Core Viewpoint - Kim Keon-hee, the wife of former South Korean President Yoon Suk-yeol, has admitted to receiving luxury bags but denies any form of solicitation or quid pro quo [1][2]. Group 1 - Kim Keon-hee's defense team stated that she was initially reluctant to accept the items but was eventually persuaded [2]. - The defense emphasized that Kim Keon-hee acknowledges her mistake and has not used the received items, having already returned them [2]. - Kim Keon-hee's side claims that there were no solicitations as alleged by the "Kim Keon-hee Special Investigation Team," and the acceptance of the items is unrelated to the president's specific duties [2].

Core Viewpoint - The case discusses the complexities of determining the amount of bribery when a public official returns a gift but receives cash in exchange, highlighting different interpretations of the actions involved [1][2][3]. Group 1: Case Details - Qin, the deputy general manager of a state-owned real estate company, accepted a luxury bag worth 230,000 yuan from Zhao, the representative of an advertising company, in exchange for assistance in securing a project [1][2]. - After using the bag for over a year, Qin returned it to Zhao in December 2019, stating he no longer wanted it and hoped for more cash in return [1][3]. - Zhao subsequently gave Qin a total of 400,000 yuan in cash in January 2020, leading to the investigation in February 2023 [1][2]. Group 2: Different Perspectives on Bribery - The first viewpoint suggests that since Qin returned the bag before the investigation, he did not commit bribery, and the amount of bribery is only the 400,000 yuan received [2][3]. - The second viewpoint argues that the initial acceptance of the bag constituted bribery, and the return of the bag does not affect the total amount, which would be 630,000 yuan (230,000 yuan for the bag plus 400,000 yuan in cash) [2][3]. - The third viewpoint, which is supported by the author, states that the initial acceptance of the bag constituted bribery (230,000 yuan), and the subsequent cash received (400,000 yuan) should be adjusted by the market value of the returned bag (200,000 yuan), leading to a total of 430,000 yuan in bribery [3][4]. Group 3: Legal Interpretation - The legal framework indicates that returning a bribe does not negate the act of bribery if the return is not timely or is done to conceal the crime [4][5]. - The distinction between returning a bribe and engaging in a transaction for more cash is emphasized, with the latter being classified as transactional bribery [6][7]. - The final determination of the bribery amount is based on the market value of the returned item and the cash received, leading to a calculated total of 430,000 yuan [7].

Core Insights - The article emphasizes that successful businesses do not rely on price wars but instead focus on raising prices while maintaining customer loyalty, indicating a strong competitive advantage or "moat" [1][6][21] Pricing Strategy - Price wars may attract customers initially but lead to thin profits and a perception of low quality [3][18] - Businesses that can raise prices demonstrate value, brand strength, and uniqueness [5][21] Competitive Advantage - A company's ability to increase prices signifies market control and customer loyalty, creating an unassailable advantage [6][8] - Examples like Starbucks, Apple, and Moutai illustrate how unique branding and customer perception allow for higher pricing [9][10] Building Pricing Power - Three key strategies to establish the ability to raise prices: 1. Differentiate offerings to stand out from competitors [10] 2. Build brand value, as strong brands justify higher prices through customer identity [11] 3. Enhance customer experience, as superior service encourages customers to spend more [12] Mindset Shift - The focus should be on how to increase prices rather than decrease them, highlighting a significant cognitive difference in business strategy [14][21] - Companies that prioritize price reduction often find themselves in a cycle of diminishing returns and eventual obsolescence [18] Case Studies - The case of Louis Vuitton illustrates how a brand can thrive by continuously raising prices, reinforcing its status and desirability [16] Conclusion - To achieve substantial profits, businesses must recognize that competing on price is a battle of endurance, while competing on value and brand strength is a measure of capability [20][21]

世界奢侈品祛魅运动。 来源 | 凤凰网财经 （ID： finance_ifeng） 2万美元的名牌包只要不到1 0 0 0美元就能买到？中国代工厂的Ti kTo k爆料，让全球奢侈 品消费者集体破防——原来自己一直在为"品牌故事"支付天价智商税。 外国网友集体"破防" 那些标价几千甚至上万美元的奢侈品大牌，竟然大多是中国制造的，而实际成本低得离 谱。 当特朗普政府无理对中国商品加征关税，中国工厂主们在 Ti kTo k 上掀起了一场"奢侈品 祛魅"运动，直接把大牌背后的真相扒了个底朝天。 有工厂主透露，他们能以 5- 6 美元 的价格出售和 Lul ul emon 同厂同款 的瑜伽裤，而这 条裤子在美国专柜的售价高达100 美元，而两者"面料和工艺基本完全相同"。 更夸张的是，有声称代工多年名牌包的厂家，直言某款售价 2 万美元 的奢侈品牌包包， 从代工厂直接拿货的价格，竟然不到原价的 二十分之一！甚至还在视频上配上"中国制 造业进入美国可以让美国人生活得更好"的文案。 这些视频向全球网友传递了一个颠覆性的信息：许多国际大牌在中国以极低成本生产出 优质商品，再通过品牌包装和营销手段，以天价转售给海外消费者。 ...

有人崩溃留言：" 我花大价钱买的奢侈品包，居然全是中国制造的？ " 底下立刻有人补刀：" 欢迎来到现实世界！ " 编者按： 2 万美元的名牌包只要不到 1000 美元就能买到？中国代工厂的 TikTok 爆料让全球奢侈品消费者集体破防！——原来自己一直在为 " 品 牌故事"支付天价智商税"。 01 外国网友集体"破防" 那些标价几千甚至上万美元的奢侈品大牌，竟然大多是中国制造的，而实际成本低得离谱。 当特朗普政府对无理对中国商品加征关税，中国工厂主们在 TikTok 上掀起了一场 " 奢侈品祛魅 " 运动 ，直接把大牌背后的真相扒了个底朝天。 有工厂主透露，他们能以 5-6 美元 的价格出售和 Lululemon 同厂同款 的瑜伽裤，而这条裤子在美国专柜的售价高达 100 美元 ，而两者"面料和 工艺基本完全相同"。 更夸张的是，有声称代工多年名牌包的厂家，直言某款售价 2 万美元 的奢侈品牌包包，从代工厂直接拿货的价格，竟然不到原价的 二十分之一 ！ 甚至还在视频上配上"中国制造业进入美国可以让美国人生活得更好"的文案。 这些视频向全球网友传递了一个颠覆性的信息：许多国际大牌在中国以极低成本生产出优质商品， ...