Workflow
老年人培训骗局
icon
Search documents
“日入过千”AI课梦碎、红松凌晨推销钢琴课……老人的培训陷阱
Xin Jing Bao· 2025-10-31 10:41
Core Points - The article highlights the increasing trend of elderly individuals falling victim to online training scams, particularly in AI and other skill-based courses, driven by misleading advertisements promising high earnings [1][2][10] - It emphasizes the emotional and educational needs of the elderly, which are exploited by companies through aggressive marketing tactics [19][21] Group 1: Company Practices - Companies like Beijing Chunfeng Huayu Technology Co., Ltd. lure elderly customers with free courses, later upselling paid courses under the guise of exclusive offers [9][10] - The company has faced penalties for false advertising, indicating a pattern of deceptive practices in the online training industry targeting seniors [9][11] - Many training institutions utilize a strategy of low initial costs to attract elderly consumers, followed by high-pressure sales tactics for additional courses or unrelated products [10][14] Group 2: Consumer Experience - Elderly consumers often report feeling misled by exaggerated claims of potential earnings, leading to financial losses when they fail to achieve promised results [2][19] - The lack of formal contracts and clear refund policies complicates the process for elderly individuals seeking to reclaim their funds after realizing they have been scammed [11][17] - Emotional manipulation is a common tactic, with sales representatives exploiting the loneliness and desire for social connection among elderly consumers [19][20] Group 3: Legal and Regulatory Environment - Legal experts indicate that many training companies may be violating consumer protection laws through false advertising and misleading claims about course effectiveness [12][13] - The increase in complaints related to elderly training scams has prompted calls for better regulation and oversight of online educational platforms [16][20] - Courts are often faced with challenges in adjudicating these cases due to the lack of written agreements and the complexities of proving deceptive practices [17][18]