5 ms·

I'm not sure I follow your logic. Let's assume that you're correct: Tesla achieves FSD in the next decade, and it automates billions of daily man hours. That's

I'm not sure I follow your logic. Let's assume that you're correct: Tesla achieves FSD in the next decade, and it automates billions of daily man hours. That's only really relevant to Tesla's current market cap if you also assume that other car makers don't achieve FSD in the next decade. If everyone has FSD, then in terms of relative company value it's the same as no one having it; it's just another feature, like A/C or cruise control.

iknowstuff 3y ago
Other automakers still have software literally worse than a 2013 Model S. They’re still the blackberries of a newly iPhone automotive world. They can not compete with Tesla’s fleet data, OTA updates and widely deployed uniform self driving hardware. Mobileye provides basic ADAS to automakers but they’re hella behind FSD12 and don’t have the kind of deployment capabilities Tesla has.
ArtTimeInvestor 3y ago
Being among the best usually means you can stay in there because you can reinvest your earnings into becoming even better. Google still makes tens of billions of dollars from search every quarter. The revenue is actually still growing.
kjksf 3y ago
If self-driving works it's inevitable that the market will transform from mostly selling cars to mostly providing robotaxi service. Robotaxi service has "winner takes most" dynamics, just like regular human-taxi service. Just look at how stable Uber and Lyft marketshare was over the years. Imagine company X drops 10 thousand robotaxis in San Francisco area. Anyone who cares to can get a taxi for half the price (or less) of regular taxi. Company Y develops self-driving technology 6 months later. There's just no way for company Y to re-take significant market share in San Francisco if their costs are similar to company X. They can drop 10 thousand cars but most San Franciscan who want such service already have app for service X installed and a habit of using it. Company Y might decide on (expensive) marketing campaign or price war but company X can do that as well. Company X can finance price war from profit but company Y must borrow. And there's only so much you can borrow. In US we saw this with Uber vs Lyft vs everyone else. Early market share of Uber proved to be bullet proof regardless of what Lyft tried to do. In China Uber was in a trench price warfare with Didi and when they didn't see a way to win, they decided to loose (and sold their business to Didi). So the winner of robotaxi market will be the first company that has a working self-driving software AND can produce millions of cars per year to capture the market.
- TheAlchemist 3y ago
  And yet, Uber is loosing money for pretty much their whole existence. I think we will get to robotaxis one day, most probably. I'm not sure though about the earnings power this will give to those companies.
  - fragmede 3y ago
    That day is already here. Waymo's been providing robotaxi rides in San Francisco and Phoenix for a while, and soon, LA and Austin.
    - TheAlchemist 3y ago
      I thought that Waymo is 'almost' a robotaxi - in the sense that there is a remote operator that takes over when the car is stuck or it's getting dangerous. I think Cruise revealed the numbers about the % of time an operator takes over and it was surprisingly high - one intervention every 2.5-5 miles.
      - fragmede 3y ago
        it doesn't matter what the back end looks like. even if it's all just a call center in the Philippines driving the cars with playstation controllers, on the customer end, there's an app, and it summons a car with no driver in it, and it takes me to my destination. Their profitability relies on just how much that call center needs to get paid, so it's in their interests to drive that down, and have it be real, but that's their business. As a customer, all I know is that there's a competitor to Uber/Lyft called Waymo, and it's better and worse in specific ways. No driver means no having to deal with a person. If I'm sending a girlfriend home late at night, she doesn't need to get into a strangers car. the driver could be drinking or hit on her or whatever. robo taxi isn't going to do that, even if it's a call center in the Philippines.
        TheAlchemist 3y ago
        Ok, that's not what I call a 'real' Robotaxi. If the operator needs to intervene maybe once per 100 miles then I would consider we're close. Re profitability - yes, but if there is more than one companies, they will just drive down the margins. I don't see how it will generate billions frankly.

iknowstuff 3y ago

Other automakers still have software literally worse than a 2013 Model S. They’re still the blackberries of a newly iPhone automotive world. They can not compete with Tesla’s fleet data, OTA updates and widely deployed uniform self driving hardware. Mobileye provides basic ADAS to automakers but they’re hella behind FSD12 and don’t have the kind of deployment capabilities Tesla has.

ArtTimeInvestor 3y ago

Being among the best usually means you can stay in there because you can reinvest your earnings into becoming even better. Google still makes tens of billions of dollars from search every quarter. The revenue is actually still growing.

kjksf 3y ago

If self-driving works it's inevitable that the market will transform from mostly selling cars to mostly providing robotaxi service. Robotaxi service has "winner takes most" dynamics, just like regular human-taxi service. Just look at how stable Uber and Lyft marketshare was over the years. Imagine company X drops 10 thousand robotaxis in San Francisco area. Anyone who cares to can get a taxi for half the price (or less) of regular taxi. Company Y develops self-driving technology 6 months later. There's just no way for company Y to re-take significant market share in San Francisco if their costs are similar to company X. They can drop 10 thousand cars but most San Franciscan who want such service already have app for service X installed and a habit of using it. Company Y might decide on (expensive) marketing campaign or price war but company X can do that as well. Company X can finance price war from profit but company Y must borrow. And there's only so much you can borrow. In US we saw this with Uber vs Lyft vs everyone else. Early market share of Uber proved to be bullet proof regardless of what Lyft tried to do. In China Uber was in a trench price warfare with Didi and when they didn't see a way to win, they decided to loose (and sold their business to Didi). So the winner of robotaxi market will be the first company that has a working self-driving software AND can produce millions of cars per year to capture the market.

TheAlchemist 3y ago
And yet, Uber is loosing money for pretty much their whole existence. I think we will get to robotaxis one day, most probably. I'm not sure though about the earnings power this will give to those companies.
- fragmede 3y ago
  That day is already here. Waymo's been providing robotaxi rides in San Francisco and Phoenix for a while, and soon, LA and Austin.
  - TheAlchemist 3y ago
    I thought that Waymo is 'almost' a robotaxi - in the sense that there is a remote operator that takes over when the car is stuck or it's getting dangerous. I think Cruise revealed the numbers about the % of time an operator takes over and it was surprisingly high - one intervention every 2.5-5 miles.
    - fragmede 3y ago
      it doesn't matter what the back end looks like. even if it's all just a call center in the Philippines driving the cars with playstation controllers, on the customer end, there's an app, and it summons a car with no driver in it, and it takes me to my destination. Their profitability relies on just how much that call center needs to get paid, so it's in their interests to drive that down, and have it be real, but that's their business. As a customer, all I know is that there's a competitor to Uber/Lyft called Waymo, and it's better and worse in specific ways. No driver means no having to deal with a person. If I'm sending a girlfriend home late at night, she doesn't need to get into a strangers car. the driver could be drinking or hit on her or whatever. robo taxi isn't going to do that, even if it's a call center in the Philippines.
      - TheAlchemist 3y ago
        Ok, that's not what I call a 'real' Robotaxi. If the operator needs to intervene maybe once per 100 miles then I would consider we're close. Re profitability - yes, but if there is more than one companies, they will just drive down the margins. I don't see how it will generate billions frankly.