Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the decline of the brand 莱芬 (Lai Fen), which was once celebrated for its high cost-performance products, now facing significant quality and customer service issues, leading to a loss of consumer trust [1]. Group 1: Product Quality Issues - A consumer reported that their 莱芬 hairdryer started smoking after two years of use, raising concerns about product safety and quality [3][5]. - The same consumer expressed dissatisfaction with the company's customer service, which charged nearly 120 yuan for repairs instead of offering free service [7][8]. - Another consumer experienced multiple repairs on their 莱芬 product within three years, indicating recurring quality problems [10][12]. Group 2: Safety Concerns - A serious incident was reported where a 莱芬 hairdryer sparked and caused burns, bringing significant media attention to the brand's safety issues [17]. - A quality inspection in March 2025 revealed that 莱芬 hairdryers failed to meet safety standards, further damaging the brand's reputation [18]. Group 3: Marketing vs. Reality - 莱芬 initially gained popularity by positioning itself as a "Dyson alternative," leveraging aggressive marketing strategies that emphasized performance metrics [19][20]. - The brand's rapid growth, with sales reaching 30 billion yuan in 2023, was primarily driven by marketing rather than product quality [19]. - As marketing efforts waned, the shortcomings in product quality became apparent, leading to consumer disillusionment [21].

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the challenges faced by Laifen Technology, highlighting its decline in sales and the limitations of the small home appliance market, as well as the impact of management decisions on its growth trajectory [2][26]. Group 1: Company Performance - During the 2025 618 shopping festival, Laifen's GMV was over 300 million, a nearly 40% decrease from 500 million in 2024, falling short of its annual target of 6 billion [2]. - Laifen's rapid growth from 2021 to 2024, where it achieved a GMV of 15.67 billion in 2022 and continued to grow by 10 billion in the following years, has now slowed down significantly [2][4]. Group 2: Market Positioning - Laifen capitalized on the "traffic dividend" and "market gap," becoming known as a "Dyson alternative" by offering high-speed hair dryers at a fraction of Dyson's price, which was around 1/5 of Dyson's cost [4][5]. - The company achieved 154 million in sales on Douyin in the first nine months of 2022, surpassing the combined sales of Dyson and Mijia [5]. Group 3: Legal and Management Challenges - Laifen faces a patent infringement lawsuit from Dyson, which has hindered its overseas market expansion and created a perception of being "light on technology, heavy on marketing" [7][8]. - The company's founder, Ye Hongxin, has a complex relationship with the hair dryer category, viewing it as a profitable but unfulfilling business, while he is more passionate about developing other products like electric toothbrushes [9][10]. Group 4: Product Development and Strategy - Laifen's focus on product detail has led to slow new product launches, with the electric shaver taking four years to develop, resulting in missed market opportunities [11][12]. - The company has struggled with marketing strategies, as seen in the failed "Storm Action" campaign, which resulted in significant financial losses and inventory issues [14][15]. Group 5: Industry Limitations - The small home appliance market has a natural revenue ceiling, with the domestic hair dryer market projected to reach around 120 billion in 2024, limiting Laifen's growth potential [19][20]. - Laifen's revenue from hair dryers is around 3 billion, capturing over 35% of the market, but the potential for further growth is constrained [20][21]. Group 6: Future Outlook - Laifen's attempts to diversify into electric toothbrushes and shavers face challenges due to limited technological innovation and strong competition in these categories [23][24]. - The article concludes that Laifen's current predicament is a result of the inherent limitations of the small appliance sector, shifting platform dynamics, and tactical missteps, raising questions about its ability to regain growth [26][27].