Core Viewpoint - The recent accident involving Xiaomi's car in Chengdu highlights not only the safety issues within Xiaomi's vehicles but also reflects broader safety concerns prevalent in the entire new energy vehicle industry [1][10]. Group 1: Safety Concerns - The hidden door handle design of Xiaomi's car hindered rescue efforts during the accident, raising significant safety concerns about such designs that prioritize aesthetics over functionality [2][10]. - The electronic door handles have a success rate of only 67% in side collisions, compared to 98% for traditional mechanical handles, indicating a critical safety gap [2]. - New regulations have been introduced to ensure that car doors can be opened in emergencies, emphasizing that design innovations must not compromise basic safety functions [2][10]. Group 2: Performance vs. Safety - The rapid acceleration capabilities of models like the Xiaomi SU7 pose increased demands on drivers' skills and awareness, potentially turning public roads into race tracks [3][10]. - The demographic of Xiaomi's users shows that 68% are under 35 years old, with a significant portion being inexperienced drivers, raising concerns about their ability to handle high-performance vehicles [3]. - The disparity between the performance of electric vehicles and the safety standards that accompany them could lead to dangerous situations if safety does not keep pace with performance advancements [3][10]. Group 3: Driver Education and Awareness - Many drivers lack adequate understanding of new technologies in electric vehicles, such as energy recovery and single-pedal driving, which can lead to accidents if not properly managed [5][7]. - The misuse of intelligent driving systems, where drivers over-rely on technology, has resulted in serious accidents, highlighting a gap in driver education and awareness [6][8]. - The marketing strategies of some car manufacturers often downplay the need for driver training and safety education, leading to a mismatch between driver capabilities and vehicle technology [7][10]. Group 4: Regulatory Response - The Ministry of Industry and Information Technology is seeking to enhance safety requirements for intelligent and connected vehicle production, focusing on improving the capabilities related to network and data security [8][9]. - New regulations aim to address the risks associated with new technologies while optimizing the requirements for different product development characteristics [9]. Group 5: Industry Responsibility - The accident serves as a reminder that new energy vehicle manufacturers must prioritize safety over rapid technological advancements and market competition [10][11]. - Safety should be integrated throughout the entire lifecycle of vehicle production, from design to after-sales service, ensuring that consumer education and feedback mechanisms are robust [10].

Core Points - Xiaomi announced a recall of 116,887 SU7 standard electric vehicles due to insufficient recognition and response capabilities of the L2 highway navigation assistance feature, which may increase collision risks if the driver does not intervene in time [1][4] - The recall is conducted through an Over-The-Air (OTA) update, a method that has been increasingly formalized in recent years for addressing software issues in vehicles [1][5] Summary by Sections Recall Details - The recall specifically targets the standard version of the SU7 model, excluding the SU7 Pro and Max versions, which utilize different technology [4] - The standard version is powered by an NVIDIA Orin chip with a computing power of 84 TOPS, while the Pro and Max versions use two NVIDIA Orin X chips with a total computing power of 508 TOPS [4] - The OTA update aims to enhance the reliability of the driving assistance feature, including optimizing speed control strategies and adding dynamic speed functions [4][9] OTA Recall Context - In 2024, there were 233 automotive recalls in China, affecting 11.237 million vehicles, with 19 of those recalls involving OTA updates, impacting 4.068 million vehicles, a 246.8% increase from the previous year [5] - The National Market Supervision Administration has established regulations requiring companies to report OTA recalls to ensure safety and transparency [7][9] Regulatory Environment - The regulatory framework for OTA recalls has evolved since 2020, emphasizing the need for companies to report software-related recalls to prevent hidden defects from being overlooked [7][9] - Recent guidelines from the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology stress the importance of obtaining necessary permissions for OTA upgrades related to autonomous driving features [9][11] - The shift towards OTA technology for defect resolution reflects a broader trend in the automotive industry, where software is becoming a critical safety element, necessitating improved safety verification and user communication [11]

