5 ms·

On the one hand, Apple has a lot of experience in domains where Tesla has been less than great (supply chain, manufacturing) and software is slowly becoming a k

by brmgb 7y ago

On the one hand, Apple has a lot of experience in domains where Tesla has been less than great (supply chain, manufacturing) and software is slowly becoming a key differentiator for the automobile industry so I can somewhat see where synergies might exist. On the other hand, automobile is quite far from Apple core business. I know that there is not much growth remaining in Apple key markets but still if I were a shareholder, I'm not sure I would be comfortable with Apple making such a move. I guess we are entering a new golden age for conglomerates.

NicoJuicy 7y ago
I'm not sure if supply chain optimalisation is the same as manufacturing robotics that Tesla needed though
- brmgb 7y ago
  I'm far from convinced Tesla actually needed so much robotics. Relying on robots so much might actually have been a strategic mistake due to their inexperience. It looks to me like this bet has still to pay off. Nevertheless, Apple knowledge goes a lot further than supply chain optimization. They are actually quite good at manufacturing (both manual assembly and robotics). They know how to design products optimized for large volume production. They know how to work effectively with third parties. They know how to do quality control which is extremely important for a system integrator. Apple is not a pure software company: they already have a manufacturing culture in place inside the company. What they don't have is domain specific knowledge so if they really wanted to enter the transport market, I guess buying Tesla could make sense.
screye 7y ago
As we keep getting better at operating at scale, logistics will continue economically favoring conglomerates over smaller companies. Amazon is the best example of this, and I don't see why the likes of Apple won't follow suit. Apple seems to be aggressively hiring from top institutes for their self-driving team. So, they might just have decided to go about the whole thing by developing a 1st party product instead.
djtriptych 7y ago
Traditional autos are far from Apple's core business (whatever that is. software? hardware? design?) but Tesla isn't. It's supply chain + manufacturing + software + batteries + sensor tech + gps. All things Apple has spent billions developing internally. And how many Tesla owners also own an iPhone. I bet it's something like 80%_
- brmgb 7y ago
  > Apple's core business (whatever that is. software? hardware? design?) Selling laptops and phones mostly segueing into digital services. > Tesla isn't. Sadly, it very much is. Tesla potential customers are not buying a Tesla in place of another batteries + sensor tech + gps. They are first and foremost buying a car.
  - djtriptych 7y ago
    Let's not discount Apple's history of entering and quickly dominating huge established markets. Also, Tesla already makes and sells pretty great cars. Customers are happy. The cars are incredibly safe. What do they need now that they've successfully built the parts of the business that are outside of Apple's core competencies?
  - zapzupnz 7y ago
    > Tesla potential customers are not buying a Tesla in place of another batteries + sensor tech + gps I feel like this is a poor comparison. When companies attempt to make luxury experiences affordable to the masses (yes, still more expensive, but at least within reach), the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. Of course Tesla customers aren't going out buying cars instead of batteries. But what drives people to want to purchase Teslas? They don't just want cars, they want luxury cars, they want electric cars, they want sleek and modern cars. The question is how does one build a car, make it out of the best parts so that the customer has the best experience, how does one build it inexpensively but still safely, securely, and maintaining the luxury quality. If any old car would do, they wouldn't get a Tesla, they'd get a Honda Civic. That's not Tesla's target market.
- ambicapter 7y ago

by brmgb 7y ago

NicoJuicy 7y ago

I'm not sure if supply chain optimalisation is the same as manufacturing robotics that Tesla needed though

brmgb 7y ago
I'm far from convinced Tesla actually needed so much robotics. Relying on robots so much might actually have been a strategic mistake due to their inexperience. It looks to me like this bet has still to pay off. Nevertheless, Apple knowledge goes a lot further than supply chain optimization. They are actually quite good at manufacturing (both manual assembly and robotics). They know how to design products optimized for large volume production. They know how to work effectively with third parties. They know how to do quality control which is extremely important for a system integrator. Apple is not a pure software company: they already have a manufacturing culture in place inside the company. What they don't have is domain specific knowledge so if they really wanted to enter the transport market, I guess buying Tesla could make sense.

screye 7y ago

As we keep getting better at operating at scale, logistics will continue economically favoring conglomerates over smaller companies. Amazon is the best example of this, and I don't see why the likes of Apple won't follow suit. Apple seems to be aggressively hiring from top institutes for their self-driving team. So, they might just have decided to go about the whole thing by developing a 1st party product instead.

djtriptych 7y ago

Traditional autos are far from Apple's core business (whatever that is. software? hardware? design?) but Tesla isn't. It's supply chain + manufacturing + software + batteries + sensor tech + gps. All things Apple has spent billions developing internally. And how many Tesla owners also own an iPhone. I bet it's something like 80%_

brmgb 7y ago
> Apple's core business (whatever that is. software? hardware? design?) Selling laptops and phones mostly segueing into digital services. > Tesla isn't. Sadly, it very much is. Tesla potential customers are not buying a Tesla in place of another batteries + sensor tech + gps. They are first and foremost buying a car.
- djtriptych 7y ago
  Let's not discount Apple's history of entering and quickly dominating huge established markets. Also, Tesla already makes and sells pretty great cars. Customers are happy. The cars are incredibly safe. What do they need now that they've successfully built the parts of the business that are outside of Apple's core competencies?
- zapzupnz 7y ago
  > Tesla potential customers are not buying a Tesla in place of another batteries + sensor tech + gps I feel like this is a poor comparison. When companies attempt to make luxury experiences affordable to the masses (yes, still more expensive, but at least within reach), the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. Of course Tesla customers aren't going out buying cars instead of batteries. But what drives people to want to purchase Teslas? They don't just want cars, they want luxury cars, they want electric cars, they want sleek and modern cars. The question is how does one build a car, make it out of the best parts so that the customer has the best experience, how does one build it inexpensively but still safely, securely, and maintaining the luxury quality. If any old car would do, they wouldn't get a Tesla, they'd get a Honda Civic. That's not Tesla's target market.
ambicapter 7y ago