出品 | 搜狐财经 作者 | 王泽红 "从今天（5月12日）开始，我跟大家说不再拉人进来了。现在群里有392个人，全部验证过，都是（小米SU7 Ultra）车主，基本 都是想要退2万的定金。" "还有人陆续想加群，但我有点不敢再加人了，害怕有一些其他变数。其他群友想要拉人，我跟他们说，如果有新消息你们可以 转达一下。" "害怕各种各样的截图发出去。"姜文向搜狐财经坦言道，他是小米SU7 Ultra的一位准车主，也是挖孔版车退订群的创建者。 近期，小米因SU7 Ultra碳纤维挖孔机盖版车型再次陷入舆论风波，多名准车主认为，其高价选装的碳纤维双风道前舱盖，存在 虚假宣传问题或者官方表达有误，引发众多车主不满。 这也导致部分车主产生退车情绪，5月12日下午，有欲退车车主告诉搜狐财经，已收到小米客服反馈。 姜文供图 欲退订车主：本是想炫耀，现在太反差了 有车主表示，价值4.2万元的碳纤维机盖，宣传时的赛车级碳纤维、双风道空气动力学设计、能辅助散热还能提升下压力、减 重、提高整车性能……结果车刚提回来被泼了一盆冷水。 有博主用鼓风机对着小米SU7 Ultra的"挖孔"前盖猛吹，但放在开孔上的纸巾纹丝不动。此外，有车主 ...

Core Insights - In the first quarter of 2025, a total of 461,767 consumer complaints were received nationwide, marking a year-on-year increase of 33.33% [1] - The complaints led to the resolution of 261,218 cases, recovering economic losses amounting to 23.723 million yuan for consumers [1] - The nature of complaints showed that contract issues accounted for 26.56%, after-sales service issues for 26.07%, and quality issues for 19.67% [1] Complaint Categories - Compared to the first quarter of 2024, the proportion of complaints regarding false advertising, counterfeiting, and safety issues increased, while complaints related to quality and contract issues decreased [2] - Product-related complaints totaled 245,964, representing 53.27% of all complaints, an increase of 6.38 percentage points from the previous year [2] - Service-related complaints amounted to 190,382, accounting for 41.23% of total complaints, a decrease of 5.00 percentage points [2] Specific Product Complaints - The top five categories for product complaints were home electronics, clothing and footwear, daily goods, food, and transportation tools [2] - Compared to the first quarter of 2024, complaints regarding clothing and daily goods increased, while complaints about agricultural production materials decreased [2] Specific Service Complaints - The leading categories for service complaints included internet services, life and social services, education and training services, sales services, and cultural, entertainment, and sports services [3] - There was an increase in complaints related to financial services, cultural, entertainment, and sports services, and public facility services, while complaints about life and social services, internet services, and telecommunications services decreased [2][3]

Core Viewpoint - Xiaomi's high-end model SU7 Ultra faces backlash over misleading advertising regarding its carbon fiber dual-channel hood, leading to customer dissatisfaction and demands for refunds [1][2][4]. Group 1: Customer Complaints - Multiple SU7 Ultra pre-order customers claim that the advertised carbon fiber dual-channel hood does not match the actual product, which lacks the promised internal modifications and functionality [2][4]. - A group of over 300 customers has formed to demand refunds, citing that the high-priced option is merely decorative rather than functional as initially advertised [1][4][5]. Group 2: Company Response - On May 7, Xiaomi issued an apology and proposed a compensation plan, offering a limited-time option to switch back to the aluminum hood for undelivered orders and providing 20,000 points for those who had already received the car [3][5]. - The company acknowledged that the previous communication regarding the hood's features was unclear, stating it provides some airflow and cooling functions beyond just aesthetic replication [3]. Group 3: Market Position and Sales - The SU7 Ultra was officially launched on February 27, priced at 529,000 yuan, and has reportedly surpassed 10,000 pre-orders, achieving its annual sales target ahead of schedule [5]. - The model aims to be the "fastest" four-door production car, equipped with advanced features such as a racing-grade cooling system and a chassis tuned for performance [5].

Core Viewpoint - Xiaomi's high-end model SU7 Ultra is facing backlash from over 300 prospective owners due to alleged false advertising regarding the carbon fiber dual air duct hood, leading to demands for a no-penalty return policy [1][4]. Group 1: Customer Complaints - Many SU7 Ultra prospective owners believe that the advertised features of the carbon fiber dual air duct hood do not match the actual product, which they claim is merely decorative [2][4]. - A group of SU7 Ultra prospective owners has formed a rights protection group to advocate for a no-penalty return policy, expressing dissatisfaction with Xiaomi's compensation plan [1][5]. Group 2: Xiaomi's Response - On May 7, Xiaomi publicly apologized and offered a compensation plan, which includes a limited-time option to switch back to an aluminum hood for undelivered orders and a points system for those who have already received their vehicles [3][5]. - Xiaomi's initial marketing claimed that the carbon fiber hood was a functional upgrade, but the company later stated that it only partially provides airflow and cooling benefits, which has led to confusion among consumers [3][4]. Group 3: Product Details and Market Performance - The SU7 Ultra was officially launched on February 27, priced at 529,000 yuan, and aims to be the "fastest" four-door production car, with over 10,000 pre-orders already received [6]. - The vehicle features Xiaomi's advanced electric motor system and is designed for high-performance use, including track capabilities [6].

