Who Fall Into The “brand Competition” In The Abyss?

November 24, 2009 in Haikou City, the Bureau issued a consumer warning on product quality supervision, the warning said ” Nongfushangquan “Guangdong Wanlu Lake Co. June 27, 2009 30% of the production of Nongfuguoyuan mixed fruit and vegetable, August 16, 2009 Grapefruit juice production of soluble C100 Beverages And the “unified” enterprise of China Investment Co., Ltd. August 22, 2009 peach production exceeded more than the total arsenic. News is published, immediately in the major media and the website caused an uproar.

Scandal not only out Nongfushangquan high-profile response, saying the issue should be resolved through legal means, and quickly upload the sample to the State Quality Supervision and Inspection Centre, processed food, by testing samples of the total arsenic content in compliance. Nongfushangquan Business unilateral recheck the sea side that is invalid, and questioned this matter is behind the plan after the results. Haikou Municipal Bureau of Commerce and Industry have replied that there is “black hands” of manipulation. For a controversial reputations.

Strayed into the abyss In the current brand Marketing Competitive activities, many companies will hear some suggestions: use of negative news or corporate loopholes for speculation in the industry to achieve the well-known jumps into enterprise marketing purposes, or against competitors. But speculation is completed, the brand reputation and loyalty are what hurt? On how much to enhance sales? Will not let the industry back? It merely a temporary brand carried away damaging to the industry hype? Even speculation became well-known who will continue to purchase your products? involved in the industry and consumers will have the brand loyalty it? a series of problems is the business about to happen, is happening, or even being executed. This being so involved in this vicious corporate brand competition, the entire industry into the abyss.

Nongfushangquan the door of this arsenic is built on such a banner of “brand competition,” a slogan against the background of the consequences. We must look back to the water market competitors again and again into the abyss of the “best of the campaign”:

1, “water gate”: July 24, 2008, End of the World Release ” Master Kong : Your high-quality water where? “Network article exposing the truth of Master Kong water. Post said that friends had sneaked into the Master Kong is located in Hangzhou Economic & Technological Development Zone on the 4th Avenue on the 27th of the production base, near the base study found no so-called “quality water”, the only natural water source is polluted Qiantang River, so that users judge “Master Kong or processed with water or use dirty water from Qiantang River, it is absolutely not what ‘good water’.” Posts published drawing attention, many users have accused the Master Kang allegedly false propaganda.

A time, Master become common knowledge. September 2, 2008, “water gate” affair continued for a month, the water giant Master Kong the first time, senior management group at the press conference, to be invited to the Beijing-Tianjin region mineral media Aquatic Products Ads labeled “high-quality water use” of the cognitive differences caused by the public apology to consumers.

“Water Gate” before the crisis, according to Master Kong 2007 annual report, its Package Water market share reached 15.4% for the market first. Water crisis, according to Sina survey: more than 80% of the users that no longer trust Master Kong brand. “Water incident” on the Master Kong brand and Sell Damage is obvious.

2, “false donated door”: August 11, 2009, “Public Welfare Times,” published in “Nongfushangquan” penny “donated by the question,” the article questioned Nongfushangquan the “penny” Community activities: In accordance with the previously released “penny” project continued from 2001 to 2008 plan, the farmer spring every year at least 15 million yuan donation to the “Sunshine Project” Education Fund, while the actual cash donations can only be found in public donations in 2006 500 million, does not match the original commitment. Nongfushangquan then the “malicious slander” as an excuse claims five million yuan, the newspaper and the public when the China Social Work Association to court.

“False donated door” storm had just subsided, farmers can have a break just spring, followed in the spring is to let the farmer can not afford the “arsenic door.” SABUNG AYAM