始祖鸟在喜马拉雅搞出大动作之后，全网都在问：这是怎么通过审核的？真的就看不出问题吗？ Emmmm……别说公众，公关也是同款疑惑，疑惑程度只深不浅。 9月22日，央视《东方时空》去现场探访，实拍到了一堆谁看了都想骂几句的画面，采访的环保专家、动物专家也说后果严重。 因为与主办方之前"没什么影响"的说法出入很大，始祖鸟和蔡国强"说谎"的词条又上热搜，要求"严惩"的呼声也挺大。 聊聊怎么当时就没人拦一下始祖鸟呢？ 对于高溢价的品牌，这种彰显咖位和手笔的活动，是标配，也是常态。谁家不弄几个，出门遇到同行都不好意思打招呼。 我们并不否认这类活动的价值。肯定有，而且还是不小的价值。这篇文章想要讨论的是：精准营销和闭环沟通，为什么会更容易导致危机公关，以及有没 有改善的余地。 02 喜马拉雅放烟花这种天花板级别的"大型创意活动"，必然需要经过一道又一道的流程审批。 我们能够通过始祖鸟的官方直播看到放烟花画面，意味着整个链路上的人，都按下了"同意"。 有2种可能性： 其一，公司里上上下下左左右右，有一个算一个，都没看出来。 01 在喜马拉雅放烟花，请蔡国强亲自操刀，搞出"龙"这种气势，连炸4波，我不知道具体费用，因为没有搞过 ...

Core Viewpoint - The conflict between Luo Yonghao and Xibei over "pre-made dishes" highlights a significant gap in contemporary business logic and consumer psychology, reflecting consumers' growing concerns about transparency and value perception in the food industry [2][4]. Consumer Concerns - Consumers are increasingly questioning what they are actually paying for when dining out, particularly in establishments that emphasize fresh and authentic ingredients [3][4]. - The expectation of fresh, made-to-order meals is being challenged by the presence of pre-made items, leading to feelings of deception among consumers when they discover frozen or long-shelf-life products [5]. Value Perception - The issue of price versus perceived value is critical; consumers are willing to pay high prices for quality but are frustrated when they feel they are paying for industrial processes rather than culinary craftsmanship [5]. - The core concern is whether consumers are paying for "Xibei's craftsmanship" or "Xibei's efficiency," and they demand clear pricing to make informed choices [5]. Crisis Management - Xibei's public relations response has been criticized as "disastrous," with experts noting that the company's approach escalated the situation rather than calming it [7]. - The initial confrontational response to Luo Yonghao's criticism failed to acknowledge consumer concerns and instead turned the issue into a battle between the company and its customers [7][8]. - The company's attempts to clarify terminology and definitions did not resonate with consumers, who prioritize their experiences over technical correctness [8]. Shift in Strategy - Following the backlash, Xibei appears to be transitioning from a defensive stance to a more reflective approach, indicating a willingness to address consumer concerns and rebuild trust [9]. - Effective crisis management should focus on transparency, humility, and collaboration with consumers rather than legal threats or technical arguments [11][15]. Future Implications - The incident serves as a warning for businesses about the importance of transparency and trust in the digital age, where information asymmetry is diminishing [20][21]. - Companies that integrate transparency into their core strategies and prioritize consumer value are more likely to succeed in the evolving market landscape [21].

Core Viewpoint - The controversy surrounding the "pre-prepared dishes" debate highlights a significant disconnect between consumer expectations and the practices of contemporary dining establishments, particularly in the case of Xibei Restaurant Group [3][4][5] Consumer Concerns - Consumers are increasingly questioning the value they receive for their money, particularly when they perceive a lack of transparency regarding food preparation methods [4][5] - The expectation of fresh, hand-prepared meals is being challenged by the revelation of pre-prepared items, leading to feelings of deception among consumers [4][5] - The issue of price versus perceived value is central, with consumers willing to pay for high-quality dining experiences but resistant to paying for industrial processes disguised as artisanal cooking [4][5][6] Crisis Management - Xibei's initial response to the controversy was criticized as "disastrous public relations," characterized by confrontational tactics rather than de-escalation [6][8] - The company's attempts to clarify terminology regarding "central kitchen" versus "pre-prepared" dishes failed to resonate with consumer understanding, leading to further ridicule [6][7] - The involvement of the founder in the public dispute exacerbated the situation, turning a brand crisis into a personal image crisis [7][8] Shift in Strategy - Following initial backlash, Xibei appears to be transitioning from a combative stance to a more reflective approach, indicating a willingness to address consumer concerns [8] - Recommendations for effective crisis management include acknowledging mistakes, providing transparent information about food preparation, and inviting consumer participation in product development [9][10][12] - Emphasizing emotional resonance and storytelling in marketing can help bridge the gap between industrial processes and consumer expectations [11][12] Industry Implications - The incident serves as a cautionary tale for businesses about the importance of transparency and consumer trust in the digital age, where information spreads rapidly [13][17] - Companies must adapt to a new paradigm where trust is a quantifiable asset, and transparency is essential for maintaining consumer loyalty [17] - The future of competition in the industry will hinge on the ability to foster trust through open communication and accountability [17]