GM and Honda Will Codevelop Affordable EVs Targeting the World’s Most Popular Vehicle Segments

Putting your 'class leading' powertrain under your competition's vehicles will only harm GM.  It's a very poor decision, long-term.

7 minutes ago, balthazar said:

Putting your 'class leading' powertrain under your competition's vehicles will only harm GM.  It's a very poor decision, long-term.

Competing companies have been doing this for decades without negative effects. I see no issue here. 

I know Lincoln used a BMW diesel in the '70s. The toyoter 86 has a Subaru engine... but these are both niche sub-segments.
A -say- compact CUV has a huge potential volume in comparison.

What are some other examples?

- - - - -
I see an issue once an 'Ultium Equinox' and an 'Ultium CR-V' (or whatever) are in the same segment/space, that whereas Utium could have swayed the sale to GM... instead it will go to Honda. I mean; that's GOING to happen, and that's a lost sale to GM.

22 minutes ago, balthazar said:

I know Lincoln used a BMW diesel in the '70s. The toyoter 86 has a Subaru engine... but these are both niche sub-segments.
A -say- compact CUV has a huge potential volume in comparison.

What are some other examples?

- - - - -
I see an issue once an 'Ultium Equinox' and an 'Ultium CR-V' (or whatever) are in the same segment/space, that whereas Utium could have swayed the sale to GM... instead it will go to Honda. I mean; that's GOING to happen, and that's a lost sale to GM.

Not so long ago, the Saturn Vue used the Honda built 3.5L V6 and I guarantee you that most buyers were not even aware of it when they bought. There are plenty of other examples of this but that is the first one that came to my mind. Ford and GM co-opted the 10 speed transmission that is in their current autos and trucks. How many buyers are even aware of any of these things? Not many so save for the car nuts here, it is (again) a non-issue.

I believe singular engines here isn't a direct parallel (despite me bringing that example up).

Ultium (according to GM) will power ALL their products at some point ("soon"), and it would empower GM sales to maintain all Ultium production for themselves - they should 'shut honda out' if honda has no suitable competition.  There's also a question of having suitable volume/supply for GM in this era.  GM has ONE vehicle currently out on Ultium, and they're already agreeing to sell the powertrain to a competitor.

19 minutes ago, balthazar said:

I believe singular engines here isn't a direct parallel (despite me bringing that example up).

Ultium (according to GM) will power ALL their products at some point ("soon"), and it would empower GM sales to maintain all Ultium production for themselves - they should 'shut honda out' if honda has no suitable competition.  There's also a question of having suitable volume/supply for GM in this era.  GM has ONE vehicle currently out on Ultium, and they're already agreeing to sell the powertrain to a competitor.

You're right. you're always right Balth. WTF do I know? I yield. Just skip the fact that said platform won't be in anything by Honda until at least 2027 and ignore what I just said about the average customer not knowing or much less caring about such things, you are always right.

And here I thought SMK was the skilled one at cherry picking, bar moving, and creating phantom issues that only HE thinks are issues. 

How many products will GM have running Ultium before Honda gets it in 2027 to use in their vehicles?  More importantly, how soon will GM products using Ultium be available at somewhat affordable prices?

I just see a potential for a huge competitive advantage were GM to start mass, great-range affordable Ultium BE vehicles and across the street; honda is still pushing IC civics CR-Xs. 

57 minutes ago, balthazar said:

I just see a potential for a huge competitive advantage were GM to start mass, great-range affordable Ultium BE vehicles and across the street; honda is still pushing IC civics CR-Xs. 

That advantage will still be there. Not sure what part of “2027” you are not getting here. GM has a dozen or so models planned before then and this deal will greatly reduce costs, yet another common practice amongst carmakers seeking mutually beneficial deals. Like I said, a non-issue. 