近日，小米汽车就两个问题两度致歉，话题瞬间冲上热搜榜首。然而，这不过是小米所面临舆论风暴的冰山一角。 一个多月时间里，小米汽车接连出了四个大事。这四次重击犹如四根钢钉，将小米汽车钉在舆论的十字架上。 曾经意气风发的雷军和如日中天的小米，如今正站在悬崖边缘，脚下是深不见底的信任黑洞。 5月7日深夜，小米汽车官方发布一个声明，就近期小米SU7 Ultra车型引发的两项争议，两次"深表歉意"。 第一个争议，"排位模式"解锁。 小米SU7 Ultra近日更新了车机版本，对车辆的动力输出进行了限制，1548匹最大马力被锁定，车主需要达成赛道成绩才能解锁，否则只能使用大约900匹 马力。 不少小米车主认为，自己购买该车就是冲着高马力去的，现在性能被限制，这是不尊重车主的表现，而且还侵犯了车主的权利。 第二个争议，小米SU7 Ultra 碳纤维挖孔机盖。 有博主通过实验，用鼓风机对着小米SU7 Ultra的"挖孔"前机盖猛吹，结果发现纸巾纹丝不动。 更有车主亲自拆解前机盖，发现所谓的"双风道高效导流"碳纤维开孔，既无法有效引导空气至刹车系统或产生下压力，日常使用中散热效果也不明显。 这样的结果引发巨大风波，让很多"挖孔"版 ...

Core Viewpoint - The "Guiding Compass Stock" app has faced multiple user complaints regarding misleading marketing practices, including persistent phone harassment and exaggerated claims about its features, raising concerns about consumer deception [1][3][8]. Group 1: Marketing Practices - The app promotes a "1 yuan permanent experience" to attract users, claiming a value of 1580 yuan for its services, which has led to complaints of aggressive upselling tactics from company representatives [1][3]. - Users report receiving numerous unsolicited calls and messages after signing up, with staff pressuring them to upgrade to higher-priced versions of the software [1][4]. - The company employs a marketing model that combines "traffic promotion + direct sales + experiential sales," which has resulted in a significant increase in registered and paying users [3][4]. Group 2: Product Claims and User Experience - The app's main selling point is its "three locks" feature, which claims to provide intelligent monitoring and accurate buy/sell signals with a success rate of around 70% [4][5]. - Users have criticized the "three locks" feature for being misleading, with many reporting significant losses after following its buy signals [5][7]. - Experts have pointed out that the signals provided by the app often lag behind market movements, potentially leading users to make poor investment decisions [7][8]. Group 3: Regulatory Concerns - The app's marketing practices may violate regulations regarding investment advisory services, particularly concerning misleading claims and inducements to upgrade [8]. - Regulatory bodies have previously penalized similar firms for using deceptive marketing tactics and making unsubstantiated claims about their services [8].

近日，有网友发布视频称，粉丝量超2千万的网红"大LOGO"带货的一款马头岩肉桂茶存在虚假宣传 问题。5月2日，南都记者从福建省武夷山市市场监督管理局获悉，经初步核查，相关茶叶公司涉嫌虚 假宣传，目前已经立案调查，后续调查结果将会向社会公布。 5月2日，记者搜索发现，网友发布的质疑"大LOGO"带货茶叶存在虚假宣传的视频已无法查看。该网 友在最新发布的视频中称已将此前的视频隐藏，并称武夷山市相关部门已经与他取得联系并告知事件 最新进展。 5月1日，武夷山市市场监督管理局曾发布情况通报称，4月27日，武夷山市市场监管局收到网友反映 某网络大V于4月23日16时发布标题为"武夷山核心产区高货！！！正岩纯料马头岩肉桂！！！兄弟们 这波稳稳拿下！！！送人自饮想喝点好的千万别错过！！！"的带货视频存在虚假宣传问题，立即组织 人员进行调查。 经初步核查，该视频中涉及的企业武夷山市马枕峰茶业有限公司涉嫌虚假宣传，武夷山市市场监督管 理局已于4月28日进行立案调查。目前，该案正在进一步核查处置中，武夷山市市场监督管理局将及 时公布相关调查情况，并将开展全面排查整治，依法从严从快打击茶叶市场违法行为。 5月2日下午，武夷山市市场 ...

