Hello! I'm your financial journalist and economic analyst friend. This article from "Skei's Random Thoughts" may be written from the perspective of a "traditional fuel car enthusiast," but it actually hits the most painful and critical issue in China's current automotive industry: After rapid expansion, have we sacrificed quality and long-term vision in exchange for short-term market share?
I'll break down the logic behind this news, the current state of the industry, and the future trends in plain language.
Summary of the Key Points
The main argument of the article is that China's new energy vehicle (NEV) industry is at a turning point, moving from a period of "rushing forward" to one of "forced cooling down."
The author uses his own decision to continue buying fuel cars—which, in essence, represents a commitment to "well-proven reliability—to criticize the current trend of NEVs being developed too quickly. The article points out that in order to capture the market, some car companies have reduced the development cycle from the traditional 3-4 years to just 18 months, leading to frequent issues with "production consistency"—that is, the cars displayed in showrooms are not the same as those delivered to customers, and there are many quality defects. At the same time, public opinion has been manipulated by online trends, with phenomena such as negative public relations campaigns and fake reviews.
The article believes that the strict actions taken by four government departments (targeting leading companies like BYD and Geely) and the cleanup of illegal social media accounts by the Cyberspace Administration are essentially a form of "purification" for the industry. The future competition will no longer be about who can develop the fastest or have the most features, but about which companies possess the "engineer's gene"—that is, those who do not skip verification steps, do not treat customers as guinea pigs, and are not controlled by online popularity. The ultimate conclusion is that the industry is shifting from a focus on quantity ("whether there is a product") to a focus on quality ("whether it is good").
---
In-Depth Analysis: A Detailed Explanation from Five Dimensions
1. The Cost of Rushing: 18 Months vs. 36 Months—What's Been Lost?
Many consumers think that as long as a car can drive, why not have it on the market sooner? However, the author reveals a harsh engineering truth: Time is a safety factor.
- Traditional Approach (36-48 months): It used to take at least 3 to 4 years to develop a fuel car, from designing to selling it. During this period, the car would be tested under extreme conditions, such as freezing temperatures in Heilongjiang and high temperatures in Hainan, as well as on mountains and in deserts. This process, over millions of kilometers, aimed to identify and fix potential problems (such as rubber aging, overheating of electronic components, and loose screws) before the car was sold.
- Current Approach (within 18 months): To compete in the market, many NEV companies have cut the development cycle in half. This means that many tests are replaced by simulations or simply omitted.
- Consequences: The cars you buy may have issues, like the Tesla owner mentioned—sealants around the doors are not properly applied, causing leaks when it rains. The after-sales service might say, "This is a common issue with the new model," which is essentially an admission that the car is not fully tested before being sold. What's lost is the patience required for thorough testing.
2. Regulatory Action: Why Target BYD and Geely?
The article mentions that the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology and other departments have targeted BYD and Geely, which might surprise some readers since they are among the top sellers. But this is not about suppression; it's about setting rules. The action is part of a "Special Campaign for Production Consistency and Quality Improvement." In simple terms, it's about ensuring that the car you see in the dealership matches the car you drive home in terms of specifications, such as wheelbase, fuel efficiency, and features.
- Industry-wide Problem: In recent years, due to fierce competition, some companies have manipulated production processes or exaggerated their specifications. For example, they might report lower fuel efficiency than the actual performance, or the cars displayed in showrooms have more features than those delivered to customers.
- Significance of the Regulation: The regulatory action targets industry leaders, indicating that it's a effort to correct the industry's reckless growth. It sends a message to all companies: "Don't try to cut corners or manipulate data to boost sales; there are clear standards." This is a "health check" for the entire industry, aimed at removing excesses and bringing it back to a more rational state.
3. The Backlash of Online Trends: When "Negative Public Relations" and "Exaggerated Features" Become the Norm
The article also discusses the chaotic public opinion surrounding cars. This is a source of confusion for many consumers. Why are online reviews so mixed?
- Distorted Marketing: In the past, reviews were based on word-of-mouth; now, they are based on what's trending online. To attract attention, companies and social media outlets create artificial demand, such as adding unnecessary screens or removing interior pillars to make the car seem more spacious, which can compromise safety.
- Dark Marketing Practices: Some companies pay social media platforms to influence reviews or hire people to post negative reviews against competitors. The CCTV exposure of companies forcing customers to sell their cars is a extreme example of this unethical behavior.
- The Law of the Weak: When one company invests heavily in research and development, another may spend on marketing and negative publicity, and the latter often sells more. This leads to engineers who truly care about quality being marginalized. The Cyberspace Administration's removal of over 9,000 illegal accounts aims to clear this noise and allow the market to hear genuine opinions.
4. What Is the True "Engineer's Gene"?
The author defines the "engineer's gene" as a respect for technology and a sense of responsibility towards customers. Here are three specific criteria to assess a company's reliability:
- Standard 1: Don't Skip Verification: You can use simulations to speed up development, but you can't treat simulation results as real road test data. Extreme conditions like extreme temperatures and different terrains can only be tested with actual cars.
- Standard 2: Don't Treat Customers as Test Subjects: Good engineers solve problems in the lab before releasing the product. They don't let customers suffer from slow charging in winter or poor air conditioning in summer, and they don't rely on over-the-air updates (OTA) to fix issues. BYD's engineers repeatedly test fast charging technology, and Great Wall Automobile has refused to produce rushed products for 36 years—these are examples of the engineer's gene.
- Standard 3: Don't Rely on Online Popularity for Quality: Real technological breakthroughs don't need hype. Advanced algorithms for autonomous driving and battery safety can only be achieved through sustained investment and time.
5. The Future Trend: From "Having a Product" to "Having a Good Product"
China's NEV penetration rate has exceeded 60%. What does this mean?
- End of the Growth Phase: The market is no longer about who can enter first; now, it's about who offers better products. The focus has shifted from expanding market share to improving quality.
- Lessons from Fuel Cars: The author's preference for fuel cars reflects a value: trust in things that have been proven over time. Fuel cars have been around for over a century, and their reliability is the result of years of engineering effort. NEVs, being much newer, need time to build that same trust.
- Who Will Win in the Long Run?: In the end, it won't be the companies with the most impressive marketing or the lowest prices, but those that take the time to ensure the quality of their products.
Advice for Consumers:
If you're thinking about buying a car, don't just look at specifications and prices. Ask yourself:
- How long has the car been on the market? Has it undergone thorough testing in all weather conditions?
- What is the company's reputation? Has it had any major quality issues or negative public relations incidents?
- Are its core technologies (like batteries and autonomous driving) independently developed and tested over time, or are they just copied from others?
At this critical moment of industry transformation, slowing down may actually be the fastest path to success, and stability is the greatest competitive advantage. What we're waiting for is a more mature, reliable, and customer-centric automotive industry.
Thank you for reading!