How did the ＂sharing economy＂ degenerate into a ＂sharing assassin＂？

　　Want to know the trends, policies, information, cases and methods related to urban renewal? Please pay attention to "Shanghai Urban Renewal" WeChat official account!

　　-The text is 3,500 words in total, and the reading time is expected to be 4 minutes.

　　Recently, a talk show actor spoke about the price increase of the shared charging treasure in the program. "The thermal power was once 39 cents, the wind power was once 46 cents, and the shared charging treasure was 5 volts and 10,000 milliamps with 0.05 kWh, but it charged 4 yuan for an hour. I used its electricity and it sucked my blood."

　　After the broadcast of the program, the topic of sharing economic price increases rushed to the hot search, and many netizens said that they had the same experience. 1.5 yuan, bike-sharing can only ride for 15 minutes, which is more expensive than the bus. The shared charging treasure near some scenic spots, 8 yuan/hour, will be less than 10 yuan after a little charge. I vaguely remember that at the beginning of the sharing economy, bike-sharing and the shared charging treasure could be used for free within half an hour. Now the price increase for several times in a row is really unacceptable.

　　Sharing economy was once called the "four new inventions" in China. In 2015, with the blessing of capital, China entered the sharing economy society. For a time, everything can be shared, from bicycles to cars, from umbrellas to basketball. But now that eight years have passed, the road to profit from the sharing economy has never worked, and the two listed companies that were born are also teetering. Then, why does the sharing economy become a "sharing assassin"?

　　1. More and more expensive sharing economy

　　"Is it so expensive to rent a shared charging treasure? I really don't understand. " Ms. Li complained, "I used the shared charging treasure six times this month, once I was detained by 70 yuan, and once I didn't return it. The expenses add up to the parking fee."

　　Mr. Chen, who lives in Baoshan District, Shanghai, feels the same way. "Because of the nature of my work, I often use the shared charging treasure. I have to say that the price of the shared charging treasure is too expensive now."

　　It is understood that the well-known brands of shared charging treasure in the market, such as charging, small electricity, street electricity, Meituan, and incoming calls, are all increasing in price. The cheapest one in first-tier cities should start in 3 yuan, and if it is in scenic spots or business districts, it is often in 6 yuan or 10 yuan. Some charging treasure merchants have also played tricks on the price tag, not writing the hourly price, but writing 0.5 hours or 30 minutes.

　　I remember two years ago, the starting price of shared charging treasure was basically 1 yuan or 1.5 yuan per hour. In contrast, today's price has tripled or tripled.

　　Coincidentally, the price in bike-sharing is also rising gradually. This year, prices have generally increased in bike-sharing industries. According to the earlier announcement, the bicycle price of Meituan increased as scheduled. The prices of 7-day, 30-day and 90-day unlimited cycling cards were raised from 10 yuan, 25 yuan and 60 yuan to 15 yuan, 35 yuan and 90 yuan, respectively, with an increase of 40%~50%.

　　Hello Bike Ride Package will be extended to 15 yuan in 7 days, and to 35 yuan in 30 days, with a single starting price of 2 yuan per hour. The starting prices of other brands in bike-sharing are almost all adjusted, and the price increase is around 50%. For a time, remarks such as "sharing economy is uneconomical" and "sharing economy becomes sharing assassin" were rampant.

　　Forget the price increase, but the service of sharing economy is getting worse and worse, which makes consumers more unbalanced.

　　"I rented a charging treasure before, and I didn't find the return point of the brand near my home, so I was forced to buy it." Ms. Li told the author. In fact, it's not a case that the charging treasure can't be returned. There was a news this summer. In Shanghai Disneyland Park, tourists rented the charging treasure, but they couldn't return it. They were so angry that they threw the charging treasure on the spot.

　　In order to solve this problem, some people on the Internet claim to be the replenisher of the shared charging treasure. Their job is to visit various outlets. As soon as there is a vacancy, they will make it up, which means that everyone will not be able to make it up, sell it at a high price in disguise, and then the manufacturers and franchisees will share it. I have to say, this operation is really confusing.

　　In addition, the problem of sharing charging treasure "charging can't keep up with the speed of power failure" has also touched many consumer minefields. Some time ago, some netizens said that they used up all the power of the shared charging treasure. As a result, the mobile phone only charged 30% of the power. Even if applications such as video and navigation were turned on, the charging speed could not keep up with the power failure.

