Author: Sun Yan Source: IT Times
Nowadays, it is a game between brands and anchors, if consumers do not recognize the current coupon compensation scheme, tens of thousands of consumer complaints escalate, then it is unfavorable to brands and anchors, and even Taobao platforms. Here, if the live broadcast room can not buy the lowest price, then consumers next year double 11 probability is not willing to squat in the live broadcast room, the direct impact is sales and commissions. Over there, if the official flagship store pre-sale is more expensive than the spot, then consumers are likely to be reluctant to participate in the pre-sale, and the brand will not be able to arrange inventory and logistics in advance according to the number of pre-sales.
After 24 hours after li jiaqi and Wei ya, the two anchors of "suspend cooperation" and "L'Oréal does not come out of the compensation plan, I will come to the bottom", L'Oréal Paris finally responded to the ampoule mask incident again at 8:00 pm on November 18 and announced the solution, for consumers who bought ampoule masks in the flagship store from October 20 to October 31 and the cumulative product orders reached 999 yuan, and did not receive 999-200 consumption coupons. L'Oréal will offer a $200 voucher without a threshold. For consumers who purchase ampoule masks at the same time in the flagship store but the cumulative order is less than 999 yuan, L'Oréal will provide two coupons for 499-100. At the same time, the above consumers are invited to become Gold Card members.
On November 19, Li Jiaqi and Wei Ya's team both replied to the IT Times reporter: "It does not matter whether we recognize it, the core lies in whether consumers recognize it." As of press time, neither Li Jiaqi nor Via has issued an official statement on L'Oréal Paris's compensation plan.
Image source: Oriental IC
"IT Times" reporter randomly interviewed a number of consumers who complained on Sina Black Cat, Weibo and other platforms, and all said that they did not recognize the compensation plan of L'Oréal Paris to give coupons, and generally tended to refund the price difference.
In November, the monthly sales of the same ampoule mask for the three live broadcasts were: Li Jiaqi sold more than 600,000 sets in the live broadcast room, more than 200,000 sets in the Via live broadcast room, and more than 100,000 sets sold in the official flagship store of L'Oréal.
Roughly estimated, if Li Jiaqi and Wei Ya are at the bottom, how much do they need to lose? The price of L'Oréal Ampoule Mask is 429 yuan / set, and most consumers actually pay about 375 yuan to 418 yuan after stacking cross-store full reductions and other coupons. If the difference is refunded according to the lowest price of 257 yuan, each set needs to be refunded 118 yuan to 161 yuan. Assuming that Li Jiaqi and Wei Ya pay the bottom compensation, Li Jiaqi will need to pay nearly 70.8 million yuan to 96.6 million yuan, and Wei Ya will need to pay 23.6 million yuan to 32.2 million yuan.
At the same time, the entire pre-sale mechanism of the Taobao platform will be questioned, because the L'Oréal Paris pre-sale is more expensive than the spot is not the case of this double 11, and brands such as Converse and Feile have been named by the China Consumer Association.
Judging from the random interview of IT Times, most consumers do not approve of L'Oréal Paris's coupon compensation plan, and Li Jiaqi and Wei Ya's team are also waiting to see consumer feedback, so what will be the direction of this incident? L'Oréal Paris said in a statement on November 18 that it had set up an incident task force at the first time to actively understand, clarify and deal with consumer inquiries and needs with relevant government departments, which showed that the relevant regulatory authorities had intervened in this matter.
The focus of the incident is whether L'Oréal Paris's claim of "maximum effort of the year" on its official Microblog constitutes deliberate consumer fraud or false publicity. Finally, it depends on the findings of the relevant regulatory authorities.
You Yunting, a partner at Shanghai Dabang Law Firm and an intellectual property lawyer, said that in terms of civil liability, if the investigation proves that L'Oréal's "maximum efforts of the year" propaganda in early October was deliberately defrauding consumers, they should refund one to consumers and pay three. If L'Oréal provides sufficient evidence that it was negligently caused the promotion, it does not necessarily constitute fraud, but the liability for refunding the difference to the consumer is mandatory.
In terms of administrative liability, whether it is a deliberate fraud or an accident of negligence, the Market Supervision Bureau may confiscate the illegal gains and impose an administrative penalty of confiscating the illegal gains and imposing a fine of not less than one times but not more than ten times the illegal gains for false publicity.