China’s Answer to Tesla Is Hopeful Entrant to Global Car Market

The New York Times, January 26, 2017

Lu Qun, chairman of Qiantu Motor, in Beijing in December.

by Michael Schuman

BEIJING — On a windswept lot near Beijing’s main airport, Lu Qun talks up the electric sports car he hopes will transform him into China’s Elon Musk.

“This is a real performance car,” the entrepreneur boasted of his sleek, gray-and-black Qiantu K50. “It’s fun. You can feel the quality. You’ll love driving this car.”

For Mr. Lu, 48, the roadster is his best chance to make it big. After a lifetime of obscurity creating vehicles for other companies, the bespectacled engineer is betting that the rise of electric cars will propel his company — and his country — into the automotive spotlight.

“Traditional auto manufacturers are constrained by their old models,” he said. “We can see things with fresh eyes.”

Across China, government officials, corporate executives, private investors and newcomers like Mr. Lu are in a headlong rush to develop a domestic electric car industry. The country’s goal, like Mr. Lu’s, is to capitalize on the transition to electric to turbocharge the country’s lagging automobile sector to become a major competitor to the United States, Japan and Germany.

That has been a goal of China’s industrial planners for decades, as the government has lavished resources on building homegrown automakers and discriminated against foreign players.

But so far, that effort has failed.

Local manufacturers have lacked the brands, technology and managerial heft to outmaneuver their established rivals, either at home or abroad. Chinese consumers have preferred more reliable Buicks, Volkswagens and Toyotas to the often substandard offerings from domestic manufacturers, while little-known Chinese models have struggled to gain traction overseas.

Electric vehicles could offer a second chance — one China’s policy makers do not intend to miss.

They targeted electric cars for special support in an industrial policy called “Made in China 2025,” which aims to foster upgraded, technologically advanced manufacturing. By 2020, Beijing expects its automakers to be able to churn out two million electric and hybrid vehicles annually — six times the number produced in 2015.

This time, China’s carmakers may be better positioned. Since electric vehicles are a relatively new business for all players, Chinese manufacturers and international rivals are largely starting from the same point.

“There is a smaller gap between where China is today and the rest of the world” in electric cars, said Bill Russo, managing director at Gao Feng Advisory, a Shanghai consultancy, and a former Chrysler executive. “There is room for newer start-up companies to dream big in China.”

Mr. Lu is one of those dreamers.

Fascinated by cars since he was a boy, he studied automotive engineering at Beijing’s prestigious Tsinghua University. Upon graduating in 1990, he joined the research and development team at the China-based joint venture of Jeep, then a division of Chrysler.

During his time there, which included two years in Detroit, Mr. Lu came to feel such overseas operations had limited prospects in China — the ventures’ partners would try to balance their interests, and so were slow to develop strategies and make decisions.

So in 2003, he and nine colleagues started CH-Auto Technology Corporation as a specialty research and design shop for the local car industry. Since then, the firm has designed vehicles for some of China’s biggest automakers.

Mr. Lu decided to start manufacturing his own vehicles because of the shift to electric. Since producing electric cars requires new parts and technologies, he believed a small entrant could better compete with these new vehicles than traditional automakers.

“Electric vehicles won’t just replace cars with conventional engines, but they will bring a huge change to the entire car industry,” Mr. Lu said. “We wanted to be part of this revolution.”

The result is the K50. Designed at his research center, the two-seater has a light, carbon fiber exterior and a console stuffed with touch screens. Rows of batteries propel the roadster to a top speed of about 120 miles per hour and carry it as far as 200 miles on a single charge.

No longer content to watch others produce his designs, Mr. Lu is currently constructing a $300 million factory in Suzhou, a city near Shanghai, to manufacture 50,000 cars a year. In all, he expects to invest as much as $1.4 billion into his venture over five years.

He did not specify what the car would sell for, but Mr. Lu intends to price the K50 at the top of the market when it goes on sale this year.

That sets CH-Auto on a collision course with the industry’s flagship: Tesla.

Elon Musk’s company already has an edge. While Mr. Lu is building his business from scratch, Tesla has been established in China since 2013. CH-Auto will have to persuade wealthy customers to plunk down a large sum on an unfamiliar brand — Qiantu — over Mr. Musk’s recognizable models.

Mr. Lu nevertheless remains confident. He argues the sporty K50 will appeal to a more leisure-oriented driver than Tesla’s cars. As a logo, the company has chosen the dragonfly, because its managers believe the speedy, nimble insect has similar attributes to his electric car. To market it, Mr. Lu is considering opening showrooms in major Chinese cities, backed by a platform to sell online.

Elon Musk “is someone I can learn from,” he said. “Tesla has huge symbolic significance because it is the first company to make people believe a business model solely around electric vehicles is possible.”

But, he added, “we are not looking to create the Chinese Tesla.”

When it comes to competing with Tesla, Mr. Lu can count on ample help from the Chinese government.

To bring down costs and spur demand, the state has unleashed a torrent of cash. It has offered subsidies to manufacturers and tax breaks for buyers, and plowed investments into charging stations to make electric cars more practical.

In all, UBS Securities estimates that the government spent $13 billion promoting electric vehicles in 2015 alone. So far, Mr. Lu has financed the K50 through loans and injections of fresh capital, but says he “won’t refuse” government subsidies if they become available.

Some analysts fear the state’s largess could prove as much bane as boon.

China may be recreating the waste and excess in electric cars that has plagued other state-targeted sectors, like steel and renewable energy, without spurring the technological innovation the economy needs to compete. And even though China’s car market is the world’s biggest, it is still unlikely to absorb all of the electric vehicle projects underway today.

“They are fueling overcapacity, with a lot of wasted money, and I’m doubtful that in the end you’ll have a successful electric car industry,” says Crystal Chang, a lecturer at the University of California, Berkeley who studies China’s auto industry policies.

Significant sums have already been squandered. In September, the Finance Ministry fined five companies for defrauding the government of $150 million by fabricating sales of electric vehicles to obtain more subsidies, and several companies have failed to make an impression.

Mr. Lu is certain, however, that the K50 stands out in a crowded field. The car has already gotten some advance buzz; a review on one popular Chinese website praised its design as “beautiful” and “avant-garde” and its body as “very muscular.”

