Кто управляет миром? Начинающим конспирологам.

[F. degli A.]

Fed снизила ставку на 0,25% до 1,5-1,75%.
Это уже третье подряд снижение.

CEO Сonfidence:
https://twitter.com/Schuldensuehner/sta ... 0444342272

P.S. Сегодняшний отчет Deutsche Bank за 3-й квартал с убытками выше ожиданий инвесторам не понравился, и акции DB во Франкфурте упали на 7%. Картина маслом:
https://twitter.com/Schuldensuehner/sta ... 3426097153

[F. degli A.]

Не только твое имхо. Это типичная энроновская модель, только, не в нефти, а в типа хайтеке.

Конкретика по отчету Теслы за 3-й квартал:
Заявленная прибыль - 143 млн USD (во втором квартале был задекларирован убыток в 315 млн USD).
Оборот - минус 8% (в США - минус 39%).
Количество проданных машин - немного больше, но за счет низкомаржинальной Model 3. Продажи Model S и Model X снизились.
Вместо запланированных расходов на R&D в размере 557 млн USD заявлены 385 млн USD (разница т.о. - 172 млн USD).

Маску нужно было вынести шортистов, что он и сделал при помощи т.н. financial engineering.
В общем - развесистая клюква.

[Touring*]

Массовое автомобилестроение крайне капитально интенсивный бизнес, поэтому Тесла ещё существенное время не будет прибыльной.

Например ФВ заявлен общий капекс в 44 млрд. евро в срок 2018-2025 на переход на электро, это $7 млрд. год. И в основном данные вложения пойдут в заводы. А ведь у производителя есть ещё и опекс. Фактически имея хороший денежный поток от ДВС сегмента, ФВ сейчас перенаправляет его в электро, плюс вкладывает в это прибыль прошлых лет, плюс заёмные деньги. Это не в Аурусы играться, а игра ну очень по-крупному.

У Теслы нет такого же источника денег, она вынуждена финансировать всю цепочку (R&D + расширение производства машин, производства батарей, сети распространения машин, сети зарядок для них) из чистой прибыли, на в разы меньшем обороте, чем у того же ФВ. Конечно же, она делает это за счёт денег инвесторов. Это обычное состояние стартующего бизнеса. Приз, потенциальная возможность занять нишу одного из нынешних лидеров.

[F. degli A.]

<...> а игра ну очень по-крупному.<...>

Конечно.
Причем риски крайне высоки.
У того же VW месяц назад Cash flow был отрицательным, а величина необеспеченных пенсионных обязательств составляет сейчас ок. 33 млрд евро.

[Touring*]

Да, и дипломированный инженер, профессор Дисс берёт на себя большой риск. Но немцы упрутся и сделают.

[Gundesvan]

Чем он рискует?!
Растущий рынок, туда что не вбрось - сметут.
Вся инфраструктура есть, каналы сбыта есть.
Один из лидеров автомобилестроения.
Сегодня только анонсирован электроВАГ.

Это Маск рискует, если VW ID.3 составит конкуренцию Model3 - Тесла моторс останется со своими долгами навсегда.
Ну и опять же - она не пропадет.
Выкупят.

[Touring*]

Вот что пишет профессор-инженер Markus Lienkamp, работавший до 2009-го в VW в электро-подразделении концерна, а сейчас возглавляющий в TUM кафедру автомобилестроения, которая в том числе делает для заказчиков из отрасли разработки, и аналитические работы.

Daimler

Dr. Dieter Zetsche as CEO steered Daimler towards BEV and mobility early on. Daimler has overcome weaknesses a few years ago and Zetsche is a guarantor of the long-term strategy of the company. He has shown a new corporate culture and fresh products that he wants to modernize and change the company. His former head of development, Prof. Weber, is technologically well-versed and has made well-informed and sensible decisions.

Daimler is currently generating high returns and is investing large sums in the transition to BEV. However, the company does not have a large anchor shareholder. As the main employer in Baden-Württemberg, a financially strong country, Daimler can be sure of supporting the state government if it gets into trouble.

Technologically, Daimler is one of the best-positioned companies. Daimler has gained experience in electromobility with its own cell factory, even if production was discontinued for operational reasons. Through his former participation in Tesla, they were able to gain insight into their know-how. Daimler massively builds the in-house production of battery packs. Daimler has always been a pioneer in terms of safety and has defined the standards. As the powertrain at BEV lasts a long time, it is important that the rest of the vehicle also endures this mileage.

