REUTERS
"Lucid forecasts annual vehicle production below estimates"
Reuters
February 21, 2024
Feb 21 (Reuters) - Lucid Group forecast annual vehicle production far below analysts' estimates on Wednesday, on signs that demand for its luxury electric vehicles will slow down as high interest rates pinch consumer budgets.
Shares of the company fell around 5% in extended trading.
The company expects to make 9,000 units for the full-year 2024 compared with estimates of 22,594 according to five analysts polled by Visible Alpha.
The company made 8,428 vehicles in 2023.
The Saudi Arabia-backed company took to slashing prices once more for its Air sedans last week to counter sagging demand at a time when the EV industry is seeing a slowdown.
The company also missed estimates for fourth-quarter revenue hit by a slowdown in deliveries as consumers grapple with high costs.
Lucid reported revenue of $157.2 million, missing average analysts' estimate of $179.9 million, according to LSEG data.
Reporting by Zaheer Kachwala in Bengaluru; Editing by Shailesh Kuber
https://www.reuters.com/business/autos- ... 024-02-21/
ELECTRIC VEHICLES
Re: ELECTRIC VEHICLES
REUTERS
"Rivian cuts jobs, sees annual production below estimates"
Reuters
February 21, 2024
Feb 21 (Reuters) - Rivian said on Wednesday it would cut its workforce by 10% and forecast EV production this year that widely missed estimates, hurt by downtime for factory upgrades and slowing demand for electric vehicles due to high interest rates.
Shares of the company tumbled about 17% in extended trading after Rivian said it expects to produce 57,000 vehicles in 2024, well below estimates of 81,700 units, according to eight analysts polled by Visible Alpha.
It produced 57,232 vehicles last year.
"We firmly believe in the full electrification of the automotive industry, but recognize in the short-term, the challenging macro-economic conditions," CEO RJ Scaringe said in a statement on Wednesday.
Amazon.com-backed Rivian has been burning through cash to ramp up production of its R1S SUV and R1T pickup trucks as it spends on building a new factory in Georgia and loses thousands of dollars on every vehicle it builds.
The company's cash burn comes at a time when demand for EVs has slowed, with Tesla CEO Elon Musk warning that high interest rates are making cars unaffordable.
After shying away from reducing the price of its vehicles last year despite a price war sparked by Tesla, Rivian this month cut the price of its R1T pickup trucks and R1S SUVs by $3,100.
Meanwhile, Lucid also forecast production for 2024 that was much lower than Wall Street's expectations, even after it cut prices of its Lucid Air luxury electric sedans last week.
Rivian's cash and cash equivalents were $7.86 billion at the end of the December-quarter, compared with $7.94 billion in the preceding three-month period.
It also recorded a 10% fall in deliveries in the fourth quarter, missing estimates, citing lack of deliveries to Amazon in the three-month period to focus on the holiday period.
However, revenue for the October-December period stood at $1.32 billion, above Wall Street estimates of $1.26 billion, according to LSEG data.
Rivian has been posting a loss on every vehicle it sells and expects to record its first quarter of positive gross margin later this year.
The company's R2 platform, which is expected to be cheaper and smaller, is set to be unveiled early next month.
The company reported a net loss of $1.52 billion for the fourth quarter ended Dec. 31, compared with a loss of $1.72 billion a year earlier.
Reporting by Akash Sriram in Bengaluru; Editing by Shailesh Kuber
https://www.reuters.com/business/autos- ... 024-02-21/
"Rivian cuts jobs, sees annual production below estimates"
Reuters
February 21, 2024
Feb 21 (Reuters) - Rivian said on Wednesday it would cut its workforce by 10% and forecast EV production this year that widely missed estimates, hurt by downtime for factory upgrades and slowing demand for electric vehicles due to high interest rates.
Shares of the company tumbled about 17% in extended trading after Rivian said it expects to produce 57,000 vehicles in 2024, well below estimates of 81,700 units, according to eight analysts polled by Visible Alpha.
It produced 57,232 vehicles last year.
"We firmly believe in the full electrification of the automotive industry, but recognize in the short-term, the challenging macro-economic conditions," CEO RJ Scaringe said in a statement on Wednesday.
Amazon.com-backed Rivian has been burning through cash to ramp up production of its R1S SUV and R1T pickup trucks as it spends on building a new factory in Georgia and loses thousands of dollars on every vehicle it builds.
The company's cash burn comes at a time when demand for EVs has slowed, with Tesla CEO Elon Musk warning that high interest rates are making cars unaffordable.
After shying away from reducing the price of its vehicles last year despite a price war sparked by Tesla, Rivian this month cut the price of its R1T pickup trucks and R1S SUVs by $3,100.
Meanwhile, Lucid also forecast production for 2024 that was much lower than Wall Street's expectations, even after it cut prices of its Lucid Air luxury electric sedans last week.
Rivian's cash and cash equivalents were $7.86 billion at the end of the December-quarter, compared with $7.94 billion in the preceding three-month period.
It also recorded a 10% fall in deliveries in the fourth quarter, missing estimates, citing lack of deliveries to Amazon in the three-month period to focus on the holiday period.
However, revenue for the October-December period stood at $1.32 billion, above Wall Street estimates of $1.26 billion, according to LSEG data.
Rivian has been posting a loss on every vehicle it sells and expects to record its first quarter of positive gross margin later this year.
The company's R2 platform, which is expected to be cheaper and smaller, is set to be unveiled early next month.
The company reported a net loss of $1.52 billion for the fourth quarter ended Dec. 31, compared with a loss of $1.72 billion a year earlier.
Reporting by Akash Sriram in Bengaluru; Editing by Shailesh Kuber
https://www.reuters.com/business/autos- ... 024-02-21/
Re: ELECTRIC VEHICLES
REUTERS
"Ford halts shipments of new F-150 Lightning EVs"
By David Shepardson
February 23, 2024
Feb 23 (Reuters) - Ford Motor said on Friday it had halted shipments of all 2024 model year F-150 Lightning electric pickup trucks, so it could perform quality checks for an issue it did not specify.
The No. 2 U.S. automaker said the shipment halt began on Feb. 9.
It did not say when it expected to resume shipments that had begun in January of the EV truck.
A spokesperson declined to say what quality issue was being checked.
Ford also said that this week it began shipping the first newly designed gas-powered 2024 model F-150 pickups to dealers.
Ford said it expects "to ramp up shipments in the coming weeks as we complete thorough launch quality checks to ensure these new F-150s meet our high standards."
Automotive News reported that hundreds, if not thousands, of 2024 model gas-powered F-150 trucks had piled up in storage lots in southeast Michigan since production began in December.
Ford said in September it would start shipping the new F-150 in early 2024 and said Friday it was "on plan."
Last month, Ford said it would reduce production of its F-150 Lightning, as demand for electric vehicles (EVs) has been lower than expected.
Ford said Friday production of the EV truck was continuing.
In January, the automaker said it would cut production at its Michigan Rouge Electric Vehicle Center to one shift starting April 1.
In October, Ford temporarily cut one of three shifts at the EV plant.
Ford told suppliers in December it planned to produce about 1,600 F-150 Lightning EV trucks per week starting in January, roughly half of the 3,200 it previously had planned.
Ford sold 24,165 F-150 Lightning trucks last year in the U.S., up 55% from 2022, out of about 750,000 total F-150 U.S. sales.
Ford in August had said the plant that builds F-150 Lightning could hit a 150,000-vehicle annualized production rate by October.
In 2022 it said it would double EV truck production.
Reporting by David Shepardson in Washington Sourasis Bose in Bengaluru; Editing by Shailesh Kuber and David Gregorio
https://www.reuters.com/business/autos- ... 024-02-23/
"Ford halts shipments of new F-150 Lightning EVs"
By David Shepardson
February 23, 2024
Feb 23 (Reuters) - Ford Motor said on Friday it had halted shipments of all 2024 model year F-150 Lightning electric pickup trucks, so it could perform quality checks for an issue it did not specify.
