说起酱油，大多数想到的第一品牌就是"海天酱油"；这些年海天凭借着各种广告，让不少人对海天酱油深入人 心。 可就是这样一个大品牌的酱油，这几年公司的市值居然蒸发了近5000亿。海天究竟得罪谁了？如今这么惨的海 天，还能翻身吗？ 海天双标门事件 2021年，海天还没出事的时候，海天一股的单价最高可达125.54元，海天当时的市值是7000多亿元；可是随着2022 年海天"双标门"的发生，海天的名声坏了。 不少人不再信任海天，股民开始纷纷抛售自己手中的海天股份；到了2024年4月，海天的股份已经跌到36.89元一 股。海天的市值也跌到了2000亿元左右；短短的三年海天的市值蒸发了近5000亿！这一切都和海天的双标门事件 脱不开关系。 2022年，有网友发现海天对国内售卖的酱油，与对国外售卖的酱油配料居然不一样！对国外售卖的酱油配料只有 水、大豆、食盐、砂糖和小麦。 但是对国内售卖的酱油，海天酱油除了以上这五种产品之外，还额外添加很多食品添加剂，比如谷氨酸钠、苯甲 酸钠等添加剂。这件事被曝光后，不少国人十分的生气，凭什么在国内卖的酱油，有这么多添加剂？ 酱油是我们日常生活中的必需品，我们每天吃的食物可能都要用到酱油来 ...

Core Viewpoint - The recent invalidation of the "Qianhe 0+" trademark by the National Intellectual Property Administration has reignited discussions about misleading marketing practices in the food industry, particularly regarding claims of "zero additives" [1][2]. Group 1: Trademark and Consumer Perception - The "Qianhe 0" soy sauce was previously criticized for cadmium detection, leading to public scrutiny of the "0+" trademark and its implications for product content [1]. - Many consumers mistakenly believe that trademarks containing "0" or "0+" indicate that products are entirely free of additives, while companies argue that such claims depend on the ingredient list [1][2]. - The invalidation of several trademarks, including "Qianhe 0+", aligns with consumer expectations for transparency and honesty in product labeling [1]. Group 2: Misleading Marketing Practices - Numerous products utilize misleading labeling practices, emphasizing "zero additives" while only omitting specific ingredients, creating a false impression of overall purity [2]. - Companies often exploit consumer desires for safety and health by blurring the lines between trademark claims and actual product content, leading to potential consumer deception [2][3]. - The recent regulations from the National Health Commission and the State Administration for Market Regulation prohibit the use of terms like "not added" or "zero added" in food labeling, aiming to standardize and clarify food product information [3]. Group 3: Corporate Responsibility and Ethics - Companies are urged to maintain integrity in their branding and marketing, as misleading practices can erode consumer trust and damage long-term brand reputation [3][4]. - The emphasis on clever marketing tactics over genuine product quality can lead to short-term gains but ultimately risks losing consumer loyalty [4]. - A commitment to quality and transparency is essential for companies to build lasting success and avoid the pitfalls of misleading advertising [4].

Core Viewpoint - Qianhe Flavor Industry is committed to responding to the "dual reduction" policy on food additives by adopting a "simplified formula" approach, increasing R&D investment, and innovating technology to produce healthier seasoning products with simple ingredients and natural flavors [1][3]. Group 1: Company Strategy and Development - The company plans to complete the renewal of product packaging and labeling by the end of the year to comply with the new national food safety standards [1]. - Qianhe Flavor Industry has invested over 400 million yuan in R&D since its listing and holds 112 related patents, combining traditional techniques with modern technology to achieve additive-free and traceable production [2]. - The company aims to enhance product development by increasing R&D investment and scientifically restoring ancient brewing techniques to meet consumer demand for healthy seasoning products [1][2]. Group 2: Compliance and Quality Assurance - Qianhe Flavor Industry's products have passed national quality inspections with a 100% compliance rate since 2014, including soy sauce, vinegar, cooking wine, and oyster sauce [2]. - Recent inspections by the Sichuan Provincial Market Supervision Administration confirmed that 23 batches of Qianhe's products met national standards for brewed soy sauce, with no preservatives or sweeteners detected [2]. Group 3: Market Performance - The company has seen a 35% month-on-month increase in sales on online platforms such as Douyin, JD, and Tmall, as well as improved sales in offline supermarkets like Walmart and Hongqi Chain [3].

