5 ms·

This is a clear eyed, smart move by Ford. Gives a good impression of their trajectory. For Tesla: other automaker will convert to NACS, rendering existing CCS

This is a clear eyed, smart move by Ford. Gives a good impression of their trajectory. For Tesla: other automaker will convert to NACS, rendering existing CCS chargers a relic of the past, leaving alternative charging networks in the dust and requiring massive retooling to come back. This positions Tesla as an energy provider like Shell/Chevron. Eventually I bet they'll be forced to split out the auto manufacturer from the energy vendor to avoid antitrust problems, but that will be in a while.

mrDmrTmrJ 3y ago
Why would they be forced to do that? Assuming that they 1. Charge all customers the same price at each super-charger station. (Prices will vary with time of day and different super-charger charger locations.) 2. They open up their network to everyone voluntarily. I don't see an argument for self favoring or anti-trust. What am I missing? Why do you think that outcome will happen?
- AYBABTME 3y ago
  In a world where Tesla is one of the biggest auto manufacturer AND holds a quasi monopoly on vehicle charging, I think there will be a point where governments will want Tesla Auto and Tesla Energy to not be the same, as they'll hold too many pieces of the puzzle. But that's highly speculative of course, and it's just a possible development in a scenario where Tesla ends up being incredibly successful in the way I describe. Which of course is very arguable, as people have done for years.
akira2501 3y ago
> This positions Tesla as an energy provider like Shell/Chevron. And I was worried that the "green revolution" was going to be without rent seeking corporate greed getting involved. Yay?
- MrBuddyCasino 3y ago
  If there is no reward for making superior products, who will bother making them?
  - akira2501 3y ago
    There is. It's a patent. Those expire but Tesla gave it away before that anyways. So, I guess, Tesla? Anyways.. the idea that selecting a plug would make you somehow positioned to be an "energy provider" ala Shell is just awful to me, let alone, but that anyone would seemingly be thrilled about that outcome brought out my sarcasm.
    - MrBuddyCasino 3y ago
      A patent itself is not a reward, its a cost. The value you extract out of it can be valuable, which brings us back to square one: incentives.
      - sib 3y ago
        A patent is an asset. An asset is anything that has present or future value to a company. So - being granted the patent is a reward for creating the invention and going through the process of filing the patent.
      - akira2501 3y ago
        Right.. and Tesla threw those incentives away. So, are incentives the "end all and be all" of analysis? It seems like it isn't.
    - _ea1k 3y ago
      I'm not sure what your point is here. Tesla positioned themselves as an "energy provider" by building a ton of locations. The connector being better is a separate issue. Anyone else can adopt that if they choose to.
      - akira2501 3y ago
throwaway5959 3y ago
And what about people that already own CCS cars?
- mathgeek 3y ago
  You get an adapter, per the article on Ford’s plan.
  - throwaway5959 3y ago
    Those are only being made for ford vehicles.
    - mathgeek 3y ago
      I’m not following what your point is. Since this is a discussion of hypotheticals, it’s safe to assume any change in standards would include adapters becoming available for late-model legacy vehicles.
- manarth 3y ago
  Adapters?
quintushoratius 3y ago
> This positions Tesla as an energy provider like Shell/Chevron. No, this positions Tesla to be an energy middleman. They're not finding and distributing energy, just reselling it at a markup.
- pseg134 3y ago
  There is a large firey ball in the sky called the sun. Tesla captures its energy using a technology called solar panels.
- AYBABTME 3y ago
  You call it middleman, I call it platform. Owning the platform everyone uses for charging their car is not a bad place to be. Add to this that they're working on including house solar+batteries into a national smart grid system, and they're producing their own large scale energy storage and generation technology... they're positioning themselves to be a major player in the energy industry.

mrDmrTmrJ 3y ago

Why would they be forced to do that? Assuming that they 1. Charge all customers the same price at each super-charger station. (Prices will vary with time of day and different super-charger charger locations.) 2. They open up their network to everyone voluntarily. I don't see an argument for self favoring or anti-trust. What am I missing? Why do you think that outcome will happen?

AYBABTME 3y ago
In a world where Tesla is one of the biggest auto manufacturer AND holds a quasi monopoly on vehicle charging, I think there will be a point where governments will want Tesla Auto and Tesla Energy to not be the same, as they'll hold too many pieces of the puzzle. But that's highly speculative of course, and it's just a possible development in a scenario where Tesla ends up being incredibly successful in the way I describe. Which of course is very arguable, as people have done for years.

akira2501 3y ago

> This positions Tesla as an energy provider like Shell/Chevron. And I was worried that the "green revolution" was going to be without rent seeking corporate greed getting involved. Yay?

MrBuddyCasino 3y ago
If there is no reward for making superior products, who will bother making them?
- akira2501 3y ago
  There is. It's a patent. Those expire but Tesla gave it away before that anyways. So, I guess, Tesla? Anyways.. the idea that selecting a plug would make you somehow positioned to be an "energy provider" ala Shell is just awful to me, let alone, but that anyone would seemingly be thrilled about that outcome brought out my sarcasm.
  - MrBuddyCasino 3y ago
    A patent itself is not a reward, its a cost. The value you extract out of it can be valuable, which brings us back to square one: incentives.
    - sib 3y ago
      A patent is an asset. An asset is anything that has present or future value to a company. So - being granted the patent is a reward for creating the invention and going through the process of filing the patent.
    - akira2501 3y ago
      Right.. and Tesla threw those incentives away. So, are incentives the "end all and be all" of analysis? It seems like it isn't.
  - _ea1k 3y ago
    I'm not sure what your point is here. Tesla positioned themselves as an "energy provider" by building a ton of locations. The connector being better is a separate issue. Anyone else can adopt that if they choose to.
    - akira2501 3y ago

throwaway5959 3y ago

And what about people that already own CCS cars?

mathgeek 3y ago
You get an adapter, per the article on Ford’s plan.
- throwaway5959 3y ago
  Those are only being made for ford vehicles.
  - mathgeek 3y ago
    I’m not following what your point is. Since this is a discussion of hypotheticals, it’s safe to assume any change in standards would include adapters becoming available for late-model legacy vehicles.
manarth 3y ago
Adapters?

quintushoratius 3y ago

> This positions Tesla as an energy provider like Shell/Chevron. No, this positions Tesla to be an energy middleman. They're not finding and distributing energy, just reselling it at a markup.

pseg134 3y ago
There is a large firey ball in the sky called the sun. Tesla captures its energy using a technology called solar panels.
AYBABTME 3y ago
You call it middleman, I call it platform. Owning the platform everyone uses for charging their car is not a bad place to be. Add to this that they're working on including house solar+batteries into a national smart grid system, and they're producing their own large scale energy storage and generation technology... they're positioning themselves to be a major player in the energy industry.