Huawei Under Fire: A Power Struggle Inside the CCP?

Hello, everyone. Hi, welcome to Lay's Real Talk. All right, let's imagine driving a car at 62 miles per hour. Then you slam on the brakes. Normally, your car stops within roughly 125 feet. But this time, the brake pedal or the brake pedal bracket breaks. You hit the emergency deceleration button and instead of 125 feet, your car takes 459 feet to stop. That's nearly four times the normal stopping distance. Now, imagine this happening in a luxury car costing $140,000. And here's the shocking part. The testers tried a second car, same failure. Then a third, same failure again. Three brand new cars, three broken brake pedal brackets, and the company behind the cars, Huawei. Yeah, here's the, oh, let me remove the video first. I'm going to play you the video in a little bit. So this is the CCP's golden child, the symbol of China's technological supremacy. And here's something important. Huawei's most powerful political backer is Xi Jinping himself. Under Xi, Huawei became a national champion, a symbol of his ambition to challenge American technological dominance. And last February, Xi Jinping personally welcomed Huawei's founder Ren Zhengfei to a high-profile meeting with China's technology leaders. And remember when Ren's daughter, Huawei's CFO Meng Wanzhou, was detained in Canada, Xi Jinping personally got involved to ensure her release. That's how important Huawei is to Xi Jinping's political and technological agenda. For years, this company seemed practically untouchable. But now, even the Communist Party's own media outlets are openly criticizing it. So, what changed? Has Huawei lost its privilege? Or is Xi Jinping himself losing the power that he needs to protect his favorite SOEs? Because what began as a car safety controversy has turned into something much bigger. It became a battle over Huawei and potentially a window into the power struggle inside Beijing. All right, let me explain the car testing drive. So three cars. Let me just play this one minute video. This is the video that started everything. Let's see where we go. Okay, so I turn off the audio. Basically, the person is wearing a helmet that has the word Dong Che Di, which means car expert. It's a major Chinese automotive review and testing platform owned by ByteDance, the owner of TikTok. And this platform reviews automobiles and released videos about their testing results. So in this video, the person is saying that the brake pedal bracket broke three times. This team tested three brand new Maxtral V800 luxury vehicles. and this car is developed jointly by Huawei and the chinese automaker Jack Motors so here you see the the yeah it broke okay anyway so uh let me show you a picture of the car this is yeah this is the car so this is the Maxtral V800 it's a luxury minivan used for VIP transportation or wealthy executives uh basically it's it's used for chauffeur driven travel and its competitor uh i mean i don't think there is i don't think it had i don't think Lexus will consider its competitor because its Lexus quality is far superior if there's a match then it would be the Lexus LM. All right, so the test was simple. Accelerate to 100 kilometers per hour, which is about 62 miles per hour, and perform an emergency stop. According to the testers, all three cars suffered brake pedal bracket failures. Okay, let me come back. And yeah, not just one, but three of them. And here's what made the results so disturbing. The brackets broke in almost exactly the same place with strikingly similar fracture patterns. One vehicle had only three kilometers on its odometer, so practically afresh of the assembly line. The testing team examined the broken components and found that the brackets pivot area had only one vertical reinforcing plate. Other vehicles they compared it with, two or three. The team also identified what appeared to be welding marks near the fractures. Now think about this, three brand new vehicles, different production batches tested over three days. All three failed in essentially the same way. The testers argued that this was no random defect. And remember, we're not talking about some cheap entry-level car or vehicle this is um the Max Maxtral V800 was launched in August this year with initial deliveries beginning i believe in early september and um and then more deliveries were made toward the end of the month the price tag reached around one million yuan, which is roughly $140,000. It's not called a hybrid. It's an extended electric vehicle. So it has a turbo engine and then two, I think, electric motors. But at that price range, you would certainly expect the brake pedal to stay in one piece. And investors weren't amused either. On that same day, Jack Motors shares plunged, wiping out approximately 6.2 billion yuan in market value in a single day. Then Huawei responded because the test results went viral. This video went viral. Huawei's luxury automotive brand came under enormous pressure. That evening, The brand issued an official statement on social media. The company promised to improve the bracket's design and offer free upgrades to customers who had already received their cars. Listen carefully. Free upgrades, not a recall. Huawei also insisted that its braking system had passed tests exceeding national and industry standards. and no bracket failures had occurred during actual customer use. But there was one problem. Huawei never explained why three brand new test vehicles had suffered nearly identical failures, nor did the company promise to investigate the issue. And then something strange happened. That evening, Xinhua, China's official state news