Core Viewpoint - The article highlights the phenomenon of "trademark edge" marketing strategies in various industries, particularly in personal care and food sectors, raising concerns about consumer rights and fair competition [2][7]. Group 1: Trademark Issues - The "Pantene 3 Minute Miracle" conditioner has come under scrutiny for its trademark usage, with small print indicating that the trademark does not imply product efficacy [5]. - Similar marketing tactics are observed in other brands, such as "Tide All-in-1 360°" and "Crest 3D White," where the terms used are more about branding than actual product technology [3][5]. - The use of everyday terms as trademarks creates a misleading impression of product quality or effectiveness, leading to consumer confusion [5][6]. Group 2: Legal Perspectives - Legal experts note that the distinction between trademark edge and reasonable borrowing is often unclear and must be determined on a case-by-case basis [9][10]. - Misleading trademarks can harm consumer rights and disrupt fair market competition, as seen in various public controversies involving well-known brands [7][8]. - The legal framework surrounding deceptive trademarks is complex, with challenges in proving consumer harm and establishing causation between trademark use and consumer loss [11]. Group 3: Consumer Rights and Challenges - Consumers face significant difficulties in protecting their rights against misleading trademarks, often requiring legal action or complaints to regulatory bodies [10][11]. - The ambiguity in legal standards for trademark edge behavior complicates consumer claims, making it hard to demonstrate losses related to deceptive marketing [11]. - Brands that rely on misleading language rather than product quality risk losing consumer trust in the long run [11].

Core Viewpoint - The trademark "Pantene 3 Minute Miracle" has sparked significant public interest and controversy regarding its registration and marketing claims, highlighting potential issues with consumer perception and brand representation [1][2]. Trademark Registration - Procter & Gamble has successfully registered the trademark "Pantene 3 Minute Miracle" along with "3 MINUTE MIRACLE" for personal care products, while other related trademarks like "分钟奇迹" and "3分钟奇迹" are currently invalid [2][3]. - The registered trademark "Pantene 3 Minute Miracle" was applied for on August 9, 2019, and has a protection period from March 21, 2020, to March 20, 2030 [3]. Industry Context - The controversy surrounding the trademark is not isolated, as other companies have faced scrutiny for similar marketing practices, indicating a broader trend of potential misleading claims in branding within the consumer goods sector [5].

Core Viewpoint - White Elephant Food is facing public scrutiny due to trademark issues related to its "Half Bag Noodles" and "Half Bucket Noodles" products, which mislead consumers regarding the actual weight of the products [1][2] Group 1: Trademark Controversy - The packaging of "Half Bag Noodles" and "Half Bucket Noodles" claims "large quantity, double satisfaction," leading consumers to believe the products contain significantly more than standard offerings [1] - Actual weight comparisons show that the "Half Bag Noodles" only contain 25 grams more than the regular version, which is a 1/5 to 1/4 increase, contrary to consumer expectations [1] Group 2: Company Response - White Elephant's customer service confirmed that "Half" is a trademark and that the actual weight is as stated on the packaging, acknowledging the public's perception of "playing with words" [2] - The company issued an apology and announced plans to rename the products to "Noodle Cake 120g" and "Noodle Cake 110g," ceasing production of the original packaging within the month [2] Group 3: Company Performance and Market Position - White Elephant Food has experienced significant fluctuations in its market presence, initially gaining popularity with its 1 yuan bone soup noodles in 2003 but later facing competition from brands like Jinmailang [3] - The company rebounded after the "soil pit pickled cabbage" incident in 2022, which improved its brand image and led to a surge in sales, reaching 9.175 billion yuan in 2023, surpassing Jinmailang to become the third in the industry [3] - Despite revenue growth, White Elephant is criticized for its over-reliance on online channels and an imbalanced development between online and offline sales [3]

