The car industry (rather the auto industry) hasn't had a paradigm shift in over a 100 years. I just hope Apple can provide that paradigm shift.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Aiming to Begin Electric Car Production in 2020
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I'd say the car industry is already in the midst of one, and Apple (possibly) joining in on the fun is proof of that. It's just been a very, very slow shift.
Yeah that who it's mocking, but the first 1-2 minutes are the ones I was really referring to. The rest is comedic gold as well, obviously!
So Telsa turns a profit as long as you don't take all the expenses into consideration. How about the tax rebate? Is that taken into consideration or doesn't it count because all taxpayers fund that?
Seems strange to go for a product category that's probably shooting for several million units sold annually instead of hundreds of millions with iPhones, but if the profit margins work then I'm fine with it as a shareholder. If they've gotten to the point where they think they can keep their other products innovative and ahead of the competition while diverting their attention to cars, sure, why not.
I think it's a good idea Apple moving into the car industry, it seems like the industry is waiting for a big name to beef up the competition and make a difference in innovating the Car industry.
Currently not that much has improved with cars in the last 10 years, not to the same scale that we have seen made to the phone. If Apple was to be a player in this market (and we all know Samsung will join too), R&D will shoot up tenfold and benefit the customer with the technological advances.
I think Steve Jobs would approve of Apple taking on the Car industry, lets not forget that Apple for the first time tapped into the Phone industry in 2007 and look where Apple is now.
Currently not that much has improved with cars in the last 10 years, not to the same scale that we have seen made to the phone. If Apple was to be a player in this market (and we all know Samsung will join too), R&D will shoot up tenfold and benefit the customer with the technological advances.
I think Steve Jobs would approve of Apple taking on the Car industry, lets not forget that Apple for the first time tapped into the Phone industry in 2007 and look where Apple is now.
If you want to look at it that way; Tesla repayed the government loan they got about 10 years ahead of time, and they invested in a gigafactory in US, which will have thousands of new jobs. That`s what they do with taxpayers money, on top of the profit they make, rather than asking for a bailout from the government which is also paid by tax payers. GM bail out cost was 11.2 billion dollars. That`s no where near the tax rebate for electric cars.
However you look at it, Tesla makes more money per car.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
Or just implying it will make a difference. A few years ago 3 words "I cracked it" lit a fire under the whole TV manufacturer industry. Everybody took cracks at making smarter televisions, more feature rich, bigger & better. We all win.
Rumors implied an Apple Watch long before there was one. Lots of players tried to build a great watch. Then Apple actually rolls out their cut at one. Now lots of other players are trying to make one too. All that competition and all those brains working on trying to out-Apple Apple means better and better products will come to market. Unlike the TV, others taking cuts at smart watches will push Apple to improve their own.
So now, the rumors heat up that Apple might get into the car-making business. Electric, energy efficient, smart car that might drive itself. As the rumors pile up, what will every car maker on the planet (+ Samsung) do? Better, smarter, more energy efficient electric cars are coming... whether Apple actually builds one themselves or not. We'll all benefit whether an Apple car ever comes to market.
I wish Apple rumors would spin that Apple is working hard on curing the top 10 or so diseases, world peace, world hunger, etc. to simply scare the players already in those spaces into stepping up their game. This is one case where the boy can cry "wolf!" and actually change the world (without necessarily having to do it themselves).
Good idea. I thought they should have done this a few years ago, but I think the timing is about right. Probably the only company that could rival Tesla.
----------
Just don't visit the page all the time. I rarely come here anymore. It's mostly junk.
----------
Just don't visit the page all the time. I rarely come here anymore. It's mostly junk.
I don't have a problem with the auto industry bailout, nor do I have a problem with the tax rebates being invested in the US economy. The GM bailout saved hundreds of thousands of jobs, the Telsa loan created new jobs. Win win. It seems like voodoo accounting to say a company that operates at a net loss makes more money than one that makes a net profit.
I had no intent to derail the discussion or take it on a tangent and I apologize for that. I used a long winded way to say that IMO, if Apple gets into the car business, they are not going to follow a business model that loses money at the onset.
----------
Excellent observations and a well thought out post. We all did benefit from better TV's, watches, etc.
Look at it this way; When some one asks you how much money you make, do you subtract the groceries or the clothes you buy and then tell them the money you save? Most people don`t. It is not voodoo but how accounting works. A company not making a net profit doesnt mean it is not making money per item. (You can ask Amazon). Sorry it seems like voodoo to you but that`s how it is.
If it costs me 15,000 to produce something and I sell it for 10,000, I didn't make money. If I don't include executive salaries, R&D, advertising, etc, I'm not showing a true cost per unit. Bad analogy with the pay check.