@balthazar @surreal1272 @riviera74 One of the benefits of this is that GM was already down the rabbit hole of Lithium-Ion batteries for the Ultium produced autos and Honda had already started work on the all-solid-state batteries of which GM is now able to use as the 2nd generation Ultium battery pack. This co-development is a good thing as GM gets to use Honda engineered all-solid-state batteries and Honda gets access to electric motors / Ultium Platform to eventually get their EVs going.

I DOUBT many Honda owners would switch as that Lemming pool seems to be hung up on Honda generic appliances, not saying that some might not be swayed to buy GM, but when I talk with Honda and Acura owners, I have rarely heard anyone say they would buy from GM.

25 minutes ago, David said:

@balthazar @surreal1272 @riviera74 One of the benefits of this is that GM was already down the rabbit hole of Lithium-Ion batteries for the Ultium produced autos and Honda had already started work on the all-solid-state batteries of which GM is now able to use as the 2nd generation Ultium battery pack. This co-development is a good thing as GM gets to use Honda engineered all-solid-state batteries and Honda gets access to electric motors / Ultium Platform to eventually get their EVs going.

I DOUBT many Honda owners would switch as that Lemming pool seems to be hung up on Honda generic appliances, not saying that some might not be swayed to buy GM, but when I talk with Honda and Acura owners, I have rarely heard anyone say they would buy from GM.

All of this because somehow it has never occurred to Balth that GM is well aware of the very thing he thinks is an issue. They are not going to do something like this if they thought it would put them at a competitive disadvantage. That would be simply asinine logic to have otherwise. 

58 minutes ago, David said:

I DOUBT many Honda owners would switch as that Lemming pool seems to be hung up on Honda generic appliances, not saying that some might not be swayed to buy GM, but when I talk with Honda and Acura owners, I have rarely heard anyone say they would buy from GM.

Kind of in the same manner say, you or Balth, wouldn't be caught dead in a European car...or anything that isn't GM?

I've certainly daily-driven non-GM products in the past.

But yes; I don't find Euro vehicles appealing.

3 hours ago, balthazar said:

Ultium (according to GM) will power ALL their products at some point ("soon"), and it would empower GM sales to maintain all Ultium production for themselves - they should 'shut honda out' if honda has no suitable competition.  There's also a question of having suitable volume/supply for GM in this era.  GM has ONE vehicle currently out on Ultium, and they're already agreeing to sell the powertrain to a competitor.

I would guess that being able to scale up for multiple vehicles (GM and Honda) would also help bring down some of the costs, being able to amortize across a lot more units. 

Regardless if a Honda or GM sells, Both get a bit of the pie. I'm not sure why this is a bad thing.

Two heads are always better than one.

3 hours ago, surreal1272 said:

and ignore what I just said about the average customer not knowing or much less caring about such things, you are always right.

What's funny, is that sounds exactly like something he would have said. 

"The customer doesn't care if X engine is in XYZ vehicle, they just want it to work right and get the from A to B". 

25 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

I would guess that being able to scale up for multiple vehicles (GM and Honda) would also help bring down some of the costs, being able to amortize across a lot more units. 

Regardless if a Honda or GM sells, Both get a bit of the pie. I'm not sure why this is a bad thing.

From a R&D standpoint, that's true. 

But obviously the margin on a complete vehicle will be more than on one component of such.  Then there's the tactical advantage of 'that Buick Encore has a 320 mile range, but the Honda CR-V only goes 200 miles; let's go check out Buick'.

Changing a hardcore loyalist's opinion is commonly futile, but there ARE 'open-minded' consumers out there, and electrification presents a 'ground floor' where a number of consumers are  going to 'reset' their biases.  Look no further than the adoption of Tesla. 

* Not that folk were biased against Tesla, but it was an outsider that's made significant inroads among consumers.

- - - - -
I'm not approaching this as 'consumers care/don't care who made the powertrain', but as 'GM has a strongly competitive BE platform... and honda doesn't'.

Sounds like this isn't that much different than other joint ventures that have been common with automakers for years---different automakers sharing a platform or sharing dirty bits or jointly developing a platform or dirty bits. 