“A big advantage they have is their knowledge of what it takes to build a quality vehicle,” said Jack Perkowski, managing partner of the Beijing-based consulting firm JFP Holdings and a veteran of China’s car sector. “They have a better chance than many others because of that.”

Mr. Lu is counting on it.

“There are a lot of electric vehicle companies and hot projects attracting a lot of money,” he said. “Not every company and not every car will be successful.”

Perspectives on the Future of Mobility and Autonomous Driving

by Bill Russo

I recently attended the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas, where traditional automakers, suppliers and several technology firms were showcasing their vision of the future of mobility.  Of particular interest were the many demonstrations and announcements related to autonomous vehicles.  Early forms of this technology are finding their way into commercial applications in the form of “assisted driving” features which incorporate cameras and radar/lidar to provide the car an extra set of eyes to sense its surroundings and inform the driver of risks.  Rapid advancement of technologies needed to fully automate the driving process is also evident, indicating that robotic forms of transportation will be possible within at least 2 industry product cycles (5-10 years).

The following is a Q&A which offers a perspective on the future of mobility and the design and function of autonomous vehicles.

*******************************

  1. The Autonomous Driving (AD) era will allow for an entirely new driving experience for drivers and passengers.  How much of an impact will AD technology have on the comfort and convenience of driving?

Autonomous Driving will completely redefine the comfort and convenience of transportation.  In our current paradigm, comfort is designed around the driver and occupants in an externally focused manner:  with eyes to the road.  The space around the front seat occupants – both driver and passenger – is oriented to the information needed to manually drive the car to its destination. Autonomous vehicles will experience fewer accidents, over 95% of which are attributable to human error.  Cars can therefore be lighter, with less structure without compromising occupant safety.  Traffic jams will be less common since autonomous vehicles will be able to leverage vehicle-to infrastructure and vehicle-to-vehicle connectivity in order to avoid congestion and smooth the flow of traffic.

*******************************

  1. When you look back at the public’s embrace of big technology shifts – trains or commercial aviation for instance – to what extent was that shift motivated by the convenience of the new mode of transportation?

Convenience always shapes our choices when it comes to transportation.  Human beings are inherently explorers and some of history’s greatest inventions – wheels, bicycles, steamships, trains, cars, and airplanes – have allowed us to be mobile over greater and greater distances.  Over time, each of these inventions added more and more convenience-oriented features to make the experience of mobility more “painless”.  Mobility devices are themselves a convenience which allow us to get where we want to be without walking.  All forms of public and privately-owned transportation are solving this basic problem of minimizing our travel time.  Each solution became commercially viable by offering a benefit versus other forms of transportation that some people were willing to pay to either use or own.  For example, trains reduce travel time across a country from months to days, and commercial aviation reduced this to hours.  We can now circle the world by jet in a little more than a day, a journey the first explorers could not complete in several years, if they lived to tell the tale.   In recent history, owing to the invention of the internal combustion engine powered car (Carl Benz in 1886), and the moving assembly line (Henry Ford in 1908) the car became the primary means for the average person to satisfy their daily commuting needs.  In the increasingly urbanized world of the 21st century, we will experience the next evolution in convenient human mobility:  personalized, autonomous mobility on-demand.

*******************************

  1. What are some ways in which the Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS) technology already in the market, like cruise control, is increasing comfort and convenience for drivers and passengers?

Such technologies act as “support” systems for drivers which allow more tasks to be “delegated” to the car.  For example,  cruise control allows a driver to focus less on maintaining a constant speed and thereby improves the driving experience.  Routine or mundane tasks like parking or adjusting speeds while driving on highways are already becoming mainstream.  Lane departure warning, parking assistance, and cruise control are features that allow the driver to focus less on routine tasks and focus on the actual experience of driving.  Over time, the number of tasks that can be handled by the “smart car” will increase in order to reduce “pain points” of driving and making the overall experience more convenient, safer and therefore more enjoyable for the occupant.

*******************************

  1. In addition to the advantages of existing ADAS and autonomous driving technologies, what are consumers most focused on when it comes to comfort and convenience of fully autonomous vehicles?

With Autonomous driving, a new paradigm can be established to re-focus the passenger on how to productively use their transportation time.  Observing the outside of the car moves from a requirement to a choice – especially for the user of a mobility service.  Space that is allocated to providing driver information can be repurposed from a driver-passenger perspective to a “connected user” perspective.  Beyond mobility, a fully autonomous vehicle’s key benefit will be the experience it gives to the user, and the primary benefit which comes from delegating the task of driving to the car is PRODUCTIVE TIME.  As such, while the purpose of the car as a transportation device has not changed, the very concept of how to treat and offer convenience-oriented features to the occupant is different:  the autonomous vehicle is built with a “user-centric” mindset, as opposed to a “driver-centric” mindset.

An autonomous car, especially one used in longer-distance (>10km) commuting distances will need to be able to transform travel time into productive time through convenient services which may include infotainment (watching news/video, gaming), online communication (social networking, e-mail, conference calls), or online-to-offline services (discounts or promotions based on mobility patterns).  In the world of personalized, autonomous mobility on-demand, the car essentially becomes a connected rolling space that transports us between the places we live, work, and play.

*******************************

  1. What Autonomous Driving feature will consumers be most surprised by and also what core functionally will they gravitate to most?

For people born in the late 20th century, it will be difficult to reimagine this new form of mobility.  Most of us from this period see a car through a nostalgic lens:  our most prized possession outside of our home, and the one that we can take with us to showcase our lifestyle and aspirations.  For many, this will never change.

However, mobility is being revolutionized by digital technology.  The rapid emergence of ride-hailing services such as Uber, Lyft, Ola, and Didi Chuxing are transforming the car into a transportation service device.  It is in this mode that we can see a great fit for autonomous forms of mobility – as the operators of such services will benefit from not having to incur the cost of a driver, along with the lower maintenance and repair cost of autonomous vehicles.  Users of such services expect to be driven and are not seeking the driving experience in any case.

The most surprising aspect of this type of vehicle will be that it affords its users the opportunity to turn inward and use their time productively.  Future cars used for short commuting will be smaller and occupy less physical space:  they simply pick people up and drop them off and do this with minimal “extras”.  These will be summoned by an app on a mobile device.  Longer commuting will be done in autonomous vehicles which have spaces designed to address the productivity needs of the occupants:  with connectivity and consumption of content at the core.  Such cars may be booked or offered through a “subscription model” to give the users some flexibility in the service offering.  The shift in this paradigm will surprise people the most since these vehicles will be designed from a pure passenger experience perspective which will include how to entertain or delight the user during the journey.