agency, We posted Huawei's statement on Weibo and WeChat, but shortly afterward, Xinhua deleted it. Why? No explanation. Now, Xinhua is no ordinary news organization. It's one of the Communist Party's most powerful propaganda outlets. So who wanted Huawei's statement removed and why? Was someone higher up unhappy with Huawei's response? Or was another political force involved? We do not know. But the deletion immediately raised questions about who was backing ByteDance's auto platform, Dong Che Di, in this case. And then came another twist. Around 11 p.m., Chinese internet users discovered that the testing video, the video that I show, the actual testing video is much longer. I just showed you one minute of it. So that video had disappeared from Bilibili, China's popular video sharing platform. By the following afternoon, the 9th, the video was reportedly inaccessible on Douyin. That's the Chinese version of TikTok. That's ByteDance's own video platform. And then even Dong Che Di's own app was having trouble playing the video. Now think about this. Xinhua removes Huawei's statement. Other social media platforms remove videos criticizing Huawei. These don't appear to serve the same interests. So were different forces pulling in opposite directions? Critics accused Huawei of using its powerful political connections to suppress negative coverage. There was no announced recall, no compensation, no apology. Instead, the videos were disappearing. Of course, that doesn't establish who ordered the removal, but Chinese internet users were furious. One commentator wrote, instead of fixing the problem, they get rid of the video. Next time, will they get rid of the car owner? Another one said, this just confirms that there really is a quality problem. And here's the irony. The phrase, don't do these maestro testing videos have been wiped from the internet. That phrase, the hashtag became a trending topic on Weibo. The disappearing video had become a bigger story than the videos themselves. And then things got political. The Communist Party's own media turned against Huawei. On October 10, just two days after the controversy erupted, an official media account in Xinjiang published a blistering attack on Huawei. The headline says, When responding to product safety concerns, can you just speak like a human being? Wow, that's unusually aggressive for an official Chinese media outlet. Essentially, it was telling Huawei, stop hiding behind technical jargon. Give consumers a straight answer. The article's message was very simple. Consumers wanted to know whether their cars were safe. Huawei responded by talking about technical standards, regulatory requirements, and testing procedures. In other words, consumers were asking, will my brakes break? And Huawei was answering, we comply with regulations. That was the heart of the criticism. But remember, this wasn't some independent blogger attacking Huawei. This was an official government media outlet at provincial level. and it was openly accusing the communist party's favorite technology champion of not behaving like a normal human being right it's like can you just talk like a normal human being um and chinese internet users were stunned why xinjiang and why now but the story didn't end there within roughly a day the article disappeared deleted now people were stunned all over again First, an official media outlet dared to attack Huawei. Then, even that criticism was apparently too much. People began asking, just how powerful is Huawei? Does it have so much political backing that even an official media outlet in Xinjiang cannot criticize it? Then, Zhejiang province enters the fight. And just when it seemed Huawei had silenced its critics, another official media outlet stepped in. On October 11, three days after, China News Service, a major national-level state-run news organization, amplified an article from Zhejiang Publicity, which is an official provincial media account of the Zhejiang province. The article criticized companies that respond to product quality concerns not by answering consumers' questions, but by making negative posts disappear. It also condemned organizations that cover up problems, suppress information, and conceal the truth instead of correcting mistakes. And it delivered a pointed warning. You cannot cover up everything. The more you hide, the faster you lose public trust. Now, think about the significance. Huawei, the CCP's national technology champion, was facing public criticism from official media outlets over the apparent suppression of unfavorable information. Basically, you know, Huawei was directly criticized. Well, actually, I should say the Zhejiang provincial media mouthpiece or the provincial mouthpiece was directly criticizing the censorship, right? And that was unprecedented. And here's the bigger question. Were these media outlets really criticizing Huawei or were they targeting the political forces protecting it? Because let's be clear, can Huawei simply pick up the phone, call Weibo, Douyin, Bilibili, WeChat and every other major Chinese platform and order them to delete negative coverage? Does Huawei control China's internet censorship program? Not on its own. China has a massive censorship apparatus and its center is, I mean, the unit, the agency that controls it, that manages it, is the Cyberspace Administration of China. And it's operating under the party's internet control structure. And who oversees that political structure at the highest level? This man. Yes, no other than Cai Qi, one of Xi Jinping's closest allies. I would say the closest ally and a member of the Politburo Standing Committee. So if these videos