Core Viewpoint - Xiaomi and its founder Lei Jun are currently facing significant challenges and controversies, particularly related to the recent SU7 car accident, which has raised questions about the company's quality and safety standards [1][2][4]. Group 1: Impact of SU7 Incident - The SU7 accident has led to intense scrutiny and criticism of Xiaomi, with Lei Jun acknowledging the unexpected severity of the incident's impact on the company [2][4][7]. - The incident has highlighted the difficulties of entering the automotive industry, marking a significant crisis for Xiaomi [3][7]. - Public expectations for Xiaomi have increased dramatically, with Lei Jun realizing the company's substantial influence and responsibility in the automotive sector [7]. Group 2: Quality and Safety Concerns - Following the SU7 accident, there have been widespread concerns regarding the effectiveness of Xiaomi's intelligent driving systems and transparency in data [6]. - Xiaomi has renamed its driving assistance features to clarify their capabilities, reflecting a response to regulatory pressures and public criticism [6]. - Ongoing quality issues have emerged, including complaints from SU7 owners about design flaws and discrepancies between promotional claims and actual product performance [9][11]. Group 3: Chip Development - Lei Jun announced the upcoming release of Xiaomi's self-developed mobile SoC chip "Xuanjie O1," marking a significant milestone in the company's technological advancement [13]. - The development of chips is seen as a critical step for Xiaomi in establishing itself as a leader in hard technology, following previous setbacks in chip development [15][16].

Core Viewpoint - The recent traffic accident involving the Xiaomi SU7 has led to significant public scrutiny regarding the safety of Xiaomi's smart driving system and its marketing practices, resulting in a brand trust crisis and stock price fluctuations [7]. Group 1: Incident and Response - On March 29, a serious traffic accident occurred involving a Xiaomi SU7 standard version, which drew considerable media attention and criticism towards Xiaomi and its founder Lei Jun [1]. - Following the incident, Lei Jun publicly committed to cooperating with police investigations and addressing concerns from the families involved and the public [2]. - Lei Jun's social media activity decreased significantly after the accident, but he later expressed that the support he received helped him regain confidence and motivation [3][6]. Group 2: Stock Performance - Since the accident, Xiaomi's stock price initially declined but has since shown signs of recovery, currently trading above HKD 50 per share [8]. Group 3: Sales and Expansion - Despite the incident, Xiaomi's automotive sales remained robust, with over 28,000 vehicles delivered in April, and plans for further expansion with new store openings across various cities [10]. Group 4: Industry Response to Smart Driving Terminology - The accident has prompted a broader industry reevaluation of terminology related to smart driving, with companies like Xiaomi changing their marketing language from "smart driving" to "assisted driving" to avoid misleading consumers [14]. - Regulatory bodies are emphasizing the need for clear definitions and responsibilities regarding smart driving technologies, urging manufacturers to avoid exaggerated claims [18].

Market Overview - The US dollar index experienced fluctuations, reaching a high of 100.87, influenced by the Federal Reserve's decision to maintain interest rates and a hawkish signal from Powell [2][10] - Spot gold saw a significant increase of nearly $100 at the beginning of the week due to a weaker dollar and safe-haven demand, but later declined as optimism around trade negotiations grew [2] - Asian currencies strengthened initially, with the New Taiwan Dollar rising over 9% in two days, but the appreciation halted as the dollar strengthened [4] Oil Market - International oil prices experienced volatility, initially dropping 5% due to OPEC+ plans to accelerate production, but later rebounded due to increased demand in Asia and Europe, as well as a decrease in US production [6] Cryptocurrency Market - Bitcoin surpassed the $100,000 mark for the first time since February, indicating a positive trend for risk assets, with Ethereum also seeing a significant increase of over 20% [7] Trade Agreements - The US and UK reached a trade agreement that includes partial tariff reductions and expanded market access, although many details remain to be finalized [12] - The EU threatened to impose tariffs on nearly €100 billion worth of US goods if trade negotiations fail [13] Financial Policies - The People's Bank of China announced a series of monetary policy measures, including a 0.5% reduction in the reserve requirement ratio, aimed at stabilizing the market [18] - The Bank of England lowered its benchmark interest rate by 25 basis points to 4.25%, marking the fourth rate cut in the current easing cycle [24] Semiconductor Industry - The Trump administration plans to revoke AI chip export restrictions established during the Biden administration, aiming to simplify semiconductor trade regulations [14] Automotive Industry - New energy vehicle companies are shifting their marketing focus from "smart driving" to "assisted driving," reflecting a change in industry standards and sensitivity to legal responsibilities [26]

