The public fight between Mobike and ofo, and the innovation of Zhihu Live

Long story short, today’s post is an attempt. In the future, we would like to extract some more valuable media opinion excerpts from various technology media and Internet-related self-media on a daily basis, and share them with you after summarizing them, hoping to help you better understand the major events that happened in the industry in a day.

Today we will mainly focus on two things: the bickering rivalry between Mobike and ofo, and Zhihu Live’s seven-day no-reason refund policy .

The following is the main text

1. Mobike and ofo are a pair of happy enemies

Last weekend , Mobike and ofo caused trouble again . April 22 was supposed to be the first anniversary of Mobike's entry into urban operations , but on the morning of that day, ofo, a competitor of Mobike, hurriedly announced that it had received a strategic investment in the D+ round from Ant Financial . The reason why it was so urgent was that some media reported that ofo's relevant financing procedures had not yet been completed. It was inevitable that the announcement was deliberate to take place before Mobike’s anniversary celebration.

In the afternoon, when Mobike held its anniversary celebration, ofo sent an ambiguous blessing on Weibo, trying to make its presence felt: Happy birthday! Thank you for growing together over the past year. I was very lonely without you in that year!

The implication is obvious: we ofo were born earlier than you Mobike, and according to seniority, you should call us big brother. Plus the text on the poster: On June 16, 2015, ofo pioneered the dockless shared bicycle model; ofo, the originator and leader of shared bicycles. It also tried its best to show off its arrogance as a leader in the shared bicycle field, but at the same time, it also seemed quite sour.

Being publicly cueed by its competitor, Mobike was not willing to be outdone. 20 minutes later, Mobike responded on Weibo: Thank you for the blessing! That year, we were very pleased to see you following our steps, stepping out of the ivory tower, and learning from us to work hard on developing electronic locks and high-quality vehicles.

Afterwards, it posted another message expressing gratitude for the blessings. This time the poster with the picture was even more harsh than ofo's, and it directly hit ofo's sore spot: the mechanical combination lock whose password cannot be changed.

In fact, the competition between Mobike and ofo has always existed. When it comes to policy, both sides are always making innuendos. In its previous response to Beijing's new bicycle policy, Mobike pointed its finger at ofo, saying: It calls on relevant government departments to force all companies in the industry to immediately recall and destroy all shared bicycles that do not have satellite positioning functions.

The lack of satellite positioning function is another major pain point and hidden danger of ofo. Mobike actually used this to defeat ofo in terms of policy. Ofo must be hating it to the core.

In the article "One Year after Mobike's City Operations, ofo Presents a "Generous Gift"," the author @周路平 also sorted out for us the secret rivalry between these two happy enemies from the perspectives of operating strategy, financing rhythm, and industry status.

1. Operation strategy. At the beginning of this year, ofo and Mobike announced that riding would be free, which marked the beginning of the money-burning of shared bicycles, and this burning continued for a month. In actual operations, it is common to see people surrounding each other's bicycles in order to compete for advantageous positions.

2. Industry status. If everyone was fighting for survival in the early days, now that the problem of survival has been solved, both sides are focusing more on their status in the industry. There has always been a dispute over who created the dockless shared bicycle model and who is the pioneer and leader in the shared bicycle field, and both sides have their own reasons. Ofo can say that it had already been launched on the Peking University campus in June 2015, and Mobike can say that it was the first to adopt smart locks and add positioning functions. In short, everyone has their own reasons.

3. Financing rhythm. The financing reports of both parties always show a trend of chasing each other. As long as one party announces the financing first, the other party will usually disclose a new round of financing within a week. At present, Mobike has already raised funds in its D round, and ofo has announced that it has received a strategic investment in its D+ round from Ant Financial.

Earlier, Tencent invested in Mobike and carried out large-scale traffic diversion to Mobike through WeChat . Now, Alibaba has also joined the capital war for shared bicycles, which is bound to trigger more intense competition. Regarding what Tencent and Alibaba 's investment in shared bicycles means, major media commentators have expressed their views from different perspectives.

In the article "In the Bicycle War, "Internet Companies Want to Defeat Each Other", author Zhu Xiaopei pointed out that the intentions of Tencent and Alibaba in the matter of shared bicycles are becoming increasingly clear:

Alibaba (Ant)’s layout in bicycles can utilize and improve Ant’s Sesame Credit . Faced with Ant’s layout, how can Tencent be willing to sit back and watch it develop? Moreover, Tencent’s promotion of Mobike can achieve three goals at one stroke: mini program , WeChat payment , and internationalization.

