Apple nears 'Apple Car' deal with Kia, first model might be fully autonomous enterprise ve...

2»

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 32
    larryjwlarryjw Posts: 1,031member
    One statement from this article made me question is entire premise — that the car will be fully autonomous, not designed to have a driver.

    No chance in hell any government agency, Fed or State, would allow that. 

    And, no proof whatsoever that autonomous vehicles can and will work in the various circumstances vehicles will find themselves in. 

    Okay, we’ve got some autonomous vehicles on our campus which traipse along campus delivering food to hungry dorm residents topping out at speeds of 3mph. 

    I have my doubts Apple wants to compete in this arena. 
    JWSCwatto_cobra
  • Reply 22 of 32
    Everyone is forgetting Apple invested $1B in Chinese ride-hailing service Didi Chuxing in May of 2016.  
    Apple car will initially roll out as autonomous ride sharing service in China. 
    byronlcornchipwatto_cobraFileMakerFeller
  • Reply 23 of 32
    1348513485 Posts: 347member
    I don't believe the number$ will work, with Apple owning and operating a taxi service or rent-a-car. If this type of Apple vehicle is actually true (it's a rumor after all), they will sell or lease them to taxi services and other enterprises. Immediate ROI for Apple, much less overhead involved.

    byronlwatto_cobra
  • Reply 24 of 32
    dk49dk49 Posts: 267member
    Everyone is forgetting Apple invested $1B in Chinese ride-hailing service Didi Chuxing in May of 2016.  
    Apple car will initially roll out as autonomous ride sharing service in China. 
    Are you saying that Didi Chuxing will buy all these autonomous vehicles from Apple? I don't think so. Because that will be very capital intensive for Didi Chuxing. Their ROI will take a long time. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 25 of 32
    mcdavemcdave Posts: 1,927member
    GG1 said:
    Here's my guess. If I get it wrong in three years you can make fun of me. If I get it right, you can still ridicule me. I think Apple with pursue a Car as Service strategy. In urban areas they will offer a 'membership/subscription' where you get a driverless vehicle for so many hours or so many miles a month. Higher cost gets you more access and faster response. Again, in urban areas this is a valuable and cost saving measure for consumers. Cars are a VERY inefficient use of money for those in urban areas where driving 45 miles to work isn't needed. In fact, I think in almost all cases they are an inefficient use of money. Anyway, Apple doesn't want to be Tesla. Not even Tesla wants to be Tesla anymore. There is no upside in selling cars to consumers. But a smart, forward looking, driverless service has potential when paired with a great brand, tied into your portable, wireless devices ETC. In San Francisco, New York, Boston, Los Angeles - this would make sense. I lived in one of those BIG cities and just finding's parking each night sucked not to mention driving to places and trying to valet or find parking. So that's my wild guess from 30,000 feet.
    I agree with Car as a Service after reading "autonomous" many times and now "last mile" in this article. What threw me off was the hiring of the Porsche chassis guy (thinking the focus was on performance), but Porsche have large vehicles with air suspension, so I suspect the Porsche guy will massage the Kia chassis for multiple (6+) people to ride in comfort. I am especially interested in the Apple battery and self-driving technology. This is getting interesting.
    Interesting times to launch a multi-person carrier. I hope the have a single person/ride option too.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 26 of 32
    dk49 said:
    Everyone is forgetting Apple invested $1B in Chinese ride-hailing service Didi Chuxing in May of 2016.  
    Apple car will initially roll out as autonomous ride sharing service in China. 
    Are you saying that Didi Chuxing will buy all these autonomous vehicles from Apple? I don't think so. Because that will be very capital intensive for Didi Chuxing. Their ROI will take a long time. 
    I'm saying Apple will need a willing partner to roll out an autonomous service. Nothing better than a partner you partially own in the world's largest market. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 27 of 32
    cornchipcornchip Posts: 1,949member
    A couple years ago, someone in these forums suggested that Apple’s first “car” would be a shuttle for employees. 

    I always thought that was a pretty clever thought with lots of advantages. 

    A- predefined routes = minimal risk, yet real world experimentation, data gathering and refinement.