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the dual nature of the electric vehicle (EV) industry, highlighting both the rapid growth in sales and the increasing concerns over safety related to intelligent driving technologies. It emphasizes a shift in marketing strategies from promoting "intelligent driving" to "assisted driving" as a response to safety incidents and regulatory pressures [4][11][22]. Group 1: Market Growth and Trends - Global EV sales reached 4.46 million units in Q1 2025, with a market share of 19.7%, and China accounted for 67.7% of global sales, contributing 84% to the growth [4]. - The transition from electric to intelligent driving is recognized as the next phase in the industry, but it requires a gradual adaptation process [9][10]. Group 2: Shift in Marketing and Terminology - Companies like Xiaomi have changed the terminology from "intelligent driving" to "assisted driving" to reduce consumer misconceptions and manage risks [5][13]. - During the May Day holiday, several EV manufacturers downplayed their previous enthusiastic marketing of intelligent driving features, focusing instead on comfort and entertainment aspects of vehicles [15][16]. Group 3: Regulatory and Safety Considerations - The shift in marketing strategies is linked to accidents caused by misunderstandings of intelligent driving capabilities, prompting a need for clearer communication [11][22]. - Regulatory bodies have emphasized the importance of accurate advertising for driving assistance technologies, warning against false claims that could lead to severe consequences [19][21]. Group 4: Industry Evolution and Competition - The transition from "intelligent driving" to "assisted driving" signifies a maturation phase for the industry, moving from aggressive growth to a more responsible approach [22][24]. - Traditional automakers are beginning to re-enter the market with new high-end EV brands and products, increasing competition for new players [36][38]. Group 5: Consumer Implications and Future Outlook - The change in terminology may lead to reduced consumer expectations regarding intelligent driving, promoting a more rational understanding and potentially lowering accident risks [31][34]. - The industry faces challenges in differentiating products under a unified terminology while ensuring safety and transparency in marketing [29][30].

Core Viewpoint - The rapid advancement of "smart driving" technology has been halted due to regulatory restrictions following a high-profile accident involving Xiaomi's SU7, leading to significant financial repercussions for several electric vehicle manufacturers [3][4][5]. Group 1: Regulatory Impact - The Ministry of Industry and Information Technology has issued new regulations limiting the promotion and functionality of smart driving systems, particularly prohibiting the use of terms like "takeover" and restricting features that cannot be fully controlled by the driver [3]. - Following the accident, Xiaomi rebranded its "smart driving" feature to "assisted driving" on its vehicle ordering page [4]. Group 2: Financial Consequences - Prior to the accident, several electric vehicle companies, including Xiaomi and BYD, raised substantial capital through share placements, with Xiaomi and BYD each raising approximately HKD 42.5 billion and HKD 43.5 billion respectively [5]. - The announcement of these placements led to a sharp decline in stock prices, with BYD's shares dropping over 7% and Xiaomi's market value evaporating by nearly HKD 100 billion in a single day [5]. Group 3: Cost Structure of Smart Driving - Smart driving technology constitutes a significant portion of vehicle costs, with research indicating that it accounted for 38% of total expenditures for automakers last year, second only to battery costs [5]. - The cost of smart driving systems varies between thousands to tens of thousands of yuan, representing 5% to 15% of the total vehicle cost, and this percentage may increase with the addition of advanced features [7]. Group 4: R&D Strategies - Companies like NIO, Xiaopeng, and Li Auto primarily adopt a mixed model of self-research and external procurement for smart driving technologies, balancing core capabilities with faster product deployment [8]. - NIO's self-developed smart driving chip reportedly saves around CNY 10,000 compared to using multiple external chips [9]. Group 5: Market Dynamics - BYD's recent strategy to integrate high-level smart driving features across a wider range of models, including those priced below CNY 100,000, disrupts the previous pricing logic in the smart driving market [17][18]. - The industry consensus is that achieving economies of scale through mass production is essential for reducing smart driving costs, with a focus on penetrating the mainstream price segment of CNY 100,000 to CNY 200,000 [19]. Group 6: User Perception and Challenges - There is a significant gap in user understanding of smart driving technologies, particularly in lower-priced models where feature reductions may amplify safety concerns [20][21]. - The reliance on pure vision systems in lower-tier models poses challenges in complex real-world scenarios, as these systems may struggle with rare but critical situations not covered in training data [21][22].

