Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Sunday January 28 2018, @06:31PM   Printer-friendly
from the johnny-cabs dept.

[...] The most important reason for GM's comeback, though, is its success in convincing investors that it is a leader not just among established carmakers, but among tech firms, too. It has rapidly accelerated from the position of an also-ran in the field of autonomous vehicles to apparent leader. A scorecard issued annually by Navigant, a consultancy, puts GM ahead of the AV pack of carmakers and tech firms, with Alphabet's Waymo in second place.

That GM is ahead of Silicon Valley's risk-takers may seem surprising. But earlier investments, which were once looked on with scepticism, seem to be paying off. Alan Batey, GM's president for North America, points to the manufacturing of mass-market long-range EVs, where the firm has a lead. The Chevy Bolt, the world's first such vehicle, has been on sale for over a year, beating Tesla's Model 3 and the new Nissan LEAF to market.

The Bolt is supposed to be the basis for an ambitious autonomous ride-sharing business. On January 12th GM announced the latest version of its Cruise AV, a Bolt-based robotaxi without a steering wheel or pedals. GM plans to use it to launch a commercial scheme in several cities, starting next year. Rival tech firms and carmakers are only running, or are planning to launch, small test projects.

When GM paid $1bn in 2016 for Cruise, an artificial-intelligence startup, many analysts wondered whether it was throwing away money. But the marriage of cutting-edge technology and large-scale manufacturing seems to be paying off. The carmaker has learned to be more nimble; Cruise has picked up how to make its fiddly technology robust enough for the open road. As a result, GM can now mass-produce self-driving cars, says Dan Ammann, second-in-command to Ms Barra. Scale will help steeply to reduce the cost of sensors, which are the key components of an AV.

The firm is being rewarded because, unlike other carmakers, it has assembled all the parts of the puzzle you need to build new transport services, says Stephanie Brinley of IHS Markit, a consultancy. But even if GM is no longer a dinosaur, risks remain. In particular, it may be too bullish in its estimate of the market for robotaxis and it may be placing too much faith in the benefits of being the first to market.

[...] Critics think that GM may have accelerated too swiftly and that it will have to endure years of losses before robotaxis take off. Even if things move fast, points out Berenberg, another bank, GM may not be the one to benefit. The main constraint in growing a ride-hailing business now is acquiring drivers. But when these are eliminated, capital will be the only limit. And that could mean huge fleets of robotaxis chasing passengers, forcing prices down. Riders may then choose a brand they recognise, such as Uber and Lyft, rather than Maven, GM's ride-hailing business.

If so, being first would confer little advantage. And yet, if carmakers do not want to accept their fate passively, they have little choice but to remodel themselves. The outsized Silverado and the sensor-packed Cruise AV show that GM has the present in hand—and that it is at least doing its best to safeguard its future.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 4, Interesting) by jelizondo on Sunday January 28 2018, @07:06PM (3 children)

    by jelizondo (653) Subscriber Badge on Sunday January 28 2018, @07:06PM (#629540) Journal

    Certainly being first to market does not translate into a profitable business, but on the other hand, competitors do not have the advantages that GM enjoys.

    Let’s see, Waymo, no manufacturing experience or capacity for large production runs. Of course, Google could get some large manufacturer (either in the U.S. or Asia) to make their cars; this would be my bet and it might be interesting to see if Hyundai, Fiat-Chrysler or Toyota can work together with Google.

    Uber and Lyft? Give me a break, they don’t manufacture anything at all, basically all they have is an app and mind-share. If they, as the TFA suggests, start big on the robotaxi business, where will they get thousands of robotaxis? It might be GM selling to them the cars, so GM wins.

    Tesla? I love Tesla and Musk, but Musk has his finger in too many pies and with the Model 3 late (again) one can doubt that they can grow fast enough to take on GM.

    Interesting times ahead, indeed.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Interesting=2, Total=2
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   4  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 28 2018, @09:46PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 28 2018, @09:46PM (#629590)

    Waymo had their koala cars on the roads, but their test fleet is almost exclusively Chrysler vans, and they must work closely with the manufacturer for their level of integration.

  • (Score: 2) by opinionated_science on Sunday January 28 2018, @11:41PM

    by opinionated_science (4031) on Sunday January 28 2018, @11:41PM (#629632)

    a good analysis. But the murky reporting of these things by vested interests, suggests that Tesla may yet succeed.

    He's managed to exploit the exponential effect of modern computing - and more importantly, changed the exponent of manufacture.

    Of course, we'd all like to see a smooth delivery... but recalibrating one's expectation with the *massive* inertia of the established industries, suggests they are running scared.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 29 2018, @07:31AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 29 2018, @07:31AM (#629736)

    Musk has his finger in too many pies

      'pies' is now another lingo for 'asses'?