Limiting US Milk Powder Purchases Is a Slap in Our Face

Published in China
(China) on 19 June 2012
by Xin Guo (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Emily Zhang. Edited by .

Edited by Lydia Dallett

 
According to some U.S. media, in recent years the American Chinese community has become a major source of milk powder purchases for relatives in China. Many American Chinese often buy boxes of milk powder, which has resulted in product shortages for local consumers. Consequently, Target, Wal-Mart and some other big supermarkets have limited purchasing quantities (against Chinese consumers) — five to twelve cans. American Chinese say that the limit cannot restrain those who are in real need; Consumers can still trick the sellers by disguising themselves, and the sellers will not be too serious about the limit’s implementation.

When Yili Milk (a Chinese milk powder brand) was found to contain an abnormal level of mercury content, the claim that its milk powder was the best became a joke. Following the incident, the price of imported milk powder soared to four times the price sold in the products’ country of origin. The Co-Chairman of Milk Association, Kun Song said, “My grandson drinks Chinese milk,” which had zero effect in changing Chinese consumers’ demand for foreign milk powder. When Chinese consumers swarmed like locusts upon foreign milk power, the statement that Chinese infant formulas have the highest standards in the world became ridiculous to most people.

When the main authorities of Chinese milk products, milk-product associations and milk producers, tried to restore Chinese consumers’ confidence in domestic milk products by shouting their names and [boosting their] reputations, the U.S. issued a milk powder purchasing limit against Chinese consumers — a slap in the face not only to Chinese consumers, but also to Chinese milk producers and authorities.

The purchasing limit is indeed bad news for Chinese consumers. Though American sellers initiated the limit themselves, its implementation is still loose. Nonetheless, if the limit is expanded and implemented strictly, Chinese consumers will be pushed into a dilemma in which they cannot buy foreign milk and do not want to buy Chinese milk. But milk powder is a necessity for children, and parents will eventually be forced to buy either Chinese milk powder or foreign ones, but with a very high price. From the perspective of consumer preferences and real choices, the majority of parents would rather pay a higher price because money is nothing compared to their children’s health.

When foreign sellers issue milk powder purchasing limits against Chinese consumers, Chinese milk enterprises and authorities should not be satisfied with, or take advantage of, the outcome. Instead they should feel embarrassed and ashamed. The dilemma that Chinese consumers are currently in is exactly the result of [the milk authorities’] lack of efforts and quality control. If their quality was able to withstand testing, and supervision was strict, how could milk powder scandals such as melamine-powder and synthetic leather milk have happened? If there were no such scandals, why did Chinese consumers abandon domestic products and favor foreign milk? Again, if Chinese consumers did not swarm like locusts to buy foreign milk, why did foreign sellers put a limit on milk purchases by Chinese consumers?

When Chinese milk authorities tried endless ways to stimulate domestic demand, foreign sellers, on the contrary, limited their supplies. Such a strong contrast does not demonstrate company strategies. Rather, it shows the gap in company morals and product quality between the two countries, as well as the pros and cons of the sense of responsibility and effectiveness of implementation by the two countries’ authorities.

Foreign sellers were able to limit their supply because they are confident about their products. Chinese milk powder producers continually blow steam about their products’ quality, showing exactly how uncertain they are. The saying goes, “merits represent the past, and problems affect the future.” It is better for Chinese milk producers to mention less about their merits and focus more on solving their problems. The producers should not laugh at Chinese consumers’ rejection by the U.S. market or be thrilled by the consumers’ return, thinking that business opportunities have just arrived. The producers should realize that Chinese consumers will still buy foreign milk powder if domestic milk products still experience problems every two or three days


