Group 1 - The core viewpoint of the article emphasizes that the fee reform in the public fund industry not only reduces investment costs for investors but also encourages market participants to shift focus from scale orientation to professional orientation and effective returns [1][2] - The recent fee reform, described as unprecedented, includes significant reductions in subscription and service fee caps for various types of funds, such as stock funds and mixed funds, which are lowered from 1.2% and 1.5% to 0.8% and 0.5% respectively [2] - The public fund industry has historically played a crucial role in the healthy development of China's capital market, but it faces institutional limitations that hinder its competitiveness compared to private funds [3] Group 2 - The existing front-end fee model has created a protective development environment for public funds but has also limited their competitive awareness and professional capabilities, leading to a lack of responsiveness to market changes [3] - To achieve healthy development in the capital market, a new institutional framework and incentive mechanism must be established to align the interests of fund managers, custodians, and investors [4] - The introduction of a back-end profit-sharing model could enhance market competitiveness by fostering a community of interests among investors, fund managers, and custodians, ultimately allowing more capable institutions to thrive [4][5] Group 3 - The article argues that excessive protectionism can harm market competitiveness, and the high-quality development of China's capital market requires an open and fair competitive environment [5] - The conclusion of the fee reform is seen as a new starting point for the public fund industry, with a focus on professional capabilities and trust mechanisms as the foundation for success in the capital market [6]