With the freedom to drink milk tea and use mobile data, what's next?
Many people are asking.
Starting in August, major operators suspended online agency card sales, and suddenly, many platforms could no longer sell monthly plans with tens of yuan and hundreds of gigabytes of super-large traffic for as low as 10-odd yuan.
Even earlier, last year, the small-amount mobile phone top-ups of 10 yuan and 20 yuan bound to third-party platforms like WeChat were already gone.
"Free phone top-ups and data" seems to be becoming a thing of the past.
The increasing disappearance of small-denomination and low-priced services, what does it really mean?
There were already signs that small-denomination recharge options were not very convenient.
Since last year, most rechargeable payment platforms, such as WeChat, Alipay, and Cloud Flash Pay, no longer offer small denomination options like 10 yuan or 20 yuan, with the minimum recharge amount starting directly from 50 yuan, and some even requiring a minimum of 100 yuan.
Changes in Recharge Service Platform Denominations
For instance, if your monthly phone bill is 80 yuan, previously you could get it done on WeChat with a 50 yuan plan plus a 30 yuan add-on, but after the bundles disappeared, you would have to pay 100 yuan, resulting in an additional 20 yuan.
Similarly, the suspension of third-party card sales services by operators in August this year is essentially the same.
Compared to before, the most obvious change brought about by the implementation of this new regulation is that the scenarios for ordinary people's card applications and top-ups will be reshaped.
It's worth noting that prior to this, third-party platforms such as Taobao, Pinduoduo, and short video live streaming rooms were the core hubs for low-cost traffic cards. Various 19-yuan and 29-yuan ultra-large traffic packages emerged one after another, far lower than the official packages sold by operators, with many options and extremely low thresholds, also being the main way for the public to access the internet at a low cost.
If these low-priced traffic cards were to truly disappear from the internet, it would seem that many people would be losing a hidden benefit.
The reason is not hard to understand. The official pricing for packages on sale is uniform and has a higher threshold, compared to the cheap and high-traffic packages that third-party platforms used to offer. Although we have a wide range of package options, the price advantage is no longer there.
For example, a data card with an original monthly fee of 59 yuan and 235G of monthly traffic can have its monthly fee reduced to 19 yuan after using coupons and other discounts. In contrast, on some telecom operators' official websites, monthly plans with the same price of 19 yuan or 29 yuan may only offer 2G to 35G of traffic, with 30GB being exclusive traffic.
Additionally, if more traffic is added in the future, it will not be very cheap.
Some users say their cheapest plan, which they've kept for over a decade, starts at 69 yuan a month and includes only 10GB of data. At current 5G speeds, that runs out within two or three days of being out and about. To buy extra data, 10 or 20 yuan only gets a few more gigabytes, and it must be used within a limited time.
So it's hardly surprising that the disappearance of small-denomination third-party top-up channels and low-cost data cards has sparked widespread discussion.
Some people claim their interests have been affected, while others downplay the issue, pointing out that there are other convenient channels for replenishment.
But behind these controversies, why has the reaction to this matter been so strong, with many netizens even raising questions?
For a long time, the communications services market has had a unique phenomenon, "cheaper doesn't necessarily mean inferior quality".
This runs counter to the consumer logic in our daily lives that "good service comes with a good price".
In theory, the traffic cards and small-amount phone bill services offered by third-party channels are not inferior services, but rather precisely match the needs of a large number of niche users.
Many people only have a small balance left on their phones and don't want to recharge with large denominations, so small-amount quick recharges perfectly cater to fragmented demands. For students, elderly users, those using backup cards out of town, or other low-tariff groups, third-party services solved the pain points of official packages being overpriced, having high thresholds, and lacking flexibility. Gradually, these became one of the few low-cost digital benefits for the masses. Now that low prices are gone for good, isn't it painful?
This is enough to show that third-party low-cost communication services are not dispensable auxiliary functions, but rather a necessity that caters to the daily needs of ordinary people, which is also the inevitable reason why the public's perception has fallen short after the new regulations took effect.
So, we have to ask another question: have our call fees and data traffic freedom really disappeared?
In fact, there isn't.
but rather it was hidden away.
