Interesting take on Lucid stock

[Tâm]

...The two largest car companies in the US just gave them a tonne of customer revenue with Tesla having to not spend a single dime and possibly not even needing government funding. Well played Elon, well played……

I think the NACS free offer was influenced by Federal funding.

Tesla used to ask for the shared cost of charging infrastructure if other companies wanted to copy its charging form factor.

Last year, Texas denied funding for Tesla charging stations and awarded the funding to CCS stations.

My speculation is Tesla doesn't want that kind of denial for the giant Federal fund just like the way Texas did, so it has to entice others by dropping the cost-sharing requirement for NACS. It's now free with no string attached for copying the Tesla charging form factor.

It worked, and Ford was the first that got hooked on the enticement.

The Whitehouse then also got hooked and declared that NACS could get funding if the minimum CCS port requirement is met.

Texas, which rejected Tesla charging stations last year, got hooked this year and became the first state to require NACS minimum to get its funding.

Washing State got hooked and requires NACS minimum to get its funding this year.

In summary, it's about money. The government funding finally led us where we are today: Too many postings about NACS on this board.

To kill the expansion of NACS, the money needs to be stopped.

 

[Adnillien]

Tesla doesn’t need to move so aggressively on opening the network to all, CCS or charger upgrades to get funding from the government.

NEVI funding requires 920V minimum. Hence, Tesla has to upgrade their new charging stations to get funding.

 

[hmp10]

We're making this too complicated. It's really very simple.

If the U.S. moves toward a nationwide charging standard and Lucid manages to get itself labeled as a holdout or foot-dragger -- no matter whether fairly or not -- they're dead in the water. All the technical reasons, no matter how well grounded, about why the money should have been spent on a different charging priority or why NACS is not optimal for 900+ voltage cars will fall on deaf buying ears.

Lucid's focus should be on getting on board with NACS and then doing the engineering necessary to keep the other advantages of its charging hardware and software intact, such as high-voltage charging at CCS chargers that can provide it, bi-directional charging, etc.

It's already clear that just having a technology leg up on the competition is not going to do it for Lucid. If they want to move toward mainstream sales numbers, they've got to move toward an image of being in the mainstream, even if at the top end of it.

 

[Tâm]

"holdout or foot-dragger"

It could be explained that: The 5-year funding for NEVI requires a minimum of 4 CCS at each station, so the death of CCS is an over-exaggeration before the expiration of 5 years.

That's the thinking: Why worry when the day won't arrive in 5 years?

 

[idiot900]

It could be explained that: The 5-year funding for NEVI requires a minimum of 4 CCS at each station, so the death of CCS is an over-exaggeration before the expiration of 5 years.

That's the thinking: Why worry when the day won't arrive in 5 years?

In 5 years many of us will have moved on to the next car (I fear, at a heavy depreciation loss). Regardless there will almost certainly be a piece of plastic and copper on the market that will allow us to DCFC at Tesla stations, if there isn't already.

 

[Tâm]

...a piece of plastic and copper...

I think some engineers just prioritize function over beauty.

This 1984 Motorola cellphone, as big as a brick did work very well without an attached wire:

Why worry about the future that a small cell phone would take over the world?

The giant boombox did work very well:

Why worry about the future of tiny Sony Walkman or Iphone taking over the world?

I am not an engineer. I am a consumer, and I don't subscribe to the thesis that just because they are just a plug and cable so it's perfectly fine for consumers to embrace the bulky, heavy, and ugly form factor.

I don't subscribe to the thesis that just because CCS is the bulky, heavy, and ugly form factor, consumers would flock to experience it rather than choose the smaller, more eye-pleasing form factor of NACS.

An engineer may not prioritize the form factor, but I think the market world would say differently.

That in turn would continue to depress Lucid's stock price

 

[quantum]

No CCS provider has proven they can deliver a reliable network, ChargePoint included. Money alone won’t solve the problem and for any investor to catch up to Tesla is a multi year, multi billion dollar project. Permitting let alone all the politics behind it would already slow it down.