The author @王新喜also believes that there are certain benefits to ofo’s cooperation with Alibaba. Ant Financial's user platform, payment users and credit system can enhance ofo's competitiveness. Ofo's bicycle usage data can also help Ant Financial expand its credit data and improve its credit reporting system.

But the author @王新喜said in "Tencent and Alibaba have already entered the game: Is the wind direction in the shared bicycle battlefield changing? 》This article raises another key point: offline payment scenarios. The author believes:

Investment in shared bicycles can further enrich offline payment scenarios. With the rapid growth in the number of shared bicycle users and the number of bicycles put into use, Tencent and Alibaba have to invest in the market to expand offline payment scenarios.

Regarding a change in the gameplay of the shared bicycle battlefield, the author mentioned that this change may be a shift from shared bicycle companies subsidizing users to Alipay and WeChat starting to subsidize users' riding activities:

For ofo, the most important significance is to solve the deposit problem by introducing users' Sesame Credit. When users' Sesame Credit reaches a certain score, they can "unlock" the bicycles without paying a deposit, which lowers the threshold for users to use the bicycles and may play a certain positive role in attracting users. In other words, it may drive shared bicycles to transform into a "credit model" without deposit.

Once the era of no deposit comes, the pressure of cost investment will increase, posing a test to the cash flow and profitability of shared bicycle companies. In the second half of the year, simply continuing to build and invest in bicycles may no longer work. From the current perspective, Mobike and ofo have already tried out their recharge rebate activities, free rides, no deposit required, red envelope cars, red envelope zones and other gameplay. With the entry of Alibaba and Tencent, competing in capital, supply chain, scale, market share, entry points and subsidies will become the norm.

Regarding the view that the way shared bikes are played will change after the entry of Internet giants, @孟永辉, the author of the article "How can shared bikes be "better shared" as giants rush in and the direction is unclear", also expressed his approval. The author compared the current shared bike market with the previous battle between Didi and Kuaidi, and believed that:

Capital first joined the battle for shared travel . As capital died down, Internet giants began to join in, followed by a payment war among Internet giants. The development logic of shared bicycles is actually somewhat similar to that of shared travel. With the participation of Internet giants, the next stage of the shared bicycle war may begin to see a payment war. That is, Internet giants enrich their payment scenarios by allowing users to bind their respective third-party payment accounts, allowing users to live more of their lives on their platforms.

The participation of Internet giants will undoubtedly bring about greater adjustments to the shared bicycle platform. The battle between shared bicycles will also shift from the current shared bicycle deployment to third-party payment:

Internet giants represented by Tencent and Alibaba have joined the battle of shared bicycles. This shows from another perspective that the development of shared bicycles driven by capital has come to an end and a new stage of development will begin. In the future, new adjustments and competition represented by third-party payment, smart technology applications, and big data applications will be fully launched, and the competition among shared bicycles will become more in-depth.

Change means there is opportunity. Regarding Mobike and ofo, the most popular speculation is undoubtedly who will defeat whom in the end? Will there be a merger? When will the merger take place?

Many people believe that there will definitely be a merger and it won’t take too long. Didi and Uber, Ganji and 58 in the past, burned much more money than the bicycle companies, and their fights were even more fierce. In the end, didn’t they still have to merge?

According to a survey conducted by Caixin reporters, there is no possibility of a merger between Mobike and ofo, at least in the short term. In addition to expanding their own market share, the two companies will also merge small and medium-sized players in the market.

In short, the competition for capital has injected new strength into shared bicycles. In the short term, both sides should continue to work hard to crush their opponents in all aspects. Maybe in the end both sides will be destroyed, or maybe they will shake hands and make peace. Let's wait and see what happens.

2. Zhihu Live: Seven-day no-reason refund

On the afternoon of April 24, Zhihu Live, which had been online for 11 months, held an online press conference and announced product upgrades. It launched four platform policies: " providing seven-day no-reason refunds, providing traffic subsidies, upgrading the evaluation system, and providing more efficient copyright services ." The most popular one is “ 7-day no-reason refund ”. The details are as follows:

In order to solve the pain point of "buying a Live and finding that it does not meet your expectations", Zhihu platform supports users to purchase a Live and within 7 days after the Live ends, if they have not listened to more than 15 voice messages, they can choose a refund without reason, and the voice messages before the start of the Live will not be counted in the 15 messages.

