Recently, BYD, a famous automobile manufacturer in China, has been pushed to the forefront of public opinion because of an advertising fraud involving hundreds of millions of yuan and complicated cases.
Follow up on BYD's contract door
This case of advertising fraud can be called a "strange case": on the one hand, BYD, as a reporting party, insists that it is the victim of this fraud; But on the other hand, the people who have really suffered huge losses are the many advertising providers who have provided a large number of advertising services for BYD, but are unable to pay for them, and their target is BYD, who claims to be the victim.
With regard to more specific details of the case, it is clear that further conclusions can only be reached through the investigation of the police. However, no matter how the case is finally determined, BYD's actions are not convincing, and it has obvious suspicion of prevarication and hoax. Such an attitude will not help to resolve disputes with advertising providers or to find out the truth behind the fraud.
As many advertising providers have said, BYD's logic is that a series of advertising campaigns in the past few years cannot be 'unaware' as they say. Although the advertising cooperation contract is signed by the advertising supplier and the middleman, in the process of implementing the contract, the BYD distribution agencies all over the country are deeply involved, not only contributing to the car, but also specially inviting the media to report on these activities. In such a case, there is no doubt that BYD does take advantage of the publicity and exposure from these advertising cooperation.
BYD, who has already taken advantage of it, has to act as the victim, which inevitably gives the impression of "being cheap and selling well". It is true that only the law can make a definitive decision on this case. However, to measure whether BYD's attitude is sincere, the steelyard is in the hearts of the suppliers and the public.
For an enterprise, intangible assets and tangible assets are equally important. The so-called tangible assets refer to cash, factory buildings, creditor's rights and so on, which are naturally indispensable for enterprises; however, at the same time, the role of intangible assets such as reputation, brand, technology, talent and so on cannot be underestimated.
For a large car enterprise, the biggest intangible asset is brand value, and the brand's quality is bound to be closely linked with its business reputation. Today, BYD can choose not to bear any responsibility in the face of the advertising suppliers who recover the arrears, which is not a problem in law, but this approach will certainly damage the reputation and reputation of the enterprise, and ultimately affect its business value.
At present, BYD should not only actively cooperate with the police investigation, so that the truth of the case can be found out as soon as possible; at the same time, it should also take out the responsibility and spirit of a large enterprise, actively negotiate and coordinate with the advertising supplier, and seek a solution acceptable to both sides, rather than ignore the problem and rely on it to the end. From the perspective of public relations, this is undoubtedly the worst option, which will only result in the loss of both the supplier's money and BYD's reputation.
At present, although we still can't see the whole picture of this' rosenthman 'case, BYD, as the protagonist of the event, is not without something to do: to actively undertake the social responsibility of the enterprise, or to do nothing in front of the dispute, just between the thoughts of the decision-making level of BYD. (Yang Xinyu)