What's new
By:

Kyle shares more about Lucid Cosmos

HC_79 said:
So did Rivian and they seemed to pivot quite well compared to Lucid when not models launched at the same time. The COVID argument is wearing thin. Gravity didn’t go through COVID and they still messed up the launch. Kyle is right, they’re just not good when it comes to execution.
Click to expand...
They both went through it. Rivian recovered quickly but Lucid is still suffering from long COVID
 
PetevB said:
And Lucid?

Lucid has doubled down on building the “best car”—efficiency, dynamics, packaging. But there are two big problems.

First, the market for that is shrinking. Even today’s buyers care more about software, autonomy, and tech experience. The next generation may not care about driving at all.

Second—and this may ruffle feathers—I don’t think Lucid is actually making “the best car” in any holistic sense. Yes, dynamically and from a packaging standpoint. But when you factor in reliability, software, and driver-assist capability, it’s hard to argue they are anywhere close to leading overall.

They’re trying to be the electric Porsche—but without the brand equity, build consistency, or ecosystem to support that positioning.

The hope is they fix execution, become a true engineering-led premium brand, and build from there. But the brand they’re actually creating isn’t landing that way—and they’re struggling to even approach Rivian, which itself isn’t exactly thriving.

Pretty rough outlook. And as someone who appreciates great driving dynamics, that’s not easy to say.
Click to expand...

I think this is kind of the wrong read as to what Lucid wants. Trying to be the new Porsche by releasing a sedan and 3-row SUV would be a strong choice. They're clearly emulating the Tesla playbook: large sedan then large SUV, both at premium prices because they need to recoup some R&D money. Then they move into higher volume segments. When Tesla started, sedans were still popular. Now, there's no point for Lucid to build a Camry/Accord/Model 3 competitor. The CUV is the standard car in the US and quickly growing in the rest of the world so they went straight to the midsize CUV.

The real issue is that I think Lucid is kind of misguided as to what the mainstream car buyer wants. They did this weird segmentation between the Cosmos and Earth with the explanation that the Cosmos is targeting affluent millennial parents. They think these buyers want a sleek and sporty vehicle? There's direct evidence from a competitor for the affluent buyer with a family that this is absolutely not the case. Look at the BMW X3 and X5 (traditional boxy SUVs) selling tens of thousands more than the X4 and X6 (fastback SUVs). It's the same with Audi. No one else bothers making a fastback SUV because the sales don't make up for what it would cost to develop.

If you move out of the luxury brands, Toyota, Honda, Subaru, and everyone else sells boxy CUVs as the standard family car. Parents don't want to be smacking their heads into a sloping roof line as they wrangle their kids into and out of car seats. Kyle made it clear that while the Cosmos back seat decent enough space, the R2 was just bigger. Going from Rivian R2's 3.75 mi/kwh to Cosmos' 4.3 mi/kwh doesn't seem like a big enough of a difference to justify the back seat experience.

Honestly, it feels like they got the target audiences for the Cosmos and Earth flipped. Family buyers want a more traditional car and DINKS might go for the sleeker, sportier version. And the target audience for the unnamed 3rd midsized outdoors model has an average age of 49 with active lifestyles? I guess that means very early retirees going to ski resorts? Land Cruiser buyers?

But hey, maybe I'm completely wrong and families will pick the Cosmos way more than the R2 or Model Y.
 
erigion said:
I think this is kind of the wrong read as to what Lucid wants. Trying to be the new Porsche by releasing a sedan and 3-row SUV would be a strong choice. They're clearly emulating the Tesla playbook: large sedan then large SUV, both at premium prices because they need to recoup some R&D money. Then they move into higher volume segments. When Tesla started, sedans were still popular. Now, there's no point for Lucid to build a Camry/Accord/Model 3 competitor. The CUV is the standard car in the US and quickly growing in the rest of the world so they went straight to the midsize CUV.

The real issue is that I think Lucid is kind of misguided as to what the mainstream car buyer wants. They did this weird segmentation between the Cosmos and Earth with the explanation that the Cosmos is targeting affluent millennial parents. They think these buyers want a sleek and sporty vehicle? There's direct evidence from a competitor for the affluent buyer with a family that this is absolutely not the case. Look at the BMW X3 and X5 (traditional boxy SUVs) selling tens of thousands more than the X4 and X6 (fastback SUVs). It's the same with Audi. No one else bothers making a fastback SUV because the sales don't make up for what it would cost to develop.

