Netizens pretend to be foreigners. Offo second deposit refund with apology letter

 Netizens pretend to be foreigners. Offo second deposit refund with apology letter

Recently, many ofo users have encountered the problem of deposit difficulty. Although the ofo client shows that the refund is expected to arrive within 15 working days, there are also user reports that the said 15 working days can not be cashed at all, and the system has been showing the refund.

Netizens @zjt93 tweeted on December 13 that they had tried the legendary foreigner reporting strategy. He pretended to be a foreigner from California who had lived in China for two or three years, who was not good at Chinese and liked to work on the platform, and wrote a complaint email to ofo.

Originally, the netizen was just trying. Unexpectedly, on December 14, ofo returned his deposit and sent him an English email apologizing.

Chinese users are still waiting so hard that foreign users can quickly refund? The difference of ofo has aroused extensive discussion among netizens. After the user posted the experience on Weibo, the topic

Many netizens expressed their anger at this:

At present, the microblog mentioned above has not been seen on the home page of @zjt93, but in the early morning of December 15, @zjt93 updated the microblog again and responded. The following are some excerpts:

In the name of shared economy, we should be responsible to consumers to the end.

After the acquisition of its biggest rival, Mobay, by American Corps, the negative rumors of ofo have never stopped. A few days ago, another netizen said that he pretended to be a foreigner to write to ofo, and really quickly returned the deposit.

If you pretend to be a foreigner, the deposit will be refunded in seconds. Whether this is a paragraph or ofo does make a distinction is not yet clear. However, from defaulting on supplier loans to difficult withdrawal of deposits, the tight ofo capital chain has long been a well-known fact. If it is for the sake of reducing the negative impact, it is not surprising that foreigners should speed up refund processing and avoid the tide of refunds.

In the field of sharing bicycles, ofo has gone a long way. But the so-called distance is only about three years. Various bicycle brands, from scratch to scratch, capital from entry to exit, industry boom and bust cycle has been greatly compressed, leaving only one chicken feather.

Its not just bicycles, its the shared economy, and many new things are just a flash in the pan. In 2017, which is regarded as the first year of the shared economy, people are overwhelmed by the sharing of charging treasures, umbrellas, cars, clothing and so on. The lack of a clear business model and profit logic does not prevent them from financing in the capital market. Taking sharing bicycles as an example, China Shared Economic Development Report 2017 shows that by the end of 2017, there were 77 sharing bicycle enterprises in China, with a total investment of 23 million bicycles, and the financing amount reached 25.8 billion yuan in that year.

Many of the booming shared economies are capital-driven industries. Being ripened by capital means that many consumption scenarios do not necessarily correspond to real consumption needs. Once the money is burnt out, investors and investment institutions can not be found to take over. All forms of shared economy have to return to the basic issue of profitability and find a way to survive for a long time.

So, in the hard times of ofo, many of the products that were once popular have already disappeared. Those brands that are still alive can hardly escape the predicament that the scenery is no longer there. Recently, an article entitled Dreaming Time of Shared Economy mentioned that investors who share massage chairs generally find themselves in a strange circle, chairs are repaired and broken, and maintenance costs are high. The same example is shared bicycle. In todays streets, the time cost of finding a good car is greatly increased.

In retrospect, some stories of shared economy are magical, with ups and downs, high and low. This can not be overstated by the craziest trial and error. Chinas huge population base enables the sharing of the right of use to have a certain degree of efficiency. Of course, the cultivation of capital is indispensable. However, capital also makes the industry impetuous, so that many entrepreneurs seek to make fast money, seek to cash in, and ignore the thinking of the business model itself, thus accelerating the decline of the industry.

Capital games themselves have no original sin, but when they leave, consumers often pay for them. The unreturned deposit, the broken bicycle blocking the passage on the street and so on make people feel good. Ironically, some entrepreneurs try to find consolation from the quality theory when they share the history of bicycle boom and bust. They think that the low quality of Chinese is the biggest cost of starting a business. This logic of reversing causality, like the story of pretending that foreigners are refunding their deposits in seconds, provides an explanation for the situation of high opening and low going. In the booming wave of entrepreneurship, consumers are always the flow that supports valuation, not the real object of service.

After waking up, the liquidation will come sooner or later. Once the myth of making wealth changed to another way of telling it - those who once abandoned you their peers owe you a deposit of 199 yuan. Although there are many bad outcomes, even if the entrepreneurs are unwilling to do more, after the industrys boom and bust cycle, they can only fulfill their promises, clean up the mess and take responsibility for consumers to the end. Otherwise, the social contradictions and disputes accumulated will be difficult to clear up.

I hope that Chinese entrepreneurs will face up to the problem and recognize as soon as possible that the business logic of this road is not feasible is to rely on capital harvesting flow to make fast money from consumerswool. And, after reflection, you can act. This is probably the worst ending after the bubble. (Bright Web Review)

Source: Liable Editor of Beijing Daily: Yao Liwei_NT6056