MG’s New Sedan Looks So Much Like a Porsche That the CEO Had to Quit a Livestream

MG’s big reveal didn’t go as planned. On June 29, Chen Cui, the executive leading MG’s brand operations, was hosting a livestream to walk viewers through the design story of the company’s new MG07 fastback sedan. Instead of celebrating the car’s styling, he spent the session fielding relentless accusations that the thing looked like a direct ripoff of the Porsche Taycan — or worse, the Xiaomi SU7, which itself borrows heavily from Porsche’s design language. By the time the complaints piled up, Cui was visibly shaken and ended the broadcast early, according to Chinese media reports.

Here’s the thing: MG’s response was almost worse than the original criticism. Rather than acknowledge the obvious visual similarities, the company doubled down with a reframing argument that basically amounts to “we copied ourselves.” At a follow-up media briefing, Cui claimed the MG07 wasn’t aping Porsche or Xiaomi—it was a modern interpretation of styling cues from classic MG models, specifically pointing to the 1965 MGB GT and other heritage vehicles. The message was clear: we’re reviving our own design language, not stealing from competitors.

The Aerodynamics Defense (That Actually Kind of Works)

Here’s where MG has a legitimate point buried under all the defensiveness. Modern EV design is constrained by physics in ways that naturally push every manufacturer toward the same basic shape. When you’re chasing maximum efficiency and minimizing drag, you end up with similar solutions: low noses, flush door handles, sweeping rooflines, and tapered fastback tails. It’s not conspiracy—it’s engineering necessity. Under EPA efficiency standards and the laws of aerodynamics, there’s only so much freedom available before you’re fighting drag and killing range.

That said, MG’s defense loses steam when you actually look at the details. The MG07’s headlights have more than a passing resemblance to Porsche’s signature lighting design. Certain wheel patterns feel uncomfortably familiar. And from the side, the car inevitably evokes the Xiaomi SU7—which, let’s be honest, was already operating in the Taycan’s shadow to begin with. These aren’t accidents of aerodynamic convergence; they’re specific stylistic choices that MG could have approached differently.

The Real Problem: Everyone Looks the Same Now

The MG07 controversy actually highlights a deeper crisis in EV design language. As battery-powered cars have become the default, manufacturers are increasingly converging on similar silhouettes because that’s what works. The low-slung fastback sedan formula is now the path of least resistance for engineers and designers alike. It’s efficient, it’s spacious, and it’s already proven to work—which means fewer risks and fewer expensive redesigns.

But there’s a critical flip side: when everyone is chasing the same aerodynamic targets and building off the same basic formula, differentiation becomes nearly impossible. You can’t just make a slippery car anymore—you have to make a slippery car that people can actually tell apart from every other slippery car on the road. That’s the genuine design challenge of the EV era, and the MG07’s troubled debut proves that most manufacturers haven’t figured it out yet.

MG isn’t alone in this struggle. The flood of new EVs flooding the market has created a visual sameness that confuses buyers and frustrates designers. Walk through any EV lineup—from legacy manufacturers to upstarts—and you’ll see variation in execution but very little variation in foundational thinking. Long hood, sloped roofline, flush details, swept-back proportions. Rinse, repeat.

Is the MG07 Actually Ugly? No. Is It Derivative? Absolutely.

Here’s the honest take: the MG07 is not a badly designed car. It’s competent, modern, and clearly engineered to be efficient. But it is undeniably derivative. Whether you’re seeing Porsche Taycan, Xiaomi SU7, or classic MGB GT heritage (good luck with that last one), the reality is that the MG07 didn’t break new ground. It executed an existing formula competently, and that’s both its strength and its weakness.

The livestream disaster reveals something else too: MG is sensitive about this comparison because it knows the criticism is at least partially justified. If the design was truly original and clearly differentiated from competitors, there would be no reason for the CEO to get emotional. The fact that viewers immediately—and in large numbers—drew comparisons to Porsche and Xiaomi suggests the similarities are obvious enough that they jump out at first glance. That’s a design problem masquerading as a PR problem.

Ultimately, what happened to MG happens to every EV manufacturer now: physics and efficiency push everyone toward the same shape, then market pressure forces them to find personality within constraints so tight that personality becomes nearly impossible. MG’s mistake wasn’t copying Porsche. It was failing to deliver something distinctive enough to silence the inevitable comparisons. In the EV era, that’s becoming the unforgivable sin.

Sources: Carscoops