Core Viewpoint - The article emphasizes the importance of proper trademark usage as a fundamental aspect of market order, highlighting the need for systemic improvements to address the increasing prevalence of misleading trademarks in the market [1][3]. Group 1: Trademark Misuse and Consumer Trust - Trademarks should serve as a reliable link between companies and consumers, but recent cases show that they have become misleading tools, causing confusion among consumers [1][2]. - The controversy surrounding the "half bag" noodles from Bai Xiang ended with an apology and a commitment to adjust the packaging, indicating that the company managed to maintain its reputation despite the issue [1][3]. - There is a growing trend of misleading trademarks, such as "0 sugar" beverages and "tree-ripened" fruits, which have gained significant public attention and concern [1][2]. Group 2: Regulatory and Systemic Recommendations - The article suggests that individual case rectifications are insufficient; a more comprehensive regulatory framework is needed to prevent misleading trademarks from entering the market [3]. - Trademark examination agencies should exercise caution regarding descriptive terms that are commonly understood by the public to minimize misleading registrations [3]. - Establishing a trademark "combinatorial usage" registration system is proposed to enhance transparency and accountability in trademark usage [3].

Core Viewpoint - The discussion surrounding the "Qianhe 0" trademark and "zero additive" soy sauce has brought the topic of consumption upgrades and food safety in the Chinese soy sauce market into the public eye, leading to a more rational market perspective on condiment consumption [1][2]. Group 1: Market Performance - In May, Qianhe Weiye's online sales increased by approximately 35% compared to April, driven by early promotions for the 618 shopping festival on e-commerce platforms [1][3]. - Offline sales also saw a significant rebound, with a 20% increase in May compared to April, particularly in major retail chains like Walmart and Hongqi [3]. - During the Dragon Boat Festival, Qianhe Weiye conducted 625 promotional activities nationwide, resulting in a 31% increase in sales compared to May [3]. Group 2: Regulatory Changes - The introduction of new regulations by the National Health Commission and the State Administration for Market Regulation aims to standardize food labeling, prohibiting terms like "no additives" and "zero additives" on pre-packaged foods, with a two-year transition period before full implementation [2]. - Qianhe Weiye plans to comply with these new regulations by adjusting product labels to eliminate the "zero additive" wording where applicable [2]. Group 3: Consumer Trends - There is a growing consumer demand for healthy condiments with simple ingredients and natural flavors, reflecting a shift towards health-conscious consumption [4]. - The increasing scrutiny on food safety and quality has created opportunities for companies that can guarantee product quality, while also leading to a market shakeout [5][6]. - Qianhe Weiye's commitment to transparency in its ingredient sourcing and production processes has garnered recognition from authoritative media, reinforcing its brand credibility [5][6].

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the prevalence of misleading trademarks in various industries, particularly in food and consumer products, highlighting the deceptive practices that mislead consumers about product characteristics and quality [1][3]. Group 1: Misleading Trademarks in Food Industry - Bai Xiang instant noodles' trademark "多半" misleads consumers into thinking they are purchasing a "多半袋" (half bag) of noodles [1]. - Other examples include Qianhe's soy sauce labeled as "千禾0" implying zero additives, and Yuanqi Forest's tea products that confuse "0 sugar" and "0 cane sugar" [1]. - Brands like Pucheng Dairy and various noodle brands use terms like "高端无添加" (high-end no additives) and "手擀" (handmade) to create false impressions about their products [1]. Group 2: Deceptive Practices Beyond Food - The article notes that misleading trademarks are not limited to food, with electronic products using terms like "120W" that may not reflect actual power [3]. - Brands create confusion by using similar names to well-known brands, such as "小天才特×" and "胖都来," which can mislead consumers [1][3]. Group 3: Trademark Registration Issues - The trademark registration process includes formal and substantive reviews, but subjective interpretations can lead to misleading trademarks being approved [3]. - Some applicants exploit loopholes by splitting trademarks or applying in multiple categories to bypass scrutiny [3]. - Examples include the "壹号土" trademark, which could mislead consumers into thinking it relates to "土猪肉" (local pork) [3]. Group 4: Importance of Integrity in Business - The article emphasizes that integrity is crucial for businesses, especially in the food industry, where consumer health is at stake [4]. - Companies must be accountable for the authenticity of their trademarks to build consumer trust in product quality and safety [4]. - Regulatory bodies are encouraged to monitor and penalize businesses with invalid trademarks to maintain market integrity [4].

