资本脉络追踪：快牛系的"借壳导流"游戏 "芸豆花"的背后，并非单一公司的独立运作，而是牵扯出曾因"714高炮"被央视曝光的"快牛系"资本网络。通过企查查股权穿透发现，上海醉梦由上海乾 昭信息技术有限公司（下称"乾昭公司"）全资控股，两家公司的法定代表人均为李泽娃，且乾昭公司拥有"芸豆借款"的软件著作权——这正是"芸豆花"的 前身产品。 更关键的关联在于人员重叠。乾昭公司的历史工商信息显示，快牛智能（前身为快牛金科）创始人兼CEO倪抒音、高级顾问陈松曾在此任职，倪抒音还曾 担任该公司法定代表人。而快牛智能官网显示，其核心团队包括联合创始人王明亮、首席风控官郭曦，这三人的名字还出现在上海盼哆信息技术、深圳钱 京京科技等多家关联公司的法人或前法人名单中，形成一张紧密的"快牛系"资本网络。 当安徽市民李先生的儿子李飞为应急下载一款借款APP时，他未曾想到，这场看似普通的借贷会演变成一场"债务噩梦"——输入个人信息后未获额度提 示，3000元资金却被强制下款，10天还款期内需连带1200元利息，折算年化利率高达1460%。更令人咋舌的是，逾期后日息飙升至1500元，短短数日还款 金额逼近3万元，伴随而来的还有"爆通讯录 ...

Core Viewpoint - The article highlights the emergence of a predatory debt planning industry that exploits individuals in financial distress, despite regulatory crackdowns and previous rejections by loan platforms [1][8]. Group 1: Industry Practices - Numerous companies are hiring debt planners and credit management specialists, offering salaries as high as 500 RMB per hour, to attract a large pool of indebted individuals [2][5]. - The recruitment process emphasizes finding clients through social media, short videos, and other online platforms, while also utilizing illegal data acquisition methods to target potential victims [2][4]. - The industry has developed a modular approach, with organized operations that include creating fake legal documents and using deceptive marketing tactics to lure clients [3][5]. Group 2: Risks to Consumers - Consumers are often misled into paying high service fees for ineffective debt solutions, which can lead to further financial distress and potential identity theft [6][10]. - The article notes that some organizations may disappear after collecting fees, leaving clients with unresolved debts and damaged credit records [6][10]. - There is a growing trend of using fraudulent practices, such as identity theft to secure new loans, exacerbating the debt crisis for individuals [6][10]. Group 3: Regulatory Response - Regulatory bodies and law enforcement agencies are increasing efforts to combat the rise of fraudulent debt optimization schemes, emphasizing the need for collaboration among financial institutions, platforms, and regulators [7][9]. - New measures include stricter advertising regulations on social media platforms and enhanced scrutiny of debt-related services to protect consumers from scams [9][10]. - Experts suggest that clearer regulations and better consumer education are essential to mitigate the risks associated with these predatory practices [10][11].

Core Viewpoint - The article highlights the risks associated with debt management services marketed by certain law firms and debt optimization companies, which often mislead consumers with false promises and may engage in fraudulent practices [1][12][13]. Group 1: Debt Management Services - Many consumers encounter advertisements for "debt optimization" and "overdue negotiation" services, often presented by individuals claiming to be legal assistants or financial advisors [1][3]. - These services promise to alleviate debt burdens by offering solutions such as "no payments for 1 to 3 years" and "only repaying the principal," which are often unrealistic and misleading [3][5][11]. - The operations of these companies typically involve high-pressure sales tactics and vague contractual agreements that can lead to consumer exploitation [12][13]. Group 2: Consumer Experiences - Consumers report being drawn to local law firms that claim to have extensive experience in handling debt issues, often leading to significant service fees without any real solutions [11][12]. - Complaints on platforms like Black Cat Complaints reveal numerous instances of consumers feeling deceived, with reports of service fees collected without any effective resolution of their debt issues [12][13]. - The article notes that many of these firms have expanded their reach to local markets, using targeted advertising to attract consumers in distress [9][11]. Group 3: Legal and Regulatory Concerns - Legal experts express skepticism about the legitimacy of the services offered, particularly the claims that debt management can be conducted without impacting credit scores [7][8]. - The practices of these debt management companies may violate regulations regarding consumer protection and financial practices, leading to potential legal repercussions for both the companies and the consumers involved [12][13]. - The article emphasizes the need for consumers to be cautious and to seek services from licensed financial institutions rather than unregulated debt management firms [12][13].