The No. 2 U.S. automaker said the shipment halt began on Feb. 9.
It did not say when it expected to resume shipments that had begun in January of the EV truck.
A spokesperson declined to say what quality issue was being checked.
Ford also said that this week it began shipping the first newly designed gas-powered 2024 model F-150 pickups to dealers.
Ford said it expects "to ramp up shipments in the coming weeks as we complete thorough launch quality checks to ensure these new F-150s meet our high standards."
Automotive News reported that hundreds, if not thousands, of 2024 model gas-powered F-150 trucks had piled up in storage lots in southeast Michigan since production began in December.
Ford said in September it would start shipping the new F-150 in early 2024 and said Friday it was "on plan."
Last month, Ford said it would reduce production of its F-150 Lightning, as demand for electric vehicles (EVs) has been lower than expected.
Ford said Friday production of the EV truck was continuing.
In January, the automaker said it would cut production at its Michigan Rouge Electric Vehicle Center to one shift starting April 1.
In October, Ford temporarily cut one of three shifts at the EV plant.
Ford told suppliers in December it planned to produce about 1,600 F-150 Lightning EV trucks per week starting in January, roughly half of the 3,200 it previously had planned.
Ford sold 24,165 F-150 Lightning trucks last year in the U.S., up 55% from 2022, out of about 750,000 total F-150 U.S. sales.
Ford in August had said the plant that builds F-150 Lightning could hit a 150,000-vehicle annualized production rate by October.
In 2022 it said it would double EV truck production.
Reporting by David Shepardson in Washington Sourasis Bose in Bengaluru; Editing by Shailesh Kuber and David Gregorio
https://www.reuters.com/business/autos- ... 024-02-23/
Re: ELECTRIC VEHICLES
Bloomberg
"Investors Flee Tumbling EV Upstarts Once Hailed as ‘Next Tesla’"
Story by Esha Dey
25 FEBRUARY 2024
(Bloomberg) -- There was a time when the backing of some of the world’s deepest pockets and the mere ambition to sell electric cars was enough to inspire confidence in the stocks of upstarts Rivian Automotive Inc. and Lucid Group Inc.
Now investors have all but thrown in the towel on the shares.
All it took was a fresh dose of reality from the two companies this week around cooling demand for EVs.
Rivian, which makes electric pickups, SUVs and delivery vans and counts Amazon.com Inc. as its top shareholder, said its production will stay flat at last year’s levels.
It also announced plans to shrink its workforce again.
Lucid, majority-owned by Saudi Arabia’s sovereign wealth fund, projected only a slight increase in output over 2023.
Both forecasts fell far short of analysts’ expectations.
For investors, the sense of gloom has been building since October, when Tesla Inc. warned of sagging interest in EVs.
Though shares of the EV giant have fared poorly since then, losing around 20% and massively underperforming the broader market, the impact on smaller rivals like Rivian and Lucid has been nothing short of disastrous.
“If you are a hyper-growth company in what is seen as a disruptive industry and you are not growing your topline, you are in trouble,” said David Mazza, chief strategy officer at Roundhill Investments.
“Having an anchor investor like Amazon or the Saudis gives them a longer runway from a capital perspective, but their growth will still be slower and margins thinner than what was once expected.”
Shares of Irvine, California-based Rivian are down by about 44% since Tesla’s October warning — the first in a series of grim outlooks from global EV-makers and suppliers — and closed Friday at a record low.
Newark, California-based Lucid has dropped some 33% in the same period, and isn’t far above its own nadir.
Still, had it not been for their wealthy backers — Amazon has a 17% stake in Rivian, and Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund holds roughly 60% of Lucid, data compiled by Bloomberg show — the stocks could be looking far uglier.
“The presence of these names is a comfort to investors and a cushion to the price,” Mazza said.
“If these stocks were just relying on the EV hype, then they will be down much worse.”
Amazon in an emailed statement said that the recent results from Rivian don’t change anything about the e-commerce company’s “existing investment, collaboration, or order size and timing.”
Rivian has a deal with Amazon to sell it 100,000 electric delivery vans by 2030.
Saudi Arabia’s PIF didn’t respond to an email seeking comment outside of the fund’s regular business hours on Friday.
‘Alarm Bells’
Overall, the biggest concern is that these cash-burning, unprofitable companies will struggle to sell cars at a time when even industry-leader Tesla — by far the biggest seller in the US market — is cutting prices to boost demand.
And while Tesla’s profits and large-scale production allow it to compete by lowering prices, Rivian and Lucid have neither of those advantages.
“For these car manufacturers, investors want to see demand,” said David Wagner, portfolio manager at Aptus Capital Advisors.
Rivian’s latest results suggest it will take several quarters to emerge from its production stoppage with a leaner cost structure and a redesigned platform, he said.
“In the meantime, I think skeptics will be scrutinizing the cash balance and ringing alarm bells,” Wagner said.
“So if there is no multiple expansion and no growth — what else is the stock supposed to do?”
Both Rivian and Lucid are now worth a fraction of the prices they fetched at their public-market debuts in 2021.
Rivian’s market value is around $9.6 billion, and Lucid’s is about $6.9 billion.
That’s a long way down from their $153 billion and $91 billion valuation peaks, respectively, in 2021.
Wall Street analysts are losing confidence as well.
Analysts’ average 12-month price targets for Rivian and Lucid fell nearly 20% just this week.
Meanwhile, the outlook for EVs broadly just keeps getting worse.
Global sales of EVs are estimated to grow 20% this year, to about 16.7 million units, according to BloombergNEF’s most recent analysis.
That’s a marked cooling from the 33% jump seen in 2023.
“Trying to be the ‘next Tesla’ is turning out to be an expensive strategy,” Morgan Stanley analyst Adam Jonas wrote in a note Friday.
“As EV startups turn into restructuring stories, whoever finds a sponsor has the best chance.”
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets ... 4285&ei=26
"Investors Flee Tumbling EV Upstarts Once Hailed as ‘Next Tesla’"
Story by Esha Dey
25 FEBRUARY 2024
(Bloomberg) -- There was a time when the backing of some of the world’s deepest pockets and the mere ambition to sell electric cars was enough to inspire confidence in the stocks of upstarts Rivian Automotive Inc. and Lucid Group Inc.
Now investors have all but thrown in the towel on the shares.
All it took was a fresh dose of reality from the two companies this week around cooling demand for EVs.
Rivian, which makes electric pickups, SUVs and delivery vans and counts Amazon.com Inc. as its top shareholder, said its production will stay flat at last year’s levels.
It also announced plans to shrink its workforce again.
Lucid, majority-owned by Saudi Arabia’s sovereign wealth fund, projected only a slight increase in output over 2023.
Both forecasts fell far short of analysts’ expectations.
For investors, the sense of gloom has been building since October, when Tesla Inc. warned of sagging interest in EVs.
Though shares of the EV giant have fared poorly since then, losing around 20% and massively underperforming the broader market, the impact on smaller rivals like Rivian and Lucid has been nothing short of disastrous.
“If you are a hyper-growth company in what is seen as a disruptive industry and you are not growing your topline, you are in trouble,” said David Mazza, chief strategy officer at Roundhill Investments.
“Having an anchor investor like Amazon or the Saudis gives them a longer runway from a capital perspective, but their growth will still be slower and margins thinner than what was once expected.”
Shares of Irvine, California-based Rivian are down by about 44% since Tesla’s October warning — the first in a series of grim outlooks from global EV-makers and suppliers — and closed Friday at a record low.
Newark, California-based Lucid has dropped some 33% in the same period, and isn’t far above its own nadir.
Still, had it not been for their wealthy backers — Amazon has a 17% stake in Rivian, and Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund holds roughly 60% of Lucid, data compiled by Bloomberg show — the stocks could be looking far uglier.
“The presence of these names is a comfort to investors and a cushion to the price,” Mazza said.
“If these stocks were just relying on the EV hype, then they will be down much worse.”
Amazon in an emailed statement said that the recent results from Rivian don’t change anything about the e-commerce company’s “existing investment, collaboration, or order size and timing.”
