In recent days, the issue of “prepared food” has continued to capture public attention.

On September 10, Luo Yonghao publicly stated on Weibo that during a visit to a Xibei restaurant he found that “almost all the dishes were prepared food.” He criticized the high prices and lack of prior disclosure, and called for legislation requiring restaurants to label the use of prepared dishes.

Xibei strongly refuted the claim, arguing that Luo’s comments were untrue, and subsequently released details of the preparation process for several dishes to defend itself.

As the controversy grew, the definition of “prepared food,” corporate disclosure obligations, and the reputation of restaurant brands became central topics of public debate. Luo Yonghao insisted that Xibei’s dishes were “almost entirely prepared food,” arguing that their pricing did not match their quality, while emphasizing that consumers have the right to know whether restaurants use such dishes. Xibei, citing official regulatory documents, argued that its products do not meet the strict definition of “prepared food.”

The prepared food industry has grown rapidly in recent years. According to the Blue Book on China’s Prepared Food Industry Development (2024–2025), the market reached RMB 485 billion in 2024, a year-on-year increase of 33.8%, and is projected to exceed RMB 749 billion by 2026.

At the heart of the dispute is a fundamental difference in how the two sides interpret “prepared food.”

What is “prepared food”?

In March 2024, six government agencies including the State Administration for Market Regulation jointly issued a Notice on Strengthening Food Safety Supervision of Prepared Foods and Promoting High-Quality Industry Development. The notice defined the scope, standards, and regulatory framework for prepared foods.

Prepared food, also known as “prepared dishes,” refers to pre-packaged dishes made from one or more edible agricultural products, with or without seasonings, but without preservatives. They are industrially pre-processed through methods such as mixing, marinating, frying, baking, boiling, or steaming, and can only be consumed after heating or cooking. The definition excludes staple foods such as frozen noodles, instant foods, boxed meals, buns, pastries, sandwiches, and pizza.

The notice also emphasized that chain restaurants using central kitchens to process and distribute semi-finished or finished dishes to their outlets must comply with food safety laws and standards. However, dishes produced in central kitchens are not classified as “prepared food” under this definition.

This official definition differs significantly from public perception. Many consumers equate “central kitchens” or “frozen processing” with “prepared food,” whereas regulatory standards take a more narrow view.

Another key issue is consumer rights.

According to Article 8 of the Law on the Protection of Consumer Rights and Interests of the People’s Republic of China, consumers have the right to know the true circumstances of the goods or services they purchase. The 2024 notice also called for greater disclosure regarding the use of prepared foods in restaurants, to protect consumer rights to information and choice.

Consumers care not only about whether restaurants use prepared processes, but also about transparency—whether they have sufficient information to judge if a dish’s price matches its actual value. In this case, many questioned whether Xibei’s “premium positioning” was justified.

Founded in 1988, Xibei is a well-known restaurant brand with nearly 400 outlets in 62 cities across China and about 17,000 employees. The incident has impacted its brand reputation. Some outlets reportedly saw short-term declines in customer traffic and revenue.

Notably, Xibei’s crisis response drew criticism: in attempting to “prove its innocence,” it exposed its reliance on central kitchens and frozen ingredients, which caused consumer backlash. The sharp language exchanged online further amplified the controversy. 

On September 15, Xibei issued an apology, acknowledging a gap between its production methods and consumer expectations. It pledged to shift some processing steps from central kitchens back to in-store preparation and shorten ingredient shelf lives to address concerns.

The “Luo Yonghao vs. Xibei” dispute is more than just a clash between two parties. It reflects broader tensions in China’s restaurant industry around transparency, consumer rights, and food safety standards. Whether restaurants can clearly disclose “what customers are really eating” may become a key test of fairness. This controversy may accelerate legislation and industry norms on labeling prepared foods, pushing the dining sector toward greater transparency and trust.

Author：Qinger