Core Insights - The article discusses the intense competition in the food delivery industry, particularly during the summer, highlighting the various discounts and promotions offered by different apps to attract consumers [1][2] - It emphasizes the changing preferences of the younger generation, particularly the "post-00s," who are navigating the overwhelming choices in food delivery and are increasingly interested in cooking at home with innovative methods [2][3] Industry Trends - The food delivery market is characterized by aggressive marketing strategies, including a plethora of discount coupons and flash sales, which have created a competitive environment [1][2] - There is a growing trend among young consumers to seek convenience in cooking, leading to the popularity of simplified cooking methods and tools, such as microwave ovens, rice cookers, and air fryers [3][4] Consumer Behavior - Young consumers are experiencing decision fatigue due to the vast array of food options available, prompting some to turn to cooking as a simpler alternative [2][5] - The concept of "邪修" (Xie Xiu) cooking reflects a rebellion against traditional cooking methods, appealing to the desire for quick and easy meal preparation without strict adherence to recipes [3][6] Culinary Innovation - The article highlights the creative combinations of ingredients and cooking techniques that resonate with the younger demographic, showcasing how unconventional methods can lead to enjoyable meals [4][5] - The narrative illustrates that cooking can be a spontaneous and enjoyable experience, akin to the creative process in scriptwriting, where breaking conventional rules can yield delightful results [5][6]

Core Viewpoint - The ongoing price war in the food delivery industry is unsustainable and detrimental to all parties involved, including consumers, merchants, and platforms [4][90][102]. Group 1: Industry Dynamics - The State Administration for Market Regulation has urged major food delivery platforms to engage in rational competition, indicating that the current aggressive pricing strategies are harmful to the industry [5][6]. - Meituan's CEO expressed concerns that the majority of orders in the current price war are "bubble" orders that do not contribute to actual revenue or profit [10][11]. - The influx of nearly 800 billion in subsidies from various platforms has created a competitive atmosphere where companies feel pressured to participate in irrational pricing wars [13][14]. Group 2: Impact on Merchants - Many small and medium-sized businesses are suffering due to the price war, as consumer demand is being redirected towards larger brands benefiting from subsidies [30][34]. - Merchants are finding it increasingly difficult to compete, with some resorting to self-subsidizing to attract customers, which further erodes their profit margins [41][42]. - The rising costs of raw materials, exacerbated by increased order volumes, are putting additional financial strain on merchants [45][46]. Group 3: Consumer Behavior - Consumers may initially benefit from lower prices, but the long-term implications include potential declines in food quality and service as merchants cut costs to survive [100][101]. - The perception of low prices due to subsidies may lead consumers to believe that such prices are sustainable, which is misleading and could result in higher prices once subsidies are removed [98][99]. Group 4: Calls for Change - Industry leaders and restaurant associations are calling for an end to the irrational competition, emphasizing the need for platforms to allow merchants to set their own prices [68][71]. - The consensus among industry stakeholders is that the current model is unsustainable and that a return to rational pricing is necessary for the health of the industry [89][105].

Core Viewpoint - The Shanghai market regulatory authorities have taken action against platforms like Ele.me, requiring them to implement significant rectifications in response to the ongoing "takeout war" and related promotional practices [2][5]. Group 1: Regulatory Actions - Shanghai's market regulatory department has conducted talks with Ele.me and other platforms, mandating three key rectifications: the complete removal of "zero-yuan purchase" promotions, a significant reduction in the scope of free meal marketing, and the establishment of a special task force to enhance activity monitoring, price control, and rider rights protection [1][2]. - The National Market Supervision Administration previously held discussions with major platforms including Ele.me, Meituan, and JD.com, urging them to comply with legal regulations and promote fair competition [2][4]. Group 2: Industry Response - In light of the intensified competition, major platforms have launched various promotional campaigns, including significant discounts and "zero-yuan" offers, which have led to record-high order volumes [5][6]. - Meituan reported a daily order volume exceeding 1.5 billion as of July 12, a notable increase from 1.2 billion the previous week, while Taobao Flash Sale announced a new high of 80 million daily orders [5]. Group 3: Future Strategies - Following the regulatory actions, major platforms are pivoting to new strategies. Meituan has initiated a "Ten Thousand Brands" plan to support 10,000 well-known restaurant brands, while JD.com has launched a "Dish Partner" recruitment plan with a cash investment of 1 billion yuan [7]. - JD.com has emphasized its focus on reducing industry commissions, ensuring rider benefits, and promoting quality takeout, distancing itself from the recent aggressive subsidy practices [6][7].

