0:00 A Chinese nizen recently revealed that at the Milan Furniture Fair, the well-known German sofa brand Coiner refused entry to Chinese visitors. The person who shared the story said they had planned to go in and take a look, but after checking his personal information at the entrance, staff denied him access. Another Nison from mainland China said that only after experiencing certain things did he understand why some places no longer allowed Chinese visitors inside. Recently, many of my friends have gone to Milan again for exhibitions. From their videos, I could see that more and more booths are refusing entry to Chinese visitors. It sounds upsetting, right? But I have to say, the way we are treated today is something we brought upon ourselves. In the past, when we
0:47 visited exhibitions in Milan, you could take photos however you wanted. You could even flip their items over and photograph them, and no one would mind. But now, that's no longer allowed. Why? Because we steal. >> He went on to say that at an international exhibition in Milan, there was a theft that drew attention. Important original design drawings displayed at a booth disappeared after being handled by several Chinese visitors. At the same time, many people were skeptical and even felt the claim might be biased. Still, they expressed sympathy for the exhibitor as those materials were almost equivalent to the company's historical records. However, just a few days later, an even more shocking incident occurred involving a Chinese tour group. The group visited a museum dedicated to a late design
1:33 master. The museum preserved the designer's original studio under government protection. While family members and former colleagues were responsible for daily explanations and management. After the visit, the museum discovered that a valuable art album was missing. They contacted the group, suggested it may have been taken by one of their members. When the news reached the group, everyone on the bus was shocked and angry and all denied any involvement. To prevent the situation from escalating, the group leader took a more measured approach, suggesting the possibility that it had been taken by mistake and called on anyone who had it to return it voluntarily. However, no one admitted to it at the scene. The situation later took a turn. The group realized that one member had not returned with the bus. After making
2:19 contact and upon learning that the museum had surveillance evidence, the individual admitted to taking the album, but clearly had not fully understood the seriousness of the act. In the end, at the GU's request, the item was arranged to be returned. Even so, the incident triggered strong dissatisfaction within the group. Some members became highly emotional, and a few even chose to leave immediately rather than wait for the person involved. What's more, the following day, the individual acted as if nothing had happened and offered no apology to the group. This attitude further intensified the conflict. The blogger said that many Chinese people have become accustomed to imitation and copying, and some even take pride in producing lowcost replicas. They don't value the long development time and
3:05 investment behind the original work. For example, a piece of furniture that appears simple often requires designers to spend 2 years repeatedly testing and refining it. Yet, imitators can replicate it in a short time, even sending images back home through live streams for rapid reproduction. However, such imitation products are often only similar in appearance. In terms of structure and material quality, there are clear differences. Consumers may feel they're getting a bargain on the surface, but in reality, they may not truly receive real value. Some analysts suggest that this incident may also be related to Italy's recent crackdown on counterfeit and substandard furniture originating from China. On April 13th, Italy's Garta Definian under the coordination of prosecutors in
3:51 Trined a large-scale enforcement operation cenamed Gamba Corta Shortle Leg. It successfully dismantled a nationwide industrial chain involved in the counterfeiting of designer furniture. The operation focused on combating violations of intellectual property rights. In the end, more than a dozen individuals were investigated and over six categories of counterfeit home products were seized. They mainly included light fixtures and iconic seating designs. These items were unauthorized replicas of classic Italian industrial designs whose intellectual property rights were protected at the European level. The case occurred on the eve of the Milan International Furniture Fair and drew strong attention from Europe's design and home furnishings industries. According to the
4:37 investigation, the criminal network operated in a highly systematic way. First, counterfeit products were imported in large quantities from China. They were then stored and distributed nationwide through a supply chain network made up of 13 Italian companies. These companies were registered across 10 provinces including Rome, Milan, and Naples. They covered major markets across both northern and southern Italy. Through continuous monitoring and tracking of retail chains and e-commerce platforms, financial police were able to fully reconstruct the entire commercial process from overseas importation to domestic storage and sales. They confirmed that these companies served as key nodes in the counterfeit trade. With authorization from the Trin prosecutor's office, financial police carried out
