Following FAW and GAC’s announcement on the evening of Sept. 14 that they had signed a letter of intent and would begin cooperation, the auto industry was hit by another major development the following morning. Market rumors suggested that Huawei and Seres were preparing to make a “small adjustment” to their partnership around the AITO brand. Later, financial news outlet Yicai and other media, citing people familiar with the matter, reported that the change could take effect as early as this week, with the partnership shifting toward an “asset-light model.” Statement on AITO’s response to HIMA cooperation model In simple terms, Huawei would no longer take the lead in AITO’s operations, including product planning, marketing, sales and services. Instead, Seres would assume the lead, while Huawei would play an “enabling” role. People familiar with the matter said the move was intended from Huawei’s perspective to “focus resources and accelerate the success of the Luxeed, Stelato, Maextro and SAIC brands.” ChinaEV Home sought confirmation from an insider at Huawei-backed Harmony Intelligent Mobility Alliance (HIMA) and received an affirmative response. At around 5 p.m. on Sept. 15, HIMA officially addressed the rumors on Weibo, acknowledging that an adjustment was taking place and confirming that it was broadly in line with the reports circulating that morning. Statement on HIMA’s response to AITO’s cooperation model HIMA stressed that “existing rights and subsequent services will not be affected.” A Seres source also told ChinaEV Home that “under the new model, the AITO experience will only continue to improve.” The basic idea is that AITO will operate through dedicated sales and service channels under the new model, ensuring that owners’ service experience is protected and potentially improved. Before HIMA responded, reports that “Huawei and Seres are negotiating” had already begun circulating online. Some of the details, however, suggested that the story was more complicated than the three words “asset-light model” might imply. It is therefore worth looking more closely at why Huawei and Seres are adjusting their partnership, whether the move could benefit both sides, and, at a deeper level, what potential implications it could have for the HIMA cooperation framework itself. A New Chapter in the Partnership To understand the latest adjustment, it is necessary to revisit the four cooperation models Huawei has previously offered to automakers. The first is the component supplier model, or Tier 1 model. Huawei acts solely as a supplier of hardware, software and related technologies, while partners select and combine those technologies as needed. Huawei does not participate in vehicle definition, brand management or product operations. This represents the lowest level of Huawei involvement. The second is the “Hi” model, in which Huawei’s involvement is somewhat deeper than under the component supplier model. It was later upgraded to the “Hi Plus” model, which emphasizes bringing a full-stack solution into vehicles while leaving brand and channel definition to the automaker. Five brands under HIMA model including AITO, Luxeed, Stelato, Maextro and SAIC Notable examples include Avatr, Arcfox and Dongfeng M-Hero. The recently emerging “Electra” series can be viewed as a variant of the Hi model. Huawei is more deeply involved and provides a more complete technology stack, but product definition and channel operations remain led by the partner. The final model is “Smart Selection,” or the HIMA model. Compared with the previous three approaches, this is where Huawei has the highest level of involvement. As mentioned earlier, Huawei takes the lead across brand, product, channels and marketing. In essence, vehicles launched under the HIMA matrix reflect Huawei’s strategic direction. In other words, if Huawei is no longer leading AITO’s product, marketing, sales and service operations, as stated in the official announcement, its involvement is effectively moving back toward the Hi model, with Huawei primarily providing technology support. Future AITO products will reflect Seres’ own reading of and judgment on the market to a greater extent. It is also worth noting the word “enabling” in the reports. This may suggest that Huawei is not completely withdrawing from AITO’s operations, but will continue to offer opinions and recommendations for Seres to consider. An unverified screenshot of an online conversation suggested that AITO’s operating strategy would also change following the adjustment between Huawei and Seres. An unverified screenshot of an online conversation for AITO’s operating strategy For example, AITO could be repositioned as a sub-brand under Seres, while Huawei Experience Stores in shopping malls might stop displaying AITO products. There were even suggestions that the presenters at HIMA launch events could change. However, the timestamp shown in the screenshot appears to be around Sept. 5. The information it contains was therefore likely related to an earlier stage of discussions rather than the final plan, making its credibility relatively low. On platforms including Zhihu and Weibo, rumors had already emerged as early as Sept. 11 that Huawei and Seres were renegotiating details including supply-chain decision-making authority and the transfer of operational control, with Seres seeking greater autonomy. Online conversation about AITO’s operating strategy, with Seres seeking greater autonomy. Amid the various claims circulating online, a source familiar with the matter told ChinaEV Home that the adjustment would be more accurately understood as “a new exploration within the HIMA cooperation framework.” That short phrase actually carries considerable significance. For example, despite the adjustment, Huawei and Seres remain within the HIMA cooperation framework, meaning the word “enabling” should still carry substantive weight. Meanwhile, “new exploration” implies that the two sides are moving beyond their established comfort zone. By definition, exploration can succeed or fail, and therefore involves a degree