Alibaba is spending RMB 3B to make you stop opening apps, while Tencent is hoping you download a new one
China’s AI giants aren’t fighting over red envelope engagement. They’re fighting over where intent begins and behavior forms.
Hi all, I’ll be in San Francisco in about 3 weeks. If any reader wants to meet up or have suggestions on who I should talk to about China tech, AI, or new media, please DM me.
Alibaba is spending RMB 3 billion this Spring Festival. Tencent is spending RMB 1 billion. Baidu, half a billion. What looks like the annual red-envelope ritual where big tech burns cash, attempts to acquire new users, a bit of a feel-good marketing campaign, and flex, this year is actually a bit different.
Honestly, I almost scrolled past it. But the more I looked at the big numbers and headlines, the more I realized it is something else. This is a fight over where daily consumption starts and which AI interface wins.
Alibaba is trying to make “ask AI” a default behavior for ordinary transactions: ordering takeout, booking a flight, buying a movie ticket. Tencent is taking a different approach. It is reaching for a playbook that already worked once, which is to use a social mechanic to force a new habit at a national scale, the way WeChat Pay used red envelopes to get people to link bank cards back in 2015.
This is why the headlines matter, but not in the way people think. It is not just RMB 3 billion vs RMB 1 billion. It is what that money is paying for: habit training and habit changing.
Why now? And what now?
Spring Festival/ Lunar New Year/ Chinese New Year is China’s largest national holiday. Everyone, I mean everyone, gets time off (well, I guess except the Chinese AI labs). In this case, it is a national-scale product lab.
Demand spikes across essentially all things consumer — travel, food, entertainment, and gifting. Everyone is coordinating with family and friends. 串门, visiting neighbors and relatives, is also part of the ritual. Communications and touchpoints are at the highest level. People are moving fast and making decisions under time pressure. That’s when defaults can shift, because convenience suddenly matters more than “best choice.” And that is why these companies are trying to tap into this opportunity to introduce their AI apps.
We have seen this with prior primitives. GPS did not just create apps. It made ride-hailing and delivery feel obvious, and Meituan and Didi became infrastructure. Cameras plus bandwidth did not just create a format. It changed discovery and attention, and Douyin and Kuaishou became the front door for entertainment and then, later on, commerce. And let us not forget Hallmark created allllll those ‘holidays’ for consumer consumption.
The same logic applies here, but it’s more direct. The current consumption path via internet apps is user-driven: open the app, search, compare, place an order, pay, and wait.
The AI-native version compresses that chain or even completely removes it. You state the intent once, and the system executes the rest, including ordering, payment, dispatch, and after-sales. Less switching. Less browsing. Maybe less comparing. You can also say less decision-making, which is a bit terrifying.
If 2015 changed how money gets paid in China, this round is trying to change where commerce begins. From opening an app to asking an AI. From user-operated to system-executed. Once the entry point shifts, second-order effects follow.
Advertising will look different if discovery becomes more conversational and less browse-driven. Checkout looks different when it occurs within an agent flow. Payment becomes more like plumbing if it is executed in the background. And the “app install base + user habit” moat becomes less permanent if users shift from thinking in apps to thinking in outcomes. It’s not clear who has the better strategy, but the competition is once again on between the forever rivalries.
Alibaba’s bet: convenience and the bundle becomes the moat
Alibaba’s RMB 3 billion feels less like a traffic play and more like an ecosystem integration play.
The red packets are the hook to get you into the ecosystem. The real product is training users to complete transactions through Qwen across Alibaba’s own services: Ele.me for food delivery, Taopiaopiao for movie tickets, Fliggy for travel, plus the rest of the commerce stack.
If you want an agentic loop to work in real life, it cannot stop at “recommendation.” It has to complete the loop. The easiest way to do that is to own the pipes.
This is also why Alibaba’s approach is structurally different from what OpenAI or Google are trying to do with AI shopping. In comparison, what we’re seeing so far in the West is that cross-platform chains are long and brittle. You can generate a list, compare specs, surface links, and then the user still has to click around, log in, confirm, and pay. The handoff moments are everywhere, and each one is a friction point and also an interception point.
