Apple eyes former naval base in California to test 'Project Titan' self-driving car - report

124678

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 144
    foggyhillfoggyhill Posts: 4,767member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post





    Feel good. Apple is dominos well right now that they almost have to invest in something new to help grow the company. New here means dramatically different businesses. There is only so much they can do wth computing as the gating factor is often improvements in technologies they have limited control over.



    Here is where I have a problem, a successful car could result in huge growth for Apple. Consider the size of Ford, Toyota and the like. The only difference here is that these companies have a long history of aggressive completion. Apple will move into a competitive landscape it is simply not familiar with. This is a reasonable cause for concern.



    [/Quote]

     that is not a good enough reason. It means Apple's DNA has changed.

    [/quote]



    Again more non senses. If they deliver a reliable car with good human factors then the have the potential to overwhelm the current market leaders.

     

    Your assuming that the new autonomous/connected cars is actually an area those old companies have an advantage, they don't, far from it. It is Tabula Rasa for everyone in that field and Apple brings unique skills and area that sorely lacks those. That alone can create differention and success. In a way, Tesla by focusing on power and the high end is more focused on the traditional way of buying a car, despite the cars being electric. This is not what Apple wants to do.

     

    The part where those old time car dealers have the most experience can now be mostly done by contractors/parts manufacturers like Magna. There is obviously a small area of IP they do have a leg up on, but considering Apple's resource and the slow slip of cars towards consumer electronics, I wouldn't feel too cocky about that if I were them.

     

    As everyone knows, Apple mostly want to capture their high end, most profitable clients, they don't care for the rest; that alone should give them night sweat. Apple could capture 5% of the whole market and still be filthy rich and happy, just like they're now doing with their laptop and desktop lines.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 62 of 144
    foggyhillfoggyhill Posts: 4,767member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismY View Post





    1) How far into debt is Telsa?



    2a) We need to consider, assuming they are wanting to get into the car design and selling business, if it's worse than "taking on [the] problem" or building a car from scratch. Sure, they have Tesla's patents in which to use, but Tesla is already a Silicon Valley neighbor, with an Apple-like pursuit and following, and may have worked out innumerable issues that Apple could push forward, thus saving themselves a great deal of time and money. And if that money saved is greater than Telsa's cost plus debt it may very well be advantageous.



    2b) However, if Telsa is such a great buy, why hasn't Google et al. bought them out?

     

    The problem with Tesla is that they're not solving the user experience problem, just giving them essentially more of the same in a different package (electrical). If Apple wants to really differentiate, it must really offer something that no one can match/build, only them. Considering the barrier to entry; if they do this, they'd be unassailable for a very long time.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 63 of 144
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Slurpy View Post

     

     

    Hey, I'll join him on the 15,000,000 Apple Watches in 12 months bet. I'm down to be perma-banned if that does not happen. That's how much confidence I have that they will easily reach that target. 




    I guess the real question is will you ever know for sure?

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 64 of 144
    solipsismysolipsismy Posts: 5,099member
    foggyhill wrote: »
    The problem with Tesla is that they're not solving the user experience problem, just giving them essentially more of the same in a different package (electrical). If Apple wants to really differentiate, it must really offer something that no one can match/build, only them. Considering the barrier to entry; if they do this, they'd be unassailable for a very long time.

    That's also in Apple's wheelhouse.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 65 of 144
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismY View Post





    I see opportunity there for Apple. If we were talking about a bad or obsolete design like, say, buying Blackberry, I don't see what Apple could do with that; but if we're talking about finding a way of taking good design (so good that even Mercedes is licensing) and finding ways to reduce costs by making it more efficient, then I can absolutely see why Apple's chocolate would find its way into Telsa's peanut butter.

    And if I know Apple, there will be two models…...sometimes you feel like a nut--sometimes you don't!! :D

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 66 of 144
    solipsismysolipsismy Posts: 5,099member
    And if I know Apple, there will be two models…...sometimes you feel like a nut--sometimes you don't!! :D

    They will also only offer a 5 kWhr battery for free, and then charge you a monthly rate for the 20 kWhr, 200 kWhr, 500 kWhr, and 1000 kWhr battery options¡
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 67 of 144
    If they bought Tesla, they'd be taking on a problem. Tesla is losing a lot of money.