*******************************

  1. Self-parking, one of the earlier semiautonomous features, is now found on many mainstream models and widely used by drivers. Do you think the public will adopt more complex autonomous features or a fully autonomous vehicle in the same manner?

The commercialization path for more complex and fully autonomous driving will be very different than what we seen so far.  In the current owner/driver-centric business paradigm, new features have to be sold to customers who accept the value proposition of the technology and are willing to pay for it.  Early-stage technologies typically come with a heavy price premium and are typically introduced to “premium” brands where customers are less price sensitive.  However, barring regulatory intervention, this will likely limit adoption of technologies including electric and autonomous vehicles as there are cheaper alternatives (conventional engines and human drivers).

The game-changer for both electric and autonomous vehicles comes from the convergence of On-Demand Mobility (ODM) with electric and autonomous vehicles.  ODM players, such as Uber and Lyft are highly investing in autonomous vehicles as a means of lowering their operating costs and unlocking the potential to participate in the Digital ecosystem through offering the users of its services access to content and O2O services.  This will create a new pathway to commercializing and scaling up the autonomous driving technology in a way that has not been seen before:  as we have seen with other “smart devices”, hardware innovation is backed by the digital ecosystem and thereby eventually becomes mainstream for everyone.

*******************************

  1. Since road conditions vary globally, will perceptions of comfort and convenience vary by country? For example, will it permeate places like Amsterdam where many travel by bicycle or public transportation already?

Comfort and convenience are solutions to mobility “pain points”, and the degree to which people experience these pain points varies greatly based on where we live.

Mobility pain is much higher in densely populated urban cities like New York, London, Paris, New Delhi, Mexico City and virtually all major cities in China.  The driving experience in highly urbanized countries like China can be horrific.  Cities like Beijing experience gridlock conditions at several times during a day, and suffer from severe environmental impact from the tailpipe and other emissions.  Electric and autonomous mobility on demand would be a welcome solution to address these mobility pain points.

*******************************

  1. From a societal perspective, how will AD technology change the way individuals get to and from their various destinations?

Adoption of autonomous driving technology will improve flow of traffic, reduce accidents and improve the quality of life in an increasingly urbanized world.  Scaling up this technology through the convergence of ODM with electric and autonomous vehicles in these cities will accelerate a transition from a transportation model where we own an under-utilized asset that is used 1-2 hours per day to a model where autonomous cars, directed by a smart-city transportation grid, are deployed on demand to where they are needed.  This is a far more efficient system where we will witness a shift from ownership of hardware toward paying for the utility that is derived from the hardware.

*******************************

  1. When it comes to commuting, how will AD technology ease the problem of extensive traffic jams in cities like Beijing or Los Angeles?

Autonomous vehicles deployed by on-demand mobility services fleets will be able to communicate with each other, and will be directed to and from users and their destinations by a Smart City transportation network.  These cars will be highly utilized assets, which minimizes the amount of city space which needs to be allocated for parking lots for cars which sit idle for more than 22 hours a day.  Cars can be routed around the traffic, minimizing the traffic jams that define the life of residents of cities like Los Angeles and Shanghai.  Smart, connected, and autonomous mobility devices backed by advanced algorithms used to govern the mobility patterns will improve the livability of cities in an increasingly urbanized world.

*******************************

  1. Besides the impact AD will have on productivity, how else will it improve lives for people outside of transportation?

Autonomous driving will have a tremendous impact on our environmental footprint.  The technologies required to power and govern a network of personalized, electric and autonomous mobility on demand (A-MOD) have the potential to transform the lives of people all over the world.  For example, these increasingly electric-powered vehicles will be also be part of the energy storage grid, we could very well moderate energy consumption and potentially shrink our carbon footprint.  Transportation innovation has reshaped the history of mankind, and the transportation revolution of the next decade will set the course and has the potential to improve the lives of all generations to follow.

______________________

Bill Russo is the Managing Director and Automotive Practice Leader at Gao Feng Advisory Company, based in Shanghai.  He has 30 years of automotive industry experience and has lives and worked in China since 2004.  He was formerly the leader of Chrysler Group’s business in North East Asia.

Faraday Future Faces Crucial Test With New Electric Car

The Wall Street Journal, January 3, 2017

Electric carmaker Faraday Futures demonstrated its prototype all-electric FF 91 vehicle at CES 2017 on Tuesday. The four-door car can go from zero to 60 miles an hour in 2.39 seconds, executives say.

LAS VEGAS—Time is running out for Faraday Future’s ambitious plan to crack the U.S. auto industry and take on Tesla Motors Inc.

The startup faced a critical test here on Tuesday when it revealed an all-electric car that it says will be ready for production in 2018 and will cast aside doubts about its future.

Faraday made a splash at the CES technology conference last year with futuristic car designs and plans to build a $1 billion factory in Nevada. The buzz soon turned to skepticism amid a steady drip of news about suppliers demanding payments, Faraday executives leaving and its main investor bleeding cash.

At a media event on Tuesday ahead of this week’s CES 2017 conference, the Los Angeles-area company showed a four-door, sports-utility-like vehicle called the FF 91 that executives claim can go from zero to 60 miles an hour in 2.39 seconds, faster than the Tesla Model S.

Faraday’s car has cushy back seats that can recline like a La-Z-Boy chair and an interior cabin loaded with large video screens that can be updated with next-generation gadgets. Faraday hasn’t disclosed a starting price.

“I’m hoping…to convince people that we’re real,” said Nick Sampson, Faraday’s senior vice president of engineering and research and development. “We are doing a real product, it’s not just a vaporware, Batmobile to create attention.”

Mr. Sampson said the company plans to roll out the FF 91 in 2018, but he wouldn’t discuss Faraday’s financial status.

That question arose in November when Faraday’s main investor, Chinese billionaire Jia Yueting, disclosed a cash crunch at LeEco Holdings. Mr. Jia, founder of LeEco, told employees the company had expanded too quickly as part of a multibillion-dollar spending spree to build a conglomerate ranging from smartphones to electric cars and a film studio.