　　Through consulting the data, it is found that this is mainly the reason for the decline of the performance of shared charging treasure. The shared charging treasure itself is not a durable consumer product. Under the high-intensity use of users, its battery will accelerate its decay, so there is a situation of insufficient charge.

　　Generally speaking, the charging treasure products of well-known brands often provide cycle life of 500 to 600 times, while the charging treasure of miscellaneous brands can basically provide 300 times. That is to say, in the future, it is very likely that more and more users will experience a decline due to performance degradation.

　　On the complaint of black cats, consumers are deeply resentful of the shared charging treasure, and the related complaint information has accumulated more than 110,000. The problems focus on the unreasonable charges of the shared charging treasure, high fees and inaccurate map navigation.

　　Like the shared charging treasure, bike-sharing has frequent problems. Many users reported that there were some problems in bike-sharing, such as inaccurate return points, frequent breakdowns, bugs in charging standards, and poor riding experience. Some netizens even said, "bike-sharing is neither economical nor affordable, so it is better to take a bus."

　　There were ice cream assassins and yogurt assassins before, followed by charging treasure assassins and bicycle assassins. I really have to sigh that it is really too difficult for consumers to keep their wallets this year!

　　2. Why did you become a "shared assassin"?

　　So, what makes the sharing economy become a "sharing assassin" openly?

　　In fact, the main reason why the sharing economy has changed its face is that the profit problem of the sharing economy has never been solved, and the sharing enterprises have to raise prices because of their livelihood.

　　The business model of sharing economy is too heavy, and laying offline requires a lot of cost. Take the shared charging treasure as an example, its operating cost includes equipment cost, site cost, operation and maintenance, management and so on. According to the latest quarterly financial report data of Monster Technology, its marketing, sales and management expenses have accounted for 96.2% of the total operating income.

　　Bike-sharing's hardware cost and operation and maintenance cost should not be underestimated. Take Hellobike as an example. The daily operation and maintenance cost of a bicycle is 0.3 yuan, and the daily depreciation cost of each vehicle is 0.6 yuan. A bicycle spends about 400 yuan on operation and maintenance and depreciation every year.

　　While the cost remains high, the profit model of the sharing economy is very simple, mainly based on rental services. Moreover, the sharing economy generally fought a "price war" in the early stage, which led to a general loss of sharing enterprises in China.

　　According to the financial reports and prospectuses of various companies, in 2022, the operating losses of the "new business" section where Meituan includes bike-sharing and charging treasure business reached 28.4 billion yuan.

　　According to the prospectus disclosed by Hellobike in 2021, from 2018 to 2020, Hellobike accumulated a loss of about 4.8 billion yuan; In the first quarter of 2023, Didi's other business income, including green orange bicycles, lost 9 billion yuan.

　　Shanghai Industrial Transformation and Development Research Institute provides innovative, one-stop, modular and comprehensive services such as planning, industrial positioning, spatial adjustment, operation planning, project introduction, enterprise consultation, resource docking, index release and training inspection for governments, parks and enterprises at all levels in industrial transformation and urban renewal.

　　If you need business cooperation and consultation, please contact: 15821900331 (Mr. Fu).

　　In the past, the sharing economy still had capital for blood transfusion, and the structural contradiction caused by heavy investment and light income was not obvious, but now the "cooling down" on the capital side has become a sharp blade hanging over the sharing economy.

　　In 2017, the number of investment and financing in China's sharing economy industry reached 275, and the amount of investment and financing reached 219.786 billion yuan. From Alibaba, Tencent, Jingwei Venture Capital, Temasek and DST, to state-owned background investors such as Guoxin Science and Technology Fund and China Investment Corporation, they all participate in sharing economic investment.

　　In 2018, the number and amount of investment and financing showed a downward trend. By 2021, the number of investment and financing in China's sharing economy industry was only 24, and the amount of investment and financing was also reduced to 45.679 billion yuan.

　　The expected rise did not come as scheduled, capital is accelerating its exit, and the sharing economy has no fixed core technology and solid commercial barriers. With the increase of operating costs, the price increase is natural.

　　At present, the shared charging treasure platform forced by livelihood has begun to change from direct operation mode to agency mode. Manufacturers no longer have complete pricing power, and manufacturers, agents and merchants contain each other and rely on each other. The "profit sharing" model has directly aggravated the chaos of price increases.

