Are you talking about those new self walking shoes? I’d like two pair!
Mike
2 Likes
That is clearly where the auto industry thinks things are headed, especially with their trend toward a business model of charging a subscription fee to use features of the car, just like we have to koff up each year to keep using Quicken, or an antivirus package (I’m really old, remember when Norton offered free updates for the life of the product).
Automakers are also eliminating most of the physical knobs and switches, replacing them with a central screen, or two. Seems the auto industry figures people want their cars to work like their phones, so, to use the features of the car, you now have to wade through menus on a touchscreen. A few years ago, Microsoft figured people wanted their PCs to work like their phones, and spawned Windows 8. We know how that worked out.
Steve
Part of that trend, however, is justifiable from the mfg standpoint. Buttons require labor to install, to connect to wires. And they break. But I prefer buttons for a car, so that I don’t take eyes off road.
The auto industry is changing. The question that this board is debating is whether this change will be evolutionary or revolutionary. I obviously think it will be the latter. Take the discussion about Ferraris as an example. The more conservative here believe that even when AI does the driving people will still want to own Ferraris for the status. I think the success Tesla has had in competing with the luxury brands indicate that this is not likely to be true.
Despite their strong, high-status branding, BMW, Mercedes, and Porsche all rapidly lost market share to Tesla. So much for old school status. I think this is because the new status symbol is technology, and Tesla is seen as the tech leader. Tesla had doubled down on this by not bothering to update the exterior of their models very much. Instead, they periodically upgrade the performance by updating the software. That is a radical change from the traditional OEM strategy of changing body styles every 3-5 years to boost sales. Tech over style.
I guess it is possible that Goofy and albaby are correct that people will choose their autonomous vehicles based on tail fins, spoilers, and the hood ornament, but I doubt it. I think it will be based on which vehicle has the longest range, fastest charge time, the most sophisticated work/entertainment features, and the best ability to maneuver through traffic and find parking. In other words, it will be about the battery and the software.
1 Like
Well, I have offered before that I think Tesla is a cult, fwiw, I think Apple is a cult too. Ford and GM are not cults, so they will need to think up some way to appeal to customers.
Speaking of Ford, saw this laffer of a press release from them today:
According to the company, Dion will oversee the global deployment of methodologies and tools based on Lean manufacturing and related concepts, capabilities that are central to realizing the value-creation and growth potential of the company’s Ford+ plan.
gag, what a pile of MBA buzzword nonsense. If Ford hasn’t figured out lean manufacturing, after 40 years, there is no hope that this guy can do any better.
1 Like
Well, thanks for misstating my argument. It’s that I don’t think there are going to be autonomous cars, at least in my lifetime, in yours, or probably in your childrens’.
[I need to edit this: Yes there will be autonomous cars, heck there already are. I don’t think they are going to destroy - or even fundamentally change the auto market.]
While there will be changes in the automotive industry (as there have been for 100 years) those will be in specific conditions and for specific purposes. For instance, I see it in inner-city, high density areas, where parking is already a nightmare and the cost of ownership is high. For suburbanites, not really. While they may use TaaS from time to time, they will own cars because they want and need them.
Millenials, once the largest cohort of Uber users, for instance, is (belatedly) now the largest group of car buyers. They’re moving from high density to white picket fence living and finding that waiting around is OK in the city where rent-a-drivers are plentiful, but not so much fun in the suburbs, especially if you have multiple errands to run on a single day on your weekend. Whether it’s a human driver or not, I expect that will continue.
Note: I am not saying there’s won’t be some sort of generic taxicab service available, just that it is not going to be the end of the automotive world as we know it.
Big surprise. They lost market share when Lexus and Infiniti entered the market too. Tesla had the cool factor, and still does for some, but that rarely lasts forever. (Apple is an outlier in that respect, and has a middleware lock-in that I don’t see as exclusive to Tesla. Others not named Tesla are working on, in some cases prototyping self driving cars, so the future is a blank slate. That’s not to say Tesla won’t do well, it very well may. I just don’t see a reason it will own the market to the exclusion of everything else.