LeEco’s precarious cash situation has had “some impact” on Faraday, Mr. Sampson said, but he stressed the companies are separately run.

In late December, Mr. Sampson spent more than three hours showing reporters around the company’s headquarters, a former Nissan Motors Co. facility in Gardena, Calif. The former Tesla executive led a tour through various departments, including aerodynamics, body engineering and manufacturing, as many executives presented using large LeEco TVs and talked optimistically about being ready to begin production.

Notably absent was Marco Mattiacci, global chief brand and commercial officer, whose name was printed on the agenda. He quit a few days later, according to people familiar with the matter.

Mr. Mattiacci formerly headed Ferrari in North America and was one of eight senior executives who left in the past year, according to one of the people.

Some of Faraday’s Western executives, hired from high-profile auto makers, have disagreed with their Chinese counterparts over the direction of Faraday, according to people familiar with the matter.

Underscoring how important Faraday views the CES reveal, a giant TV screen in the company’s lobby near the boardroom displays a clock counting down the hours until the event. “While getting a PR event right would be a step in the right direction, it’s still not clear whether they can raise the funds needed to finish the journey,” Bill Russo, an automotive consultant for Gao Feng Advisory Co. in Shanghai, said.

Faraday joins a crowded field of startups that aim to follow the same path as Tesla. Silicon Valley automotive startup Lucid Motors last month revealed the production version of its electric sedan that will cost about $160,000 for early versions, with the expected starting price to drop to around $65,000.

The sales pitch for the Lucid car is similar to Faraday’s: promises of sports-car-like abilities, luxurious interiors and eventual self-driving capabilities. The companies also share Mr. Jia as an investor, though he isn’t a majority shareholder in Lucid.

During the recent Faraday tour, an executive demonstrated the car’s self-parking feature. While reporters were allowed rides in prototypes to demonstrate acceleration and handling, they weren’t given up-close demonstrations of the autonomous feature.

Instead, they watched from across the parking lot as the vehicle’s operator kept his left hand hanging out the window as the car approached an open spot and backed into it. Asked if reporters could see up-close how it worked, a spokesman said, “Maybe later.”

At the event Tuesday, after showing a video of the self-parking, Mr. Jia surprised the audience by popping out of the car after driving on stage.

He pushed a button to activate the self-parking feature. But it didn’t work.

“It’s a little bit lazy tonight,” Mr. Sampson said.

Moments later they tried it again with success. The company then said it will begin taking $5,000 deposits.

Write to Tim Higgins at Tim.Higgins@WSJ.com

Click here to read this article at wsj.com

Bill Russo to Chair “Future Cars” Panel at September Automotive Roundtable

Shanghai, China, September 1, 2016

Inbox Microsoft Outlook, Today at 2.33.36 PM

As the development of automotive electronics and telematics is gaining speed, intelligent car applications are gradually and successfully integrated in our daily lives.

The numerous advantages of latest technologies do not only include an improved driving experience or enhanced safety, but also the evolution towards less fuel consumption and more sustainable driving.

Therefore, the September Automotive Roundtable in Shanghai will discuss promising trends of future cars in China and its latest applications in several areas, such as Driver Assistance Systems, Autonomous Driving, Automotive Multimedia & Communication, Connected Vehicles and Online Services in China.

– in cooperation with Autoköpfe –

– Strategic Partner: EU Chamber –

When: Thursday, September 01, 2016, 6 pm

6:00 – 7:00 pm: Registration and Networking Dinner, incl. buffet dinner

7:00 pm: Presentation:

By Mr. Roger Looney, VP of Vehicle Engineering – Vehicle Systems Development, including Electric Drivetrain & Autonomous Driving, Qoros

Roger Looney has 30 Years experience in automotive tooling, engineering and design and over 20 years experience in Asia. Current goals include utilizing that knowledge and experience to develop world class, exciting vehicles of the future.
Specialties: Automotive Product Development and Launch, Electronics, Hybrid & EV development, Asia Mergers and Acquisitions, Six Sigma, Product Development, New Business Development in Asia, Team Building in China, Low Cost Country Sourcing, Contract Development and Negotiation in China, Korea, Japan.
 

7:20 pm: Presentation: Integrated Mobility, Transportation Redefined

By Mr. Bevin Jacob, Head of Biz Dev, APAC, Continental Intelligent Transportation Systems

An ‘Internet of Vehicles’ enthusiast, Bevin Jacob envisions building and incorporating “Mobility Services” to improve Consumer’s digital lifestyle. He has 16 years of active involvement in building “Connected Solutions” for Mobile, Telematics and Multimedia Devices. Bevin enjoys working with highly motivated teams to bring about disruptive innovations in connected vehicles business.

7:40 pm: Panel discussion: Future Cars

Moderator: Mr. Bill Russo, Managing Director, Gao Feng Advisory Company

Bill Russo is the Shanghai-based Managing Director and the Automotive Practice leader at Gao Feng Advisory Company. His over 30 years of experience includes 15 years as an automotive executive, including 12 years of experience in China and Asia. He has also worked nearly 12 years in the electronics and information technology industries.  He has worked as an advisor and consultant for numerous multinational and local Chinese firms in the formulation and implementation of their global market and product strategies. While the Vice President of Chrysler North East Asia, he successfully negotiated agreements with partners and obtained required approvals from the China government to bring six new vehicle programs to the market in a three-year period, while concurrently establishing an infrastructure for local sourcing and sales distribution. Mr. Russo has a Bachelor of Science in Chemical Engineering from Columbia University in New York, and a Master of Science in Manufacturing Systems Engineering from Lehigh University in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania. Mr. Russo is a highly sought after opinion leader on the development of the China market and the automotive industry.

Panel additionally includes:

 Ms. Vanessa Moriel, Managing Director Asia, Liase Group

Vanessa Moriel is Managing Director Asia with the LIASE Group, a global retained executive search firm & talent management consultancy that specializes exclusively in automotive and mobility companies. 

Ms. Moriel has been providing CEO & top management placements and succession expertise for global automotive companies across the Asia-Pacific region for close to 15 years. She previously worked for Schlumberger, the London Consulting Group, Frito-Lay (Pepsico) and Fiducia Management Consultants. 

