Positive Comments: New Safety Regulations Force Industry Upgrade, Leading Brands Spearhead Quality Revolution
The new safety regulations for power banks issued by the Civil Aviation Administration in June 2025 seem on the surface to be a tightening of aviation safety supervision. In fact, it is a crucial battle to drive the entire power bank industry to transform towards “safety first.” From a long – term perspective of industry development, this incident not only exposed problems but also gave birth to positive change signals and injected new impetus into the industry.
First of all, the new regulations directly raised the market access threshold through the implementation of mandatory 3C certification, accelerating the end of the chaos of “bad money driving out good.” In the past, due to the low technical threshold and cost – sensitivity of the power bank market, some small and medium – sized manufacturers used uncertified 3C battery cells or simplified safety designs (such as omitting over – charge protection circuits and using inferior casings) to cut costs. As a result, the market was flooded with low – price but high – risk products. The new regulations of the Civil Aviation Administration clearly state that “products without 3C marks are not allowed to board the plane,” which is equivalent to setting up a “safety filter” for consumers in high – frequency usage scenarios (air travel). If consumers want to carry power banks on the plane, they must choose products that meet the 3C standards. This policy will force the channel side (such as e – commerce platforms and offline retailers) to actively clean up uncertified products, promoting the market to develop towards compliance and standardization. As mentioned in the news that “3C certification has only been popularized in the past one or two years,” it shows that there were a large number of uncertified products in the market before. The implementation of the new regulations will effectively purify the market environment and create growth space for compliant brands.
Secondly, the rapid response and proactive responsibility – taking of leading brands have set a new benchmark for “quality competition” in the industry. Facing the trust crisis caused by the involved battery cells of Amprius, brands such as Ugreen, Anker Innovations, and Koogeek did not choose to “remain silent and avoid.” Instead, they adopted more proactive strategies: Ugreen voluntarily removed products affected by the suspension of 3C certification (even if they did not use the involved batch of battery cells) and clearly marked that the current products use first – tier battery cells from Lishen and EVE Energy; Anker Innovations reached a strategic cooperation with ATL (Contemporary Amperex Technology Co., Limited) to strengthen the safety endorsement of the supply chain; Koogeek quickly responded to the certification issue through official channels and made product information transparent. These actions not only alleviated consumers’ anxiety but also sent a key signal – the core competitiveness of brands is shifting from “price” and “fast – charging speed” to “safety and reliability.” As emphasized in the news, “compete in experience and safety, rather than simply in price.” The demonstration effect of leading brands will drive the entire industry to shift from a “function competition” to a “safety competition,” which is conducive to improving the overall quality level of the industry in the long run.
Finally, this incident objectively became a national – level “power bank safety education,” and the awakening of consumers’ safety awareness will in turn promote the healthy development of the industry. In the past, most consumers paid more attention to explicit indicators such as capacity, price, and appearance when choosing power banks, and lacked awareness of implicit safety factors such as 3C certification, battery cell brands, and safety protection technologies. The extensive discussions triggered by the recall event and the new regulations (such as netizens disassembling products to verify battery cell batches and popularizing the importance of 3C certification on social platforms) have made “safety” the core consideration for consumers’ decision – making. According to the pain point mentioned in the news that “consumers have no way to distinguish battery cell batches,” the market will be more inclined to choose products with “strong brand endorsement, transparent information, and perfect after – sales service” in the future. This will encourage enterprises to increase investment in safety technology R & D (such as more reliable battery cell design and multiple protection circuits), supply chain management (such as traceable battery cell batches), and user communication (such as actively publicizing safety certification information), forming a positive cycle of “consumers attach importance to safety – enterprises improve safety – market supply is optimized.”
Negative Comments: Hidden Supply Chain Risks Expose Trust Crisis, Industry Differentiation Intensifies
Although the new regulations and the actions of leading brands have sent positive signals, this power bank safety incident has also exposed deep – seated problems that have long existed in the industry. If not handled properly, it may have an impact on industry confidence and the survival of small and medium – sized brands.
First of all, the concentrated outbreak of supply chain risks has exposed the vulnerability of “over – dependence on a single supplier.” The core contradiction in this recall event lies in the quality problem of a specific batch of battery cells from Amprius. However, what is even more alarming is that some brands are overly dependent on a single battery cell supplier. As mentioned in the news, the V1.0 version of Amprius’ involved battery cells (model 126280) has safety hazards, while the V2.0 version is safe. However, the regulatory authorities suspended all its 3C certifications due to “failure in factory inspections,” causing brands that use other batches of Amprius battery cells (such as some products of Xiaomi and Ugreen) to be implicated (for example, Ugreen removed relevant products). This reflects that when problems occur in the core supply chain link (such as battery cells), even if the brand has strict quality control, it may be passive due to the systematic risks of the supplier. For small and medium – sized brands, due to their small purchase volume and weak bargaining power, it is more difficult for them to establish stable cooperation with leading battery cell manufacturers. They often have to rely on second – and third – tier suppliers, and their supply chain’s ability to resist risks is even lower. Once the supplier has quality problems, they may face large – scale recalls or even the collapse of the brand.
