The group purchase price of model 3 dropped by 40000. Although it was welcomed by consumers, it encountered some setbacks. Tesla believes that pinduoduo’s group buying constitutes resale, and refuses to deliver model 3 to the group buying owners of pinduoduo’s “limited time and second kill” channel. Pinduoduo responded to the Tesla incident: there is no order resale and supports consumers to protect their rights. < / P > < p > first of all, the car must be genuine. Pinduoduo won’t go and can’t copy Tesla. No one can copy Tesla. In fact, when Tesla China’s top management directly said “don’t be fooled” on social media, it was actually accusing pinduoduo of selling fake cars. This has constituted considerable legal risk. < / P > < p > Third, this activity did not and could not skip Tesla’s direct sales model. Naturally, there was no harm to Tesla’s business model. In this activity, pinduoduo has given subsidies and borne its own losses, but the anti unfair competition law in 2017 has cancelled the provision on “selling goods at a price lower than the cost”. Selling below cost and attracting users is the normal market now. Obviously, it can’t be said that giving consumers welfare is illegal. Just like didi subsidized taxi fare, no one said it was illegal for didi to give consumers welfare. No court will make such a judgment, whether in terms of the law itself or the feelings of consumers. < / P > < p > Fourth, the essence of this activity is to subsidize customers by pinduoduo, and then place orders on behalf of customers. It is a purchasing process, not resale. Judging whether a car has been resold depends on whether the name of the vehicle registration certificate has been changed or not; in essence, it is whether the vehicle is used by others. Obviously, neither of these two situations has happened. This is just like the train ticket purchasing business of major platforms, which does not constitute resale. Therefore, although Tesla tried to point consumers to pinduoduo for selling second-hand cars and deceive consumers, this is not legally feasible. < / P > < p > there is no doubt that when Tesla’s interference is beyond the scope of legal protection, all kinds of embarrassing situations will occur. This time, Tesla is directly engaged with consumers. What’s more, all their responses can only use the word “doubt”. Clearly, Tesla’s refusal to sell the model 3 to consumers is unfounded, and they know it’s hard to get legal support. < / P > < p > Tesla’s behavior hurt consumers’ feelings. Some consumers said, “do you still need your consent to give me a subsidy of 20000 yuan by pinduoduo?” When someone is willing to give some benefits to consumers, it is stupid to stop them. The popularity of brands is ultimately given by consumers. Although Tesla’s prices, profits and rules have not been destroyed, Tesla still boycotts this activity, ostensibly because it does not want its products to be priced down. But what if the subsidy is not pinduoduo, but state subsidy? In fact, Tesla has always had state subsidies. So, at a deeper level, they may not want to be associated with pinduoduo. < / P > < p > This reminds me of an article that was popular on the Internet in China 20 years ago. A highly educated marketing consultant from the countryside attended a product development meeting of a tissue factory. At the meeting, he proposed to develop a kind of napkin for farmers. The marketing consultant strongly opposed that there was no market. A female returnee executive who supports the product asks, what do they use after dinner? The marketing consultant made a gesture of wiping his mouth with his sleeve, and then he wrote down what happened: she gave me a contemptuous look. This is the collision between elitism and Chinese reality. Over the past 20 years, China’s economy has experienced explosive development. The inclusive nature of the Internet, the development of technology, and the smart mind have created a platform like pinduoduo. The consumption upgrade brought about by this platform has spread over the vast territory of China, enabling more people to use kitchen paper and napkin at appropriate prices. However, this kind of populist inclusive consumption is still despised by the so-called elitism of the upper class. < / P > < p > refuse pinduoduo, perhaps because Tesla’s Chinese team feels that it should keep a distance from pinduoduo and reject populism – you must keep a distance from the platform that sells kitchen paper to small town people. Secondly, as business elites, they have a wrong view of pinduoduo. Pinduoduo is no longer a platform they imagined. Driven by 10 billion subsidies and other activities, its active buyer ARPU (average income per user) increased by 92% year-on-year, showing the rapid high-end trend of platform users. This gathering of so many Tesla users is a powerful example. < / P > < p > more importantly, Tesla China has lost its true temperament. In fact, Tesla’s temperament has never been elitist. Tesla founder musk, of course, is a high-end business person, but his temperament is geek. He ate pancakes, danced at the ribbon cutting ceremony, dressed simply, but did one thing to the extreme. Whether it is Tesla, Falcon heavy rocket, or star chain, they have achieved the ultimate and reduced the cost under the existing technical conditions. < / P > < p > from this perspective, pinduoduo is also in the business field. It uses the existing technology to achieve the extreme and reduce the cost to the extreme. Companies are different in their fields, but they have the same temperament to make things the best. It’s unnecessary. I’m afraid I’ll get it. What’s more, people have done solid things to let consumers get substantial benefits. < / P > < p > brand positioning can be high-end, but it can not lose the internal enterprise spirit, attitude can not be superior, do harm to consumer sentiment behavior. In a popular car model, the sales staff put on a face of Rolls Royce, not only lost the right and wrong, but also confused the gains and losses. Why should it be so hard?