在中國近期掀起的新一輪外賣平台補貼大戰中，許多餐飲商家被迫捲入激烈的價格競爭。平台透過各種補貼、滿減活動和配送優惠，吸引消費者在線上點餐，但實際上這些成本多半由商家自行承擔，使原本就不高的利潤空間更加壓縮。許多中小型餐廳在平台抽成高、客單價低的情況下，面臨「賣一單虧一單」的局面，為求生存，他們不得不對外賣與堂食採取不同標準，也就是俗稱的「雙標操作」。

具體來說，堂食客人享用的菜品往往使用的是花生油、當年新米、新鮮蔬菜與肉類，這些食材成本較高，保證味道與品質，因為面對面服務的顧客，對口感和餐點細節有直接的感知和評價。然而對於外賣訂單，許多商家則選擇改用成本更低的桶裝調和油、陳米或冷凍處理過的預製菜，甚至用小份量、去掉部分配料的方式來縮減支出。從外觀上，這些調整很難被外賣顧客察覺，畢竟餐點經過封裝、運輸後，熱度、口感本就會有所損失，也讓商家有更大的操作空間。

這種情況並非個別現象，而是廣泛存在於各地餐飲業的現實生存策略。多位商家在接受採訪時坦言：「不搞雙標就活不下去」。外賣平台對商家的抽成普遍在20%到30%之間，有些特殊時段甚至更高，若再加上人力、食材、包裝與外送分潤等開支，幾乎無利可圖。因此他們不得不在外賣製作成本上做文章，透過「劣質食材替代」、「預製菜充當現炒」等方式縮減支出，以維持運營。

此外，部分商家還會設計兩套菜單，一套是給堂食客人看的，包含更多高品質選項；另一套是專為外賣設計，雖然名稱一樣，但實際製作標準有所降低。甚至有業者在後廚設兩條生產線，一條現炒現做，一條流水線預製包裝，針對不同銷售渠道作出差異化處理。

消費者對此的感受也逐漸敏感起來。許多網友反映，外賣的口味與堂食明顯不同，質疑是否遭遇「雙標」。而預製菜的大量使用也引發了健康與誠信方面的討論。有些平台雖然宣稱推動外賣透明化，甚至要求商家標示預製與非預製商品，但實際執行多流於形式，難以徹底約束。

總體而言，這場由平台補貼大戰引發的價格戰，已讓餐飲業陷入惡性循環。為了迎合平台與消費者對「便宜又快」的期待，商家不得不壓縮品質；而消費者則因信任下降與體驗落差，逐步質疑整個外賣生態的誠信基礎。在缺乏政策與行業規範介入的情況下，這種「雙標求生」的現象恐怕只會愈演愈烈，最終影響的不只是個別餐廳的品牌聲譽，也可能動搖整體餐飲市場的公信力與長遠健康發展。

Amid the latest wave of food delivery platform subsidy wars in China, many restaurant owners have been forced into fierce price competition. Platforms attract consumers to order online through various subsidies, discount campaigns, and delivery incentives. However, these costs are largely borne by the merchants themselves, further squeezing an already narrow profit margin. Many small and medium-sized restaurants, faced with high platform commissions and low average order values, are finding themselves in a "losing money with every order" situation. In order to survive, they have no choice but to adopt different standards for dine-in and delivery meals—a practice widely known as “double standards.”

Specifically, dishes served to dine-in customers often use higher-quality ingredients such as expeller-pressed peanut oil, freshly harvested rice, and fresh vegetables and meat. These ingredients are more costly but ensure better taste and quality, which matters because dine-in customers experience the food directly and can immediately judge its flavor and presentation. In contrast, for delivery orders, many restaurants switch to cheaper alternatives, such as bulk blended oil, older rice, or frozen pre-cooked meals. They may also reduce portion sizes or omit certain ingredients to cut costs. These changes are difficult for delivery customers to detect, as the food is sealed, transported, and may lose some heat and flavor during the process, giving restaurants more leeway for cost-cutting measures.

This is not an isolated phenomenon—it reflects a widespread survival strategy across the food and beverage industry. Several restaurant owners admitted in interviews that "we can’t survive without double standards." Delivery platforms typically charge commissions of 20% to 30%, sometimes even higher during peak times. After factoring in labor, ingredients, packaging, and delivery service fees, there is virtually no profit left. As a result, restaurants are compelled to reduce production costs for delivery, resorting to lower-quality substitutes and using pre-made meals in place of freshly cooked dishes to maintain operations.

Additionally, some merchants go as far as creating two separate menus: one for dine-in customers featuring more premium options, and another for delivery, where the items may bear the same names but are prepared to lower standards. Some restaurants even establish two production lines in the kitchen—one for freshly cooked dine-in meals and another assembly-line setup for packaging pre-made food—adapting their workflows according to the sales channel.

Consumers are becoming increasingly sensitive to this issue. Many online users have commented on noticeable differences in flavor between dine-in and delivery versions of the same dish, raising concerns about “double standards.” The widespread use of pre-made meals has also sparked debates around health and transparency. While some platforms claim to promote greater transparency in food delivery and even require restaurants to label pre-made versus freshly made items, such measures are often superficial and poorly enforced.

Overall, this price war, driven by aggressive platform subsidies, has plunged the restaurant industry into a vicious cycle. To meet consumer and platform demands for "cheap and fast" food, merchants are forced to compromise on quality. Meanwhile, customers—losing trust and experiencing inconsistent meals—are starting to question the integrity of the entire food delivery ecosystem. Without regulatory oversight or industry-wide standards, this phenomenon of "double standards for survival" is likely to intensify, ultimately impacting not just the reputation of individual restaurants but also undermining the credibility and long-term sustainability of the broader dining industry.