I`m sorry to say say this but you dont really understand the meanings of marginal profit and operating profit. Please go read it.
End of story!
Selling one product, way way simplified (or course, taxes are not looked at here
.Net profit = Total Revenue - Non product related costs (say general admin) - cgs x (# product sold)
cgs is cost of good sold (it has its own definition, see wiki)
So, you can make a profit on a product and yes, still be in the red if not covering your other costs.
seriously. you must be mentally damaged to even suggest such a thing. Apple may use minivans or other platforms to test batteries and other components, but it is beyond silly to suggest that an actual Apple retail vehicle would even resemble the all-but-dead minivan.
----------
especially with the rear doors up.
The problem is that to date, those options suck. Smart TV that isn't very smart, for one. The competition all tripped over themselves trying to out - apple Apple, rather than genuinely try to make a better product. The motivation is all wrong to begin with!
We may have more options, but I don't feel any better is because those options stink for most part.
It's true, currently the industry is in the midst of embracing change. Almost all of the many manufacturers have significant resources invested in R&D projects centered around new types of electric power units as well as advancing hybrid power units. Many of these new vehicles will be brought to market well ahead of Apple's upcoming product.
Apple has an opportunity to join them, but it's important to keep things in perspective, Apple's not going to cause the major established brands to panic or even feel pressured. It's a massive industry that won't change overnight nor lose substantial sales to Apple. The impact Apple may have will be to offer Apple vehicles to Apple enthusiasts and those that are curious.
You are 10+ years to late, they were already in the car business. But hey, anything to bash them, right!?!?!?
If it annoys you, then yes.
They were in the phone business before Apple, too. But hey, you can't take a joke on the World Wide Web, right!?!?!?
Apple wants to produce a car that will disrupt the gas market and nothing Tesla does produces this outcome.
Apple is not going to manufacture a car. They are probably making a concept vehicle, to show how Apple can improve a car's audio, video, and communication interfaces, how they would extend HomeKit into CarKit, integrate CarPlay, and so on. Then invite other carmakers to integrate those concepts into THEIR cars.
As for the battery guys, it's possible those car battery people are now helping to design better wristwatch and phone batteries.
As for the battery guys, it's possible those car battery people are now helping to design better wristwatch and phone batteries.
I agree that's the immediate future - the first real application for self-driving cars will be as communal transport systems at airports, theme parks, large business campuses etc. Apart from the price, there's nothing wrong with current eVehicles for commuting if you are prepared to run a second car, or rent one, for those journeys that EVs are unsuitable for. The problem is, a lot of people are very attached to having their own private car.
...sorry, but this whole "early automobiles" comparison is nonsense. Yes, the very first cars were basically useless follies driven by rich enthusiasts, but once they became well-engineered and reliable they very rapidly exceeded the speed, range and convenience of horse-drawn carts. Also, I'm no historian, but I don't think there was ever a time when the average family owned 1.5 horse-drawn carriages: at some point (due to a mix of social factors and technology) automobiles became more affordable than horses had ever been. What the automobile really had to compete with was the railroad and busses - and they won that because people wanted personal and flexible transport that let them go where they wanted, when they wanted via the route they wanted.
Modern EVs are already way beyond the "early automobile" stage. Nobody would suggest that a Tesla isn't a practical mode of transport and they're not being marketed as eccentric follies. In fact, by all reports, they're nicer to drive than petrol cars. However, they're still cars - they don't have any night-and-day advantages over petrol cars apart from environmental impact (and even that depends somewhat on where your electricity comes from) yet they have major disadvantages when it comes to cost and effective range.
...and have hundreds of parking spaces of which currently at most two have EV chargers (which may or may not be the right type for your EV) - which is fine as long as EVs are a rarity driven by attractive customers with large disposable incomes.
...but how about arriving, sitting around for 40 minutes until a charging station is free, then returning to your car to move it to the charging station... only to find that some (censored) has jumped the queue. Rinse and repeat. It's no good saying that supply will increase to meet demand - if supply doesn't increase to anticipate demand then it only takes a few anecdotes experiences like this to stop EV uptake in its tracks.
...battery capacities will improve slowly, but are not going to follow Moore's Law. A gallon of petrol is about 30kWh and an EV rapid charger delivers 50kW - i.e. roughly speaking, a filling station gas pump delivers as much energy in a minute or so as an EV charger does in an hour.
Indeed - in fact, the one EV that did make me stop and think is the BMW i3 with range extender. Nothing high-tech like a hydrogen fuel cell (which would open the whole can of worms that is handling hydrogen) - just a motorbike engine and a generator.
The main thing putting me off that is the £30k price tag when you could get a really nice luxury small car for £20k or something perfectly decent for £10k.