were removed through coordinated political intervention, the issue goes far beyond Huawei's public relations department. Department. It potentially involves the authorities responsible for controlling China's internet and someone who is very close to Xi Jinping. And that raises a fascinating question. When official media outlets condemn the suppression of these videos, who are they really criticizing? Huawei, the cyberspace administration, or powerful individuals like Cai Qi, or even his boss? Well, I'll leave that question with you, because the political implications are enormous. Now, let's answer the question, because I mentioned it briefly. Why Xinjiang? And why Zhejiang? And why now? Well, for years, Huawei seemed practically untouchable. Anyone who dares criticize Huawei will be met with consequences. So suddenly, official media outlets were openly challenging it. So to understand why this is so intriguing, let's look at the political backgrounds of these places. First, Xinjiang. I have to show you a picture of these two men so you understand the political dynamics. Well, after the former Xinjiang Party Secretary Ma Xinrui, who was a close ally of Xi Jinping's wife, who is also, some believe he is a distant relative of Madame Pang, Madame Xi. After he was removed from his post, Chen Xiaojiang took over. Now, Chen had previously served as vice minister in the United Front Work Department and a relatively low-profile position compared with running an entire border region. Then suddenly he was elevated to one of China's most powerful regional leadership positions. Chen also has connections to Hu Jintao's political network, dating back to their years in Gansu, and some observers associate him with the reformist faction. Now, under Chen's leadership, Xinjiang's official media was among the first to launch a fierce attack on Huawei. Was it a coincidence? Possibly. But would an official media outlet in Xinjiang dare to criticize Huawei so aggressively, calling them, you know, calling them not behaving like a human, normal human being? I mean, in a normal situation, would an official media outlet in Xinjiang dare to criticize Huawei so aggressively without believing it had some political room to do so? I find that hard to imagine. And then there's Zhejiang. Zhejiang is Xi Jinping's old political stronghold. He served as the party secretary there. And many officials who later rose alongside him had worked there in Zhejiang, such as his premier Li Qiang. So when Zhejiang's official publicity account criticized the suppression of unfavorable information, it carried an intriguing political dimension. The criticism was no longer coming from Xinjiang alone. It was coming from Xi Jinping's own power base. And then China News Service, a national level media outlet, amplified the message, taking criticism that had appeared in provincial media to a much larger national audience. Now, considering another connection, I should say, let's look at the pattern, right? You have first, Xinjiang official media attacks Huawei. Then Zhejiang, Xi Jinping's former political stronghold, joined the criticism. And then a major national state media organization amplifies the message. So what's going on? Is this simply an unusual display of official concern over consumer safety? Or are different political networks inside the Communist Party testing one another's strength? I mean, CCP is notoriously oblivious of consumer safety. So I do not think this is an unusual display of official concern over consumer safety So if Huawei's political protection is weakening What does that tell us about the people who have protected for years? Because this may no longer be just a story about three broken brake pedal brackets It may be a story about cracks emerging in Huawei's political armor. And the story doesn't stop there. Because on October 11, something even more extraordinary happened. People's Daily entered the fight. Yes, People's Daily, the Communist Party's most authoritative newspaper. Its app published an article with a provocative headline. It says, four government agencies say no to rush-to-market cars. Okay, so you have this rush-to-market cars. So what do you think that was aimed at? Well, the article made two important points. First, it directly addressed Huawei's Maextor V800 vehicle controversy By declaring, although the incident awaits an official investigation, one thing is beyond dispute. A car's brake pedal should never break while driving. Think about that. This wasn't an angry consumer or a blogger or a car blogger. This was people's daily, and it wasn't delivering an official verdict, but the message was unmistakable. A broken brake pedal is unacceptable, period. No amount of technical jargon can explain that way. And then comes the second point. It's potentially even more damaging. The article went beyond one defective component and raised questions about China's entire EV development model by announcing or by mentioning a draft proposal issued the day before. So on October the 10th, four government agencies released a draft proposal tightening technical requirements for automotive design, testing, and validation. It addressed virtual controls, door handles, advanced human machine interfaces, and heavily reclining seats. Sound familiar? Well, these are precisely the kinds of high-tech futuristic features Huawei has been promoting in its automotive business. And according to People's Daily, industry observers saw the proposed rule or the rules as a warning against so-called rush-to-market vehicles. That's significant because that's precisely the strategy Huawei and many of China's EV makers adopt. Because