NIO ONVO L90's "Betrayal of Early Adopters" and Steve Jobs' 2007 Lesson

NIO Announces New ONVO L90, Faces Backlash from Early Adopters

In April 2026, NIO announced its monthly delivery figures, reaching 29,356 units, marking a 22.8% year-on-year increase. Since achieving single-quarter profitability at the end of 2025, NIO has temporarily moved out of a critical survival phase. Despite these positive numbers, NIO founder William Li (Li Bin) didn’t appear optimistic. Social media has been flooded with protests from customers who purchased the ONVO (Le Dao) L90, a sub-brand model, towards the end of 2025, as dissatisfaction among these early adopters remains unresolved.

Among users, the nickname “L-Chive-0” (a play on words in Chinese implying being taken advantage of) has gained traction. The reason? Just days after taking delivery of their vehicles, a new version of the L90 was announced, leading many to feel “backstabbed.” With the lifecycle of new energy vehicles shrinking from the traditional five years to just eight months, the “betrayal of early adopters” is becoming a structural issue in the Chinese auto market. For NIO, which prides itself on being a “user-centric company,” this “backstab” is seen as a significant breach of trust.

The ONVO L90: From Savior to Scapegoat

The ONVO L90 was launched in August 2025 as a six-seater SUV. At the time, NIO was grappling with poor sales and mounting losses, casting doubt on Li Bin’s goal of achieving profitability by the end of the year. The L90, with its competitive price-performance ratio, emerged as a “beacon of hope,” surpassing 10,000 units in monthly sales for three consecutive months post-launch and becoming a cornerstone of NIO’s sales recovery. Early L90 buyers were instrumental in supporting the brand during tough times, which makes the current “backstab” scandal all the more bitter.

In January 2026, China’s Ministry of Industry and Information Technology (MIIT) released a catalog of new vehicle applications, which included an upgraded L90 model equipped with lidar technology. At that time, the current model was still being sold, and NIO stated that the lidar-equipped version would be a “new grade” while promising to continue updating the visual version. However, when the new L90 was unveiled on April 21, it left early adopters stunned. The updated model featured NIO’s proprietary “Shenji” autonomous driving chip, a global model, the Sky OS Tianshu system, and over 70 software and hardware upgrades—all at the same price. The old model was instantly rendered obsolete.

William Li’s Response and Compensation: Business Logic vs. User Sentiment

At a media briefing the day after the announcement, William Li spent 20 minutes addressing the controversy. While he sincerely apologized, he explained, “ONVO’s monthly sales hover around 3,000 units, ranking fourth in its class. Without upgrades, it cannot compete in the market, and the entire brand could fail.” He further stated that revealing the upgrade plans in advance would necessitate discounting existing inventory, which would disrupt delivery schedules and financial forecasts—an untenable impact for a fledgling brand. However, by opting for silence and proceeding with the upgrade, the company imposed the costs of information asymmetry on its users, eroding goodwill and trust. Li ultimately prioritized business logic over user sentiment.

As compensation, NIO is offering first-generation owners five years of free NOA (Navigation On Autopilot) usage and a ¥10,000 (approximately $1,450) renewal coupon valid for five years. ONVO President Shen Fei described this as a “small token of goodwill.” However, users were quick to calculate that the five-year NOA service is worth only a few thousand yuan, and the ¥10,000 coupon requires purchasing another car to redeem. The most requested hardware upgrades were ruled out by Li, who explained, “The hardware architecture of the old and new models is entirely different. Upgrading from the Orin X chip to the Shenji chip involves not just replacing the chip but also overhauling the central computing unit, wiring harness, and sensors. Regulatory restrictions make even paid upgrades infeasible.” While NIO may see this as the best course of action, many users remain dissatisfied.

What particularly enrages users is the perceived violation of their right to know. According to MIIT documents, NIO was aware of the upgraded model’s development and had planned for it as a replacement. However, the company continued to market the old model under the premise of “two coexisting autonomous driving options.” Following the announcement of the compensation plan, many users expressed disappointment, with some declaring they had turned from brand advocates to detractors. Once proud of the fact that 70% of its sales came from user referrals, NIO now faces the risk of eroding its customer trust—a potential death knell for the brand.

Steve Jobs’ 2007 Crisis: A Trust-Building Response

The predicament William Li faces in 2026 is reminiscent of the challenge Steve Jobs encountered in 2007. On June 29, 2007, the first-generation iPhone was launched at a time when Nokia held a 53% global market share, and BlackBerry dominated 40% of the U.S. market. While the “iPhone moment” is now seen as a turning point in the smartphone industry, initial sales were modest. The 4GB version was priced at $499, and the 8GB version at $599. During its first weekend, AT&T activated only 146,000 units, and by the end of July, total sales reached just 220,000, a mere 1.8% of the U.S. monthly market.

In September 2007, Jobs slashed the price of the 8GB iPhone from $599 to $399 to boost holiday sales. Early adopters were furious over this substantial price cut just months after launch. Facing a storm of complaints, Jobs quickly issued an open letter, apologizing and offering early buyers a $100 Apple Store credit as compensation. This proactive approach not only pacified customers but also accelerated the iPhone’s penetration into the mass market. The decision to act boldly and the transparent compensation strategy ultimately reinforced Apple’s reputation for high resale value and customer trust, laying the groundwork for its dominance in the tech world.

The Promise of a “User-Centric Company”: A Test of Values

When Steve Jobs returned to the struggling Apple in 1997, his core marketing philosophy revolved around “values.” The “Think Different” campaign defined the community of users who shared the brand’s ideals. The 2007 compensation was more than a business decision; it was a response to the trust of early adopters and proof that values hold firm even in adversity. Trust, at its core, is a “debt of faith”—a brand borrows trust from its users and must repay it at a higher cost in the future.

NIO has positioned itself as a “user-centric company,” proudly stating that 70% of its orders come from user referrals. This creates an expectation that users are not just consumers but co-creators of the brand. However, the recent “backstab” incident has exposed three asymmetries: information asymmetry (knowing about the upgrade but continuing to sell the older model), compensation asymmetry (unilateral announcement of compensation terms), and technological road map asymmetry (a complete disconnect in upgrade paths). If a brand sacrifices trust for survival, the promise of being a “user-centric company” is undermined. Once the compounded value of trust is lost, so too is the organic sales network and the foundation of the brand.

An Industry-Wide Issue: Breaking the Curse of “Betrayal”

“Betraying early adopters” has become a structural problem in the new energy vehicle industry. Tesla, Zeekr, and XPeng have all faced similar controversies. The industry is beginning to explore ways to break this cycle. For instance, XPeng CEO He Xiaopeng has promised to slow down the pace of hardware upgrades, while Zeekr has implemented a paid upgrade program. These initiatives aim to restore user trust in their respective brands.

Steve Jobs’ actions in 2007 serve as a lesson for today’s automakers. If brands fail to respond to user trust with concrete action, the value of being a “user-centric company” will be forgotten. For NIO, this episode could be a critical step toward rebuilding trust.