Core Viewpoint - The controversy surrounding White Elephant instant noodles stems from the misleading use of the trademark "Duoban" (meaning "more than half"), which consumers interpreted as indicating a larger quantity, rather than a brand name [1][2][3]. Group 1: Trademark Issues - The term "Duoban" is confirmed to be a registered trademark of White Elephant, not an indication of increased product weight [4][5]. - White Elephant's other trademark applications, such as "Duoban" bags and buckets, have been rejected and are currently invalid [5][6]. - The "Duoyiban" (meaning "more than half") product only offers a 25% increase in noodle quantity compared to standard products, raising further consumer concerns [2][7]. Group 2: Industry Trends - The phenomenon of "trademark edge cases" is prevalent in the food industry, where companies exploit descriptive terms to mislead consumers [2][11][13]. - This practice reflects a deeper conflict between corporate profit motives and consumer rights protection, as companies prioritize market share over transparency [3][14]. Group 3: Consumer Reactions - Following the revelation about the "Duoban" trademark, public backlash against White Elephant has intensified, with consumers expressing disappointment and distrust [16][18]. - The incident highlights the gap between consumer expectations for brand integrity and the reality of misleading marketing practices [18]. Group 4: Company Background - White Elephant Food Co., established in 1997, focuses on producing high-quality noodle products and has expanded its operations across multiple provinces in China [10]. - The company has completed a B+ funding round, attracting investments from notable firms like Fosun Group and GF Securities [10]. Group 5: Regulatory Context - The use of misleading trademarks contradicts the principles outlined in the Trademark Law, which mandates honesty and transparency in marketing [14][15]. - The National Food Safety Standards require that food labeling be truthful and objective, further emphasizing the need for compliance in marketing practices [14].

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the resurgence of Lianhua MSG, a Chinese brand, after overcoming negative perceptions and rumors about MSG's health risks, highlighting the importance of accurate information and effective marketing strategies in the food industry [1][19]. Group 1: Health and Safety of MSG - MSG, primarily composed of monosodium glutamate, is deemed safe by organizations like WHO and FAO, with extensive research supporting its safety as a food additive [3][4]. - Common health concerns regarding MSG, such as its potential carcinogenicity and links to hair loss or obesity, lack scientific backing, and MSG contains less sodium than table salt [5][6]. - The nutritional comparison shows MSG has 8160mg of sodium per 100g, significantly lower than table salt's 39311mg per 100g, indicating that using MSG can help reduce sodium intake [6]. Group 2: Historical Context of MSG in China - MSG was first isolated by Japanese chemist Ikeda Kikunae in 1908, leading to its commercialization as "Ajinomoto" [8][10]. - The production of MSG in China began with Wu Yunchu's water hydrolysis method in 1923, which broke Japan's monopoly and established domestic production [10][12]. - Lianhua MSG emerged as a leading brand in the 1980s, achieving a market share of 43% and becoming the first MSG stock in China by 1998 [12][19]. Group 3: Market Dynamics and Competition - The entry of multinational companies promoting "chicken essence" in the early 2000s led to a significant decline in MSG's market share, as these companies successfully rebranded consumer perceptions [12][14]. - The negative portrayal of MSG was exacerbated by the "Chinese restaurant syndrome" narrative, which originated from a 1968 letter in a medical journal, despite MSG being recognized as safe by the FDA since 1959 [15][16]. Group 4: Revival Strategies for Lianhua MSG - Post-bankruptcy, Lianhua MSG utilized new media to reshape consumer perceptions, showcasing production processes and innovative product ideas like "MSG cocktails" and "MSG ice cream" [19][24]. - The company reported over 100 million in net profit in 2024, indicating a successful turnaround and revaluation of the brand in the market [19][24]. Group 5: Food Safety and Public Perception - The article emphasizes the need for rigorous food safety regulations and accurate public information to combat misinformation and restore consumer trust in domestic products like MSG [20][24]. - It advocates for a multi-faceted approach to food safety communication, combining traditional and new media to effectively educate the public about the safety and benefits of MSG [24][25].

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the controversy surrounding the labeling of soy sauce products claiming "zero additives," highlighting the need for clearer regulations on food labeling to protect consumer rights and ensure product safety [3][4]. Group 1: Industry Concerns - Recent media tests revealed heavy metals in several soy sauce products marketed as "zero additives," raising consumer concerns about misleading labeling practices [3]. - The prominent "Qianhe 0" label on Qianhe soy sauce was found to be a trademark rather than a guarantee of no additives, leading to public skepticism about the integrity of food labeling [3][4]. - The article emphasizes that deceptive trademarks can mislead consumers regarding product quality, which is a violation of trademark law [3]. Group 2: Regulatory Implications - Current laws and regulations do not clearly define how "zero additives" should be labeled, indicating a gap in consumer protection [4]. - The upcoming Food Labeling Supervision Management Measures aim to clarify regulations, prohibiting misleading terms like "not added" or "zero added" for substances not present in food products [4][5]. - The article calls for a more scientific and rational approach from consumers towards food choices, urging them not to overly glorify "zero additives" as the sole indicator of health and safety [5]. Group 3: Market Dynamics - The "zero additives" marketing concept has gained traction, with companies like Qianhe leveraging it to differentiate themselves in a competitive market [4]. - However, the article warns that relying solely on marketing gimmicks without ensuring product quality can backfire, as seen in the current controversy [4][5]. - The need for honesty and transparency in food production is emphasized, suggesting that companies should focus on genuine quality rather than marketing hype [5].