Rivian has a deal with Amazon to sell it 100,000 electric delivery vans by 2030.
Saudi Arabia’s PIF didn’t respond to an email seeking comment outside of the fund’s regular business hours on Friday.
‘Alarm Bells’
Overall, the biggest concern is that these cash-burning, unprofitable companies will struggle to sell cars at a time when even industry-leader Tesla — by far the biggest seller in the US market — is cutting prices to boost demand.
And while Tesla’s profits and large-scale production allow it to compete by lowering prices, Rivian and Lucid have neither of those advantages.
“For these car manufacturers, investors want to see demand,” said David Wagner, portfolio manager at Aptus Capital Advisors.
Rivian’s latest results suggest it will take several quarters to emerge from its production stoppage with a leaner cost structure and a redesigned platform, he said.
“In the meantime, I think skeptics will be scrutinizing the cash balance and ringing alarm bells,” Wagner said.
“So if there is no multiple expansion and no growth — what else is the stock supposed to do?”
Both Rivian and Lucid are now worth a fraction of the prices they fetched at their public-market debuts in 2021.
Rivian’s market value is around $9.6 billion, and Lucid’s is about $6.9 billion.
That’s a long way down from their $153 billion and $91 billion valuation peaks, respectively, in 2021.
Wall Street analysts are losing confidence as well.
Analysts’ average 12-month price targets for Rivian and Lucid fell nearly 20% just this week.
Meanwhile, the outlook for EVs broadly just keeps getting worse.
Global sales of EVs are estimated to grow 20% this year, to about 16.7 million units, according to BloombergNEF’s most recent analysis.
That’s a marked cooling from the 33% jump seen in 2023.
“Trying to be the ‘next Tesla’ is turning out to be an expensive strategy,” Morgan Stanley analyst Adam Jonas wrote in a note Friday.
“As EV startups turn into restructuring stories, whoever finds a sponsor has the best chance.”
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets ... 4285&ei=26
Re: ELECTRIC VEHICLES
REUTERS
"EV startup Fisker raises going concern doubts, shares plunge"
By Zaheer Kachwala and Abhirup Roy
February 29, 2024
Feb 29 (Reuters) - Fisker on Thursday warned it might not be able to continue as a going concern as it struggled to sell its flagship electric vehicle after high interest rates have led to a slowdown in demand, sending its shares down 35% in extended trading.
The maker of Ocean electric SUVs said its current resources were "insufficient" to cover the next 12 months.
Fisker said it would cut its workforce by about 15% and was in talks with a debt holder about a potential investment.
Fisker also said it was in talks with a large automaker about a deal that could include an investment in the startup, joint development of one or more electric vehicle platforms, and North America manufacturing.
It did not disclose the name of the automaker or financials of the deal.
Fisker said it aims to deliver between 20,000 and 22,000 Ocean vehicles in 2024.
If the additional financing plans do not materialize, the company said it might be forced to reduce production of Ocean, decrease investments, scale back operations and cut jobs further.
Fisker's commentary followed disappointing production forecasts from larger peers Rivian and Lucid as high borrowing costs have sourced consumer sentiment and sharply slowed demand for EVs that are typically more expensive than gasoline-powered vehicles.
"2023 was a challenging year for Fisker, including delays with suppliers and other issues that prevented us from delivering the Ocean SUV as quickly as we had expected," CEO Henrik Fisker said.
The company has been grappling with delivering its vehicles to customers.
Though it made more than 10,000 vehicles in 2023 - less than a quarter of its initial forecast - it delivered only about 4,700.
Last month, Fisker said it would add dealerships alongside its direct-to-consumer distribution model to expand its delivery network.
So far, Fisker has signed 13 dealer partners across the U.S. and Europe.
Fisker said its business plan was "highly dependent" on the successful transfer to the new dealer partner model this year.
Last year, Fisker unveiled a $45,000 electric pickup, Alaska, and a smaller SUV, PEAR, priced at $29,990.
But the projects depend on the partnership.
"We are not planning to start external expenditure on our next projects until or we have a strategic partnership in place," Henrik Fisker said on a post-earnings call with analysts.
On Thursday, Fisker reported preliminary revenue of $200.1 million for the fourth quarter, missing the average analyst estimate of $310.8 million, according to LSEG data.
Net loss widened to $463.6 million from $170 million a year ago.
Reporting by Zaheer Kachwala in Bengaluru and Abhirup Roy in San Francisco; Editing by Shailesh Kuber, Maju Samuel and David Gregorio
https://www.reuters.com/business/autos- ... 024-02-29/
"EV startup Fisker raises going concern doubts, shares plunge"
By Zaheer Kachwala and Abhirup Roy
February 29, 2024
Feb 29 (Reuters) - Fisker on Thursday warned it might not be able to continue as a going concern as it struggled to sell its flagship electric vehicle after high interest rates have led to a slowdown in demand, sending its shares down 35% in extended trading.
The maker of Ocean electric SUVs said its current resources were "insufficient" to cover the next 12 months.
Fisker said it would cut its workforce by about 15% and was in talks with a debt holder about a potential investment.
Fisker also said it was in talks with a large automaker about a deal that could include an investment in the startup, joint development of one or more electric vehicle platforms, and North America manufacturing.
It did not disclose the name of the automaker or financials of the deal.
Fisker said it aims to deliver between 20,000 and 22,000 Ocean vehicles in 2024.
If the additional financing plans do not materialize, the company said it might be forced to reduce production of Ocean, decrease investments, scale back operations and cut jobs further.
Fisker's commentary followed disappointing production forecasts from larger peers Rivian and Lucid as high borrowing costs have sourced consumer sentiment and sharply slowed demand for EVs that are typically more expensive than gasoline-powered vehicles.
"2023 was a challenging year for Fisker, including delays with suppliers and other issues that prevented us from delivering the Ocean SUV as quickly as we had expected," CEO Henrik Fisker said.
The company has been grappling with delivering its vehicles to customers.
Though it made more than 10,000 vehicles in 2023 - less than a quarter of its initial forecast - it delivered only about 4,700.
Last month, Fisker said it would add dealerships alongside its direct-to-consumer distribution model to expand its delivery network.
So far, Fisker has signed 13 dealer partners across the U.S. and Europe.
Fisker said its business plan was "highly dependent" on the successful transfer to the new dealer partner model this year.
Last year, Fisker unveiled a $45,000 electric pickup, Alaska, and a smaller SUV, PEAR, priced at $29,990.
But the projects depend on the partnership.
"We are not planning to start external expenditure on our next projects until or we have a strategic partnership in place," Henrik Fisker said on a post-earnings call with analysts.
On Thursday, Fisker reported preliminary revenue of $200.1 million for the fourth quarter, missing the average analyst estimate of $310.8 million, according to LSEG data.
Net loss widened to $463.6 million from $170 million a year ago.
Reporting by Zaheer Kachwala in Bengaluru and Abhirup Roy in San Francisco; Editing by Shailesh Kuber, Maju Samuel and David Gregorio
https://www.reuters.com/business/autos- ... 024-02-29/
Re: ELECTRIC VEHICLES
REUTERS
"Next Autopilot trial to test Tesla's blame-the-driver defense"
By Dan Levine and Hyunjoo Jin
March 11, 2024
March 11 (Reuters) - Six weeks before the first fatal U.S. accident involving Tesla's Autopilot in 2016, the automaker's president Jon McNeill tried it out in a Model X and emailed feedback to automated-driving chief Sterling Anderson, cc’ing Elon Musk.
The system performed perfectly, McNeill wrote, with the smoothness of a human driver.
"I got so comfortable under Autopilot, that I ended up blowing by exits because I was immersed in emails or calls (I know, I know, not a recommended use)," he wrote in the email dated March 25 that year.
Now McNeill's email, which has not been previously reported, is being used in a new line of legal attack against Tesla over Autopilot.