Core Viewpoint - White Elephant is facing multiple challenges, including a trademark controversy and issues with its pricing strategy, which have led to a trust crisis among consumers and distributors [1][3][4]. Trademark Controversy - The packaging of White Elephant's "Duoban" series still displays "Duoban" as a registered trademark, despite consumer concerns about potential misleading advertising [3][4]. - White Elephant issued an apology and explained that the "Duoban" products were intended to differentiate larger portion sizes from regular ones, but acknowledged the confusion caused [3][4]. - The company announced plans to rename the "Duoban" series and cease production of the original packaging within the month [3][4]. Pricing Issues - There is a discrepancy between online retail prices and offline distributor prices, with some distributors reporting losses due to identical pricing [5][6]. - A distributor noted that the costs associated with logistics and storage often lead to losses for offline distributors, although not all distributors are affected [5][6]. - Analysts suggest that the lack of a balanced pricing strategy between online and offline channels could harm distributor relationships and market stability [6][8]. Channel Strategy - White Elephant has shifted its focus towards online sales, which previously accounted for less than 5% of revenue in 2019, but has since become a priority [7][8]. - The company established an independent e-commerce entity and has been actively engaging in various online platforms to enhance its digital presence [7][8]. - Despite the growth in online sales, balancing the pricing strategy between online and offline channels remains a critical issue for the company's future [8].

Core Viewpoint - The recent trademark controversy surrounding White Elephant Food has highlighted the brand's commitment to quality and consumer trust, showcasing its proactive approach in addressing public concerns and setting a new industry standard [1][3][7]. Group 1: Trademark Controversy - White Elephant Food faced public scrutiny due to the trademark status of "多半" on its product packaging, which led to consumer confusion [1]. - In response to the backlash, the company quickly changed the product names to "面饼120克" and "面饼110克," and committed to ceasing the use of the disputed trademark [1][3]. - This decision is estimated to potentially cost the company tens of millions but has enhanced its image among consumers [3]. Group 2: Commitment to Quality - Since its inception in 2000, White Elephant has prioritized product quality, investing in independent testing facilities to ensure raw material safety [3]. - The company has maintained a record of "zero major food safety incidents" over more than two decades, reflecting its dedication to quality and consumer trust [3]. - White Elephant has also led efforts to revise and improve industry standards, demonstrating a commitment to higher quality products [3]. Group 3: Industry Impact - White Elephant's actions serve as a wake-up call for the entire industry, emphasizing the importance of integrity and quality in maintaining consumer trust [3][7]. - The company's approach illustrates that true strength lies in the ability to recognize and rectify mistakes promptly, a quality that is increasingly rare in the business world [7]. - White Elephant embodies the spirit of Henan, showcasing values of honesty, diligence, and responsibility in its operations [4][7].

Core Viewpoint - The controversy surrounding the "Duoban" trademark has put White Elephant Food Co., Ltd. in an awkward position, raising questions about consumer perception and brand integrity [1][4][12]. Group 1: Trademark Controversy - The "Duoban" trademark was intended to differentiate products from regular portion sizes, but it has led to consumer confusion regarding the actual quantity [3][12]. - White Elephant's apology for the misunderstanding has been met with skepticism, as many believe the company is playing word games [4][13]. - The "Duoban" series products have been criticized for misleading packaging, which emphasizes terms like "Duoban" and "Duoban bag," leading consumers to think they are getting more than they actually are [10][11]. Group 2: Sales Performance - In 2023, White Elephant's total sales reached 9.175 billion yuan, surpassing Jinmailang to become the third-largest player in the industry with a market share of 12% [6][19]. - Projections for 2024 indicate that sales revenue could exceed 10 billion yuan, potentially elevating the company to the second position in the industry, surpassing Unification [7][19]. Group 3: Operational Challenges - The trademark issue has exposed underlying problems such as channel imbalance, insufficient terminal penetration, and low internal collaboration efficiency [8][20][22]. - Compared to competitors like Master Kong and Unification, White Elephant has lower visibility in supermarkets, particularly in regions like Anhui and eastern Henan, where sales performance is reported as poor [20]. - The company faces a chaotic pricing system, with discrepancies between online promotional prices and offline wholesale prices [21].

Core Viewpoint - White Elephant Food Co., Ltd. issued an apology regarding consumer misunderstandings related to its "Duoban" trademark, clarifying that the current "Duoban" products are larger versions of their original offerings, and plans to adjust packaging soon [1][2]. Group 1: Company Response and Consumer Feedback - The company acknowledged consumer complaints about the "Duoban" products, which were perceived as misleading due to the trademark's implication of quantity rather than actual product weight [1][2]. - The brand expert defined the phenomenon as "naming inflation," indicating that brands are under pressure to compete, leading to potentially misleading product names [1][5]. Group 2: Industry Trends and Challenges - The instant noodle industry is experiencing stagnation due to various factors, including competition from delivery services and increasing health awareness among consumers [7]. - The market for instant noodles has stabilized at around 43 billion servings annually, following a decline from a peak of 38.52 billion servings in 2016 [7]. - White Elephant Food faces competition from both established brands like Kang Shifu and emerging brands, necessitating a shift in branding and product innovation to maintain market relevance [7][8]. Group 3: Branding and Marketing Strategies - The company's strategy of using names that suggest larger quantities aims to attract price-sensitive consumers, but this could risk damaging brand reputation if the actual product does not meet expectations [7][8]. - Experts suggest that the industry must move beyond superficial branding changes and focus on genuine product innovation to shed negative perceptions associated with instant noodles [8].

