As the automotive industry enters a period of intensive innovation, a question worth pondering has emerged: Why do carmakers invest heavily in developing technologies that may not be compelling enough reasons for consumers to buy into them? Over the past few years, China's automotive industry has accelerated its technological innovation, with features such as 800V high-voltage platforms, assisted driving, AI chassis, and super hybrid systems. However, as the complexity of technical parameters has increased and the frequency of technology launches has grown, consumers' understanding and trust in these technologies have not necessarily kept pace. Does technological leadership translate to brand leadership? How can technological innovation truly translate into market competitiveness? On October 28, at the Technology Brand Innovation Development Forum held alongside SAECCE 2026, Autohome's Editor-in-Chief Cui Fangfang shared her observations and reflections on automotive technology branding. She pointed out that technology fundamentally represents a capability, but whether it can become a decision-making criterion for users purchasing and using products requires a process of building brand mindshare. Autohome Editor-in-Chief Cui Fangfang One. Why Do Users Perceive Technology More Weakly Even as It Gets Stronger? What should a successful automotive technology conference look like? Cui Fangfang began by citing Tesla's Roadster's promotional case. She noted that while Tesla has long emphasized not engaging in traditional advertising, this does not mean it lacks marketing acumen. Instead, Tesla excels at transforming technology into events that capture public attention. In the promotional visuals for Roadster, what truly caught users' attention was not the power of the propulsion system or the complex technical parameters, but the striking visual effects. These visuals, exceeding expectations, quickly garnered public attention for the technology that would otherwise require extensive explanations. For technology to become a brand, it must first address the issue of being "seen." A successful technological event must possess two key features: one, an image that exceeds expectations, and two, the capability to be shared by users. The latter is particularly crucial. If users only remember a few pages of PPT and a series of parameters from a conference, but cannot explain to friends how the technology is superior, the conference's effectiveness will be severely compromised. However, event marketing alone cannot directly build trust. A survey conducted by Autohome's Research Institute revealed that 63% of users hoped to receive technical explanations after attending a technology conference, while 42% wanted to see scenario-based evaluations and actual test results. These data highlight a key contradiction in technological communication: companies tend to explain how advanced the technology is, while users are more concerned about what problems the technology can solve. Cui Fangfang shared a typical user comment: "I am stuck in traffic every day - how much peace of mind can this system actually give me?" To her, this seemingly simple question actually encapsulates three levels of judgment by users: does the technology relate to me? Is it really effective? How much can it help me solve problems? This is a common challenge faced by many automotive technology communications. Companies usually introduce technology from an engineer's perspective, while consumers understand the technology from their own life experiences. There exists a natural cognitive barrier between these two perspectives. How to bridge this gap determines whether technology can truly become a brand asset. Two: Parameters are not purchase reasons; user value is what matters. As the automotive industry accelerates its technological innovation, more carmakers are building independent technology brands. From battery technology to hybrid systems, from intelligent driving to intelligent chassis, technology brands are becoming an important way for carmakers to build differentiated competitive advantages. However, not all technologies are worth the heavy investment needed to build into a brand. Cui Fangfang proposed three criteria for assessing the value of a technology brand. First, the technology must address the genuine concerns of users, providing clear user value. Second, the enterprise must demonstrate clear technical contributions and differentiation. Third, the user benefits and commercial value brought by the technology should be validated. Among these, identifying user value is the first step in building a technology brand. For instance, when a carmaker emphasizes charging efficiency, users are more concerned about how long they can park and charge during a long-distance journey. When a carmaker introduces the capabilities of intelligent driving, users are more interested in whether they can commute more comfortably. When a carmaker showcases advanced chassis technology, family users are more concerned about whether the elderly and children in the back seat can be comfortable and safe during long trips. "Only when we translate the technology capability into user-perceivable scenarios and real user experiences can we become the reason for users to choose us," Cui Fangfang believes. A technology brand not only needs to address the question of "what do we have?" but also needs to answer the user's question of "why do they need it?" It is worth noting that the construction of a technology brand is also