In reality, after examining the operators' recharge interfaces, we found that what has disappeared is the freedom to recharge any amount on unofficial platform channels. However, the minimum denomination can still be recharged through the operators' apps, and even custom amounts are allowed, so the freedom of phone bills and traffic is not actually gone.
A certain operator's app recharge interface
It is still possible to customize the amount.
As for low-cost data plans, after the new regulations took effect on August 1, theoretically, all online phone card businesses were consolidated under official channels. Does this mean that users' data discounts have truly disappeared?
Not entirely.
Currently, users who want to apply for a new mobile SIM card or select a data plan can only do so through official channels of China Mobile, China Unicom, or China Telecom, but there are still rewards such as point redemption, which offer benefits like discounts. I have used points to redeem voice and data services before.
In addition, operators have also launched various traffic packages on their official platforms that cater to different time periods and entitlements, with more flexible forms and options.
In conclusion, while the minimum recharge and low-cost data plans are indeed disappearing from some platforms, freedom is not completely gone. Some self-media and reports claiming that "all phone bill freedom is exiting history" are not true.
Another issue that has arisen is what the real reason is for the disappearance of third-party minimum talk-time recharge and low-cost data cards.
Currently, there are two possible explanations for the disappearance of third-party minimum recharge amounts and third-party traffic card sales services. One is the various official responses provided, but the second explanation is more worthy of consideration, as it involves multiple aspects such as industry development and market operations, which will be discussed later.
The official explanation, of course, is meant to respond to public skepticism and criticism.
An operator responded, stating that the closure of the small-amount recharge channel for third-party platforms was mainly due to security considerations to protect account safety, and suggested that users use the official App for recharging.
Operators also stated that the closure of third-party platform recharge services for 10 yuan and 20 yuan is mainly because the small-amount recharge cooperation agreements with some third-party platforms expired last year and have not been renewed, resulting in the minimum recharge amount being raised to 50 yuan.
However, multiple third-party recharge platforms claim that the recharge denominations are set by the three major operators.
Each company gave different reasons, giving a sense of passing the buck.
Similarly, carriers have their own rationale for halting SIM card sales through third-party internet channels. Problems with these channels have become increasingly common: some unscrupulous merchants falsely claim carrier authorization to sell cards, illegally collect personal information such as ID numbers and facial recognition data, and create risks including telecom fraud, information leaks, and the circulation of black-market SIM cards.
The chaotic situation does exist, but is governing low-cost services simply due to these factors?
It's worth noting that these third-party services have existed for some time, and the various problems they pose are unlikely to have been discovered only now. In reality, the withdrawal of low-cost third-party traffic services is driven by surface-level regulatory norms and, at a deeper level, by the synchronized adjustment of multiple interests and development logic, rather than a single factor.
From a business perspective, setting aside compliance factors, relying on low-cost voice and data plans has become increasingly difficult to attract new customers, and the withdrawal of low-priced, fragmented services is an inevitable choice for enterprises.
In the early stages of internet popularization, operators had to rely on third-party channels to quickly expand their customer base, cover lower-tier users, and seize market share, thereby tolerating the existence of various low-priced packages and agency distribution models.
But with China's total mobile phone users now exceeding 1.8 billion, market penetration has essentially reached saturation, making it prohibitively expensive to keep acquiring new customers through third-party low-price, fragmented data plans. For carriers, these small, scattered orders with ultra-low average transaction values consume system and labor resources while contributing no meaningful profit—they no longer fit the industry's shift toward scale-driven growth.
On the other hand, operators' traditional businesses have been under pressure in recent years, with their focus shifting to new businesses such as computing power.
Statistics show that in the first half of 2026, China's telecommunications business revenue totaled 887.3 billion yuan, a year-on-year decrease of 2.1%. Given that the revenue growth of the three major operators in 2025 generally slowed to around 1%, and traditional businesses saw "no increase in revenue despite increased volume". In the first quarter of 2026, due to the combined effects of policy factors and the peaking of traditional businesses, the profits of the three companies also declined collectively, so operations require higher-quality development.
So, emphasizing regulation is an important reason for adjusting the low-price service model, but another point is: shifting gears for growth.
The three major telecom operators' combined capital expenditure in the first half of the year exceeded 100 billion yuan, with spending shifting from communication traffic toward computing power services. Third-party platforms are showing a similar trend.