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the recent changes in terminology regarding autonomous driving systems in the automotive industry, particularly the shift from "intelligent driving" to "assisted driving" in response to regulatory pressures and safety concerns [1][2]. Group 1: Regulatory Changes - Xiaomi has renamed its autonomous driving features from "Xiaomi Intelligent Driving Pro" to "Xiaomi Assisted Driving Pro" in line with new regulations [1] - The Ministry of Industry and Information Technology (MIIT) held a meeting on April 16, emphasizing that car manufacturers should avoid using terms like "intelligent driving" and instead use "assisted driving" to prevent exaggerated claims [1][2] - The MIIT has initiated measures to strengthen the management of smart connected vehicle product approvals, recalls, and software updates [2] Group 2: Industry Trends - The automotive industry has seen a trend of using increasingly vague terms to describe autonomous driving capabilities, with many companies promoting their systems as L2+, L2.5, or even L3 without clear definitions [4][5] - The distinction between legal definitions of L2 systems and consumer perceptions of L3 or higher levels has led to confusion and potential safety risks [6] - A significant increase in accidents related to smart driving systems has been reported, with a 217% rise in 2024 compared to the previous year, largely due to driver misjudgment of system capabilities [7] Group 3: Safety Concerns - The article highlights a tragic incident involving a Xiaomi SU7 vehicle that caught fire, underscoring the urgent need for improved safety measures in autonomous driving systems [8] - The MIIT has called for manufacturers to conduct thorough testing and validation of their driving assistance systems, ensuring clear communication of system capabilities and limitations [8] - The Chinese automotive industry is expected to move towards a balanced approach that prioritizes both "intelligence" and "safety" in the development of autonomous driving technologies [8]

Core Viewpoint - Xiaomi has renamed its smart driving features to emphasize the assistive nature of the technology, reflecting a shift in marketing strategy to address consumer understanding and safety concerns [1][3][29]. Group 1: Name Change and Implications - The term "智驾" (Smart Driving) has been changed to "辅助驾驶" (Assisted Driving) for the Xiaomi SU7 vehicle models to clarify the functionality of the technology [1][2]. - The renaming aims to mitigate misunderstandings that may lead consumers to believe they can fully rely on the system, as evidenced by incidents involving drivers misusing the technology [3][4]. Group 2: Consumer Perception - Consumers often interpret product names literally, which can lead to misconceptions about the capabilities of smart driving systems [4][5]. - The distinction between "智能驾驶" (Smart Driving) and "辅助驾驶" (Assisted Driving) is significant, as the latter implies that the driver must remain engaged [5][29]. Group 3: Marketing and Naming Strategy - Effective naming in marketing can significantly influence consumer perception and product success, as seen in various examples from the food industry [6][19]. - The choice of terminology can either enhance or hinder a product's acceptance in the market, highlighting the importance of strategic naming [19][27].

Core Viewpoint - The automotive industry is undergoing a significant shift in terminology and marketing strategies regarding intelligent driving, moving from "smart driving" to "assisted driving" in response to regulatory pressures and safety concerns [1][2][3]. Group 1: Regulatory Changes - The Ministry of Industry and Information Technology (MIIT) issued a draft standard prohibiting the use of ambiguous terms like "automatic driving" and "smart driving," mandating the use of "assisted driving" or "combined assisted driving" [1]. - Following a serious accident involving a Xiaomi vehicle, regulatory bodies tightened promotional language, emphasizing the need for clear communication about the limitations of L2-level assisted driving systems [2][3]. Group 2: Industry Response - Xiaomi's rebranding of its driving assistance features reflects a broader trend among new automotive companies, including Li Auto, NIO, and Xpeng, to adjust their marketing language and focus on safety and comfort rather than advanced driving capabilities [1][2]. - The shift in terminology is seen as a response to the misalignment between technological maturity and public perception, with many consumers mistakenly believing L2 systems offer full autonomy [3]. Group 3: Technical Considerations - Xiaomi's SU7 model highlights the ongoing debate between pure vision systems and multi-sensor fusion technologies, with the former being cost-effective but limited in adverse conditions, while the latter offers enhanced safety at a higher cost [4]. - The change in naming from "smart driving" to "assisted driving" serves to manage user expectations and clarify the responsibilities of drivers in the context of current technological limitations [4]. Group 4: Consumer Education - The rebranding initiative aims to foster a more rational understanding of intelligent driving among consumers, moving away from the notion of "fully autonomous" vehicles [6]. - Companies are implementing measures to educate users about the limitations and responsibilities associated with assisted driving, including mandatory training and detailed user manuals [6]. Group 5: Future Outlook - The transition to "assisted driving" signifies a move towards a more realistic and safety-focused approach in the automotive industry, with an emphasis on balancing technological advancements with regulatory compliance [7]. - The industry is expected to evolve towards L3-level and above autonomous driving, but this progression will prioritize safety and responsible marketing practices [7].