GAC is currently navigating through two simultaneous challenges.

The first is immediate and pressing. Some Aion models, equipped with CALB's 177Ah lithium iron phosphate batteries, are experiencing a range of issues, including cell swelling, leakage, breakdowns, and abnormal range. Owners have called for a recall, but Aion has stated that recalls are a legal process and that automakers "do not have the unilateral authority to announce a recall," though they have initiated the recall application process.

The second challenge lies ahead. This year, GAC has carved out its robotics business into a separate entity, Huilun Technology, and launched the fourth-generation embodied intelligent robot, GoMate Mini. Plans are in place for small-scale trial production in 2026 and mass production in 2027. In July, Huilun Technology forged a strategic partnership with JD.com, bringing GoMate Mini inspection robots, dexterous hands, motors, and other hardware to JD.com's platforms for commercial validation.

One challenge pertains to quality and after-sales issues in GAC's traditional business, while the other opens up an imaginative space for its new venture.

Though seemingly unrelated, both challenges highlight a common issue: GAC's problem is not a lack of new narratives but rather its ability to clearly articulate and fully assume responsibility in the complex hardware business.

The AION S, the model at the heart of this controversy, is primarily used in commercial operations.

The AION S was once one of Aion's flagship mass-market models, often hailed as the "ride-hailing god car" by drivers. Commercial vehicles offer direct advantages: concentrated orders, rapid scaling, and swift capacity utilization. In the early days of the new energy vehicle market, the B-end and ride-hailing sectors served as shortcuts for many brands to boost sales.

However, these shortcuts come with hidden costs.

Ride-hailing vehicles are no ordinary passenger cars. They may cover 200-300 kilometers daily, undergoing frequent fast charging and deep discharging, subjecting vehicles and batteries to high stress for extended periods. For automakers, these users provide a quick sales boost; for batteries and after-sales systems, they are the first to reveal quality issues.

In July, GAC Aion announced a warranty upgrade, extending battery coverage from 8 years/150,000 km to 8 years/300,000 km, and pledged to enhance battery data monitoring, offering free repairs or battery pack replacements based on inspection results.

The problem is that many owners are dissatisfied with the "based on inspection results" clause.

According to Sina Technology, multiple owners reported that 4S stores denied warranty claims by citing normal battery voltage differential tests. However, voltage differentials cannot account for all battery issues, as cell swelling may not immediately manifest in voltage readings.

In essence, owners observe battery drain, breakdowns, and safety risks, while dealerships focus on whether detection metrics meet standards.

This gap represents the cost of trust. A few years ago, Aion could have overshadowed controversies with its growth trajectory.

But times have changed.

In 2025, GAC Group reported revenue of RMB 95.662 billion, a 10.43% year-on-year decline; net profit attributable to shareholders was a loss of RMB 8.784 billion. By the first half of 2026, GAC anticipated a net profit loss of RMB 4.06-4.57 billion, with a core profit loss (excluding non-recurring items) of RMB 4.8-5.6 billion.

The company attributed this to intensifying domestic market competition, increased sales investment in autonomous brands, pressure on joint-venture brands, reduced investment returns, and exchange rate losses.

GAC is not struggling to sell vehicles. In the first half of 2026, GAC sold 773,100 vehicles, a 2.35% year-on-year increase; penetration of energy-saving and new energy models reached 62.82%; autonomous brand exports hit 121,500 units, surging 132% year-on-year.

The sharper issue is that selling more does not necessarily translate into earning more.

This is GAC's current dilemma. Joint-venture brands, once profit anchors, are now under pressure; autonomous brands and new energy vehicles drive growth but require heavier marketing, R&D, and service investments. The battery controversy erupted precisely when GAC most needed to prove that "autonomous brands can be profitable and retain users."

For automakers, after-sales is not merely a cost item. Especially for new energy vehicles, batteries determine residual value, safety, and user trust. If ride-hailing drivers feel excluded from warranties by detection standards, the issue transcends repair costs—it undermines the fundamental contract between brand and user.

GAC undoubtedly needs new narratives.

In February 2026, GAC announced the establishment of Guangdong Huilun Technology as an independent operator for its embodied intelligent robotics business. GAC claimed that Huilun Technology has developed full-stack R&D capabilities in structural design, system platforms, motion control algorithms, intelligent perception and decision-making algorithms, and achieved breakthroughs in core components like axial flux motors, integrated joint modules, drivers, and dexterous hands.

In July, Huilun Technology formed a strategic partnership with JD.com. Under the plan, GoMate Mini inspection robots, axial flux motors, dexterous hands, and other products will be launched across JD.com's channels in 2026. Previously, Huilun's products provided guidance services at Guangzhou Baiyun Airport and Guangzhou Metro, completing security inspection tests in metro environments.

This is not an entirely abrupt crossover.

Automobiles and robots indeed share capabilities: motors, electronic control, batteries, sensors, vision algorithms, supply chain management, and mass manufacturing. Compared to many robotics startups, automakers possess a deeper understanding of complex hardware engineering and cost control.

However, robots are not a business built on the slogan "cars are robots with wheels."

As robots increasingly enter security, inspection, logistics, and commercial spaces, they demand stability, traceability, and maintainability. Commercialization depends not just on demo presentations but also on how failures are handled, responsibilities divided, data closed-looped, and whether service networks can respond promptly.

This is precisely the issue exposed by Aion's battery controversy.

When owners encounter failures, the more complex the boundaries between automakers, battery suppliers, 4S stores, and regulatory processes, the more users feel passed around.

When robots enter subways, airports, campuses, and malls, similar issues will arise: the robot belongs to Huilun, the scene to the client, algorithms may come from partners, and hardware from different suppliers. When problems occur, questions about who responds, compensates, recalls, and explains cannot remain ambiguous.

Zoom In

Legally, Aion's statement about recall procedures is not incorrect. Automotive recalls indeed require technical risk certification, corporate declaration, filing with the State Administration for Market Regulation, public announcements, and other legal steps; companies cannot arbitrarily announce recalls.

However, for users, "no right to announce a recall" is not the most critical answer.

Users care about: Is my car still safe? Why can some people get replacements while others cannot? Does normal voltage differential rule out swelling? If regulators later confirm defects, will vehicles beyond 300,000 km still qualify for free handling? If the battery manufacturer is at fault, will the automaker cover users first?

Unless these questions are addressed, GAC's new technology narrative will be overshadowed by its legacy business issues.

Robots can offer GAC imaginative potential, but they cannot replace the automotive business's foundation. What GAC truly needs to strengthen today is not a sexier tech label but the most fundamental capability of a complex hardware company: identifying, explaining, and assuming problems while making the accountability chain understandable to users.

GAC is telling three stories: stabilizing joint-venture brands, breaking through with autonomous brands, and opening the future with robots and AI.

But the order matters.

For GAC, robots represent tomorrow, Aion represents today, and the battery controversy represents yesterday's debts. Whether tomorrow's story holds depends on whether today can settle yesterday's accounts.