China Industry and Information Technology News, a media outlet under the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, published an article on the 22nd “Is the “Dehua in Ningxia” argument necessary? The article points out that in recent times, “de-Ningde” has been repeatedly hyped up in the new energy vehicle industry, and it has become a public opinion farce. China's automobile industry chain is not “too strong,” but rather has painstakingly established advantages in some key links, and at the same time, there is still huge room for continuous improvement in its overall strength. In this context, if public opinion often advocates “de-assimilating” and artificially antagonizing leading local enterprises with other enterprises in the industrial chain, it is not in line with the stage of development in which the Chinese automobile industry is currently. What a mature industry really needs is not to cut peaks and fill valleys, let alone “weaken whoever is ahead”; rather, it is necessary not only for more outstanding companies to grow, but also for companies that have already formed global competitiveness to continue to move forward. In reality, the so-called “battery self-research” of some companies mainly focuses on battery pack design, system integration, BMS management, and even product definition. It is not the same concept as actually completing battery cell development and achieving large-scale stable manufacturing. At present, the relevant layout of many car companies has not reached the core of battery manufacturing. The power battery itself is an industry with a high concentration of capital, technology, talent, and manufacturing. Large-scale manufacturing in particular requires long-term process accumulation and quality control. By no means is building a plant or buying equipment, it naturally forms industrial competitiveness. If every automaker pursues “big and complete,” every step of the way is repeatedly invested, and every ability requires internal solutions, which seems to increase autonomy, it may actually lead to a new low level of repeated construction and misallocation of resources. The true competitiveness of modern industry is built on a specialized division of labor. Of course, we need more power battery companies to grow, we need more technology routes to compete, and we also need automakers to enhance their technical capabilities. However, “diversification” is not the same thing as “de-leading”, and “independent innovation” is not the same thing as “doing everything yourself”. Industrial competition can be intense, technology routes can be different, and supply chains can be diversified. However, there is one bottom line that cannot be blurred: low-quality internal volumes must not be allowed to damage the hard-won competitive advantage of China's new energy industry, marketing concepts must not be allowed to replace real technological innovation, let alone artificially turn industrial chain collaborators into industrial chain antagonists.

China Industry and Information Technology News, a media outlet under the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, published an article on the 22nd “Is the “Dehua in Ningxia” argument necessary? The article points out that in recent times, “de-Ningde” has been repeatedly hyped up in the new energy vehicle industry, and it has become a public opinion farce. China's automobile industry chain is not “too strong,” but rather has painstakingly established advantages in some key links, and at the same time, there is still huge room for continuous improvement in its overall strength. In this context, if public opinion often advocates “de-assimilating” and artificially antagonizing leading local enterprises with other enterprises in the industrial chain, it is not in line with the stage of development in which the Chinese automobile industry is currently. What a mature industry really needs is not to cut peaks and fill valleys, let alone “weaken whoever is ahead”; rather, it is necessary not only for more outstanding companies to grow, but also for companies that have already formed global competitiveness to continue to move forward. In reality, the so-called “battery self-research” of some companies mainly focuses on battery pack design, system integration, BMS management, and even product definition. It is not the same concept as actually completing battery cell development and achieving large-scale stable manufacturing. At present, the relevant layout of many car companies has not reached the core of battery manufacturing. The power battery itself is an industry with a high concentration of capital, technology, talent, and manufacturing. Large-scale manufacturing in particular requires long-term process accumulation and quality control. By no means is building a plant or buying equipment, it naturally forms industrial competitiveness. If every automaker pursues “big and complete,” every step of the way is repeatedly invested, and every ability requires internal solutions, which seems to increase autonomy, it may actually lead to a new low level of repeated construction and misallocation of resources. The true competitiveness of modern industry is built on a specialized division of labor. Of course, we need more power battery companies to grow, we need more technology routes to compete, and we also need automakers to enhance their technical capabilities. However, “diversification” is not the same thing as “de-leading”, and “independent innovation” is not the same thing as “doing everything yourself”. Industrial competition can be intense, technology routes can be different, and supply chains can be diversified. However, there is one bottom line that cannot be blurred: low-quality internal volumes must not be allowed to damage the hard-won competitive advantage of China's new energy industry, marketing concepts must not be allowed to replace real technological innovation, let alone artificially turn industrial chain collaborators into industrial chain antagonists.