Core Viewpoint - The Shanghai market supervision department has taken action against platforms like Ele.me, requiring them to implement three key rectifications to ensure fair competition and consumer protection in the food delivery industry [4][5]. Group 1: Regulatory Actions - The Shanghai market supervision department has conducted talks with Ele.me and other platforms, mandating the complete removal of "zero yuan purchase" promotional activities [4][5]. - Platforms are required to significantly reduce the scope of free meal marketing and establish a special task force to enhance activity monitoring, price control, and rider rights protection [4][5]. - Continuous enforcement of regulations is emphasized to ensure compliance and promote a healthy and sustainable development of the food service industry [4][5]. Group 2: Industry Competition - The recent "food delivery war" has prompted regulatory bodies to intervene after platforms engaged in aggressive discounting strategies, including free offers and substantial coupon distributions [8]. - Major platforms like Meituan reported a surge in daily order volumes, with Meituan exceeding 1.5 billion orders and Taobao Flash Sale reaching over 80 million orders [8]. - Industry leaders are calling for a return to rational competition, with Meituan's CEO highlighting the need for fair practices to avoid detrimental outcomes for all parties involved [8]. Group 3: New Initiatives Post-Regulation - Following the regulatory actions, Meituan has launched the "Ten Thousand Brands" initiative to support 10,000 well-known restaurant brands with tailored services [10]. - JD.com has introduced a "Dish Partner" recruitment plan, investing 1 billion yuan to find partners for 1,000 signature dishes, aiming to enhance quality and supply chain efficiency [10]. - Taobao Flash Sale has denied rumors regarding operational strategies, asserting that their business practices adhere to normal commercial regulations [10].

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the ongoing competition among food delivery platforms, highlighting that large subsidies and promotional offers have not diminished despite regulatory scrutiny. The competition has shifted from a short-term battle to a more cyclical and normalized state, particularly affecting the tea beverage industry [1][2][3]. Group 1: Market Dynamics - The market has seen a transition from intense competition to a more regularized form, with tea beverages becoming a key tool for platforms to increase order volume [4][5]. - The expectation of a "win-win-win" scenario for platforms, merchants, and consumers has not been realized, leading to questions about the role of tea brands in this competitive landscape [6][7]. - The current phase of the competition is characterized by direct confrontations among platforms, with a focus on increasing order volumes and reducing the effectiveness of competitors' promotions [13][14]. Group 2: Merchant Perspective - Merchants face a lack of transparency regarding the costs associated with promotional orders, as platform subsidies are often tied to merchant discounts [9][10]. - The burden of promotional costs is shared between merchants and platforms, with merchants typically bearing a significant portion of the costs [11][12]. - The influx of low-priced orders has led to a decline in normal sales, with many merchants reporting that a large percentage of their orders are now promotional [22][23]. Group 3: Financial Implications - The tea beverage industry has seen significant order growth due to platform subsidies, with leading brands benefiting the most due to their strong supply chain capabilities [27][28][29]. - However, the financial burden on brands is increasing, as they often have to share a larger portion of the promotional costs over time [38][39]. - The average price of tea beverages has decreased from 15-20 yuan to 10-15 yuan, leading to a decline in industry profit margins from 21.4% in 2023 to 14.7% in 2024 [46]. Group 4: Competitive Landscape - The competitive environment is becoming increasingly challenging, with a high rate of store openings and closures indicating a struggle for profitability among tea brands [49]. - The reliance on platforms for order volume is raising operational costs and may lead to a decline in efficiency for offline operations [50][51]. - The article suggests that the ongoing price competition may lead to a market correction in the future, but brands that prioritize sales may continue to offer additional subsidies [57][58].

