The fate of the little yellow cars: the difficulty of refunding the deposit becomes an "occupational disease" of the sharing family | company casino, bandar slot gacor

People's "grievance" against ofo's little yellow cars finally broke out.

Not long ago, users of ofo’s little yellow car queued up to refund their deposits, causing an uproar. Hundreds of users braved the severe cold and lined up for hundreds of meters downstairs at the Ofo headquarters in Beijing, collectively asking for deposits from Ofo. The scene was very "spectacular." Of course, these users are only a small part of the "large army" of deposit refunds. Those users who cannot go to Beijing to "go through the back door" can only wait in line online.

Currently, the number of users queuing up to refund their deposits in the Xiaohuangche APP has exceeded 10 million, and the total amount of deposits owed by Xiaohuangche has exceeded 1 billion yuan. Although the number of users who have refunded their deposits on the Xiaohuang Car APP has declined, the rate of decline is extremely slow. After several days of queuing for refunds, the number of users who have refunded their deposits online is still in the tens of millions. According to media statistics, if calculated at this refund rate, it would take Ofo three years to complete the refund of deposits for all users.

Nowadays, it has become a common knowledge that deposits on small yellow cars cannot be refunded.

Not only small yellow cars, the difficulty in getting the deposit back is an "occupational disease" of the sharing family

When it comes to sharing companies whose deposits are difficult to refund, yellow cars are not the only ones.

In September last year, Kuqi Bicycle experienced the same situation as ofo where the deposit was difficult to refund. When users on the Kuqi Bicycle platform apply for a deposit refund from the platform, the platform cannot successfully refund the user's deposit. Not only that, even the customer service phone number cannot be reached. In fact, the problem of deposits being difficult to refund is normal in the shared travel industry.

Recently, the car-sharing platform Tuge has also been involved in a controversy over the difficulty of refunding deposits. A large number of users complained to Beijing Tuge Technology Co., Ltd. on Weibo, Sina Black Cat and other platforms, saying that the 1,500 yuan deposit they paid on the Tuge platform could not be refunded normally, and some users' refunds have not been processed for up to three months. It should be noted that not only the shared travel industry, but also the entire sharing industry has experienced problems with deposits being difficult to refund.

For example, the clothing rental platform Doraemon was suspected of bankruptcy in November last year, and even its APP could not be used normally. Many users reported that the 300 yuan deposit stored in the APP was difficult to refund. In December last year, some media revealed that Doraemon still had at least 150 million yuan in deposits that had not yet been returned. Users have no choice but to take some worthless used clothes from the platform to minimize their losses.

The shared basketball platform "Zhu Le Ge Qiu" also reported closure this year. The basketball cabinets in some shared basketball courts were empty, and the official public account has been unattended for a long time. Many users complained on Weibo that the deposit and balance of "Zhu Le Ge Qiu" could not be refunded normally...

At this point, the difficulty in getting the deposit back is obviously not a problem of the Xiaohuangche sharing company, but a common problem in the entire sharing industry.This situation is caused by some sharing companies taking advantage of the regulatory loopholes in the deposit model to misappropriate user deposits without authorization.

The deposit model is a "risk control" measure for users by sharing companies. In order to prevent the company's shared products from being destroyed or stolen by users for no reason, it is understandable that sharing companies launch a deposit model. However, as the sharing industry has been exposed one after another with deposits being unable to be refunded, many users have seriously questioned the deposit model. They can't help but raise questions such as "Why are deposits difficult to refund?" and "Where have all our deposits gone?".

Where did the deposit go?

The reason why deposits are difficult to refund in the sharing industry is mainly due to the fact that companies are "short of cash" and have to misappropriate user deposits "for emergency relief".

At present, sharing companies are all asset-heavy models, and their product costs and related operating costs are very high. Taking shared cars as an example, the price of purchasing a new energy car is between tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands, which is extremely expensive. The cost of car parking spaces and related site rentals is also a large sum of money. This is not over yet. Add in the expenses of vehicle maintenance, repairs, and platform operations, and the financial pressure that companies must bear is evident.

Based on common sense, if a company reinvests, it needs a relatively high profit return to maintain its long-term stable development. However, from the current point of view, the profit model of most sharing companies is not yet perfect, and investment and return are not directly proportional.

For example, the hourly rental price of shared cars is generally between 10 yuan and 20 yuan. Due to the heavy investment in the early stage, it is obviously difficult for shared car companies that rely on rentals to make back their capital in a short period of time, and it is also quite "difficult" to make a profit.

The same goes for the shared power bank industry and the shared bicycle industry, which also invest a lot in the production, maintenance, repair and platform operation of products. Moreover, the price of shared power banks and shared bicycles is generally one yuan per use, and the profits are really not high. Coupled with other factors such as market competition, many sharing companies are constantly spending money to subsidize users while expanding their business scope, and they have started a "price war" with each other, which has significantly reduced the company's income. In other words, many sharing companies are engaged in the business of "losing money and making money".

Under this situation, many sharing companies are unable to make ends meet, which will bring huge losses to these companies over time. In order to maintain the normal operation of the company and fill in the big holes, many sharing companies misappropriated user deposits and "never returned". Under the trend of "sharing economy", companies misappropriate user deposits to maintain normal operations of the company, and at the same time, they also gain the favor of a lot of capital.

