Tea Beverage GMV-Sharing Franchise Diagram

Strengths

• Strong interest alignment: The brand and franchisees share weal and woe, reducing the latter's perception of risk
• Asset-light and fast expansion: GMV-proportional commissions allow the brand to quickly recover funds and open stores at high speed
• Digital traceability: Transparent GMV management and precise commission collection reduce evasion disputes

Weaknesses

• Integration friction in the early stage of the new model: From one-time lump-sum payments to revenue sharing, franchisees need time to adapt
• Complex GMV accounting: Requires powerful IT systems and tax planning system support
• Over-reliance on ongoing store sales: If store performance fluctuates, brand commissions plummet sharply

Opportunities

• Lower-tier and overseas markets: The flexible GMV-sharing model is easier to penetrate into price-sensitive county markets
• Multi-brand / Brand incubation: Utilize existing digital and supply chain platforms to incubate and commission new categories
• OMO (Online-Merge-Offline) GMV: Incremental revenues such as food delivery and private domain traffic are incorporated into the GMV-sharing scope

Threats

• Peer follow-up and intense competition: Tea beverage giants are racing to introduce similar interest-alignment schemes, squeezing profit margins
• Franchisee dissatisfaction with excessively high commission rates
• Downward trend in single-store GMV: Macroeconomics and intensified competition compress store output, damaging total commission amounts