Secondly, it is difficult to repair consumers’ trust, and “safety anxiety” may affect market demand in the long term. Although the news emphasizes that “products that do not use the involved batch of battery cells are safe,” ordinary consumers lack professional knowledge and have difficulty accurately judging the battery cell batch and safety through appearance, model, or SN code. For example, some netizens reported that “the product belongs to the recalled model, but the SN code verification shows that it is not within the recall range,” which indicates that the same model may use different batches of battery cells, and consumers cannot verify it by themselves. This information asymmetry will intensify the panic psychology of “better safe than sorry,” causing some consumers to choose to “not buy power banks” or “only buy expensive leading – brand products,” thereby suppressing market demand. In addition, the opaque process of “suspension” and “resumption” of 3C certification (for example, 11 3C certifications of Amprius were suspended due to factory inspection problems, but when they will be resumed and how to improve were not clearly notified) will also weaken consumers’ trust in the certification system and may even lead to doubts about “whether the certification can really guarantee safety.”
Finally, industry differentiation will further intensify, and the survival space of small and medium – sized brands will be compressed. Leading brands, with their advantages in funds, technology, and supply chain, can quickly respond to the crisis (such as changing battery cell suppliers and adding safety inspection links), and even turn the crisis into an opportunity for brand promotion (such as Anker’s cooperation with ATL to strengthen safety endorsement). However, due to limited resources, small and medium – sized brands may face a broken capital chain due to recalls if they rely on problematic suppliers. If they change suppliers, they have to bear higher procurement costs (leading battery cell manufacturers offer higher quotes for small – batch orders), and they also need to re – apply for 3C certification (which has a long cycle and high cost). This “Matthew effect” may lead to a further concentration of market share towards the leading brands. Small and medium – sized brands may either withdraw from the market or be forced to turn to the low – end market (but the low – end market is shrinking due to the new regulations restricting products without 3C certification), and the innovation vitality of the industry may be damaged as a result.
Suggestions for Entrepreneurs: Strengthen Supply Chain Risk Control, Focus on Safety Technology, and Establish a Transparent Communication Mechanism
This power bank safety incident has provided multi – dimensional inspiration for entrepreneurs. Combining industry pain points and trends, the following suggestions are worth noting:
-
Build a “multi – source + traceable” supply chain system to reduce the risk of relying on a single supplier
Entrepreneurs need to realize that as the core component of power banks, the quality of battery cells directly determines product safety. Therefore, in supply chain management, they should avoid over – dependence on a single supplier. In particular, small and medium – sized brands need to actively expand their cooperation partners (such as establishing small – batch trial production cooperation with leading battery cell manufacturers like Lishen and EVE Energy) to disperse risks. At the same time, establish a strict battery cell batch traceability system to ensure that the procurement, testing, and usage information of each batch of battery cells can be queried. Once a problem occurs, the involved products can be quickly located and recalled, avoiding the passive situation of “the whole model being blamed” (such as the confusion among consumers caused by some brands using different batches of battery cells in the same model in this incident). -
Make “safety technology” the core R & D direction, rather than just focusing on functional innovation
Consumers’ demand for power banks has upgraded from “large capacity and fast charging” to “safety and reliability.” Entrepreneurs need to adjust their R & D priorities and increase investment in safety technology. For example, they can develop “multiple protection circuits” (over – charge, over – discharge, and short – circuit protection), “temperature monitoring modules” (real – time monitoring of battery cell temperature and early warning), and “fire – proof casing materials.” They can even jointly develop customized safety battery cells with battery cell manufacturers (such as optimizing tab layout and improving diaphragm insulation). In addition, they need to actively obtain authoritative certifications (such as 3C, UL, CE) and publicize the certification information to enhance consumers’ trust with third – party endorsements. -
Establish a “transparent + instant response” user communication mechanism to resolve information asymmetry
To address the pain point of consumers’ “inability to distinguish battery cell batches,” entrepreneurs can actively publicize battery cell suppliers, batch information (such as marking “using Lishen XX batch battery cells”), and safety test reports (such as over – charge test and extrusion test results) through product packaging, official websites, and e – commerce product detail pages. When there is a supply chain risk (such as a cooperation supplier being exposed with problems), they need to quickly explain the situation to users through official channels (Weibo, WeChat, customer service hotline), clearly inform them of “the scope of involved products,” “the safety basis of non – involved products,” and “after – sales solutions” (such as free testing and replacement) to avoid intensifying panic due to information lag. For example, Ugreen’s active removal of affected products and explanation of the safe battery cells used in current products during this incident is a worthy example of “transparent communication.” -
Pay attention to policy dynamics and plan for compliant production in advance
The new regulations of the Civil Aviation Administration have sent a clear signal of “tightening safety supervision.” Entrepreneurs need to closely follow relevant policies (such as updates to 3C certification standards and aviation/railway transportation safety regulations) and adjust production processes in advance to meet the requirements. For example, ensure that all products on sale have passed 3C certification to avoid being removed from the channels due to lack of certification; reserve a position for a “clear 3C mark” in product design to avoid being rejected for boarding due to unclear marks. In addition, they can participate in the formulation of industry standards (such as jointly promoting a “power bank safety grading standard” with leading brands and testing institutions) to enhance the enterprise’s voice in the industry.
This power bank safety incident is both a crisis and an opportunity. For entrepreneurs, only by making “safety” the core competitiveness of products, winning consumers’ trust through supply chain optimization, technological innovation, and transparent communication, can they stand out in the new competition stage of “competing in safety.” The future of the industry belongs to enterprises that truly put user safety first.
Latest
- Startup Commentary”OpenAI Coin: A New Type of Scam?”
- Startup Commentary”The Xiaomi Desk Setup Robot Priced at 199 Yuan: Its “Inner Qualities” Are by No Means Simple”
- Risk Compass”Aerial work in China”
- Risk Compass”High-end housekeeping in China”
- Risk Compass”Prestressed Concrete Cylinder Pipe (PCCP) Pipeline in China”
