截至目前，双方已在核心产品矩阵形成全面合作：从经典的212越野车，到王牌MPV、卡路里皮卡等主 力车型，累计立项合作项目超十个，覆盖传统燃油与新能源两大动力赛道。其中已实现量产的合作车 型，累计销量突破五万台，市场表现印证了双方技术协同的市场价值。当前，针对下一代越野车的动力 系统研发，双方已进入深度攻坚阶段，有望为中国越野市场带来技术突破。 东安动力表示，此次战略合作的达成，不仅是行业优势资源整合的典范，更成为中国越野车市场高质量 发展的重要里程碑——标志着双方正式迈入"共同定义产品、共享技术成果、共拓市场空间"的深度融合 阶段。展望未来，双方将以联合创新实验室为载体，聚焦硬核越野性能提升与前瞻新能源技术落地，致 力于将212越野车打造为兼具技术实力与文化魅力的中国越野新标杆。 东安动力此前披露的2025年三季度获取定点协议的公告显示，2025年三季度，公司新市场开发共获取5 家企业（基于保密协议约定，客户名称不便披露）的5项新市场《定点协议》，其中全新开发客户3家。 上述项目预计生命周期为5年至10年，总销量预计100万台，其中，涉及新能源新市场项目2项，规划销 量预计80万台。 由于产品平台化，公司具备 ...

双方表示，将基于联合实验室聚焦越野性能提升与新能源技术落地，针对下一代越野车动力系统进行联 合研发。 凤凰网科技讯 12月15日，近日，北京汽车制造厂有限公司与哈尔滨东安汽车动力股份有限公司正式签 署战略合作协议，并共同为"新动力联合创新实验室"揭牌。 北汽制造旗下拥有212等经典越野车型，东安动力（600178）则为国内动力总成供应商。根据协议，双 方将在传统燃油及新能源动力领域展开合作，目前已累计立项超十个项目，覆盖212越野车、王牌MPV 及卡路里皮卡等车型，相关合作车型累计销量已突破五万台。 ...

作为依托纺织和铝业成长起来的传统制造业巨头，魏桥为何毅然闯入竞争白热化的汽车行业？魏桥跨界造车，将面临怎样的机会与挑战？ 近日，魏桥创业集团(下称"魏桥")旗下北京汽车制造厂的全新品牌锐胜汽车，发布了旗下首款车型——锐胜M8。 这是魏桥自2023年以来，通过投资控股领途汽车、北京汽车制造厂，并联合新势力车企布局了极石汽车、212越野车等多个汽车品牌后，在造车领域的又 一次关键落子。 作为依托纺织和铝业成长起来的传统制造业巨头，魏桥为何毅然闯入竞争白热化的汽车行业？魏桥跨界造车，将面临怎样的机会与挑战？ 从纺织、铝业到汽车 魏桥的发展史可谓一部跨界转型史，其从纺织起家，构建了自备电厂+铝业跨界的双主业。过去几十年来，魏桥的业务扩张之路一直遵循产业协同逻辑。 1951年，魏桥的前身魏桥油棉厂(旧称"魏桥轧花厂")建厂。2003年，魏桥纺织成为全球规模最大的棉纺织企业。随着纺织用电需求不断提升，魏桥开始自 建电厂，后因电力富余而进入电解铝行业。2014年，魏桥铝电成为全球最大铝产品生产商。 魏桥在近两年大举跨界造车的背后，是其两大支柱产业——纺织与电解铝，均面临增长瓶颈和盈利压力的现实。 2018年,魏桥创始人张士 ...

Core Viewpoint - The dispute between BAIC Group and Beijing Automotive Manufacturing Factory over the "BAIC" brand highlights that the division of a company is not merely resolved through a share transfer agreement, as the definition of intangible brand heritage can lead to more complex and enduring challenges [2][4]. Group 1: Background of the Dispute - BAIC Manufacturing was established in 1951 and became a significant player in China's automotive industry, with the "BAIC" brand gaining national recognition through the production of the BJ212 off-road vehicle in 1965 [4]. - In 2015, BAIC Group transferred 51% of BAIC Manufacturing's shares to a private entity, leading to BAIC Manufacturing becoming a private company [5]. - Following the share transfer, BAIC Manufacturing began to emphasize its historical connection to the "BAIC" brand, which led to tensions with BAIC Group [7]. Group 2: Legal Proceedings - Since 2021, BAIC Group has filed multiple lawsuits against BAIC Manufacturing for trademark infringement, claiming that BAIC Manufacturing has used the "Beijing" trademark without authorization [8]. - The court ruled in favor of BAIC Group, recognizing the brand's established market presence and the potential for consumer confusion [9]. - The lengthy duration of the legal proceedings is attributed to the extensive evidence required in trademark and unfair competition cases [9]. Group 3: Future Implications - BAIC Manufacturing has appealed the first-instance ruling, indicating that the legal battle is far from over [11]. - Experts suggest that companies should prioritize the clear delineation and protection of intangible assets during asset restructuring or divestiture to avoid similar disputes in the future [11][12]. - The case serves as a reminder for companies to include detailed contractual terms regarding the use of brand names and trademarks in share transfer agreements to prevent future conflicts [12].