She holds a Bachelor’s degree in Chemical Engineering for the Institute of Technology and Superior Studies of Monterrey and has completed an Executive Program in Strategy and Organization from the Stanford Graduate School of Business.

Mr. John Shen, Managing Director, Accenture Strategy, Greater China

Mr. Shen Jun has more than 20 years of industry and management consulting experience. He is now Managing Director with Accenture Strategy Greater China. Before he joined Accenture, Mr. Shen was Senior Partner at Roland Berger Strategy Consultants and has been leading the Automotive Competence Center (ACC) in Greater China. Mr. Shen has served many leading MNC/local companies in automotive industry, covering a wide range of topics. Mr. Shen has in-depth knowledge and expertise in the functional areas of corporate strategy, merger and acquisitions, operational benchmark, organizational restructuring and sales and marketing management (especially on branding, channel optimization, pricing and new product launch), etc.

8:10 pm: Q&A

Where: Courtyard by Marriott Shanghai Jiading 上海绿地万怡酒店

            3101 Huyi Highway, Jiading District, Shanghai 201821, P.R.C
上海嘉定区沪宜公路3101号

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Fee: 250 RMB/Person for annual spinsors, incl. buffer dinner, free flow soft drinks and beer

350RMB/Person for non-sponsors, incl. buffet dinner, free flow soft drinks and beer

(Please note only cash or pre-payment via bank transfer is accepted)

Hotel Room Information: The participants of Automotive Roundtable can enjoy the special rate of the hotel room: Superior Room: 550 RMB/night (incl. 1-2 breakfast). To book the room, please email to:

Ms. YILIA JIANG

Assistant Sales Manager

cy.shajd.sales.exe3@courtyard.com

Tel: 86.21.3991.6816,  mobile: 139.1831.2521

and indicate rate code of “Automotive Roundtable”.

Language: English

Seats are limited! If you like to attend, RSVP via email

kathrin@g-i-events.com or lucia@g-i-events.com by August 30, 2016.

In case you register but cannot attend, please cancel your reservation before August 30. Otherwise you will be invoiced for the event.

Thanks to all our sponsors and our media partner!

If you are interested in sponsoring, speaking or participating, please feel free to contact us at: info@g-i-events.com.

 

This car company ripped off Land Rover. Here’s why it might get away with it.

The Washington Post, July 19, 2016

imrs.php

(LEFT) The 2017 Range Rover Evoque Convertible is debuted during the
Los Angeles Auto Show in Nov. 2015, in Los Angeles (AP Photo/John Locher).
(RIGHT) Jiangling Motor Co.’s Landwind X7 SUV is displayed at the
16th Shanghai International Automobile Industry Exhibition in April 2015
(Tomohiro Ohsumi/Bloomberg).

The cars are basically indistinguishable unless you hone in on the exact stitching of the seats or the fine arrangement of the headlights. Even then, changes are so minuscule, it’s nearly impossible to realize one of these vehicles costs $41,000, and the other just $21,700.

British luxury carmaker Jaguar Land Rover and Chinese carmaker Jiangling will go to court this summer in China to settle their dispute over what exactly is fair game in the auto industry. Can Chinese companies continue to get away with “shanzhai” — a Chinese term for prideful counterfeiting — of car designs?

Range Rover’s Evoque and Jiangling’s Landwind X7 are practically the same car to the untrained eye.

It’s a judicial battle that pits Western car companies against the burgeoning Chinese and East Asian market, and one that has captured the attention of economists, auto industry insiders and intellectual property experts.

The Chinese consumer market has grown exponentially since late 1980s economic reform. Some of the largest growth has come from auto companies, both state-owned and foreign joint-ventures. In 2008, when the market was still in its relative infancy, Chinese buyers purchased 9.4 million cars. By 2015, they bought 24.6 million.

And as the industry rapidly expands, Western carmakers, from the United States’ “big three” to German luxury brands to other imports, have rushed to gobble up market share, in the process flooding China and its comparably fledgling car companies with new vehicle models.

The best way Chinese manufacturers could compete was “shanzhai,” reverse engineering foreign products as a way to enter the market without overwhelming research expenditures.

“In the automotive industry, you can copy the look of the the vehicle, but the skills required for the highly complex integrated systems, if you’re a Chinese company, you don’t have engineers with long career histories with that capability,” said Bill Russo, managing director of Shanghai-based Gao Feng Advisory Company.

“So you shorten the life cycle by purchasing or licensing or reverse engineering. And this is not a Chinese-invented cycle.”

Imitation, as the idiom goes, is the sincerest form of flattery. But it’s also a great way to make money, something merchants have realized for hundreds of years.

The United States in the 1800s, for example, lacked authors who could stack up against British literary giants, so American publishers reprinted British works without paying heed to copyright laws, said Mark Bartholomew, a professor of law at the University at Buffalo.

Benjamin Franklin, the Benjamin Franklin, even published pirated works. William Wordsworth and Charles Dickens came to America to complain about it. The United States only stiffened its intellectual property laws once its industries, both mechanical and intellectual, matured by the end of the century.

“It boils down to economics,” Bartholomew said. “The Chinese economy doesn’t have this same tradition of the manufacturers like Ford or Hyundai or any of the folks who are making these cars. So if you don’t have these copyright laws, why pay if you can get away with it?”

China does have intellectual property laws, though, and it’s a signatory to international intellectual property agreements. But China’s laws are applied inconsistently, and even the international rules aren’t always enforced in China and elsewhere around the world.

Some countries recognize certain kind of intellectual property, but not others. For example, special door handles on a car: Are those a decorative creative works, or do they have some functionality? Creative works get copyrights. Objects with usefulness get patents. And states, not companies, are the arbiters of what objects get what protection.

It leaves multinational companies rushing to strategically secure their rights all over the world. In large established markets like the United States and Europe, car companies apply for protection right away. But in a developing market such as China — its auto market was until recently considered “developing” — those applications only became priorities over the last decade.

Smaller Chinese companies without strong market presence used past administrative delays as windows of opportunity. If intellectual property protection hadn’t been filed domestically, it was convenient to reverse engineer the product. And if the protection was filed sloppily, companies reverse engineered cars largely without the risk of prosecution.

Even when U.S. auto makers file their paperwork in the right way, China car companies enjoy remarkable home field advantage in their courts. More mature courts in Beijing or Shanghai might have judges more willing to hear out foreign companies, but rural courts or those in factory-heavy districts often show interest to local industry, including counterfeiters.