Regarding this matter, some technology accounts have published articles to follow the hot topics, such as "The average hourly wage of the speakers exceeds 11,000 yuan, and Zhihu Live has launched a 7-day no-reason refund mechanism on its 1st anniversary" published by an author signed by @赵东山in Chuangye Magazine, "Zhihu Live also supports 7-day no-reason returns" published by @手机互联网in Tencent Technology , and "Zhihu Live supports 7-day no-reason returns, but there is a prerequisite" published by an author signed by @李帅飞in iFanr, etc.

At the same time, the number of views on the Zhihu platform regarding the question " How do you evaluate the new refund policy of Zhihu Live ?" has reached about 55,000. Looking through everyone's answers, overall, everyone's opinions are still very clear, and some people support Zhihu Live. for example:

@陈沦: Zhihu is still the first to take the lead. Must give a thumbs up! This is also a prerequisite for the healthy development of the content payment market. We look forward to more survival of the fittest and truly producing good content, rather than relying on sensationalism to attract attention and pay IQ tax.

There are also those who remain neutral. for example:

@李石: I have a neutral view on this policy. If it is good, it will be rebirth from the ashes. If it is bad, it will be playing with fire and getting burned. The good thing is that it can be reverse filtered, which is good for both sharers and learners. The bad thing is that there are more and more sharing platforms. If the product team does not invest more resources in operations and subsidies, the product will die out precipitously.

So what impact will Zhihu Live’s “7-day unconditional refund” have on the users and speakers at the Vortex Center? What is the reason behind it? Let’s look at them one by one:

1. What impact will it have on the users and speakers of the Vortex Center?

@张小鱼of Hedgehog Commune published an article titled "Zhihu Live also supports 7-day no-reason returns, is this learning e-commerce ? 》 mentioned the current situation of conflict of interest between speakers and listeners. In this regard, users and related self-media people expressed their views:

From the perspective of listening users, some users support and think that the "7-day no-questions-asked refund" service will attract them to "buy more and listen to more", especially for topics that they were hesitant about before. However, some users also said that the refund policy has little impact on their purchasing behavior, because "if I buy too much, I won't have time to listen."

Judging from the speakers, most people expressed disapproval, which can be divided into the following three aspects:

• This move is too rough and feels a bit "one size fits all";
• It makes it more difficult to distribute the live content of the speaker. I don’t know how to distribute the content before and after 15 items.
• A live broadcast may only have about 20 comments. If users choose to refund when they have almost finished listening to the live broadcast, it will harm the interests of the speaker.

In an interview with @望月, a self-media person who has purchased 10 Live accounts on Zhihu, his thoughts on this are:

The refund policy "may scare away some brainless fans". This measure can protect the rights and interests of users and prevent users from paying IQ tax for fame or gimmicks. It also puts higher requirements on the speakers. The speakers must pay attention to the quality of the content, otherwise they will face refunds. "It is also about returning knowledge payment to knowledge itself, rather than curiosity and celebrity effects."

Overall, this policy has more advantages than disadvantages for users, because judging from the current quality of Zhihu Live, the proportion of poor quality is still greater than that of high quality. Many old and new users have labeled Zhihu Live as "collecting IQ tax" due to the uneven quality. This scenario is somewhat similar to the "fakes" on Taobao . This policy shows that refunds are a very simple thing. On the one hand, it can win back lost users. On the other hand, high-quality content can drive the payment weight of existing users, which is equivalent to taking a "peace of mind pill".

For Live speakers, they may feel a little "awkward" at first. For example, in the article "Zhihu Live has been around for a year, and it has started to support a "seven-day no-reason" refund service" published by Geek Park author @江湖边, Wei Wei, a gastroenterologist at Dingxiang Clinic with more than 10 years of clinical experience, said, "I can see that a wave of embarrassment is waiting for me ahead." However, as adaptability increases, this can drive out low-quality Live speakers and enhance the enthusiasm of high-quality speakers, thereby ensuring the healthy development of the entire Live ecosystem. Ultimately, for high-quality speakers, the benefits outweigh the disadvantages.

