Luo Yonghao's Criticism Tests Brands: A Turning Point in PR

On September 12, Luo Yonghao posted a brief review on Weibo. It was his impression after tasting Wild Master ice cream at an airport. According to a Super Focus report by Huxiu, the post spread immediately. The brand side issued no official statement. Even so, related topics rose to the top of search rankings.

The wording of the post was blunt.

“Perfectly ordinary, and considering the price, you could even call it bad.”

Luo Yonghao also touched on a comparison with Zhong Xuegao. “Much worse than Zhong Xuegao, it makes me miss Zhong Xuegao,” he said. He further stressed that it was a legitimate evaluation as a consumer. He cautioned against suspecting any behind-the-scenes manipulation. Wild Master’s official response was minimal. It only replied, “We will record the related issues and report them to upper management.” No official statement was issued at all. “Wild Master’s silent response” reached No. 1 in search. The brand gained more than 400,000 followers in three days. Many users called on it, “Don’t reply.” Both the critic and the criticized ended up gaining attention.

How an Airport Remark Went Viral and the Reaction

The trigger this time was a tasting at an airport. Luo Yonghao evaluated the taste as a personal experience. He expressed the view that it was not worth the price. The post was instantly spread to tens of millions of followers. Because it was based on consumer experience, it is difficult to refute. Unless it is false, it is structurally unlikely to constitute a rights infringement. The brand side chose silence. It closed the matter with only a single line from its customer service contact. That stance反而 expanded the buzz. Rises in search rankings and follower growth happened at the same time. User reactions also leaned toward supporting the silence. Voices spread that it would be wiser not to rebut head-on. That was because the case of Xibei was still fresh in memory. The lesson was shared that an emotional exchange expands a crisis. Silence was seen not as a passive move but as a strategy.

Growth to Over a Thousand Stores and the

Price Contradiction

Wild Master’s predecessor is Yeren Mufang, founded in 2011. Founder Cui Jianwei shifted from investor to operator. For 13 years after its founding, it had fewer than 100 stores. It long remained a quiet regional brand. The turning point came after 2024. It opened 244 new stores in 2024 and 916 in 2025. Total stores exceeded 1,600. It became No. 2 in store count among Chinese chain ice cream brands. It stands just behind DQ, which has been in China for 34 years. What supported the growth was a business logic called restraint. For more than 10 years it raised no funds and has no plan to go public. It maintained a policy of not handling delivery. It掲掲掲 put up the sign, “We don’t serve anything left overnight.” It guaranteed freshness with time-slot sales containers. It changed Italian-style in-store containers to a system divided by time. Changes on the supply side also helped. One Italian-made gelato machine cost about 500,000 yuan. Now equivalent domestic machines have fallen to 50,000 to 60,000 yuan. Lower equipment barriers became the basis for chain expansion. But scale is not synonymous with safety. Gelato’s market share is only about 6% to 8.5%. The market size in 2025 is about 16.16 billion yuan. That is small compared with the overall ice cream market of 191.2 billion yuan. Wild Master’s average spend per customer is 28 to 38 yuan. That is twice the level of DQ’s average spend. As rationalization of consumption advances, maintaining a high price range is difficult. The balance between product value and price is being questioned. Luo Yonghao’s criticism hit this vulnerable spot. When the freshness sign no longer works, what will remain? The significance lies in the fact that this question was shared.

Zhong Xuegao’s Bankruptcy and Xibei’s Failed

Confrontation

Luo Yonghao also showed complex feelings toward Zhong Xuegao. Zhong Xuegao’s fate has already been sealed. In July 2025, a court ruled it into bankruptcy proceedings. Core assets including trademarks were auctioned for 21.1 million yuan. There was a time when it was valued at 4 billion yuan. From peak to trough took only a few years. The cause of failure is said to lie not in external competition but in internal weakness. Persistently high prices provoked user backlash. An emphasis on promotions led to neglect of the supply chain. The 66-yuan “Ecuador Pink Diamond” became symbolic. Explanation of quality differences was insufficient. Doubts also spread that it would not melt even when burned with a lighter. Founder Lin Sheng rebutted that it was a distortion by pseudoscience. But the mismatch between pricing and usage occasions was never resolved. The case of Xibei is even more dramatic. It started with Luo Yonghao’s questions about pre-made dishes. It was originally a public debate over consumers’ right to know. Founder Jia Guolong chose a head-on confrontation. A rational dispute turned into an emotional showdown. He later admitted to a huge loss of 500 million yuan. He also revealed the closure of 102 stores. Corporate hardship became tied to personal emotions. A defense by Huayuhua founder Hua Shan added fuel to the fire. He posted repeatedly on Weibo and praised it as the pinnacle of the restaurant industry. Luo Yonghao criticized Huayuhua by name in a livestream. The 60-million-yuan advisory fee over 10 years did not work effectively. Jia Guolong later reflected, “If I could choose again, I would never confront him.” He made clear he would not build a personal IP and would return behind the scenes. The boundary between the individual founder and the corporate brand was recognized.

