3 ms·

The article is paywalled, so I'm not sure if they cover this. I don't love a company owning two competing verticals when those verticals are impacted by network

by slg 6y ago

The article is paywalled, so I'm not sure if they cover this. I don't love a company owning two competing verticals when those verticals are impacted by network effects. Shell's gas business becomes less valuable the more they build out their EV business and vice versa. It creates a big potential conflict. What are the odds that a company like Shell would make the the decision that benefits society and prioritizes the EV business over their fossil fuel business?

rlpb 6y ago
I understand your concern. On the other hand though, if fossil fuel based business is going to shrink massively over the next few decades and their entire business resolves around this, switching while carrying across their brand and relevant expertise seems like a perfectly sensible thing for their shareholders to do.
- slg 6y ago
  It isn't about what is sensible for the business. It is about what is sensible for society. These fossil fuel companies have routinely put their own short term financial interests above that of the planet. Maybe they have learned their lesson and will fully commit to a cleaner future. Maybe they will drag their feet on their EV business in order to give their gasoline business a few more great years. A majority of the legacy players in this space have a history of ignoring or actively slowing down the transition from ICE vehicles to EVs. If I was the UK government, I would need some guarantee that Shell wouldn't do this before I allowed this purchase to go through.
notahacker 6y ago
> What are the odds that a company like Shell would make the the decision that benefits society and prioritizes the EV business over their fossil fuel business? As certain as anything in business in the UK, since the UK government has a timeline to ban the sale of new fossil fuel powered vehicles, and no such plan to ban EVs.
- jaggs 6y ago
  Hmm...I'm not sure you're 100% correct there. It seems likely that the long term goal will be to switch from private ownership of cars, EV or not, and switch to automated roaming vehicles like personal electric taxi/buses wherever possible. Cities cannot absorb many more vehicles? It seems somewhat similar to CD ownership vs streaming?
  - notahacker 6y ago
    I'm 100% certain the UK government's actual plan to force all new cars to be electric in a few year's time is more of an influence on a fossil fuel supplier acquiring UK car charging networks than your own speculation about a post-car world. Sure, there's no certainty the world won't be restructured to allow everybody to pool AGI taxis, but that's not really a factor in Shell backing EVs against the petroleum it made its fortune with.
imtringued 6y ago
100% guaranteed if there is a carbon tax.
Zanni 6y ago
If they're prevented from entering a competing vertical (electric charging), doesn't that guarantee a conflict? They'd be putting everything into protecting their existing vertical (oil and gas).

by slg 6y ago

rlpb 6y ago

I understand your concern. On the other hand though, if fossil fuel based business is going to shrink massively over the next few decades and their entire business resolves around this, switching while carrying across their brand and relevant expertise seems like a perfectly sensible thing for their shareholders to do.

slg 6y ago
It isn't about what is sensible for the business. It is about what is sensible for society. These fossil fuel companies have routinely put their own short term financial interests above that of the planet. Maybe they have learned their lesson and will fully commit to a cleaner future. Maybe they will drag their feet on their EV business in order to give their gasoline business a few more great years. A majority of the legacy players in this space have a history of ignoring or actively slowing down the transition from ICE vehicles to EVs. If I was the UK government, I would need some guarantee that Shell wouldn't do this before I allowed this purchase to go through.

notahacker 6y ago

> What are the odds that a company like Shell would make the the decision that benefits society and prioritizes the EV business over their fossil fuel business? As certain as anything in business in the UK, since the UK government has a timeline to ban the sale of new fossil fuel powered vehicles, and no such plan to ban EVs.

jaggs 6y ago
Hmm...I'm not sure you're 100% correct there. It seems likely that the long term goal will be to switch from private ownership of cars, EV or not, and switch to automated roaming vehicles like personal electric taxi/buses wherever possible. Cities cannot absorb many more vehicles? It seems somewhat similar to CD ownership vs streaming?
- notahacker 6y ago
  I'm 100% certain the UK government's actual plan to force all new cars to be electric in a few year's time is more of an influence on a fossil fuel supplier acquiring UK car charging networks than your own speculation about a post-car world. Sure, there's no certainty the world won't be restructured to allow everybody to pool AGI taxis, but that's not really a factor in Shell backing EVs against the petroleum it made its fortune with.

imtringued 6y ago

100% guaranteed if there is a carbon tax.

Zanni 6y ago

If they're prevented from entering a competing vertical (electric charging), doesn't that guarantee a conflict? They'd be putting everything into protecting their existing vertical (oil and gas).