Not sure why everyone keeps assuming it’s Peter’s ego that is getting in the way on switching to NACS. He was quite clear in the interview that it’s about 1000v and nothing to do with the plug, nothing to do with ego. If Tesla rolls out 1000v chargers and Peter keeps holding out when everyone else jumps on board do you really think the board would allow that? I think he’d be told to leave his ego at the door as it’s not in the best interests of the company to not adopt.

For now, it’s all rumor and speculation on when Tesla will deploy 1000v chargers in the US. We know the V4’s in Europe support 1000v but Tesla only opted to deliver 500v to them. Lucid is right to be wary of committing when all information about Tesla’s V4 / 1000v rollout Has come from a bunch of media and know it all influencers who talk like they’ve got a seat at the board at these companies and know the ins and outs of all the discussions taking place.

Ford, GM etc. jumping the gun could’ve screwed everyone over as Tesla doesn’t need to move so aggressively on opening the network to all, CCS or charger upgrades to get funding from the government. The two largest car companies in the US just gave them a tonne of customer revenue with Tesla having to not spend a single dime and possibly not even needing government funding. Well played Elon, well played……

yeah, Ford and GM sold out! They dont have faith they will succeed.

 

[idiot900]

I think some engineers just prioritize function over beauty.

This 1984 Motorola cellphone, as big as a brick did work very well without an attached wire:

Why worry about the future that a small cell phone would take over the world?

The giant boombox did work very well:

Why worry about the future of tiny Sony Walkman or Iphone taking over the world?

I am not an engineer. I am a consumer, and I don't subscribe to the thesis that just because they are just a plug and cable so it's perfectly fine for consumers to embrace the bulky, heavy, and ugly form factor.

I don't subscribe to the thesis that just because CCS is the bulky, heavy, and ugly form factor, consumers would flock to experience it rather than choose the smaller, more eye-pleasing form factor of NACS.

An engineer may not prioritize the form factor, but I think the market world would say differently.

That in turn would continue to depress Lucid's stock price

Oh I agree. I was just pointing out that it’s unlikely our cars would be rendered unable to fast charge out in the real world, even if it’s through a clunky adapter.

 

[quantum]

I think some engineers just prioritize function over beauty.

This 1984 Motorola cellphone, as big as a brick did work very well without an attached wire:

Why worry about the future that a small cell phone would take over the world?

The giant boombox did work very well:

Why worry about the future of tiny Sony Walkman or Iphone taking over the world?

I am not an engineer. I am a consumer, and I don't subscribe to the thesis that just because they are just a plug and cable so it's perfectly fine for consumers to embrace the bulky, heavy, and ugly form factor.

I don't subscribe to the thesis that just because CCS is the bulky, heavy, and ugly form factor, consumers would flock to experience it rather than choose the smaller, more eye-pleasing form factor of NACS.

An engineer may not prioritize the form factor, but I think the market world would say differently.

That in turn would continue

Regarding charging cables, not a big deal really. Not something you enjoy like music or always hold and use like a phone. CCS is perfectly fine to plug in, NACS is slimmer and smoother, but not a dealbreaker in my opinion. I dont thonk anyone buying a car would worry about form of a charger.

 

[joec]

This whole conversation started what, two weeks ago? I think it’s a bit rich to call Lucid a “foot-dragger” for not blindly jumping on the bandwagon that quickly. They have plenty of time to figure out what they want to do.

Like I said, announcing today they will be changing connectors in two years doesn’t exactly help sales in the short term. Who wants a car with a dead-end connector?

Maybe, just maybe, they want to, I don’t know, have a few conversations with their engineers before knee-jerk promising to jump onto a different charging standard?

This is chess, not checkers. Personally, I feel better that some thought goes into this decision. Particularly because for Lucid, as opposed to Ford, GM, etc, the consequences of a poor choice here are far more dire.

 

[hmp10]

This whole conversation started what, two weeks ago? I think it’s a bit rich to call Lucid a “foot-dragger” for not blindly jumping on the bandwagon that quickly. They have plenty of time to figure out what they want to do.

Like I said, announcing today they will be changing connectors in two years doesn’t exactly help sales in the short term. Who wants a car with a dead-end connector?