Core Viewpoint - The controversy surrounding the "Duoban" trademark by White Elephant Food highlights the potential for consumer misunderstanding due to marketing strategies that may blur the lines of clarity and transparency [1][2][3] Group 1: Company Response and Consumer Perception - White Elephant Food confirmed that "Duoban" is a registered trademark and that the actual product weight is indicated on the packaging, asserting that there is no issue with the product itself [1] - The company stated that the "Duoban" products are larger versions of their standard offerings, aiming to differentiate them for consumer selection [1] - Despite the company's explanations and apologies, the actual increase in product weight (25 grams) did not meet consumer expectations of "more than half," leading to claims of misleading marketing [1][2] Group 2: Marketing Strategy and Consumer Rights - The use of the term "Duoban" has historical context, as White Elephant previously promoted a "Duoban" product with a clear increase in quantity, which may have reinforced consumer expectations [2] - The article emphasizes that marketing strategies should not obscure information, as this can lead to consumer trust issues, especially for a leading company in the industry [2][3] - Consumer rights laws in China mandate that businesses provide truthful and comprehensive product information, raising questions about the appropriateness of the trademark's usage [2] Group 3: Recommendations for Improvement - Suggestions for improving packaging design include using equal font sizes for trademark explanations and product names or adding clearer definitions to avoid consumer confusion [3] - The article advocates for enhanced semantic review mechanisms in trademark registration to prevent public misunderstanding when everyday terms are used as trademarks [3] - It stresses the importance of maintaining transparency in marketing practices to protect brand value and consumer trust in the long run [3]

Group 1 - The core issue revolves around the "Duoban" trademark on White Elephant's noodle products, which has sparked consumer confusion and criticism regarding marketing practices [2] - White Elephant clarified that "Duoban" is indeed a registered trademark and that the product weights are accurately displayed on the packaging, with the "Duoban" products being larger versions of their standard offerings [2] - The company has apologized for any misunderstandings caused and plans to adjust the packaging to prevent future consumer confusion [2] Group 2 - The first domestically produced nine-valent HPV vaccine has been approved for sale in China, marking a significant development in the market and breaking the long-standing foreign monopoly [5] - This vaccine is the second nine-valent HPV vaccine globally, indicating a competitive advancement in the healthcare sector [5] Group 3 - The latest Federal Reserve "Beige Book" report indicates a slight decline in U.S. economic activity, with rising policy uncertainty and price pressures affecting businesses and consumers [8] - The report highlights mixed performance in consumer spending and a slowdown in manufacturing activity, with some businesses preemptively increasing purchases due to tariff impacts [8] - The residential real estate market remains stable, but new housing starts and construction activities are generally stagnating or slowing down [8] Group 4 - Cartier has confirmed that user data has been leaked, affecting customers globally, including in China, with the leaked information comprising names and birth dates but not banking details [11] - This incident follows a similar data breach involving another luxury brand, Dior, indicating a growing concern over data security in the luxury goods sector [11]

Core Viewpoint - The controversy surrounding the "Duoban" trademark on Bai Xiang's instant noodle packaging highlights consumer confusion and potential misleading marketing practices, raising concerns about consumer rights and corporate ethics [1][2][3]. Group 1: Company Practices - Bai Xiang's "Duoban" trademark is intended to indicate a larger product size (110-120 grams) compared to its previous 70-gram offering, but the marketing strategy has been perceived as a deceptive play on words [2]. - The use of the term "Duoban" has been criticized as a marketing gimmick that misleads consumers into thinking they are receiving more product than they actually are, which could damage the company's reputation [2][3]. Group 2: Industry Implications - The incident serves as a warning to other companies in the industry about the risks of engaging in misleading marketing tactics, as seen in similar cases with other brands [4]. - The market economy favors honest and trustworthy companies, and those that resort to deceptive practices may face long-term consequences, including loss of consumer trust and brand reputation [3][4].