　　From the darling of capital in the past to the embattled today, why does the sharing economy not work?

　　3. Where is the future of the sharing economy?

　　In fact, the life of the entire sharing economy is not easy.

　　The monster charging listed under the title of "the first share of shared charging treasure" has been listed for more than 2 years, and it was only in the first quarter of this year that it turned a profit and earned a small profit. In terms of stock price, the performance of monster charging is not satisfactory. As of July 28th, the share price of Monster Charging was reported at $0.986, which was far from the highest $10 after listing.

　　The original founder of ofo, Dai, did not even refund the deposit of 16 million people. After owing 1.5 billion, he started a coffee business in the United States.

　　Not only sharing charging treasure and bike-sharing, but also other sharing economy industries are "struggling for survival". For example, after sharing offices, wardrobes and car scenery, there is only one chicken feather left.

　　In fact, the crux of this is that the sharing economy, a business model, does not seem to have the long-term commercial ability to make money continuously in essence. However, in order to prop up the valuation in China, the sharing economic model of "efficient allocation of idle resources in stock" has been shifted to a new leasing economic model of "increasing resources for sharing".

　　The original intention of sharing economy means that individuals or institutions with idle resources transfer the right to use resources to others. In this process, the transferor can get economic returns from it, while the demanders can get the right to use resources at a lower price, thus achieving a "win-win" situation.

　　The core of the sharing economy is the exchange of idle resources, and the lower price is the core advantage that the sharing model can "crowd out" other economic models. In 2008, swept by the financial crisis, Airbnb and uber were established in that year and 2009 respectively, becoming the ancestors of the sharing economy.

　　But in China in 2015, the sharing economy began to go astray. Many enterprises under the banner of "sharing" do not focus on how to "revitalize the stock", but simply and rudely rely on hot money to "burn out the increment" to quickly occupy the market.

　　In this process, companies that practice leasing hang up the signboard of "sharing economy" and tell a series of beautiful and sexy stories to capital. Whether it is bike-sharing or shared charging treasure, they have become a "short-term rental economy" mode with heavy investment and burning money. The supply of these equipments does not come from people's idle goods, but from the company's centralized procurement and unified delivery.

　　However, the income based on leasing can't support the normal operation of the sharing enterprise after all. In order to prolong the life of the company, the bosses of the sharing economy try their best to open up a second curve.

　　Take Hello APP in bike-sharing as an example, it turns traffic into advertising business. Now, when you open Hello APP, you will find that in addition to travel services, Hello APP has also launched many businesses such as games, socializing, borrowing money, blind date, pet trading and so on.

　　Monster charging is also trying to expand its diversified income. At present, Monster Charging has three revenue sources: shared charging, charging treasure sales, advertising service and new business. In Q1 this year, these three businesses achieved revenue of 794 million, 18.6 million and 9.8 million respectively. The growth rate of the latter two businesses reached 43.7% and 52.8% year-on-year.

　　Although the second curve of these sharing enterprises has achieved meager revenue, in general, this kind of products is a tool for consumers to use up and leave, and users stay on the relevant pages for a short time. It seems very difficult to achieve a big leap in the existing consumption path.

　　According to the industry research report of iResearch, the annual data performance in 2022 tends to be conservative, and the industry scale is 10 billion. By 2023, with the steady recovery of residents' economic activities such as production and life, the industry boom will warm up, and the industry capacity is expected to increase to nearly 17 billion, and it will exceed 70 billion in 2028. In China, the sharing economy still shows great development resilience and potential.

　　In fact, it is not a good idea to increase prices. These sharing economy companies can also take measures such as reducing the cost of delivery and operation, exploring overseas markets, increasing the frequency of customer use, and developing value-added services and innovative income to achieve profitability. The key point is to find a balance between cost and price, eliminate the psychological gap of users, and return the sharing economy to a green and healthy development track.

　　Source: Chief Business Review, by Que Ning.

　　Editor: Zhan Xiaodong

　　Audit: Xia Yu

　　What are the "new ways of playing" in Shanghai's business this year?

　　8-2

　　????????? ?????????

　　Snack shops are like "a spring breeze comes overnight". Is it a recovery or a downgrade of consumption?

　　8-1

　　?? ??