Daimler has set up a joint venture with Bosch for automatic driving. Two of the world's best partners work together in this area. Even if Audi with the new A8 already offer a higher functionality than the S-Class, which has been in the market for a long time, this should not be a real disadvantage, because Daimler with the new S-Class around 2020 with significantly expanded functionality (I suspect automatic driving at higher speeds on the highway) will go into production.

Daimler has been trying out mobility concepts for a long time, such as Car2Go, toll systems or the portal Moovel. Daimler would certainly also be able to offer Robotaxis. Since Daimler does not produce large quantities as a premium manufacturer and, moreover, is still diversified via trucks, buses and light commercial vehicles, Daimler would not hit so much as the mass market procucers. Daimler also benefits from its experience in the taxi business, because it helps make the cars very durable. This is especially important for Robotaxis because they travel very high distances and failures are unacceptable.

VW

Matthias Müller, a computer scientist, I met at my time at VW as an open-minded and interested technicians but also strategist. He stands for innovation and change. Dr. Herbert Diess was head of development at BMW. At the time, Dr. Norbert Reithofer was CEO and Harald Krüger was Production manager. Reithofer believed in the plug-in hybrids. In contrast, Diess favored the BEV. He already had a good relationship with Elon Musk of Tesla and was open to his ideas. Supposedly this difference has led to Diess leaving the company in the direction of VW. Thus, he will now implement his ideas first with the VW brand as brand manager. He is regarded internally as the designated successor to Müller, so that the continuity of the VW Group in the direction of BEV is ensured.

Despite high fines as a result of the diesel scandal in the US, the VW Group generates high profits. VW is currently investing tens of billions of euros in electromobility and planning to build large battery factories - certainly together with suppliers.

With the (big) brands VW Passenger Cars (Lower Saxony), VW Commercial Vehicles (Lower Saxony), MAN (Bavaria), Scania (Sweden), Audi (Bavaria), Skoda (Czech Republic) and SEAT (Spain), the VW Group has legs in the whole Europe. Since in some countries VW share of jobs is enormously high (in Lower Saxony, VW is as big as the next 50 companies together), the respective country will certainly support the company in crisis.

The smaller luxury brands Bentley, Bugatti, Porsche and Lamborghini can survive even in extreme scenarios. Luxury manufacturers also tend to have a low level of vertical integration, so they can easily pass on the burden of electromobility technological change to suppliers. In addition, Porsche has announced that it will sell half of its vehicles as BEV by 2025.

BMW

At BMW, it pays to take a look at the top of the company. Norbert Reithofer, the former CEO, did not believe in large quantities of the BEV in his customer segment, but favored the plug-in hybrids. Large development budgets flowed and flowed into this technology. In the scenario I've described earlier, the plug-in hybrid (PHEV) does not matter because it's too heavy, too expensive, and too thirsty on the long haul due to the almost compelling gasoline engine.

Harald Krüger followed Reithofer and is probably convinced of his strategy. Moreover, BMW's corporate culture tends to be grassroots, meaning that even a board of directors hardly makes decisions that are not accepted by the team. BMW is, however, of the entire culture and history a company that already carries the word "motor" in its name and where many still rave about the silky-smooth running of the four-stroke engine. In such a phase of change, this corporate culture can make a rapid turnaround difficult.

BMW was thus long in the direction of PHEV and thus long invested in the wrong direction. After the i3 (press presentation at the IAA 2011), not a single BEV followed until today. The i5 was designed, but the further development stopped, the i1, which could have emerged from our project MUTE, was not implemented. They have lost seven valuable years.

With a return on sales close to 10%, BMW has been making very good profits for years and still has the strength to invest in technology. Now is the tight time, because they have no dedicated platforms and it makes the impression that current platforms will be used for BEV as a conversion. So a Mini is planned with just 300 km range. The i3, originally conceived as a purpose design, only provides a range of 300 km and other vehicles are not even announced.

The concept and the many pre-orders of the Tesla Model 3, characteristically named as an analogy to the BMW 3 Series, have surprised and bothered BMW. The announcement is actually an attack on the core model of BMW, which generates the most profits.

BMW is the smallest independent company in the automotive industry and is predominantly privately owned. In an emergency, it would be difficult for citizens to convey that a company that has been very successful for decades and earn good money have to be saved with state funds. Scrapping scheme premiums hardly help the OEM of luxury vehicles, as 2010 has shown.

BMW currently has technological catching up to do with automatic driving and is therefore investing billions in this area over the next few years. BMW also wants to position itself as a luxury mobility provider. In addition, enormous investments in electromobility would now have to be made. In my estimation, BMW would have to invest completely in the new fields for the next five years and forego profits in order to make the turnaround. BMW has fallen behind the competition due to a wrong strategy for years. Many executives have seen this, especially in the field of electromobility, and have left the company.

