Core Viewpoint - The recent public relations crisis involving the company Xibei and its marketing consultant Huayi Huayi highlights the challenges and limitations of the "super symbol" marketing methodology, raising questions about the true value of marketing consulting in the industry [1][11][19] Group 1: Company Background - Huayi Huayi was founded in 2002 by brothers Hua Shan and Hua Nan, gaining recognition for its "super symbol" methodology in marketing [1][6] - The company has worked with numerous well-known clients, including Xibei, Haidilao, and Mijue Ice City, among others, many of which are publicly listed companies [6][10] Group 2: Marketing Methodology - The "super symbol" theory aims to reduce brand communication costs by utilizing familiar cultural symbols and phrases, resulting in simple and straightforward branding elements [6][8] - The design principles of Huayi Huayi emphasize large logos, bright colors, and repetitive imagery, which have proven effective in rapidly increasing brand awareness in certain market conditions [6][8] - Critics argue that the methodology is overly formulaic and lacks innovation, often resulting in designs that are perceived as unattractive or simplistic [7][8] Group 3: Client Attraction - Huayi Huayi attracts clients by promising reduced communication costs and seemingly predictable commercial outcomes, appealing to businesses seeking quick results [10] - The confidence and authoritative image of the founders, particularly Hua Shan, contribute to client trust, as they often refuse to participate in competitive bidding [10] Group 4: Recent Crisis and Implications - The crisis surrounding Xibei's "baby meal" marketing campaign revealed a significant gap between brand promises and actual product quality, leading to consumer backlash [11][13] - The failure of the "super symbol" approach in this instance serves as a cautionary tale for the consulting industry, emphasizing the need for genuine product experience and consumer trust rather than just catchy slogans [11][19] - The financial impact on Xibei has been severe, with reported daily revenue losses of 2 million to 3 million yuan [19]

Core Viewpoint - The recent controversy involving Luo Yonghao and the consulting firm Hua Yu Hua has sparked significant discussion in the marketing industry, questioning the value and effectiveness of long-term consulting relationships [1][2][32]. Group 1: Incident Overview - Luo Yonghao criticized Hua Yu Hua, which has been providing consulting services to the restaurant chain Xibei for ten years, charging a total of approximately 60 million RMB [2]. - Despite Luo's public apology indicating a desire to move on, discussions about the value of the consulting fees and Hua Yu Hua's relevance in the current marketing environment continue to escalate on social media [2][32]. - The incident has highlighted the ongoing scrutiny and debate surrounding the effectiveness of marketing consulting firms like Hua Yu Hua [2][32]. Group 2: Hua Yu Hua's Business Model - Hua Yu Hua's annual revenue is nearly 300 million RMB, with an average contribution of about 1.9 million RMB per employee, indicating a high level of productivity compared to industry peers [3]. - The firm's core value is not solely based on its methodologies but significantly relies on the reputation of its founder, Hua Shan, who serves as a social symbol of trust in the industry [8][31]. - The consulting firm has established a pricing model starting at 6 million RMB per year, which has set a high benchmark for the industry, aiming to restore the dignity of service providers [36]. Group 3: Industry Impact and Perception - Hua Yu Hua is viewed as a leading figure in the advertising and brand consulting industry, with many professionals considering its methodologies as influential, despite criticisms regarding the lack of innovative theories [6][32]. - The firm has been instrumental in shaping the pricing landscape of the marketing consulting industry, moving away from low-cost services to a model that emphasizes high fees and trust [36]. - The ongoing debate about the effectiveness of Hua Yu Hua's strategies reflects broader concerns within the industry regarding the value of marketing consulting and the reliance on external validation for internal decision-making [10][18][31].

Core Viewpoint - The advertising industry is experiencing significant discussions and controversies, particularly surrounding the consulting firm Hua Yu Hua and its long-term relationship with the restaurant brand Xi Bei, highlighted by recent comments from entrepreneur Luo Yonghao [1][2][3]. Group 1: Hua Yu Hua's Business Model and Value - Hua Yu Hua has charged approximately 60 million RMB over ten years for consulting services to Xi Bei, raising questions about the value of such fees in the current marketing environment [4][6]. - The firm employs around 160 people and generates nearly 300 million RMB in annual revenue, indicating a high average contribution per employee of about 1.9 million RMB [9]. - The core value of Hua Yu Hua is perceived to be less about its methodologies and more about the reputation of its founder, Hua Shan, who serves as a social symbol of trust in the industry [8][47]. Group 2: Industry Dynamics and Perception - The marketing consulting industry is characterized by a reliance on external validation and trust, particularly in sectors like dining where visual branding is crucial [31][42]. - The firm has been involved in significant discussions regarding its effectiveness and the perceived lack of innovative methodologies, with some critics labeling it as a "scam" [50][51]. - Despite criticisms, Hua Yu Hua has contributed to raising industry standards by establishing a high pricing model, which has influenced the overall pricing landscape in marketing services [58][62]. Group 3: Recent Controversies and Reactions - Luo Yonghao's public criticism of Hua Yu Hua has sparked widespread debate on social media about the value of their consulting fees and their relevance in today's marketing landscape [5][6]. - Following the backlash, Hua Yu Hua's leadership issued an apology to Luo, indicating a strategic move to mitigate negative public sentiment [66][68]. - The incident reflects the challenges faced by consulting firms in maintaining their reputation amidst public scrutiny and the evolving expectations of clients [70].