of uncertainty. That interpretation inevitably raises another question: Why would Huawei and Seres voluntarily make such a change? Considering the current competitive environment and AITO’s own development, perhaps the most reasonable explanation is that “this is a decision that benefits both sides.” Different Needs, Different Gains Seres recently released its first-half financial results, with its profit figures triggering considerable debate. The report showed that Seres swung to a loss in the first half of 2026, with net loss attributable to shareholders reaching RMB 1.717 billion ($255 million) and adjusted net loss attributable to shareholders reaching RMB 2.379 billion ($354 million). Seres management attributed the year-on-year swing to losses to “the transition period for its core models, during which economies of scale have yet to be realized,” compounded by sharp increases in the prices of key components such as lithium carbonate and memory chips. AITO M9 Zhang Xinghai, chairman of Seres, previously said vehicle costs had risen by RMB 15,000-20,000 ($2,230-$2,970) per unit. Together, these factors created significant pressure on revenue and costs. After the results were released, market observers began suggesting that Seres would seek to optimize costs and contain losses in the second half. Seen from that perspective, bringing greater control over the AITO brand in-house could give Seres more control over its supply chain and channels, potentially becoming one way to reduce costs. The logic is straightforward. When Huawei was deeply involved in AITO’s operations, most component suppliers were designated by Huawei, while Seres handled execution. Seres may not necessarily have had strong bargaining power with individual suppliers. For future new models, Seres could also choose to reduce its reliance on Huawei-supplied components and instead turn to third-party suppliers or its own technologies, providing another avenue for cost reduction. Channels, sales and services could likewise be adjusted using Seres’ own resources, creating room for further cost control. From the user-experience perspective, as the Seres source pointed out, separating service channels from HIMA could also provide AITO owners with a more “exclusive” experience. The source added that “the new cooperation model will improve Seres’ operational efficiency. The division of responsibilities will change, but good technology, good products and good service will not.” This suggests that the changes users can actually perceive should be smaller than the structural changes behind the scenes. Stelato G9 The challenge is that these changes have yet to be validated by the market, and it remains uncertain how users will ultimately respond. That is precisely why the phrase “new exploration” implies that the outcome could go either way. So what is the benefit for Huawei? The most direct answer already appeared in the morning’s “insider report”: “focus resources and accelerate the success of the Luxeed, Stelato, Maextro and SAIC brands.” The move could therefore provide Huawei with another opportunity to prove its model. Whether based on Richard Yu’s previous comments or the subsequent marketing and communications performance of multiple HIMA brands, operating five brands has clearly presented Huawei with certain challenges. AITO’s success demonstrated the potential of Huawei’s Smart Selection model and helped attract four more automakers into the partnership. But the market has always had one question: Can Huawei replicate AITO’s success? SAIC Z7 Judging by sales, Huawei has yet to completely dispel that question through its operation of Luxeed, Stelato, Maextro and SAIC. Against that backdrop, Seres taking on the operational burden of AITO could instead give Huawei another opportunity to prove itself and validate the HIMA model. From both a practical and strategic perspective, Huawei would have reason to seize the opportunity. At this point, it becomes clear that the other four brands within the HIMA matrix, while not the protagonists of this adjustment, also play an important role. The market will inevitably watch their responses closely. Will they follow AITO and seek similar changes to their partnerships? Given the current circumstances, maintaining the existing model, with Huawei continuing to take the lead, may provide greater continuity. The reason is not difficult to understand. Huawei’s deeply integrated model has already produced a successful example in AITO, while the “new exploration” carries a degree of risk and uncertainty. AITO’s needs are also different from those of the other four brands. AITO’s core priorities are cost reduction and moving further upmarket, while the other four brands currently need to build both brand visibility and sales volume. For the latter objectives, a path that has already been validated may represent a more predictable approach. One industry peer also believes the adjustment to AITO’s operations could actually represent “a good development opportunity” for the other four brands. “AITO has already achieved commercial success under the previous cooperation model. Now that it is taking on channels, products and other responsibilities itself, Huawei can save manpower and financial resources and naturally concentrate those resources on the other brands.” This also suggests that, at least in the short term, the HIMA cooperation framework — namely, the model in which Huawei takes a deep operational role — is unlikely to undergo major changes. In fact, with resources becoming more concentrated, the chances of a new breakout model emerging within the HIMA portfolio could increase. In a market full of variables, both change and continuity can make sense when they follow a coherent business logic. This latest decision by HIMA to actively adjust its model also provides a useful window into the future evolution of China’s new-energy vehicle industry: where will the model of a technology company providing deep, reverse empowerment to automakers ultimately lead? The answer may emerge sooner than expected.
+6 others
