Official media speaks out forcefully, State Administration for Market Regulation takes a stand—Has the time finally come for the "food delivery war" to end?

1. What happened? Official media voices, regulatory support

On March 25, 2026, the State Administration for Market Regulation’s official website reposted an editorial from the Economic Daily titled “The Takeout War Should End.”

The article clearly states that the long-standing price war (subsidy war) in the takeout industry has caused serious negative spillover effects. This competition is not only an inefficient “money-burning game” among platforms but also severely disrupts the normal pricing system of the catering industry, leading merchants into a vicious cycle of “no subsidies means death, subsidies mean chaos,” and even forcing them to sacrifice quality and cut profits. This “loss-leading” model not only hampers the overall recovery of consumer spending but also affects the livelihoods of ordinary workers, running counter to the central government’s macro policies to boost consumption and promote high-quality development.

The repost by the State Administration for Market Regulation may indicate that regulators will strongly intervene to curb malicious price competition, calling for the industry to shift from “spending wildly” to healthy competition based on “service, technology, and efficiency.” Earlier, in January 2026, the Office of the Anti-Monopoly and Anti-Unfair Competition Committee of the State Council announced an investigation and assessment of the takeout platform service industry.

That afternoon, stocks of leading platforms like Meituan and Alibaba surged sharply, driving the Hang Seng Tech Index higher, reflecting strong market expectations for improved industry competition and profitability recovery.

2. Why is this important? Market action and the inevitability of regulatory enforcement

1. Why is the Hong Kong stock market voting with its feet on the “takeout war”?

This battle, initiated by JD.com in early 2025 and later evolving into an “epic” money-burning war between Taobao Flash Sale and Meituan Takeout, has seen the three major internet giants invest over 80 billion yuan in nearly a year. The capital market’s strong disapproval stems from its serious overextension of core value and strategic focus:

The failure of Alibaba’s “high-frequency with low-frequency” synergy narrative: Investors have lost patience with Alibaba’s attempt to drive its main e-commerce platform (low-frequency) through instant retail (high-frequency). In Q3 FY26, Alibaba’s instant retail segment is expected to still lose around 20 billion yuan, yet the growth rate of its main site’s Customer Management Revenue (CMR) has slowed to just 0.8% in the same quarter, seemingly confirming the collapse of this cross-selling logic. Investors now prefer Alibaba to focus on the valuation of its cloud computing and AI-driven second growth curve, but Alibaba is currently mired in a “three-front battle”—fighting Pinduoduo with over 400 billion yuan in cash reserves, heavy investments in AI and cloud businesses, and a fierce showdown with Meituan over Taoxianda—consuming valuable operating cash flow through inefficient investments, shaking the confidence of value investors.