2 hours ago, Robert Hall said:

Sounds like this isn't that much different than other joint ventures that have been common with automakers for years---different automakers sharing a platform or sharing dirty bits or jointly developing a platform or dirty bits. 

Not according to Balth. Apparently it’ll be the end of GM if they do what they’ve been doing for decades lol. 

3 hours ago, balthazar said:

I'm not approaching this as 'consumers care/don't care who made the powertrain', but as 'GM has a strongly competitive BE platform... and honda doesn't

And that is why you apparently don’t get it. 

So... I don't 'get' how automakers compete with each other, and I claimed 'the end is nigh for GM' while I was at it.

Interesting interpretation.

- - - - -
Robert - have any cross-corporate engine-sharing examples you can think of?

^^^

Saturn Redline V6 was a 3.5 liter Honda V6

Pontiac Vibe had a Toyota 1.8 liter 4 cylinder

mid '80s Chevrolet Nova had a Toyota 1.6 liter 4 cylinder

Toyota 86 has a Subaru 2.4 liter flat 4 cylinder

this generation Toyota Supra has a 3.0 liter inline 6 from BMW

Lotus Elise uses a Toyota 1.8 liter 4 cylinder

Lotus Evora uses a Toyota 3.5 liter V6

McLaren F1 used a 6 liter BMW V12

Aston Martin uses AMG engines. V12s and V8s.  I dont remember what models...

Im sure there are other examples. These are from the top of my head that I know about. 

Honda does not have any EV platforms. Honda could just as easily partner up with another manufacturer that could use the R&D money and engineering sharing that has a platform, maybe BMW, maybe Mercedes, maybe Ford or Stellantis or even Toyota.  (Toyota has been known to help fellow Japanese car makers...like Mazda) and GM could just as easily lose out to (sales)  Honda in the long run anyway...

Might as well partner up, share costs, use Honda brains AND money and sell affordable EVs world wide.

GM may have needed solid state battery tech. Or at least to share R&D costs for solid state tech...

If GM (and Honda) is to sell affordable EVs, for real, to customers, because as we know EV production is expensive and selling high priced EVs to compensate the costs is not viable as the majority of car owners are not of the wealthy type..then this way is the way. 

Dont partner up with Honda, Honda will partner up with another, and lose out on potential sales with Honda as your rival..

Partner up with Honda, share costs and engineering, and lose out on potential sales to Honda, but as your partner... Big difference.  

4 hours ago, balthazar said:

I'm not approaching this as 'consumers care/don't care who made the powertrain', but as 'GM has a strongly competitive BE platform... and honda doesn't'.

The above is what you said, clearly separated from the rest of your statement @balthazar and I stand by what I said. You can’t simply ignore the consumer factor just because it doesn’t align with the rest of your argument. “The end is nigh” is obvious sarcasm and does not change my core point. 

6 hours ago, David said:

I DOUBT many Honda owners would switch as that Lemming pool seems to be hung up on Honda generic appliances, not saying that some might not be swayed to buy GM, but when I talk with Honda and Acura owners, I have rarely heard anyone say they would buy from GM.

And why should they buy GM?

Lemming pool?

Generic appliances? 

All three questions and Im gonna bash GM defending Honda.

Yes...Honda builds generic shyte.  As does GM.  One generic appliance vehicle from GM is no better or worse than from Honda. 

GM HAD a lemming pool of rabid fanbois. GM pissed that away. GM has tried to get them back. Honda invited them in and these folk have not looked back. Dont blame Honda lemmings. Blame GM corporate big wigs for phoquing it up.

Yes. GM is no longer THAT GM anymore.  But its too damned bad if Honda fanbois stay with Honda.

But the thing that bothers me most about that quote of yours and Balthy's about not sharing with Honda....

Honda has GREAT engineers. 

Being partnered with Honda is an ASSET for GM. And obviously vice versa. Honda has no EV platforms. They could engineer them. They may not have the cash to do so. 

