchants despite the discussions aimed at curbing excessive competition [1][9]. Group 1: Market Dynamics - On July 18, the State Administration for Market Regulation held talks with major platforms like Ele.me, Meituan, and JD.com, urging them to standardize promotional behaviors and engage in rational competition [1][7]. - Merchants reported that sales on July 19 were comparable to the previous week, indicating that the promotional activities were still in effect despite regulatory pressure [1][6]. - The platforms continued to issue significant discounts and coupons, with Meituan offering various food and beverage vouchers, and other platforms like Taobao and JD.com also providing substantial discounts [2][3]. Group 2: Competitive Landscape - The competition among food delivery platforms remains intense, with Ele.me gaining a larger market share at the expense of Meituan, while JD.com is also increasing its presence [10][11]. - Merchants noted that the revenue from Ele.me has surpassed that of Meituan, with Ele.me accounting for 49.7% of their delivery income, while Meituan's share has dropped to 36.9% [10]. - The ongoing promotional strategies reflect a "subsidy inertia," where platforms continue to offer discounts to retain users and maintain order volumes, despite regulatory calls to reduce aggressive pricing [9]. Group 3: Regulatory Impact - The regulatory body emphasized the need for platforms to avoid predatory pricing and adhere to laws governing e-commerce and fair competition [7][8]. - Legal experts highlighted that if platforms continue to offer products below cost to eliminate competition, it could be classified as unfair competition [8]. - The regulatory discussions have not yet led to a clear framework for enforcement, allowing platforms to navigate around the rules through combined discounts [9].

Core Viewpoint - Ningde Times has filed a lawsuit against Xiamen Haicheng Energy Storage Technology Co., Ltd. for unfair competition, claiming that Haicheng's core product, the 587Ah battery cell, closely overlaps with its patented product parameters, with an energy density deviation of only 4.4%, significantly below the industry standard of 10% [2][4]. Group 1: Legal Proceedings - The lawsuit was officially filed on June 25, 2023, and is scheduled for a hearing on August 12, 2023 [3]. - This is not the first legal dispute between the two companies; in 2023, Ningde Times sued Haicheng's founder for violating a non-compete agreement, resulting in a compensation payment of 1 million yuan [5]. Group 2: Company Background and IPO - Haicheng's founder and several executives have previous experience at Ningde Times, indicating a "Ningde system" background [4]. - Haicheng is currently in the process of an IPO on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange, having submitted its application on March 25, 2023. The court's decision on August 12 could impact the IPO process [6]. Group 3: Company Performance - Haicheng has rapidly grown to become one of the top three global lithium-ion energy storage battery suppliers within five years, with a planned annual production capacity of 62GWh by the end of 2024 and over 100GWh by 2026 [7]. - The company's revenue has shown significant growth, with approximately 3.615 billion yuan in 2022, 10.202 billion yuan in 2023, and an estimated 12.917 billion yuan in 2024, resulting in a compound annual growth rate of 89%. The shipment volume of energy storage batteries has a compound annual growth rate of 167% during the same period [8].

Core Viewpoint - The newly revised Anti-Unfair Competition Law aims to address the issue of "involution" in competition, which has become a significant challenge in the current market environment [1] Group 1: Addressing Malicious Price Competition - The law targets the issue of low-price competition, which leads to thin or negative profit margins for businesses, making it unsustainable [2] - It highlights the phenomenon of "bad money driving out good," where lower-quality products can still be profitable at lower prices, harming consumers and legitimate businesses [2] - The new law prohibits misleading advertising and requires platforms to refrain from forcing merchants to sell below cost, thereby protecting the interests of small and medium-sized enterprises [2] Group 2: Regulating Dominant Market Players - The law addresses the abuse of market position by large "chain master" enterprises that dominate pricing and supply chains [3] - It prohibits these enterprises from imposing unreasonable payment terms and conditions on smaller businesses, ensuring fairer trading opportunities [3] Group 3: Combating Negative Competitive Practices - The law aims to eliminate practices where companies undermine each other through false information or smear campaigns, which disrupt market order [4] - It includes provisions to regulate non-market factors that interfere with competition, such as tailored subsidies for local businesses that disadvantage outsiders [4] Group 4: Strengthening Legal Enforcement - The revised law expands the scope of regulatory oversight and allows any individual or entity to report suspected unfair competition, ensuring timely legal action [5] - It increases penalties for violations, such as raising the maximum fine for commercial bribery from 3 million to 5 million yuan, and introduces fines for forced sales on platforms ranging from 50,000 to 200,000 yuan [5] - The law emphasizes the importance of legal frameworks in maintaining market order and ethical business practices, which is crucial for addressing "involution" in competition [5]

Core Viewpoint - Bentley has clarified that it has no association with the co-branded betel nut gift box launched by "Hecheng Tianxia," emphasizing that the product and related activities were not authorized or recognized by the Bentley brand [1][3]. Group 1: Bentley's Response - Bentley stated that the co-branded product and related activities are not affiliated with the brand or its authorized dealers in China [1]. - The brand reserves the right to take legal action to protect its legitimate rights and interests due to unauthorized use of its branding [7]. Group 2: Hecheng Tianxia's Marketing Strategy - Hecheng Tianxia has previously collaborated with luxury brands such as Rolls-Royce, Mercedes-Benz Maybach, and Porsche for promotional events [5]. - The marketing campaign for the Bentley collaboration included actors dressed as historical figures, which sparked public debate regarding the appropriateness of the partnership [3]. Group 3: Regulatory Context of Betel Nut - Betel nut has been classified as a Group 1 carcinogen by the World Health Organization, with significant links to oral cancer cases [7][8]. - Recent regulations in China have restricted the sale and advertising of betel nut products, with specific prohibitions on their classification as food and advertising [8].

