Browse
Log in / Register
Share
July 2024 – A public dispute has erupted between two major Chinese electric vehicle manufacturers, Li Auto and Nio, centering on the authenticity of a promotional video. The controversy raises questions about marketing ethics and competitive pressures in the rapidly evolving EV sector.
Ma Lin, a Vice President at Nio, has openly challenged the legitimacy of a chassis performance comparison video. The clip, originally released through Li Auto's official channels, purportedly showed the Nio ES9 alongside the Li Auto L9 Livis. Ma Lin's primary contention is that the Nio vehicle in the video demonstrated behavior inconsistent with its engineering specifications. He specifically noted that the ES9's "Standard" mode appeared to match or exceed the oscillation speeds of its dedicated "Ultra-Soft" mode, a setting designed for maximum comfort. Nio has called on its rival to verify the video's source and fully disclose the testing parameters and environmental conditions used.
The video, which has since been removed from Li Auto's primary channels, continues to circulate on third-party automotive blogs and social media platforms, amplifying the debate. This incident follows a separate, third-party chassis evaluation conducted by automotive platform Dongchedi, which compared the same vehicle models. Industry observers frequently note that manufacturer-conducted tests are often viewed with more skepticism regarding objectivity than those performed by independent entities.
This is not the first instance where Li Auto's comparative marketing tactics have drawn criticism. In mid-2025, during the launch of the Li i8 model, the company presented a video depicting a collision test with an 8-ton Dongfeng heavy-duty truck. Dongfeng Liuzhou Motor Chenglong, the truck manufacturer, issued a formal statement in response. The company characterized the test as a "self-defined, non-standard scenario" that did not reflect real-world driving conditions and accused Li Auto of attempting to damage a competitor's reputation. Li Auto later stated it had "no intention of involving competing brands," a response that did little to quell the criticism.
The rivalry intensified further just weeks later. Liu Jie, Li Auto's Vice President, suggested on social media that Nio's Onvo brand had engaged in a "black PR" campaign, hiring online commentators to disparage the Li i8. Shen Fei, President of Onvo, responded tersely by reposting Liu's comment with the advice, "I suggest you report it to the police." These serial conflicts underscore a market environment where competitive messaging is becoming increasingly aggressive.
Market Context and Sales Pressure The escalating public disputes occur against a backdrop of shifting market dynamics. For much of the past year, Li Auto has reported year-on-year declines in its monthly sales figures. The company, once a dominant player in the extended-range electric vehicle (EREV) segment, is facing intensified competition. Furthermore, market data suggests a gradual consumer shift in preference towards pure battery electric vehicles (BEVs) over EREVs, placing additional strain on Li Auto's core product strategy.
One bright spot for the automaker has been the performance of its pure electric model, the i6, which ranked as the fourth best-selling car in China for April 2024. This success indicates a potential pathway for the company as it navigates the changing landscape. Analysts point to these market pressures as a likely catalyst for the heightened competitive rhetoric and controversial marketing efforts, as brands fight fiercely for consumer attention and market share.
Industry Perspective on Comparative Marketing Marketing experts and automotive analysts viewing the situation note that while comparative advertising is common globally, its execution is critical. "When a brand directly targets a competitor, especially with technical performance data, transparency is non-negotiable," commented an industry analyst familiar with the Chinese EV space who requested anonymity. "Any perception of manipulating test conditions can backfire severely, eroding consumer trust not just in the offending brand, but potentially in the industry's claims more broadly."
The core issue, according to observers, is the lack of a standardized, mutually agreed-upon protocol for such comparisons. Without independent oversight or clear disclosure of all variables—including road surface, tire pressure, vehicle load, and exact suspension software versions—the results remain open to interpretation and challenge. This latest controversy between Li Auto and Nio may prompt calls for greater industry self-regulation or clearer guidelines from consumer protection agencies regarding performance claims in automotive advertising.
