A wave of takeout coupons is back this weekend! Meituan, JD’s crayfish promotion, and Taobao’s 188 yuan (approx. USD 26 / KRW 36,100) coupon bundles are bombarding consumers, prompting netizens to exclaim, “I can’t eat anymore.” Is this a repeat of the familiar subsidy war? Not quite. What the tech giants are now fighting over is no longer a single meal delivery, but the key entry point to unlocking the trillion-yuan instant retail market. Behind the free milk tea lies a fierce new battle to reshape the local consumption ecosystem.
The Free Milk Tea Feast: Who’s Celebrating, Who’s Suffering
In this early July takeout melee, platforms launched “nuclear-level” discounts that ignited consumer enthusiasm. Deals like “25 yuan off 24” or “18 yuan off 18” (approx. USD 3.5–3.8 / KRW 5,000–5,300), even “zero-cost purchases,” pushed consumers into a frenzy. On social media, young people shared orders of 1.1 yuan (approx. USD 0.15 / KRW 210) chicken cutlet combo meals, joking that “capital is fattening us up like pigs.”
But this revelry is riddled with contradictions. Users outside core city districts were excluded due to delivery restrictions, while student groups affected by campus bans on food delivery lamented, “some drown in floodwaters, some die of drought.”
Milk tea shops were the first “casualties.” Paper bags piled up at stores like Mixue Bingcheng and Yihe Tang, and self-pickup lines stretched long. Some chain tea brands experienced order surges that crashed their systems. Over 2,000 merchants were forced to manually disable orders during the crash. “We lose 8 yuan (approx. USD 1.10 / KRW 1,500) per order. But if we stop taking orders, we’re afraid our platform ranking will drop,” one store owner chuckled bitterly while closing the store.
Meanwhile, income inequality among couriers worsened. Some couriers earned over 1,000 yuan per day (approx. USD 138 / KRW 198,000), thanks to heatwave bonuses and delivery streak incentives. However, less known is the fact that one top-tier hospital in Guangzhou received seven injured couriers in a single night due to traffic accidents—one sustained a fractured spine from running a yellow light.
A Three-Way Dilemma Behind the Prosperity
Behind this capital feast lies a chain of cost transfer from platforms to merchants to couriers—hurting the long-term health of the industry.
Merchants are trapped in a situation of “losing money for visibility.” Under the pressure of platform traffic, they are forced to bear more than 70% of the subsidy costs. A 24-yuan (approx. USD 3.30 / KRW 4,800) beef noodle order nets them less than 8 yuan (approx. USD 1.10 / KRW 1,600), with profit margins squeezed to barely 1 yuan (approx. USD 0.14 / KRW 210).
To survive, some restaurants cut food portions, switch to near-expiry ingredients, or inflate packaging fees—falling into a vicious cycle of “low-price traffic—quality collapse—customer loss.” According to the China Consumers Association, complaints about food services on July 5 surged by 380% year-on-year, mainly citing “items not matching the description” and “over 3-hour delivery delays.”
Couriers are paying with their health for high incomes. In the first half of 2025, insurance payouts for courier work injuries increased by 217% year-on-year. More hidden risks involve food safety: one order of spicy hotpot was delayed for 3 hours during a system crash, and the consumer was hospitalized with acute gastroenteritis. Consumers may feel like they’ve scored a bargain, but they’re actually risking their health. A university survey revealed that 62% of respondents admitted “buying food they didn’t need just to qualify for a discount.”
Instant Retail: The Real Battlefield of the Takeout War
Why are capital players willing to burn so much money? The answer lies in the data: the instant retail market has reached 650 billion yuan (approx. USD 90 billion / KRW 129 trillion), up 28.89% year-on-year—17.89 percentage points higher than regular online retail. By 2030, this market is expected to exceed 2 trillion yuan (approx. USD 276 billion / KRW 396 trillion).
Takeout’s high frequency and essential nature make it the most effective tool for platforms to acquire users and cultivate local consumption habits. Whoever dominates takeout holds the gateway to everyday local consumer engagement.
Alibaba launched the first strike. On July 2, Taobao Flash Sale announced a 50 billion yuan (approx. USD 6.9 billion / KRW 99 trillion) subsidy for merchants and users, designating July 5 as “Order Surge Day.” By integrating Ele.me, Fliggy, and Taobao/Tmall traffic, Alibaba is building a closed-loop ecosystem of “e-commerce + local services + supply chain.”
Meituan quickly counterattacked. On the morning of July 5, Meituan’s leadership held an emergency meeting and launched a flood of high-value discount vouchers. Following the 618 campaign, Meituan restructured its business: Meituan Preferred was scaled back, while Flash Sales and Xiaoxiang Supermarket became the new focus.
JD appears low-profile but has carved its own path. Richard Liu said: “What we do in food delivery is really to serve the fresh food supply chain. I can sell meals at a loss forever as long as I profit from the supply chain.” Among JD delivery users, 40% also purchase e-commerce products. “Losing money on delivery is cheaper than buying traffic from Douyin or Tencent.”
The Three Kingdoms Battle: Different Paths to Survival
After three months of skirmishing, the strategies of the three giants have become increasingly distinct.
Alibaba has chosen to “burn money for market share.” In just two months, Taobao Flash Sale surpassed 60 million orders per day. Of the 50 billion yuan subsidy plan announced on July 2, merchant-side “zero or reduced commission” and “delivery subsidies” are core strategies.
Meituan leverages high-frequency traffic to expand instant retail. With a 70% market share in flash delivery, Meituan plans to expand storefronts and lightning warehouses to build the next-generation shopping experience for 1 billion users. Xiaoxiang Supermarket is set to roll out to all first- and second-tier cities.
JD focuses on quality and supply chain. The company announced that full-time couriers would receive full social insurance and housing fund benefits. Richard Liu personally delivered food to generate buzz. On June 17, JD completed the privatization of Dada Group to strengthen its logistics network.
Goldman Sachs estimates that platform losses may exceed 100 billion yuan in 2025 (approx. USD 13.8 billion / KRW 198 trillion), and the battle may continue until September. JP Morgan predicts that by 2026, Meituan’s market share will reach 72.8%, creating a “7:2:1” stable market structure.
After the Price War, Where Is the Industry Headed?
Regulators have stepped in to address the chaotic competition. In May 2025, the State Administration for Market Regulation, together with five other departments, summoned executives from Meituan, Ele.me, and JD, pointing out three major issues: predatory pricing disrupting market order, false advertising harming consumer rights, and overworked couriers posing safety risks.
The newly revised Anti-Unfair Competition Law, set to take effect in October, explicitly prohibits platforms from forcing exclusive cooperation with merchants and from abusing algorithmic dominance to squeeze profits. After the policy rollout, platform commission caps dropped from 22% to 18%, but some firms continue to evade regulations through “hidden deductions.”
Industry experts are calling for a healthier ecosystem. Analysts point to three key solutions: developing AI-driven dynamic pricing models; creating a profit-sharing structure that benefits platforms, couriers, and merchants alike; and advancing standardization in cold-chain logistics. Behind the free milk tea frenzy, the trillion-yuan battle over instant retail continues. As the milk tea in consumers’ fridges runs out, the bill for this capital feast is just beginning to print—and the ultimate payer may be the long-term health of the entire industry.
[Disclaimer]: The above content reflects analysis of publicly available information, expert insights, and BCC research. It does not constitute investment advice. BCC is not responsible for any losses resulting from reliance on the views expressed herein. Investors should exercise caution.