Nevertheless, at BMW one can find the world's best engineers, so the turnaround is still technologically possible. The image of BMW is still excellent and continues to attract good engineers and managers.

In addition, BMW has a low level of added value and can change the home production of the ICE components if necessary.
BMW can easily cope with the turnaround to mobility provider and also invests itself in concepts such as DriveNow, which is supposed to be profitable. BMW has been trying to establish itself as a provider of premium mobility for quite some years - quite successfully. The planned merger between DriveNow and Car2Go will strengthen the position of both providers.

Toyota

Toyota has been relying on the HEV for many years and is also extremely successful there. The HEV is really only suitable for the city and the middle distance - exactly where the BEV now finds its application. On long-haul and heavy vehicles, the HEV is actually the wrong propulsion system. Then Toyota promoted the fuel cell. Recently, Toyota - probably due to market pressure from China - decided to focus more on the BEV.

Toyota has been writing high profits for years. As a dominant OEM in Japan, the state will assist Toyota in the event of a crisis. The Japanese corporate culture includes not dismissing employees. Thus, Toyota will carry these "legacies" (sorry for this politically incorrect term) around for many years.

Toyota, in contrast to most other OEMs, has many internal suppliers of components for internal combustion engines. Thus, Toyota will have a hard time letting it go bankrupt.

Technologically, Toyota is familiar with electric drives and has also gained experience with the Li-ion battery. Allegedly, Toyota is the world leader in solid state battery technology and could thus make the technological leap.

Toyota had to spend around $1 billion in Silicon Valley for automated driving - apparently because they do not have the technology themselves.

As a mobility service provider, Toyota has not made much of a progress.

Hyundai-Kia

Hyundai is the second largest conglomerate in South Korea and the largest car manufacturer in the country. With LG and Samsung also in Korea, Hyundai gains access to the latest battery technology. In addition, South Korea believes in electromobility as a country - on the strength of its excellent market position in batteries and power electronics alone.

The company makes profits, is certainly well protected by the state and can cushion financial problems through the corporate conglomerate.

Technologically Hyundai is rather below average and copied both technically and in design much of VW. The models i10, i20 and i30 are based on the vehicle concept of the Up, Polo and Golf. In the field of automatic driving and mobility, Hyundai has not yet profiled. In the case of BEV, considerable overall vehicle expertise is also required which Hyundai has not acquired through its previous copying behavior.

Renault-Nissan

Already at the beginning of the decade, Carlos Ghosn was the first CEO of a volume manufacturer to believe in the BEV and put concepts such as the Twizy on the market. Thus, the Nissan Leaf was one of the first BEV on the mass market and is currently the best-selling BEV in the world.

At the beginning, the Leaf was bad in terms of driving dynamics as well as battery life and service life. Meanwhile, the Leaf offers an appealing design and a range of 400 km in the cycle - more than the eGolf from VW and the i3 from BMW. Renault / Nissan believes in the mass market, but was unfortunately a bit too early and has neglected for years the conventional model range in the further development.

Renault-Nissan is making a profit and has invested in electric mobility at an early age. Nevertheless, in relation to vehicle production, it is far from the profits of the premium manufacturers.

The French state will support the former state-owned company in emergencies, so it is reasonably crisis-proof.

In terms of technological know-how, Renault-Nissan is not particularly progressive, but certainly has built know-how through field experience. In automatic driving, the company will have to buy from suppliers.

In the field of mobility services, Renault-Nissan has not yet positioned itself and can’t compensate for the heavy decline in unit sales.

Jaguar-Land Rover

JLR was led by Wolfgang Ziebart into the new era of electromobility. He was also involved in the development of the sports car company Artega, which built very early electric sports car and thus believes in the technology.

JLR was acquired by the Indian Tata Group, which invested heavily. Thus, the company has main production sites in the Great Britain and a high tradition there. The UK will certainly protect one of the few quasi own local companies - as well as the investor from India with a good capital position.

JLR is once again making a profit as a luxury brand and has been investing in electromobility for years. The new platforms will get a body with a high aluminum content and will be pure BEV.

JLR will need to shop for automatic driving technology, and they have not yet positioned themselves in shared mobility. But as they operate in a niche market with low volumes, a collapse in the mass market for JLR would not be particularly strong.

BYD

Build Your Dreams - the name says it all and the company founder believed in electric mobility early on. Warren Buffet got in early and was rewarded with high profits.

The company is a shining example for China of freeing itself from the technological dependence of international automotive companies, so that the state will certainly support them.

