雷军再陷舆论风暴！小米强制车主，提前支付尾款

Core Viewpoint - Recent controversies surrounding Xiaomi and its founder Lei Jun highlight the dual nature of public attention, which can elevate or damage reputations rapidly [1] Group 1: Financial Controversy - Rumors emerged that Lei Jun transferred $5 billion overseas through Wells Fargo, leading to public scrutiny; however, Xiaomi's PR manager clarified that there was no collaboration with Wells Fargo or its executive [1] - The incident reflects the volatility of public perception and the potential impact on Xiaomi's brand image [1] Group 2: Automotive Payment Issues - Xiaomi has faced backlash for requiring prospective car owners to pay the remaining balance on their vehicles within seven days, or risk cancellation of their orders and forfeiture of deposits [3] - This practice has been compared to the "pre-sale" model in real estate, where buyers assume significant risks, raising concerns about consumer protection [7] - The affected customers primarily include those awaiting the Xiaomi SU7 and SU7 Ultra models, with some being asked to pay up to 573,900 yuan [3] Group 3: Customer Evaluation and Market Strategy - Xiaomi's approach targets specific customers deemed less likely to complete their purchases, based on their responsiveness to financing procedures or expressed disinterest [9] - The company aims to mitigate the impact of "scalpers" hoarding orders, as production capacity constraints lead to long wait times for vehicle delivery [9] Group 4: Legal and Ethical Considerations - The purchase agreement includes a clause allowing Xiaomi to demand early payment, which may be viewed as a "standard clause" under consumer protection laws; however, it raises questions about fairness and consumer rights [12] - Legal experts suggest that this clause could be interpreted as an unfair practice if consumers were not adequately informed about its implications [15] - Xiaomi's previous commitment to allow payment after vehicle inspection contrasts with its current policy, leading to accusations of inconsistency [13]