What Tesla has to do is to treat consumers correctly.
After apologizing late at night on the 21st, Tesla seemed to have chosen to “compromise” to consumers, but consumers did not buy it for the late apology. The major social platforms are full of discussions about Tesla .
On the day of the rights protection incident, Tesla’s stock price once fell by more than 6%, fell below 700 US dollars in one fell swoop, fell to 691.85 US dollars, and its market value shrank by nearly 46 billion.
Compared with Tesla, the Chinese brands that participated in the Shanghai Auto Show during the same period are all showing their muscles. Huawei demonstrated the latest models and autonomous driving technology, and Xiaopeng Motors also announced its new model P5…
Tesla, which is in a crisis of public opinion, is just like Samsung Electronics that “exploded the door” back then .
Samsung’s shadow
If time goes back to the year of the Samsung explosion, Tesla seems to be able to find its own shadow. Today, Tesla Motors, like the Note 7 at the time, has an outstanding software and hardware ecology, enthusiastic fans, and supercars in China. High market share.
In the overall environment, Samsung is facing the domestic mobile phone camp that is still developing, and Tesla is facing the new forces of Chinese car-making that are just starting out.
At the same time, Tesla seems to have inherited the shortcomings of Samsung Electronics back then: Arrogant and don’t put consumers in the eyes .
On August 19, 2016, after the Note 7 was first released in ten countries around the world (excluding Bank of China), there were a number of serial explosions. One month later, on September 1st, China only went on sale. On the second day, Samsung announced the recall of Note 7 that was first released in ten countries.
At this time, Chinese consumers smelled the difference of Samsung’s treatment: It is also Note 7, why is it still on sale in China if there is an explosion abroad? Samsung’s explanation is that the battery suppliers are different.
But then, the Note 7 of many national bank machine owners exploded. After testing, Samsung determined that the cause of the explosion was that the user put the phone in the microwave oven, not the product. This judgment naturally caused dissatisfaction among the masses: it was clear that they wanted to shirk responsibility.
It was not until October 10 that Samsung issued an announcement stating that it acknowledged that the Bank of China version of Note 7 also had problems, and the Bank of China version of Note 7 was recalled and refunded the next day.
So far, in the verbal criticism of various domestic media and consumers, Samsung Electronics gradually lost its position in the hearts of Chinese consumers, and then lost the entire market .
Judging from the whole incident, Samsung’s attitude towards Chinese consumers can be described as “negative”. On the one hand, it is to shirk responsibility, and on the other hand, it is to please other markets. This will naturally arouse consumer disgust.
Going back to the Tesla incident, after entering the Chinese market for many years, Tesla has maintained an “arrogant” attitude. Attitude has not changed: There is no problem with your own product, it is the user who is wrong .
Behind the many previous “out of control”, “sudden acceleration”, and “brake failure” incidents, Tesla’s approach was to provide a set of background data to prove that the accident was caused by improper use by users.
This almost “unilateral” approach obviously cannot convince consumers.
It can be seen that since entering the Chinese market, Tesla has established itself as an “iPhone in the automotive industry”. Under the guidance of technological design and characteristic marketing model, Tesla has grown stronger day by day and has become a “unique” existence in the domestic new energy vehicle industry. But it is clear that after becoming famous, Tesla has become a “big shop”.
If it weren’t for the voices of CCTV, Xinhua News Agency, and the General Administration of Market Supervision, would Tesla still “compromise”? ?
Watershed for domestic new energy car companies?
After the incident, Shen Yiren, former vice president of OPPO, specially commented on the Tesla brake incident: Will this become a watershed for the rise of domestic brands like the Samsung Note7 incident.
How to treat this view? There is some truth, but not all right.
During the Samsung explosion, domestic mobile phone brands have actually achieved a rise.
In 2014, Xiaomi suddenly emerged as the leader in domestic smartphone shipments, surpassing Samsung to rank first, with the latter dropping by 22.4%.
Samsung’s failure in the Chinese market lies in its over-reliance on flagship phones with increasingly higher prices, while ignoring the construction of low- and mid-range models and lack of powerful mid- and low-end models.
The price of Samsung’s mid-range models is between 2,000 yuan and 3,000 yuan, but this price range is the most intense range of domestic machines. There are not only Xiaomi, Honor and other cost-effective brands, but also OV models that mainly attack the offline market. Samsung does not have the price-performance ratio of Xiaomi and Honor, nor does it have OV advertising channels, and at the level of localization, it is even more inferior to those domestic brands that have been deeply involved in the domestic market. Under the offensive of the price-performance ratio of domestic mobile phones, Samsung mobile phones, which dominate business functions, have gradually lost the low-end market.
In the high-end market, the original powerful Galaxy S series and Note series showed a lack of innovation. The iPhone was chased by the iPhone before, and Huawei was chased by Huawei, which also lost a large number of users.
Strictly speaking, the Samsung Note7 incident cannot be called a watershed. It’s more like a fuse, making Samsung completely lose the Chinese market .
Looking back at the entire mobile phone industry chain, Today Samsung Electronics still has a pivotal position , The screen, sensor, lens, memory and even chips are all made by Samsung.
For Tesla, the establishment of a factory in the Shanghai Free Trade Zone is taking advantage of the “reform wave” in the development of domestic new energy vehicles. More importantly, Tesla’s entry into China also carries an important mission- Catfish effect .
In the domestic new energy market at that time, the phenomenon of “PPT car making” emerged one after another. A group of companies such as Ranger and Sailin only exist in people’s memory now.
Tesla’s entry, Let the country fade the false fire of new energy vehicles, and let the real new car-making forces begin to consolidate their technical strength. Think of Tesla as the task of catching up.
Traditional car companies have also begun to pay attention to the significance of the dual-point policy and begin to accelerate the transformation of electrification. According to the average fuel consumption of passenger car companies and the points of new energy vehicles in 2020 announced by the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology recently, companies like FAW-Volkswagen and other companies with negative fuel consumption points need to buy points from Tesla and other new energy car companies, and each point is quoted. Up to 3,000 yuan.
With the efforts of all parties, Domestic new energy car companies are gradually becoming formal , And gradually have the strength to challenge Tesla.
Looking back on this rights protection incident, Tesla is like a complete “negative teaching material”, clearing the scope of the safety department for domestic new energy vehicle planning, whether it is consumer life safety or car data security.
Therefore, even if there are no two incidents, the explosion gate and the rights protection gate, domestic mobile phones and domestic new energy car companies are rising, and the speed is getting faster. On the opposite of Tesla, there are not only Chinese new energy car companies, but also traditional car companies that are equally eyeing. If it cannot be resolved reasonably, he will lose more than the Chinese market.
Conclusion
Tesla, like Samsung, is at fault in the way it communicates with consumers.
But unlike Samsung’s solid foundation, Tesla is a company that relies on consumers. If it falls off the altar, both sales and market value will deal a heavy blow to Tesla. .
In the United States, its home base, Tesla’s arrogant attitude has also been exposed. The National Highway Safety Administration has previously issued an announcement due to quality issues requiring the recall of some Model X models produced between September 2015 and July 2016. A total of 9136 vehicles. However, the explanation given by Tesla is that it “missed the primer.”
In the 2020 US “Consumer Report” reliability rankings, Tesla ranked second from the bottom.
In addition, as the leader of Tesla, Musk is also constantly making enemies. Whether it is new energy car companies, traditional car companies or investors, they have all been “evaluated” by Musk.
For Tesla, as a leader in the field of new energy vehicles, he has gradually become a positive benchmark and negative warning for various car companies.
You must log in to post a comment.