In just one week, China’s auto market has birthed several high-profile “dramatic moments” that sparked widespread discussion.
Chronologically, it began with Great Wall Motor’s Wei Jianjun subtly likening a certain automaker to “Evergrande group of the auto industry.” This was followed by a joint appeal from the China Association of Automobile Manufacturers (CAAM) and the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology (MIIT) to halt “cutthroat price wars.” Then came Richard Yu’s unfiltered remarks at the Future Auto Pioneers Conference, culminating in what appeared to be a veiled response from Lei Jun.
On the surface, these auto industry “dramas” seem like unrelated incidents. Yet beneath lies a reflection of intensifying market competition, where open and covert rivalries among automakers have reached a fever pitch.
During a group interview at the M03 Max launch event, He Xiaopeng noted that 2025 might not even be the peak of competition. Still, it’s undeniable that the elimination round in the auto sector is nearing its final stages.
Adding to automakers’ anxiety is the absence of a clear “absolute winner.”
Over the past year, the “sales champion” title among new energy vehicle (NEV) makers has changed hands multiple times. Leading automakers face intense scrutiny over massive debts, while mid-tier players struggle with both sales and profitability. China’s auto market remains ripe for reshuffling.
Yet, this very uncertainty is also what makes China’s auto industry fascinating.
“Evergrande group of the Auto Industry”
The term “Evergrande group of the auto industry” first emerged on May 23. Great Wall Motor founder and chairman Wei Jianjun stated in an interview with Sina Finance: “The ‘Evergrande group’ of the auto industry already exists—it just hasn’t exploded yet.”
Wei’s reasoning: Some automakers are obsessed with “buying scale with cash,” relying on high-leverage expansion without building profitable business models. Saddled with unsustainable debt, their fragile supply and capital chains could collapse entirely if disrupted.
“Debt ratios” formed the core of Wei’s argument. He named several automakers: BYD with total liabilities of ¥584.7 billion ($81.40 billion) and a liability ratio exceeding 70%; NIO and Seres, both with liability ratios above 87%.
Though Wei didn’t explicitly identify the “Evergrande group of the auto industry,” context and examples pointed squarely at BYD. Subsequently, BYD’s stock plunged, wiping over ¥100 billion ($13.92 billion) off its market value.
This “unwarranted disaster” forced BYD to publicly defend itself. It vehemently denied being the implied “auto Hengda” and clarified the nature of the “total liabilities” Wei referenced.
Li Yunfei, BYD’s PR manager, responded on Weibo: Compared to global giants, BYD’s debt structure is healthy (Ford, GM, and Boeing have higher ratios), with “interest-bearing debt” only at ¥28.6 billion ($3.98 billion) —just 5% of total liabilities.
Meanwhile, Toyota holds ¥1.8 trillion ($250.66 billion) in interest-bearing debt, Ford ¥1.1 trillion ($153.18 billion), whereas Evergrande’s interest-bearing debt ratio once hit 70%.
Li concluded: “No mainstream Chinese automaker is the ‘Evergrande group of the auto industry.’”
Beyond fueling a war of words between Great Wall Motor and BYD, this controversy directly spurred CAAM to issue an “Initiative.” The document emphasized that healthy industry development requires reasonable profits and called on automakers to cease “cutthroat” price wars.
Notably, shortly before the Initiative, BYD slashed prices across multiple models—the Seagull Smart Driving Edition now starts at just ¥55,800 ($7,770).
Geely, Leapmotor, and Deepal quickly followed suit, proving that “price” remains a weapon for many.
Can restricting “price wars” fundamentally alter the market landscape? Unlikely. Beyond pricing, leading players have multiple tools to capture market share—ensuring competition will persist, just in different forms.
The battle has begun.
Richard Yu’s Unfiltered Remarks
After a period of quiet, Huawei’s Richard Yu used the “home advantage” of the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area Auto Show to unleash another series of viral remarks.
