Last night (May 9), a netizen who called himself "Wenzhou Tesla out of control owner" posted an apology letter to Tesla on social platforms, admitting that he mistakenly used the throttle as a brake and fabricated the brake failure and other content. Became the first consumer to apologize to the OEM.
Tesla pioneered
Usually when it comes to rights protection, the subject is generally the consumer. But last year, Tesla, known as the catfish in the market, set a precedent for consumers as an OEMs. And won.
Previously, the Tesla brake failure incident was boiling over, and the brand safety was seriously questioned. The Henan car advocate mentioned in the apology letter and The Tianjin car owner Mr. Han are the main force of the Tesla brake door incident, and the platform supported behind it is even more suspicious.
Tesla's single-pedal mode, as we all know, concentrates the throttle and brake functions on one pedal, and the driver is very easy to step on by mistake in a hurry. Therefore, after the public opinion broke out that Tesla's brakes failed, almost one-sided public opinion led to the opposite side of Tesla.
In fact, the case was based on EDR testing in October last year, and a court judgment was issued, finding that the owner accidentally stepped on the pedal and caused the vehicle to have an accident. For this result, not only the owner is not satisfied, but many public opinion trends also feel somewhat biased. However, just when everyone thought that Tesla would be good to meet, Tesla's legal department did something that surprised many people, suing the owner of the accident, demanding compensation for damages to reputation and apologizing.
There has always always been only a complaint from the people to the officials, but this time an official has come to sue the people. And it also won, and the results from the first and second instance trials showed that Tesla won the lawsuit. With the apology letter incident at the beginning of the article. In this regard, many people are puzzled. Doesn't product public relations want to pay attention to big things and small things? In this way, the negative news is bigger, it seems that Tesla has taken advantage, and it is not afraid of the impact on the market reputation?
In this regard, Kan Chejun believes that there must be an impact. But the impact is not only Tesla, but is likely to become a Chinese car consumer market, a cross-era relationship between consumers and OEMs.
Subtract BMW under the clouds of doubt
Let's turn our attention for a moment to the other end of the automotive market. BMW, one of the leaders of luxury, has not had a good time in recent public opinion.
"I think BMW is very immoral", "secretly replacing the coarse aluminum alloy with two thin iron bars", "In order to save costs, cut corners, take consumers to do experiments, shoddy, there are safety hazards", "BMW is rapidly losing its conscience at a speed that is visible to the naked eye, in places invisible to the naked eye." All kinds of negative information flooded the short video platform.
In this regard, Kan Chejun first made it clear that the attitude of "aluminum for steel" is not a new topic, Chinese consumers are particularly sensitive to it, the reason is very simple, all aluminum represents a more expensive cost, steel is more popular, aluminum for steel shows that luxury cars are treated with double standards, bullying Chinese - this logic has a flaw - that is, whether aluminum steel replacement will lead to quality decline?
As far as BMW is concerned, it has come once as early as 2017 on the Seventh Generation 5 Series. The four-link rear suspension control arm of the sixth generation 5 series F18 is made of cast aluminum alloy, and the rear suspension of the G38 is upgraded to a five-link bar, of which 1 is cast aluminum alloy and the other 4 are stamped steel, which is the standard "aluminum steel exchange". So the question is, has the quality of "aluminum for steel" decreased?
In fact, without increasing the number of connecting rods by 1, BMW also reduced the quality of the spring by 23.5%. From BMW's point of view, increase the number of connecting rods, reduce the quality of the spring, reduce production costs and improve fuel economy. For consumers, models with longer wheelbases still have agile chassis responsiveness and are more fuel-efficient to drive. So does that mean we've wronged BMW? That's not it either.
Because the core of the problem is whether to reduce the allocation? The answer is yes, whether the quality is affected, the cost of building a car has been reduced, and whether the price of the market terminal should also be reduced? Not really. This is also the reason why BMW chooses to be silent about the overwhelming negative information, and many media colleagues feel depressed - the reduction does not reduce the price, it does.
Consumers don't want preferential treatment, but fairness
Many readers may say that confusing the Tesla owner's apology with BMW's reduction is the heat of the car. In fact, it is not, two things that seem to be incompatible, in fact, show a truth, that is, consumers need not preferential treatment, but fairness. If there is nothing wrong with the product itself, then there is no need to carry the pot for human error that occurs after-sales. Similarly, because the cost is controlled and the consumer pays, even if the attitude is humble, it is not acceptable.
In terms of product tone, Kan Chejun has no prejudice against Tesla and BMW, and even the Hong Kong and Taiwan plots in childhood are more fond of BMW. But in terms of attitudes towards consumers, products, and the market, at least in China, although Tesla may not be perfect, we have not seen BMW's sincerity.
In "Let the Bullets Fly", Zhang Mazi said that X-son wants to be fair, fair, and fair. Kan Chejun feels that the same is true for Chinese car consumers.
-END-