News
Exclusive: How NIO plans to stay a step ahead of Tesla and German rivals in China
In a high-end shopping district in Shanghai, China sits one of the newest, premium electric vehicles in the market: the mid-sized, all-electric NIO ES6 sports utility vehicle.
Taking the spotlight inside an expansive showroom of curved glass windows, terrazzo floors, and light douglas fir wood walls, the NIO House retail gallery is as much a high-tech electronics store as it is an experience.
Five years ago, NIO didn’t even exist; it was merely an idea in tech-mogul William Li’s head. Li partnered up with Jack Cheng, a former Fiat and Ford Executive, and Lihong Qin, a former real estate executive, to form a next-generation automobile company. Since then, NIO has delivered over 15,000 vehicles, employs over 9,500 people, and built an extensive charging and battery swapping network, as the company looks to become the de-facto brand in the burgeoning electric mobility market.
NIO’s journey over the last five years hasn’t been comfortable, or cheap; the company has raised over $3.5B from investors, including a public offering on the New York Stock Exchange last year (NYSE: NIO). But the fact that the company is producing and delivering vehicles to consumers puts NIO in rare company. Aside from Tesla who spent nine years to bring their first mass production vehicle to the market, other electric vehicle companies, including Faraday Future, Lucid Motors, Canoo, and Byton have yet to deliver a vehicle to customers, let alone build a factory for car production.
While it’s become commonplace to hear NIO being referred to as “the Tesla of China” – both are publicly traded companies that design and manufacture premium electric vehicles – the differences far outweigh their similarities. Where Tesla seeks to streamline its retail presence, NIO is investing heavily into the buildout of designer showrooms and members-only clubs for vehicle owners. Tesla has focused exclusively on fast-charging solutions, yet NIO is placing a massive bet on battery swapping technology and a move-fast-at-lower-risk manufacturing strategy that puts the company a step ahead of the competition.
Manufacturing in China
Five and a half hours outside of Shanghai (two hours by bullet train) in Hefei, China, NIO is building thousands of electric vehicles in a state of the art factory. Spooling up production last April, it’s an understatement to say that NIO was new to the vehicle manufacturing business. While the company had spent years developing their electric platform and first SUV, the ES8, they lacked manufacturing expertise to bring it to market. Designing and building their own factory, costing billions and taking years, wasn’t an option. Instead, NIO partnered with the state-owned manufacturer, JAC Motors.
JAC and NIO were considered an odd couple when the two announced their partnership in April 2016; JAC more well-known for their low-cost vehicles, rather than their craftsmanship. Outside of their automotive manufacturing expertise, JAC holds a highly coveted license to manufacture cars in China. Such a permit and strong relationship with the government is attractive to NIO and other automakers, including VW who is considering purchasing a large chunk of JAC. “Last November, the Chinese government endorsed this type of joint-manufacturing structure. With that preferential policy in place, NIO can put more investment and focus into R&D and the development of our user network and services,” William Li, NIO’s CEO, told Teslarati.
To counter perceptions of low-quality, NIO decided to bring on their own manufacturing team, to ensure that the vehicles were not only as high-quality as the competition, but better.
Enter Feng Shen and Victor Gu, two former Volvo executives charged with setting up and running the 2.5M sqft NIO-JAC facility. While the two joined NIO at different times, Shen had previously recruited Gu to Join Volvo back in 2010. The two believe strongly in making high-quality vehicles, putting it at the top of their priorities. For example, NIO’s body scans over 1,000 different spots on each ES8 body.
“We put tremendous effort into controlling the quality of the vehicle,” Shen told Teslarati. “For example, every day we sample two vehicles, evaluating the quality of the vehicle through a custom quality audit.”
Inside the NIO factory is a combined workforce of 2270 NIO and JAC employees, working to produce both the ES8 and ES6. The ES6 is in test production and expected to be in customers hands in June. NIO’s facility features some of the most advanced robotics in the industry, with their all-aluminum body line achieving 97.5% automation. NIO claims the body line is the most advanced of its type in China. The facility is currently able to produce 100,000 vehicles per year but can be expanded to produce 150,000 units and beyond.