Plaintiffs' lawyers in a California wrongful-death lawsuit cited the message in a deposition as they asked a Tesla witness whether the company knew drivers would not watch the road when using its driver-assistance system, according to previously unreported transcripts reviewed by Reuters.
The Autopilot system can steer, accelerate and brake by itself on the open road but can't fully replace a human driver, especially in city driving.
Tesla materials explaining the system warn that it doesn't make the car autonomous and requires a "fully attentive driver" who can "take over at any moment".
The case, set for trial in San Jose the week of March 18, involves a fatal March 2018 crash and follows two previous California trials over Autopilot that Tesla won by arguing the drivers involved had not heeded its instructions to maintain attention while using the system.
This time, lawyers in the San Jose case have testimony from Tesla witnesses indicating that, before the accident, the automaker never studied how quickly and effectively drivers could take control if Autopilot accidentally steers towards an obstacle, the deposition transcripts show.
One witness testified that Tesla waited until 2021 to add a system monitoring drivers' attentiveness with cameras - about three years after first considering it.
The technology is designed to track a driver's movements and alert them if they fail to focus on the road ahead.
The case involves a highway accident near San Francisco that killed Apple engineer Walter Huang.
Tesla contends Huang misused the system because he was playing a video game just before the accident.
Lawyers for Huang's family are raising questions about whether Tesla understood that drivers - like McNeill, its own president - likely wouldn't or couldn't use the system as directed, and what steps the automaker took to protect them.
Experts in autonomous-vehicle law say the case could pose the stiffest test to date of Tesla's insistence that Autopilot is safe - if drivers do their part.
Matthew Wansley, a Cardozo law school associate professor with experience in the automated-vehicle industry, said Tesla's knowledge of likely driver behavior could prove legally pivotal.
"If it was reasonably foreseeable to Tesla that someone would misuse the system, Tesla had an obligation to design the system in a way that prevented foreseeable misuse," he said.
Richard Cupp, a Pepperdine law school professor, said Tesla might be able to undermine the plaintiffs' strategy by arguing that Huang misused Autopilot intentionally.
But if successful, the plaintiffs' attorneys could provide a blueprint for others suing over Autopilot.
Tesla faces at least a dozen such suits now, eight of which involve fatalities, putting the automaker at risk of large monetary judgments.
Musk, Tesla and its attorneys did not answer detailed questions from Reuters for this story.
McNeill declined to comment.
Anderson did not respond to requests.
Both have left Tesla.
McNeill is a board member at General Motors and its self-driving subsidiary, Cruise.
Anderson co-founded Aurora, a self-driving technology company.
Reuters could not determine whether Anderson or Musk read McNeill's email.
NEARLY 1,000 CRASHES
The crash that killed Huang is among hundreds of U.S. accidents where Autopilot was a suspected factor in reports to auto safety regulators.
The U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has examined at least 956 crashes in which Autopilot was initially reported to have been in use.
The agency separately launched more than 40 investigations into accidents involving Tesla automated-driving systems that resulted in 23 deaths.
Amid the NHTSA scrutiny, Tesla recalled more than 2 million vehicles with Autopilot in December to add more driver alerts.
The fix was implemented through a remote software update.
Huang's family alleges Autopilot steered his 2017 Model X into a highway barrier.
Tesla blames Huang, saying he failed to stay alert and take over driving.
"There is no dispute that, had he been paying attention to the road he would have had the opportunity to avoid this crash," Tesla said in a court filing.
A Santa Clara Superior Court judge has not yet decided what evidence jurors will hear.
Tesla also faces a federal criminal probe, first reported by Reuters in 2022, into company claims that its cars can drive themselves.
It disclosed in October it had received subpoenas related to driver-assistance systems.
Despite marketing features called Autopilot and Full Self-Driving, Tesla has yet to achieve Musk's oft-stated ambition of producing autonomous vehicles that require no human intervention.
Tesla says Autopilot can match speed to surrounding traffic and navigate within a highway lane.
The step-up "enhanced" Autopilot, which costs $6,000, adds automated lane-changes, highway ramp navigation and self-parking features.
The $12,000 Full Self-Driving option adds automated features for city streets, such as stop-light recognition.
'READY TO TAKE CONTROL'
In light of the McNeill email, the plaintiffs' lawyers in the Huang case are questioning Tesla's contention that drivers can make split-second transitions back to driving if Autopilot makes a mistake.
The email shows how drivers can become complacent while using the system and ignore the road, said Bryant Walker Smith, a University of South Carolina professor with expertise in autonomous-vehicle law.
The former Tesla president's message, he said, "corroborates that Tesla recognizes that irresponsible driving behavior and inattentive driving is even more tempting in its vehicles".
Huang family attorney Andrew McDevitt read portions of the email out loud during a deposition, according to a transcript.
Reuters was unable to obtain the full text of McNeill's note.
Plaintiffs' attorneys also cited public comments by Musk while probing what Tesla knew about driver behavior.
After a 2016 fatal crash, Musk told a news conference that drivers struggle more with attentiveness after they have used the system extensively.
"Autopilot accidents are far more likely for expert users," he said.
"It is not the neophytes."
A 2017 Tesla safety analysis, a company document that was introduced into evidence in a previous case, made clear that the system relies on quick driver reactions.
Autopilot might make an "unexpected steering input" at high speed, potentially causing the car to make a dangerous move, according to the document, which was cited by plaintiffs in one of the trials Tesla won.
Such an error requires that the driver "is ready to take over control and can quickly apply the brake".
In depositions, a Tesla employee and an expert witness the company hired were unable to identify any research the automaker conducted before the 2018 accident into drivers' ability to take over when Autopilot fails.
"I'm not aware of any research specifically," said the employee, who was designated by Tesla as the person most qualified to testify about Autopilot.
The automaker redacted the employee's name from depositions, arguing that it was legally protected information.
McDevitt asked the Tesla expert witness, Christopher Monk, if he could name any specialists in human interaction with automated systems whom Tesla consulted while designing Autopilot.
"I cannot," said Monk, who studies driver distraction and previously worked for the NHTSA, the depositions show.
Monk did not respond to requests for comment.
Reuters was unable to independently determine whether Tesla has since March 2018 researched how fast drivers can take back control, or if it has studied the effectiveness of the camera monitoring systems it activated in 2021.
LULLED INTO DISTRACTION
The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), which investigated five Autopilot-related crashes, has since 2017 repeatedly recommended that Tesla improve the driver-monitoring systems in its vehicles, without spelling out exactly how.
The agency, which conducts safety investigations and research but cannot order recalls, concluded in its report on the Huang accident: "Contributing to the crash was the Tesla vehicle's ineffective monitoring of driver engagement, which facilitated the driver's complacency and inattentiveness."
In his 2016 comments, Musk said drivers would ignore as many as 10 warnings an hour about keeping their hands on the wheel.
The Tesla employee testified that the company considered using cameras to monitor drivers' attentiveness before Huang's accident, but didn't introduce such a system until May 2021.
Musk, in public comments, has long resisted calls for more advanced driver-monitoring systems, reasoning that his cars would soon be fully autonomous and safer than human-piloted vehicles.
"The system is improving so much, so fast, that this is going to be a moot point very soon," he said in 2019 on a podcast with artificial-intelligence researcher Lex Fridman.
"I'd be shocked if it's not by next year, at the latest ... that having a human intervene will decrease safety."
Tesla now concedes its cars need better safeguards.
When it recalled vehicles with Autopilot in December, it explained that its driver-monitoring systems may not be sufficient and that the alerts it added during the recall would help drivers "adhere to their continuous driving responsibility".
The recall, however, didn't fully solve the problem, said Kelly Funkhouser, associate director of vehicle technology at Consumer Reports, one of the leading U.S. product-testing companies.
Its road tests of two Tesla vehicles after the automaker's fix found the system failed in myriad ways to address the safety concerns that sparked the recall.
"Autopilot usually does a good job," Funkhouser said.
"It rarely fails, but it does fail."
