Fritz Maffry on the Electric Vehicle Transition and the Tech Sector in General
From my colleague Fritz Maffry:
Few believed Elon Musk could bring the Model 3 to scale, produce it efficiently, and get volume achieved, on production and distribution.He did. So many pretended he was just at the mercy of the focus of the big traditionals when they really decided to compete. He wasn’t, and now they are scrambling to catch up to something they have no idea how to beat in the near future.
They are all kind of competing, while behind, while Tesla roars forward on full power and focus. Which do you think will own the future? To pretend that Elon’s achievements are not staggering is to miss the plot, and they will be most difficult to compete with.
Here are articles that suggest a) German automakers are struggling with the EV transition, but b) Mercedes Benz isn’t giving up.
If you look at the charts, Tesla has achieved escape velocity, while and the rest are mostly stuck at inconsequential volumes that achieve no scale economics. This is largely because most of them are really reworking platforms that are mostly designed for combustion engines. They’re not going to equal Tesla and the gap is broadening.
Uber is now reaching for a $120 billion valuation out of their IPO. Bird capitalized to a billion. Tech is making it happen; it has very little to do with civil engineering or urban planners, or so very little. Your local coal monopoly utility has hijacked the process, then demonstrated a coal monopoly is horrible at generating tech innovation, with multiple tech vendors not on short leashes by the utility.
Meanwhile Google and others are taking cost structures down to nothing, shared electric vans will be close to no cost for some transportation purposes.
Meanwhile Elon is surpassing Boeing on long term contracts for space work. Boeing is playing hard games to undermine Space X, there is no contest in speed of innovation and cost structure, Elon is driving the innovative disruptive model and the traditional military industrial complex is concerned. They can’t just have perpetual cost overruns and pass them on like they used to.
If you are still doubtful that autonomous does not surpass streetcar extensions, then more information will not help; only seeing actual case studies of complete obsolescence via autonomous will bring to clarity for you the massive advantages in cost, performance, and flexibility that autonomous has.
Here in Kansas City, we chose to do the comfortable thing. Our power utility, together with a mega engineering firm, and the chamber (with the CEO hired by the head of the utility) are all steering things completely down the wrong tracks for real innovation or to position superbly for the clearly disruptive near futures that will dominate. And they will gladly do it again, as they own the regional political alignments.
The only thing is they can’t stop progress, and this will happen at scale before the next track is laid. The red state of Arizona is all over this, as is the blue state of California; it should not be a partisan issue, but of course it will be made to play out that way. It is simply an extraordinary future with great performance and cost advantages; only negligence can have us not preparing for it with full purpose, expecting to have multiple entities competing and facilitating and shaping that.
Elon is a national treasure, worth all the KCPL, Chamber, City Hall, Area Transit Authority efforts put together. We chose the wrong path and now that will become completely obvious to the public. I guess I should also mention also the real estate developers, who thought they knew about the future of transportation innovation. Not quite. not close, and not appropriate; they hijacked the efforts because they had the political power. Tthey wasted a fortune, came back to the table, and now want to now waste another fortune.
We will end this with a big old fat we told you so. We told you Tesla was amazing; we told you Elon was driving innovation; we told you coal monopolies were ill-equipped to drive this, and that it was going to be led by tech. Of course, a dozen bureaucrats, ill-suited and unprepared for the dialog, decided to rubber-stamp what they were force fed by the bigs and usual suspects; now we have a hollow future for the expanded Streetcar, and a strained reality on the entrepreneurial traction the region has achieved. We didn’t get solar right, we didn’t get electric bikes right, we didn’t let Tesla show us what they can do in competition with the single threaded approach of the utility. We didn’t do multi-mode until it was thrust upon us by Lime and Bird. We didn’t do autonomous early efforts, we didn’t do comparison studies with simulations and costing exercises. We didn’t do long-park scenarios with solar charging; we did just what the monopoly coal utility and their proxy, Black and Veatch wanted us to.
This year Google, Apple, Tesla, Navya, GM/Cruise will prove how wrong our thinking has been in the region, and how real innovation is deliberately choked off. Most of these innovations need a new approach to best manage disruption; they (the planners and exclusive leads) won’t accept one, of course but the disruption will happen just the same, with their wasting more money and underachieving as they did over the last decade. Our regional politicians have let down the region, with guidance by old school business leaders who are about to be disrupted too. There will be some sweet justice in tech showing how much better things could be, and finally the region understanding that is how it is going to go.
Elon: nice job. Many of us appreciate the intelligence and commitment you have put into this. Those who play short games in the shallow end of the pool deserve to have lost the $2 billion they did in the last week, as the story of the real accomplishments of Elon Musk and Tesla were better told with more examples and data, numbers and proof, performance and achievement. In the near-term, Elon is going to disrupt some other markets as well, and he is as magic to Tesla as Jobs was to Apple, and the innovator of his time. Escape velocity has been achieved, the battle has turned.
Craig,
Whenever I read the gung-ho rants by advocates like Fritz Maffry, I can’t help cringing.
In one way I appreciate their enthusiasm, and yet I wish they’d tone it down as extravagant claims only makes promoting EV adoption more difficult.
I realize Fritz Maffry’s is addressing an audience of fellow true believers, so his claims should probably be taken it that context, but even so it’s not helpful.
I’m a very early shareholder and owner of Tesla products, also I often write in laudatory terms about the enormous achievements of Elon Musk. For nearly twenty years, I’ve produced, sold, serviced and promoted EV’s (albeit of a specialist nature).
Although I’m also passionate about EV transport, I believe it’s important to retain a sense of perspective and objectivity if the EV industry is to grow and prosper.
