Become a MacRumors Supporter for $25/year with no ads, private forums, and more!

Apple-Backed Didi Chuxing Earns Record $5.5B in China Tech Funding, Looks to Driverless as Future

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
50,523
11,910



Ride-sharing company Didi Chuxing has raised more than $5.5 billion from investors in China, marking the largest amount of funding earned by a technology company ever in the country. Didi, which Apple invested $1 billion into last year, is believed to use its new funding to expand beyond China, invest in artificial intelligence initiatives, and even look into various driverless and automated vehicle technologies (via Bloomberg).

Specific investors for this round of funding were left unidentified, but people familiar with the investments suggested the likes of SoftBank Group, Silver Lake Kraftwerk, China Merchants Bank Co. and one arm of Bank of Communications Co. were all backing Didi. The company's total valuation is said to have been raised from $34 billion -- which it earned after acquiring Uber's business in China -- to now sit at $50 billion.

Tim Cook catching a ride with Didi Chuxing president Jean Liu


The funding places Didi ahead of Xiaomi's $46 billion valuation, and makes the company the world's second most valuable startup after Uber's $68 billion.
Ride-hailing giant Didi Chuxing raised more than $5.5 billion from investors, scoring the largest round of funding ever for a technology company to bankroll an expansion beyond China and into driverless technology.

That price tag would surpass smartphone maker Xiaomi Corp.'s and make Didi the world's most valuable startup after Uber. Didi amassed $10 billion in cash and equivalents last year, but the deal yields more ammunition as it prepares to challenge Uber and Alphabet Inc. in automated driving, and buys the company time to carve out new revenue streams.
Didi's expansion beyond hailing cars is believed to become "increasingly important," due to China's increasingly strict regulations regarding qualifications for the users who drive Didi vehicles. In places like Beijing and Shanghai, the company's drivers are required to be local residents, preventing what is estimated to be thousands of potential Didi Chuxing drivers from nearby towns and countryside to work for the startup.

As a potential major pillar of its expansion, Didi executives hope that investing into driverless technology research will assist in overcoming hurdles related to China's human driver restrictions. The further Didi investigates and tests driverless technologies, the more data Apple receives on the subject, since the companies are now working together and sharing notes related to autonomous innovations one or the other might make.
Cheng and President Jean Liu hope that adopting driverless technology will help overcome such hurdles in the future. Didi wants to take advantage of data on 400 million users across some 400 cities to aid research into AI and autonomous vehicles. It opened an artificial intelligence lab in Mountain View, California last month, called Didi Labs. And it's already lured dozens of stalwarts in the field including former Uber auto-security expert Charlie Miller, known for remotely hacking into a Jeep Cherokee in 2015.
While Didi works on implementing driverless rides for its users, Apple is said to be working on a self-driving platform of its own, with a deadline of late 2017 when the company will officially decide on the "feasibility" of its progress on the tech at that time. Just this week, a Lexus SUV was spotted leaving an Apple facility in California, coming equipped with various sensors and cameras and believed to be one of the vehicles Apple is using to test self-driving cars on the road.

Article Link: Apple-Backed Didi Chuxing Earns Record $5.5B in China Tech Funding, Looks to Driverless as Future
 

macduke

macrumors G4
Jun 27, 2007
11,167
15,133
Central U.S.
Apple's investment here makes so much more sense than it did at first. I think they realized that they need a huge market to test their driverless technology without putting their name on it in case something goes wrong. So they supply this technology they've been working on to Didi Chuxing to incorporate into their driverless cars. The regulations in China are probably less strict, and since Didi Chuxing is a Chinese company, they'll get some media protection from the government in case something goes wrong. Apple can collect a lot of data and improve their driverless system in China while growing their investment. The investment also probably placates the Chinese government to a certain extent and makes them look more favorably upon Apple, and Apple will likely end up making a good bit of money on the investment in the process. It's a win-win.