Core Viewpoint - The dispute between BAIC Group and Beijing Automotive Manufacturing (referred to as "BAIC Manufacturing") over the use of the "BAIC" brand has resulted in a first-instance victory for BAIC Group, although BAIC Manufacturing has appealed the decision. This case highlights the complexities of brand heritage ownership and the challenges that arise after corporate restructuring, indicating that the division of tangible assets does not resolve the issues surrounding intangible brand legacies [2][9]. Group 1: Background of the Dispute - BAIC Manufacturing was established in 1951 and is recognized as one of the early pioneers of China's automotive industry [3]. - The "BAIC" brand gained national recognition with the successful production of the BJ212 off-road vehicle in 1965, which became a symbol of Beijing's state-owned automotive industry [4]. - In 2015, BAIC Group transferred 51% of BAIC Manufacturing's shares to a private enterprise, leading to BAIC Manufacturing becoming a private company [5]. Group 2: Nature of the Dispute - The conflict arose when BAIC Manufacturing began using the "Beijing" brand in its marketing and vehicle models starting in 2021, which prompted BAIC Group to file a lawsuit [2][6]. - BAIC Group claims that BAIC Manufacturing's use of the "Beijing" trademark constitutes trademark infringement and has filed multiple lawsuits since 2021 [7]. - The court recognized BAIC Group's long-standing use of the "BAIC" brand and its associated trademarks, establishing its significant market presence and brand recognition [8]. Group 3: Future Implications - BAIC Manufacturing has announced its intention to appeal the first-instance ruling, indicating that the legal battle is far from over [9]. - Experts suggest that BAIC Group should learn from this case to ensure clearer delineation and protection of intangible assets during future asset restructuring [9]. - Similar disputes over brand usage rights are not uncommon in the industry, as evidenced by past cases involving other companies [10].

2021年，北汽制造厂在汽车车身上印制"北京"商标并在宣传中使用相关标识，北汽集团以商标侵权将其诉至公堂，案件至今未果。2024年6月，北汽制造厂 发布全新212越野车品牌及首款车型，北汽集团声明二者无关。2025年国庆期间，一场汽车赛事翻车事故更是将这场纷争推向高潮。在2025中国汽车城市攀 爬巡回赛上，一辆标注"212"的汽车翻车，因标识问题，很多人误以为是北汽集团产品并质疑其技术安全，北汽集团紧急澄清涉事车辆属北汽制造厂，与己 无关。 近日，北汽集团发布声明称，收到人民法院就某汽车企业不正当竞争案件作出的一审胜诉判决。法院认定，涉事企业使用"北汽"及含"北汽"字样的标识，损 害北汽集团竞争利益，构成不正当竞争。判决其立即停止使用含"北汽"字样的企业简称，公开登报消除不良影响，并向北汽集团支付经济损失赔偿及维权合 理开支。 目前，北汽集团一审胜诉，但不排除北京汽车制造厂进一步上诉的可能。此事件后续会如何发展，GPLP犀牛财经也将继续关注。 判决书明确指出，北汽集团长期在各类商业活动中持续、广泛使用"北汽""北汽集团"作为企业简称，且持有多项相关商标。经过数十年发展，"北汽""北汽 集团"企业简称已在公众中 ...

Core Insights - The 212 off-road vehicle brand is undergoing significant management changes following a controversial incident involving a vehicle accident, which has raised safety concerns and led to the dismissal of the brand center director, Li Ran [1][9]. Group 1: Management Changes - Li Ran, the brand center director of 212, was dismissed due to inadequate team management, high personnel turnover, and financial mismanagement, including unclear payment settlements and violations of financial discipline [1]. - The dismissal comes amid a challenging period for the brand, as it attempts to establish itself as an independent entity following its transition from a single model to a full-fledged brand [4][9]. Group 2: Brand Development - The 212 brand, which has historical roots dating back over 60 years to the Beijing Jeep 212, is currently selling the 212 T01 model priced between 139,900 and 188,800 yuan, with over 13,000 units sold in the first ten months of the year [2]. - The brand is set to hold a major launch event on June 6, 2024, marking its independent brand status, although it faces challenges related to its association with the Beijing Automotive Manufacturing Plant, which has no ownership ties to the BAIC Group [2][9]. Group 3: Marketing and Future Strategy - Li Ran played a crucial role in the brand's initial marketing and image development, which included various promotional activities and collaborations, such as the G212 high-speed rail partnership and off-road driving events [7]. - The brand aims to deepen its connection with Chinese off-road culture while navigating the challenges ahead, emphasizing the need for both heritage and innovation in its future development [7].

