According to media reports on July 21st， the intense competition in the food delivery market has cooled down during the third weekend of July， effectively bursting the bubble of “zero-cost purchases” that characterized the recent promotions. While discount coupons are still available on major platforms， their value has significantly diminished.
On July 18th， the State Administration for Market Regulation convened a meeting with three major platform companies: Ele.me， Meituan， and JD.com. The regulatory body emphasized the importance of strict adherence to relevant laws and regulations， urging these platforms to uphold their primary responsibilities， further standardize promotional activities， and engage in rational competition. The goal is to collectively foster a beneficial ecosystem that ensures a win-win situation for consumers， merchants， delivery riders， and platform enterprises， thereby promoting the standardized， healthy， and sustainable development of the catering service industry.
During the height of this “delivery war，” consumers were able to purchase goods at exceptionally low prices， with some even enjoying milk tea for free. Many internet users took to social media to share their “milk tea freedom” experiences， showcasing the significant discounts they received.
Wang Puzhong， CEO of Meituan’s Core Local Business， commented that any intense business competition that does not drive progress， or even contravenes basic business logic， ultimately produces no true winners. For the catering industry， whether it be for dining or beverages like milk tea and coffee， the pricing perception painstakingly built over time is being eroded by these subsidy battles. Furthermore， he noted that for most sit-down restaurant brands， the intense subsidy war for delivery negatively impacts the normal operational order of their dine-in services， making it an unsustainable model.
Industry insiders point out that while the subsidy war between platforms appears to be a “food delivery war，” its essence lies in the competition for users’ immediate consumption scenarios and the strategic aim to secure dominance in the “last mile” of local life services.
However， it is widely believed that this round of subsidy battles is unsustainable in the long run. This is primarily because both established and emerging food delivery platforms， as well as the merchants operating on these platforms， cannot indefinitely absorb the immense costs associated with substantial subsidies. Consequently， the economic benefits reaped by delivery riders and consumers are merely a fleeting benefit.