As a result, some sharing companies use users' money to continue to expand the market, increase the production of shared products, and promote the company. On the surface, they are living a very "glorious" life. However, the truth is false. Under the glamorous appearance, companies are racking their brains to find ways to make profits.

Of course, paper cannot always cover the fire. Once a large number of users refund their deposits, and the company does not have extra funds to refund users' deposits, then the company's misappropriation of deposits will be exposed, which will bring a huge blow to the company.

LetterIf any crisis comes, the sharing industry will fall into a "tide of withdrawals"

Currently, as some sharing companies have frequently been exposed to problems such as misappropriation of deposits, business closures, and difficulty in refunding, the public has many complaints about the prepaid deposit model of the sharing industry. With the fermentation of the yellow car incident, people's trust in the sharing industry has reached a certain freezing point.

On December 6, 2018, a report released by the China Consumers Association and Baidu showed that the number of complaints about the sharing economy showed an upward trend in 2018. In the fields of shared bicycles, shared cars and shared power banks, which are the most representative areas of the sharing economy, shared bicycles accounted for the largest number of complaints, reaching 67.5%; followed by shared car complaints, which accounted for 21.8%; and shared power bank complaints, which accounted for 10.9%. Among all complaints, the most common one is the issue of "deposit cannot be refunded".

"It is difficult to get the deposit back, but it is difficult to reach the sky." Nowadays, as more and more companies are exposed to the fact that deposits are difficult to refund, users lack trust in the deposit model of the sharing industry, and many people say they are hesitant to pay deposits. Some users even refunded all their deposits from Mobike, Hellobike and even shared power bank after the incident involving the yellow bikes. Coupled with the increasing number of public complaints against the sharing economy this year, some predict that if this momentum develops, the sharing industry may enter a "wave of withdrawals."

As for whether the "deposit wave" will really come, it is still unclear. However, what is certain is that the current sharing industry has fallen into a crisis of trust in which the masses "change sides". I would like to ask, among the sharing companies surviving today, how many sharing companies have not misappropriated user deposits? Who can guarantee not to become the next little yellow car?

Losing public support, the deposit model in the sharing industry needs to be "cured"

Nowadays, the difficulty of refunding deposits has become a common problem in the sharing industry, and the "inaccuracy" of the deposit model in the sharing industry is the root of all evil.

As we all know, the deposit model first appeared in the leasing industry. For example, a deposit is required for hotel accommodation, a deposit is required for renting a car to travel, and a deposit is also required for renting a TV. The launch of the deposit model is undoubtedly to protect the interests of the company and prevent rental products from being damaged or stolen by customers. This is similar to the sharing industry.

But the difference is that the deposit model in the leasing industry is instant return, which means that when the customer returns the rental product, the company will immediately return the deposit to the user. This is not the case in the sharing industry. When users finish using and return shared products, the deposit will not be automatically returned to the user. Instead, the user needs to apply for a refund of the deposit online, and the deposit usually takes 3 days, 7 days or more to be returned to the user, which is extremely inconvenient.

But whether it is shared bicycles, shared power banks or shared umbrellas, users use them more frequently. Out of inertia and trust in sharing companies, many users choose not to refund their deposits for the time being, leaving the money in the "wallet" of the sharing company. As mentioned above, in order to operate better, some sharing companies cannot withstand the "temptation" and eventually embark on the road of "misappropriating deposits". Companies that take this road will face disaster if they are not careful. Therefore, for the sake of users and the company itself, share the company’s depositIt’s time for a change in the paradigm.

On the one hand, sharing companies can cooperate with third-party institutions to keep user deposits in the hands of third parties instead of managing them themselves. Moreover, enterprises can add automatic refund functions, and the platform can make judgments based on the actual situation of users, making it more convenient and faster for users to apply for refunds. In other words, when users use up shared items, they can receive the deposit they paid, reducing the difficulty for users to return their deposits.

On the other hand, the "deposit-free model" is launched. The deposit-free model is the so-called "credit + deposit-free". As long as the user's credit points reach the value specified by the company, they can enjoy the right to use shared products without deposit.

Since the deposit-free model is linked to user credit, if a user defaults, his credit score will be reduced accordingly, which will affect the user's use of related shared products. Therefore, the deposit-free model can effectively constrain user behavior and gradually form a virtuous cycle. More importantly, the deposit-free model can not only fully eliminate user concerns, but also attract more potential users to use shared products and bring more traffic to the enterprise, which can be said to be a multi-purpose solution.

Summary

With the emergence of "deposits that are difficult to refund" on sharing platforms such as ofo and Tuge, the public has triggered a crisis of trust in the sharing industry, and the entire sharing industry has become in danger. However, looking at it from another perspective, this may also be an opportunity for the sharing industry to correct the unhealthy trend of misappropriating user deposits and move towards a normal development track. As long as sharing companies can truly consider users and provide more convenient and faster deposit refund methods and deposit-free models to re-establish users' trust in the sharing industry, then the sharing industry will usher in a new starting point.