Maybe, just maybe, they want to, I don’t know, have a few conversations with their engineers before knee-jerk promising to jump onto a different charging standard?

This is chess, not checkers. Personally, I feel better that some thought goes into this decision. Particularly because for Lucid, as opposed to Ford, GM, etc, the consequences of a poor choice here are far more dire.

I didn't say Lucid is a foot-dragger right now. I made my comment conditional, saying "if" the U.S. moves to a nationwide standard "and" Lucid manages to get itself labeled as a holdout or foot-dragger . . . .

We're still in the early days of this. That's why I'm so perplexed that Rawlinson has weighed into this at all at this point. Why not just respond to questions by saying something like, "we'll see how the situation develops. Meanwhile, Lucid will remain committed to making its cars the fastest and most-efficient users of the charging infrastructure in whichever direction it evolves."

Instead, he has already managed to generate press coverage, no matter how distorted, claiming that Lucid might not go with a nationwide standard if it doesn't develop along the lines he would like.

My point throughout this discussion has been that Lucid is at a critical juncture, and more effective marketing is becoming more critical with each passing month, with even small marketing missteps having outsized impact.

Lucid's future at this point might hinge on the success of the Gravity. If an NACS future has taken hold of the public imagination by late next year when the Gravity hits the market and Lucid has raised doubts about the efficacy of that standard, it will only have hobbled itself.

I am a voracious follower of press and social media coverage of Lucid. In recent months a shift in tone has accelerated in two dimensions. In the technology dimension, Lucid has begun to solidify its position at the technology leader. Even some of the strongest pro-Tesla voices have moved in this direction, particularly as Sandy Munro has finally entered the fray with teardowns of Lucid components.

But in the charging dimension, things are moving in the other direction. Frustration is growing with the CCS network, and such EV powerhouse reviewers as Kyle Conner, Tom Moloughney, and Marques Brownlee are now going so far as to recommend against buying CCS EVs if you plan much road tripping or don't have home access to L2 charging. (I have a feeling this has a lot to do with GM, Ford, and Rivian being so quick to jump on the NACS bandwagon. Ford has already said its EV sales were suffering because of issues owners were having with CCS charging, especially Electrify America.)

The promise of a nationwide standard associated with the one charging infrastructure that has a solid reputation for reliability (Tesla's) combined with the growing disdain for the CCS networks creates a toxic brew for any automaker perceived to be on the fence. I'm just worried that Rawlinson's public suggestions that NACS may be the wrong place to spend tax money -- no matter how well grounded technically -- is going to backfire.

Nikola Tesla was much more correct from a technical standpoint than Thomas Edison about almost everything relating to the electrification of America. Edison died a wealthy public icon. Tesla died alone and broke in a rooming hotel.

 

[quantum]

I didn't say Lucid is a foot-dragger right now. I made my comment conditional, saying "if" the U.S. moves to a nationwide standard "and" Lucid manages to get itself labeled as a holdout or foot-dragger . . . .

We're still in the early days of this. That's why I'm so perplexed that Rawlinson has weighed into this at all at this point. Why not just respond to questions by saying something like, "we'll see how the situation develops. Meanwhile, Lucid will remain committed to making its cars the fastest and most-efficient users of the charging infrastructure in whichever direction it evolves."

Instead, he has already managed to generate press coverage, no matter how distorted, claiming that Lucid might not go with a nationwide standard if it doesn't develop along the lines he would like.

My point throughout this discussion has been that Lucid is at a critical juncture, and more effective marketing is becoming more critical with each passing month, with even small marketing missteps having outsized impact.

Lucid's future at this point might hinge on the success of the Gravity. If an NACS future has taken hold of the public imagination by late next year when the Gravity hits the market and Lucid has raised doubts about the efficacy of that standard, it will only have hobbled itself.

I am a voracious follower of press and social media coverage of Lucid. In recent months a shift in tone has accelerated in two dimensions. In the technology dimension, Lucid has begun to solidify its position at the technology leader. Even some of the strongest pro-Tesla voices have moved in this direction, particularly as Sandy Munro has finally entered the fray with teardowns of Lucid components.