对于国产奶,还是少说点成绩,多解决点问题。别见到外国销售商赶中国消费者就幸灾乐祸,见猎心喜,认为自己的商机到了,要知道,若是产品质量还是三天两头出问题,消费者还是不会买国产奶的账。
据美国媒体消息,近年来,许多在美华人成了中国大陆亲友购买奶粉的重要源头,华人整箱整箱的买奶粉,导致其他顾客无奶粉可买。为此,Target、Walmart等卖场推出5至12盒的限购令。有在美华人表示,限购令无法限制有需要的人,只要改头换面重新购买,商家不会认真。(6月17日 中国新闻网)
当伊利奶粉被查出汞含量异常时,奶粉质量历史最好的说法愈发成为笑谈;当中国内地部分洋奶粉价格涨到原产地4倍时,乳协理事长宋昆冈“我孙子就喝国产奶” 的例子毫无打动人心的力量;当国内消费者蜂拥跑到海外、境外去买奶粉时,中国婴幼儿配方奶粉标准世界最严之说让人掩口而笑。
就在中国奶制品主管部门、奶业协会、奶企齐力为国产奶粉呐喊,正名,以图重振消费者信心的时候,大洋彼岸的美国却对中国的消费者下达了限购令,这犹如一记耳光,打的不光是中国消费者,更是中国的奶企和监管部门。
对国内消费者来说,这实在是个坏消息。限购令虽然是美国销售商的自发决定,执行还不严格,但如果一旦禁令扩大,并得到严格实行,将把中国消费者逼入国产奶 不愿买,外国奶买不了的两难境地。但奶粉对孩子必不可少,家长或者被迫买国产奶,或者花高价买外国进口奶,但从消费者的消费倾向,还是实际选择来看,大部 分家长宁可花高价买外国奶,毕竟孩子的健康比钱更重要。
外国销售商对中国消费者下达限购令,中国的奶企和监管部门应该别有滋味在心头,他们应该感到脸红和愧疚。中国消费者目前的两难困境,正是由于他们的不给 力、不作为造成的。试问,若质量过关,监管严格,会发生三聚氰胺、皮革奶等一系列奶制品丑闻吗?若没有这些食品丑闻,中国消费者会舍国产奶追外国奶吗?若 不疯抢外国奶,外国销售商会对中国消费者限购吗?
中国奶业主管部门和企业千方百计激发消费者购买欲的时候,外国经销商却对中国人进行限购,这种强烈的对比,显示的不是企业经营策略的不同,而是两国奶企在企业道德、产品质量上的差距,两国食品监管部门责任心和执行力上的优劣。
外国销售商限购是因为对质量有底气,中国奶企天天高喊国产奶粉质量如何好,恰恰是对质量没有底气的表现。俗话说,成绩不说跑不了,问题不说不得了。对于国产奶,还是少说点成绩,多解决点问题。别见到外国销售商赶中国消费者就幸灾乐祸,见猎心喜,认为自己的商机到了,要知道,若是产品质量还是三天两头出问题,消费者还是不会买国产奶的账。
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Germany: It’s Not Europe’s Fault

Taiwan: Trump’s Talk of Legality Is a Joke

Israel: Antisemitism and Anti-Israel Bias: Congress Opens Investigation into Wikipedia

Singapore: The Assassination of Charlie Kirk Leaves America at a Turning Point

Germany: Trump Declares War on Cities

Topics

Spain: Charlie Kirk and the Awful People Celebrating His Death

Germany: Trump Declares War on Cities

Japan: US Signing of Japan Tariffs: Reject Self-Righteousness and Fulfill Agreement

Russia: Trump the Multipolarist*

Turkey: Blood and Fury: Killing of Charlie Kirk, Escalating US Political Violence

Thailand: Brazil and the US: Same Crime, Different Fate

Singapore: The Assassination of Charlie Kirk Leaves America at a Turning Point

Germany: When Push Comes to Shove, Europe Stands Alone*

Related Articles

Germany: It’s Not Europe’s Fault

Spain: State Capitalism in the US

Thailand: Appeasing China Won’t Help Counter Trump

India: Will New US Envoy Help to Repair Ties under Threat?

France: Global South: Trump Is Playing into China’s Hands