2. Why did Zhihu Live launch the "7-day unconditional refund" policy?

In "Zhihu Live also supports 7-day no-reason returns, is this learning e-commerce? In this article, the author @张小鱼interviewed relevant persons in charge and made relevant interpretations:

• No prepayment for trial listening, unfair terms have become the industry's default rule: Zhihu Live launched the "7-day no-reason refund" function, which should be regarded as the first time that a domestic knowledge-based paid product has provided a refund service.
• Survival of the fittest, let the market decide: We want to create a knowledge market, make information more transparent, and help improve the average quality of content.
• Is there a conflict of interest? Let’s stand on the side of consumers first: “7-day no-reason refund” provides a market-based constraint on the quality of speakers. Zhihu Live builds a market for paid knowledge. In a well-functioning market mechanism, the satisfaction of user interests and the protection of the interests of speakers complement each other.

• To highlight high-quality content, the supporting mechanism should be more rigorous: The upgraded Zhihu Live will be closer to the real market status, and corresponding anti-cheating rules will be formulated to ensure that truly high-quality content can receive corresponding promotional resources and audience recognition, allowing good speakers to obtain more benefits.

In addition, the author @江湖边explained the following three reasons from a commercial perspective in the article "Zhihu Live has been around for a year and it has started to support a "seven-day no-reason" refund service":

In general, Zhihu has begun to treat "knowledge trading" as a market transaction:

• It has accelerated its commercialization pace and often presents itself as a "platform service provider."
• Zhihu Live is still building a community ecosystem.
• If knowledge payment is to develop over the long term, there must be sufficiently good tools on the supply side.

In summary, the launch of "7-day unconditional refund" by Zhihu Live is an important step in the pursuit of commercialization, as Zhihu co-founder Li Shenshen said:

Zhihu is a knowledge-based social platform. Live is an important part of the entire ecosystem that grows on the Zhihu community. “We want to create a market-oriented platform that meets different expectations and usage scenarios, and continue to refine the market mechanism to make the circulation and matching of content more efficient and fair, so that users with needs and knowledge workers who can provide services can be truly matched and connected, thereby extending more value.”

If you still remember, in the second half of 2016, Luke Hou, co-founder of Sanjieke, published an article titled "Effective Allocation and Commercialization of Scarce Community Resources from Zhihu Live". Looking back now, some of the ideas in the article coincide with those of Li Shenshen, co-founder of Zhihu:

I think a community is mainly made up of two factors: content + relationships.

The supply capacity of a community’s scarce resources determines its ability to survive. Any community is like a social ecosystem. It has redundant resources as well as relatively scarce resources. I once said, "There is society in the community." A key point in the success or failure of a community is whether it can mobilize the enthusiasm of core scarce resources and effectively supply scarce resources to the public.

Looking back now, Zhihu's path to commercialization is more determined than we thought, even though it has received investment from Tencent. In fact, Zhihu is trying to combine the two things into one consideration. Therefore, my judgment is that the success of Zhihu Live does not depend on its product form and technical capabilities, but on its operational capabilities and the results after the "required actions" of the operation are completed.

The Zhihu product has entered the stage of strong operation, and operation is nothing more than the operation of high-quality content and high-quality experts (operation of content or people). If we regard Zhihu columns as the integration and operation of high-quality content, then Zhihu Lvie is the operation of high-quality experts.

In general, Zhihu’s goal is to build a “knowledge service market” that will not only become a high-quality information platform for cognitive surplus, but also the infrastructure of the knowledge economy. We are committed to establishing a series of market mechanisms around "knowledge supply and demand" so that knowledge suppliers can benefit from it. From now on, Zhihu Live is still very determined in this regard, and we look forward to the changes in Zhihu Live under the new policy. (over)

PS: As mentioned earlier, today's article is an attempt. In the future, we would like to extract some more valuable media opinion excerpts from various technology media and Internet-related self-media on a daily basis, and share them with you after summarizing them, hoping to help you better understand the major events that happened in the industry in a day.

Mobile application product promotion service: APP promotion service Qinggua Media advertising

The author of this article @三节课 is compiled and published by (Qinggua Media). Please indicate the author information and source when reprinting! Site Map