Battery improvement may not be linear. CATL announced a month ago that it would be mass producing by the end of this year a condensed matter battery for aviation and EV use with an energy density of 500 Watt hours/kg. That is about 2X the energy density of the battery in the Model Y.
Seems like there are promising new battery chemistries at the final stages of development. Just a matter of time before range becomes not much of a factor. Apparently it isnāt much to VW as it will introduce in 2024 the decidedly non-aerodynamic VW van in electrified form.
However, when it comes to perceptions, a 2022 survey found that **consumers feel more secure using Apple devices than Android ones** . In addition, among those surveyed who experienced security breaches, 75% of iOS users said that they were able to fully recover their data compared to only 55% of Android users.
You'll need some technical proficiency and customization experience to utilize Android's platform, which not all smartphone users have. On the contrary, **iOS devices have a straightforward, user-friendly interface** .
Whereas Apple designs their own custom chips, optimized to power their own custom hardware, which runs its own custom OS. Thatās the biggest advantage Apple has over almost every Android manufacturer today. They control the hardware, software, and chipsets included in their products. And itās why Android devices might have more processing cores or more RAM, but is still smoked by the cheapest iOS devices. All that raw power isnāt being optimized by the hardware or operating system because Qualcomm; the chip manufacturer, isnāt on the same page as Samsung; the smartphone manufacturer, who isnāt on the same page as Google; who provides the Android operating system.
But the benefits of Appleās all-encompassing approach to their products doesnāt stop there. Have you ever noticed that there are a lot more high quality, low cost apps available on the iPhone or iPad compared to Android smartphones or Android tablets? Itās because developers prefer creating app for iOS over Android. They only need to optimize their apps for a handful of iPhones and iPads, the vast majority of which are running one version of iOS. Rather than ensuring their app can run on thousands of different Android products running several different versions of Android.
People, at least some people, are willing to pay-up for what they perceive to be better quality (in whatever dimension that means to them.) There is surely a part that is āstatusā, but ābelonging to a cultā is not part of it.
If GM, Ford etc use Teslaās OS the passengers in the compartment use Teslaās version of OS, Tesla search portal, Tesla entertainment, Tesla work toolsā¦etcā¦and Tesla router OSā¦
Tesla goes vertical, horizontal and ubiquitous. To license Teslaās OS will mean Ford and GM have little to no rights to own it. Calling it āopensourceā is a farce. Cheaper for Ford today but the market wont be Fordās.
There are three things to sell with EV. The EV body and motor is one obvious thing. The Battery is the next. The entertainment/PC is going to be the final most profitable part to sell. The last takes everyoneās time and has them buying stuff while in the EV.
That brings up a question I have been pondering: does Ford want to make hardware at all?
Automakers have been swapping parts for ages. There are Saturn SUVs running around with Honda engines. For a while, Ford was pasting Mercury badges on Nissan-built minivans.
Jim Hackett, when CEO of Ford, made a telling comment, when asked if Ford would bail out of Europe, like GM did. Hackett said there would be āFord brandedā product in Europe, not āFordā product. Not necessarily Ford built, but vehicles with a Ford badge on them.
Some years ago, Ford contracted to use a VW EV platform in Europe.
Fordās plan for India, was to sell all their physical assets to Mahindra, then paste Ford badges on Mahindra product.
Ford has contracted to use Tesla chargers.
Does Ford really want to make hardware, or does Farley look at the PC market, and, as you said, decide all the profit is in the software, especially, as he has said, software that he can charge a monthly subscription fee, for the life of the car?
Not sure I would go that far, but this isnāt a great time for Ford EVs. On the plus side, Ford has significantly ramped up Mach E production, making almost 12,000 of the vehicle in April. On the downside, Mach E sales are down 44% year on year for the month of May. Currently, Ford is on pace to sell just 17% of the Mach Es it will produce in 2023. Worth noting in comparison that Tesla Model Y US sales in Q1 2023 increased 79% year on year. Even the Model 3 increased 11%.
To give an idea of the problems Ford faces with the Mach E, it will be introduced in Australia this year and is planned to be priced about $6000 USD more than the cheapest Model Y. Good luck with that.
The F150 lightening is doing well though. Ford can be successful as long as it doesnāt try to go head-to-head with Tesla.
I recall a year or two ago that there was a lot of talk about how the introduction of a ton of new EV models from OEMs was going to pose an immediate challenge to Tesla. Turns out that as of Q1 2023 Tesla market share has increased in North America, increased in Europe, and even increased in China, all to new highs. China is particularly impressive as all the other major nonChinese automakers have seen their sales cratering in the land of Xi.
Itās pretty remarkable how successful one can be with one or two really good car models.
And here perhaps is the beginning of the trend toward a mass market ātoaster on wheelsā BEV. A modest beginning to be sure (it is not even a car really), but a thousand mile journey begins with the first step.
Tesla hinting at a cheaper model to come is locking the others out of the market. People will wait instead of buying something else. Meanwhile Tesla themselves have demand now.
