返回档案库

案例库 · 广告与公关 · 市场决策 · 2021

这条还没译成中文,下面是英文原文。

Vips made the beer price look like the dish price — PROFECO fined it 4.8M pesos

Sept 2021: PROFECO fined Vips 4.8M pesos — a chile relleno that appeared to cost 35 pesos, which was really the price of the beer beside it.

Operadora Vips · 2021-09

怎么回事

Vips, one of Mexico's largest restaurant chains, ran a promotion whose advertising confused what the price attached to: the ad displayed a chile relleno that appeared to cost 35 pesos, but 35 pesos was the price of the beer included in the purchase — the actual price of the dish was not mentioned at all. The promotion referenced 'seasonal dishes' without specifying which dishes those were or where to find out, and the disclaimer sat in a font size and colour PROFECO called impossible for consumers to read.

PROFECO notified Vips of preventive measures on 4 September 2021, giving the chain 24 hours to suspend the advertising, and announced a fine of 4.8 million pesos. The case was part of the sweep PROFECO presented in the president's morning press conference alongside Sony, Viva Aerobus and BP — four major brands named for misleading advertising in the same week.

The mechanism is price anchoring by misdirection: the eye pairs the price with the dish because the dish is what the ad wants you to want. PROFECO's case was that the pairing was false. A price that attaches to the wrong product is not a discount — it is the product being used as bait for a price that belongs to something cheaper.

为什么会这样

  • The 35 pesos was the beer's price presented next to the dish — the dish itself had no stated price.
  • 'Seasonal dishes' was never defined; the qualifier could not be checked against the menu.
  • The disclaimer was printed to be unread — small font, faint colour, PROFECO said so.
代价4.8M MXN fine; ads suspended in 24h代价高昂

教训

A price in an ad attaches to whatever the customer believes it attaches to: if the number belongs to a different product than the one displayed, the ad is misleading.

后来呢

Vips suspended the advertising within the 24-hour window PROFECO ordered. The case is cited in Mexico for regulating menu and promotion pricing clarity in restaurant advertising.

资料来源

发现哪里写错了?告诉我们。

Comments · 0

    登录 后就能评论。

    类似的案例

    这家公司栽倒的地方,别处有人漂亮地解开过。 第二意见 →