If you move out of the luxury brands, Toyota, Honda, Subaru, and everyone else sells boxy CUVs as the standard family car. Parents don't want to be smacking their heads into a sloping roof line as they wrangle their kids into and out of car seats. Kyle made it clear that while the Cosmos back seat decent enough space, the R2 was just bigger. Going from Rivian R2's 3.75 mi/kwh to Cosmos' 4.3 mi/kwh doesn't seem like a big enough of a difference to justify the back seat experience.

Honestly, it feels like they got the target audiences for the Cosmos and Earth flipped. Family buyers want a more traditional car and DINKS might go for the sleeker, sportier version. And the target audience for the unnamed 3rd midsized outdoors model has an average age of 49 with active lifestyles? I guess that means very early retirees going to ski resorts? Land Cruiser buyers?

But hey, maybe I'm completely wrong and families will pick the Cosmos way more than the R2 or Model Y.
Click to expand...
I think we could be in for a surprise for the kinds of buyers cross-shopping to the Earth and Cosmos.

Yes, the Earth and unannounced adventure model will go for the rugged X3 / X5 / Rivian R2 buyer.

However, I think the Cosmos could win over those cross-shopping for a sporty hatchback (e.g VW Golf, Kia K4) and station wagon buyer (i.e. the European market). Based on Car and Driver's comment that the Cosmos "splits the difference between a fastback hatch and a more upright SUV", I think these kinds of shoppers want something sportier and not a head-tossing tall seating position. (I know I do. Give me a tri-motor Sapphire trim and I'll gladly order one)

Overall, I believe that the breath in which the midsize program covers will generally capture the wider customer ranges that exist

I'm putting the emphasis on the cross-shoppers because the Kia EV 9 found clients cross-shopping from Range Rover, so again, we might see some interesting cross-shopping.
 
Agree with Need4Sleep. Also worth noting that perhaps they started with the Cosmos because that was the most natural next step for them. It shares the same ethos as the Air and Gravity and would therefore be the easiest to develop in short order. They're entering uncharted waters with the Earth and later rugged midsize as a company with no real experience with "rugged"/"adventure" offerings.
 
HC_79 said:
Up until Kyles video I was skeptical the car was going into production this year or if it did they would pull the same stunt with Gravity and get 5 off the production line, have a big party and say we did it!! Given that he said its very near getting to validation builds I was surprised and changed my perspective on where they're actually at in its design cycle. If in fact what Kyle said is true, kudos to Lucid for keeping it so well hidden for all this time. That being said, the window to get it shown and start building hype should be sooner rather than later.

I also wouldn't expect real customers to start getting the car until Q2 at the earliest. Production will no doubt start in December and Q1 deliveries will probably go to Lucid employees, family and friends etc.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I'm skeptical "normal" people will get their Cosmos before at least late Q1 2027, too. But I keep reminding myself that Cosmos was designed to be a much simpler car for a reason.

It's still Lucid, and it's still obviously challenging to build any car, but this build should make Air and Gravity look like a 500 piece Jigsaw puzzle compared to a 10,000-piece one. Far fewer things that can go wrong doesn't mean nothing will go wrong. But they have much better odds this time.

My confusion is about the AMP-2 SA building the first cars. Does that mean the first customers will be in SA, too? Or are they going to be shipping them over here and re-assembling, much like they do in the other direction now with Air and Gravity? That wasn't clear to me.

If they ship to those customers first, then there's no way anyone in the US is getting Cosmos before this time next year or later.
 
Need4Sleep said:
I think we could be in for a surprise for the kinds of buyers cross-shopping to the Earth and Cosmos.

Yes, the Earth and unannounced adventure model will go for the rugged X3 / X5 / Rivian R2 buyer.