Reporting by Dan Levine and Hyunjoo Jin in San Francisco; Additional reporting by David Shepardson in Washington; Editing by David Clarke, Peter Henderson and Brian Thevenot
https://www.reuters.com/business/autos- ... 024-03-11/
"Next Autopilot trial to test Tesla's blame-the-driver defense"
By Dan Levine and Hyunjoo Jin
March 11, 2024
March 11 (Reuters) - Six weeks before the first fatal U.S. accident involving Tesla's Autopilot in 2016, the automaker's president Jon McNeill tried it out in a Model X and emailed feedback to automated-driving chief Sterling Anderson, cc’ing Elon Musk.
The system performed perfectly, McNeill wrote, with the smoothness of a human driver.
"I got so comfortable under Autopilot, that I ended up blowing by exits because I was immersed in emails or calls (I know, I know, not a recommended use)," he wrote in the email dated March 25 that year.
Now McNeill's email, which has not been previously reported, is being used in a new line of legal attack against Tesla over Autopilot.
Plaintiffs' lawyers in a California wrongful-death lawsuit cited the message in a deposition as they asked a Tesla witness whether the company knew drivers would not watch the road when using its driver-assistance system, according to previously unreported transcripts reviewed by Reuters.
The Autopilot system can steer, accelerate and brake by itself on the open road but can't fully replace a human driver, especially in city driving.
Tesla materials explaining the system warn that it doesn't make the car autonomous and requires a "fully attentive driver" who can "take over at any moment".
The case, set for trial in San Jose the week of March 18, involves a fatal March 2018 crash and follows two previous California trials over Autopilot that Tesla won by arguing the drivers involved had not heeded its instructions to maintain attention while using the system.
This time, lawyers in the San Jose case have testimony from Tesla witnesses indicating that, before the accident, the automaker never studied how quickly and effectively drivers could take control if Autopilot accidentally steers towards an obstacle, the deposition transcripts show.
One witness testified that Tesla waited until 2021 to add a system monitoring drivers' attentiveness with cameras - about three years after first considering it.
The technology is designed to track a driver's movements and alert them if they fail to focus on the road ahead.
The case involves a highway accident near San Francisco that killed Apple engineer Walter Huang.
Tesla contends Huang misused the system because he was playing a video game just before the accident.
Lawyers for Huang's family are raising questions about whether Tesla understood that drivers - like McNeill, its own president - likely wouldn't or couldn't use the system as directed, and what steps the automaker took to protect them.
Experts in autonomous-vehicle law say the case could pose the stiffest test to date of Tesla's insistence that Autopilot is safe - if drivers do their part.
Matthew Wansley, a Cardozo law school associate professor with experience in the automated-vehicle industry, said Tesla's knowledge of likely driver behavior could prove legally pivotal.
"If it was reasonably foreseeable to Tesla that someone would misuse the system, Tesla had an obligation to design the system in a way that prevented foreseeable misuse," he said.
Richard Cupp, a Pepperdine law school professor, said Tesla might be able to undermine the plaintiffs' strategy by arguing that Huang misused Autopilot intentionally.
But if successful, the plaintiffs' attorneys could provide a blueprint for others suing over Autopilot.
Tesla faces at least a dozen such suits now, eight of which involve fatalities, putting the automaker at risk of large monetary judgments.
Musk, Tesla and its attorneys did not answer detailed questions from Reuters for this story.
McNeill declined to comment.
Anderson did not respond to requests.
Both have left Tesla.
McNeill is a board member at General Motors and its self-driving subsidiary, Cruise.
Anderson co-founded Aurora, a self-driving technology company.
Reuters could not determine whether Anderson or Musk read McNeill's email.
NEARLY 1,000 CRASHES
The crash that killed Huang is among hundreds of U.S. accidents where Autopilot was a suspected factor in reports to auto safety regulators.
The U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has examined at least 956 crashes in which Autopilot was initially reported to have been in use.
The agency separately launched more than 40 investigations into accidents involving Tesla automated-driving systems that resulted in 23 deaths.
Amid the NHTSA scrutiny, Tesla recalled more than 2 million vehicles with Autopilot in December to add more driver alerts.
The fix was implemented through a remote software update.
Huang's family alleges Autopilot steered his 2017 Model X into a highway barrier.
Tesla blames Huang, saying he failed to stay alert and take over driving.
"There is no dispute that, had he been paying attention to the road he would have had the opportunity to avoid this crash," Tesla said in a court filing.
A Santa Clara Superior Court judge has not yet decided what evidence jurors will hear.
Tesla also faces a federal criminal probe, first reported by Reuters in 2022, into company claims that its cars can drive themselves.
It disclosed in October it had received subpoenas related to driver-assistance systems.
Despite marketing features called Autopilot and Full Self-Driving, Tesla has yet to achieve Musk's oft-stated ambition of producing autonomous vehicles that require no human intervention.
Tesla says Autopilot can match speed to surrounding traffic and navigate within a highway lane.
The step-up "enhanced" Autopilot, which costs $6,000, adds automated lane-changes, highway ramp navigation and self-parking features.
The $12,000 Full Self-Driving option adds automated features for city streets, such as stop-light recognition.
'READY TO TAKE CONTROL'
In light of the McNeill email, the plaintiffs' lawyers in the Huang case are questioning Tesla's contention that drivers can make split-second transitions back to driving if Autopilot makes a mistake.
The email shows how drivers can become complacent while using the system and ignore the road, said Bryant Walker Smith, a University of South Carolina professor with expertise in autonomous-vehicle law.
The former Tesla president's message, he said, "corroborates that Tesla recognizes that irresponsible driving behavior and inattentive driving is even more tempting in its vehicles".
Huang family attorney Andrew McDevitt read portions of the email out loud during a deposition, according to a transcript.
Reuters was unable to obtain the full text of McNeill's note.
Plaintiffs' attorneys also cited public comments by Musk while probing what Tesla knew about driver behavior.
After a 2016 fatal crash, Musk told a news conference that drivers struggle more with attentiveness after they have used the system extensively.
"Autopilot accidents are far more likely for expert users," he said.
"It is not the neophytes."
A 2017 Tesla safety analysis, a company document that was introduced into evidence in a previous case, made clear that the system relies on quick driver reactions.
Autopilot might make an "unexpected steering input" at high speed, potentially causing the car to make a dangerous move, according to the document, which was cited by plaintiffs in one of the trials Tesla won.
Such an error requires that the driver "is ready to take over control and can quickly apply the brake".
In depositions, a Tesla employee and an expert witness the company hired were unable to identify any research the automaker conducted before the 2018 accident into drivers' ability to take over when Autopilot fails.
"I'm not aware of any research specifically," said the employee, who was designated by Tesla as the person most qualified to testify about Autopilot.
The automaker redacted the employee's name from depositions, arguing that it was legally protected information.
McDevitt asked the Tesla expert witness, Christopher Monk, if he could name any specialists in human interaction with automated systems whom Tesla consulted while designing Autopilot.
"I cannot," said Monk, who studies driver distraction and previously worked for the NHTSA, the depositions show.
Monk did not respond to requests for comment.
Reuters was unable to independently determine whether Tesla has since March 2018 researched how fast drivers can take back control, or if it has studied the effectiveness of the camera monitoring systems it activated in 2021.
LULLED INTO DISTRACTION
The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), which investigated five Autopilot-related crashes, has since 2017 repeatedly recommended that Tesla improve the driver-monitoring systems in its vehicles, without spelling out exactly how.
The agency, which conducts safety investigations and research but cannot order recalls, concluded in its report on the Huang accident: "Contributing to the crash was the Tesla vehicle's ineffective monitoring of driver engagement, which facilitated the driver's complacency and inattentiveness."
In his 2016 comments, Musk said drivers would ignore as many as 10 warnings an hour about keeping their hands on the wheel.
The Tesla employee testified that the company considered using cameras to monitor drivers' attentiveness before Huang's accident, but didn't introduce such a system until May 2021.
Musk, in public comments, has long resisted calls for more advanced driver-monitoring systems, reasoning that his cars would soon be fully autonomous and safer than human-piloted vehicles.