Core Viewpoint - The National Financial Regulatory Administration has issued a risk warning regarding fraudulent online loan practices, highlighting three main deceptive tactics used by illegal institutions to mislead consumers into taking out loans [1][2][3]. Group 1: Deceptive Tactics - The first tactic involves confusing concepts to mislead borrowers, where illegal platforms use ambiguous terms like "installment payment" instead of "installment loan," leading consumers to sign contracts without fully understanding the terms [1][2]. - The second tactic is making false promises to entice borrowers, such as exaggerated claims about loan approval or government assistance, often accompanied by unfavorable contract terms that benefit the lender [2][3]. - The third tactic is concealing the actual cost of loans, where platforms advertise low interest rates while hiding higher effective rates and additional fees, resulting in borrowers facing unexpected financial burdens [2][3]. Group 2: Current Market Situation - As of the end of 2024, there are approximately 350 million online loan users in China, with 120 million having overdue payments, indicating a significant market penetration and associated risks [3]. - In the first half of 2025, law enforcement uncovered 58,000 cases of fraudulent loans, arresting over 41,000 suspects and seizing 57.7 billion yuan in illicit funds, reflecting the scale of the issue [3]. - A significant portion of victims, 68.3%, are university students, highlighting the vulnerability of certain demographics to these fraudulent practices [3]. Group 3: Recommendations for Consumers - Consumers are advised to critically evaluate promotional content from online loan platforms, ensuring they do not fall for enticing offers that may lead to financial traps [4]. - It is essential for consumers to verify the legitimacy of loan institutions by consulting regulatory bodies or official websites to avoid scams [4]. - Careful examination of contract terms is crucial, with consumers encouraged to seek clarification on any ambiguous clauses before signing [4]. - Protecting personal information is vital, and consumers should take measures to safeguard sensitive data during the loan application process [4].

Core Viewpoint - The article highlights the pervasive issue of online lending targeting university students, emphasizing the psychological and financial consequences faced by this demographic due to high-interest loans and predatory lending practices [3][10][29]. Group 1: Online Lending Landscape - Online lending has evolved from campus loans to a broader online loan market, which continues to thrive despite regulatory efforts to curb it [10][30]. - Regulatory bodies have issued multiple directives to prohibit online lending to students, yet these measures have been largely ineffective due to loopholes and lack of enforcement [9][30]. - The online lending industry has become a lucrative business, with companies like Qifu Technology and Xinyi Technology reporting significant profits and high sales margins [22]. Group 2: Target Demographic - University students, despite being legally adults, are often ill-equipped to handle financial responsibilities, making them prime targets for online lenders [23][29]. - The lack of financial literacy among students leads to a high acceptance of loans with exorbitant interest rates, often exceeding 36% when hidden fees are included [17][21]. - The ease of access to loans through popular apps and platforms creates a false sense of security, encouraging students to borrow without fully understanding the implications [24][14]. Group 3: Psychological Impact - Many students experience severe psychological distress due to overwhelming debt, with some developing conditions like severe depression [5][29]. - The societal shift towards a culture of borrowing rather than saving is concerning, as it may lead to long-term financial instability for young adults [36][38]. - The article warns that the normalization of debt among the younger generation could mirror the financial crises seen in other countries, particularly the U.S. [38][39]. Group 4: Regulatory Challenges - The fragmented regulatory framework surrounding online lending creates a vacuum where predatory practices can flourish [30]. - Key concepts related to responsible lending, such as "excessive borrowing" and "proper identification of borrowers," remain poorly defined, allowing lenders to exploit these ambiguities [31]. - The article calls for more stringent regulations and clearer definitions to protect vulnerable populations, particularly students, from falling into debt traps [35][31].

Core Viewpoint - The article highlights the alarming rise of online lending among university students, leading to severe financial and psychological consequences, despite regulatory efforts to curb such practices [1][5][6]. Group 1: Online Lending Issues - A significant number of university students are falling into debt traps due to online lending, with reports indicating over 5000 cases of students seeking redress for loan issues [1][5]. - The average annual interest rates for online loans can range from 15% to 36%, often obscured by various fees, leading to a much higher effective cost for borrowers [11][12]. - Many students are unaware of the true costs associated with these loans, as platforms often use misleading marketing tactics to attract borrowers [9][11]. Group 2: Regulatory Challenges - Despite multiple regulatory attempts since 2016 to ban online loans to students, the industry has adapted, continuing to operate under different guises [5][23]. - The lack of a centralized regulatory body and clear definitions around key concepts like "excessive borrowing" allows online lending platforms to exploit loopholes [23][24]. - Platforms often bypass regulations by not actively verifying student status, allowing them to lend indiscriminately to young borrowers [24]. Group 3: Psychological and Social Impact - The psychological toll on students is significant, with many experiencing severe anxiety and depression due to unmanageable debt [1][5]. - The financial burden often extends to families, as students may rely on parental support to repay loans, creating a cycle of financial strain [20][21]. - The article emphasizes that university students, despite being legally adults, lack the financial literacy and experience to navigate these lending traps effectively [16][20].

Core Viewpoint - The article highlights the resurgence of illegal "campus loans" in China, posing significant risks to students' financial well-being and urging them to adopt prudent financial practices and utilize legitimate funding sources [1][2] Group 1: Risks of Illegal Campus Loans - Illegal "campus loans" are re-emerging, severely harming students' interests [1] - Some fraudulent online lending platforms lure students with low thresholds, quick processing, high limits, and low interest rates, leading to excessive borrowing and debt [1] - Students unable to repay debts face illegal collection practices, resulting in serious consequences [1] Group 2: Recommendations for Students - Students are advised to establish a rational consumption mindset, emphasizing frugality and responsible spending to avoid overconsumption and peer pressure [1] - It is recommended to apply for financial aid through legitimate channels, such as national student loans and scholarships, to ensure academic completion [1] - If considering commercial student loans, students should communicate with parents, assess repayment capabilities, and carefully review loan agreements to ensure legality and fairness [1] Group 3: Legal Protections - In case of falling into illegal "campus loan" traps, students should remain calm, inform parents and teachers, and retain evidence such as contracts and payment records [2] - Immediate reporting to authorities is advised to protect legal rights [2]