5:23 targeted searches of company headquarters, retail outlets, and logistics warehouses linked to the case. The operation stretched across six regions Pedmont Lombardi Venetto Lzio, Apulia, and Compania. The operation was supported by local financial police units in each region. During the searches, more than 6,500 counterfeit items were seized, the majority of which were lighting products and seating. These items closely replicated the iconic designs of well-known Italian industrial brands, but lacked authorization from the rights holders, seriously infringing on intellectual property. Beyond that, the operation also revealed serious safety risks. Many of the SE's lighting products failed to meet EU electrical safety certification standards. They
6:08 lacked basic electrical stability and insulation, posing risks of fire or electric shock. Financial police stressed that these lowpriced designer style products not only mislead consumers, but also create unfair competition for legitimate Italian manufacturers and honest businesses. It damages the reputation of made in Italy and the domestic manufacturing sector. The investigation began with long-term monitoring of offline retail channels and e-commerce platforms. Authorities found a large number of well-known designer furniture items on the market that were nearly identical in appearance, proportions, and details, yet priced significantly below normal levels. By analyzing product circulation paths and commercial data, investigators gradually reconstructed the full supply
6:54 chain. First, products were mainly imported from overseas, primarily from China. Second, after entering Italy, they were stored in multiple centralized warehouses. Then they were distributed nationwide through physical stores and commercial channels. This system formed a highly organized parallel market with long-term sales reaching thousands of units. A total of 14 individuals have been charged in connection with the case. The charges include introducing goods with false markings into Italy for trade, handling stolen goods, and commercial fraud. Each suspect's specific liability will be determined based on their role within the chain. The investigation is still ongoing. to further verify the exact turnover generated through the sales. Several
7:39 Italian media outlets have reported on the operation, noting that it not only struck a blow to the counterfeiting industry chain, but also highlighted the importance of protecting consumer rights. Under Italian law, all individuals involved are presumed innocent until a final and irrevocable judgment is issued. The Financial Police stated that this operation is part of an ongoing series of actions aimed at combating activities that harm made in Italy. Its goal is to safeguard the legitimate rights of citizens and lawful business operators. So, what is the actual quality of Chinese-made furniture? Let's take a look at a video. A vlogger showed a latex mattress she had bought from a Hongjo based Jason Furniture. Because the size was wrong, I wanted to
8:24 cut it open and shorten it. I never expected that inside it was actually just a piece of sponge. This side is the front. The so-called latex is only an extremely thin layer and it tears apart with a light pull. One Edison commented, "You didn't expect it. And Jason Furniture didn't expect it either. Who would have thought you would actually cut it open and look inside?" Another said, "Pure sponge only costs around 40 yen, while latex cost several thousand. They really dare to make that kind of money. Another netison said, "I just went to their live stream and asked about it and they kicked me out." A consumer rights vlogger filmed himself dismantling a newly purchased set of furniture on site. >> I bought a full set online, a bed, a
9:09 mattress, and bedside tables, plus the two latex pillows they threw in. Let me show you what it's really like. This is the mattress, 1.8x 2 m. I can lift it with one hand. This is what they promoted in the live stream as independent pocket springs. If it were real, it couldn't possibly be this light. >> He then demonstrated the headboard, which he was also able to lift with one hand. Next, he opened the complimentary bedside table and said that when he received the package, he initially thought it was something small like a mug, as it looked completely different from what has been shown on the live stream. >> The first thing that hits you is a very sharp, irritating smell. It's an unpleasant mix of wood and glue. They claim this is a solid wood bedside table, but I suspect only this single panel is actually solid wood. And how thin is this board? I feel like with
9:56 just a little pressure, it would break. It's that thin. Basically like paper. Maybe all the solid wood is right here. From the side, you can see it clearly. It's all particle board. The parts you can see are solid wood, but the parts you can't see are all particle board. They don't even bother to use thick particle board. You can see this part is this thick. For the parts you can't see, let me show you. >> He added that there was no need to dismantle the other bedside table. He said it was essentially a formaldahhide emitter and that the smell would not dissipate even after several years. Excessive formaldahhide exposure, he warned, could lead to leukemia and various respiratory illnesses. Next, the vlogger opened a headboard that was supposed to be genuine leather. They claim this is top grain cowhide,