However, I think the Cosmos could win over those cross-shopping for a sporty hatchback (e.g VW Golf, Kia K4) and station wagon buyer (i.e. the European market). Based on Car and Driver's comment that the Cosmos "splits the difference between a fastback hatch and a more upright SUV", I think these kinds of shoppers want something sportier and not a head-tossing tall seating position. (I know I do. Give me a tri-motor Sapphire trim and I'll gladly order one)

Overall, I believe that the breath in which the midsize program covers will generally capture the wider customer ranges that exist

I'm putting the emphasis on the cross-shoppers because the Kia EV 9 found clients cross-shopping from Range Rover, so again, we might see some interesting cross-shopping.
Click to expand...
I couldn't agree more. And this is what I meant about the whole midsize platform having potentially way more appeal than Rivian's R2, which will have its loyal fans, but not be able to attract anyone beyond it.

Rivian won't be offering any true competitor to Cosmos for many years. But Earth and Stay Tuned will definitely capture some potential R2 buyers.
 
joec said:
Yeah, I'm skeptical "normal" people will get their Cosmos before at least late Q1 2027, too. But I keep reminding myself that Cosmos was designed to be a much simpler car for a reason.

It's still Lucid, and it's still obviously challenging to build any car, but this build should make Air and Gravity look like a 500 piece Jigsaw puzzle compared to a 10,000-piece one. Far fewer things that can go wrong doesn't mean nothing will go wrong. But they have much better odds this time.

My confusion is about the AMP-2 SA building the first cars. Does that mean the first customers will be in SA, too? Or are they going to be shipping them over here and re-assembling, much like they do in the other direction now with Air and Gravity? That wasn't clear to me.

If they ship to those customers first, then there's no way anyone in the US is getting Cosmos before this time next year or later.
Click to expand...
They said in the investor day Q&A that US customers were a priority, even with midsize initially being produced solely in KSA. My understanding is the initial batch will be going to the US with other markets to follow.
 
MGRMLN said:
One thing that never gets talked about is the unfortunate timing of Lucid's Brand Launch being in the heart of COVID! Remember that hysteria? I certainly do!
Consequently, their supply chain and manufacturing all had to pivot and I think the quality of some of their suppliers were frankly abysmal. Despite that, they had to deliver a ground up, top line car that took on established brands who've had decades to optimize their supply chain quality over decades. Not making excuses. Just pointing out real challenges.

The next era, as they leave the luxury tier into vehicles that are more attainable, I would hope they can keep the feel and dynamics of their cars, simplify their manufacturing and excise their software demons, all of which they stated as their goals. I hope they manage it!
Click to expand...
They sell more Airs than the ICE Merc s class and the BMW i7, i5…..that is an achievement. And with much less service centers.
 
Why all the negativity? Lucid makes the best sporty EV’s….no one can beat it in efficiency. Best combination of efficiency, space, handling, looks, performance. Anyone doubting that is lying to themselves. Only drawback are software issues, which are being addressed effectively. Ignore the glass half empty gang. Yeah, some complaints here and there about sales, service, software delays….but these are not a reason to dish on the company.

Lucid doesn’t have brand recognition? It will come with the midsize. You all think Rivian did great with midsize? I don’t think so- they compromised and took the safe route of building a mini me of the R1. It’s like a shrunken R1. I’m not impressed. Lucid seems to be more innovative and thinks outside the SUV box.

And don’t forget…..MECHANICAL DOOR HANDLES in the midsize! That in itself shows Lucid listens to its customers! No lazy engineering here.
 
They have said SA was going to be building cars for the US. The reason was it would allow the use of Chinese battery packs without paying steep Chinese tariffs.
 
erigion said:
I think this is kind of the wrong read as to what Lucid wants. Trying to be the new Porsche by releasing a sedan and 3-row SUV would be a strong choice. They're clearly emulating the Tesla playbook: large sedan then large SUV, both at premium prices because they need to recoup some R&D money. Then they move into higher volume segments. When Tesla started, sedans were still popular. Now, there's no point for Lucid to build a Camry/Accord/Model 3 competitor. The CUV is the standard car in the US and quickly growing in the rest of the world so they went straight to the midsize CUV.

