Recently, the strategic differences between Meituan and Alibaba in the field of on-demand food delivery have sparked widespread discussion within the industry. The two giants' understanding and layout of this emerging market show a starkly different approach.

Meituan views the flash delivery service as a series of independent regional markets, believing that the hard cost per delivery is around 6-7 yuan, making it difficult to achieve economies of scale. They emphasize the importance of high-value orders and advocate for increasing the unit price to cover the high delivery costs. Meituan believes that low-priced orders struggle to balance costs, which may lead to merchant dissatisfaction. To ensure quality service, Meituan chooses to subsidize couriers per head to maintain the stability of the core delivery team.

In stark contrast, Alibaba firmly believes that economies of scale are equally applicable in the field of on-demand food delivery. Their strategy is to rapidly increase order volume, reduce costs through scale advantages, and thereby promote healthy development on both the delivery and merchant sides. Alibaba does not insist on pursuing high-priced, high-quality services but welcomes orders at various price points. Based on this philosophy, they adopt a model of subsidizing delivery workers based on order quantity, rather than the traditional headcount subsidy.

The two companies have significant differences in their forecasts for the market outlook. Meituan estimates that by 2030, the scale of the takeout flash purchase market will reach 2 trillion yuan. However, Alibaba's expectations are more optimistic, predicting that the market size could reach 4 trillion yuan. This difference in forecasts directly impacts both parties' investment strategies and resource allocation.

This strategic divergence is reminiscent of the different paths taken by JD.com and Taobao in the e-commerce sector. Meituan tends to position its food delivery and flash purchase services as high-value, high-quality boutique offerings, while Alibaba bets on achieving cost optimization through economies of scale, pursuing broader market coverage while ensuring basic service quality.

As competition deepens, which strategy will ultimately prevail in this rapidly evolving market remains to be seen. In any case, consumers are likely to benefit from this competition and enjoy more diversified and convenient takeout flash shopping services.