Alibaba has fewer handoff moments because it owns more of the loop. If the AI recommends a restaurant and you say “book it,” the booking and payment can happen inside the same flow.
Tencent Pony Ma’s public comment captured the tension well. He praised Alibaba for combining its internal ecosystem and working hard on integration, and then pointed out the obvious risk: users may not like a full bundle, and not every internal service is best in class.
That is exactly the best. Alibaba is betting that “good enough” across ten services wins if the experience is smooth and end-to-end. The bundle becomes the moat because it reduces switching inside the flow. In an agent world, the cleanest loop often beats the fanciest individual feature.
If it works, Alibaba does not just own transactions. It owns the moment before the transaction, the intent layer, and then everything downstream.
Tencent’s dilemma: protect WeChat, but do not miss the habit shift
Tencent’s position is more complex, and it has always played more cautiously. It's always been famous for winning at "second-mover advantage," often executed through a "fast follower" strategy - see payment (WeChat Pay vs. Alipay), short videos (Douyin vs. WeChat Channels).
WeChat is a consumer infrastructure in China. A real AI failure inside WeChat is not “a bad feature.” It is reputational damage at scale: hallucinations causing real-world mistakes, privacy concerns, and scams amplified by automation. Trust breaks slowly and rebuilds even slower.
So Tencent’s caution makes sense.
But caution has costs. Tencent knows that, too. Pony Ma has acknowledged that Tencent moved slowly and has reiterated that AI is the only area truly worth continued investment at this stage. That is honest. It is also a signal that Tencent is balancing two imperatives that conflict: move fast enough to shape new habits, but not so fast that it compromises the core product that generates cash and trust.
When I tested Yuanbao Pai this week, the product idea is interesting, but it also highlights the key problem: any extra step that pulls users out of their default WeChat rhythm is not trivial.
You have to quite literally send an invite to a friend/ group chat to ask them to 1/ download Yuanbao, 2/ enter the invite code, 3/ join the specific chat to interact. In a world where the fight is about defaults, distribution is not just “how many users you can reach.” It is how few steps it takes to become muscle memory.
In general, I don’t find it super helpful yet. Like I had to @元宝 the chatbot, and then ask for reminders, summarize chat, or offer suggestions. However, I could see it being more useful through the WeChat Enterprise interface.
But the question for Tencent now is not whether it can build an AI chatbot, it is whether it can turn AI into a daily-life execution layer without jeopardizing WeChat’s core trust.
Meanwhile, ByteDance is not waiting. Doubao’s scale and Spring Festival visibility are a reminder that consumer AI is now a standalone battlefield, and it does not fully map to the old “social vs commerce” lines. It secured itself a position as the official Spring Festival Gala partnership. The gala is broadcast across the world to over 700 million viewers. Where everything from baijiu to EV makers to home appliance brands to robots all try to snatch a highly sought-after spot as a sponsor/ advertiser. Think F1 sponsorship level exposures.
It’s all hands on deck to capture the 老百姓 (literal translation: hundred last names), the average Joe, the normal civilian, the everyday person’s heart and mindshare now.
Business plus AI, or AI plus business?
The cleanest framing I have is this.
Alibaba is treating AI as the front door to its existing commerce ecosystem. The business came first. AI is the interface that compresses the loop.
Tencent is treating AI as a capability that must earn its way onto the most sensitive consumer-facing surface in China. The product came first. AI is the enhancement, rolled out in a way constrained by trust and safety.
It’s actually the same vocabulary, but with a different ordering. Biz + AI? AI + Biz? The ordering implies speed, risk tolerance, and who wins if this transition is real.
In years to come, when we look back on the inflection point when the Chinese big-tech AI landscape truly changed, we may trace it back to this Spring Festival. Happy year of the horse, everybody~
Last year’s Spring Festival put DeepSeek V3 on the map. This year might be about something less flashy but more impactful: who owns where commerce and activity start.
It’s clean.
This article comes at the perfect time. How will this habit-training really unfold? Very insightfull post!