But in the charging dimension, things are moving in the other direction. Frustration is growing with the CCS network, and such EV powerhouse reviewers as Kyle Conner, Tom Moloughney, and Marques Brownlee are now going so far as to recommend against buying CCS EVs if you plan much road tripping or don't have home access to L2 charging. (I have a feeling this has a lot to do with GM, Ford, and Rivian being so quick to jump on the NACS bandwagon. Ford has already said its EV sales were suffering because of issues owners were having with CCS charging, especially Electrify America.)

The promise of a nationwide standard associated with the one charging infrastructure that has a solid reputation for reliability (Tesla's) combined with the growing disdain for the CCS networks creates a toxic brew for any automaker perceived to be on the fence. I'm just worried that Rawlinson's public suggestions that NACS may be the wrong place to spend tax money -- no matter how well grounded technically -- is going to backfire.

Nikola Tesla was much more correct from a technical standpoint than Thomas Edison about almost everything relating to the electrification of America. Edison died a wealthy public icon. Tesla died alone and broke in a rooming hotel.

I don't know why you are comparing Lucid, a motor company to Thomas Edison and Nikola Tesla. The analogy befounds me.

Regarding NACS, it does not support anything above 500V charging. So why jump on board now when it is useless for Lucid. Just because Ford, GM and Rivian jumped on board in a whiffy, doesnt mean Lucid needs to. This needs to be thought out carefully. There is no point starting engineering something you may not use. NACS is not all cut out they way most people think. Again, its the software- user freindly. Nothing technologically advanced. No cooling for the plug- hence the small size. There is no advantage for lucid jumping on this bandwagon unless Tesla offers 1000V chargers at a majority of its stations. There are twice as many tesla chargers as CCS chargers, but 30% more charging locations with CCS as opposed to Tesla. Also, you dont want to go to a US standard that is run by one manufacturer.

I'm hoping this will kick start the CCS manufacturers to take this more seriously.

A knee jerk reaction is not how you run a company, best to wait and see how things develope. 80% charging occurs at home, so not that big a deal breaker really!! By the time EV sales really get going and price comes down, I'm hopeful CCS issues will be resolved to some extent.

 

[hmp10]

I don't know why you are comparing Lucid, a motor company to Thomas Edison and Nikola Tesla. The analogy befounds me.

Nikola Tesla and Thomas Edison became personal as well as professional rivals, much as have Musk and Rawlinson. This came to cloud certain decisions both Tesla and Edison made. Tesla was almost always right about which electricity technology was a more-promising path (AC vs. DC, for example). Yet Edison came to dominate the industry largely because of better business and marketing acumen. I don't see anything confounding about the comparison.

A knee jerk reaction is not how you run a company, unless you are a chief twit like elon musk. Best to wait and see how things develop.

I am not suggesting a knee-jerk reaction. I am suggesting that Rawlinson take a wait-and-see position, at least for public consumption. This is exactly why, in the post you are answering, I wrote this:

"Why not just respond to questions by saying something like, 'we'll see how the situation develops. Meanwhile, Lucid will remain committed to making its cars the fastest and most-efficient users of the charging infrastructure in whichever direction it evolves.'"

If that's not advocating a wait-and-see position, I don't know what is.

 

[quantum]

Thanks for the detailed explanation. Yes, agree, he could have said we will wait and see.

 

[HC_79]

Also, don’t assume that when Ford, GM, Rivian etc. jump onto NACS that they’ll get the same experience as Tesla owners. EA supports 30 or 40 different ways of activating the charger because every manufacturer wants to do it there way and the CCS communication protocol allows this from what I read a while back. EA even said it was a challenge in the early days with all the manufacturers wanting to handle it differently and they needed to program the software etc. to accommodate.

Tesla may take the Apple approach and say “you communicate this way or no way our network“ but if they don’t then the plug type is irrelevant. We all know how well legacy auto does software so this whole NACS transition is definitely a wait and see.

