Core Viewpoint - The recent controversy surrounding pre-prepared meals highlights the importance of consumer awareness regarding the ingredients and preparation methods of these products, emphasizing the need for clear definitions and standards in the industry [1][2][3] Group 1: Consumer Rights and Transparency - Consumers prioritize knowing the quality and sourcing of ingredients in pre-prepared meals, which is a fundamental consumer right as outlined in the Consumer Rights Protection Law of the People's Republic of China [2] - There is a need for restaurants to ensure transparency in their offerings, providing clear information about the quality of ingredients and preparation processes to build consumer trust [2][3] Group 2: Industry Development and Standards - The discussion around pre-prepared meals should not hinder the healthy development of the restaurant industry, which plays a crucial role in job creation and economic growth [3] - It is essential for regulatory bodies to establish clear definitions and standards for pre-prepared meals, ensuring food safety while allowing the industry to leverage the advantages of these products for growth and competitiveness [3]

Core Viewpoint - Li Auto reaffirms its commitment to a payment term of within 60 days, responding positively to industry associations and government calls for compliance with guidelines [1] Group 1 - Li Auto emphasizes strict adherence to timely acceptance of goods and reconciliation standards to ensure the stability and confidence of its partners [1]

Core Viewpoint - The controversy surrounding the "Duoban" trademark on Bai Xiang's instant noodle packaging highlights consumer confusion and potential misleading marketing practices, raising concerns about consumer rights and corporate ethics [1][2][3]. Group 1: Company Practices - Bai Xiang's "Duoban" trademark is intended to indicate a larger product size (110-120 grams) compared to its previous 70-gram offering, but the marketing strategy has been perceived as a deceptive play on words [2]. - The use of the term "Duoban" has been criticized as a marketing gimmick that misleads consumers into thinking they are receiving more product than they actually are, which could damage the company's reputation [2][3]. Group 2: Industry Implications - The incident serves as a warning to other companies in the industry about the risks of engaging in misleading marketing tactics, as seen in similar cases with other brands [4]. - The market economy favors honest and trustworthy companies, and those that resort to deceptive practices may face long-term consequences, including loss of consumer trust and brand reputation [3][4].