Once Apple is ready, they can expand the driverless system to the rest of the world. The big question, however, is will they end up developing their own car or sell this as a platform for all auto manufacturers? On the one hand, they could make a lot of money licensing it. But is that Apple's typical behavior? They tend to want to control the hardware. But it's a pretty huge hardware pivot, even for them. And I understand that this probably sounds close-minded given the naysayers who were wrong about the iPhone, but the iPhone is a lot closer in hardware to an iPod than an iPhone is to a freaking car. It's certainly not impossible, but a lot more difficult.
 

WBRacing

macrumors 65816
Nov 19, 2012
1,291
2,883
UK
Wow.

Whoever thinks Tim Cook is a bad CEO is a moron.
So because a company has managed to get a lot of people to invest in it, that proves all the people critical of Cook are morons?

It might be suggestive that others agree that it is a good company to back, but it is hardly conclusive evidence of his fabulousness as a CEO.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: WWPD

MrX8503

macrumors 68020
Sep 19, 2010
2,281
1,586
Apple's investment here makes so much more sense than it did at first. I think they realized that they need a huge market to test their driverless technology without putting their name on it in case something goes wrong. So they supply this technology they've been working on to Didi Chuxing to incorporate into their driverless cars. The regulations in China are probably less strict, and since Didi Chuxing is a Chinese company, they'll get some media protection from the government in case something goes wrong. Apple can collect a lot of data and improve their driverless system in China while growing their investment. The investment also probably placates the Chinese government to a certain extent and makes them look more favorably upon Apple, and Apple will likely end up making a good bit of money on the investment in the process. It's a win-win.

Once Apple is ready, they can expand the driverless system to the rest of the world. The big question, however, is will they end up developing their own car or sell this as a platform for all auto manufacturers? On the one hand, they could make a lot of money licensing it. But is that Apple's typical behavior? They tend to want to control the hardware. But it's a pretty huge hardware pivot, even for them. And I understand that this probably sounds close-minded given the naysayers who were wrong about the iPhone, but the iPhone is a lot closer in hardware to an iPod than an iPhone is to a freaking car. It's certainly not impossible, but a lot more difficult.

It was a genius move on Apple's part.

The big question, however, is will they end up developing their own car or sell this as a platform for all auto manufacturers? On the one hand, they could make a lot of money licensing it. But is that Apple's typical behavior? They tend to want to control the hardware. But it's a pretty huge hardware pivot, even for them. And I understand that this probably sounds close-minded given the naysayers who were wrong about the iPhone, but the iPhone is a lot closer in hardware to an iPod than an iPhone is to a freaking car. It's certainly not impossible, but a lot more difficult.

Steve Jobs famously said that if you're serious about software you build the hardware. This is what gave us the iPhone. Remember that Apple had no phone experience other than their partnership with Motorola.

I don't know if that culture is still in Apple, but building a car will be one of biggest technolgical feats for Apple since the iPhone.
 

macduke

macrumors G4
Jun 27, 2007
11,167
15,133
Central U.S.
Steve Jobs famously said that if you're serious about software you build the hardware. This is what gave us the iPhone. Remember that Apple had no phone experience other than their partnership with Motorola.

I don't know if that culture is still in Apple, but building a car will be one of biggest technolgical feats for Apple since the iPhone.
I tend to believe they are still working on it, but in a reduced capacity. Hopefully they're being smart about it now. I think they poured too many resources into it too quickly. The iPhone and iPad are things that Apple worked on very slowly for many, many years. They got the different pieces in place ahead of time, such as when they bought FingerWorks and their multitouch technology in 2005. That was a game changer for them, and from what I understand, they accelerated development after that and deciding on the full screen form factor as the best way forward.