Core Viewpoint - The incident involving the 212 off-road vehicle during a climbing event has sparked discussions about vehicle safety and quality, leading Beijing Automotive Group to clarify its non-involvement with the model in question [1][2]. Group 1: Incident Details - On October 1, a 212 off-road vehicle overturned during a climbing event, causing significant deformation of the A-pillar, although no injuries were reported [1]. - The vehicle involved was confirmed to be produced by Beijing Automotive Manufacturing Co., Ltd., which is not affiliated with Beijing Automotive Group [1][2]. - Experts noted that the accident highlighted the need for improved safety standards in professional events, with factors such as improper weight distribution and throttle control contributing to the incident [1]. Group 2: Brand and Ownership Issues - Beijing Automotive Group emphasized that the vehicle should not be referred to as "Beijing 212" or "Beijing Off-road 212," as these terms misrepresent the facts [2]. - Historical ties between Beijing Automotive Group and Beijing Automotive Manufacturing have led to brand confusion, as the latter was a subsidiary for 42 years before becoming a private enterprise [4][5]. - The ownership of the "212" trademark has been contentious, with Beijing Automotive Manufacturing contesting trademarks applied for by Beijing Automotive Group [5]. Group 3: Market Context and Future Implications - The off-road vehicle market in China is experiencing growth, with expectations of sales reaching 350,000 to 400,000 units this year [5]. - Despite the market potential, the T01 model from Beijing Automotive Manufacturing has struggled with low sales and quality criticisms, indicating a gap in manufacturing expertise [5]. - Industry experts suggest that the resolution of the "212 incident" could lead to clearer brand distinctions and improved safety standards within the sector [6].

Core Viewpoint - The incident involving the 212 off-road vehicle during a climbing event has sparked discussions about vehicle safety and quality, leading to North Auto Group clarifying its non-involvement with the vehicle in question [1][2][3] Group 1: Incident Details - On October 1, a 212 off-road vehicle overturned during a climbing event, resulting in significant deformation of the A-pillar, although no injuries were reported [2] - The vehicle involved was confirmed to be produced by Beijing Automotive Manufacturing Co., Ltd., which is not affiliated with North Auto Group [2][3] - Experts noted that the accident highlighted the need for improved safety standards in professional events, with factors such as improper weight distribution and throttle control contributing to the incident [2] Group 2: Brand and Ownership Clarification - North Auto Group emphasized that the 212 model is not associated with its Beijing Off-road brand, and media misrepresentation could harm its reputation [3] - The historical context of the 212 model's branding is complex, as Beijing Automotive Manufacturing was once a subsidiary of North Auto Group but has since become an independent entity [4] - Disputes over trademark rights have arisen, with North Auto Group previously taking legal action against Beijing Automotive Manufacturing regarding the use of the "North Auto" brand [4] Group 3: Market Context and Future Implications - The hard-core off-road vehicle market in China is expected to grow significantly, with projected sales reaching 350,000 to 400,000 units this year [5][6] - Despite the market potential, the T01 model from Beijing Automotive Manufacturing has struggled with low sales and quality criticisms, indicating a gap in manufacturing expertise [6] - Industry experts suggest that both companies need to clarify their brand identities and improve product quality to remain competitive in the evolving market [6]

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the recent controversy surrounding the 212 off-road vehicle, which was mistakenly associated with the BAIC Group, highlighting the need for clarity regarding brand ownership and safety concerns in the off-road vehicle market [4][5][8]. Group 1: Incident Overview - A video of a 212 off-road vehicle flipping during a climbing competition went viral, leading to public scrutiny over vehicle safety and quality [4]. - The incident occurred on October 1 during a climbing event in China, with many mistakenly attributing the vehicle to BAIC Group due to its prominent "212" branding [4][5]. Group 2: BAIC Group's Response - In response to the growing public outcry, BAIC Group issued a statement clarifying that the involved vehicle was produced by Beijing Automotive Manufacturing Factory, which is not affiliated with BAIC Group [5][9]. - The statement emphasized that the vehicle is part of a new model set to launch in 2024 and that BAIC Group retains no ownership or rights over it [5][9]. Group 3: Historical Context of the 212 Vehicle - The 212 vehicle, originally developed in 1966 for military purposes, has a storied history but is no longer connected to BAIC Group since the latter divested its stake in 2015 [8]. - Despite the legal separation, BAIC Group allowed the continued use of its trademarks by the manufacturing company, leading to brand confusion [8]. Group 4: Market Dynamics and Safety Concerns - The off-road vehicle market in China is experiencing rapid growth, with a projected market size exceeding 2 trillion yuan and a 70% year-on-year increase in sales, reaching 940,000 units in 2024 [14]. - However, the rise in popularity has been accompanied by safety risks, as highlighted by the recent incident and previous accidents, raising concerns about the safety of off-road activities [14]. Group 5: Background of the Manufacturing Company - The Beijing Automotive Manufacturing Factory is now owned by Shandong Weiqiao New Energy Technology Group, which has been diversifying into the automotive sector after facing challenges in its traditional textile and aluminum businesses [15][18]. - The company has made significant investments in the new energy vehicle sector and aims to establish a strong presence in the automotive market, but faces competition from established players [20][22]. Group 6: Sales Performance of the 212 Model - The newly launched 212 T01 model has seen disappointing sales, with only 8,207 units sold in the first half of 2025, significantly trailing behind competitors like the Tank 300, which sold 27,000 units [20][22]. - The model's performance in the broader SUV market is also underwhelming, ranking 136th in sales during the same period, indicating challenges in gaining market traction [20][22].