2 Likes
Who said that? I don’t think people choose their vehicles today based on tail fins, spoilers, or the hood ornament. But they do choose their vehicles based on the body design, interior appointments, quality of fit and finish, amenities (like the work/entertainment features you describe, but not just software), and reliability. Which is why there’s such an incredible variety of vehicle segments, brands, and styles in the automotive market…literally hundreds of different cars of all types and prices and styles. Some people want pickup trucks, some want large SUV’s, some want small hatchbacks, some want midsize sedans.
That’s not going to change, if we don’t move to MaaS. From your post above:
…says the guy posting an article from 2004. Talk about being lost in the past! But apart from that cheap joke, what’s amazing about the article you linked is how wrong it was. As this discussion itself proves, automobiles are still incredibly varied and individualized and diverse. Which is why you’re projecting that their standardization will happen, not that is has happened over the two decades since that article.
Meanwhile, though, it’s cellphones that have become homogenized - almost entirely decoupled from individualizing features. Almost every cellphone has converged onto a single form factor (screen-maximizing candybar). Close to 90% of all cell phones in the U.S. are one of two types - an iPhone or a Galaxy. Those individuating ringtones that the youths were into back in 2004? Vanished from a multi-billion dollar industry to nearly nothing. Young people don’t express themselves with their cellphone choices.
But cars? Cars are still as varied as parasitoid wasps. And they’re going to continue to be, as long as people own their own cars - even if they drive themselves. As Goofy points out, as young people enter the car market with gusto, they are showing the same desire for variety in their vehicle choices that prior generations did.
4 Likes
Once again, the mists of nostalgia are preventing you from recognizing some very clear trends indicating the opposite.
A recent study showed that Millennials are driving a respectable 8% less than Generation X and 9% less than young Boomers.
Furthermore, teens have been delaying getting their drivers license with that trend extending now for several decades. In 1983 46% of 16 year olds and 80% of 18 year olds had obtained a license. By 2018 those numbers declined to 26% and 61%.
Sure, the younger generations will eventually buy cars, but only because they have to. America is not designed to be friendly for the car-less. But there is little evidence that Generation Z has any greater desire to drive. The numbers are more consistent with the younger generations increasingly seeing cars as a necessary hassle, rather than an object of desire.
All of which makes me think that if technology provides a viable option to car ownership, like robotaxies, a lot of people will make the switch. And even if pessimists like Goofy are right and autonomous driving doesn’t happen I think the golden era of the car as a status symbol is coming to an end. Americans today buy pickup trucks and SUVs. When asked why the most common reasons given are utility and safety. Style doesn’t come into it much. Not like the old days when drivers lusted for muscle cars and convertibles. To be honest, I think a major appeal of the SUV is that it is the only vehicle the obese can drive comfortably, and we are after all an obese nation.
I think you are missing the forest for the trees. The cell phone has to be evaluated as a package with the multitude of Apps and accessories that make it such a powerful device. The cell phone can do so many things that for many, using it for communication has become a secondary function.
It is that power that makes the cell phone a much more potent status symbol than a car. It is not even close. There is much more media interest with new phones than new cars, unless that car is a Tesla. Kids are much more likely to talk about their phone than their car.
Only a quarter of 16 year olds care about getting their driver’s license. But I bet almost all feel that that their phone is an absolute necessity.
This is true. But of the 91% or 92% that are driving as much as boomers did, what kind of cars are they choosing to buy? Driving less may imply lots of things, like “mostly working from home”, “not working”, “choosing to live in a village-like place that is pedestrian friendly”, “city living with good public transit”, etc. But I don’t see how it implies “not wanting variety in the ‘personal vehicle’ consumer product category”.
Well, you are not surprised to find that I have issues with your conclusions. Several, in fact.
- The study cited is only one of many, and some show the opposite. (Linked below.) But I acknowledge there are several trends going on which might make it appear so: millennials are staying in urban environments slightly longer, making their need for a car slightly lower. The entire generation was affected by the 2008 fiasco, which has led them to postpone both car ownership and home ownership longer than boomers did at the same age. This is not because they chose to, but economic necessity dictated it. And finally, yes there are some trend lines changing things ever so slowly: more bike paths, more walking to work in an urban core, even modestly better mass transit options in some areas. But overall, millennials want cars just like boomers did.