HOWEVER, Honda engineers will work with GM engineers when these Ultium platforms become available to them and when enough Honda EVs by Ultium are sold to Honda customer's....Honda engineers could work with GM engineers to IMPROVE upon future Ultium platforms.

Honda has a wide wide wide engineering field.   It was smart for GM to partner up with Honda...

Honda 

It's a good idea to try to team up and share cost, most car companies do something like that.

The market needs EVs that aren't $50 or $100k, but I still wonder when we'll see "affordable" EV's as the battery cost is still around $100 per kWh or maybe a little more.

17 minutes ago, oldshurst442 said:

Honda has no EV platforms. They could engineer them. They may not have the cash to do so. 

Sometimes - that's the way the cookie crumbles in commerce. 
 

This chart is from the following story: GM’s Ultium Electric Car Platform Technology: Everything You Need to Know (motortrend.com)

Which is based on GM's own web site: Committing to an All-Electric Future | General Motors (gm.com)

Yet is it not that GM wants to make money from selling their tech also, not just manufacturing? If GM is to get everyone into an EV, then having other auto companies use the Ultium Platform is a must.

1 hour ago, oldshurst442 said:

^^^

Saturn Redline V6 was a 3.5 liter Honda V6

Pontiac Vibe had a Toyota 1.8 liter 4 cylinder

mid '80s Chevrolet Nova had a Toyota 1.6 liter 4 cylinder

Toyota 86 has a Subaru 2.4 liter flat 4 cylinder

this generation Toyota Supra has a 3.0 liter inline 6 from BMW

Lotus Elise uses a Toyota 1.8 liter 4 cylinder

Lotus Evora uses a Toyota 3.5 liter V6

McLaren F1 used a 6 liter BMW V12

Aston Martin uses AMG engines. V12s and V8s.  I dont remember what models...

Im sure there are other examples. These are from the top of my head that I know about. 

 

Honda does not have any EV platforms. Honda could just as easily partner up with another manufacturer that could use the R&D money and engineering sharing that has a platform, maybe BMW, maybe Mercedes, maybe Ford or Stellantis or even Toyota.  (Toyota has been known to help fellow Japanese car makers...like Mazda) and GM could just as easily lose out to (sales)  Honda in the long run anyway...

Might as well partner up, share costs, use Honda brains AND money and sell affordable EVs world wide.

GM may have needed solid state battery tech. Or at least to share R&D costs for solid state tech...

If GM (and Honda) is to sell affordable EVs, for real, to customers, because as we know EV production is expensive and selling high priced EVs to compensate the costs is not viable as the majority of car owners are not of the wealthy type..then this way is the way. 

Dont partner up with Honda, Honda will partner up with another, and lose out on potential sales with Honda as your rival..

Partner up with Honda, share costs and engineering, and lose out on potential sales to Honda, but as your partner... Big difference.  

 

The one that always stuck in my mind and I did like the auto but fit was tight for my size was the original Taurus SHO with a Yamaha V6. That auto Rocked!

2 hours ago, balthazar said:

- - - - -
Robert - have any cross-corporate engine-sharing examples you can think of?

Many.  Olds enumerated a few above.   And lots of platforms shared across makers—GM and Toyota, GM and Suzuki, Ford and Mazda, Etc.  JVs happen.  

1 hour ago, David said:

The one that always stuck in my mind and I did like the auto but fit was tight for my size was the original Taurus SHO with a Yamaha V6. That auto Rocked!

Until you had to replace that motor. My best friend had a ‘97 back in the day and when the water pump took a dump, it wrecked the motor as well. Ford wanted $16K to replace that motor. It was still $8K to replace it second hand. Just obscene but not shrouding given that the motor was only ever produced for that one generation SHO. 

2 hours ago, balthazar said:

Sometimes - that's the way the cookie crumbles in commerce. 
 

True. And GM's time was almost up in 2009.  Ford came up to bat for them. 

