Core Viewpoint - The ongoing "takeout war" among major platforms has led to significant financial investments in subsidies, resulting in record-breaking order volumes, but it has also created a complex competitive environment that may harm smaller businesses and reduce market diversity [1][2][3] Group 1: Market Dynamics - Since April, platforms have invested nearly 1 trillion yuan in subsidies to attract customers, leading to a surge in order volumes [1] - The initial benefits of subsidies included increased market share for platforms and sales for merchants, but many restaurants report that they are not profiting, leading to a "loss-leader" situation [1][2] - The competition has shifted from a marketing strategy to a prolonged battle, altering the landscape of the restaurant market [1] Group 2: Impact on Small Businesses - Smaller businesses face an unequal competitive environment, where they must choose between participating in subsidies, which erodes profits, or risking marginalization by not participating [2] - The reliance on a single platform for revenue can limit the operational autonomy of smaller restaurants, increasing their financial pressure [2] - The ongoing price wars may force unique small eateries out of the market, as they struggle to maintain profitability [2] Group 3: Long-term Implications - The "takeout war" may reduce market diversity, as consumer choices become limited to a few large brands offering standardized products, potentially impacting local culinary culture [3] - The heavy reliance of many businesses on a few platforms could weaken the overall resilience of the restaurant retail system [3] - The focus should shift from a simplistic "winner vs. loser" perspective to understanding the long-term effects on the entire restaurant ecosystem [3] Group 4: Call for Change - There is a need for platforms to transition from a "traffic-driven" mindset to a "coexistence-driven" approach, ensuring that all types of businesses can thrive [3] - The ultimate goal should be to create a healthy ecosystem where large, medium, and small businesses can grow, consumers receive sustainable quality service, and delivery personnel are respected and protected [3] - True success for platforms will be measured by their ability to connect their achievements with the prosperity of the broader economic ecosystem [3]

2025年以来，以美团、淘宝闪购、京东等为代表的即时零售与外卖平台通过"百亿补贴""亿元补贴"等活 动掀起了声势浩大的外卖竞争。为评估外卖平台大规模补贴策略对于提振当前消费市场所产生的具体效 果，北京大学光华管理学院光华思想力课题组基于淘宝闪购数据，结合平台大数据和科学分析方法，在 淘宝闪购平台抽取2025年2-7月期间持续留存的平台消费者样本，以及持续经营的商户样本，构建覆盖 消费者和商户的双重视角和多层次分析框架进行了研究。 研究结果显示：淘宝闪购优惠券对饿了么平台上的外卖消费产生了显著的拉动作用，每1元有效闪购补 贴带动了在饿了么平台上大约1.65元的额外新增消费，且对零售（非餐饮）的拉动更大。闪购优惠券的 消费拉动作用存在显著的溢出效应，每1元的有效闪购补贴带动了消费者6.76元通过支付宝平台完成支 付的额外消费，其中对线上电商实物消费的带动金额为3.11元。研究还发现，闪购渗透率与地区行业层 面餐饮商家平均线下周营收正相关，未发现挤占堂食的统计证据；闪购优惠券对参与商户在线上、线下 营收都有正向拉动作用，且对营收规模最小的25%商户的拉动作用最强。 为规范本次外卖补贴竞争，引导市场健康可持续发展，支 ...

Core Viewpoint - The recent regulatory actions against major food delivery platforms like Ele.me, Meituan, and JD.com signal the government's intent to regulate market order and promote healthy development in the food service industry [1][7]. Group 1: Market Dynamics - A significant subsidy war has erupted among major food delivery platforms since July, leading to record-breaking order volumes, with Meituan reaching 1.5 billion orders and Ele.me surpassing 80 million daily orders [2][3]. - The "0 yuan purchase" promotions have attracted considerable consumer attention, with users actively sharing their experiences on social media [3]. Group 2: Impact on Stakeholders - Delivery riders have seen a notable increase in their earnings, with some reporting a rise in daily deliveries from 40-50 to 60-70, resulting in potential monthly earnings of an additional 2,000 yuan [4]. - However, the surge in orders has placed immense pressure on merchants, leading to staffing shortages and operational challenges, with some stores needing to temporarily suspend their delivery services [4][5]. Group 3: Sustainability Concerns - The reliance on subsidies raises questions about the sustainability of this growth model, as many merchants report operating at a loss due to the high costs of fulfilling discounted orders [4][6]. - The potential for a "vicious cycle" of subsidies leading to market imbalance is a concern, with warnings from industry insiders about the long-term implications for service quality and food safety [6]. Group 4: Regulatory Response - The government has taken steps to curb "zero-sum" competition by mandating the cessation of certain promotional activities, indicating a push towards more sustainable practices in the industry [7].

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]

Core Viewpoint - The recent regulatory discussions with major platforms like JD.com, Meituan, and Ele.me highlight the need for fair competition and the unsustainability of excessive subsidies in the food delivery industry [1][4][19] Group 1: Regulatory Actions - The National Regulatory Administration and multiple departments have urged platforms to comply with laws and regulations to ensure fair competition and protect the rights of consumers, merchants, and delivery riders [1][4] - The discussions signal a significant shift in the regulatory landscape, aiming to promote a healthy and orderly development of the platform economy [1][4] Group 2: Competition Dynamics - The food delivery sector has seen intense competition, primarily driven by subsidies, which has become unsustainable in the current macroeconomic environment [4][7] - Platforms like Meituan and Ele.me have historically relied on subsidies to attract users, but this approach is increasingly viewed as detrimental to long-term industry health [7][19] Group 3: Impact on Stakeholders - The subsidy wars not only affect platform competition but also have broader implications for millions of merchants and delivery riders, leading to potential declines in profits and income [5][13] - The reliance on subsidies creates a vicious cycle where merchants are pressured to lower prices, ultimately harming their profitability and the overall market [13][14] Group 4: Market Size and Consumer Behavior - The high-frequency food delivery market is limited to approximately 75 million individuals in China, primarily those with monthly incomes above 5,000 yuan [8][11] - Once subsidies are removed, consumer demand for food delivery is expected to decline, raising concerns about the sustainability of the current business model [8][11] Group 5: Long-term Viability - The article emphasizes that relying solely on subsidies is not a viable long-term strategy for platforms, as it undermines the profitability of merchants and the overall market [16][17] - The need for rational competition and a return to common sense in business practices is highlighted as essential for the future of the food delivery industry [18][19]