The Effect of Silent Response and the Logic

of the Stress Test

Wild Master’s silence is seen as a response informed by Xibei’s lesson. The cost of confronting Luo Yonghao head-on is far higher than staying silent. At least that point has been shared across the industry. The more essential point is its function as a stress test. First, it serves as public verification. Conventional firestorms centered on undercover investigations and complaints. Both left room for buffering. Negotiations with media outlets were possible through PR means. Scattered complaints were easily buried. Luo Yonghao changed this structure. He combines instant spreading power with experience-based statements. It is legally difficult for brands to strike back. A single post delivers a market verdict. Xibei exposed a transparency problem. Wild Master exposed doubts about the imbalance between price and taste. Second, dialogue with consumers has become mandatory. Many PR systems were built on a logic of information control. They lacked a logic for responding to concerns. Luo Yonghao stands on the side of naive perception. “To an ordinary person’s understanding, these are pre-made dishes,” he said. He struck at universal intuition, not expert judgment. The technique of overriding intuition with technical definitions no longer works easily. Third, a shift from post-crisis response to advance building has been forced. Silence is merely a passive response. There is a need for an attitude that treats criticism as free consumer insight. The founder has responded to price controversies in the past. But a lack of dialogue on the product side remains. Building a system to make up for this shortfall is the challenge.

How Luckin Profited by Riding the Wave

A contrasting case is Luckin. Luckin appointed Luo Yonghao as its “mega-size recommendation ambassador.” It announced a project recreating famous scenes from the past. Its WeChat Index jumped to its highest in the past month. The increase in gross profit per cup exceeded 2 yuan. Annual new profit is expected to be about 2 billion yuan. It drew attention as a model example of bandwagoning. Its distinctive feature is that it used criticism not as an enemy but as a resource. It led to a reaffirmation of product and price. It turned memorable scenes for users into shared assets. It generated buzz without advertising spending. This method cannot be applied to every brand. Without a product foundation and supply system, it would backfire. Luckin had the leeway to absorb it with scale and speed. Wild Master, because of its high price range, needs to be cautious. Xibei lost the opportunity with its emotional response. The difference among the three is not only in skillful or clumsy responses. It is also a difference in business structure and price legitimacy. Luo Yonghao’s presence became a device that visualized that difference. Brand PR has shifted from post-crisis firefighting to advance building. Its role as a free pressure gauge has become established.

Editorial Opinion

On short-term impact. The success of this silent response will likely generate followers in the next 3 to 6 months. Guidance to avoid head-on rebuttals to Luo Yonghao may be shared at PR sites. Companies will likely prepare standard phrases for customer contact points and rules for silence periods. Controls to restrain founder exposure during firestorms will also likely be strengthened.

On the long-term view. In 1 to 3 years, proving price legitimacy will become the axis of competition. High-priced food and beverage brands will need to show differences in taste and experience with figures and processes. Disclosure of supply chains and freshness management will become the standard for trust. Brands that cannot disclose will likely lose support.

On questions from the editorial team. Silence is not synonymous with restoring trust, is it. An increase in followers is only momentary interest, is it not. Silence without product improvement is merely postponing the problem, is it not. What should be disclosed to make use of the stress test. The creation of those standards is now being questioned.

References

• “ 罗永浩可能是所有品牌公关的“恩人” “, by 超聚焦 — 虎嗅网, 2026-09-15T00:20:11.000Z (ARR)
• Source URL: https://www.huxiu.com/article/4891192.html?f=rss