In July of another year, Nongfu Spring and the Hong Kong Consumer Council, two old enemies, got on the bar again. Who ate the gunpowder? It's not a mess. One thing to say, a bottle of water can still make such a big noise, which can be regarded as adding a bit of heat to the midsummer of July. What are the applicable standards, judgment standards, and subjective misleading, Nongfu Spring was stunned in the lawyer's letter, and the sharp words and harsh wording made the people who eat melons stunned. How should this battle be fought? We'll see.
Let's start with the cause of the incident.
The Hong Kong Consumer Council conducted a bottled water test a few days ago and found that 3 micrograms of bromate per liter were detected in the water of Nongfu Spring, which is just up to the ceiling of the EU standard. This revelation can shock consumers' hearts - why does Nongfu Spring still have this kind of operation? There shouldn't be bromate in the water!
But Nongfu Spring is clearly out of business. People list word by word in the lawyer's letter: 3 micrograms is far lower than the United States, Japan, and United Kingdom, and even the WHO standard has not been met! You're endless, aren't you? It's okay to show off any sense of existence?
To be honest, after watching the two sides scare each other, as a consumer, I am confused. Who should I believe? Is the EU's 3 micrograms the truth, or is the WHO's 10 micrograms king?
However, there is one thing to say, just from the wording of the lawyer's letter, Nongfu Spring is real.
"Wrong application standards, wrong standard judgments, and obviously subjective misleading", this three-hit combination is a real hardcore, and there is no ambiguity at all. Nongfu Spring is determined to compare this with the Consumer Council.
Then taste the three points mentioned by Nongfu Spring.
First of all, the applicable standards, the Consumer Council is talking about EU standards, but Nongfu Spring is the water sold in China. The EU will not work, let's give a look at the Chinese standard first?
Secondly, even if you really take the EU standard, your judgment is a bit too bad for the Consumer Council. 3 micrograms and 3 micrograms, you don't say that people exceed the standard, isn't this a bit blatant to smear people's heads?
Finally, this subjective misleading is even more ridiculous. What do you mean? It is necessary to say that the water of Nongfu Spring is poisonous in front of consumers. Isn't this a clear statement of confrontation and picking?
But then again, the common people are still concerned about one question: should there be bromate in the water? Is 3 micrograms a big deal? It's a matter of opinion. If you have to compare this truth, it is estimated that the two sides will have to fight for 18 rounds.
Nongfu Spring and the Consumer Council, one is a predator in the water, and the other is a consumer spokesperson, and this drama of tearing each other apart must continue to be staged. Capital and public opinion, who will kill the deer? We continued to watch intently.
But there is a point that Nongfu Spring is talking about. The impact of the Council's hammer on consumers is not a star. The trend of public opinion for this revelation is not something that can be eliminated by one or two sentences of apology and clarification. At that time, how to carry this pot and how to calculate this account will depend on the subsequent performance of both parties.
How much splash can 3 micrograms of bromate provoke? What kind of sparks will Nongfu Spring and the Hong Kong Consumer Council make? This drama has just begun, and the climax and excitement are still to come. Who will have the last laugh? We watched while eating melons. Will this farce be a slap in the face of capital and public opinion?