Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the recent investigation and assessment initiated by the State Council's Anti-Monopoly and Anti-Unfair Competition Committee into the competitive landscape of the food delivery platform service industry, highlighting the responses from major players like Meituan, Taobao Flash Sale, and JD Delivery [3]. Group 1: Meituan's Response - Meituan expressed strong support for the government's investigation, emphasizing the need to address irrational competition characterized by price wars, subsidies, and traffic control [4]. - The company aims to use this investigation as an opportunity to promote responsible market behavior and foster innovation and healthy development within the food delivery service industry [4]. Group 2: Taobao Flash Sale's Position - Taobao Flash Sale acknowledged that fair competition is a core principle of market economy and essential for the sustainable innovation and healthy development of the food delivery service industry [7][8]. - The platform committed to adhering to relevant laws and regulations, including the Anti-Monopoly Law and the Anti-Unfair Competition Law, while actively cooperating with the investigation [7][8]. Group 3: JD Delivery's Stance - JD Delivery welcomed the investigation, aligning with the government's efforts to combat internal competition and maintain fair market order [10]. - The company emphasized its commitment to resisting harmful competition and promoting high-quality development through innovative supply chain models [10].

Core Viewpoint - The State Council's Anti-Monopoly and Anti-Unfair Competition Committee has initiated an investigation and assessment of the market competition status in the food delivery platform service industry, responding to concerns about irrational competition practices such as price wars and excessive subsidies [1]. Group 1: Company Responses - Meituan expressed strong support for the investigation, emphasizing the need for rational competition and a commitment to fulfilling market responsibilities to promote innovation and healthy development in the food delivery sector [2]. - Taobao Shanguo highlighted the importance of fair competition as a core principle of market economy, pledging to comply with relevant laws and regulations while actively participating in the investigation to maintain a fair market environment [4]. - JD Delivery also voiced strong support for the investigation, advocating against harmful competition practices and promoting high-quality development through supply chain innovation to better serve consumers and partners [6][7].

Group 1 - The core viewpoint of the article emphasizes the need to address "involutionary" competition, which is characterized by low price, low quality, and low-level competition that disrupts market signals and undermines long-term competitiveness of enterprises, ultimately affecting industrial structure upgrades and high-quality development [4] - The State Administration for Market Regulation has established a comprehensive and orderly regulatory framework to guide enterprises from homogeneous low-efficiency competition to high-quality and high-level competition by 2025 [4] Group 2 - The revised Anti-Unfair Competition Law enhances the recognition rules for commercial defamation and includes typical "involutionary" malicious competition behaviors, such as forcing platform operators to sell goods below cost, into the regulatory scope [6] - The implementation measures for the compulsory cancellation of company registration aim to systematically clean up dishonest entities and improve market exit quality and efficiency [7] - The draft guidelines for anti-monopoly compliance for internet platforms support and guide platform enterprises in strengthening compliance management and identifying new monopoly risks [10] Group 3 - The guidelines for improving product and service quality on online trading platforms focus on product innovation and service standardization, enhancing the responsibilities of platforms and operators, and optimizing consumer protection services [12] - The basic requirements for managing delivery platforms include merchant management, pricing behavior, and consumer rights protection, aimed at improving service quality and reducing disorderly competition [13] - The regulations on the quality safety supervision of key industrial products sold online clarify the responsibilities and obligations of e-commerce operators regarding quality safety [15] Group 4 - The action plan for enhancing standards in the new energy vehicle, lithium battery, and photovoltaic industries includes the development of 167 national standards to promote quality safety and energy efficiency, addressing "involutionary" competition in these sectors [16] - Measures to steadily expand the openness of standard systems focus on improving the consistency of standards in key service areas between domestic and international markets [17]

Core Viewpoint - The State Council's Anti-Monopoly Committee has initiated an investigation and assessment of market competition in the food delivery platform service industry [1][4] Group 1: Company Response - Taobao Flash Delivery emphasizes the importance of fair competition as a core principle of market economy and a foundation for sustainable innovation and healthy development in the food delivery service industry [1][4] - The company commits to adhering to principles of fairness, justice, and openness in merchant management, pricing behavior, delivery personnel rights protection, and consumer rights protection, in compliance with the Anti-Monopoly Law and the Anti-Unfair Competition Law [1][4] - Taobao Flash Delivery expresses its willingness to actively cooperate with the industry market competition investigation and assessment, ensuring compliance responsibilities are met [1][4] Group 2: Industry Impact - The investigation aims to maintain a fair and orderly market environment and promote further prosperity in the food delivery service industry through collaboration with merchants and ecosystem partners [1][4]

