Tesla Motors recently broke out a "hidden flight" controversy, which has caused an uproar in public opinion and widespread attention and reflection from all walks of life. This incident has once again brought the issue of payment models and consumer protection in the automotive industry to the forefront.
1. Origin of the incident
Tesla cars were found to have a hidden mileage feature that required the owner to pay extra to unlock it. This practice has been strongly dissatisfied and questioned by many car owners, believing that it violates the rights and interests of consumers and is a disguised price increase.
Tesla provides a rear seat heating upgrade package for the Model 3 long-range rear-wheel drive version and long-range rear-wheel drive upgraded models through OTA (over-the-air remote upgrade) at a price of $300 (about 2,096 yuan). Car owners only need to pay on the mobile app to unlock this feature. This pay-as-you-go model has sparked heated discussions.
Second, public opinion is in an uproar
As soon as this incident was exposed, it immediately sparked a heated discussion in society. Proponents argue that this is a reasonable business model innovation; Opponents accused Tesla of "selling tiger meat" and deceiving consumers. The two sides argued endlessly, and public opinion was in an uproar.
Tesla's practice has been pointed out as being for marketing purposes, manipulating the vehicle's flight estimation equipment and showing the owner an overly optimistic estimated mileage. Only when the battery level drops below 50% will the algorithm show a close to the real range. Data from some third-party testing agencies also shows that Tesla is indeed providing more aggressive mileage estimates, which are different from other car companies.
3. Industry reflection
The incident has also sparked a rethinking of the payment model of the entire automotive industry. How do you strike a balance between innovation and consumer rights? How to standardize the payment model and avoid over-commercialization? It becomes an urgent problem to be solved.
Tesla will shift its revenue sources from traditional vehicle sales revenue to after-sales software and intelligent service revenue, and obtain software revenue through autonomous driving packages, OTA paid upgrades, and Internet of Vehicles subscription services. This "hardware + software" business model is considered one of Tesla's core competencies.
This payment model has also raised questions. Researchers have found a major vulnerability in Tesla cars that hackers can exploit to unlock up to $15,000 worth of software-locked features, including heated seats and full self-driving packages. This will undoubtedly affect the rights and interests of consumers.
Fourth, regulatory intervention?
At present, Tesla has not made an official response on this matter. There is widespread concern as to whether the relevant regulatory authorities will intervene in the investigation and what kind of ruling will be made in the end.
The State Administration for Market Regulation has instructed local regulatory authorities such as Henan Province and Shanghai Municipality to safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of consumers in accordance with the law. There is news that Tesla has agreed to replace the battery for unhappy owners. To a certain extent, this reflects Tesla's efforts to "produce consistency".
This incident once again pushed the payment model and consumer protection of the automotive industry to the forefront, and aroused widespread attention and reflection from all walks of life. Whatever the end result, it is bound to have a profound impact on the industry as a whole.