- Your conclusion requires “extrapolation to infinity”. I remember in 1998 when people said “there won’t be stores anymore because everyone will shop at Amazon” or wherever. Yet there is more retail space than there was in 1998, and construction crews and cranes continue to multiply. People want cars, people are always going to want personal transportation which is personal. Mass transit served a big need when economics dictated zero cars or one car per family. That is no longer true for most, and Uber or TaaS isn’t going to replace all - or even a significant fraction of that.
- Perhaps not for you, but I assure you if you talk to people at the automobile companies, “style” is a huge part of what sells cars, given that mostly utility and safety are roughly equal across the industry,
4 Likes
I might have told this story before, but my BIL was an airbag engineer. He has many maddening stories about the auto industry, but one his main gripes was that the “style guys” dictated literally everything. Every design feature had to bend to their will.
4 Likes
I think it is more the case that millennials need cars just like boomers did. After all, America is built on the assumption that people own cars. But I don’t believe Millennials love cars the way boomers did. Cars are not as great a part of the Millennial psyche or ego or self-worth. The romanticism of tooling down Rte 66 or cruising down main street no longer exists. You and albaby may periodically sing “Greased Lightenin’” in your muscle shirts, but that time has passed. The car is becoming more and more a utilitarian tool, like a washing machine or lawn mower.
What this means is that if a viable alternative to personal car ownership comes around, I think a lot of people will adopt it.
I mean, no one gets excited when the new car models come out. In contrast, lots of young folks get excited when the new cell phone models arrive. Your average 16 year old today is far less excited about cars than his counterparts were when LBJ was president.
I know the older generation believes that. But is it really true? The biggest selling vehicles in the US are pickups. Is that all about style or utility? How much of a style difference is there really between an F150, a Silverado, and a Tacoma?
I think it noteworthy that Tesla is not trying very hard to expand its model choices or change the outward appearance of the ones they have, yet their products continue to outsell the competition. Also noteworthy that the world’s biggest car company, VW, is substantially reducing its model offerings and is moving to a single platform for all its divisions.
And they aren’t the only OEM to do this. As firms electrify they are significantly reducing the number of options offered. The trend for awhile now seems to be toward simplicity over a multitude of styles. Apparently style doesn’t stimulate demand enough to be worth the cost.
I’m old, but I ain’t no boomer - and neither I nor any of my peer cohort had any emotional attachment to our cars.
What I find ironic (in a fun way) about this conversation is that to my ears, you’re the one who’s being rather nostalgic. Y’see, the arguments you’re making are a little old-fashioned. It was very much in vogue in urban planning circles about 15-20 years ago to predict that younger generations were going to take a hard turn away from driving generally, and caring about cars at all in particular. Like the 2004 Economist article you cited. They would be more focused on the internet world, or would have lasting preferences for co-housing or ride-sharing, or rebuff the suburbs.
But while there has been some very modest reduction in driving among younger generations, the types of major changes people were predicting just never materialized. The light vehicle fleet is larger than ever. Miles driven have almost completely caught up to pre-pandemic levels. The suburbs grew. Millennials and Gen Z delayed several life steps along the way to household formation, but they eventually got there.
That said, I wasn’t really arguing that maybe Transportation as a Service will never happen. Maybe TaaS will take over private ownership. My point is that if it doesn’t happen - if people continue to primarily own their own cars - then we’re not likely to see the kind of homogenization of vehicles that you’re forecasting. It’s been at least three or four decades since Americans had emotional love affairs with their cars, but massive variety in our vehicle fleet persists. The things that have made people want a diverse array of vehicle choices - different needs, different budgets, different style preferences - have continued. And that’s not likely to change.
6 Likes
Ironically, the one eliciting the most luvvies these days is Tesla, and you cannot argue with those who are under the influence. It’s like the days of the Mustang vs GTO or something.
8 Likes
Truer words have never been spoken! There is a word for being ‘under the influence’ but it eludes me at present.
JimA
Mesmerized?
DB2
20, 19
1 Like
No, that’s not it - mesmerized is more hypnotic. The word is on the tip of my tongue; I think it begins with a ‘c’.
JimA
Convinced?
Confused?
Connived?
Captured?
Committed?
Corralled?
Cornered?
Captivated?
C•••••••ed?
The Captain
2 Likes
I’m thinking “cult”.
Steve
3 Likes