And so the copycats started coming. Honda fought a Chinese carmaker for 12 years for copying the CR-V. The Chery QQ riffed off the Chevrolet Spark in 2005. Shuanghuan’s CEO SUV model copied BMW’s X5 in 2007. Shuanghuan’s Noble copied Mercedes Benz’s Smartcar in 2009. The Lifan 320 copied the Mini Cooper Countryman in 2012.

Hummers and Porsches and Rolls Royces have been copied. Even Ferraris have been copied, and were shipped to Spain where they were seized by police.

“Anything known to mankind can be faked, even a Ferrari,” said said Frederick Mostert, past president of the International Trademark Association and a research fellow at University of Oxford and Peking University. To prove a point, he bought one and traveled with it and shows pictures of it at speaking engagements.

Ferraris, though, aren’t the counterfeits major car companies worry about. Any buyer looking for a luxury car is in the market to spend luxury car kind of money. That’s especially true in China, where consumers are extremely brand conscious, experts say. Nobody who wants a Land Rover is going to be fooled by a Landwind.

“People who buy [the Landwind] can’t afford the Land Rover,” said Russo, the Geo Feng consultant. “And of course if you’re the company that’s out there, you’re going to be pissed off about it, but nobody is getting confused.

“Get in that Landwind and drive it. I’ve driven many, many cars in China. It’s not the same car.”

As much as the counterfeits are inconveniences, it may be the lawsuits to stop the practice that may hurt Western automakers moreauto industry experts say. The Chinese public doesn’t like to see its industries get bullied. Plus, if one copycat company gets shut down, others pop back up. Western companies end up playing legal whack-a-mole with money they could use to make newer, better cars, said Kenneth D. Crews, a Los Angeles-based attorney and adjunct professor of law at Columbia University.

That kind of strategy actually trains customers to look for newer models and not settle on older ones that are more easily counterfeited. More mature Chinese car companies have grown up and away from copying other models. Once they made enough money to invest in research and original design, they did.

“These companies have grown to become more than just copycats,” Russo said. “They’re advanced and they’re innovative.”

Click here to read this article at washingtonpost.com

Volvo: Remaking the marque

The Financial Times, June 19, 2016

Under Geely, the carmaker is back in profit and selling well in China. But is it big enough to compete with its rivals?

There is nothing exceptional about the shiny grey chassis on display in western Sweden. Its wheels, suspension and engine are all where you would expect to find them. But it stands out because of what it represents: tangible evidence of progress in one of the most daring industrial stories of recent years.

9f5f9397-d5f3-46d5-a720-029af2f854b3.img

Known as compact modular architecture, it is a shared platform destined to underpin the small vehicles made by both Volvo Cars, the Swedish premium manufacturer, and its owner Geely, the Chinese mass-market brand. “This is a bridge between the two companies,” says Mats Fagerhag, head of the joint venture that created the platform. “Everything is nice words before you start a common project and face hard facts.”

Click here to read the full article at FT.com

Bill Russo’s quote:

“The most important thing [Geely] has done is to help Volvo become a China-centric company,” says Bill Russo, a Shanghai-based consultant. “Geely has shifted Volvo from being a marginally global company situated in Scandinavia to being a global one centred in China.”

Bill Russo to Chair Panel Discussion on the Internet of Vehicles at TechCrunch

Shanghai, China, June 27, 2016

Venue:
West Bund Art Center
2555 Longteng Ave, Xuhu

Time:  11:10-11:40am

The Big Data Behind the Internet of Vehicles

TechCrunch_Shanghai_2016___TechCrunch

The traditional automotive industry, where technology innovation has primarily been focused on powertrain and safety systems, must now contend with new forms of mobility services that are transforming the manner in which we experience the product.   The particular conditions of urbanization, an ever-expanding middle class population, pollution, and congestion are uniquely challenging in China, which may create opportunities for innovative new mobility solutions for China.

The conventional hardware-centric, sales-driven, asset-heavy and ownership-based business model with sporadic customer interactions is now competing with a connected, on-demand, and often personalized mobility experiences.  This new form of “connected mobility” is driving new technologies in the world of navigation, analytics, driver safety, driver assistance and information virtualization.

Innovations such as these, originating from both traditional OEMs and new mobility solutions platforms, many of whom are Chinese, could pave the way to a an entirely new business model for China’s auto industry.

Panel Members:

Dr. Markus Seidel, Vice President, BMW Group Technology Office China

Ms. Celine Le Cotonnec, Head of Connected Services, Digital and Mobility for PSA Peugeot Citroen China

Mr. Bevin Jacob, Head of Business Development, APAC, Continental Intelligent Transportation Systems

Moderated by:

Mr. Bill Russo, Managing Director, Gao Feng Advisory Company

SAIC, Alibaba to Mark Chinese Foray Into Connected Cars

Bloomberg News, June 1, 2016

20150729 GM Corporate Development Leadership vF w-Appendix Microsoft PowerPoint, Today at 12.15.21 PM

SAIC Motor Corp. is putting finishing touches to a sport utility vehicle that features software developed with Alibaba Group Holding Ltd., marking the first foray into the connected-car business by two of China’s biggest companies.

The model will be available from September and be the first of a new category of vehicles for the automaker that’s fully integrated to the internet, according to Gu Feng, SAIC’s financial controller. Among its functions, the Roewe RX5 SUV will be able to suggest alternative routes with road closures or traffic congestion, provide directions to the nearest gas station when fuel is running low, and deliver music to one’s tastes, the company said.

“Connected cars are the inevitable trend of the auto industry,” Gu said in a phone interview, declining to give a price for the new model. “We worked with Alibaba instead of Google or Apple because the latter looks at the car as a piece of hardware to install their software. If they are successful, in future they may just get a Ford or GM to produce cars for them, so we don’t see as much synergy in working with them.”

The connected car is the latest battleground for automakers and technology companies such as Google Inc. and Apple Inc. for digital revenue and control of the vehicle dashboard. Customer spending on such technologies will reach an estimated 40.3 billion euros ($45 billion) this year, with safety and autonomous driving functions the biggest categories, according to a study by Strategy&, a consulting group of PwC.