"The system is improving so much, so fast, that this is going to be a moot point very soon," he said in 2019 on a podcast with artificial-intelligence researcher Lex Fridman.
"I'd be shocked if it's not by next year, at the latest ... that having a human intervene will decrease safety."
Tesla now concedes its cars need better safeguards.
When it recalled vehicles with Autopilot in December, it explained that its driver-monitoring systems may not be sufficient and that the alerts it added during the recall would help drivers "adhere to their continuous driving responsibility".
The recall, however, didn't fully solve the problem, said Kelly Funkhouser, associate director of vehicle technology at Consumer Reports, one of the leading U.S. product-testing companies.
Its road tests of two Tesla vehicles after the automaker's fix found the system failed in myriad ways to address the safety concerns that sparked the recall.
"Autopilot usually does a good job," Funkhouser said.
"It rarely fails, but it does fail."
Reporting by Dan Levine and Hyunjoo Jin in San Francisco; Additional reporting by David Shepardson in Washington; Editing by David Clarke, Peter Henderson and Brian Thevenot
https://www.reuters.com/business/autos- ... 024-03-11/
Re: ELECTRIC VEHICLES
REUTERS
"EV start-up Fisker prepares for possible bankruptcy filing, WSJ reports"
Reuters
March 13, 2024
March 13 (Reuters) - Electric-vehicle start-up Fisker has hired restructuring advisers to assist with a possible bankruptcy filing, the Wall Street Journal reported on Wednesday, citing people familiar with the matter.
The company has hired financial adviser FTI Consulting and the law firm Davis Polk to work on a potential bankruptcy filing, according to the report.
Fisker declined to comment.
Earlier this month, Fisker flagged going-concern risks, job cuts and a pause in investments into future projects until it secures a partnership with a manufacturer.
Reporting by Jaiveer Singh Shekhawat in Bengaluru; Editing by Shweta Agarwal and Shounak Dasgupta
https://www.reuters.com/business/autos- ... 024-03-13/
"EV start-up Fisker prepares for possible bankruptcy filing, WSJ reports"
Reuters
March 13, 2024
March 13 (Reuters) - Electric-vehicle start-up Fisker has hired restructuring advisers to assist with a possible bankruptcy filing, the Wall Street Journal reported on Wednesday, citing people familiar with the matter.
The company has hired financial adviser FTI Consulting and the law firm Davis Polk to work on a potential bankruptcy filing, according to the report.
Fisker declined to comment.
Earlier this month, Fisker flagged going-concern risks, job cuts and a pause in investments into future projects until it secures a partnership with a manufacturer.
Reporting by Jaiveer Singh Shekhawat in Bengaluru; Editing by Shweta Agarwal and Shounak Dasgupta
https://www.reuters.com/business/autos- ... 024-03-13/
Re: ELECTRIC VEHICLES
REUTERS
"Yellen says US moving to ensure domestic EV maker success despite China's exports"
By David Lawder
March 13, 2024
ELIZABETHTOWN, Kentucky, March 13 (Reuters) - U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen on Wednesday said President Joe Biden's administration is taking steps to ensure the success of its domestic electric vehicle (EV) industry in the face of China's growing exports in the sector and heavy government subsidies.
Asked whether the United States needs new tariffs on Chinese EVs, Yellen told reporters at a new battery materials plant in Kentucky: "I don't want to get ahead of where we are, but it is a commitment that President Biden has made ... that we're going to want our domestic industry to be successful."
U.S. tariffs of 25% on all Chinese vehicles imposed by former President Donald Trump effectively keeps Chinese EVs out of the U.S. market for now, but China's largest producer, BYD, has started to export to Mexico and is scouting locations for a Mexican factory.
Reporting by David Lawder; Editing by Will Dunham
https://www.reuters.com/business/autos- ... 024-03-13/
"Yellen says US moving to ensure domestic EV maker success despite China's exports"
By David Lawder
March 13, 2024
ELIZABETHTOWN, Kentucky, March 13 (Reuters) - U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen on Wednesday said President Joe Biden's administration is taking steps to ensure the success of its domestic electric vehicle (EV) industry in the face of China's growing exports in the sector and heavy government subsidies.
Asked whether the United States needs new tariffs on Chinese EVs, Yellen told reporters at a new battery materials plant in Kentucky: "I don't want to get ahead of where we are, but it is a commitment that President Biden has made ... that we're going to want our domestic industry to be successful."
U.S. tariffs of 25% on all Chinese vehicles imposed by former President Donald Trump effectively keeps Chinese EVs out of the U.S. market for now, but China's largest producer, BYD, has started to export to Mexico and is scouting locations for a Mexican factory.
Reporting by David Lawder; Editing by Will Dunham
https://www.reuters.com/business/autos- ... 024-03-13/
Re: ELECTRIC VEHICLES
THE CAPE CHARLES MIRROR MARCH 15, 2024 AT 9:49 AM
Paul Plante says:
And yes, people, disjointed, and indeed, demented, as in the demented Biden administration policies are not well connected or well ordered, and therefore are often confusing as we see in a Reuters article titled “Yellen says US moving to ensure domestic EV maker success despite China’s exports” by David Lawder on March 13, 2024, where we have this drivel from Biden treasury secretary Janet “TOODLES” Yellen to consider, to wit:
ELIZABETHTOWN, Kentucky, March 13 (Reuters) – U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen on Wednesday said President Joe Biden’s administration is taking steps to ensure the success of its domestic electric vehicle (EV) industry in the face of China’s growing exports in the sector and heavy government subsidies.
Asked whether the United States needs new tariffs on Chinese EVs, Yellen told reporters at a new battery materials plant in Kentucky: “I don’t want to get ahead of where we are, but it is a commitment that President Biden has made … that we’re going to want our domestic industry to be successful.”
end quotes
And with those statements from “TOODLES,” here we are, back to BIDE-O-NISM, Joe’s COMMAND ECONOMY, out of which comes BIDE-O-NOMICS, and its related BIDENFLATION, and by way of review, a “Command economy” or “Communist economy,” also known as a “Central Planned Economy” is an economy where decisions on what to produce, how to produce and for whom are taken by the government in a centrally managed bureaucracy.
For those of us with memories that extend farther back in time than just a few minutes ago, we recall that the Soviet Union often announced ‘5-year plans’ where targets for steel production would be created, and as we learned in 7th grade social studies, in the period 1928-40 and after the Second World War, these Five-year plans were very successful in terms of expanding the Soviet Union’s industrial production, so that for a period, the Soviet Union achieved very rapid rates of economic growth.
However, by the 1960s, the system was struggling with corruption, inefficiency and a lack of incentives, and the rapid economic growth of the Stalin years also occurred against a backdrop of political repression.
As to the problems we can expect from BIDE-O-NISM, Joe Biden’s Americanized version of STALINISM in the Soviet Union, they are as follows:
* Governments are poor at predicting future trends.
* Inflexible. Difficult to respond to shortages and surpluses
* Greater scope for corruption
* Planned economies often associated with greater political repression
end quotes
As to Joe taking steps to ensure the success of his government-subsidized domestic electric vehicle (EV) industry, consider the Reuters article titled “EV start-up Fisker prepares for possible bankruptcy filing, WSJ reports” on March 13, 2024, where we have a hurdle for Joe to overcome if he wants his government-subsidized domestic electric vehicle (EV) industry to be successful, to wit:
March 13 (Reuters) – Electric-vehicle start-up Fisker has hired restructuring advisers to assist with a possible bankruptcy filing, the Wall Street Journal reported on Wednesday, citing people familiar with the matter.
Earlier this month, Fisker flagged going-concern risks, job cuts and a pause in investments into future projects until it secures a partnership with a manufacturer.
end quotes
As those with memories will recall, this is the second time Fisker is going bankrupt, with Joe Biden having been its chief cheerleader the last time around.