And its not as if Honda is in danger of insolvency either. Plus Honda will not just give up and die.  Honda would have found another partner if it wasnt with GM.  Like I stated above, Honda as a company has a wide field of expertise and engineering that would be an asset to a joint venture program like say....solid state battery development, which they have been R&D-ing heavily in and Im surprised to learn they are advanced in this tech.  GM will be using that tech with Honda in GM's Ultium platform.  Sounds like a decent marriage to me. 

And Honda and GM have worked together in the recent past for hydrogen fuel cells and autonomous driving vehicles for fleet services. 

Would you be in favor of GM purchasing a major percentage of Honda?

^^^ 

I dont see why not.   Unless a majority stock purchase will burden GM in any way. But I cant see any negative to it.  Only good.  Its not as if General Motors has never bought another car company before.  However, either from a merger or just as a partnership, Honda would need to be Honda and not just another GM brand if a merger or a partnership with Honda is to be. 

https://www.motorauthority.com/news/1132733_2024-honda-prologue-is-new-electric-crossover-based-on-gm-s-ultium-platform

Quote

 

GM will also be responsible for production of the Ultium-based electric crossovers for Honda and Acura, while the Japanese automakers will handle design and tuning. 

 

1 hour ago, balthazar said:

Would you be in favor of GM purchasing a major percentage of Honda?

I think that would have to be a merger as GM isn’t big enough or cash rich enough to buy Honda or a large stake.  And I doubt the culture of the two would work so probably wouldn’t be a great merger.

Although some of these car companies may merge just to survive Tesla and the Chinese brands once they start exporting.

11 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

I think that would have to be a merger as GM isn’t big enough or cash rich enough to buy Honda or a large stake.  And I doubt the culture of the two would work so probably wouldn’t be a great merger.

Although some of these car companies may merge just to survive Tesla and the Chinese brands once they start exporting.

Based on the fact that Tesla was not required to have a Chinese partner, I question just how much the Communist government is involved in controlling secretly Tesla. To me, Tesla is a Chinese company as there are huge blocks of stock owned by offshore investment firms in the Asian Rim.

GM could merge with Honda, but I doubt a merger would work as Honda has a very different culture than Subaru that GM had a controlling stake in before the bankruptcy and it was sold to Toyota.

10 hours ago, balthazar said:

Would you be in favor of GM purchasing a major percentage of Honda?

Why would they need to do that?

In other words, they don’t need to buy into Honda. 

10 hours ago, smk4565 said:

And I doubt the culture of the two would work so probably wouldn’t be a great merger.

This is where I see the Honda brand going downhill. I don't think it would be a good merger for the Honda name but it would probably benefit GM. Long-term, I don't think it would necessarily work well.

I looked hard at the F-150 when shopping, but when optioned as I wanted, as soon as I selected the Powerstroke 3.0, it kicked out both the color & rims I wanted. It was a close 2nd. [Ram, BTW, was thousands more expensive in a comparable trim].

The trans is co-developed by Ford & GM. Nope- doesn’t bother me. Although I did see a recent article on Ford having 10R80 issues on the F-150. I know they are tuned/tweaked respectively.

But this was never about my purchase particulars, it was a question RE competition within the industry. 

As far as honda engineers, is anyone saying GM NEEDS honda engineer input to get the job done?

32 minutes ago, balthazar said:

I looked hard at the F-150 when shopping, but when optioned as I wanted, as soon as I selected the Powerstroke 3.0, it kicked out both the color & rims I wanted. It was a close 2nd. [Ram, BTW, was thousands more expensive in a comparable trim].

The trans is co-developed by Ford & GM. Nope- doesn’t bother me. Although I did see a recent article on Ford having 10R80 issues on the F-150. I know they are tuned/tweaked respectively.

But this was never about my purchase particulars, it was a question RE competition within the industry. 

As far as honda engineers, is anyone saying GM NEEDS honda engineer input to get the job done?

I don't think anyone was suggesting that.  And "co-developed" for both the GM 9-Speed / Ford 10-Speed is pretty generous wording. I'm sure each company had a lot of input on the respective designs, but GM was the lead on the FWD version and Ford was the lead on the RWD. Ford did some cost cutting on the 9-speed by dropping the final gear. Final tuning for both is done by the company using the transmission obviously.

