Fourteen years ago, MEITUAN-W won the group buying war precisely by offering "expired refunds." This current crisis directly undermines or even overturns user trust in the "automatic refund upon expiry" promise.
"Group buying vouchers I accumulated from 2014 to 2019 - I only recently discovered they never received automatic refunds."
In recent days, numerous users have reported that their accumulated group buying vouchers on MEITUAN-W failed to receive automatic refunds as promised. Some order statuses show "refund successful" or "under MEITUAN-W review," but the actual funds never reached their payment accounts.
The news quickly topped trending topics, causing considerable alarm among consumers. On social media platforms, complaints about "missing refunds" are everywhere, with MEITUAN-W's refund controversy rapidly evolving into a large-scale dispute with conflicting accounts.
"This is really difficult to verify! You need to reconcile account by account. After all, I bought so many small items and frequently use MEITUAN-W for food delivery. Who would have thought such a major platform would have these issues? I'll pay more attention to refunds going forward," one user complained.
How long do MEITUAN-W refunds actually take? Customer service representatives stated that refund timing depends on the payment method, typically taking 1 to 3 business days. If an order was refunded but hasn't been received, it might be due to bank or payment processor delays, and they can help verify refund progress. Multi-year unprocessed refunds are "relatively rare."
As early as August 2019, users complained: "Three years and the refund still hasn't arrived," sarcastically adding "kudos to MEITUAN-W's efficiency."
"It feels like an electronic earthquake occurred - I'll never accumulate vouchers again."
This directly undermines or even overturns user trust in the "automatic refund upon expiry" promise.
Originally, accumulating group buying vouchers was meant to save money; if unused, they would automatically refund upon expiry or users could apply for refunds. The core premise of group buying voucher consumption was consumers' firm belief that vouchers offered "anytime refunds, expiry refunds, automatic refunds."
Notably, MEITUAN-W originally built its business on "expired refunds."
In March 2010, after the failures of Xiaonei (RenRen) and Fanfou, Wang Xing started his next venture, establishing Meituan.
MEITUAN-W secured 30%, 20%, or even sub-10% discounts from merchants. Consumers purchased through the platform, receiving MEITUAN-W vouchers, which merchants later redeemed with the platform for payment.
MEITUAN-W's first product was a Fanya wine tasting package, borrowing from the Groupon model to enter the group buying market. On March 4 that year, this package attracted 79 purchases with nearly 4,000 yuan in sales.
Competition followed immediately. Wowo Group launched on March 14, F Group on March 15, and Lashou on March 16... By January 2011, 1,728 group buying websites existed in the market.
In March 2011, MEITUAN-W pioneered the "expired refund" policy. "No need for manual refunds" became a major reason users chose MEITUAN-W.
This helped MEITUAN-W emerge victorious from the "thousand-platform war" to become the industry leader.
In 2011, MEITUAN-W received $50 million in funding from Alibaba, capturing the top market share in group buying and earning recognition as "China's Most Valuable Group Buying Website." By 2013, it held 50% market share.
Subsequently, MEITUAN-W launched food delivery services and gradually expanded into hotel bookings, online movie ticket sales, and other businesses. Today, MEITUAN-W's services span over 200 categories including dining, delivery, fresh retail, ride-hailing, bike-sharing, hotels, tourism, movies, and entertainment, serving 2,800 counties and cities nationwide.
Wang Xing's goal is for MEITUAN-W to become a company on par with Alibaba and Tencent.
In 2018, MEITUAN-W listed on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange. As of August 26, 2025, its market capitalization is approximately HK$750 billion. Currently, Tencent's market cap is about HK$5.64 trillion, while Alibaba's is HK$2.37 trillion.
If the trust foundation of "expired refunds" crumbles, MEITUAN-W will lose its consumer base.
MEITUAN-W is well aware of this situation.
The company's response was reasonably swift. On the evening of August 24, facing the consumer "account checking" surge, MEITUAN-W urged everyone to be "rational."
"We apologize that incomplete and untimely product feature information displays have caused misunderstandings," MEITUAN-W stated, announcing the urgent establishment of a dedicated customer service team. From their order data review, every refund transaction is traceable, and users can check where refund funds went.
For the small portion of orders showing "refund failed," MEITUAN-W explained this mainly resulted from original payment channel issues, and the company has provided backup solutions.
Some consumers believe MEITUAN-W should address technical vulnerabilities and legacy issues. During the company's early rapid expansion, the refund system relied on third-party payment interfaces, lacking real-time monitoring of payment account status.
For instance, when users canceled bank cards, failed refunds weren't actively communicated by the platform, causing funds to remain suspended long-term.
Additionally, some users discovered refunds didn't return to original payment methods but went to MEITUAN-W wallets, requiring bank card binding for withdrawal or spending.
Some consumers questioned whether this constitutes forced use of MEITUAN-W services. Customer service explained that "some refunds or insurance claims might go to wallets," but provided no clear rule explanations.
Reviewing the entire process, what truly escalated the situation was MEITUAN-W customer service's initial response. Reports indicated customer service stated: "If it's our problem, we'll help users resolve it; if it's not our problem, we suggest users contact WeChat or their banks."
This solution was perceived as passing responsibility to "third-party payment channels," triggering user panic in checking past orders and social media amplification.
Therefore, whether for consumers or regulators, MEITUAN-W should provide more detailed, comprehensive, and sincere explanations.
Notably, consumer investigations revealed that "non-automatic automatic refunds" aren't isolated incidents: some platforms promise "expiry refunds" but require manual user applications; others insist on "original route returns" but lack backup mechanisms when user payment accounts change.
A nationwide account-checking campaign, triggered by MEITUAN-W and affecting platforms including Taobao, JD.com, and Damai, has officially begun.
For example, the musical "Cats" was originally scheduled for 2019 but canceled due to the pandemic. One consumer spent 680 yuan on tickets and only received a refund notice from Damai five years later.
On platforms like Douyin, users discovered DQ ice cream group buying vouchers purchased three years ago were still pending refunds. Upon inquiry, they learned merchants couldn't confirm whether vouchers had been redeemed in mini-programs.
Analysts point out that platforms, as transaction participants, rule makers, and fund aggregators, are responsible for ensuring complete and transparent fund flows. They should proactively identify vulnerabilities and be accountable to consumers.
Related regulation should also be strengthened. The draft "Internet Platform Price Behavior Rules" currently under public consultation regulates automatic renewals and deductions but lacks clear provisions for "automatic refunds."
For this trust crisis and public controversy, MEITUAN-W needs to demonstrate greater sincerity and determination in resolution.
On August 27, MEITUAN-W will release its Q2 2025 financial results. How has the company handled the accounting for "non-refunded expired" vouchers financially?
Disclaimer: Investing carries risk. This is not financial advice. The above content should not be regarded as an offer, recommendation, or solicitation on acquiring or disposing of any financial products, any associated discussions, comments, or posts by author or other users should not be considered as such either. It is solely for general information purpose only, which does not consider your own investment objectives, financial situations or needs. TTM assumes no responsibility or warranty for the accuracy and completeness of the information, investors should do their own research and may seek professional advice before investing.