    B- low initial production = ironing out manufacturing kinks in ramp-up to full production in a few years

    C- learn regulatory ropes without having it affect customers

    D- probably more but those were the big ones that come to mind.
    h2p
  • Reply 28 of 32
    Just crunching a few numbers.......if it is a robotaxi/ride sharing service oriented car:

    100K units initially
    I think Apple could charge a premium so I'm going to say it earns $50 per hour.
    16 hours per day at peak rate($50).
    360 days per year.

    $28.8 Billion at peak rates. Wow!!

    If this is the plan they will only be in large metro areas around the world.
    fastasleep
  • Reply 29 of 32
    Just crunching a few numbers.......if it is a robotaxi/ride sharing service oriented car:

    100K units initially
    I think Apple could charge a premium so I'm going to say it earns $50 per hour.
    16 hours per day at peak rate($50).
    360 days per year.

    $28.8 Billion at peak rates. Wow!!

    If this is the plan they will only be in large metro areas around the world.

    The cleaning and charging issues are certainly relevant and would need to be addressed.  I could see charging warehouses in each city which would be another huge expenditure.
    edited February 2021
  • Reply 30 of 32
    blastdoorblastdoor Posts: 3,278member
    Here's my guess. If I get it wrong in three years you can make fun of me. If I get it right, you can still ridicule me. I think Apple with pursue a Car as Service strategy. In urban areas they will offer a 'membership/subscription' where you get a driverless vehicle for so many hours or so many miles a month. Higher cost gets you more access and faster response. Again, in urban areas this is a valuable and cost saving measure for consumers. Cars are a VERY inefficient use of money for those in urban areas where driving 45 miles to work isn't needed. In fact, I think in almost all cases they are an inefficient use of money. Anyway, Apple doesn't want to be Tesla. Not even Tesla wants to be Tesla anymore. There is no upside in selling cars to consumers. But a smart, forward looking, driverless service has potential when paired with a great brand, tied into your portable, wireless devices ETC. In San Francisco, New York, Boston, Los Angeles - this would make sense. I lived in one of those BIG cities and just finding's parking each night sucked not to mention driving to places and trying to valet or find parking. So that's my wild guess from 30,000 feet.
    Yup — I’ve been saying for years, the business model will be Transportation as a Service.
    tmay
  • Reply 31 of 32
    blastdoorblastdoor Posts: 3,278member
    larryjw said:
    One statement from this article made me question is entire premise — that the car will be fully autonomous, not designed to have a driver.

    No chance in hell any government agency, Fed or State, would allow that. 

    And, no proof whatsoever that autonomous vehicles can and will work in the various circumstances vehicles will find themselves in. 

    Okay, we’ve got some autonomous vehicles on our campus which traipse along campus delivering food to hungry dorm residents topping out at speeds of 3mph. 

    I have my doubts Apple wants to compete in this arena. 
    “Autonomous” is more believable when paired with “last mile” and “predefined route.”
    tmay
  • Reply 32 of 32
    Here's my guess. If I get it wrong in three years you can make fun of me. If I get it right, you can still ridicule me. I think Apple with pursue a Car as Service strategy. In urban areas they will offer a 'membership/subscription' where you get a driverless vehicle for so many hours or so many miles a month. Higher cost gets you more access and faster response. Again, in urban areas this is a valuable and cost saving measure for consumers. Cars are a VERY inefficient use of money for those in urban areas where driving 45 miles to work isn't needed. In fact, I think in almost all cases they are an inefficient use of money. Anyway, Apple doesn't want to be Tesla. Not even Tesla wants to be Tesla anymore. There is no upside in selling cars to consumers. But a smart, forward looking, driverless service has potential when paired with a great brand, tied into your portable, wireless devices ETC. In San Francisco, New York, Boston, Los Angeles - this would make sense. I lived in one of those BIG cities and just finding's parking each night sucked not to mention driving to places and trying to valet or find parking. So that's my wild guess from 30,000 feet.
    That makes sense - and is prob. their best option - something that actually disrupts the market - or actually creates a new market

    Because there is no way they are making an expensive luxury consumer car partnered with Kia

    And there's no way they are doing a everyman consumer car
Sign In or Register to comment.