Core Viewpoint - The recent decline in subsidies from food delivery platforms indicates a cooling trend in the fierce competition known as the "takeout war," which has been influenced by regulatory interventions and the voices of restaurant owners advocating for fair pricing practices [1][4][9]. Summary by Sections Impact on Restaurants - Many restaurant brands are expressing concerns over the pressure from platforms to participate in large subsidies, which has led to squeezed profit margins and instances of negative profitability for certain menu items [2][3]. - The rapid increase in takeout orders, which have risen from 30%-40% to around 60% of total orders, has shifted the balance away from dine-in services, creating challenges in maintaining price consistency between takeout and dine-in options [5][6]. Regulatory and Competitive Landscape - The market regulator's intervention has prompted platforms to reconsider their promotional strategies, emphasizing the need for rational competition that does not disrupt the normal operations of the restaurant industry [1][4]. - The substantial investment of over 100 billion in subsidies by the three major platforms raises questions about the long-term benefits for the restaurant sector, as the immediate effects may not be sustainable [4][9]. Long-term Industry Considerations - The ongoing competition among major players like Meituan, Alibaba, and JD.com is expected to continue, with a focus on expanding into the broader consumer market, which includes both takeout and traditional e-commerce [13][14]. - The digitalization of retail remains low, with less than 5% of the market currently engaged in near-field instant retail, indicating significant growth potential for platforms that can effectively integrate more categories into this space [14].

Core Viewpoint - The recent decline in subsidies from food delivery platforms indicates a shift in the competitive landscape, influenced by regulatory actions and the need for rational competition among major players in the industry [1][2][3]. Group 1: Impact of Subsidy Cuts - Consumers have experienced a reduction in the benefits of food delivery subsidies, leading to a decrease in the excitement of "hunting for deals" [1]. - The intense competition among platforms has resulted in record-high order volumes, but has also caused some merchants to face declining profits and operational challenges [1][2]. - The shift in order distribution, with delivery orders increasing from 30%-40% to around 60%, has altered the dynamics between dine-in and delivery services [3]. Group 2: Merchant Perspectives - Restaurant owners express concerns over the pressure from platforms to participate in subsidy programs, which can lead to reduced profit margins and negative impacts on product pricing [2][3]. - The need for platforms to return pricing power to merchants is emphasized, as many businesses struggle to maintain profitability amidst aggressive discounting [2][5]. - The operational challenges faced by merchants, such as staffing and supply chain adjustments, highlight the strain that rapid order increases can place on businesses [6]. Group 3: Long-term Industry Implications - The substantial investment in subsidies by platforms, exceeding 100 billion, raises questions about the long-term benefits for the restaurant industry [3][7]. - The ongoing competition may lead to increased consolidation within the restaurant sector, with smaller businesses at greater risk of failure [7]. - Platforms are encouraged to adopt a more rational approach to competition, which aligns with their long-term interests and the need for a sustainable industry ecosystem [7][8]. Group 4: Future of Instant Retail - The future of instant retail hinges on the ability of platforms to integrate more product categories and enhance service efficiency, which will require significant improvements in supply chain and technology [8]. - The potential for growth in the instant retail market remains high, but the effectiveness of platforms in transitioning from aggressive competition to building a more digital and efficient ecosystem is yet to be seen [8].

