Core Viewpoint - The dispute between Luo Yonghao and Xibei highlights the growing consumer concerns regarding the use of pre-prepared dishes in restaurants and the need for clearer regulations in the food industry [1][5]. Group 1: Company Response - Xibei's customer service stated that their signature dishes are freshly prepared daily, denying the use of pre-prepared ingredients [1]. - Xibei's CEO, Jia Guolong, publicly responded to Luo's claims, asserting that no dishes at Xibei are pre-prepared and announced intentions to sue Luo for damaging the brand's reputation [1]. Group 2: Consumer Sentiment - The incident reflects a divide between consumer perceptions and restaurant definitions of "pre-prepared" food, with consumers expressing concerns over food safety and value for money [4]. - Luo Yonghao's previous statements indicate a consistent stance against restaurants selling pre-prepared dishes without proper labeling, which he views as deceptive [2]. Group 3: Industry Trends - The lack of a unified standard for pre-prepared dishes in the industry leads to consumer confusion and negative perceptions, despite regulatory efforts to clarify the definition [5]. - The rise of cooking robots, such as the AI cooking robot from Chip Chef, offers restaurants a way to maintain quality and efficiency while addressing consumer preferences for freshly cooked meals [7]. - The integration of smart cooking technology is seen as a transformative trend in the restaurant industry, providing new opportunities for cost management and competitive advantage [7].

Investment Rating - The report maintains a "Recommended" investment rating for the food and beverage industry [9] Core Viewpoints - The liquor sector has seen companies initiate performance clearing in Q2, with adjustments in channels and product structures. The performance aligns with market expectations, and Q3 shows signs of marginal recovery in sales [6][58] - The prepared food sector is expected to benefit from the upcoming public consultation on food safety standards, which will enhance industry self-regulation and favor leading brands [7][59] - The new consumption sector is supported by initiatives from platforms like Gaode, which aims to boost offline dining through substantial subsidies [8][60] Summary by Sections Industry News - Gaode will distribute over 1 billion yuan in subsidies to encourage in-store consumption [19] - The draft of the national food safety standard for prepared dishes has passed review [19] - Alcohol prices have decreased by 2.0% year-on-year from January to August [19] Investment Insights - Liquor Sector: Companies like Guizhou Moutai, Wuliangye, and Luzhou Laojiao are recommended for their high dividend yields and cyclical advantages [6][58] - Prepared Food Sector: The new food safety standards are expected to clarify the definition and scope of prepared dishes, benefiting leading brands like Anjifood and Qianwei Central Kitchen [7][59] - New Consumption Sector: The introduction of Gaode's "Street Ranking" and support plans is anticipated to increase foot traffic in restaurants [8][60] Key Company Focus and Earnings Forecast - The report highlights key companies in the liquor sector, including Luzhou Laojiao, Gujing Gongjiu, and Wuliangye, all rated as "Buy" with projected earnings per share (EPS) growth [11][12] - In the prepared food sector, companies like Anjifood and Longda Meishi are noted for their potential growth due to industry standards [7][59]

Core Viewpoint - The controversy surrounding the use of pre-prepared dishes in the restaurant industry has been ignited by a public complaint from a well-known figure, highlighting consumer demand for transparency and value in dining experiences [1][4][19]. Group 1: Incident Overview - Luo Yonghao criticized the high prices and perceived use of pre-prepared dishes at Xibei, prompting the founder, Jia Guolong, to respond defensively and announce legal action for defamation [2][4]. - Jia Guolong asserted that none of the dishes served were pre-prepared and invited customers to inspect the kitchens, launching a "Luo Yonghao Menu" with a money-back guarantee if the food was unsatisfactory [2][4][11]. Group 2: Consumer Sentiment and Industry Response - The incident has polarized public opinion, with many supporting Luo for voicing consumer concerns, while others criticize him for seeking attention without evidence [4][8]. - A significant portion of consumers (78.1%) reported that restaurants do not adequately inform them about the use of pre-prepared dishes, indicating a strong desire for transparency [18]. Group 3: Definition and Regulation of Pre-prepared Dishes - The definition of pre-prepared dishes has been clarified by regulatory bodies, distinguishing between industrially produced items and those prepared in-house by restaurants [14][15]. - Xibei claims that their dishes, prepared in a central kitchen and then cooked at the restaurant, do not fall under the category of pre-prepared dishes as per the new regulations [14][19]. Group 4: Market Trends and Consumer Expectations - The pre-prepared food market in China is projected to reach 485 billion yuan in 2024, growing at a rate of 33.8%, driven by consumer demand for convenience [18]. - Consumers are increasingly scrutinizing high-priced brands, expecting clear justification for costs, and are more sensitive to perceived value versus price [23][26].