近日，有网友发布视频称，粉丝量超2千万的网红"大LOGO"带货的一款马头岩肉桂茶存在虚假宣传问 题。5月2日，南都记者从福建省武夷山市市场监督管理局获悉，经初步核查，相关茶叶公司涉嫌虚假宣 传，目前已经立案调查，后续调查结果将会向社会公布。 该网红账号仍在售卖其他品牌的马头岩肉桂茶。 5月2日，南都记者搜索发现，网友发布的质疑"大LOGO"带货茶叶存在虚假宣传的视频已无法查看。该 网友在最新发布的视频中称已将此前的视频隐藏，并称武夷山市相关部门已经与他取得联系并告知事件 最新进展。 5月1日，武夷山市市场监督管理局曾发布情况通报称，4月27日，武夷山市市场监管局收到网友反映某 网络大V于4月23日16时发布标题为"武夷山核心产区高货！！！正岩纯料马头岩肉桂！！！兄弟们这波 稳稳拿下！！！送人自饮想喝点好的千万别错过！！！"的带货视频存在虚假宣传问题，立即组织人员 进行调查。 5月2日下午，武夷山市市场监督管理局回应南都记者采访称，目前此事仍在调查中，具体案件细节不便 透露，后续调查结果将会向社会公布。 2日下午，武夷山市马枕峰茶业有限公司相关工作人员告诉南都记者，目前他们正在配合市监部门调 查。但该工作人员又 ...

Core Viewpoint - The article investigates the potential issues within emotional consulting agencies, including allegations of misleading advertising, consumer inducement, and unethical practices in service delivery [2][4][7]. Group 1: Industry Practices - Numerous consumers reported experiences of inducement and false promises while seeking emotional consulting services, spending thousands to tens of thousands of yuan without satisfactory results [2][4]. - The agencies involved collected extensive personal information from consumers and their partners, including work units, social media accounts, and property details, raising concerns about ethical practices [2][25]. - Many of the companies lack the necessary qualifications for psychological consulting, with only one out of six identified companies having relevant credentials [3][4]. Group 2: Misleading Advertising - Consumers claimed that agencies implied or promised successful relationship repairs, which may constitute false advertising if not explicitly stated in contracts [8][9]. - Some agencies, like Happiness Youfang, allegedly suggested high success rates for their services, which could mislead consumers into purchasing upgrades [9][12]. Group 3: Consumer Inducement - Agencies reportedly encouraged consumers to frequently upgrade their services, suggesting that failure to do so could hinder their chances of success [13][14]. - Responses from agency representatives indicated that they do not engage in coercive sales tactics, but consumer testimonies suggest otherwise [14][15]. Group 4: Ethical Concerns - The practice of "dual service," where therapists engage both partners without full disclosure, raises ethical questions regarding consent and confidentiality [17][21]. - The "separation of third parties" service offered by some agencies, which involves creating conflict to break up relationships, is viewed as unethical and contrary to professional standards [22][24]. Group 5: Information Collection - Agencies collected extensive personal data, which may violate the principle of minimal necessity in data protection laws, as much of the information gathered was not directly relevant to the services provided [25][26]. - Concerns were raised about the necessity and relevance of the information collected, with suggestions that it exceeded what was required for service delivery [26]. Group 6: Contractual Issues - Many contracts included clauses that favored the agencies, such as requiring consumer consent for contract termination while lacking clear terms regarding the agency's responsibilities [27][28]. - Legal experts indicated that such contractual terms could be deemed invalid due to the imbalance of rights and obligations between the parties involved [30].

Core Viewpoint - The company, Zhenai.com, is undergoing a comprehensive investigation and rectification process in response to recent public concerns regarding the closure of multiple offline stores and the disappearance of service personnel, assuring that member rights will not be compromised [2][4][6]. Group 1: Company Response - Zhenai.com issued a statement emphasizing that any store closures or adjustments with partners are part of normal business optimization and do not affect overall operations or member services [2]. - The company has committed to maintaining customer responsibilities and contract obligations, ensuring that all signed marriage service agreements are fully honored [2][4]. Group 2: Customer Complaints - Numerous offline paid members have reported sudden store closures without prior notice, leading to service interruptions and difficulties in obtaining refunds [4][5]. - Complaints have surged, with over 100 complaints in the last 30 days on platforms like Black Cat Complaints, primarily concerning inducement to consume and difficulties in refund processes [7]. Group 3: Regulatory Issues - Zhenai.com has faced penalties for false advertising, including a fine of 1.7 million yuan for sending fabricated information and promoting false cases [8]. - The company has been criticized for its operational practices, including the use of "virtual personas" to lure potential customers into purchasing expensive membership services [10]. Group 4: Financial Background - Zhenai.com has primarily focused on early-stage financing, with significant strategic acquisitions in later stages, indicating a shift in its business model [10][12].