becoming an important component of automotive brand assets. A survey conducted by Autohome showed that compared to conventional brand marketing or brand renewal, the effective propagation of technology brand reconstruction and upgrades can increase user net favorability by 6 percentage points more. This means that in a fiercely competitive automotive market, effective technology communication may be more beneficial in improving user perceptions than simply changing brand identifiers, slogans, or inviting celebrity endorsements. Three: Users do not easily believe in conferences, technology needs to be validated in real scenarios. In recent years, the automotive industry's technological communication has undergone a notable change. In the past, carmakers often relied on the release of technical parameters and the presentation of laboratory data to form market recognition. However, with the diversification of information channels and the enhancement of users' judgment and skepticism, whether a technology is advanced cannot be solely determined by the enterprise. Cui Fangfang believes that building trust in technology requires the establishment of a comprehensive verification system, including the enterprise's explanation of technical principles, real-life scenario testing by professional institutions or media, user feedback, and the provision of corresponding safeguards. Among these, the importance of professional testing is rising. Compared to the enterprise's one-sided promotion, real-life scenario testing conducted by professional institutions or media can help users better recognize the technology. However, testing itself also needs to be validated. Cui Fangfang emphasized that technical testing should be open about the test conditions, criteria, and implementation process, with ideally complete test records. Especially for technologies related to automotive safety, a transparent and open verification process is itself a significant component of brand trust. In addition to professional validation, whether the enterprise can provide support for the use of technology also affects user trust. She cited the example of BYD's "DiDi Doudou" to illustrate how enterprises can clarify rights and protection mechanisms to inform users of the conditions under which they can receive support. This approach of extending from technology capabilities to user protection can help further enhance users' sense of security. For carmakers, the competition in technology brands is not just about showcasing performance, but also about explaining technology, conducting real-life validations, and providing comprehensive services. Four: Technology brands require new expressions. After the value of technology is understood and the capability is validated, carmakers need to address another challenge: how to form a consistent brand perception among users. Cui Fangfang believes that the automotive industry has transitioned from a relatively concentrated mass communication era to a fragmented, audience-specific communication era. Different users have distinct content preferences, information acquisition channels, and decision-making methods. Therefore, technology branding cannot rely solely on a single content form but requires the combined efforts of professional interpretation, buying guidance, scenario evaluations, hot events, and real user feedback. At the same time, artificial intelligence is changing how consumers access automotive information. With the gradual integration of large models and intelligent agents into the user decision-making process, automotive marketing not only needs to consider the traditional B2B2C communication chain but also needs to focus on the A2A2C new path. In Cui Fangfang's view, one of the current issues in some carmakers' technology communication is the lack of continuity. Switching themes at each conference and proposing a new slogan at each event, while appearing to create novelty, can actually cause user cognition to fragment. True technology brands need to continuously iterate products, validate scenarios, and propagate content to repeatedly reinforce the same core values. This judgment is also reflected in Autohome's content practices. This year, Autohome launched "Rush-Hour Intelligence Test", turning what used to be a fairly technical assisted-driving evaluation into real road scenarios that ordinary users can follow. For example, typical scenarios such as unprotected left turns, continuous lane changes, and narrow road intersections were presented live to demonstrate the vehicle's judgment and actual performance. While technical content is not inherently lacking in user needs, as long as the expression is sufficiently aligned with actual usage scenarios, consumers are willing to invest time to understand it. The value of automotive media is also extending from simple information dissemination to the verification of technology and consumer decision support. For carmakers, this is also true. A technology brand is not the result of a single conference but the gradual accumulation and long-term propagation of innovation, validation, and continuous communication. In her concluding remarks, Cui Fangfang emphasized that technology should not merely be about the pros and cons on a parameter table but should become a reliable capability that users can trust to entrust their family with. "Let the next generation of technology become the everyday that this generation can trust." That, perhaps, is the goal most worth pursuing in automotive technology branding.