The expansive white floors in NIO’s factory and ceiling that’s outfitted with 512 massive skylights fill the facility with natural light. The factory uses geothermal energy for heating and cooling, while thousands of solar panels produce energy to minimize the facility’s carbon footprint. Outside the facility, NIO is in the process of installing basketball courts and a soccer field on the factory grounds for employees to enjoy.
Converting Metal into Cash
NIO has the capability to produce thousands of vehicles per month and has ample runway before reaching maximum production capacity. The company sells its vehicles direct-to-consumer, and its streamlined logistics allows the company to hold little inventory.
When NIO launched their three-row premium SUV, the ES8, last fall, demand seemed strong. Production was ramping up as the company worked to fulfill their order books, delivering over 3,000 vehicles per month in both November and December of 2018. Then came 2019, the company’s deliveries fell dramatically to a low of 811 vehicles in February. The company pointed to the overall tense economic climate in China, seasonality surrounding Chinese New Year, and dramatic cuts to electric vehicle subsidies in China.
Compared to their peers in the large and mid-size premium SUV segments, the vehicles are competitive. The ES8 starts at roughly $66,500 (without battery leasing), excluding subsidies and other EV incentives, which is significantly below competitors like the Volvo XC90 ($93,700). Additionally, the ES8 features fast acceleration, 0-60 mph in 4.4 seconds, and a technology-forward interior. The forthcoming ES6 is entering a much larger segment than its larger sibling and is priced 7-10% lower than its peers, by Teslarati’s estimates. While the recent sales drop spooked investors, sending the company’s stock down nearly 50% from recent highs, it’s unclear if reduced demand is a long-term issue.
Regardless of recent sales issues, NIO is plowing full steam ahead. The company has 35 NIO Houses and pop-up stores open throughout China. The stores are all exquisitely designed and are built for both potential customers and current owners. Potential customers can check out the vehicles, take test drives, and purchase NIO merchandise; current NIO owners can head upstairs to the owners-only club.
-
- NIO House (Hangzhau West Lake)
-
- NIO House, club area (Shanghai)
-
- NIO House (Hefei)
-
- NIO House (Hangzhou West Lake)
-
- NIO House Library (Beijing)
-
- NIO House (Hangzhou West Lake)
NIO’s clubs are focused on providing a “joyful lifestyle beyond the car.” Essentially, they are places where owners can hang out, enjoy a latte, read books, attend events, and socialize with other owners. NIO even creates a custom drink for each NIO House, allowing owners to try out new flavors at each location.
The company believes that private clubs add value to a customers lifestyle and introduce them to a luxury-focused lifestyle. While not all owners will use the clubs regularly, NIO estimates that their owners visit 1-2 times per month. While it’s too soon to conclude whether NIO’s expansive retail spaces and clubs drive sales, it would be mild to stay that the company is betting big on the strategy.
If clubs and retail stores aren’t your schtick, NIO still has a plan for you, namely: the NIO App. Like the physical locations, the NIO app is both a place for potential customers and current owners. While the company has just over 15,000 vehicles on the road, NIO’s app has over 800,000 downloads and over 200,000 daily active users.
The NIO app is as much of a social media app as it is a vehicle-companion. Users can post photos, share their recent trips, report issues with their vehicles, or share general posts about their lives. While the app is currently only available in Mandarin, you can often find posts from users announcing their reservations, deliveries, or exciting road trips. The NIO app is great for fostering connections between potential users and current owners, allowing people to act as ambassadors for the brand; thus creating a continuous sales funnel for the company.
For owners, the app has a whole other layer of functionality. They can manage their vehicles, send bugs and feedback, and schedule a service appointment. Additionally, owners can use the “one-click for power” feature to have NIO specialist come to recharge their vehicle, either with a mobile van or at a NIO supercharger or swap station.
Building Out a Services Business.
To date, NIO has seen the service used over 100,000 times by customers. While charging at home is readily available for most EV owners in the US or EU, NIO reported that only 78% of their owners were able to install a home charger, making the service more than just an added value, but a necessity for some.
All NIO owners can use the “one-click for power” feature 12 times per year at no cost, but after that NIO offers a per-time fee or a monthly subscription. NIO charges ¥980/month or ¥10,800/year ($145/month or $1604/year) to give owners the service 15 times per month. NIO opened this service up to non-NIO vehicles at the Shanghai Auto Show, allowing all EV owners to subscribe to the service.