Telecom operators' capital expenditure
Taking China Mobile as an example, the proportion of computing power-related revenue to overall main business revenue reached 22.58% in the first half of the year. Among them, computing power service revenue reached 52.9 billion yuan, with a year-on-year growth of 14.0%. In this context, the Token economy has become popular, and in fact, operators are all doing so. For example, China Telecom previously launched three Token plans, namely the Lite Edition, Deluxe Edition, and Premium Edition, with monthly fees of 9.9 yuan, 29.9 yuan, and 49.9 yuan, corresponding to 10 million Tokens, 40 million Tokens, and 80 million Tokens per month.
Is there necessarily a logical connection between the emergence of new businesses such as computing power and Token, and the disappearance of low-cost third-party services we mentioned earlier?
Operators have indeed adjusted their business strategies, focusing on new resources and cutting unnecessary maintenance costs. One operator once noted, "Consolidating and enhancing user value has become the key to increasing revenue and profit."
This explains a question mentioned earlier, why the common 10-yuan and 20-yuan top-ups can now only be operated on the carrier's app.
Because compared to top apps with monthly active users of 700-800 million, although carriers have more than 1 billion and more than 400 million users, their app's monthly active scale does not rank in the top 10 in the application software field.
It is clear that operators prefer users with high-quality stickiness, and these users will also become the foundation for operators to provide more value-added services to users in the AI era.
As for external third-party platforms, their thinking is similar: they have no interest in maintaining low-yield businesses either. After all, for them, low-value phone credit and low-priced cards are textbook examples of low-margin, high-after-sales, low-return operations. These services generate massive order volumes, heavy customer complaints, and razor-thin profits, potentially consuming substantial operational manpower. As platforms shift toward refined operations and greater efficiency, such low-profit convenience services are naturally being pushed to the margins.
Looking at it this way, it's not possible to simply view the withdrawal of third-party low-priced services from the surface. However, for us users, the company's reasoning is based on business logic, but what consumers care about is that tightening sales channels and stopping third-party minimum recharge services have already affected me, and will future services be upgraded?
To be honest, it's intuitive for everyone to see that the low-price benefits in various industries have been disappearing in recent years, and the costs of storage, computing power resources, and other expenses continue to rise.
Many people subconsciously believe that the disappearance of low-priced services and official unified regulation means the industry's services will become more standardized and the experience will be better. However, from the perspective of ordinary consumers' real experiences, with low prices gone, they naturally have higher expectations for service upgrades.
Take low-cost data SIM cards as an example. It's undeniable that unified card issuance through official channels and managed rate plans have eliminated problems like black-market cards, fraudulent packages, and information leaks. After-sales support is more complete and benefits are more stable. For the vast majority of ordinary users, security and standardization have genuinely improved. This is the positive value of industry-wide regulatory development and the core significance of the rectification effort.
However, the issue is that the price disparity experienced by consumers is very real, and ordinary people have fewer options for affordable choices.
For user benefits, with the disappearance of third-party minimum recharge services, there will be expectations for operators to offer more diverse types of benefits. The same applies to recharge cards. Operators' customer service has also provided a clear response, stating that halting the sale of cards on third-party platforms does not affect user benefits.
Currently, the elderly, young people, students, food delivery riders, and live-streaming professionals all rely on convenient, simple, and low-denomination recharge methods, and their demand for large traffic volumes at low tariffs will not disappear.
For packages categorized as affordable, long-cycle, and scenario-based, it is necessary to fully disclose to the public the effective duration of discounts, renewal execution standards, and traffic speed limit constraints, among other terms, and to clarify all fee-related rules so that users can understand them at a glance.
After all, in the eyes of some users, adjustments and regulation may be necessary, but it's also important to eliminate non-compliant marketing and sales tactics, rather than canceling products that genuinely meet users' actual needs.
What matters is whether the industry can strike a balance between high prices and service quality, giving ordinary users access to more cost-effective and flexible communication options without compromising safety and compliance.
The era of low-cost third-party telecom services has come to an end, yet consumers' demand for affordability, convenience, and flexibility will not disappear.
Moreover, this is real and enduring demand.