Apple Car is a matter of 'when, not if' claims analyst
Wedbush analyst Daniel Ives asserts that an Apple Car is coming, and predicts that it will be by 2026.
(Credit: AppleInsider)
Apple has yet to even acknowledge the rumors that it is developing an Apple Car. Yet it's an open secret since the company has applied for at least hundreds of related patents, down to a recent one concerning seatbelts.
The company has also been recently linked to a self-driving test facility in Arizona. Plus there have been periodic reports of major staff changes on the project, such as losing managers, engineers, or even a shakeup of the whole team.
Speaking to CNBC on Friday morning, Wedbush analyst Daniel Ives says the only question over the Apple Car is "when, not if."
Ives has actually said that exact phrase before. Back in 2021, he wrote in a note to investors that it was a matter of "when not if" Apple would enter the electric vehicle market.
Wedbush's Ives was responding to reports at the time of Apple's various discussions with potential car partners, such as Hyundai, or separately Nissan.
The analyst described these discussions as a "dating game." He said then -- February 2021 -- that there was at least an 85% chance of Apple formally announcing a strategic car partnership within the following three to six months.
That obviously didn't happen, but now Ives predicts an Apple Car launch by 2026. That backs up some previous reports by Ming-Chi Kuo that said a projected 2025 launch date had fallen behind.
Even in 2021, though, Apple had reportedly been working on a car for many years. It's possible that it started in 2014, which would mean before the first Apple Watch was released, though there could now easily be a decade of work put into the still unannounced Apple Car.
Read on AppleInsider
Comments
Launching it just because they’ve worked on it for long time would be against Apple’s DNA
if we must continue building roads and highways for multi-passenger vehicles that usually transport one person per vehicle, then there should be as many continuous millions of miles of walkable and bikeable passages as there are roads and highways built; and all parking lots should have at least 25 percent soft scape with trees and solar panels to provide shade to help reduce the heat island effect. apple's corporate office is an example (not the only one) of how all developers from small to large should think when they "develop". we can do better, but is anyone else willing to think and do outside of the box?
Also, AppleTV didn't end up being the whole TV because Apple couldn't get all of the other content providers to agree to integrate into an AppleTV standard. If they were going to be the TV, it was going to be a device that seamlessly provided you with content from your cable provider, from streamers like Netflix and HULU, from things like YouTube, for purchased content, and on-air TV. For the user, it would all just work. Without that, they made a box that's better than the other boxes and dongles, but it doesn't require everyone else to play ball for it to be usable. You'll note that on your ATV box, HULU and Amazon integrate into the Apple search and 'Up Next' feed, but Netflix refuses. Xfinity only made their cable content available in an app a few months ago. When HBO became "max," their app dropped Apple's API and went with their own crappier one. Apple wasn't going to be the seamlessly integrated TV device unless they could do it all the way, all their way. None of this is analogous to their situation in developing a car.
Why wouldn't Apple produce an entire car? Apple has thirteen times the market capitalization of Toyota, the largest "established" automaker, and 55 times the market cap of GM. There are many new EV companies coming on line, and they don't have Apple's resources. See Fisker, Rivian, Lucid, and even DeLorean is apparently resurfacing as an EV company.
It seems entirely likely that Apple may contract with another company to manufacture their car, just like they do for production of iPhones and iPads, but they will not launch a new initiative as Apple Car and simply have it be CarPlay on steroids, living as an insert inside other companies' cars. That would subject Apple's reputation to the whims of other companies' design and manufacturing decisions. That's not how they do business.
Such interconnected vehicles could actually improve traffic efficiency. For instance, if there were enough connected cars mixed into a given section of highway traffic, they could actually serve to clear traffic jams by making subtle adjustments to speed that would intuitively cue other drivers as well, and safely erase the stop-and-go effect that lingers on the highway long after an obstruction has been cleared. Interconnected cars could respond with greater agility to choose detours and alternate routes that not only improve travel time for the individual, but for the whole of traffic flow as well. It's not necessary to control all of the cars on the road to do this. This is just one imagined way an Apple Car could be Apple-like, by entering an existing product category with a new paradigm. You'd buy an Apple Car not just because it's an Apple-branded thing, but because it would actually do the job of getting you from point A to point B more efficiently.
Video below:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-1VAkXNTR1Y
It would be their own service, not a 3rd party.
Apple did invest $1 billion in "Didi Chuxing", a Chinese ride sharing service in 2016. They also operate their own corporate service in and around their headquarters in Cupertino. So it is a market they're currently interested in.
I basically have two requirements for a new EV: bidirectional charging (V2G) and price at about 50k. There is one major feature I would like, but could maybe live without: solar PV on all the appropriate surfaces (hood, roof, trunk and dash). If Apple offers this, I'm all in.
That would be great, but new roads/pavement for both cars, bikes and people need to be made from materials that produce less carbon during manufacturing and installation. Cement is one of the highest CO2 producing building materials. Oddly, asphalt - partcularly if it is made with recycled old asphalt, reused aggregates and even recycled cement, has a much lower CO2 output. Solutions are there, but we haven't yet begun using them effectively.
One thing I would say regarding walking and biking is that it isn't feasible in the US south. You aren't going to be biking or walking a few miles in 100 °F summer climates. For the past 3 weeks in my locale, wet-bulb temperatures have been in the 92, 93 °F range for 2 to 3 hours in the afternoon. That's wet-bulb temperature. It's only going to get worse.
I'm thinking of proto-domed cities in hot climates. There won't be a gigantic dome, but like a reverse "Silo", more and more buildings will have indoor parks, indoor gardens, indoor chicken farms, just sticking up into the sky instead of into the ground. In dense urban areas with these types of buildings, they will gradually be interconnected by air conditioned trains, bike and walking tunnels, etc. So, proto-indoor living 24x7.
But anyways, an EV with maximally sized PV and V2G would be awesome for people with houses. The vehicle will depreciate in value, but it is also saving the owner money on electricity while providing power backup for the rolling grid issues in the future. Come on, Apple.
As for Apple's corporate ride service in Cupertino, Disney operates their own monorail in Florida, but I don't think that means they're interested in getting into the public transit business. The services that Apple operates all function as reasons to buy Apple hardware. Apple Music and AppleTV+ have apps that run on other brand devices, but even that is simply done as a way to draw new customers into the Apple ecosystem to get them to buy Apple devices. An Apple-operated ride share service would do none of that. Nothing is impossible, but the probability of Apple operating a ride share service is extremely low.