The settlement of 21.42 million yuan has been finalized, and Smartisan Technology has once again fallen into the quagmire of "height restrictions."

Recently, two consumption restriction orders issued by the People's Court of Haidian District, Beijing, have once again been imposed on Smartisan Technology (Chengdu) Co., Ltd. and its legal representative, Guan Zhiliang. This company, which once left its mark in the smartphone industry with its "sentiment" and innovation, has once again stepped into the spotlight of public opinion.

According to public information, the two newly added high - consumption restriction notices correspond to a total execution target of 21.4286 million yuan previously, with amounts of 7.1468 million yuan and 14.2818 million yuan respectively. This is just the tip of the iceberg of Smartisan Technology's long - standing debt dilemma.

Looking back at its development history, from the high - spirited start when Luo Yonghao founded it in 2012, to the accumulation of about 600 million yuan in debt after the capital chain broke in 2018, and now to the legal representative being restricted from high - consumption and the founder Luo Yonghao bearing personal unlimited liability guarantee, the rise and fall of Smartisan Technology is not only the fate of a single company but also reflects the cruel reality of the survival of small and medium - sized technology enterprises in the capital wave.

Behind the 21.42 - million - yuan high - consumption restriction order

From a legal perspective, this high - consumption restriction is not an accidental punishment but an enforcement measure taken in accordance with the "Several Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Restricting High - Consumption and Related Consumption of Persons Subject to Enforcement". Specifically, it includes prohibitions on taking flights, first - class seats and above on high - speed trains, and high - consumption in star - rated hotels, golf courses and other places. At the same time, it restricts the purchase of real estate, non - business - essential vehicles, and tourism and vacation activities.

The core purpose of these measures is to prevent the reduction of property and urge the fulfillment of debts by restricting the consumption behavior of enterprises and key responsible persons.

It is not difficult to find from sorting out the timeline that this high - consumption restriction is an inevitable result of the accumulation of debts: In June 2025, the second - instance judgment of a 15 - million - yuan loan lawsuit between Zheng Gang, the CEO of Zihui Venture Capital, and Smartisan Technology upheld the original judgment, requiring Smartisan Technology to repay the principal and interest. This judgment highly coincides with the current execution target amount, suggesting that this high - consumption restriction may be directly related to this loan dispute.

By August, the high - consumption restriction information was officially added, marking a new stage in the court's enforcement process. Unfortunately, in public channels, neither the China Enforcement Information Disclosure Network nor the announcements of the People's Court of Haidian District, Beijing, have disclosed key information such as the specific case number and the full text of the ruling document. This lack of information transparency not only makes it difficult for the outside world to clarify the whole picture of the incident but also adds a bit of mystery to Smartisan Technology's debt repayment path.

From a capital "darling" to a debtor subject to enforcement

Smartisan Technology's current debt quagmire is not caused by a single factor but is the result of the combined effect of internal strategic mistakes and external environmental pressures.

Internally, the company has long relied on financing for survival but failed to establish a sustainable profit model. In the early days, Smartisan Technology's product strategy was too aggressive. From the T - series to the Nut series of mobile phones, the launch of each product was accompanied by high marketing and R & D costs. The financial data of a huge loss of 462 million yuan in 2015 and another loss of 192 million yuan in the first half of 2016 had exposed the hidden operational risks of "heavy investment, light return".

What was even more fatal was the chaos in supply chain management. Due to the delay in paying the payment for goods to partners such as Coolpad, a component supplier, it triggered a credit crisis and legal disputes, resulting in product delivery delays and the collapse of market trust, which directly affected the capital return. This problem of "aggressive front - end products and out - of - control back - end supply chain" laid the groundwork for the subsequent debt crisis.

Externally, after 2018, the smartphone industry entered the stage of stock competition, with weak consumer demand. Coupled with the cold wave in the venture capital market, the financing difficulty of technology enterprises increased significantly. Smartisan Technology, which relied on external financing for survival, lost its source of "blood transfusion", and the break of the capital chain became inevitable.