Core Viewpoint - The ongoing food delivery war among JD, Alibaba, and Meituan has led to significant employee concerns and financial losses, with discussions revealing a lack of confidence in the strategies being employed by these companies [1][13][14]. Group 1: JD's Performance and Employee Sentiment - JD announced that 92% of its employees received full or excess year-end bonuses, with total investment increasing by 70% year-on-year, indicating a strong financial commitment despite underlying issues [1]. - However, JD employees expressed significant concerns about the sustainability of their food delivery business, with market share plummeting from 31% to 8% within a year, leading to fears of system collapse [10][11]. - The company reported a cumulative loss of 31.8 billion yuan in new businesses for the first three quarters of 2025, with marketing expenses surging by 110.5% [11][12]. Group 2: Alibaba's Strategic Confusion - Alibaba employees are confused about the company's pivot back to food delivery amidst a focus on AI, with many questioning the effectiveness of the strategy given the significant financial losses [4][5]. - The company's operating profit fell dramatically to 5.37 billion yuan in Q3 2025, an 85% decrease from the previous year, while sales and marketing expenses soared by 105% [6]. - Employees expressed skepticism about the long-term viability of the food delivery strategy, questioning whether it was a genuine effort for future growth or merely a short-term fix [6][7]. Group 3: Meituan's Anxiety and Market Position - Meituan employees are experiencing anxiety over the company's declining market share, which dropped from 60% to 50%, alongside a reported net loss of 16 billion yuan in Q3 2025 [7][10]. - The company faced its first quarterly loss in three years, with marketing expenses increasing by 91%, raising concerns about the sustainability of its business model [8][10]. - Employees are divided on the necessity of engaging in the food delivery war, with some believing that competition is essential for revenue generation, while others feel the pressure is unsustainable [10].

Group 1 - The article reveals that a programmer from a major foreign food delivery app exposed the company's practices, indicating that fees paid by users, such as "priority delivery fees" and "driver welfare fees," do not benefit the delivery drivers but instead go directly into the company's profits [1][2] - The programmer describes the company's algorithmic manipulation, where the "priority delivery" feature is a facade, as it does not actually expedite delivery but rather creates an illusion of faster service by delaying regular orders [5][6][7] - The concept of "desperation index" is introduced, which tracks drivers' behaviors to determine their financial desperation, leading to a system that intentionally withholds higher-paying orders from full-time drivers, effectively exploiting their need for income [8][10][11] Group 2 - The article discusses the "welfare fee," which is presented as a way to support drivers but actually funds the company's efforts to lobby against unionization, with the money going to high-paid lawyers [12][13] - It highlights a new method of "tip theft," where the company adjusts base pay based on predictions of potential tips, ensuring that drivers do not receive the full benefit of customer generosity, thus subsidizing the company's costs [12][13] - The programmer expresses anger and frustration over the company's practices, which prioritize profit over the well-being of drivers, indicating a systemic issue within the industry that affects labor rights and compensation [14][22]

Core Viewpoint - The article highlights the issue of merchants impersonating delivery riders to solicit positive reviews from customers, which raises concerns about consumer privacy and the integrity of feedback systems in the food delivery industry [1] Group 1: Incident Description - Customers have reported receiving calls from individuals claiming to be delivery riders asking for positive reviews in exchange for monetary rewards [1] - Many consumers have encountered this tactic, which includes both phone calls and text messages, leading to feelings of frustration and concerns about personal information security [1] Group 2: Industry Response - Multiple food delivery platforms have confirmed that such practices are explicitly prohibited and that they will impose penalties on merchants found engaging in this behavior [1] - Legal experts have indicated that this deceptive practice violates laws such as the Anti-Unfair Competition Law and the Consumer Rights Protection Law, potentially leading to fines or revocation of business licenses [1]

