[woodandsteel]

Yea, but if you made it safe, it would be too expensive for most of the target market to buy. This is the developing world.

The same thing happens everywhere, a country goes through a period of wild-west capitalism, then, if things go well, eventually it gets rich enough to be able to afford things like safe products, worker safety laws, a social safety net, and so on. I am not aware of any country that has gone straight from non-industrialized to safe industrialization.

[cloudwalking]

Seems like a bad comparison to a Tesla then, no? Nothing but click bait.

[woodandsteel]

The article is arguing that the $4k Renault is as disruptive in India as the Tesla is in the US. That seems like a reasonable claim.

[LoSboccacc]

Tata Nano ($1600 equivalent) didn't disrupt a thing, why would this?

[sangnoir]

If you had read the article, you would know Renault's answer to this question.

[LoSboccacc]

If the issue is cars being status symbol being fancy but cheap won't help and won't make it desiderable nor a status symbol anymore than a dirt cheap rolex would

[sangnoir]

Did you read the article?! Renault's approach was to model the cheaper car after an existing car (Kwid) that was proven/already popular on the Indian market, and then they drove down component costs. They are relying on a market proven market segment (and the Kwid's halo effect won't harm).

[kllrnohj]

FYI the article's real title is "Why This $4,000 Renault Is as Disruptive as the Tesla Model 3"