Honda is so far behind on EV development that the most they can contribute to GM is money, but yes, they'll need spec requirements from Honda as well.

If GM doesn't 'need' Honda's engineering input, why solicit it?

- - - - -
Most of the industry itself, since... the beginning, looks at it more like, say; Major League Baseball.  These companies are in competition with each other (duh).  

When the Mets & the Phillies meet up, the Mets don't say 'Hey; you're behind 9-2. Why not use our lead-off hitter - he's @ .403 right now! Then we can have a higher aggregate game score... you just have to pay us .05% of his salary per at-bat!'

If it's legit that 'Ultium represents a milestone achievement in electrification', then let the chips fall where they may, and if that includes honda falling 'so far behind' :  
¯\_(ツ)_/¯.  
GM 'doesn't need' honda and doesn't own honda anything.  That would include whatever minor 'economies of scale' such partnership may generate (offset by every lost sale to an Ultium honda/acura); GM doesn't need it.  GM made $10 billion in net profit in a rough year last year, and they claim they'll have 30 BE models on sale 30 months from now.  That'd put GM near the leading edge of BE volume (by model count). 

Good grief @balthazar. You spent all those words just to ignore the actual reasons why they are doing this in the first place. You even included an apples to oranges baseball team comparison. Don’t know what the deal is with you making phantom issues out of this but history has shown this has been part of the business since day one and it is not going to diminish GMs brand but doing this. It’s really that simple. 

1 hour ago, balthazar said:

If GM doesn't 'need' Honda's engineering input, why solicit it?

- - - - -
Most of the industry itself, since... the beginning, looks at it more like, say; Major League Baseball.  These companies are in competition with each other (duh).  

When the Mets & the Phillies meet up, the Mets don't say 'Hey; you're behind 9-2. Why not use our lead-off hitter - he's @ .403 right now! Then we can have a higher aggregate game score... you just have to pay us .05% of his salary per at-bat!'

If it's legit that 'Ultium represents a milestone achievement in electrification', then let the chips fall where they may, and if that includes honda falling 'so far behind' :  
¯\_(ツ)_/¯.  
GM 'doesn't need' honda and doesn't own honda anything.  That would include whatever minor 'economies of scale' such partnership may generate (offset by every lost sale to an Ultium honda/acura); GM doesn't need it.  GM made $10 billion in net profit in a rough year last year, and they claim they'll have 30 BE models on sale 30 months from now.  That'd put GM near the leading edge of BE volume (by model count). 

I’m sure the bean counters at GM sharpened their pencils enough to figure out how to make a profit off of Ultium platform sales to other manufacturers. If they can do it for transmissions, they can do it for batteries.

And economies of scale are one of the most important things in EV land right now. Look how long it took Tesla, and at such volume, before they started turning profits without selling carbon credits to FCA. GM selling 200,000 Ultium packs to Honda will make the Ultium pack cheaper for GM to produce for its own vehicles. 

15 minutes ago, surreal1272 said:

Good grief @balthazar. You spent all those words just to ignore the actual reasons why they are doing this in the first place.

Luckily we don’t charge by the word here at C&G. 

11 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

Luckily we don’t charge by the word here at C&G.

Im certainly grateful

I didn't "ignore" the reasons GM is doing this, surreal; I talked on both 'economies of scale / capital' and 'engineers co-operating' in my posts above. 

If anyone has any other motive reasons, feel free to expound.
 

1 hour ago, Drew Dowdell said:

I’m sure the bean counters at GM sharpened their pencils enough to figure out how to make a profit off of Ultium platform sales to other manufacturers.

I'm sure they did find some profit to be made off that venture.  Needless to say... GM has pursued numerous ventures with good intentions and undoubtedly compelling figures that have up-ended in short order. 

My question still stands about the longer-term / broad picture of handing your proprietary 'milestone' BE hardware over to the competition (who has none such of their own).