if Huawei, if People's Daily had merely just criticized the Maextor V800, Huawei could have dismissed it as an isolated problem. One model, one component, one embarrassing incident. But now the discussion was about something much bigger. It's about the way cars are designed, developed, tested, and rushed to market. People's Daily and the four government agencies appear to be challenging Huawei's entire automotive lineup and potentially its whole approach to building cars. And this could have implications for Huawei's entire auto strategy, right, and the broader Chinese EV industry. So I'm not saying that these four agencies drafted the regulations specifically to target Huawei. But the timing was remarkable. Huawei was once practically untouchable and now suddenly faces criticism from the party's most authoritative newspaper. Again, people ask what was going on. Four government agencies, one extraordinary coincidence. And also people notice something here. It's about timing. They ask, how did four government agencies manage to release a coordinated regulatory proposal just two days after the Huawei controversy erupted? Anyone familiar with the Chinese, with Chinese bureaucracy knows that joint regulations can take months to prepare because you have multiple departments, analyst consultations, layer after layer of approval. So could this proposal really have been drafted in two days? Highly unlikely. I must say that although it's possible, but most people or a lot of people believe that it has been developed or this thing has been in development long before the Maestro scandal. And that raises an even more interesting question. So did the ByteDance automotive platform, known as Dong Che Di, know the announcement was coming? Did it deliberately time its testing and video release to coincide with the government's regulatory push? We don't know, but consider the sequence. October 8th, Dong Che Di releases its alarming test results. October 10th, four government agencies published their draft regulations. Then the next day, the 11th, People's Daily connects the regulatory issue to Huawei's brake pedal controversy. Coincidence? Maybe. But Chinese internet users were asking questions. Some wondered whether Huawei was being targeted by a coordinated campaign. Others suspected the shadow of an internal political struggle. Remember, in the past, whenever Huawei faced criticism, official media often defended it. This time, some of those same institutions were openly challenging it. So what changed? Did someone at the top change the rules? Or has the balance of power at the very top changed? All right, and the story isn't over yet. On the evening of October 15, three powerful government agencies, the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, the Cyberspace Administration of China, and the State Administration for Market Regulation, announced a joint investigation into the Maestro V800 brake failures. The allegations will now face official scrutiny And Huawei's automotive partner Jack Motors Quickly promised full cooperation So this was no longer a media controversy It had become a national-level regulatory investigation But Huawei wasn't backing down The next day, Huawei's executive, Richard Yu Posted a rather intriguing message He said, justice may be delayed but it will never be absent. Justice? Now that's an interesting choice of words. Who needs justice here? The consumers or Huawei? Or is Huawei suggesting that it's the victim of an unfair campaign? It's possible, but here's something else. When the investigation was announced, Jack Motors shares surged, hitting their daily trading limit on October the 16th. Isn't that interesting? When the government announced investigation, the stock price surged. It's such a reverse psychology in China. Usually when here in the West, if a company is subject to regulatory investigation, the stock would tank, right? It would affect the stock price. In China, it's the opposite. That means the consumers now have more confidence in the company now that the regulatory agencies or now that the government is involved, then the consumers or the investors seem to have more confidence in the company. That only happens in China. So they apparently don't see government investigation as a threat. They see that as an opportunity for Huawei to improve its cars. Anyways, but the censorship mystery deepens. Here's another strange development. While the government was investigating the allegations, the testing videos from Dongche Di were becoming increasingly difficult to find. They are believed to have completely deplatformed in China by the October the 16th. Some users even reported being unable to play the videos through Dongchadi's app on Huawei's smartphones. Imagine that you own a Huawei phone, you open a car testing app, you try to watch a video about a Huawei-associated vehicle and the video will not play. So let's look at the contradiction, right? On one hand, three powerful government agencies are investigating the alleged safety problem. On the other, the videos exposing that problem have disappeared. So which was it? Was the system demanding accountability or was someone still trying to suppress the evidence? Or, this is the possibility I find most intriguing, there were different forces inside the system pulling in opposite directions. Because if that's what's happening, the Huawei controversy may be revealing something far more important than a defective brake pedal. It may be exposing the tensions inside China's top leadership itself. Because Huawei's real problem is not just the car. And this is why I believe this story goes far beyond It's