Core Viewpoint - The ongoing dispute between Luo Yonghao and Xibei over the quality and sourcing of pre-prepared dishes has escalated, highlighting consumer rights and industry standards in the pre-prepared food sector [2][11][18]. Group 1: Dispute Details - Luo Yonghao has publicly criticized Xibei's sourcing practices, questioning the freshness of their ingredients and the rationale behind annual procurement [2][4]. - Luo has suggested a live-streamed dialogue with Xibei's founder, Jia Guolong, to clarify the situation and promote transparency in the pre-prepared food industry [6][8]. - Jia Guolong has previously labeled Luo as a "network black mouth," which Luo claims is defamatory and has indicated potential legal action for defamation [8][11]. Group 2: Industry Context - The controversy has drawn attention from major media outlets, emphasizing the importance of consumer rights and the need for clarity in the pre-prepared food market [11][18]. - The definition of pre-prepared dishes has been clarified, indicating that they are made from processed agricultural products and must meet specific storage and preparation standards [16]. - The public discourse surrounding pre-prepared dishes raises critical questions about industry standards, consumer knowledge, and the balance between convenience and food quality [18].

Core Viewpoint - The discussion surrounding pre-prepared meals (pre-made dishes) has stirred public interest, highlighting the importance of consumer awareness and industry health. The focus should be on finding consensus and governance strategies rather than taking sides in the debate [2][3]. Group 1: Industry Challenges - There is a need for clearer standards for pre-prepared meals to reduce information asymmetry and ensure quality while providing convenience [3]. - The main challenge for pre-prepared meals lies not in technology but in establishing consumer trust [3]. Group 2: Consumer Needs - The development of the catering industry must prioritize consumer needs, ensuring that meals are safe and transparent [3]. - The industry should aim for a rational and constructive discussion to optimize the development environment for pre-prepared meals, promoting standardized corporate behavior and informed consumer choices [3].

Core Viewpoint - The discussion surrounding pre-prepared meals (pre-made dishes) has sparked widespread public interest, emphasizing the need for transparency and consumer trust in the industry [2] Group 1: Industry Concerns - The debate on pre-prepared meals is not just about individual companies but also about the healthy development of the industry as a whole [2] - There is a need to clearly define standards for pre-prepared meals to reduce information asymmetry and ensure quality alongside convenience [2] Group 2: Consumer Trust - The main challenge for pre-prepared meals lies in establishing a trust relationship with consumers rather than technical aspects [2] - The development of the catering industry must prioritize consumer needs for safety and clarity in food choices [2] Group 3: Governance and Future Development - The discussion should aim for rational and constructive outcomes, focusing on optimizing governance to enhance the development environment for pre-prepared meals [2] - Promoting standardized corporate behavior and informed consumer choices is essential for gaining public trust and ensuring a positive future for the industry [2]

Core Viewpoint - The debate over pre-prepared dishes (pre-cooked meals) in the restaurant industry highlights differing interpretations among restaurant owners and consumers regarding what constitutes pre-prepared food [2][3][4]. Group 1: Definitions and Standards - According to the 2024 definition by six ministries, pre-prepared dishes are made from one or more food products, using or not using seasonings, without preservatives, and require heating or cooking before consumption [3]. - Chain restaurants like Xibei, if using semi-finished products from a central kitchen or frozen semi-finished products, do not fall under the national definition of pre-prepared dishes unless they are fully cooked beforehand [3]. Group 2: Perspectives from Industry Leaders - Luo Yonghao claims that Xibei's assertion of not using pre-prepared dishes is a complete lie, emphasizing that consumer understanding of freshly made food is clear [4]. - Liu Jingjing, founder of Jiahe Yipin, argues that establishing a central kitchen with quality control ensures food safety, while a Beijing restaurant executive believes that central kitchens are necessary for standardization and hygiene [5]. Group 3: Diverging Opinions on Cooking Methods - Some restaurant owners, like Li Hong of Xiangcunji, prefer fresh cooking over standardization, believing it retains the home-cooked flavor that consumers desire [5]. - The debate continues with varying opinions on the necessity of pre-prepared ingredients versus freshly made dishes, with some suggesting that the essence of food quality lies in the cooking method [6]. Group 4: Consumer Expectations - Consumers prioritize food safety, health, taste, and value for money, indicating that clarity in standards and transparency in information could resolve the ongoing debate [6].