Likewise, their autonomous driving system is probably similar to the role that multitouch and the full screen design played in the original iPhone. It will help determine the final form factor of the vehicle. I think another component to that is allowing the electric car market to mature a little bit more. Apple doesn't like to go in ahead of the market, but sit back and come out with the better way. If you think about it, it makes sense to do that because it helps Apple identify pain points and address them and then point to their product and show how it's far superior. They basically let the early to market tech be their beta test. They're likely doing the same with autonomous driving and electric vehicles, and their autonomous system being tested with Didi Chuxing is the first phase of the master plan.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MrX8503

paul4339

macrumors 65816
Sep 14, 2009
1,407
666
it probably makes more sense to introduce driverless technology in countries that
- have good infrastructure,
- is ready open to adopt change,
- have less regulation or liability,
- that has a willing and participating government or other regulating bodies
- that has a current problem which the technology can add significant value

countries that have lots of resistance, in otherwords, existing 'incumbants' that have 'lots to lose' will put up barriers to slow you down, are sometimes a poor choice to bring in some types new tech.

(eg, China has been rapidly changing for last two decades, and people are accustomed to change. They have huge commuting problems and there is a huge rewards/payoff for taking risks to successfully bring in this technology. The government is willing to accommodate and help companies like Didi solve their transportation problems.

France, on the otherhand has to bring out riot police to stop Taxi cab drivers from torching vehicles in the streets of Paris in the protest against Uber, blockading the Airport, and hurting tourists and their own customers).

.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: GrumpyMom

dragicon

macrumors member
Jan 12, 2014
41
152
I have a feeling that a driverless car system in China will not work out well. The government has resisted automation in favor of keeping jobs for the population. There are so many taxi drivers in China, that I feel this would cause more unemployment. I guess time will tell, but I just don't see it.
 

IJ Reilly

macrumors P6
Jul 16, 2002
17,889
1,478
Palookaville
Equity investments are not "earnings," they are equity investments. Earnings are earnings. First thought in seeing this headline was Apple had invested in a company that had already earned $5.5B, which would be miraculous if was actually true.
 

mcfrazieriv

macrumors 6502a
Jan 30, 2012
856
2,108
I tend to believe they are still working on it, but in a reduced capacity. Hopefully they're being smart about it now. I think they poured too many resources into it too quickly. The iPhone and iPad are things that Apple worked on very slowly for many, many years. They got the different pieces in place ahead of time, such as when they bought FingerWorks and their multitouch technology in 2005. That was a game changer for them, and from what I understand, they accelerated development after that and deciding on the full screen form factor as the best way forward.

Likewise, their autonomous driving system is probably similar to the role that multitouch and the full screen design played in the original iPhone. It will help determine the final form factor of the vehicle. I think another component to that is allowing the electric car market to mature a little bit more. Apple doesn't like to go in ahead of the market, but sit back and come out with the better way. If you think about it, it makes sense to do that because it helps Apple identify pain points and address them and then point to their product and show how it's far superior. They basically let the early to market tech be their beta test. They're likely doing the same with autonomous driving and electric vehicles, and their autonomous system being tested with Didi Chuxing is the first phase of the master plan.

I think it's a staged approach. First release something as you mentioned under someone else's name to test. Then go full blown release once they are comfortable. Case: ROKR before the iPhone.
 
  • Like
Reactions: macduke

macduke

macrumors G4
Jun 27, 2007
11,167
15,133
Central U.S.
I think it's a staged approach. First release something as you mentioned under someone else's name to test. Then go full blown release once they are comfortable. Case: ROKR before the iPhone.
I had the ROKR.

You could not pay me enough to ride in the ROKR of automated driving. Holy hell, lol. Let's hope it's better than that!
 

Abazigal

Contributor
Jul 18, 2011
13,550
11,994
Singapore
Wow.

Whoever thinks Tim Cook is a bad CEO is a moron.
I think it's not so much that people feel Tim
Cook is a bad CEO per se, just that they are unhappy with the direction in which Tim Cook is leading Apple towards, because it threatens the current status quo, and everything they have come to know and love about Apple.

Change always makes people unsettled.
 
Last edited:

djcerla

macrumors 68000
Apr 23, 2015
1,866
7,877
Italy
I think it's not so much that people feel is a bad CEO per se, just that they are unhappy with the direction in which Tim Cook is leading Apple towards, because it threatens the current status quo, and everything they have come to know and love about Apple.

Change always makes people unsettled.

