Dai Wei was officially restricted from spending. How did ofo "die"?

Excessive burning of money caused people to make ends meet and finally had to declare bankruptcy. According to media reports, the founder of ofo, Dai Wei, was once again subjected to a consumption restriction order. This time it was issued by Changsha court. The consumption prohibition order includes not allowing David to spend too much, not allowing him to buy real estate or decorate high-end houses. According to media statistics, Dai Wei has been restricted by the court for 40 times so far. It is reported that Dai Wei first graduated from Peking University and co-founded ofo with his classmates in 20 14. However, after fierce competition in bicycle sharing, ofo had to burn money to subsidize users, resulting in the earliest failure to refund the user deposit of 1500, and the total debt of ofo reached1600 million yuan. So far, the bicycle sharing bubble has officially burst.

The most competitive bicycle sharing field is 20 17. Ofo and mobike subsidize users and put bicycles in an uncontrolled way. At the most exaggerated time, they burned $600 million a month. In the end, ofo put in a total of 20 million bicycles, with daily orders exceeding 30 million. However, in the most intense competition, ofo's capital chain eventually failed. The media began to report that ofo misappropriated the user deposit. At first, ofo company denied it, and later admitted to misappropriating part of it. Then a large number of users refunded the deposit and ran the deposit of ofo company. Finally, the company had to declare bankruptcy.

It is rumored that investors wanted to merge ofo and mobike at that time, but the merger plan was aborted because of the one-vote veto of founder Dai Wei. After the merger plan aborted, their investors quickly sold their shares and cashed in.

The subsequent ofo was a fiasco. Although the company ofo in the middle has tried various ways of making profits, such as posting advertisements on bicycles or selling things on apps, it has not saved the company. In the end, the bankrupt ofo not only lost the money of all investors, but also failed to refund the deposits of a large number of users.