But Joe’s problems don’t stop there, and as proof that Joe’s government is as poor at predicting future trends as any other fourth-rate banana republic, all we need do is go to a Reuters article titled “Lucid forecasts annual vehicle production below estimates” on February 21, 2024, where we have as follows:
Feb 21 (Reuters) – Lucid Group forecast annual vehicle production far below analysts’ estimates on Wednesday, on signs that demand for its luxury electric vehicles will slow down as high interest rates pinch consumer budgets.
Shares of the company fell around 5% in extended trading.
end quotes
And those high interest rates killing Joe’s INSANE GREEN DREAM are caused by BIDE-O-NOMICS, which takes us back to that story, to wit:
The company expects to make 9,000 units for the full-year 2024 compared with estimates of 22,594 according to five analysts polled by Visible Alpha.
The company made 8,428 vehicles in 2023.
The Saudi Arabia-backed company took to slashing prices once more for its Air sedans last week to counter sagging demand at a time when the EV industry is seeing a slowdown.
The company also missed estimates for fourth-quarter revenue hit by a slowdown in deliveries as consumers grapple with high costs.
end quotes
And they are not the only ones getting hurt by BIDE-O-NOMICS, as we see from another Reuters article titled “Rivian cuts jobs, sees annual production below estimates” on February 21, 2024, to wit:
Feb 21 (Reuters) – Rivian said on Wednesday it would cut its workforce by 10% and forecast EV production this year that widely missed estimates, hurt by downtime for factory upgrades and slowing demand for electric vehicles due to high interest rates.
Shares of the company tumbled about 17% in extended trading after Rivian said it expects to produce 57,000 vehicles in 2024, well below estimates of 81,700 units, according to eight analysts polled by Visible Alpha.
It produced 57,232 vehicles last year.
“We firmly believe in the full electrification of the automotive industry, but recognize in the short-term, the challenging macro-economic conditions,” CEO RJ Scaringe said in a statement on Wednesday.
Amazon.com-backed Rivian has been burning through cash to ramp up production of its R1S SUV and R1T pickup trucks as it spends on building a new factory in Georgia and loses thousands of dollars on every vehicle it builds.
The company’s cash burn comes at a time when demand for EVs has slowed, with Tesla CEO Elon Musk warning that high interest rates are making cars unaffordable.
After shying away from reducing the price of its vehicles last year despite a price war sparked by Tesla, Rivian this month cut the price of its R1T pickup trucks and R1S SUVs by $3,100.
end quotes
And then Bloomberg puts the icing on the cake in a story titled “Investors Flee Tumbling EV Upstarts Once Hailed as ‘Next Tesla’” by Esha Dey on February 25, 2024, where we have as follows with respect to Joe Biden’s COMMAND ECONOMY, to wit:
(Bloomberg) — There was a time when the backing of some of the world’s deepest pockets and the mere ambition to sell electric cars was enough to inspire confidence in the stocks of upstarts Rivian Automotive Inc. and Lucid Group Inc.
Now investors have all but thrown in the towel on the shares.
All it took was a fresh dose of reality from the two companies this week around cooling demand for EVs.
Rivian, which makes electric pickups, SUVs and delivery vans and counts Amazon.com Inc. as its top shareholder, said its production will stay flat at last year’s levels.
It also announced plans to shrink its workforce again.
Lucid, majority-owned by Saudi Arabia’s sovereign wealth fund, projected only a slight increase in output over 2023.
Both forecasts fell far short of analysts’ expectations.
For investors, the sense of gloom has been building since October, when Tesla Inc. warned of sagging interest in EVs.
Though shares of the EV giant have fared poorly since then, losing around 20% and massively underperforming the broader market, the impact on smaller rivals like Rivian and Lucid has been nothing short of disastrous.
Shares of Irvine, California-based Rivian are down by about 44% since Tesla’s October warning — the first in a series of grim outlooks from global EV-makers and suppliers — and closed Friday at a record low.
Newark, California-based Lucid has dropped some 33% in the same period, and isn’t far above its own nadir.
Still, had it not been for their wealthy backers — Amazon has a 17% stake in Rivian, and Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund holds roughly 60% of Lucid, data compiled by Bloomberg show — the stocks could be looking far uglier.
“The presence of these names is a comfort to investors and a cushion to the price,” Mazza said.
“If these stocks were just relying on the EV hype, then they will be down much worse.”
Overall, the biggest concern is that these cash-burning, unprofitable companies will struggle to sell cars at a time when even industry-leader Tesla — by far the biggest seller in the US market — is cutting prices to boost demand.
And while Tesla’s profits and large-scale production allow it to compete by lowering prices, Rivian and Lucid have neither of those advantages.
“For these car manufacturers, investors want to see demand,” said David Wagner, portfolio manager at Aptus Capital Advisors.
Rivian’s latest results suggest it will take several quarters to emerge from its production stoppage with a leaner cost structure and a redesigned platform, he said.
“In the meantime, I think skeptics will be scrutinizing the cash balance and ringing alarm bells,” Wagner said.
“So if there is no multiple expansion and no growth — what else is the stock supposed to do?”
Both Rivian and Lucid are now worth a fraction of the prices they fetched at their public-market debuts in 2021.
Rivian’s market value is around $9.6 billion, and Lucid’s is about $6.9 billion.
That’s a long way down from their $153 billion and $91 billion valuation peaks, respectively, in 2021.
Wall Street analysts are losing confidence as well.
Analysts’ average 12-month price targets for Rivian and Lucid fell nearly 20% just this week.
Meanwhile, the outlook for EVs broadly just keeps getting worse.
Global sales of EVs are estimated to grow 20% this year, to about 16.7 million units, according to BloombergNEF’s most recent analysis.
That’s a marked cooling from the 33% jump seen in 2023.
“Trying to be the ‘next Tesla’ is turning out to be an expensive strategy,” Morgan Stanley analyst Adam Jonas wrote in a note Friday.
“As EV startups turn into restructuring stories, whoever finds a sponsor has the best chance.”
http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/paul-p ... ent-907969
Paul Plante says:
And yes, people, disjointed, and indeed, demented, as in the demented Biden administration policies are not well connected or well ordered, and therefore are often confusing as we see in a Reuters article titled “Yellen says US moving to ensure domestic EV maker success despite China’s exports” by David Lawder on March 13, 2024, where we have this drivel from Biden treasury secretary Janet “TOODLES” Yellen to consider, to wit:
ELIZABETHTOWN, Kentucky, March 13 (Reuters) – U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen on Wednesday said President Joe Biden’s administration is taking steps to ensure the success of its domestic electric vehicle (EV) industry in the face of China’s growing exports in the sector and heavy government subsidies.
Asked whether the United States needs new tariffs on Chinese EVs, Yellen told reporters at a new battery materials plant in Kentucky: “I don’t want to get ahead of where we are, but it is a commitment that President Biden has made … that we’re going to want our domestic industry to be successful.”
end quotes
And with those statements from “TOODLES,” here we are, back to BIDE-O-NISM, Joe’s COMMAND ECONOMY, out of which comes BIDE-O-NOMICS, and its related BIDENFLATION, and by way of review, a “Command economy” or “Communist economy,” also known as a “Central Planned Economy” is an economy where decisions on what to produce, how to produce and for whom are taken by the government in a centrally managed bureaucracy.
For those of us with memories that extend farther back in time than just a few minutes ago, we recall that the Soviet Union often announced ‘5-year plans’ where targets for steel production would be created, and as we learned in 7th grade social studies, in the period 1928-40 and after the Second World War, these Five-year plans were very successful in terms of expanding the Soviet Union’s industrial production, so that for a period, the Soviet Union achieved very rapid rates of economic growth.
However, by the 1960s, the system was struggling with corruption, inefficiency and a lack of incentives, and the rapid economic growth of the Stalin years also occurred against a backdrop of political repression.
As to the problems we can expect from BIDE-O-NISM, Joe Biden’s Americanized version of STALINISM in the Soviet Union, they are as follows:
* Governments are poor at predicting future trends.