just a broken brake pedal. Because Huawei isn't just any ordinary Chinese technology company. Under Xi Jinping, it has become a symbol of China's technological ambitions and Xi Jinping's national pride. And its political connections reach all the way to the top. Remember this picture? Let me show you. This is Meng Wanzhou, Huawei's CFO and the daughter of the founder, Ren Zhengfei. She was arrested or detained, I should say, in Canada in 2018 at Washington's request. Her arrest triggered a major diplomatic confrontation. Beijing detained two Canadians, the two Michaels, as retaliation. Some Western media reports claim that Xi Jinping personally issued more than 100 instructions to secure Meng's release. When she returned to China, this is the picture taken at the airport, Xi Jinping even sent her a chartered airplane to bring her back to China. So at the airport, she was welcomed like a national hero. And Meng thanked Xi Jinping right there on the red carpet in a speech. And so that's how important Huawei was to Xi Jinping. So Huawei's problems were never just Huawei's problems. But now let's look at what's happening. First came this. Remember back in the summer, I told you about viral bamboo Chicago jokes mocking Huawei. And then later there were bathroom signs popping up all over China, pointing toward Huawei stores. And those street signs were banned. Then came the rumors about Ren Zhengfei and his entire family fleeing China. Those rumors were subsequently challenged, but the public ridicule kept growing. And now ByteDance's automotive platform has challenged Huawei with an expensive high-profile safety test. Three vehicles, millions of yuan spent. Now, here's the question. Would this automotive platform, Dong Che Di, have dared to do this kind of test a few years ago? And was it acting entirely on its own, or did it believe it had powerful backing? We don't know, but the question is worth asking. Meanwhile, official media outlets in Xinjiang and Zhejiang have criticized Huawei. People's Daily has weighed in. and three central government agencies have launched an investigation. So Huawei is suddenly taking hits from every direction, from ordinary consumers, from rival technology platforms, from party media, and possibly from competing political interests. So the company that once seemed untouchable no longer looks quite so untouchable. And that brings us back to Xi Jinping, right? So if Huawei's political protection is weakening, could that reflect a shift in the balance of power around Xi Jinping himself? Or is something else happening? Perhaps it's a genuine consumer safety controversy that has created an opportunity for political rivals. Some forces demand accountability. Others try to contain the damage, or it could be both. It could be a pure political play, or it could be a political play as a result of a genuine consumer safety controversy. And both things could be happening at once. Because in China, political shifts aren't always announced. Sometimes you see them in what the party media suddenly dare to criticize in what the censors allow or refuse to circulate and in which companies can no longer count on automatic protection. So here are the questions I want to leave you with. I should, the question, just one question. Huawei's biggest problem may not be whether it can fix a broken brake pedal. It's whether the people who have protected the company for years Can still protect it And if they cannot What does that tell us about Xi Jinping? I think the drama is only getting started Because right before this live stream I just saw another development One of Cai Qi's former associates Who worked for him When Cai was the party secretary of Beijing, is in trouble, is, I think, officially, is officially announced. And the accusation is Huawei. Yeah, I think the person is involved in corruption. I think corruption in Huawei's procurement process. There are money to be made in procurement processes. So, yeah. And so if you think about it, you know, here you have all these viral moments for Huawei on Chinese social media platforms. And then you see another official being investigated and everything seems to point to one of Xi Jinping's most loyal associates, Cai Qi. so yeah now that just um i i think things have things have changed uh the wind has shifted years ago this is this would be impossible to imagine yeah but now it's happening all right uh let me see if people what do people say about huawei is that the last picture that is the last picture um and also i want to do a follow-up of this program by i think i truly think huawei is in in trouble in big trouble not just politically but also financially um i want to do a program on huawei's financial trouble but i'll do that as a membership program we were trying to set up a membership program this week and even trying to do that before this program but i didn't have time to do that but i promise i will launch my membership program and the first program will be huawei's financial trouble yeah or yeah it's it's more of a business analysis of why the company huawei is seriously not doing well aside from the political trouble it's it's having this this talk is about the political trouble but I'll do a follow-up program on the business aspect all right that's all let me see what do people say uh questions oh here I have a not Mike Stewart Huawei's next model will just have a cutout in the floorboards and you stop it like Fred Flintstone yeah i mean this car is not a cheap car that's why people are genuinely shocked it's a luxury car costing 140,000 or the equivalent of that and it's directly competing with Lexus LM it's used for