We witnessed Yu’s candid speech firsthand. Key highlights:
- “Our smart driving is #1—not just ‘first-tier.’”
- “Brand and marketing power matter. Some company from another industry just entered [the auto market] and sold their first car like hotcakes. I don’t think their product is that great. Our cars are better, but our sales are a fraction of theirs. That’s brand power.”
- “Huawei’s battery standards are extremely high—meeting new national requirements five years early. Competitors’ batteries don’t meet our specs; seeing them on the road makes me nervous.”
- “For smart driving: Encourage real capability, expose empty boasts.”
Though Yu’s official topic was promoting HIMA (Harmony Intelligent Mobility Alliance), he repeatedly referenced rival automakers. Whether intentional or not, a PR storm was brewing.
Much like Wei’s interview, netizens instantly linked Yu’s “other company” to Xiaomi—igniting fierce online debate.
“Mo Yan Says Nothing”
Later that day, Xiaomi VP William Lu posted about Xiaomi’s packed auto show booth, adding: “Mo Yan once said: ‘To slander others is itself a form of admiration.’” Many interpreted this as a subtle clapback to Yu.
On June 1—amid the fallout—Lei Jun quoted the same line while announcing May sales for Xiaomi Auto, but quickly deleted it.
To this day, fans of both sides continue sparring online.
Electric Planet’s footage of Yu’s speech has drawn over 500 comments—many less than cordial.
Bloggers dubbed the clash “Yu Yin Rao Liang” (a pun on 余音绕梁—”lingering echoes”—replacing 梁 with 粮/”grain,” hinting at Xiaomi’s logo) and “Mo Yan Bu Yan” (莫言不言—”Mo Yan says nothing”). Yu’s targeted remarks are seen as a response to growing market pressures.
Statistically, HIMA remains a NEV leader in 2025.
Over the past five months (excluding March with no data and February’s 21,517 units), HIMA consistently sold ~30,000 vehicles monthly (Jan: 34,987; Apr: 29,632), hitting 44,454 in May. The highly anticipated AITO M8 has launched, with a projected stable monthly volume of 10,000 units.
Meanwhile, rivals—especially Xiaomi Auto—are rising fast.
In 2025, Xiaomi delivered 20k, 20k, 29k, 28k, and 28k units monthly (Jan-May), using only two models: SU7 and SU7 Ultra.
In July, Xiaomi’s first SUV—YU7—debuts, poised to challenge HIMA’s core SUV segment.
At a recent investor meeting, Lei Jun projected Xiaomi Auto will turn profitable in Q3-Q4 2025—just 400 days after SU7 deliveries began.
For Yu, Lei Jun—once his fiercest rival in consumer tech—has reemerged as his top adversary in smart EVs.
As noted earlier, the remarks from Wei Jianjun (Great Wall Motor), Li Yunfei (BYD), Richard Yu (HIMA), and Lei Jun (Xiaomi)—whether proactive or reactive—reflect the white-hot competition and growing uncertainty in China’s auto market.
In this transformative era, one of Lei Jun’s Weibo posts resonates deeply: “Latecomers always have opportunities.” Thus, automakers’ battles will expand beyond tech and products into PR, marketing, and multidimensional warfare.
Judging by the scale, resources, online traction, and institutional involvement in the “Yu Yin Rao Liang” and “Mo Yan Bu Yan” episodes, marketing and narrative control are becoming central battlefields.
Epilogue: The Real Victim
Some joke that Mo Yan—China’s Nobel laureate in literature—was the biggest victim of this feud. Why? After William Lu’s “Mo Yan quote” went viral, netizens fact-checked it. While the sentiment (“To slander others is itself a form of admiration”) aligns with Mo Yan’s themes, the exact phrase doesn’t appear in his writings—landing him on hot searches undeservedly.
But the real victims are the car owners silenced by the noise, or those whose objectivity is drowned out by partisan fervor. They are the ones truly hurt by this “Mo Yan” —a homophone for “don’t speak” in Chinese.
Discover more from ChinaEVHome
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