In addition to their power subscriptions, the company allows owners to lease their batteries. For ¥1660/mo ($247/mo) owners can lease either the 70kWh or 84kWh packs, dropping ¥100,000 ($15,000) off the purchase price of the vehicle. This opens up NIO’s vehicles to a wider audience, with the lowest ES8 costing ¥348,000 ($51,600) and the ES6 costing ¥258,000 ($38,300). In comparison, the Tesla Model X starts at ¥737,100 ($109,500) and the Model 3 costing ¥377,000 ($56,000). While NIO owners will continue leasing the battery pack for the entirety of their ownership, it will allow them to upgrade to larger capacity batteries in the future. Between power subscriptions and battery leases, NIO could be building out a substantial services business.
Is it sticking?
With production facilities, a strong retail presence, and a dedicated power-delivery network, NIO certainly doesn’t have a capacity issue. The company could start delivering 5,000+ cars next month and have plenty of capacity and staff to handle the volume. NIO’s vehicles don’t seem to be the problem, they’re well-built, packed full of industry-leading features, and competitively priced in their segments.
What is unclear, is whether NIO’s expensive retail and club strategy are truly generating enough sales. The company is doing minimal advertising, leaving their stores and app as its core sources for sales. With over 9,500 employees on payroll and a factory running below capacity, the company is under pressure to raise sales amid economic headwinds, which is no easy feat.
Between the company’s focus on electric SUV’s, a unique retail strategy, a lifestyle-focused app, and a variety of user-centric services, NIO differentiates itself from both competitors abroad and at home. Whether the upcoming ES6 is a hit, is to be seen, but the company has all the pieces in place to deliver a positive ownership experience for buyers.
Elon Musk
The Boring Company just doubled its tunneling power in Nashville
The Boring Company’s Prufrock MB2 is commissioned and ready to mine beneath Nashville’s streets.
The Boring Company’s second tunnel boring machine, Prufrock MB2, is officially ready to dig in Nashville. The company confirmed the news on X, posting: “Prufrock-MB2 is ready to mine in Nashville! MB2 commissioning is complete, including the brief 11 rpm rotation shown here. Will MB2 catch up to MB1, who had quite the head start? And Prufrock-MB3 ships in August!”
MB2 arrives with meaningful improvements over its predecessor. Lessons learned from the launch and operation of MB1 have already been applied to MB2 to improve efficiency and prepare the machine for launch.
Traditional tunnel boring machines operate in a stop-and-go cycle, digging roughly five feet, halt, erect precast concrete segments to line the tunnel wall, then resume. That repeated interruption is one of the main reasons conventional tunneling is slow and expensive. Prufrock is designed to install the tunnel liner simultaneously with mining, eliminating the need to stop every five feet. The machine also skips the need for excavated launch pits. Prufrock arrives on a truck, tilts down, and launches into the ground within 24 hours. And when the tunnel is complete, it emerges from the ground and drives to its next launch site on a trailer, eliminating the need for expensive cranes or pit excavation. The machine is also fully electric and runs with zero people in the tunnel during normal operations, controlled remotely from a surface operations center.
Prufrock-MB2 is ready to mine in Nashville! MB2 commissioning is complete, including the brief 11 rpm rotation shown here.
Will MB2 catch up to MB1, who had quite the head start?
And Prufrock-MB3 ships in August! pic.twitter.com/TTrMql2aRg
— The Boring Company (@boringcompany) June 17, 2026
It won’t be long before we hear of another major update on The Boring Company’s Music City Loop project – a planned underground transit network beneath Nashville that would move passengers in electric vehicles through a series of tunnels at highway speeds, and bypassing surface traffic entirely. Nashville was selected in part because of its strong rock conditions that suits the Prufrock machines well, and relatively less regulatory hurdles.
Progress has been steady on multiple fronts. All 37 permits and approvals required ahead of tunneling have been obtained, out of 45 total. Key wins include a fully executed TDOT tunnel permit authorizing 25 miles of tunnel, unanimous airport authority approval for a Nashville International Airport station, and the city’s first residential station agreement serving downtown tower residents.
With MB1 already tunneling, MB2 now commissioned, and MB3 shipping in August, Nashville is becoming something of a live proving ground for scaled tunnel boring. The broader ambition is not limited to one city. The Boring Company’s stated goal is to make underground transportation a practical alternative to surface roads across major metro areas. Nashville is one of many cities, including a successful Las Vegas tunnel system, where that idea is being put to the test at real speed.