But when I read GM's recent Corporate PR from Barra, I'm less & less convinced she / GM view themselves as being in competition anymore, and that instead, all the OEMs are going to gather around the (digital, of course) campfire and hold hands, as one conscious entity under the stars.

Whatever - just ignore my question then if too annoying.

Reality is complex.  Businesses make decisions for reasons.  Reasons we aren't privy to.   Next topic.

9 hours ago, balthazar said:

I didn't "ignore" the reasons GM is doing this, surreal; I talked on both 'economies of scale / capital' and 'engineers co-operating' in my posts above.

Your emphasis on the negative, from the get go, suggested otherwise. I stand by what I said. They are not handing a damn thing over and emphasizing said statement in bold does nothing to change that fact.

23 hours ago, balthazar said:

I looked hard at the F-150 when shopping, but when optioned as I wanted, as soon as I selected the Powerstroke 3.0, it kicked out both the color & rims I wanted. It was a close 2nd. [Ram, BTW, was thousands more expensive in a comparable trim].

That's good, but that's not really what I asked, though you sort of made my point for me.  I was asking if having the Ford Engine + Transmission in a Sierra would bother you... I'm guessing not since you were shopping the Ford also.

In the end, the comparable powertrains didn't matter to you. You had a choice of two 3-liter turbo-diesel 6-cylinders mated to 10-speed transmissions. You made your decision on which way to go based on paint color and wheel selection. You care a lot more about engines than even the above-average CR-V/Equinox buyer.  Do you really think that it would come down to who made the electric motor in an EV?  I could see it mattering to some Tesla Fanbois.. maybe.... but that's about it. 

13 hours ago, balthazar said:

Most of the industry itself, since... the beginning, looks at it more like, say; Major League Baseball.  These companies are in competition with each other (duh).  

When the Mets & the Phillies meet up, the Mets don't say 'Hey; you're behind 9-2. Why not use our lead-off hitter - he's @ .403 right now! Then we can have a higher aggregate game score... you just have to pay us .05% of his salary per at-bat!'

You know trades happen all the time in sports, right? The idea is to benefit both parties, neither one is trying to get fleeced in the transaction but to both get pieces to help themselves. 

9 hours ago, balthazar said:

I didn't "ignore" the reasons GM is doing this, surreal; I talked on both 'economies of scale / capital' and 'engineers co-operating' in my posts above. 

If anyone has any other motive reasons, feel free to expound.
 

I'm sure they did find some profit to be made off that venture.  Needless to say... GM has pursued numerous ventures with good intentions and undoubtedly compelling figures that have up-ended in short order. 

My question still stands about the longer-term / broad picture of handing your proprietary 'milestone' BE hardware over to the competition (who has none such of their own).

But when I read GM's recent Corporate PR from Barra, I'm less & less convinced she / GM view themselves as being in competition anymore, and that instead, all the OEMs are going to gather around the (digital, of course) campfire and hold hands, as one conscious entity under the stars.

Whatever - just ignore my question then if too annoying.

It's the Roger Smith era again, albeit with a lower chance of disastrous results.  With EVs, the car manufacturers are moving substantially closer to the I.T. model.  

Right now, I can buy a laptop from a whole bunch of manufacturers... Lenovo, HP, Dell are the big names you've all heard of that I would liken to GM, Ford, and Toyota. MSI, Gigabyte are less well known, I would liken them to Rivian and (new) Fisker. Acer is sort of like FCA in that they're made up of Packard Bell, Texas Instruments PCs, Commodore, Gateway, and E-machines. Samsung (Hyundai/Kia/Genesis) has been making some inroads into the laptop market with cool looking designs and some luxury offerings.  Tesla is Apple with their proprietary connectors and rabid fanboys.

So there's 11 laptop brands I mentioned, with hundreds, if not thousands of models between them. All with various features like different size screens, different styles of keyboards, different styles of charging connector, some can convert into a tablet, some have big graphics cards to play video games. One I'm looking at has an animated display on the outside of the lid... totally useless, but neat to look at.  