chauffeur driven travels and the brakes and people say that the the problem it breaks aside from aside from having less support aside from the structural problems it it's also made of plastic or composite material it's not metal um could you imagine that uh that's why i don't understand why countries like Canada or European countries are still importing Chinese EVs um quality even Chinese don't trust Chinese quality so why do for uh you know Canadians and other people like Australians want to drive a Chinese car yeah yeah so anyways all right let's see thank you Mike for the support let me see questions comments yeah uh we are in a countdown mode to CCP's fifth plenum which will start next Monday i want to do a program on on the procedural aspect of the fifth plenum what will actually happen behind closed doors during those days they will vote they will actually will be voting um procedures uh so maybe Thursday or maybe i don't know maybe next week i'll talk about the fifth plenum and what actually happens there and then what each site is trying trying to get because there there are all kinds of rumors being uh spread across the internet and you could clearly tell who is spreading them because judging by these different versions of rumors you kind of know what each side's goal or goals are at the at the platinum because they're completely opposite each other they're completely contradictory to each other that you know they're different factions spreading them against each other um yeah all right let me see questions okay well thank you mike for the uh super stickers let me see any other questions comments brutal someone says please hit the like button if you haven't yes please do that to help me i think youtube's algorithm isn't on my side so i need everyone's help to live to like and leave a comment if you can oh here's a question from may he may maniacs late it sounds like this is not coincidence and was intentionally done to embarrass Xi Jinping and his NEAI. Yeah, that's what a lot of people see it. Although I don't want to claim it, I want to be as objective as possible to present you the facts. But these are all based on actual development on Chinese social media and official media landscape. So you would never imagine state media outlet directly accusing huawei for not behaving like a human being yeah so i i agree with you a lot of people would we um would agree with you it it does look like intentional something is happening uh something is happening behind the scene someone's i agree with you lei on huawei lei super long hair looks great today oh super long it's i cut it um someone said lei you can't compete with lexus to you can't compete compare lexus to anything chinese i know that's what i corrected myself i said no i can't say uh i can't call lexus huawei's competitor no it's not fair you're right but if you have to match a model a car model so that you understand where it stands in the marketplace then that would be the lexus lm but they're not comparable they're not in the same league okay someone said i love the large size of the huawei phones but they don't support google and we need that here in the u.s yeah don't buy a huawei phone i wouldn't probably have has some backdoor uh software loaded to track your activities okay um i already answered the question that chris forwarded all right uh baby no something babe baby leon i don't know how to say your name lei thanks for the info about huawei you're so good to get those information i support you it's a good channel all the way oh thank you very much thank you i appreciate that okay here's a question from Don Johnson 1003 was Huawei one of the early players in the automotive industry no are they are they johnny come lately so now you know almost there's so many like Xiaomi all the chinese tech giants at one point were all in the ev business uh even the real estate giant what's name Evergrande was in was making ev cars uh it was like the gold rush of of china four or five years ago yeah so so everyone had a ev brand of of some kind but many of them folded uh someone said lei she needs a distraction his movement is now in the position of protecting the public. Huawei is a sacrificial lamb. What do you think of this? Needs a distraction. His government is now in the position of protecting the public. Protecting the public? What do you mean? Xi Jinping needs a distraction. He is in a lot of trouble. He needs a lot of distraction. But because he doesn't gain anything if Huawei looks bad, because his name is somehow very closely tied to Huawei. If Huawei looks bad, he looks bad. So I don't see how he can benefit from this scandal or controversy of Huawei. He doesn't gain anything. You say distraction. I don't see how that works for him. I don't see how that works in his favor. Yeah. All right. Love your color green. I look good in green. Green is a very powerful color. I look powerful in green. yeah it's my favorite color green and blue all right no more questions um when i roll out the membership program will you be kind enough to join as a member um and i'll release regular videos um for members yeah and i think you will enjoy them All right, thank you very much, Austin Ron. Huawei is the embodiment of the backdoor, yeah. I also wanted to make, there are a lot of videos I want to make about Huawei, but I don't know if you guys are interested in them. How Huawei, Huawei basically copied, Huawei brought down Nortel, Canada's Nortel, and they stole its technology. So, yeah. All right, that's all for tonight. I thank you for joining and I'll be back with more information on Thursday. All right. Stay well and see you then. Bye.