Tesla has launched a direct campaign targeting its customers in New Jersey, sending emails that warn of pending legislation that could effectively block true driverless technology in the state.
The email focuses on Senate Bill S.1677 and Assembly Bill A.3968, measures intended to create a three-year autonomous vehicle pilot program but laden with requirements that Tesla argues make unsupervised Robotaxis impossible.
Tesla is sending out this email to New Jersey Tesla owners, warning them that NJ could block autonomous vehicles, and to take action.
“Proposed legislation moving through Trenton right now would impose restrictions so severe that true driverless deployment would remain illegal.… pic.twitter.com/2bmY646AUL
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) June 16, 2026
According to the email, the bills impose “restrictions so severe that true driverless deployment would remain illegal.” Specific hurdles include mandates for human safety drivers during operations, multimillion-dollar insurance minimums, reportedly $5 million, and thresholds like 100,000 miles of demonstrated safe autonomous driving before any driverless approval.
Tesla contends these are arbitrary barriers that ignore real-world performance data and favor entrenched competitors over innovative technologies like its Full Self-Driving (FSD) system.
The push comes as Tesla has started expanding Robotaxi operations in states like Texas, where unsupervised vehicles are already providing rides in several cities. New Jersey, by contrast, risks falling behind. The company highlights in the email communication that more than 94 percent of serious crashes result from human error, meaning impairment, distraction, or fatigue. These are all problems that Robotaxis eliminate entirely.
In 2025, New Jersey recorded 582 traffic deaths, underscoring the human cost of delayed adoption.
Tesla’s outreach stresses the transformative potential of robotaxis. For families, they could offer safer school runs without drowsy or distracted drivers. For seniors and people with disabilities, robotaxis promise independence and reliable mobility.
In areas with limited public transit, they could deliver affordable, on-demand transportation, reducing congestion, emissions, and overall transportation costs. Economically, the company warns that restrictive rules could cost New Jersey jobs, innovation investment, and billions in potential growth as autonomous ride-hailing scales elsewhere.
Supporters of the legislation, including Sen. Andrew Zwicker, describe the pilot as a cautious framework with strong safety oversight, including incident reporting, expert task forces, and restrictions in sensitive zones like school areas. They view it as balancing innovation with public protection.
Tesla and pro-AV advocates counter that the bill lacks technology neutrality, creates insurmountable entry barriers for commercial deployment, and prioritizes process over outcomes — effectively functioning as a de facto ban on services like Robotaxi.
This latest clash echoes Tesla’s past battles in New Jersey over direct vehicle sales. The email directs owners to Tesla’s advocacy platform, where they can send customized messages to legislators calling for amendments: outcome-based safety standards, open competition, and clear pathways for fully driverless commercial operations.
As hearings approach, Tesla’s campaign frames the issue as a choice between protecting the status quo and embracing life-saving progress. With robotaxi technology already proving itself in permissive states, New Jersey owners are being asked to ensure their state doesn’t lock out the future of transportation.
Turn-by-turn navigation is not new technology.
For over two decades, drivers have relied on Garmin, TomTom, and later smartphone apps like Google Maps and Waze to receive precise, reliable directions. These systems have guided millions safely through unfamiliar cities, highways, and backroads with remarkable effectiveness. They handle real-time traffic, construction detours, and complex intersections with minimal fuss.
Yet Tesla, the company that promised revolutionary Full Self-Driving (FSD), continues to struggle with this foundational capability. As FSD (Supervised) v14.3.4 has started rolling out to cars this week, navigation remains its glaring Achilles’ heel, undermining the entire autonomous vision.
Tesla Summon got insanely good in FSD v14.3.2 — Navigation? Not so much
Tesla’s FSD excels in many driving behaviors—smooth acceleration, confident lane changes in ideal conditions, and responsive handling of visible obstacles. However, when it comes to following a route accurately, the system falters repeatedly.
Owners report wrong turns, missed exits, inefficient routing through local roads instead of highways, phantom speed limit errors, and even directing vehicles to building rear entrances. Interventions for navigation issues often outnumber those for core driving maneuvers. Tesla has begun surveying owners specifically about these errors, acknowledging the problem after years of complaints.
