it is certainly worth discussing whether group buying in the community can last-many people have a bad habit of not discussing the problem properly, and they will be labeled as soon as they come up. Recently, I don't know where to blow a demon wind, so many people keep their mouths shut, which is the evil of capital. For example, the following
picture
Take-away meals have become expensive, and the US Mission has been monopolized; Didi's price increase accuses Didi of being the only one. Then pretend to reflect deeply: in the early years, capital was heavily subsidized, just to monopolize the market, raise prices and reap huge profits. We were still too young.
it's too many good days, and I'm used to bad habits. There is no capital to enter the take-away market. What did you do when you ate on weekends? Have you forgotten all about it? There are only two choices: either do it at home or eat out. Now take out your mobile phone and click a few times. You can choose from dozens of restaurants nearby and deliver them to your door in 3 minutes. Capital has obviously greatly improved life, but now it has become "evil". What is the reason?
Of course, I know what they mean: Delivery is a good business, and the price should not be too expensive. Is it evil to spend money on subsidies in those days and now occupy the market and harvest hard?
first of all, it must be pointed out that the meal delivery fee belongs to the business scope of enterprises, which depends on consumers' willingness to pay, labor supply and demand and business strategy of enterprises. Don't order takeout if it's too expensive, cook at home or eat at the store, and no one will stop you. In other words, even diners who eat in the store are enjoying the benefits of the prosperity of takeaway-takeaway makes the catering industry prosperous, and there will be more choices for eating out.
The business subsidy is not that complicated. In the pre-Internet era, merchants solicited customers to advertise and spent money on various media. Now, in addition to advertising, it is better to spend money to cultivate user habits. The industry calls this "user education"-in the final analysis, it is still marketing, which is similar to the previous "5% discount for opening guests".
in the market competition, businesses naturally want to kill their rivals and become the final winners. It's not that easy. Subsidies need a huge sum of money like Jinshan Yinhai, but the effect is not good. There is no difference in food delivery service, but the key lies in the price. Many users are surrounded by several merchants in bonus hunter, and there is almost no loyalty. This is doomed, and it is difficult for the winner to win and maintain high profits.
There are many hills of Internet in China, and the amount of funds is abundant. When there is a gap, it takes only a few months from capital to products to market. As long as there is competition, there is no monopoly. The so-called "market monopoly" is nothing more than consumers voting for winners. They laughed at the end, which showed that they did the best and deserved praise, not abuse.
Take "Meituan Takeaway", the king of today's take-away market, as an example, which is very easy to understand. In 213, Meituan's take-out was launched. So far, it has invested tens of billions of dollars to win from the highly competitive market and become the king of the take-out market. It is said to be the king, and it has only 6% market share. It can never eliminate "Hungry", not to mention a bunch of small takeaway companies. After years of "subsidy war", the pattern of the take-away market is 631 (6% for the US delegation, 3% for the hungry, and 1% for other companies).
In p>219, after years of losses, Meituan Takeaway contracted subsidies and sought profits under the pressure of investors. How "profiteering" does the US group with the top spot in the market have? Every day, tens of millions of odd numbers will be distributed, and the gross profit of each order will be shared equally, which is less than that of 1 yuan, and the net profit will be 2 cents. It's hard work. It's more like money.
The market position of Meituan Takeaway is very important. Why not increase the commission substantially? Not to mention the resistance of consumers and businesses, we just need to see giants such as Ali, JD.COM, SF, Didi, etc. ready to move, and we know that things are not easy. Once the hard-working position of Meituan Takeaway collapsed, its long-term investment hit Shui Piao.
who is the biggest beneficiary of the takeaway subsidy war? Consumers order takeout at low prices, which is equivalent to taking investors' red envelopes; Millions of food delivery workers have jobs to support their families. Now the income of food delivery staff has dropped, but it still exceeds the average wage in the city. The beneficiaries are also catering enterprises, which sell more and have stronger anti-risk ability-catering enterprises and take-away platforms are cooperative, not what many people call "squeezing".
I'd like to ask those Marquez, where is the "evil of capital" they keep saying?
after talking about the take-away platform, let's briefly talk about online car rental. Last weekend, it was snowy in Beijing, so it was difficult to take a taxi when going out. It was necessary to increase the dispatching fee (disguised price increase) to get a taxi. On Weibo, I saw someone pretending to reflect: capital is evil. There was no online car ride six or seven years ago. How can I call a car on a snowy day? I really want to experience it. I don't need to cross it. I can feel it when I run to the train station and wave to stop the car.
The greatest value of online car rental is to break the control and increase the market supply; The second is to provide quality services with technical hands. The network car could have floated at a distinct price, adjusted the supply and demand, and made the car call more efficient. Helpless, some nerds cursed the price increase and denounced monopoly, so the nominal price was frozen-this led to queuing. Fortunately, the platform is smart, and it has invented such forms as "giving drivers a dispatch fee" and "giving drivers a red envelope" to make prices play a role in twists and turns.
like the take-away platform, it is difficult to maintain a "market monopoly" for online car rental. After seven years of hard work, Didi has occupied 9% of the market and still dare not relax. Its larger rivals are "Cao Cao" and "Meituan", smaller ones are local platforms (such as Beijing Shouqi and Shanghai Enjoy Road), and the vast number of invisible "black cars". As for the ride, Didi doesn't even have much market advantage.
Didi is afraid to make a profit lightly, and its market position is not stable enough; In the future, Didi will definitely be profitable, but it is difficult to maintain "profiteering". People are sensitive to transportation costs, and Didi needs to maintain its price advantage to curb potential competitors. Such a company will go public in the future, and its gross profit margin must be very low. What about profiteering?
many people enjoy capital benefits, but they keep their mouths shut about "the evil of capital", which is a typical case of words and deeds being different. They can take a taxi instead of ordering takeout-it was a beautiful era of "no capital invasion". However, they just want to take a bowl to eat, put down their chopsticks and scold their mother, and they look righteous and stern. At this point, how similar are the critics and their grandfathers.
In bilibili, where young people gather, the atmosphere has changed greatly in the past two years. In the early years, Ma Yun's video barrage was "Ma Yun's father" and "Give me money", which is vulgar, but there is no malice at last; In the last year or two, there have been shouts of killing, "Down with Capitalists", "Capital Exploitation" and "Capital with Blood", which are soul-stirring. Have they ever thought about the meaning of these slogans? If you really overthrow the capital and criticize Ma Yun, it will be beyond redemption.