Rawlinson Interview with "Motor Trend"

[hmp10]

"Motor Trend" just published an interesting interview with Peter Rawlinson.

For the first time, I think, Rawlinson openly says that Lucid's mission is to keep focus on moving EV technology forward while Tesla has become distracted by Musk's antics.

https://www.motortrend.com/features/lucid-motors-peter-rawlinson-interview-tesla-china-competition/

 

[xponents]

I love how Rawlinson rebukes all the (uninformed) stigmas surrounding Lucid! Many sources are conflicted on whether the midsize is a sedan or a crossover, leading me to believe that both are coming at the same time. I think it's also confirmed that the Air will hit 5 mi/kwh by 2026 (refresh perhaps?) while the midsize would hit 6 mi/kwh, matching up with the timelines Rawlinson gave.

The Model 3 LR battery size is 77 kwh. If Lucid wanted to achieve 6 mi/kwh with 350 miles of range (M3 LR is 340), all they would need is a 58 KWh battery.. which would make the EV incredibly light (better handling) and decrease costs as previously mentioned. It would be absolutely amazing to have that..

 

[QuantumFire]

The article reads well, but they open with a very unflattering photo of Rawlinson.

 

[Amster]

The article reads well, but they open with a very unflattering photo of Rawlinson.

I don't think it's that bad. Besides, it's not a beauty contest. It's about the cars.

 

[borski]

I actually think it’s quite a flattering photo. To each their own I guess.

As for the article, I far prefer this messaging to Tesla’s “we are not a car company, we are a robotics and AI company and all of you who think we are a car company are wrong,” given that Tesla has yet to produce a robot or anything that can reasonably be called “AI,” and have produced many many thousands of… cars.

I far prefer “yeah, we’re a car company, and we’re badass, and here’s what we’re doing to own the market in the future.”

But that’s just me.

 

[xponents]

I actually think it’s quite a flattering photo. To each their own I guess.

As for the article, I far prefer this messaging to Tesla’s “we are not a car company, we are a robotics and AI company and all of you who think we are a car company are wrong,” given that Tesla has yet to produce a robot or anything that can reasonably be called “AI,” and have produced many many thousands of… cars.

I far prefer “yeah, we’re a car company, and we’re badass, and here’s what we’re doing to own the market in the future.”

But that’s just me.

I remember the days when Tesla used to be the second thing you described.. how I miss it. If only the board could put a real CEO in the place of Elon, and then maybe we could have better competition in this field.

 

[northernstar]

"The launch later this year of the Gravity SUV means Lucid will have a product that appeals to six times as many potential customers as the Air sedan, Rawlinson says."

Personally, it would've been nice if Lucid focused on the "Tesla 3" fighter / mid-size SUV first, rather than the 3-row Gravity flagship SUV, from a profit/revenue point of view.
However, I suppose the customer's perception of the (well-established) brand and its image cannot be ignored for Lucid's long-term success/survival.

 

[segbrk]

"The launch later this year of the Gravity SUV means Lucid will have a product that appeals to six times as many potential customers as the Air sedan, Rawlinson says."

Personally, it would've been nice if Lucid focused on the "Tesla 3" fighter / mid-size SUV first, rather than the 3-row Gravity flagship SUV, from a profit/revenue point of view.
However, I suppose the customer's perception of the (well-established) brand and its image cannot be ignored for Lucid's long-term success/survival.

There's a reason both Tesla and Lucid did their lower priced models third. First is high cost / low volume, it establishes the brand, mistakes are made, lessons are learned, research pushes the envelope forward. Second is still high cost / relatively low volume, but builds on previous work and helps form and prove manufacturing, then actually start paying for the initial costs of setting up that production process. Third is where you can take all your lessons learned, use a smaller battery to cut costs, use your existing manufacturing processes and facilities to cut costs, and actually scale up production. A new company can't just launch right into a high volume product all on its own or it won't be able to meet demand. It's a different world now for Lucid vs when Tesla was at this phase, but the roadmap still makes logistical sense.

 

[northernstar]

There's a reason both Tesla and Lucid did their lower priced models third. First is high cost / low volume, it establishes the brand, mistakes are made, lessons are learned, research pushes the envelope forward. Second is still high cost / relatively low volume, but builds on previous work and helps form and prove manufacturing, then actually start paying for the initial costs of setting up that production process. Third is where you can take all your lessons learned, use a smaller battery to cut costs, use your existing manufacturing processes and facilities to cut costs, and actually scale up production. A new company can't just launch right into a high volume product all on its own or it won't be able to meet demand. It's a different world now for Lucid vs when Tesla was at this phase, but the roadmap still makes logistical sense.

Think Lucid achieved the first and second (phases) successfully with Air... from Dream Edition to Pure to Sapphire... successfully showcased the performance, driving dynamics, and the "name" value/status.
The first generation/and the first model of the Tesla... The Roadster was just Lotus Elise chassis and replaced ice components with battery components.. so like you said... it was a different time.

Another thought is that had there not been (a huge) financial backup from the Saudi Public Funds... I don't think Air -> Gravity -> "3 fighter" plan would've worked with their cash-burning rate.
Most likely Air -> "3 fighter" -> Debut of Gravity.
"Appealing six times more than Air" doesn't exactly equate to the "x6 higher" # of sales.

Regardless, it's refreshing to hear from a CEO who can talk logically and share a vision rather than try to be a viral meme or look for sensational headlines at best.

 

[Batteryman]

Think Lucid achieved the first and second (phases) successfully with Air... from Dream Edition to Pure to Sapphire... successfully showcased the performance, driving dynamics, and the "name" value/status.
The first generation/and the first model of the Tesla... The Roadster was just Lotus Elise chassis and replaced ice components with battery components.. so like you said... it was a different time.

Another thought is that had there not been (a huge) financial backup from the Saudi Public Funds... I don't think Air -> Gravity -> "3 fighter" plan would've worked with their cash-burning rate.
Most likely Air -> "3 fighter" -> Debut of Gravity.
"Appealing six times more than Air" doesn't exactly equate to the "x6 higher" # of sales.

Regardless, it's refreshing to hear from a CEO who can talk logically and share a vision rather than try to be a viral meme or look for sensational headlines at best.

Lots of people still haven’t heard of the company or know much about the technology advantage. Gravity will help with that and will lead to more sales for the volume selling midsize

 

[dcase99]

Lots of people still haven’t heard of the company or know much about the technology advantage. Gravity will help with that and will lead to more sales for the volume selling midsize

I agree. With mine I get Lucid? What is that? Then they sit in it, especially the back seat (never had a car where the back seat is a selling point) and all I hear is wow, wow. Then a teeny tiny 2 seconds heavy foot in swift mode (not even sprint) and all I hear is omg!