Navigation is perhaps my biggest complaint when it comes to FSD, because sometimes, we do know better. Some of us have been living in our areas for our entire lives, but even those who have not have years or even decades of experience driving on local roads. We might know a little better about routing.
But the navigation mistakes are more than just FSD potentially taking a slightly different route that may or may not save you a few minutes. Sometimes, they’re genuinely mind-boggling.
This isn’t just annoying; it cascades into broader failures. A flawed route plan confuses the AI’s decision-making, leading to hesitant behavior, unnecessary disengagements, or dangerous maneuvers like attempting impossible U-turns or ignoring clear ramps. In a system meant to operate with minimal supervision, unreliable navigation erodes trust.
More often than not, false or plain incorrect navigation is what causes me to interrupt FSD operation. Unfortunately, I believe the latest FSD version is the worst example of it, and it leads me to believe that Tesla might be making some changes; they’ve just made them in the wrong direction.
It makes you wonder: Why is a company that has done so much with the progress of FSD and autonomy struggling so much with navigation, something that is not new and has been around a long time?
Multiple Data Sources
First, Tesla’s navigation relies on a fragile patchwork of multiple data sources—Google Maps, TomTom, OpenStreetMap, Valhalla, and its own fleet-derived data—stitched together rather than a single authoritative map. When these conflict on lane geometry, road status, or turn details, the system hesitates or chooses incorrectly.
Traditional GPS providers maintain centralized, regularly validated databases with professional curation and rapid updates. Tesla’s hybrid approach, while innovative in crowdsourcing, introduces inconsistencies that a purely vision-based or end-to-end AI approach may not easily reconcile in real time.
Persistent Learning
FSD seems to struggle with persistent learning from driver interventions.
Unlike consumer apps that quickly adapt to repeated corrections or user preferences (e.g., avoiding certain routes or remembering habitual detours), Tesla’s FSD often fails to internalize fixes on the same trip or across similar scenarios. Owners note making the same manual override multiple times without the routing engine updating its behavior meaningfully.
This stems from the neural architecture prioritizing real-time perception and control over long-term route memory and personalization, making navigation feel rigid and “opinionated” compared to the adaptive logic in Waze or Google Maps.
I noticed that when I asked Grok to try and get me home a certain way (a way that FSD routinely took in the past because it was the most efficient), it had to place a waypoint between my location at the time and my house. When I went to edit the waypoint out, as Grok had placed it for a way to get FSD to get off the highway at the right exit, it was stumped again, rerouted, and took a longer way home.
The next thing I’ve noticed, and this might be controversial, is that Nav has gotten even worse.
I think that might actually be a good thing; Tesla seems to be adjusting it. They just need to adjust it the opposite way.
The car is taking extremely strange routes to very… https://t.co/UHg3tVfNA2
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) June 16, 2026
Reasoning, Scaling, and Intuition
Third, scaling navigation for unsupervised or robotaxi ambitions requires not just accuracy but adaptability and user-like reasoning. Current FSD often defaults to single routes that ignore driver preferences or real-world nuances like time-of-day traffic patterns. It fails to match the intuitive, context-aware planning that traditional systems have refined over the years.
Resolving navigation is critical for several reasons. Practically, it is the backbone of any autonomous journey: without trustworthy routing, the car cannot reliably reach destinations, rendering FSD useless for robotaxis or hands-free commutes. Safety depends on it—mismatched plans create hesitation in merges or intersections, increasing accident risk.
Economically, Tesla’s valuation and future hinge on FSD delivering unsupervised driving; persistent navigation flaws delay regulatory approval and erode consumer confidence. For owners who paid premiums for FSD, these issues represent unfulfilled promises. While it is unlikely Tesla will lose too many customers due to bad navigation, some will be frustrated with the constant need for human input.
Tesla has achieved miracles in electric vehicles and battery tech. Mastering turn-by-turn—technology Garmin nailed in the early 2000s—should not be this hard. By investing in tighter data integration, faster learning loops from interventions, and more intuitive routing algorithms, Tesla could close this gap.
Until then, FSD’s navigation struggles highlight a humbling truth: even the most ambitious innovator must sometimes master the basics before conquering the future.
The Boring Company just doubled its tunneling power in Nashville
Tesla urges New Jersey owners to oppose new bill that could block Robotaxi