I agree. But Steve Jobs' Apple was a stubborn entity, whereas Tim Cook's Apple is willing to admit its mistakes and make changes, see WatchOS, Mac Pro, Maps.
 

mrhick01

macrumors 6502
Sep 22, 2008
396
187
Apple's investment here makes so much more sense than it did at first. I think they realized that they need a huge market to test their driverless technology without putting their name on it in case something goes wrong. So they supply this technology they've been working on to Didi Chuxing to incorporate into their driverless cars. The regulations in China are probably less strict, and since Didi Chuxing is a Chinese company, they'll get some media protection from the government in case something goes wrong. Apple can collect a lot of data and improve their driverless system in China while growing their investment. The investment also probably placates the Chinese government to a certain extent and makes them look more favorably upon Apple, and Apple will likely end up making a good bit of money on the investment in the process. It's a win-win.

Once Apple is ready, they can expand the driverless system to the rest of the world. The big question, however, is will they end up developing their own car or sell this as a platform for all auto manufacturers? On the one hand, they could make a lot of money licensing it. But is that Apple's typical behavior? They tend to want to control the hardware. But it's a pretty huge hardware pivot, even for them. And I understand that this probably sounds close-minded given the naysayers who were wrong about the iPhone, but the iPhone is a lot closer in hardware to an iPod than an iPhone is to a freaking car. It's certainly not impossible, but a lot more difficult.

Exactly.

Didi Chuxing is providing Apple a huge test lab. This is one of the territories of "the next big thing."

Apple has put less attention into their computers, but their computer hardware business isn't going to get much bigger than the $25 billion (record numbers for Apple computer sales, btw) than they're already selling—although their soft launch "mea culpa" does at least signal that they will invest better time and attention on providing modern specs along with the form of their hardware.

Self-driving tech will be huge. There isn't yet a market to "dominate" as of yet. Several companies are making their play.
 

ryanwarsaw

macrumors 68030
Apr 7, 2007
2,686
2,387
Wow.

Whoever thinks Tim Cook is a bad CEO is a moron.

Agreed. Literally everything he has done turns to gold. This has been another great move and gives Apple a huge market that can be used as Guinea pigs. They can test what they do in California as well but they can probably do much more in China with less restrictions.
 

Vanilla35

macrumors 68040
Apr 11, 2013
3,342
1,412
Washington D.C.
I agree. But Steve Jobs' Apple was a stubborn entity, whereas Tim Cook's Apple is willing to admit its mistakes and make changes, see WatchOS, Mac Pro, Maps.

I'd personally rather have the "good" Steve had, than the lack of "bad" Cook has. Not to mention correcting mistakes means you messed it up to begin with. Wasn't as frequent of an occurrence with Steve cus he had great vision.
 

djlythium

macrumors 6502a
Jun 11, 2014
795
998
Apple's investment here makes so much more sense than it did at first. I think they realized that they need a huge market to test their driverless technology without putting their name on it in case something goes wrong. So they supply this technology they've been working on to Didi Chuxing to incorporate into their driverless cars. The regulations in China are probably less strict, and since Didi Chuxing is a Chinese company, they'll get some media protection from the government in case something goes wrong. Apple can collect a lot of data and improve their driverless system in China while growing their investment. The investment also probably placates the Chinese government to a certain extent and makes them look more favorably upon Apple, and Apple will likely end up making a good bit of money on the investment in the process. It's a win-win.

Once Apple is ready, they can expand the driverless system to the rest of the world. The big question, however, is will they end up developing their own car or sell this as a platform for all auto manufacturers? On the one hand, they could make a lot of money licensing it. But is that Apple's typical behavior? They tend to want to control the hardware. But it's a pretty huge hardware pivot, even for them. And I understand that this probably sounds close-minded given the naysayers who were wrong about the iPhone, but the iPhone is a lot closer in hardware to an iPod than an iPhone is to a freaking car. It's certainly not impossible, but a lot more difficult.
Nailed it, Macduke.
 
  • Like
Reactions: macduke
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.