Chairman Says Consumers Need Education After “$3,000/Month Salary Can’t Afford Fruit” Claim: Pagoda Responds to Misunderstanding

CNBC AI News, August 11th – Fruit retailer Pagoda finds itself in the spotlight after comments made by its Chairman, Yu Huiyong, regarding the company’s pricing strategy went viral in China. The controversy, sparked by Yu’s explanation of Pagoda’s premium pricing, has ignited a national debate about consumer choice, perceived value, and the role of retailers in shaping consumer understanding.

Yu’s remarks, addressing persistent consumer complaints about the high cost of Pagoda’s offerings, emphasized a commitment to quality over affordability. He stated Pagoda has “dedicated years to educating consumers” and will “never compromise on quality,” further fueling the online discussions.

Consumers have long voiced concerns about Pagoda’s prices, with anecdotal comments like “Can’t afford it on a 20,000 yuan salary” and “A quick trip to Pagoda easily costs 100 yuan” reflecting widespread sentiment.

Yu defended the company’s pricing by highlighting the significant differences in quality, even among seemingly identical fruits. “Fruit is a very ordinary product, but very few people truly understand it. We will continue to adhere to high standards. It would be easy to give customers a cheap impression, but the quality differences are vast. Even fruits that look the same can vary by a factor of four or five.”

Expanding on his philosophy, Yu articulated two fundamental business models: “One exploits consumer ignorance, the other educates consumers towards maturity. Pagoda has been pursuing the latter for years. We won’t cater to consumers’ lack of understanding about what constitutes ‘cheap.’ We want to inform consumers, ultimately allowing them to make their own choices. But when consumers are uninformed, they have no real choice; they can only choose based on price.”

In response to the viral video, Pagoda customer service acknowledged the circulating footage and stated there were inaccuracies that were under internal review. They indicated that official statements would be released through the company’s official channels.