13日晚，罗永浩微博最新发文称西贝的事情可以告一段落了，全文如下： 好吧，西贝的事情可以告一段落了。期待预制菜相关的国家法规尽快出台。 我要忙正事了，已经耽误了一些工作。感谢大家的关心。 此前，13日下午罗永浩发微博转发第一财经日报报道，配文称："太好了，万众期待！！！ 再次重申我的立场（以免被讹传和误解）： 1. 我不反对预制菜， 在某些情况下，我甚至会主动选择预制菜，比如图省事儿，赶时间，没胃口时对付一下等等。 2. 既然预制菜合法，餐馆当 然有权使用预制菜，但消费者有权知道餐馆是否使用了预制菜。 " 9月12日， 贾国龙在接受《中国企业家》采访时表示，他现在陷入自证循环了 。 他向记者透露，昨天（11日）和前天（10日）所有门店加起 来，日营业额分别掉了100万元，今天（12日）估计会掉200万元到300万元。 贾国龙表示他对预制菜的定义是按照国家的标准定义的。 "在工厂将整道菜全部做熟，做好封装，送到门店后，用水浴、微波炉或蒸箱加热后 就吃，这是预制菜。" 他认为预制工艺不是预制菜。 所有的菜都需要用到预制工艺，需要提前做，无非是在什么状态、用什么原料、工艺、调味品做。出餐效率、 标准化程度越高的餐饮 ...

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the public dispute between Luo Yonghao and Jia Guolong regarding the use of pre-prepared dishes at the restaurant chain Xibei, highlighting the implications for consumer rights and industry standards [5][12]. Group 1: Background of the Dispute - Luo Yonghao criticized Xibei for using pre-prepared dishes, claiming they were overpriced and lacked transparency [5][6]. - Jia Guolong, the CEO of Xibei, responded by denying the use of pre-prepared dishes and threatened legal action against Luo for defamation [5][6]. - The situation escalated into a public relations crisis, with both parties holding firm to their positions [5][12]. Group 2: Industry Implications - The article notes that the National Health Commission is working on a national standard for pre-prepared dishes, which may require restaurants to disclose their use of such products [8]. - There is a growing trend in the restaurant industry towards pre-prepared dishes, which some see as a necessary adaptation to market demands [9][15]. - The lack of clear definitions and standards for what constitutes a pre-prepared dish complicates the public's understanding and acceptance of these practices [14]. Group 3: Consumer Perspective - Consumers are increasingly concerned about the quality and transparency of food products, with many feeling uncomfortable about the use of pre-prepared ingredients [9][14]. - Luo Yonghao's position resonates with consumers who demand more transparency and accountability from restaurants regarding their food sourcing and preparation methods [12][15]. - The article emphasizes the importance of consumer rights and the need for clear communication from businesses about their practices [12][14]. Group 4: Leadership and Management - Jia Guolong's strong reaction to the criticism reflects a broader challenge for business leaders in managing public perception and maintaining brand integrity [10][12]. - The article suggests that effective communication and conflict resolution are crucial for business leaders, especially in the face of public scrutiny [12][13]. - The contrasting approaches of Luo Yonghao and Jia Guolong highlight the complexities of navigating consumer expectations and industry standards in the restaurant sector [12][15].

Core Viewpoint - The recent public dispute between Luo Yonghao and Xibei regarding the transparency of pre-prepared dishes has garnered significant attention, with Luo offering a reward of 100,000 yuan for clarity on the matter [1]. Group 1: Industry Standards - Luo Yonghao highlighted the absence of formal national standards for pre-prepared dishes, indicating that while he does not oppose them, he criticizes the practice of selling pre-prepared dishes under misleading pretenses [2]. - He acknowledged that his own live-streaming sales include pre-prepared dishes, but emphasized that these are clearly labeled as such, ensuring transparency for consumers [2]. Group 2: Company Responses - In response to Luo's comments, Xibei has launched a menu that directly addresses the controversy, indicating a proactive approach to the public relations aspect of the dispute [1].