But at the end of the day, they have a processor from either Intel, AMD, or Apple. They have RAM from Samsung or Toshiba. The screens are almost exclusively Samsung, but LG has some business there too. The hard drive is usually Samsung or Toshiba, but Apple builds their own.  Touchpads are usually by Synaptic.  Apple has recently turned more proprietary in their setup, but they still do sell some Intel machines. No matter what you pick, there is an 78% chance it will have an Intel under the hood with the remaining 22% split between AMD and Apple. 

This is the way the auto industry will go... and notice how many times I mentioned Samsung above. If you read between the lines at GM's various releases over the last year, it's pretty clear they want to be the Samsung of the auto industry.  Not only do they see themselves as a car builder, but with their huge investments into EV technology, they want to be one of the biggest component suppliers to the other manufacturers.  Samsung's laptop business is relatively small, but they own somewhere around 75% of the laptop screen business. They are huge players in storage and ram, building some of the best performing parts out there. As much as I hate Samsung end-user products, their storage and ram are among the best.

To relate this back to the 50s/60s, it like when the Hydramatic was the best transmission out there and it was used in Hudsons, Nashes, Ramblers, Kaiser-Frazers, Willys, Lincolns, and Rolls Royces. 

I fully believe that while they may not have looked at Samsung specifically, this model of being the leading supplier of EV components is their motivation.. and quite frankly.. a very sound business move. 

Elon Musk said 20% market share is Tesla's target.  Considering they have 2% market share now, that is 18% they have to steal from someone else.   Some of these OEMs might merge or join forces out of need for survival.  

2 hours ago, smk4565 said:

Elon Musk said 20% market share is Tesla's target.  Considering they have 2% market share now, that is 18% they have to steal from someone else.   Some of these OEMs might merge or join forces out of need for survival.  

Doubt this will ever happen, even if his social media and financial blast that next year he will deliver his truck, semi and roadster plus a possible robo taxi and android, I doubt more than one of these will really happen and his 2% market share will be threatened by the ICE OEMs. 

As more BEVs come out and get reviews like this where an ICE has been converted to BEV and it is better than Tesla, Tesla stale lineup will falter for the common shopper, only the fanatical people who think Tesla is the only BEV anyone should own and Musk is God will buy.

Hyundai Ioniq 5 Electric SUV Interior Review: Big, Comfy, and Clean (businessinsider.com)

Tesla could take a lesson from Hyundai on their interior space and true flat floor, for that matter pretty much all OEMs could learn from them especially the Germans where they still have a center bump.

 

Talk about serious floor space.

54 minutes ago, David said:

Doubt this will ever happen, even if his social media and financial blast that next year he will deliver his truck, semi and roadster plus a possible robo taxi and android, I doubt more than one of these will really happen and his 2% market share will be threatened by the ICE OEMs. 

As more BEVs come out and get reviews like this where an ICE has been converted to BEV and it is better than Tesla, Tesla stale lineup will falter for the common shopper, only the fanatical people who think Tesla is the only BEV anyone should own and Musk is God will buy.

Hyundai Ioniq 5 Electric SUV Interior Review: Big, Comfy, and Clean (businessinsider.com)

Tesla could take a lesson from Hyundai on their interior space and true flat floor, for that matter pretty much all OEMs could learn from them especially the Germans where they still have a center bump.

 

Talk about serious floor space.

Maybe the OEMs will catch up.  But Tesla sold 110,000 cars in the USA in Q1, Ford sold 6,700 Mach-E's, Kia 5,281 EV6 and Hyundai 2700 Ionic 5, VW with 2755 id4's.   They aren't really threatening Tesla at all.

Although I think for Tesla to hit 20% share, they can't have their cheapest Crossover be $64,000 and their base model a $48,000 rear drive sedan, because the snow belt will want AWD, and an AWD Model 3 is like $55k.  They will have to come out with an entry level model to get market share.