    I'm not talking buying Tesla. I'm talking competing against them.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 68 of 144
    davidwdavidw Posts: 2,180member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by JonInSD View Post



    Isn't this the same place where Myth Busters does all of their testing?

     

    Myth busters uses the Alameda Naval Air Base by the Oakland side of the Bay Bridge. The same naval base the Wachowski Brothers (brother/sister?) built the freeway used in the "Matrix Reloaded" freeway chase scenes. 

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 69 of 144
    quinneyquinney Posts: 2,528member
    For all those proclaiming doom for Tesla, here is an article debunking the FUD click bait $4000 loss per car article: [URL=http://bgr.com/2015/08/11/tesla-model-s-profits-4000/]http://bgr.com/2015/08/11/tesla-model-s-profits-4000/[/URL]

    For people who are so sensitive to similar articles trying to make Apple look bad, you are surprisingly gullible in the case of Tesla. Try to understand their long term business plan and you might find that they are executing it very well indeed. Also, if Apple does eventually build a mass market vehicle, they will need a battery supplier. You may need to prepare yourselves emotionally for the likelihood that the battery supplier will be Tesla.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 70 of 144
    solipsismysolipsismy Posts: 5,099member
    quinney wrote: »
    For all those proclaiming doom for Tesla, here is an article debunking the FUD click bait $4000 loss per car article: http://bgr.com/2015/08/11/tesla-model-s-profits-4000/

    For people who are so sensitive to similar articles trying to make Apple look bad, you are surprisingly gullible in the case of Tesla. Try to understand their long term business plan and you might find that they are executing it very well indeed.

    That make more sense than the Reuters article.
    Also, if Apple does eventually build a mass market vehicle, they will need a battery supplier. You may need to prepare yourselves emotionally for the likelihood that the battery supplier will be Tesla.

    I thought Tesla uses Panasonic batteries combined with their own control system.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 71 of 144
    quinney wrote: »
    For all those proclaiming doom for Tesla, here is an article debunking the FUD click bait $4000 loss per car article: http://bgr.com/2015/08/11/tesla-model-s-profits-4000/

    For people who are so sensitive to similar articles trying to make Apple look bad, you are surprisingly gullible in the case of Tesla. Try to understand their long term business plan and you might find that they are executing it very well indeed. Also, if Apple does eventually build a mass market vehicle, they will need a battery supplier. You may need to prepare yourselves emotionally for the likelihood that the battery supplier will be Tesla.

    Just in case the point was missed, that BGR story link doesn't refute the projected losses. It chalks it up to startup expenses. They're still losses if they're not profits.

    Also, Musk is planning to open his so-called "Giga-factory" to mass produce batteries. The factory will cost additional billions. These are all losses until they pay off and there is no guarantee that will happen.

    http://fortune.com/inside-elon-musks-billion-dollar-gigafactory/

    Don't get me wrong, I happen to like Musk and I'm pulling for him. I'd like nothing less than for all of his many and varied projects to succeed. If they do, it could make him the greatest businessman in history.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 72 of 144
    quinneyquinney Posts: 2,528member
    solipsismy wrote: »
    quinney wrote: »
    For all those proclaiming doom for Tesla, here is an article debunking the FUD click bait $4000 loss per car article: http://bgr.com/2015/08/11/tesla-model-s-profits-4000/

    For people who are so sensitive to similar articles trying to make Apple look bad, you are surprisingly gullible in the case of Tesla. Try to understand their long term business plan and you might find that they are executing it very well indeed.

    That make more sense than the Reuters article.
    Also, if Apple does eventually build a mass market vehicle, they will need a battery supplier. You may need to prepare yourselves emotionally for the likelihood that the battery supplier will be Tesla.

    I thought Tesla uses Panasonic batteries combined with their own control system.

