Let's analyze it from the beginning-it is an indisputable fact that the epidemic has caused the real economy to slump. Many weak shops have closed down or have closed down. The closure of these stores affected the interests of store owners. Without tenants, part of their financial resources will be gone. Then the owners of these shops should either find ways to rent shops at low prices and stop losses in time; Or wait until the epidemic is over and put all the previous profits and losses on the new tenants. Neither of these methods seems to be realistic. (1) If it is rented at a low price, it will affect the store's income for a period of time, but it is relatively stable; (2) If the rental price is high, it will affect the subsequent rental benefits, but it is unstable due to the adjustment of the market. Relatively speaking, the first scheme is better than the second scheme. Because it is stable, more people believe that they have chosen this road, so the tenants will get some preferential treatment, which will increase their income and reduce their expenses. In contrast, the profit of the store will come up, but because there is no passenger flow, there are more orders online than offline. Then what is caused is the direction of online promotion. I have to say that in the next period of time, the income from online promotion will indeed be better than that from offline, but the income will not fall for a long time.