4 ms·
There are still two arguments to be made that electric vehicles themselves are a threat to the German auto industry, independent of cost or where the vehicles a
by syncsynchalt 7y ago
There are still two arguments to be made that electric vehicles themselves are a threat to the German auto industry, independent of cost or where the vehicles are made:
1) There are an order of magnitude fewer parts, due to replacement
of the engine with battery + motor. The part count of ICE engines
was the reason we have such a robust chain of suppliers, which
are now threatened. There are also jobs lost due to loss of
assembly and integration work.
2) Several German (and Japanese) auto manufacturers rest on the
reputation of having the best engines in the business. Electric
vehicles do not have engines. The brand halo from their engine
expertise doesn't transfer directly to EVs.
- LoSboccacc 7y agoGermans are famous for interiors and safety features, those translate well. also continuous improvement of their lines, I don't like the golf personally but when you get in one you feel the years of iteration and improvements. also transmission, and as a matter of fact they're already experimenting with that on the Porsche Taycan, produced in Germany and that's already doing 3k car/month without months of drama leading up the deliveries. the rest is just an elaborate broken window fallacy, the economy will suffer not if they just shift the supply chain, as long as the job will be there.
- petre 7y ago> Germans are famous for interiors Have you ever seen an Alpha Romeo interior? Their cars ae unreliable but look great, inside or outside. Porsche is a niche luxury sports car, comparable maybe to Ferari.
- Animats 7y agoThe supply chain companies in Europe seem to be prepared. Continental has parts for gas, electric, hybrid, and Diesel cars. Continental announced parts for self-driving, offering flash LIDAR, ruggedized computers, and actuators. But nobody got self-driving to production and ordered a few hundred thousand of those units. Must be frustrating being too early.
- sbierwagen 7y agohttps://www.gwern.net/Timing https://www.gwern.net/Timing >Why is their knowledge so useless? Why are success and failure so intertwined in the tech industry? The right moment cannot be known exactly in advance, so attempts to forecast will typically be off by years or worse. For many claims, there is no way to invest in an idea except by going all in and launching a company, resulting in extreme variance in outcomes, even when the idea is good and the forecasts correct about the (eventual) outcome. >Progress can happen and can be foreseen long before, but the details and exact timing due to bottlenecks are too difficult to get right. Launching too early means failure, but being conservative & launching later is just as bad because regardless of forecasting, a good idea will draw overly-optimistic researchers or entrepreneurs to it like moths to a flame: all get immolated but the one with the dumb luck to kiss the flame at the perfect instant, who then wins everything, at which point everyone can see that the optimal time is past. All major success stories overshadow their long list of predecessors who did the same thing, but got unlucky. So, ideas can be divided into the overly-optimistic & likely doomed, or the fait accompli. On an individual level, ideas are worthless because so many others have them too—‘multiple invention’ is the rule, and not the exception. Progress, then, depends on the ‘unreasonable man’.