It’s also unhelpful to introduce unrelated ethical, political or ideological concepts when discussing EV transport adoption. Such distractions only serve to deter focus,create divisive alienation and confusion.
To my critic, it is important to say the context of the current timing. There was a full court press to force Elon from his company. Routinely there was a lop sided herd mentality of articles basically regurgitating negligible points like they were significant, in many cases they were remarkably personal in nature, and routinely off the pulse of what was really happening. In essence they were acting like he was failing when he was actually accomplishing something great.
So many sat on the sidelines, letting the confusion of the crowds dictate the momentum. Elon is supposed to sit tight while they portray his company as a deceitful and failing entity. Note, the journalists and a lot of those who should know so much better, did nothing at all.
So rather than watch a great man get mobbed by the social media scourge of an orchestrated short campaign, while the journalists just echo chamber whatever they hear the most of, I decided to lay out Tesla’s real accomplishments, milestones, breakthroughs, and competitive wins. I write private notes to journalists in the industry, they know the quantitative information I provide on product performance, tech advancement, market success.
If telling the accurate story is devicive, then let me please divide. Of course you must have been writing to tell the real story of Elon’s great accomplishments, instead, you were probably sitting on your hands instead while his company was completely mischaracterized by forces that want his failure and to trip up the great innovator of our time. On matters of mediocrity, I am an equal opportunity critic of the Republicans and the Democrats when I think they have it wrong.
Now, the public and the competition is waking up to what Elon actually accomplished with the ramp up of the model 3. One of the great business feats of all time, and you probably sat on the sidelines while they almost took him down in the meanwhile. I am not paid or in the orbit of Tesla, but I know outstanding when I see it.
Here is a chart of actual accomplishment, which is so fantastically at odds with the purposefully destructive narrative of the shorts. Were you asleep while this was all going on?
https://cleantechnica.com/2018/08/27/tesla-model-3-sales-dwarf-other-us-electric-car-sales-cleantechnica-report/
Fritz: You need to understand that your “critic” is a paid troll of environmental websites. He has over 1000 negative comments here alone, going back nine years. You may want to take what writes cum grano salis, or ignore him altogether; you wouldn’t be the first. https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/cum_grano_salis
Craig,
Good grief, what’s with the “paid troll’ nonsense ? Over the years I have urged you many times to join the early adopters, like myself, to buy an EV as personal transport !
Eventually, you did buy a Prius which is a huge improvement on your previous VW diesel, but by 2015 is hardly cutting edge “clean technology”.
Nor do I believe my comments are “negative”, they may disagree with your assessments, but they are always factual and accurate. When I quote sources or references they are chosen for authenticity, objectivity and accuracy.
The main difference between you and me, is you start with agenda and a “belief” structure which contains a Pantheon of hero’s and idols. You remain locked into a perspective viewed through a prism of political/ideological/philosophic adherence.
That’s okay, the world needs committed advocates, however it also requires a certain amount of balance and accurate information.
I dare say I’m not alone in noticing since 2016 your commitment to advancing clean technology has taken second place to political activism.
I don’t chose any particular technology, and fight for it as if it were a religious crusade ! That would be absurd, since all technology will inevitably become superseded or obsolete.
My interest in clean technology may be less lofty or esoteric than your own, but at least it has the merit of practicality and tangible results. i sell a golf course, park or resort a large EV mower, I believe I can demonstrate tangible benefits to thousands of skeptic to the benefits of clean technology.
The major difference is I believe in persuasion, I don’t sit around demanding governments compel or coerce people to change to technologies they would not otherwise purchase.
The moral dimension of marketing “green’ products has a role, but it will always be a minor consideration. Endless preaching, moralizing and intimidation doesn’t result in a better outcome, it simply produces a counter=reaction and the election of populists like President Trump !
I don’t think I’m negative, simply pragmatic and open-minded.
Fritz,
Thank you for your reply.
Actually, I am a great fan of Elon Musk and written often of his many accomplishments. I’m also have remained a loyal investor, early share holder and owner of several Tesla products, so I probably have more vested interest than you in seeing both Tesla and Elon Musk to succeed.
However, it’s important to keep a sense of proportion, Tesla is a public corporation like any other and it’s executives and directors must obey the law like everyone else. Elon’s recent problems are of his own making and he’s been treated very leniently and fairly.
I believe its equally important to keep a sense of proportion, Tesla is a business selling a product to consumers, not a religious or political cult ! Tesla must stand or fall by the merits and qualities of the products it produces.
So far, Tesla has does very well with three models in production and plans to introduce two more. This is a huge achievement for a relatively small enterprise.
The most important aspect of Tesla’s sales success has been the vehicles remain marketable without government subsidies or incentives. No other EV models have survived the withdrawal or absence of government support. This displays the genius of Elon musk’s vision and astute marketing.
But let’s be honest, Telsa’s entire annual production doesn’t equal 1% of Toyota’s !
My criticism of overly excited and enthusiastic cheer squads is they start to get a little fanatical. EV adoption needs ordinary consumers to become persuaded to buy an EV, not a small cult-like group of fanatics most of whom don’t own a Tesla !
Persuasion is what’s required, maybe I’m wrong, but it’s my experience that few consumers respond favorably to being preached at, or lectured on extraneous issues when deciding on purchasing a consumer product.
Thanks Craig, 🙂
I should have noted when they didn’t sign their piece. It does sound like the usual defense mechanisms of the mediocre status quo.
Craig knows my thesis is that the tech firms will transform energy and transportation, and are much closer to this in large scale disruption than is commonly appreciated. I intend to help them do that.
-Fritz Maffry
Please see: http://www.2greenenergy.com/2018/10/18/tech-companies/
Fritz,
Who is ‘they’ ?