    That is correct, but Tesla is building the largest battery factory in the world in Nevada. They call it the Gigafactory. It will probably be fully online well in advance of Apple needing any car batteries. The Gigafactory, the worldwide network of charging stations, many new sales and service centers, expanding production lines for the Model X and Model 3, and designing and retooling for new models are some of the areas where Tesla is spending a lot of money. All of these are to be expected for a young company in fast growth mode. If they only wanted to produce a few thousand Model Ss a year, they could be profitable right now. They have much larger ambitions, so they are not trying to make a profit at this point.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 73 of 144
    solipsismysolipsismy Posts: 5,099member
    quinney wrote: »
    That is correct, but Tesla is building the largest battery factory in the world in Nevada. They call it the Gigafactory. It will probably be fully online well in advance of Apple needing any car batteries. The Gigafactory, the worldwide network of charging stations, many new sales and service centers, expanding production lines for the Model X and Model 3, and designing and retooling for new models are some of the areas where Tesla is spending a lot of money. All of these are to be expected for a young company in fast growth mode. If they only wanted to produce a few thousand Model Ss a year, they could be profitable right now. They have much larger ambitions, so they are not trying to make a profit at this point.

    I assumed that was for rapidly increasing their current production needs of their battery array, but your comment makes it sound as if they will designing and manufacturing their own cells, too.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 74 of 144
    quinneyquinney Posts: 2,528member
    solipsismy wrote: »
    quinney wrote: »
    That is correct, but Tesla is building the largest battery factory in the world in Nevada. They call it the Gigafactory. It will probably be fully online well in advance of Apple needing any car batteries. The Gigafactory, the worldwide network of charging stations, many new sales and service centers, expanding production lines for the Model X and Model 3, and designing and retooling for new models are some of the areas where Tesla is spending a lot of money. All of these are to be expected for a young company in fast growth mode. If they only wanted to produce a few thousand Model Ss a year, they could be profitable right now. They have much larger ambitions, so they are not trying to make a profit at this point.

    I assumed that was for rapidly increasing their current production needs of their battery array, but your comment makes it sound as if they will designing and manufacturing their own cells, too.

    I don't quite understand your comment. I think the Gigafactory is intended to produce batteries for all the Tesla models (up to 500,000 per year when completed) as well as their home and business Powerwall stationary batteries. I believe Panasonic is still a partner. It is going to take years to finish, but I think the initial phase is supposed to start producing next year. It is a long term investment, rather than a short term fix. I really think they are planning to have excess capacity, to sell to other car companies, if they would just get off their asses and build a good electric car.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 75 of 144
    solipsismysolipsismy Posts: 5,099member
    quinney wrote: »
    I don't quite understand your comment. I think the Gigafactory is intended to produce batteries for all the Tesla models (up to 500,000 per year when completed) as well as their home and business Powerwall stationary batteries. I believe Panasonic is still a partner. It is going to take years to finish, but I think the initial phase is supposed to start producing next year. It is a long term investment, rather than a short term fix. I really think they are planning to have excess capacity, to sell to other car companies, if they would just get off their asses and build a good electric car.

    My question was simply: Is the Gigafactory producing batteries thereby eschewing the Panasonic batteries -or- is the Gigafactory receiving batteries from Panasonic and then building their unique array and control around them.

    If, as you state, Panasonic is still a partner, that makes me think the battery tech won't be changing much if at all when their Gigafactory goes online. I was hoping they had poured millions of dollars and 10s of thousands of man hours into creating a better battery since this year I keep hearing that Tesla isn't a "car company" but a "battery company" but that doesn't seem to be the case if it's still Panasonic's cells in every Tesla.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 76 of 144
    SpamSandwichspamsandwich Posts: 33,407member
    quinney wrote: »
    I don't quite understand your comment. I think the Gigafactory is intended to produce batteries for all the Tesla models (up to 500,000 per year when completed) as well as their home and business Powerwall stationary batteries. I believe Panasonic is still a partner. It is going to take years to finish, but I think the initial phase is supposed to start producing next year. It is a long term investment, rather than a short term fix. I really think they are planning to have excess capacity, to sell to other car companies, if they would just get off their asses and build a good electric car.

    The Tesla batteries will still be Panasonic. The Gigafactory is a joint venture, not wholly owned by Tesla. In other words, Musk is risking a lot of capital in exchange for this fast growth and if other large competitors enter the market with more competitive vehicles, it could significantly undercut Tesla's ambitions.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 77 of 144
    solipsismysolipsismy Posts: 5,099member
    The Tesla batteries will still be Panasonic. The Gigafactory is a joint venture, not wholly owned by Tesla. In other words, Musk is risking a lot of capital in exchange for this fast growth and if other large competitors enter the market with more competitive vehicles, it could significantly undercut Tesla's ambitions.