In choosing Alibaba’s Yun OS, SAIC is promoting a Chinese alternative to connectivity systems offered by Google’s Android Auto and Apple’s CarPlay. While Hyundai Motor Co. introduced Android Auto to its Sonata sedan last year and will roll it out to other models, Toyota Motor Corp. is involved in the open platform SmartDeviceLink championed by Ford Motor Co. and another initiative called MirrorLink.

“SAIC and Alibaba hope to grow the pie with services and even if they share it, it’s a bigger pie for both,” said Bill Russo, Shanghai-based managing director at Gao Feng Advisory Co. “The car is becoming the third space, after home and office, where people expect to be connected to the internet — and an increasing number of such collaborations are happening among traditional automakers and internet technology companies.”

Alibaba said it didn’t have additional comments on the collaboration with SAIC Motor.

Among its other plans, SAIC Motor is considering:

  • Listing some of the company’s units, such as its Chexiang.com platform, overseas with Hong Kong as the preferred market
  • Starting a second venture fund in Silicon Valley after investing the first $100 million on projects such as new-energy vehicles and electronic commerce
  • Building cars in India, possibly through acquiring existing plants
  • Selling left-hand drive cars to other European markets besides the U.K.
  • Building up its Hong Kong asset management unit over the next three to five years and issuing bonds

SAIC, which has manufacturing joint ventures with GM and Volkswagen AG, is seeking to boost deliveries of its own Roewe and MG brands and expand overseas even as it navigates the trend toward autonomous driving. The company’s sales have risen sevenfold in a decade to 5.9 million vehicles last year.

“The automobile is about to change fundamentally and it could run without an engine, gearbox, even a driver,” said Gu. “This is the most challenging moment for me and I feel the pressure every single day.”

Click here to read this story at bloomberg.com

How China Is Driving A Connected Mobility Revolution

Forbes Asia, May 8, 2016

Click here to read this article at Forbes.com

By Bill Russo

For the early part of the 21st century, China has been the growth engine of the global automotive industry. Despite a recent slowdown, China will surpass 25 million units in annual car sales in 2016 and has become the battleground for dominance of the global auto industry.

Several driving forces, which are particularly evident China, are disrupting the status quo of the automotive industry:

  • The unique context of China’s urban transportation challenge, the high rate of adoption of mobile device connectivity, combined with the rapid and aggressive introduction of alternative mobility solutions.
  • Disruptive new entrants into the mobility solutions competitive landscape, who draw insights about customers based on their online behaviors and mobility habits in order to offer a diverse pool of new revenue-generating solutions.

The confluence of these forces are changing the landscape of how mobility needs can be served in a rather fundamental way, touching off a wave of experimentation among both traditional automotive and new mobility solutions providers.

The Origins of Disruption

Disruptive business models typically originate from outside the core set of industry players.  Traditional Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) business models rely on selling products through an established business-to-consumer (B2C) channel, often through an intermediary sales partner that is either owned or franchised to represent the OEM brands in the marketplace.  Consumers pay to own the asset outright.

The entry point for disruption is through the “pay-per-use” service-based business model.  While this channel has existed for some time in the form of services managed through centralized professionally managed fleets (rental car companies, taxi and chauffeur services), digitally disruptive companies such as Uber, and China’s Yidao Yongche and Didi-Chuxing (created from a merger between rival mobility services from Alibaba and Tencent) have gained rapid and widespread market acceptance.

Once an entry point is established, these services-centric Information and Communications Technology (ICT) disruptors are able to leverage their big data and analytics capabilities to gain insight on consumers and their mobility patterns and behaviors. Essentially, these disruptors view connected mobility services as a natural extension of their ecosystem platform and are viewing the traditional services and perhaps even the OEM hardware business as a way of expanding their ecosystem.  Serving the “Mobility on Demand” market is merely the point of entry for an entire suite of Internet-based mobile connectivity services which may include navigation, route planning, e-commerce, vehicle repair and maintenance, usage based insurance, and other very lucrative “owner services” which are very important to today’s OEM business.

ICT disruptors are leveraging connected mobility services as a means to disintermediate the value chain of the automotive industry and capture a profitable services ecosystem.  OEMs are at risk of their business model being relegated to a high-risk, asset-intensive, commoditized, business-to-business (B2B) channel for delivering hardware to the profitable ecosystem of the mobility services providers.

Reimagining Personalized Mobility

The motivation for many ICT disruptors to invest and compete in this market is to unlock the services revenue that encircles each user.  It is not the mobility service itself that justifies the investment, but rather all the things that we (and our cars) do when mobile.  Making such experiences feel more and more “personalized” to our individual needs and lifestyles, which become apparent based on our mobility habits, will ensure the loyalty of the user to the service provider’s ecosystem.

ICT disruptors are leveraging their core value propositions to deliver a more personalized mobility solution.  These disruptors may not see the car industry as their destination, but are rather “travelling through mobility”.  They view mobility services as a channel for enrollment of users into their broader ecosystem-based platform offering a range of other services.  Chinese ICT disruptors aiming at this “personalized mobility” solutions space include LeEco, Future Mobility, and NextEV.

The table below offers a glimpse of how major Chinese players aim to leverage their core while expanding to and beyond mobility as a service.  Beyond manufacturing smart, connected, electric vehicles or building technology-enabled infotainment systems and mobility services, these visionary companies are reinventing the mobility experience as a whole.  Moreover, they are reimagining mobility as a transaction between a user and an ecosystem services provider, which stands in stark contrast with the traditional model of a transaction between an owner and a manufacturer.

Unknown

It is important to keep in mind that as cars become mobility service platforms, the technology on board will become more sophisticated and tailored to the individual end-user’s needs.  ICT disruptors may in fact decide to contract out the actual production of vehicles to an ecosystem partner, with an end-game of earning recurring revenue by providing car owners with data products and Internet services.  While some tech companies may profit from selling hardware, the main focus is on the services that flow through the hardware.

Disruptions typically originate from outside the traditional industry players, which is clearly illustrated in this case.  We are approaching an inflection point where the deployment of personalized mobility solutions will expand exponentially and thereby alter the competitive landscape and business models of several adjacent industries.