To make matters worse, the cumulative effect of legal disputes accelerated the crisis: In addition to the loan dispute with Zheng Gang, Smartisan Technology had also been sued many times for problems such as delaying the payment for goods to suppliers and bank debts, forming a vicious circle of "debt default - being enforced - credit impairment - more difficult to finance".

As the founder, although Luo Yonghao has repaid 824 million yuan in debts through live - streaming sales and other means, the huge debt scale of the company and the personal unlimited liability guarantee he signed for the debts have always tied his personal fate with that of the company. Even though he no longer serves as the legal representative, it is still difficult for him to completely break away from the debt whirlpool.

It is worth noting that Smartisan Technology's dilemma also reflects the common problems of small and medium - sized technology enterprises: In an industry environment of "difficulty in raising funds, less investment, and obstacles to exit", how to balance innovation investment and cash - flow safety? How to build the enterprise's own risk - resistance ability while relying on the founder's personal IP? These are not only questions that Smartisan Technology needs to face but also questions that all technology start - up companies driven by capital must think about.

Chain reaction

The impact of this high - consumption restriction incident has gone beyond Smartisan Technology itself and formed a chain reaction that radiates to enterprise operations, the industry ecosystem, and even the legal enforcement level. For Smartisan Technology, the impact of the high - consumption restriction order is all - round: In business negotiations, senior executives are unable to travel by high - speed trains or airplanes, making it difficult to communicate face - to - face with partners; the restriction on staying in star - rated hotels affects the customer cooperation experience.

The labels of "person subject to enforcement" and "high - consumption restriction" have deterred potential investors and suppliers, further intensifying the tension in the capital chain. More importantly, according to Tianyancha information, the current number of insured employees in the company is zero, and its business activities have been greatly reduced. The high - consumption restriction order will undoubtedly make the already difficult business situation even worse and may even lead to the complete stagnation of the existing business.

For Luo Yonghao, although he has made some progress in "the true debt - repayment story" through live - streaming sales and other means, the newly added execution target of the company still casts a shadow over his debt repayment path. As a shareholder with a 22.67% stake and a debt guarantor, the company's credit crisis will not only affect his personal business reputation but may also lead to the risk of him being restricted from high - consumption again. His previous experiences of being restricted from high - consumption due to the company's debts are the best warnings.

For Guan Zhiliang, the current legal representative, the high - consumption restriction order not only restricts his personal consumption but also has a long - term impact on his career development. His personal credit record is damaged, and he may encounter trust barriers when taking up positions in enterprises or participating in business cooperation in the future.

From an industry perspective, Smartisan Technology's case has sounded a heavy alarm for small and medium - sized technology enterprises: Entrepreneurship not only requires innovative ideas and sentiment but also needs to balance cash - flow and scale expansion and avoid over - reliance on financing; At the same time, the credit of the legal representative is deeply bound to the enterprise credit, and enterprise operators need to pay attention to compliant operations and be cautious about personal guarantees, and not ignore long - term risks for short - term development.

For Smartisan Technology, the path to get out of the current dilemma is not completely blocked: Introducing strategic investors through debt restructuring, disposing of remaining assets to repay debts, or reaching a settlement with creditors may all be the keys to breaking the deadlock. But no matter what the result is, this 21.42 - million - yuan high - consumption restriction crisis has become a typical case in the field of Chinese technology entrepreneurship.

It reminds all entrepreneurs that while pursuing their ideals, they need to always maintain awe of the market and prudence with funds; it also calls for a more perfect venture capital environment and an open mechanism for enforcement information to provide a healthier living space for enterprises.

(This article is for reference only and does not constitute investment advice. The market is risky, and investment should be made with caution.)

This article is from the WeChat official account "FUSE", written by Lü Zihe, and is published by 36Kr with authorization.