    Are you saying there is absolutely no chance this joint investment (read: risk) can work out for Tesla and Panasonic? There is risk is everything worth doing, right, including getting 1) a new car company off the ground from scratch 2) in a America and have it be both a 3) luxury and 4) all-electric vehicle. I'm glad Musk took that risk.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 78 of 144
    SpamSandwichspamsandwich Posts: 33,407member
    solipsismy wrote: »
    Are you saying there is absolutely no chance this joint investment (read: risk) can work out for Tesla and Panasonic? There is risk is everything worth doing, right, including getting 1) a new car company off the ground from scratch 2) in a America and have it be both a 3) luxury and 4) all-electric vehicle. I'm glad Musk took that risk.

    Gasoline provides much more energy in comparison to the best of the existing Li-ion batteries and there would have to be a major battery breakthrough to be more competitive and power dense. Gasoline engines are still only (reportedly) about 15% efficient, so there is a lot of room for improvement there still. Battery powered vehicles are already about 80% efficient.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 79 of 144
    tmaytmay Posts: 6,469member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by quinney View Post



    For all those proclaiming doom for Tesla, here is an article debunking the FUD click bait $4000 loss per car article: http://bgr.com/2015/08/11/tesla-model-s-profits-4000/



    For people who are so sensitive to similar articles trying to make Apple look bad, you are surprisingly gullible in the case of Tesla. Try to understand their long term business plan and you might find that they are executing it very well indeed. Also, if Apple does eventually build a mass market vehicle, they will need a battery supplier. You may need to prepare yourselves emotionally for the likelihood that the battery supplier will be Tesla.

    Going to BGR for journalistic excellence are we.

     

    Tesla is wise to continue investing into production facilities in an attempt to scale production. That is likely considered a sunk cost, and it is likely that R&D is as well. As long as investors keep supporting that, Tesla is in good shape for the long run.

     

    So then there are BOM, and separately, battery cost, plus assembly and it is likely that Tesla is still losing money per unit, but paring that loss down as they gain experience, increase volume and add lower priced models. This is what investors are keeping an eye on.

     

    In essence, Elon knows that he has to get the battery cost down, hence the separate partnership with Panasonic to create a battery manufacturing facility east of Reno, NV. That partnership has to sell lower cost batteries to other builders, and other industries, in order to scale production and achieve those cost targets. All of this seems doable, but I would be surprised if they hit breakeven for production battery by 2020. Even so, I expect the partnership to ship batteries to Tesla, and others, as soon as production starts to ramp.

     

    I believe both Tesla and Panasonic will be successful, given time and investor patience, but it will likely be the bigger automobile companies like Toyota will end up building electric vehicles in high volumes.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 80 of 144
    quinneyquinney Posts: 2,528member
    solipsismy wrote: »
    quinney wrote: »
    I don't quite understand your comment. I think the Gigafactory is intended to produce batteries for all the Tesla models (up to 500,000 per year when completed) as well as their home and business Powerwall stationary batteries. I believe Panasonic is still a partner. It is going to take years to finish, but I think the initial phase is supposed to start producing next year. It is a long term investment, rather than a short term fix. I really think they are planning to have excess capacity, to sell to other car companies, if they would just get off their asses and build a good electric car.

    My question was simply: Is the Gigafactory producing batteries thereby eschewing the Panasonic batteries -or- is the Gigafactory receiving batteries from Panasonic and then building their unique array and control around them.

    If, as you state, Panasonic is still a partner, that makes me think the battery tech won't be changing much if at all when their Gigafactory goes online. I was hoping they had poured millions of dollars and 10s of thousands of man hours into creating a better battery since this year I keep hearing that Tesla isn't a "car company" but a "battery company" but that doesn't seem to be the case if it's still Panasonic's cells in every Tesla.

    They are still working with Panasonic. They are, together, doing a lot of r&d on battery improvements. For example, they recently increased the capacity of their largest battery from 85kwh to 90kwh, without making it any bigger. I think this is the type of improvement we are likely to see. It is possible there will be some miraculous breakthrough, but
    steady incremental improvements are certain. The fact that Tesla now has several years of experience with high
    capacity automobile batteries is an asset that should not be ignored. Other car makers don't have the data.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
Sign In or Register to comment.