Technologically, BYD has little to offer in the fields of automatic driving or shared mobility.

Tesla

Elon Musk stands like no other for the BEV. He has shown with the Model S, what is technologically possible, before others have even dealt with it. He is a possessed person who believes in the impossible and demands it again and again. As a physicist, however, he should know that physics has fixed boundaries that can not be outplayed by as much ambition and PR. These limits are always apparent: The quality of the vehicles varies greatly and the Tesla forums are full of complaints and criticism. Due to the thin service network, faults are turned off slowly, or there is no technical solution at all. A colleague of mine has Tesla and have already repeatedly replaced the gearbox because of noise.

Seemingly clever details such as double doors lead to huge start-up problems and are unsuitable for underground garages. In my estimation, Tesla now has only one important technological highlight, “updates over the air" and in the current form it is prone to hackers. For me, on the other hand, production is the real horse's foot. Tesla always have troubles to get a start with appropriate quality and quantity. And that's ultimately crucial to get the costs under control. Even if Musk has bought in many experts and exerts enormous pressure, perhaps decades of experience in the automotive industry are lacking, just as the German or also Japanese premium manufacturers can show. Musk tries to cover it with permanent new ideas such as the roadster or electric truck. In the end, all that matters is whether he can raise the number of units for his Model 3 and thereby earn a profit.

In my experience, sometimes even a mistake enough to (almost) destroy a whole brand. Examples include Audi in the USA with the self-acceleration, VW with the diesel scandal, Toyota with jammed accelerators, Daimler with the elk test of the A-Class or the electro-hydraulic brake failure, FIAT with rust problems, NSU with the Wankel engine, or Opel with paint problems.

And with such a fast development time, with little testing and many new technologies, Tesla takes an enormously high risk. When comparable vehicles from Audi (e-Tron quattro), Porsche (Mission E) or Daimler first come onto the market - and that will be the case between 2018 and 2020 - Tesla cars will only be measured in terms of quality and price. And Tesla has to win this fight first. At the latest, when the models all come onto the market, the magazines will quickly carry out comparative tests and the customer may then choose the more reliable German product with a developed service network.

Tesla has never made profits and will only be able to make bigger profits as a monopoly for the next three years. Then the competition with comparable models will reduce Tesla's profit margins. If change is very fast, if other manufacturers can not move quickly and ramp up production, demand will be so high that Tesla will be able to maintain higher prices. Tesla is a bet on a quick change to the BEV. Then Tesla has the advantage of its own cell production. In addition, Tesla will have secured favorable conditions even before the sharp price increase on the commodity markets.

Other manufacturers will take years to build cell factories, supply chains, etc. In the meantime, Tesla can sell all produced vehicles. Tesla will have secured long-term low purchase prices for raw materials years ago, while other manufacturers will have to pay current market prices for lithium and cobalt. In addition, Tesla has no legacy, ie big number of employees in the company involved in the development or production of internal combustion engines. Other companies can not reclassify their employees so quickly or cheaply or force them out of the company with severance payments.

Tesla is therefore dependent on its investors continuing to provide money to cover all start-up costs and investments. Allegedly, this only lasts until the middle of 2018. Therefore, Tesla may also be collecting money again with pre-orders for Roadster and Truck. Whether Tesla is supported by the American state under President Trump or California is questionable. However, Tesla has financially strong investors who hardly want to lose their previously made bet and therefore still invest.

Tesla has certainly accumulated enough technological know-how over the last 10 years in the powertrain and the battery. Tesla relies on experienced suppliers for production, customer service and above all in the other relevant area of ​​vehicle technology. The risk that Tesla will make a system error that is not based on the error of a single component (for example, in terms of safety) is thus high given the high pace of development and lack of testing. Even when it comes to automatic driving, Tesla has so far not been shining with sophisticated systems of high safety.

So far, Tesla has not positioned itself in the area of ​​mobility providers. This is not necessary either because they do not have to substitute existing business and can concentrate exclusively on increasing volumes at BEV.

Google

In my opinion, Google will not even get involved in vehicle construction. The BEV is for Google only a marginal phenomenon and not really relevant.

Google focuses exclusively on the topic of mobility with the Robotaxi for inner cities. The production of the cars, the sensor and the computer will be others businesses and Google only deliver. the software for the automatic driving. Then, Google can use its data center to organize shared-mobility. Google will roll out this idea in all cities.