Conclusion

Over the past few years we have witnessed how ICT disruptors have pioneered new business models and are in the process reimagining mobility as a service.  The emergence of Chinese disruptive mobility solutions players such as Didi Chuxing and LeEco, with their innovative ecosystem-based strategic approach, offers clear evidence that something new is happening.  This, coupled with the Chinese government’s determination to push new-energy vehicles and build a sustainable transportation infrastructure, demonstrates the potential for China to become the major breeding ground for automotive innovation[1].

Tech disruptors including Apple AAPL +0.12%Google GOOGL +0.50%, LeEco, NextEV, and others may be garnering the most attention, but as we have observed, they are typically “travelling through mobility” as a means to enroll users into their broader service ecosystems.  On the opposite flank, traditional OEMs, who will not easily cede their over 100-year dominance in the auto industry, are pivoting into mobility services.

New players will inevitably join this emerging landscape of competition.  Alliances are also being formed among new and traditional players seeking to access complementary strengths and seize a competitive advantage.

The battle will likely be won by those who understand the true potential of connected mobility services and thereby deliver value to the user in the most personalized, convenient, comfortable, and cost-effective manner.  It is a battle where profits will be won by offering differentiated mobility-related services through a hardware platform that is most suited to the lifestyle of its end user.

Success will accrue to those companies that are best able to reimagine mobility in the context of a place like China:  where mobility needs are uniquely challenging, where innovative mobility experiments are being driven by entrepreneurial activity, and where dreams of exponential business growth become reality.

Follow me on twitter @billrusso

[1] China Drives the Future of Automotive Innovation, Gao Feng Viewpoint, by Bill Russo and Aloke Palsikar, October 2015

 

I am the Managing Director and the Automotive Practice leader at Gao Feng Advisory Company based in Shanghai.  With 15 years as an automotive executive, including over 11 years of experience in China and Asia, I have had the pleasure of working with multi-national and local Chinese firms in the formulation and implementation of their global market and product strategies. I was previously the Vice President of Chrysler North East Asia, responsible for the business operations for the Greater China and South Korea markets. In addition, I have 12 years of experience in the electronics and IT industry, having worked at IBM Corporation and Harman International.

The author is a Forbes contributor. The opinions expressed are those of the writer.

Chinese firms accelerate in race toward driverless future

AFP Newswires, April 23, 2016

 

3835931126

Chinese Internet giant LeECO Holdings Ltd unveils its internet electric battery driverless concept car ‘LeSEE’,  during a launch event in Beijing, on April 20, 2016

 

Beijing: Chinese manufacturers and internet giants are in hot pursuit of their US counterparts in the race to design driverless cars, but the route to market is still littered with potholes.

While Google has been working on autonomous vehicles for at least six years, with the likes of BMW, Volvo and Toyota in its wake, more recently Chinese businesses have entered the race, from internet search giant Baidu to manufacturer Changan.

Last week, ahead of the Beijing Auto Show opening on Monday, two self-driving Changan cars made a mountainous 2,000 kilometre (1,200 mile) journey from Chongqing in the southwest to the capital in the country’s first long-distance autonomous vehicle test.

Another Chinese internet giant, LeECO, is also venturing into autonomous technologies, unveiling Wednesday in Beijing an electric car that can park itself and be summoned to its owner’s location via smartphone.

And late last year Baidu tested China’s first locally designed driverless vehicle, a modified BMW, with a 30 kilometre ride through the streets of Beijing.

Despite China’s relatively late entry to the field, analysts believe the country could become a key market for driverless vehicles thanks to a more favourable regulatory and consumer environment.

The Boston Consulting Group (BCG) forecasts that global sales of driverless cars will reach 12 million by 2035, with more than a quarter sold in China.

Vehicles which automatically adjust their routes in response to real-time traffic information could solve chronic gridlock in China’s major cities, BCG’s Xavier Mosquet told AFP.

“If they believe this would ease traffic, Chinese authorities will do all they can to promote the development of this technology and then its use,” he said.

Robot taxis

Public concerns over the safety of driverless cars are far lower than elsewhere, according to a survey by Roland Berger consultants in 2015, which found 96 per cent of Chinese would consider an autonomous vehicle for almost all everyday driving, compared with 58 per cent of Americans and Germans.

In a country notorious for accidents, the promise of better safety through autonomous technologies could also be appealing.

The ultimate prize, say analysts, will be when mass transport firms such as taxi-hailing giant Uber, or its Chinese rival Didi, can deploy huge fleets of robot taxis.

“The real payoff for truly driverless technology will come when cars on the road are no longer owned by people, but are owned by fleet management services,” said Bill Russo, managing director of the consultancy firm Gao Feng.

“That’s where you want to think about taking the driver out of the equation. Mobility on demand is hugely popular here.”

In the Roland Berger survey, 51 per cent of Chinese car owners said they would prefer to use robot taxis rather than buy a new vehicle themselves, compared with 26 per cent of Americans.

With a ready market, China may soon become the top location for companies to refine driverless technology.

Swedish manufacturer Volvo, owned by China’s Geely since 2010, this month announced plans to test drive up to 100 of its vehicles on Chinese roads this year.

Changan, a partner of Ford, is set to roll out commercial autonomous vehicles for motorways from 2018, while mass production of driverless city cars is projected to begin in 2025.

‘Does the car choose?’

Baidu, meanwhile, says it will launch self-driving buses by 2018, which will operate on fixed routes in select cities in China.

Like Google, the internet giant already owns detailed road maps and has experience in electronic security, and a company spokeswoman told AFP it had had “very positive feedback” from the government.

But analysts are more cautious, predicting slow-moving autonomous vehicles will not appear in towns until at least 2020.

Production costs were still too high to make a robot taxi fleet viable, BCG’s Mosquet said.

“There are still many questions to be resolved” before fully autonomous vehicles can be put into public use, said Jeremy Carlson, a senior analyst for IHS.

He pointed to “chaotic traffic situations” on roads shared with cyclists and pedestrians, and less-than-adequate infrastructure.

Technology will be the first to see solutions, he said, but that still left regulation and issues around liability and insurance to be addressed.

For some, there are moral dilemmas as well.

“If you have someone jumping out in front of an autonomous car, does the car have to choose between killing that person, or swerving and crashing and killing the passenger?” asked Robin Zhu, senior analyst at Sanford C. Bernstein.

“If your car could choose to kill you, would you get in it?”

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2016-04-chinese-firms-driverless-future.html#jCp