Your attention is my accelerant, pay attention to it, learn more about finance, learn about finance, and understand finance.
The original article mentioned that the Apple Batterygate incident ended with Apple paying $3 billion (about 21.6 billion yuan) in compensation and issuing compensation to American users. In particular, the iPhone users who participated in the case and submitted claims were compensated one after another, with each mobile phone receiving 92$17, about 660 yuan, and some of them may receive compensation totaling nearly $1,000. Chinese users, on the other hand, do not have the opportunity to receive compensation. This raises the question of why Chinese users are not being compensatedIn fact, the answer is simple, because no consumers in China are suing Apple. This question reveals an important problem, namely the lack of awareness of Chinese consumers to protect their rights and the blind worship of the Apple brand.
Over the past decade, Apple has been one of the most trusted brands in the hearts of consumers. There are many people who are attracted by Apple's high-quality products and believe that Apple's product quality and quality are the best. Therefore, when Apple is faced with quality problems, many people tend to see it as the result of deliberate amplification or smearing by the water army. This blind trust has led to Chinese consumers' ignorance of Apple's problems and their reluctance to defend their rights.
In stark contrast, while the Samsung Note7 caused an uproar over the world's ** issue, Chinese consumers took a different attitude. They demanded that Samsung treat the domestic market on an equal footing with the rest of the world, but Samsung did not recall its products in the Chinese market, a double standard that sparked a boycott of Samsung by Chinese consumers, which in turn led to the disappearance of Samsung's phones in the Chinese market.
When it comes to dealing with Apple's battery gate incident, a similar situation still exists among Chinese consumers. Despite complaints from consumers, no one has filed a lawsuit. Some consumers even defended Apple, arguing that the decline in the phone's battery was normal, and that the battery was not an Apple product, and that consumers who had battery performance problems were just unlucky, and no one filed a lawsuit. As a result, Chinese consumers were not compensated.
This incident deserves our reflection. First of all, compared with American users, Chinese consumers generally have a weak awareness of rights protection, and their awareness of protecting consumer rights and interests needs to be strengthened. This has led to consumers' reluctance to question and defend their rights in the face of infringement of their rights. Second, China's legal system is different from the class action system in the United States, which requires the representative to agree to the plaintiff's decision in court, and the expensive legal fees are usually borne by the representative, which also leads to the reluctance of Chinese consumers to spend energy on class action lawsuits. Finally, consumers' collective obsession with a company or brand may lead to unprotected consumer rights. When consumers are too obsessed with a brand, they tend to tolerate and self-hypnotize, which leads to the loss of questioning ability and ultimately leads to the failure to protect consumers' rights and interests.
Although Apple has paid out U.S. users, it faces the question of how to treat Chinese users. Apple will face the question of double standards, how to quell consumer dissatisfaction, and how to compensate and remedy Chinese consumers will be the next test and challenge that Apple will need to face.
In conclusion, the development of the Apple Battery Gate incident reveals the lack of awareness of consumer rights protection and blind worship of the brand. As consumers, we need to reflect on our attitudes and behaviors when faced with brand issues. We should learn to protect our rights and interests, raise our awareness of rights protection, and reasonably question and pursue justice. At the same time, companies should also be responsible for the rights and interests of consumers, and handle similar incidents in a more transparent and fair manner to avoid damaging brand image and consumer trust. It is only through the joint efforts of both parties that a healthy, fair and transparent consumer market can be established.
If you like it, you can follow me, share financial advice regularly, and talk to you about financial topics.