* Inflexible. Difficult to respond to shortages and surpluses
* Greater scope for corruption
* Planned economies often associated with greater political repression
end quotes
As to Joe taking steps to ensure the success of his government-subsidized domestic electric vehicle (EV) industry, consider the Reuters article titled “EV start-up Fisker prepares for possible bankruptcy filing, WSJ reports” on March 13, 2024, where we have a hurdle for Joe to overcome if he wants his government-subsidized domestic electric vehicle (EV) industry to be successful, to wit:
March 13 (Reuters) – Electric-vehicle start-up Fisker has hired restructuring advisers to assist with a possible bankruptcy filing, the Wall Street Journal reported on Wednesday, citing people familiar with the matter.
Earlier this month, Fisker flagged going-concern risks, job cuts and a pause in investments into future projects until it secures a partnership with a manufacturer.
end quotes
As those with memories will recall, this is the second time Fisker is going bankrupt, with Joe Biden having been its chief cheerleader the last time around.
But Joe’s problems don’t stop there, and as proof that Joe’s government is as poor at predicting future trends as any other fourth-rate banana republic, all we need do is go to a Reuters article titled “Lucid forecasts annual vehicle production below estimates” on February 21, 2024, where we have as follows:
Feb 21 (Reuters) – Lucid Group forecast annual vehicle production far below analysts’ estimates on Wednesday, on signs that demand for its luxury electric vehicles will slow down as high interest rates pinch consumer budgets.
Shares of the company fell around 5% in extended trading.
end quotes
And those high interest rates killing Joe’s INSANE GREEN DREAM are caused by BIDE-O-NOMICS, which takes us back to that story, to wit:
The company expects to make 9,000 units for the full-year 2024 compared with estimates of 22,594 according to five analysts polled by Visible Alpha.
The company made 8,428 vehicles in 2023.
The Saudi Arabia-backed company took to slashing prices once more for its Air sedans last week to counter sagging demand at a time when the EV industry is seeing a slowdown.
The company also missed estimates for fourth-quarter revenue hit by a slowdown in deliveries as consumers grapple with high costs.
end quotes
And they are not the only ones getting hurt by BIDE-O-NOMICS, as we see from another Reuters article titled “Rivian cuts jobs, sees annual production below estimates” on February 21, 2024, to wit:
Feb 21 (Reuters) – Rivian said on Wednesday it would cut its workforce by 10% and forecast EV production this year that widely missed estimates, hurt by downtime for factory upgrades and slowing demand for electric vehicles due to high interest rates.
Shares of the company tumbled about 17% in extended trading after Rivian said it expects to produce 57,000 vehicles in 2024, well below estimates of 81,700 units, according to eight analysts polled by Visible Alpha.
It produced 57,232 vehicles last year.
“We firmly believe in the full electrification of the automotive industry, but recognize in the short-term, the challenging macro-economic conditions,” CEO RJ Scaringe said in a statement on Wednesday.
Amazon.com-backed Rivian has been burning through cash to ramp up production of its R1S SUV and R1T pickup trucks as it spends on building a new factory in Georgia and loses thousands of dollars on every vehicle it builds.
The company’s cash burn comes at a time when demand for EVs has slowed, with Tesla CEO Elon Musk warning that high interest rates are making cars unaffordable.
After shying away from reducing the price of its vehicles last year despite a price war sparked by Tesla, Rivian this month cut the price of its R1T pickup trucks and R1S SUVs by $3,100.
end quotes
And then Bloomberg puts the icing on the cake in a story titled “Investors Flee Tumbling EV Upstarts Once Hailed as ‘Next Tesla’” by Esha Dey on February 25, 2024, where we have as follows with respect to Joe Biden’s COMMAND ECONOMY, to wit:
(Bloomberg) — There was a time when the backing of some of the world’s deepest pockets and the mere ambition to sell electric cars was enough to inspire confidence in the stocks of upstarts Rivian Automotive Inc. and Lucid Group Inc.
Now investors have all but thrown in the towel on the shares.
All it took was a fresh dose of reality from the two companies this week around cooling demand for EVs.
Rivian, which makes electric pickups, SUVs and delivery vans and counts Amazon.com Inc. as its top shareholder, said its production will stay flat at last year’s levels.
It also announced plans to shrink its workforce again.
Lucid, majority-owned by Saudi Arabia’s sovereign wealth fund, projected only a slight increase in output over 2023.
Both forecasts fell far short of analysts’ expectations.
For investors, the sense of gloom has been building since October, when Tesla Inc. warned of sagging interest in EVs.
Though shares of the EV giant have fared poorly since then, losing around 20% and massively underperforming the broader market, the impact on smaller rivals like Rivian and Lucid has been nothing short of disastrous.
Shares of Irvine, California-based Rivian are down by about 44% since Tesla’s October warning — the first in a series of grim outlooks from global EV-makers and suppliers — and closed Friday at a record low.
Newark, California-based Lucid has dropped some 33% in the same period, and isn’t far above its own nadir.
Still, had it not been for their wealthy backers — Amazon has a 17% stake in Rivian, and Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund holds roughly 60% of Lucid, data compiled by Bloomberg show — the stocks could be looking far uglier.
“The presence of these names is a comfort to investors and a cushion to the price,” Mazza said.
“If these stocks were just relying on the EV hype, then they will be down much worse.”
Overall, the biggest concern is that these cash-burning, unprofitable companies will struggle to sell cars at a time when even industry-leader Tesla — by far the biggest seller in the US market — is cutting prices to boost demand.
And while Tesla’s profits and large-scale production allow it to compete by lowering prices, Rivian and Lucid have neither of those advantages.
“For these car manufacturers, investors want to see demand,” said David Wagner, portfolio manager at Aptus Capital Advisors.
Rivian’s latest results suggest it will take several quarters to emerge from its production stoppage with a leaner cost structure and a redesigned platform, he said.
“In the meantime, I think skeptics will be scrutinizing the cash balance and ringing alarm bells,” Wagner said.
“So if there is no multiple expansion and no growth — what else is the stock supposed to do?”
Both Rivian and Lucid are now worth a fraction of the prices they fetched at their public-market debuts in 2021.
Rivian’s market value is around $9.6 billion, and Lucid’s is about $6.9 billion.
That’s a long way down from their $153 billion and $91 billion valuation peaks, respectively, in 2021.
Wall Street analysts are losing confidence as well.
Analysts’ average 12-month price targets for Rivian and Lucid fell nearly 20% just this week.
Meanwhile, the outlook for EVs broadly just keeps getting worse.
Global sales of EVs are estimated to grow 20% this year, to about 16.7 million units, according to BloombergNEF’s most recent analysis.
That’s a marked cooling from the 33% jump seen in 2023.
“Trying to be the ‘next Tesla’ is turning out to be an expensive strategy,” Morgan Stanley analyst Adam Jonas wrote in a note Friday.
“As EV startups turn into restructuring stories, whoever finds a sponsor has the best chance.”
http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/paul-p ... ent-907969
Re: ELECTRIC VEHICLES
Savvy Dime
"Electric Vehicle Company Files Chapter 11 Bankruptcy"
Story by Alex Trent
16 MARCH 2024
Companies that sell electric vehicle technology and products in America have been having a tough time lately as the competition among them fights for limited customers and plateauing sales figures.
Recently, a key EV infrastructure company called Charge Enterprises filed for bankruptcy in the US Bankruptcy Court.
Their bankruptcy filing will be a blow to the industry in the US because Charge Enterprises is a manufacturer of EV charging stations, something the country is already in short supply of.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/compani ... a348&ei=60
"Electric Vehicle Company Files Chapter 11 Bankruptcy"
Story by Alex Trent
16 MARCH 2024
Companies that sell electric vehicle technology and products in America have been having a tough time lately as the competition among them fights for limited customers and plateauing sales figures.
Recently, a key EV infrastructure company called Charge Enterprises filed for bankruptcy in the US Bankruptcy Court.
Their bankruptcy filing will be a blow to the industry in the US because Charge Enterprises is a manufacturer of EV charging stations, something the country is already in short supply of.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/compani ... a348&ei=60