During my eight years of regular visits to Singapore, I have seen such big cities tick: the traffic caused by the growth of the cities is almost unmanageable. More and more people must be transported in a vehicle than before, with an average of 1 or 2 people per car. The only option is to increase the share of public transport. Singapore, for example, plans automatic buses. In principle, Google can scale the size of its vehicles. I assume that a mix of medium-sized buses with about 30 people of maximum capacity and shared Robotaxis with 4-6 seats will be sufficient to replace the individual transport (all of today's taxis and private vehicles).

The Android operating system gives Google access to comprehensive mobility data resulting from the localization of mobile phones. This allows Google to grasp the mobility behavior of the population and to offer appropriate mobility.

[KorzH]

Велосипедики!

[Touring*]

ФВ рискует тем что огромный капекс в заводы и технологические цепочки под электро который они сейчас начали осуществлять может не вернуться через продажи с прибылью в планируемый срок. То есть они проинвестируют в переход на электро чересчур много, и чересчур рано. Например это может произойти в случае если темп перехода на электро пользователями будет замедлен бутылочным горлышком в виде инфраструктуры. С другой стороны если ФВ сидеть и пассивно ждать развития спроса на электромобили, не инвестировать много в это направление, а оно вдруг пойдёт резко расти, то им придётся резко догонять. А этого не сделать мгновенно, так как инвестиции в переоборудование заводов будут в этом случае «нужны вчера». Так как все это цифры в десятки миллиардов евро, то цена ошибки топ-менеджмента с таймингом и направлением вложений мягко говоря будет чувствительной для акционеров концерна.

[Gundesvan]

Никакого риска. Сейчас концерны "участки столбят". Кто первый - тому больше достанется.

И новость - годовалая.
Финансовые потоки как видим перенаправлены.

Конец эпохи: Volkswagen прекратит выпуск бензиновых и дизельных ДВС

Скрытый текст

хотя есть один затык. В случае повреждения, горят электромобили как пинпонговые шарики

[TrainAlex]

Никакого риска. Сейчас концерны "участки столбят". Кто первый - тому больше достанется.

И новость - годовалая.
Финансовые потоки как видим перенаправлены.

Конец эпохи: Volkswagen прекратит выпуск бензиновых и дизельных ДВС

Скрытый текст

хотя есть один затык. В случае повреждения, горят электромобили как пинпонговые шарики

затык затыком а в Норвегии каждый второй проданный автомобиль - Электромобиль. А с 24 года только электро можно продавать.
Только я не понял гибрид у них электро считается?

[Touring*]

Реально, они думают сейчас не о переделе долей рынка в его нынешней конфигурации.

А о том, как, если с ключевыми технологиями звёзды всё-таки сойдутся, стать вместо оптовых поставщиков машин дилерам-посредникам (в свою очередь продающих их в частное пользование), провайдерами мобильности для розничных клиентов.

Из такой пищевой цепочки выпадают не только автодилеры с их прекрасными шоурумами и консультантами, но и ориентированные на конечного пользователя автомастерские, а также розничные страховщики. К производителям отходит и бизнес нынешних фирм, сдающих авто в аренду.

Машин в такой системе нужно производить в 4-5 раза меньше прежнего, так как во столько же вырастет коэффициент их использования. Поэтому заработок производителей уже считается не как маржа на отгруженной дилерам автомобильной единице умножить на количество единиц, а как доход от продажи какого-то объёма мобильности как цельной услуги конечным клиентам.

[Gundesvan]

[F. degli A.]

Причем что интересно: буквально 6-го ноября Der Spiegel опубликовал статью о том, что правительство Боливии разорвало к вящему неудовольствию немцев крупнейший контракт по добыче лития в районе соляного озера Salar de Uyuni.
В рамках совместного предприятия с немецкой компанией ACISA предполагалось добывать с 2022 г. от 30.000 до 40.000 тонн гидроксида лития ежегодно. Согласно условиям контракта, 85% лития должно было идти в Германию.
Очевидно, Моралес слишком многим перешел дорогу.

[Gundesvan]

Причем что интересно: буквально 6-го ноября Der Spiegel опубликовал статью о том, что правительство Боливии разорвало к вящему неудовольствию немцев крупнейший контракт по добыче лития в районе соляного озера Salar de Uyuni.
В рамках совместного предприятия с немецкой компанией ACISA предполагалось добывать с 2022 г. от 30.000 до 40.000 тонн гидроксида лития ежегодно. Согласно условиям контракта, 85% лития должно было идти в Германию.
Очевидно, Моралес слишком многим перешел дорогу.

За три предыдущих срока (почти 14 лет) - это неудивительно)))
Новость вчера попалась, он запросил соседей, коридор для самолета - чтобы свалить.
Его все дружно послали на ... А это Бразилия, Аргентина, Чили, Перу. Парагвай только промолчал.