Group 1 - The draft amendment to the Anti-Unfair Competition Law prohibits large enterprises from delaying payments to small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) for goods, projects, and services [1][2] - The draft specifies that large enterprises must not abuse their advantages in capital, technology, transaction channels, and industry influence to impose unreasonable payment terms on SMEs [1] - The draft establishes a fair competition review system to ensure that all types of operators can equally use production factors and participate in market competition [1] Group 2 - Platform operators are prohibited from forcing or indirectly forcing platform operators to sell goods below cost, which disrupts market competition [1] - The draft requires platform operators to clearly define fair competition rules in service agreements and transaction rules, and to establish mechanisms for reporting and handling unfair competition [2] - If unfair competition is detected among platform operators, necessary measures must be taken promptly, and relevant records must be preserved and reported to the appropriate government supervision department [2]

Group 1 - The National People's Congress is reviewing the Anti-Unfair Competition Law and Civil Aviation Law to address "involution" competition and promote low-altitude economy development [1][2] - The revised Anti-Unfair Competition Law aims to enhance fair competition review systems and clarify standards for confusing unfair competition behaviors, including misuse of trademarks and search keywords [1][2] - The law will also address issues related to data rights infringement and malicious trading, focusing on large enterprises' abuse of their dominant positions, particularly regarding payment delays to small and medium-sized enterprises [1][2] Group 2 - The Civil Aviation Law revision will include measures to promote the development of the civil aviation industry, particularly in manufacturing and low-altitude economy [2] - A new chapter on "development promotion" will be added, emphasizing the establishment of an innovation system for civil aviation manufacturing that integrates enterprises, market orientation, and research [2] - The law will also outline measures for optimizing low-altitude airspace resource allocation and establishing regulatory platforms for civil low-altitude flight services [2] Group 3 - The revision will enhance passenger rights protection by including specific provisions regarding ticket sales, refunds, changes, and baggage transportation [3] - It will also modify the obligations of airlines and airports to provide "food and accommodation" arrangements for passengers in case of flight delays or cancellations [3]

Group 1 - The State Administration for Market Regulation emphasizes the importance of protecting commercial secrets and has been conducting special enforcement actions against unfair competition for several years [1] - In 2024, market regulatory authorities across the country handled a total of 14,188 cases of unfair competition, with 143 cases specifically related to the infringement of commercial secrets [1]

Core Points - Douyin accused a public relations company, "Xinzhi Bailue," of fabricating false information about certain home appliance companies engaging in illegal activities on a well-known e-commerce platform [1][5] - The investigation by public security authorities confirmed the wrongdoing, leading to administrative penalties for the involved personnel [6] - Douyin's Vice President, Li Liang, stated that "Xinzhi Bailue" was instructed by a large e-commerce platform to spread rumors against Douyin, highlighting the unethical practices of marketing accounts [1][4] Group 1 - The public relations company "Xinzhi Bailue" was found to have directed its employees to disseminate false information, which resulted in significant negative impact [1][6] - The accounts operated by "Xinzhi Bailue" primarily promote their clients positively while criticizing competitors, including Douyin, through misleading reports and rumors [1][3] - Li Liang emphasized the clever tactics used by the e-commerce platform to spread rumors, including using secondary accounts to initially post rumors and then deleting them to avoid accountability [1][4] Group 2 - The false information spread by "Xinzhi Bailue" not only targeted Douyin but also affected well-known companies like Gree, Midea, Hisense, and TCL, misleading public opinion and leading to media coverage [8][9] - The company has a history of being involved in similar defamation cases, having faced lawsuits from various enterprises for reputation infringement [9] - Douyin is committed to using legal means to protect its rights against such "black public relations" and unfair competition practices, urging collective efforts to combat rumors and foster a healthy online environment [9]

Core Viewpoint - Hangzhou Pure Pet Technology Group Co., Ltd. was fined 100,000 yuan for fabricating and disseminating false or misleading information that harmed the business reputation and product reputation of competitors [1][2]. Summary by Relevant Sections Company Information - Hangzhou Pure Pet Technology Group Co., Ltd. was established on April 15, 2020, with the legal representative being Cao Jia [6][7]. - The company primarily engages in the development and operation of animal food (feed) and owns the brand "Brand" [1][2]. Violation Details - The company entered into a contract with a third-party service provider to implement price control on its animal food products sold on the Taobao platform [1]. - The third party initiated malicious complaints against stores that refused to comply with price control, using the company's registered account to file trademark infringement complaints [1][2]. - The method involved creating false trademark infringement reports using Photoshop and incomplete product traceability codes, which the company knowingly endorsed by affixing its official seal [1][2]. Administrative Penalty - The Hangzhou Xiaoshan District Market Supervision Administration imposed a fine of 100,000 yuan on the company for violating Article 11 of the Anti-Unfair Competition Law of the People's Republic of China [2][5]. - The company had ceased the related activities prior to the case being reported and cooperated with the investigation, which was considered in the penalty decision [2][5].