Core Viewpoint - Meituan has introduced a new order distribution model for its delivery riders, shifting from a speed-based order grabbing mechanism to a system where orders are allocated by the platform based on various factors, aiming to enhance fairness and reduce cheating [1][3]. Summary by Sections New Order Distribution Model - The new model automatically assigns orders to riders based on multiple factors such as the rider's backlog, route efficiency, and restaurant preparation time, with a distribution time of approximately 3-5 seconds [1][2]. - Riders can still choose which orders to attempt to grab, but their success is now influenced by their compatibility with the order rather than just speed [2][3]. Rider Reactions - Many riders express a positive attitude towards the new model, believing it may lead to a more equitable distribution of orders, especially for part-time riders [2]. - Full-time riders, however, may experience a negative impact on their income as the best orders could become less accessible [2]. Impact on Fairness and Safety - The new model is designed to combat cheating software and ensure a fairer environment for all riders, allowing new riders to access better orders and reducing the pressure to constantly monitor their devices [3]. - Experts suggest that the algorithm's complexity and lack of transparency may lead to confusion among riders regarding the order allocation process [3][6]. Recommendations for Improvement - Experts recommend increasing transparency around the algorithm's logic and involving riders in discussions to clarify how the system works, potentially through regular forums [4][5]. - There is a call for the platform to ensure that the order allocation rules are designed with input from rider representatives to balance the interests of all stakeholders [5][6].

（来源：工人日报） 阅读提示 随着互联网服务持续深入，"在村里点外卖"已非新鲜事。外卖进村在带来便利的同时，也因与城市配送 存在差异，面临如何扎根的新课题。对此，专家建议，应完善骑手权益保障；同时让农村公共服务、数 字化水平得到系统提升。 "蛋糕、快餐、水果蔬菜，都能送到家门口，真的很方便！"近日，在北京读书的小刘放假回到贵州老家 时惊喜地发现村里竟然也可以点外卖了。 如今，随着交通和通信基础设施不断完善，互联网服务持续深入，"在村里点外卖"已不再是新鲜事。数 据显示，县域生活外卖订单量年均复合增长率超40%，外卖已覆盖全国2000多个县城。 外卖进村带来了哪些便利？乡村配送与城市配送存在哪些差异？外卖进了村，如何还能扎下根？记者对 此进行了采访。 村里也能点外卖，骑手多是本地人 "能点到城市里吃不到的家乡特色粉面和小吃。"小刘在家乡打开小镇外卖小程序，页面显示可配送中餐 美食、蔬菜水果等品类，甚至还有跑腿代购。小刘发现，配送的骑手大多是本地人，对周边村落、地形 都很熟悉，即使自己的地址定位在X村X组，骑手也能精准送餐上门。 记者了解到，除了专门针对乡镇市场开发的外卖服务平台，外卖平台企业也将配送服务下沉到乡 ...

（来源：工人日报） 清晨6点半，北京城的街巷还未完全苏醒，美团众包骑手许云龙已骑上电动车，开始了新一天的配送工 作。 这位来自山东菏泽的骑手，还有另一个身份——北京市朝阳区大屯街道流动党支部的党员。在日复一日 的奔波中，他用滚动的车轮，诠释着一名流动党员的先锋本色。 社区环境整治，许云龙提前换班到场清理卫生死角；政策宣讲活动，他主动担任"宣传员"讲解惠民政 策；送餐途中，他是"流动探头"，将发现的楼道堆物、路面隐患等问题第一时间拍照反馈到工作群；遇 到邻里纠纷或设施损坏，他总是主动上前了解情况并反馈给社区。 2024年2月北京暴雪，凌晨5点，许云龙就扛着铁锹出现在小区主干道上。零下15摄氏度的寒风中，他一 个人铲出300多米的安全通道。社区书记要为他申报"好人好事"，他摆摆手说："当年在部队扫雪，这是 基本功！" 继续"跑"着服务别人 1987年，许云龙出生在菏泽市曹县一个普通家庭。14岁开始练习散打，天赋与汗水让他屡获佳绩，成为 国家二级运动员。18岁那年，他通过了山东体育大学的单招考试，却在升学之际做出了令人意外的选择 ——参军。 "小时候看电视里战士们冲在一线参与救灾的画面，我深受感染。"许云龙说，"练 ...