10:42 but there's a very sharp unpleasant smell at the seams where the pieces are jointed. You could clearly see the stitching and it can easily crack. You can also feel that it's extremely thin. The smell is almost like a trash bin that hasn't been empty for days. They also say has a solid wood frame and real leather. Can someone hand me a lighter? I'm going to take this apart by force because I don't want this thing circulating in the market anymore. Is this real leather? Even if you don't know much, you should be able to tell. I don't even feel like burning it anymore. This isn't even synthetic leather. It's just plastic. >> He warned that these kind of products often have a very clear packaging feature. They usually come in generic packaging with no brand identification at all. Proper products should clearly display basic information on the outer
11:28 box such as brand name, trademark, place of origin, and contact details. However, these items have none of that. only vague labels like leisure chair, premium bedside table, or fashion soft bed. Such products typically lack product standards, safety certifications, and any traceable source. Some e-commerce sellers promote these items as saving you money. For example, a product originally priced at 3,000 yen might be offered for just over 1,000 yen, but such low prices often come at the cost of safety and quality. While it may seem like a short-term saving, it can bring much greater risks in the long run. After one or two years of use, these products may pose increasing health hazards or lead to unexpected problems. If medical treatment becomes necessary,
12:15 the cost would far exceed the initial savings. In some cases, they simply shift the risk onto the buyer. What truly requires caution is not just the price, but whether the product has basic guarantees of quality and safety. The vlogger concluded by saying that whenever you come across live streams where the host starts with phrases like this bed isn't 4,000, not 3,000, not even 2,000, it's best to block them immediately. These accounts are not helping you save money. They are putting you at risk. I've compiled a list of these live streams and related furniture brands in the comment section. The reason I don't show them directly in the video is that once they are mentioned, they report the content for alleged copyright violations, which could get the video taken down. This kind of content is also hard to keep online for long as it is
13:02 easily suppressed. They file large numbers of complaints behind the scenes. My previous video had to be uploaded six times and in the end it was still restricted. So many people never even saw it. In real life, exposing these issues also makes enemies. These companies often have millions of followers along with multiple accounts and teams and strong manpower. So retaliation is not surprising. No matter how they respond, whether through complaints, smear campaigns, or even personal attacks, I have to bear it. For them, suppressing the whistleblower is the only way to cover up their problems. For me, choosing to expose these issues comes with a price I must accept. A large volume of low-quality furniture produced in China is not only harming consumers on the mainland, but is now
13:48 also causing problems for many people in Taiwan. A man in Taiwan, surnamed Chen, spent nearly 10,000 new Taiwan dollars on a Chinese-made wardrobe purchased on Shopppee. After assembling it, he lifted it by about 2 cm and the entire 140 cm tall wardrobe suddenly fell apart. The panels cracked and the structure collapsed. He was stunned. Later, when he contacted customer service, he received only prefuncter responses and even the installer couldn't be reached. In the end, he had no choice but to apply for a refund. Such cases are not isolated. Many consumers hoping to save money choose to buy Chinese-made furniture on platforms like Shopppee or Taow. During crossber shipping, missing parts and damaged panels are common, and
14:33 some products advertised as solid wood turn out to be composite boards. Professional assembly workers warn that lowpriced products inherently carry quality risks. On the other hand, some consumers have encountered shipping related issues. A marble table ordered by a Mr. Woo was already damaged upon arriving at Taiwan customs. A customs broker advised that it be destroyed with an additional fee of around 1,000 new Taiwan dollars. Industry representatives say that because goods go through multiple stages of transport and inspection, it's often difficult to determine responsibilities for damage and the procedures must be followed accordingly. Crossber online shopping can also involve regulatory risks. One consumer purchased what was advertised on Tao as decorative artificial dry
15:20 branches, but instead he received real tree branches instead. The shipment was intercepted by customs upon entry, resulting in a fine of 15,000 new Taiwan dollars. Authorities remind the public that items such as plants, untreated wood, and meat products are all regulated goods, and violations can result in fines of up to several hundred,000 Taiwan dollars. In addition, disputes in online shopping are frequent. One seller reported that after selling a pair of shoes for $459 Taiwan, the buyer returned only an empty box. Both sides held their own claims, and the case was eventually referred to the platform for mediation. Lawyers point out that if the seller can prove the item was not returned, the case may constitute fraud and could require legal
16:06 action. Industry insiders say that China's furniture sector is currently in a clear winter period or a phase of transition. Due to multiple economic factors, the industry as a whole is under significant pressure. In February this year, IKEA closed seven stores in China within a single week, signaling a major strategic adjustment in its China operations. In this environment, the widespread presence of e-commerce and live stream platforms selling low-quality furniture and misleading product descriptions has further added negative pressure to the industry.
