Core Viewpoint - The sales of top live-streaming e-commerce hosts have halved during the 2024 Double 11 shopping festival, with return rates for popular women's clothing stores soaring above 90%, prompting many e-commerce operators to return to traditional shelf-based e-commerce models. This shift is attributed to the decline of traffic dividends, high operational costs, and a return to rational consumer behavior, indicating that relying solely on impulse buying driven by interest e-commerce and big data recommendations is not sustainable [1]. Group 1: E-commerce Models - Shelf e-commerce is a fundamental model that mirrors traditional offline supermarkets by categorizing products online to attract users to search and purchase actively [2]. - Content e-commerce has emerged as a new shopping method that uses high-quality content (text, short videos, live streams) to subtly guide consumer behavior, where "content is the marketplace" [5]. - Live-streaming e-commerce involves hosts showcasing products in real-time and interacting with consumers, driven by emotional decision-making, and differs from other content e-commerce by emphasizing user participation [11]. Group 2: Advantages and Disadvantages - Shelf e-commerce advantages include a wide range of products, one-stop shopping convenience, stable logistics, and mature after-sales systems, while disadvantages include intense competition, low margins, and insufficient personalized recommendations [7]. - Content e-commerce benefits from driving consumption through integrated product information and high user engagement, but faces challenges such as low brand loyalty and high impulse purchase return rates [8][15]. - Live-streaming e-commerce has high impulse purchase characteristics and fosters trust through real-time interaction, but it also suffers from high return rates and limited market reach [16]. Group 3: Comparative Analysis - The driving logic of shelf e-commerce is search and comparison (user finds products), while content e-commerce relies on content to stimulate interest (products find users), and live-streaming e-commerce focuses on real-time interaction [17]. - User roles differ across models: shelf e-commerce users are active shoppers, content e-commerce users are content consumers, and live-streaming e-commerce users are audience members [17]. - Core scenarios vary: shelf e-commerce is for clear demand orders, content e-commerce stimulates demand during browsing, and live-streaming e-commerce relies on time-limited promotions [17]. Group 4: Industry Insights - The e-commerce landscape is evolving, and regardless of the chosen model, success hinges on analyzing and monitoring transaction efficiency, including return rates and conversion costs [1]. - Nine Numbers Cloud BI provides real-time data analysis and monitoring capabilities for e-commerce businesses, supporting multi-dimensional evaluation of return performance and profit margin calculations to identify high-profit products and loss items [1].

Core Viewpoint - Xiaomi's automotive division is facing significant backlash due to discrepancies between product claims and actual performance, particularly regarding the carbon fiber hood and power limitations of the SU7 Ultra model [2][3][10] Group 1: Product Issues - The carbon fiber dual-channel hood, priced at 42,000 yuan, was found to lack effective heat dissipation, contradicting promotional claims [2][3] - The OTA update in May limited the SU7 Ultra's horsepower from 1548 to 900, requiring owners to complete track assessments to unlock full power, which has led to consumer dissatisfaction [2][7] - Xiaomi acknowledged the issues with the hood and offered compensation, including free aluminum hoods for unfulfilled orders and 20,000 points (approximately 2,000 yuan) for those who have already received their vehicles [3][10] Group 2: Consumer Reactions - Many consumers feel that Xiaomi's compensation plan is inadequate, as it requires them to wait over 30 weeks for the hood replacement and the points offered do not cover the cost of the optional features [3][10] - There are demands for a full refund and compensation based on the principle of "triple compensation" for perceived fraudulent advertising [4][5] Group 3: Legal and Regulatory Context - Legal experts suggest that Xiaomi's promotional practices may violate consumer protection laws, particularly if the claims about the product's performance are misleading [5][8] - The current regulations regarding "software-defined vehicles" are seen as lacking, raising questions about the nature of the product being sold—whether it is a complete vehicle or a service-based model [9][10] Group 4: Strategic Implications - The recent events highlight a shift in the automotive market where consumer expectations are increasingly focused on product integrity and transparency rather than brand hype [10] - Xiaomi's leadership acknowledges the need for higher standards and aims to improve safety and governance in response to public scrutiny [10]