Recently, the Euler brand under Great Wall Motors has had a "stealing chip" incident, and in response to several statements issued by the Euler brand, there have been polarized comments on the Internet. One side believes that Euler's apology is insincere and avoids its own responsibility; the other side believes that Euler has demonstrated the responsibility of the national brand, calling on consumers to be tolerant of the Euler brand and give room for growth.
This can't help but remind Brother Reed of the Huawei brand. I believe many people still remember that there was a large-scale discussion on the Internet before, one of which believed that Huawei is a national brand, as a Chinese should fully support Huawei mobile phones, and should not buy foreign brands such as Apple mobile phones. The opposite side said that consumers have the freedom to buy and should not use moral kidnapping to help Huawei mobile phones kill opponents.
What both events have in common is how Chinese consumers treat national brands. Full support, or free choice of goods in a free market atmosphere? This question may wish to be answered at the end, we will first briefly review and understand the Euler "stealing chips" incident.
"Missing core", Euler is anxious?
As we all know, due to the repeated outbreaks of the new crown epidemic, the supply and demand relationship of global automotive chips has been very tight this year. From several times the cost price to the "coreless" impact on the production and delivery of automobiles, the entire automotive industry, without exception, has been significantly affected. Great Wall Motor's Euler brand is obviously also plagued by "lack of core", otherwise it is difficult to explain why Euler will quietly replace the good cat chip marked on the official website from the "Qualcomm Qualcomm8 core" CPU chip to the "Intel Intel · Atom·x5·a3940·4-core" processor chip, thus triggering negative public opinion of false propaganda.
What is the difference between the two chips? Why is it causing consumer dissatisfaction? According to Brother Rumble, the cost price of the Qualcomm chip previously advertised by Euler Good Cat is about double that of the Intel chip. In addition, the computing power of the chip is ten times different. Many consumers said that in the process of using Euler Good Cat, there were problems such as navigation cats. Euler good cat owners generally believe that Euler's shoddy and false marketing has triggered a consumer trust crisis.
So, how does the Euler brand explain it?
Euler: It's all a misunderstanding
Great Wall Motors also responded several times after the Euler "stealing chip" incident and issued a corresponding compensation plan. The explanation for "stealing the chip" is that "in the planning, this configuration was originally intended to be installed on future models." Great Wall Motors said that there is no motive for false publicity, because the news that has been released to the public is that Weipai Moka is the world's first model equipped with Qualcomm 8155 chips, and the event of the mocha listing is in May this year, and the Euler Good Cat is the model listed last year.
If this is the case, why would Euler promote the Qualcomm chip equipped with the cat in advance on the official website? The Great Wall said that this is a misunderstanding of the label, the official website of the promotion is to introduce the lemon platform, coffee intelligence platform, and did not say that the Cat Car machine equipped with the Qualcomm 8155 chip.
However, in fact, in the configuration table of the good cat model, Qualcomm's professional on-board processing chip is clearly marked, which is difficult not to misunderstand. If this is not intentional by the car manufacturer, then this mistake can only be a mistake in the input data of the "temporary worker". But for consumers, since the promotional materials are written as Qualcomm chips, the Intel chips you give at this time are "not fragrant".
Euler brand response is insufficient sincerity, consumer dissatisfaction escalated
After the news of Euler's "stealing the chip", consumers have successively asked automakers to replace the Qualcomm chip marked by the promotional materials. Common sense, this requirement is not excessive. After all, euler broke the appointment first, and it is very important to sincerely apologize and respond to the needs of consumers. But what is unexpected is that the response released by the Euler brand has once again fermented things.
First of all, consumers think that the response of the Euler brand is light. It did not face the mistake directly, but tried to narrow the distance with consumers with words such as "Princess Highness"; at the same time, it did not clearly state that it would replace Qualcomm chips, but only issued rights and interests packages, extended entertainment traffic packages, etc. For the Qualcomm chips that consumers want, Euler has never mentioned anything, and it is difficult for consumers to get a satisfactory answer.
On the surface, with euler's several statements and the issuance of the rights package, the matter has come to an end. But are the owners of Euler's good cats really satisfied? A sign of sincerity praising Euler's approach is becoming more and more thought-provoking.
In this case, euler's good cat owner's request is not excessive, but can the final solution be satisfactory? This answer is probably only the owner of the car. And those who applaud Euler, do they really pay attention to the difficulties encountered by Chinese brands in the development process?
The so-called "tolerance" is nothing more than a kind of coddling. Chinese brands must have the endurance to accept the voices of external doubts, and they must also learn to reflect and grow in mistakes. Tolerance can not save Chinese car brands, facing the storm is the best polishing weapon!