The real issue is that I think Lucid is kind of misguided as to what the mainstream car buyer wants. They did this weird segmentation between the Cosmos and Earth with the explanation that the Cosmos is targeting affluent millennial parents. They think these buyers want a sleek and sporty vehicle? There's direct evidence from a competitor for the affluent buyer with a family that this is absolutely not the case. Look at the BMW X3 and X5 (traditional boxy SUVs) selling tens of thousands more than the X4 and X6 (fastback SUVs). It's the same with Audi. No one else bothers making a fastback SUV because the sales don't make up for what it would cost to develop.

If you move out of the luxury brands, Toyota, Honda, Subaru, and everyone else sells boxy CUVs as the standard family car. Parents don't want to be smacking their heads into a sloping roof line as they wrangle their kids into and out of car seats. Kyle made it clear that while the Cosmos back seat decent enough space, the R2 was just bigger. Going from Rivian R2's 3.75 mi/kwh to Cosmos' 4.3 mi/kwh doesn't seem like a big enough of a difference to justify the back seat experience.

Honestly, it feels like they got the target audiences for the Cosmos and Earth flipped. Family buyers want a more traditional car and DINKS might go for the sleeker, sportier version. And the target audience for the unnamed 3rd midsized outdoors model has an average age of 49 with active lifestyles? I guess that means very early retirees going to ski resorts? Land Cruiser buyers?

But hey, maybe I'm completely wrong and families will pick the Cosmos way more than the R2 or Model Y.
Click to expand...
Lucid is trying to make the Porsche of EV’s….they are not in the market competing against boxy midsize Hondas and Toyotas…..boxy SUVs handle bad, less efficient, poor range,. Lucid because of its packaging, can get the same space out of a more compact, curvy structure. Go sit in a Gravity and then the R1T….you will realize what Lucid philosophy is all about. Looks like you don’t get it…..
 
gaskiller said:
Why all the negativity? Lucid makes the best sporty EV’s….no one can beat it in efficiency
Click to expand...
Because their currently track record is good driving, poor selling, buggy cars, bad software, horrific service times before the layoffs even, and a company that exists as a hobby for the Saudi’s that appears lost in the market with no clear direction that has also lost over 90% of its value in a year or so?

Turns out a lot of people didn’t care about the car being slightly more efficient than a Tesla. Lucid has so much more going for it than efficiency, they need to quit harping on that. They’re backing thr wrong pony.

The market said “no”, but the PIF said “yes”. Will it work? Time will tell, but so far, no.

I want them to succeed. I wanted Fisker to succeed too. I wanted Tesla to eat it. So who knows!
 
Pragmatic said:
They have said SA was going to be building cars for the US. The reason was it would allow the use of Chinese battery packs without paying steep Chinese tariffs.
Click to expand...
If there are still tariffs, they break the car into major content and apply tariffs based on content - not just where it is built.
 
finance.yahoo.com

Luxury EV maker Lucid Motors sidesteps US tariffs at Saudi plant

CFO Taoufiq Boussaid says the company plans to manufacture its next-generation line of midsize vehicles at a plant in Saudi Arabia, where it can circumvent high tariffs on Chinese parts.
finance.yahoo.com finance.yahoo.com

Can not voucher for the accuracy or if recent changes to laws invalidate the plan. The referenced talk was given December 3, 2025. The plan as I understand it, was import Chinese batteries to SA duty free, assemble vehicle, import completed vehicle to US paying a lower tariff on SA built vehicle.
 
Pragmatic said:
finance.yahoo.com

Luxury EV maker Lucid Motors sidesteps US tariffs at Saudi plant

CFO Taoufiq Boussaid says the company plans to manufacture its next-generation line of midsize vehicles at a plant in Saudi Arabia, where it can circumvent high tariffs on Chinese parts.
finance.yahoo.com finance.yahoo.com

Can not voucher for the accuracy or if recent changes to laws invalidate the plan. The referenced talk was given December 3, 2025. The plan as I understand it, was import Chinese batteries to SA duty free, assemble vehicle, import completed vehicle to US paying a lower tariff on SA built vehicle.
Click to expand...
I was applying NAFTA/USMCA methods to KSA. You are right on special applications to KSA produced products at the time. Of course, we'll see what the future brings. Thanks for the correction!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top