Group 1 - The large subsidies on food delivery platforms have not disappeared despite regulatory discussions, indicating ongoing competitive practices among major players like Ele.me, Meituan, and JD [1] - The food delivery battle is shifting from short-term bursts to a more normalized cyclical competition, with low-priced tea drinks becoming a key tool for platforms to boost order volumes [2][4] - The expectation of a "win-win-win" scenario for platforms, merchants, and consumers has not been realized, raising questions about the role of chain tea brands in this competitive landscape [3] Group 2 - Merchants face opaque cost structures behind discount orders, with platform subsidies often tied to merchant concessions, leading to increased operational costs [5][6] - The "explosive red envelope" subsidy model requires merchants to bear a minimum cost per order, complicating their financial outcomes [6][7] - The current phase of the food delivery competition has intensified, with platforms directly targeting each other to suppress competitors like Taobao Flash Sale [8] Group 3 - The surge in low-priced orders is squeezing normal product sales, leading to a decline in actual revenue for merchants despite high order volumes [16][12] - Merchants are increasingly reliant on external platforms, which may undermine their offline business efficiency and raise operational costs [31] - The average price of tea drinks has dropped significantly, with industry profit margins declining from 21.4% in 2023 to an estimated 14.7% in 2024 [29] Group 4 - The competitive landscape is marked by a high store opening and closing ratio, indicating a challenging environment for new tea brands [30] - The reliance on platform subsidies may provide temporary relief for merchants but could lead to long-term sustainability issues once subsidies are reduced [32] - The ongoing price competition is reshaping consumer perceptions, with lower price points becoming the new norm in the market [33]

增强理性竞争下的确定性，即时零售的盘子才能做得更大。 "没有那么便宜了。"刚刚过去的周末，许多消费者发现了外卖平台补贴力度的集体下降。7月18日，市场监管总局约谈饿了么、美团、京东三家平台企业， 要求各平台进一步规范促销行为，理性参与竞争。随着监管出手规范，过去几个月轰轰烈烈的"外卖大战"有了降温趋势。 回顾这场外卖大战，消费者享受到了外卖"薅羊毛"的快乐，外卖平台收获了订单量创新高的红火战报，不少商家订单疯涨、骑手收入翻倍，也有部分外卖商 家利润下降，"0元购"奶茶无人取，消费者遭遇商家"卡单"、出餐慢，增长的热闹与过度的消耗同时存在。 这不会是即时零售市场的最后一战。只要大公司们对即时零售和传统电商终将进入同一片战场的战略判断不变，京东、美团、阿里的流量"入口"之争就不会 轻易结束，甚至还可能迎来新玩家的不断入场。一些问题因此变得重要——这场热战留下了什么？市场需要有哪些冷思考？ "定价权要还给商家" 值得外卖平台警惕的是，在这场外卖大战中喊停的，除了监管，还有许多餐饮品牌创始人、餐饮协会的声音。 部分平台补贴需要商家部分出资是争议的一面，嘉和一品创始人刘京京呼吁，平台不应裹挟商家参与巨额补贴，双重承担配 ...

Core Insights - The article presents the weekly ranking of outstanding works titled "作·嗅之星" for the period of July 11 to July 17, 2025, highlighting the top articles and their authors [1][3]. Ranking Summary - The top article is "The Company Doesn't Care How Much Work You Do" by Ye Xiaochai [3][5]. - The second-ranked article is "Why is the Takeaway Industry Still in Battle After Ten Years?" by Junze [3][5]. - The third article, "Is Effort Really Becoming Less Valuable?" is authored by Jiu Bian [3][5]. - "Alibaba's 'Advance' and Pinduoduo's 'Retreat'" by Biao Wai Biao Li ranks fourth [3][5]. - The fifth article, "Sam's Club Lists Haoliyou, Middle Class is Out" is written by Shan Nong Xia Shan [3][5]. - The sixth article, "Will 99% of Programmers Become Unemployed?" is from Tencent Research Institute [3][5]. - The seventh article, "A Generation of SUV Dominator Declares Bankruptcy" is reported by Investment界 [3][5]. - The eighth article, "Why Aren't Those Airlines That 'Suspended Flights to China' Coming Back?" is authored by Travel界 [3][5]. - The ninth article, "What is the Actual Vacancy Rate of Housing in Beijing?" is by Knowledge分子 [3][5]. Support for Authors - The company will regularly provide bonuses and special support rights to the awarded authors to encourage the continuous production of quality content [4][8].