 

[Cosmo Cruz]

I don't know why you are comparing Lucid, a motor company to Thomas Edison and Nikola Tesla. The analogy befounds me.

Then it would be worth your while to read biography of both men. Worth it. Fascinating people. Edison was a psychopath/sociopath.
Tesla was ... you should read his bio. Helps if you've ever encountered Maxwell's equations, or tried to find a short in your car's wiring harness. Edison was the kind of guy who'd put foil on the rabbit ear antennae of his analog tv, while Tesla would invent a digital transmitter/tuner.

What kind of man was Edison?
Dropped out of school around 13 yo but learned Morse code so got jobs with the railroads. He was fired often but could get a new job anywhere there was a telegraph. He used to take the batteries and set up a circuit at the railroad workers showers. He had a room over the showers and watched as the workers stood on the metal grate and then reached for the faucet. Kinda like Elon. He loved to fry animals with electricity...in his room: one of the reasons he was fired so often (the smell!). Evil yes; not so much genius.
Edison exploited immigrant geniuses by making then live in the workplace (cots), and paid them subsistence wages, or none at all, and took all the credit for himself. He offered Tesla $50k ... Tesla delivered the goods and then some, but Edison stiffed him. Edison's genius was his ability to find talent and exploit it to death...he was all marketing, no soul. A true Amerikan Hero.

The number and kind of inventions Tesla came up with makes one wonder if he was of this earth.

 

[Tâm]

Companies with 400v systems versus those with 800+. If you’re going to compare numbers, it’s 3 companies versus how many that haven’t jumped onto the nacs bandwagon? The European and Asian manufacturers haven’t endorsed nacs. Of course, I could be behind on announcements as I haven’t been following this issue. But knowing that the V3 chargers will only give me 50 kw, I don’t see what the rush is since we have no idea how long it will take for V4 to be widely available. I think saying Lucid is agnostic to the plug being used is right but maybe they need to say they will use whatever is best and widely available

GM does have 800V: The Hummer. It can mechanically switch itself to charge with 400V or 800V station:

Site Maintenance

GM built with Ultium Platform Technology will have that same automatic 400V 250kW and 800V 350 kW capability as well, and not just Hummer.

GM’s Ultium Electric Car Platform Technology: Everything You Need to Know

GM plans to make EVs profitable through savvy engineering, not marketing.

www.motortrend.com

 

[Tâm]

When NEVI funding kicks in, 800V charging stations will be the norm.

Until then, there are about 1,000 charging stations in the US that do 800V charging. That's only 2%.

2% is a tiny number.

While waiting for NEVI 800V charging stations, if Lucid doesn't know how to adapt to Taycan and GM Ultium, which can do 400V and 800V with a decent speed, this lack of flexibility might also keep the stock price down.

 

[RM-S8]

Then it would be worth your while to read biography of both men. Worth it. Fascinating people. Edison was a psychopath/sociopath.
Tesla was ... you should read his bio. Helps if you've ever encountered Maxwell's equations, or tried to find a short in your car's wiring harness. Edison was the kind of guy who'd put foil on the rabbit ear antennae of his analog tv, while Tesla would invent a digital transmitter/tuner.

What kind of man was Edison?
Dropped out of school around 13 yo but learned Morse code so got jobs with the railroads. He was fired often but could get a new job anywhere there was a telegraph. He used to take the batteries and set up a circuit at the railroad workers showers. He had a room over the showers and watched as the workers stood on the metal grate and then reached for the faucet. Kinda like Elon. He loved to fry animals with electricity...in his room: one of the reasons he was fired so often (the smell!). Evil yes; not so much genius.
Edison exploited immigrant geniuses by making then live in the workplace (cots), and paid them subsistence wages, or none at all, and took all the credit for himself. He offered Tesla $50k ... Tesla delivered the goods and then some, but Edison stiffed him. Edison's genius was his ability to find talent and exploit it to death...he was all marketing, no soul. A true Amerikan Hero.

The number and kind of inventions Tesla came up with makes one wonder if he was of this earth.

Amazing.

 

[xponents]

Amazing.

I literally live where Edison made the lightbulb, and I had no idea about that story.