Once again, I could probably write a weekly blog on this
topic alone. It’s worthy of it too, as
we will see this week and beyond. So,
let’s start to get caught up.
We start with Fox News’s
June 30th “Driverless ‘CargoPods’ are delivering groceries to Londoners in new
trial.” That’s a valid
autonomous-vehicle proposition, and will move from the manned trucks now in use
to unoccupied ones texting or phoning customers when they’re outside, but how
much will they charge? As name
recognition and brand establishment would seem less important for a venture both
seriously price-competitive and startable on short notice, it seems wrong for
any firm to accept losses for years to position themselves for eventual
possible profitability, so online grocer Ocado should be expecting positive
cash flow soon.
Less substantive is Brent Snavely’s July 2nd Detroit Free Press report that “Ford
exec points to ‘great progress’ in driverless cars.” That company has done better than moving
toward “deploying its first fully self-driving car by 2021” which others have
achieved already, such as by assembling a consortium including software maker
Argo AI. Ford’s vice president of
research and advanced engineering may have said “we don’t worry too much about
where the competitors are,” but we don’t need to take this sort of announcement,
clearly for public consumption, seriously.
One area of autonomous vehicles which could go in many ways
is the nature of their interiors. With
no need for them to be focused on the needs of drivers, car interiors will be
blank canvases. One of an infinite
number of possibilities, described in “Autonomous cars will bring a moveable
feast of products and services” (Cyrus Radfar, Yahoo Finance, July 2), is “the mobile mall,” using displays to
simulate the interiors of a variety of stores.
Such would coordinate well with the inexorable-seeming trend toward
online shopping, post-credit-card point of sale technology, and the preferences
of those in the Millennial and Generation Z generations. For car interiors we can use all the imaginative
ideas we can find, and this one is certainly reasonable.
We’re in the early stages of intercity rivalries in this
industry, and one of the most prominent so far is “Michigan’s New Motor
City: Ann Arbor as a Driverless-Car Hub”
(Neal E. Boudette, The New York Times,
July 9). To the well-established MCity proving
grounds, that college town will soon add autonomous buses, as of early July was
up to 1,500 vehicles which “radio their speed and direction to each other and
to equipment like traffic lights and crosswalk signals,” and soon expects to
make good use of all those personally-carried cellphones by having them
broadcast pedestrians’ locations to traffic signals and on to cars. Elsewhere in that state, additional and much
larger proving grounds are being built in Ypsilanti and Flint, where, among
other things, consortia can aggressively address the problematic issue of
autonomous snow driving.
We saw more progress in such business conglomerations in
“Waymo and Apple Pick Their Dance Partners for Self-Driving Cars” (The Motley Fool in Fox Business, July 10th.) We now have Waymo, Google’s driverless vehicle
concern, pairing with Avis and Chrysler, and Apple simultaneously announcing its
Hertz partnership involving Lexus cars.
It’s well worthwhile for consortia to work with companies knowing about
physically managing millions of vehicles, and also benefiting Hertz and Avis is
easier entrée into the future of car rental, which, as the article points out,
“will likely become more, not less, relevant in an autonomous world.” The consortia themselves may include “non-exclusive
partnerships,” which, as we will see in this series, are happening
already. These are good positive trends.
It is well worthwhile to keep an eye on how investors, as
well as other analysts, see driverless-technology companies. These same sources published “3 Top Stocks in
Self-Driving Cars” on July 12th, a piece, which after suggesting
that to some people such vehicles still seem “like a bit of cheesy ‘50s-era
science fiction” and citing a well-obsolete Business Insider study suggesting
“that there will be 10 million autonomous cars on the roads by 2020” (not that
many only three years from now) and overly conservative HIS Automotive
forecasts of 600,000 by 2025 (let’s try 10-20 million) and 21 million by 2035
(could be 200 million), then moved on to the merits of Waymo, onboard computer
maker NVIDIA, and China’s driverless consortium leader Baidu. All are potentially great buys, especially
for investors with the stomach for risk, as any could also turn out like Stutz
or Hupmobile.
A problem with that huge Asian market is the subject of
“China’s Grip on Maps Hinders Self-Driving Car Makers” (Liza Lin and Tim
Higgins, The Wall Street Journal,
July 13). China, which we sometimes forget
is not a free country, “is limiting the amount of mapping that can be done by
foreign companies.” A bad idea, and one
reason why I do not think it will be anywhere near the forefront of
self-driving progress.
Moving on to the regulatory side, we found out on July 21st
from Kevin Roose in The New York Times
that “As Self-Driving Cars Near, Washington Plays Catch-Up.” Although there is no such thing as “a bill
that would speed up the development of self-driving cars,” federal regulatory
efforts, thus far mercifully mild, are still small in the proposed Highly
Automated Vehicle Testing and Deployment Act of 2017. That bill may do more to remove obsolete
regulations than to create new ones, and, as Roose pointed out, state
governments, wanting economic benefits from driverless business activity, have
generally been lenient as well.
That’s three weeks’ worth – much more will follow.
No comments:
Post a Comment