A leaked email chain shared anonymously with Foodie has uncovered a contractual deadlock between Hong Kong bubble tea brand Silk. and its insurance underwriters two weeks before the launch of a major November campaign.
In an email dated Oct. 15 detailing a “Special Risk Assessment Notice”, Silk.’s insurers reclassified a cup inventory covered in the brand’s upcoming promotional campaign from “standard paper packing” to “high-yield financial assets”. The aggregate liability for the inventory was priced in excess of HKD3.18 million across 170,484 cup units.
The leaked email chain and insurance documents revealed the insurance underwriters were threatening to cancel Silk.’s commercial liability cover of HKD10 million unless Silk. agreed immediately to transport all cup inventory using “armored transport vehicles”, manage “dual-custody vault handoffs” with aluminium security briefcases, and impose front-of-house door security during asset transfer by Oct. 27, otherwise their cover would be nullified or suspended.
In an email sent by Silk.’s chief operating officer to the company’s legal team, the COO expressed frustration with the demand from insurers, stating: “Is this a serious mandate or are underwriters trying to push us? We are less than two weeks away from launch […] We didn’t budget HKD 100k+ for high level security just to transport prize peels.”
“[REDCATED] — Call Brink’s and Ferrari Group immediately to get quotes, but DO NOT commit yet. We need numbers by tomorrow morning. [REDACTED] — get back to the insurance guy. Remind them we’ve carried zero claims on standard transit for 3 years. They cannot threaten our liability cover 2 weeks before campaign rollout over a pool of prizes. Push for a waiver […],” the email continued.
Foodie reached out to Silk. regarding the leaked documents to verify the conversation and uncover the value of the cups and their importance in justifying a HKD10 million high-value transit insurance cover. A company spokesperson was tightlipped, saying:
“Silk. is aware of an unauthorized disclosure of internal operational communications. We do not comment on internal security protocols, logistics policies, or third-party vendor agreements. Our upcoming operational timeline remains unaffected.”
