Apple reportedly eyed BMW's i3 electric car as basis for branded vehicle
According to a report published Friday, Apple last fall initiated talks to partner with BMW on a rumored electric car project underpinned by the German automaker's i3 model before ultimately changing its mind.
Local publication Manager Magazin cites industry scuttlebutt as saying Apple reached out to BMW in 2014 to discuss the possibility of collaborating on an electric car. As part of the supposed deal, BMW's i3 commuter car would have served as the basis of Apple's vehicle.
It's not clear what automotive elements Apple planned to borrow from BMW, but a simple rebadging is unlikely. Potentially of interest to Apple was the German carmaker's "LifeDrive" architecture, a two-part design that separates i3's passenger cabin from its drivetrain and battery module.
Interest in the collaborative effort was such that Apple CEO Tim Cook visited BMW's electric car operations facility in Leipzig with a cadre of senior managers, the report said. It is unclear what Apple brought to the table, aside from almost unlimited investment capital, but the report suggested BMW is concerned that lower-than-expected i3 sales might impact its ability to build out the "i-series" range.
Apple might have offered to lend a hand in the battery technology department if rumors of a secret R&D initiative to develop advanced vehicle energy systems are to be believed. A major disadvantage to any current model electric car is range. BMW's i3, for example, gets about 80 miles on a charge or just under double that with an optional two-cylinder gas range extender. Battery technology is at the heart of the issue. Onboard large-format batteries are heavy, expensive and not easily serviced, but there is an ongoing effort within the industry to increase capacity, charge times and overall drivetrain efficiency.
In February, Apple was slapped with a lawsuit alleging it illegally poached high-ranking executives from A123, a battery maker whose technology has been applied in high-performance electric land vehicles. Court documents show Apple's recent hires worked on an advanced technology research team at A123 and were so critical to the division that it had to be shut down after their departure.
Whispers of Apple's car project, reportedly dubbed "Titan," gained momentum in February when reports claimed the company was working on a self-driving electric vehicle. Subsequent rumors have said the project is gobbling up human resources as management reshuffles talent away from core operating areas. As of February, one report estimated Titan's team consisted of "several hundred" workers.
AppleInsider uncovered evidence that Apple was indeed conducting car-related research in March. Apple recently leased a group of buildings located a short drive from its Cupertino, Calif., headquarters and modified the space to support garages, automotive repair bays and testing facilities.
Local publication Manager Magazin cites industry scuttlebutt as saying Apple reached out to BMW in 2014 to discuss the possibility of collaborating on an electric car. As part of the supposed deal, BMW's i3 commuter car would have served as the basis of Apple's vehicle.
It's not clear what automotive elements Apple planned to borrow from BMW, but a simple rebadging is unlikely. Potentially of interest to Apple was the German carmaker's "LifeDrive" architecture, a two-part design that separates i3's passenger cabin from its drivetrain and battery module.
Interest in the collaborative effort was such that Apple CEO Tim Cook visited BMW's electric car operations facility in Leipzig with a cadre of senior managers, the report said. It is unclear what Apple brought to the table, aside from almost unlimited investment capital, but the report suggested BMW is concerned that lower-than-expected i3 sales might impact its ability to build out the "i-series" range.
Apple might have offered to lend a hand in the battery technology department if rumors of a secret R&D initiative to develop advanced vehicle energy systems are to be believed. A major disadvantage to any current model electric car is range. BMW's i3, for example, gets about 80 miles on a charge or just under double that with an optional two-cylinder gas range extender. Battery technology is at the heart of the issue. Onboard large-format batteries are heavy, expensive and not easily serviced, but there is an ongoing effort within the industry to increase capacity, charge times and overall drivetrain efficiency.
In February, Apple was slapped with a lawsuit alleging it illegally poached high-ranking executives from A123, a battery maker whose technology has been applied in high-performance electric land vehicles. Court documents show Apple's recent hires worked on an advanced technology research team at A123 and were so critical to the division that it had to be shut down after their departure.
Whispers of Apple's car project, reportedly dubbed "Titan," gained momentum in February when reports claimed the company was working on a self-driving electric vehicle. Subsequent rumors have said the project is gobbling up human resources as management reshuffles talent away from core operating areas. As of February, one report estimated Titan's team consisted of "several hundred" workers.
AppleInsider uncovered evidence that Apple was indeed conducting car-related research in March. Apple recently leased a group of buildings located a short drive from its Cupertino, Calif., headquarters and modified the space to support garages, automotive repair bays and testing facilities.
Comments
Fascinating. Battery tech, mapping tech, liquidmetal, sapphire windshields.... But I don't believe BMW has the technology to produce car-sized solid blocks of aluminum for Apple to machine into a unibody auto.
Who does? Alcoa?
If Apple Car had Tesla level sales (even from this year) it would be called a market failure.
Agreed. It wouldn't be anywhere near enough to move the needle. The Watch revenues alone in the first four quarters could equal or exceed Teslas revenues for the equivalent four quarters!
If Apple Car had Tesla level sales (even from this year) it would be called a market failure.
Sadly... this is true. You are spot-on Solips. Apple would be screwed if they did, screwed if they didn't.
Because 70 million iPhones sold.
I'm expecting the Apple Watch segment will exceed all of Tesla's revenue and profits for 2015. That's not even adjusting the timeframes to compare first year on market. Tesla did $3.198 billion for 2014, and showed a 55% increase in unit sales YoY for the first quarter of 2015. Apple Watch will probably do at least 4x that and will actually have a healthy profit margin to boot.
If Apple does want to get into this business I can see how that would be a way to go, but I don't think it would cost a mere $60 B. That's just the market valuation, but even speculation of such a buyout would shoot that up excessively.
That's why revenue, profits, and market share from sales are measured.
Alcoa is busy supplying millions of tons of aluminum to Ford for the F-150.
How the **** does Apple noting being intimated by the media equate to the media not calling it a market failure? Clearly you know the media labels Apple's efforts as market failures, as you later state, thus discounted your previous argument against my statement.
Personally I hope Apple is not just making an electric car with snazzy features and Ive design, and that's it. They need to try and solve things. It'd be better if they created a commute taxi network with 8 passengers vans, with a constantly re routing hop-on-hop-off service. Request pickup via app. A closeby car with a free seat, and a route in the same direction will reroute and pick you up. The goal, to reduce traffic.
True, but Apple only has to buy slightly over half. I doubt Apple would make this type of purchase though. It would be far cheaper and less complex for Apple to build from the ground up.
The trouble with cars as Tesla is learning is most states have laws preventung direct manufacturer sales of vehicles to consumers. It makes sense for companies like GM and Ford because they relied on third party dealer investment to build the infrastructure to sell cars. It makes little sense for a new entry player like Tesla that doesn't need or want have third parties sell its cars for it.
... Now had it been an i7 things might have been different ...
If Apple have to build gas/LPG/Hydrogen based car than it can possibly fail because that requires many decades of trial and error to refine many aspects of building a vehicle. But, for electric car, if Tesla can do it, others can as well and Apple can do even better. Remember, Tesla have to sell car to survive but Apple can pu money from other products revenue and raise the bar that Tesla or others may not be easily able to match.