Comment丨 Watsons apologizes: the price is more than "1 cent"

Although Watson claims that the anchor is a third-party staff member, this kind of "temporary worker" rhetoric obviously cannot keep Watsons out of the matter.

"Just for a penny thing, biting like a mad dog" "Kicking you are happy" "Deservedly"... Recently, because the anchor insulted and blackmailed consumers in the live broadcast room, Watsons was sent to Weibo hot search. The incident originated from the mask promotion activity launched by Watsons on the Meituan platform on the 11th, according to the promotion rules, consumers can buy a box of masks at a price of 1 cent, but they need to pick up the goods in offline stores. However, consumers who successfully placed orders said that after receiving the merchant's stocking and picking up information, they were told that they were out of stock when they picked up the goods, and the merchant did not have any way to deal with it. As a result, Watson's approach has led to a large number of consumer complaints.

Late at night on the 14th, Watsons apologized for the anchor's inappropriate remarks, and said that this activity caused a large number of abnormal orders in a short period of time that far exceeded the inventory due to system reasons, and Watsons had redeemed some orders in the case of inventory support, and later suspended the payment due to insufficient inventory, and Watsons decided to take the way of replenishment to fulfill the remaining orders.

With 1 cent can buy a box of masks, the corresponding cost is certainly more than the price, it seems that consumers take advantage of the advantage and Watsons "suffers losses", but in fact, this account can not be so calculated. After all, the launch of this film discount campaign lies in Watson's hope to attract more consumers through the activity. In other words, for every 1 cent mask delivered, Watsons gets a connection between the product and the user, and if the user trusts the quality of the product, he may buy more masks or other products, which forms an effective sales conversion.

Through the participation and word of mouth of many consumers, the "1 cent" activity can also drive the brand influence of Watsons in the consumer group, so that more consumers who do not know Watsons before form a perception of the brand, and even form a secondary communication through the use of relatives and friends - this is the interpersonal communication model based on the social chain, and its effect is far better than direct advertising.

However, Watsons apparently did not settle the big account of this event, and in the apology statement, Watsons said that the inventory was limited, so it suspended the payment. However, Watsons customer service has not given corresponding solutions before, such as the delayed payment time of the 1 cent mask, the later replenishment, etc., which is equivalent to declaring that the ultra-low price discount that consumers should enjoy is facing unjustified cancellation, which has violated its activity commitment, which is not only a corporate untrustworthy behavior, but also suspected of violating article 4 of the Advertising Law: "Advertisements must not contain false content, and must not deceive and mislead consumers."

After paying for the order but unable to pick up the goods, questions and complaints followed, which is also a proper move for consumers to safeguard their legal rights. However, under the silence of Watsons' official, the anchor of its product operator attacked consumers with vicious words, and his words have been suspected of personality insults. Although Watson claims that the anchor is a third-party staff member, this kind of "temporary worker" rhetoric obviously cannot keep Watsons out of the matter. After all, Watsons has reached a cooperative relationship with the operating agency, and such misconduct by the employees of the partners also means that the relevant personnel of Watsons are derelict in their daily management. Consumers will put the account on Watson's head, and it makes perfect sense.

Now it seems that Watsons can not make up for the multiple losses caused by this incident with only an apology statement and the replenishment of consumers who did not get a 1 cent mask. After all, after this incident, Watson's corporate image has been damaged, especially the trust of consumers in its brand may be reduced. And the anchor's out-of-line remarks amplify Watson's arrogant and rude posture towards consumers. In the highly competitive FMCG market, it is believed that more consumers will choose to vote with their feet.

In the past, there is a so-called "big shop bully", but don't forget that in a market where free competition and consumers are given full choice, even largest stores cannot withstand the rapid loss of customers, and the cost is so great that no amount of money can make up for it. The lesson of Watson's "1 cent promotional mask" incident is profound, and other brands should also take it as a warning, respect consumers, and pay attention to consumer rights and interests, which is the way to go steadily.

Red Star News special commentator Bi Ye

Edited by Wang Yaotao

Red Star Review Submission Email: [email protected]

(Download Red Star News, there are prizes for the newspaper!) ）