BMW CEO steps away after market loss
- Thread starter Andrew1972
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted by UncleDave
https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/foru...screen_shot_2019_07_11_at_9.14.20_am.png
Well, if a Tesla uses the same computing and control architecture as an F-35, they would have at least used ARINC protocols as well.
There's a lot of HTML/CSS/JS driving the HMI in a Tesla too.
Most cars these days share some commonality with a pre-Intel Mac using the PowerPC architecture(American/European and newer Hyundai/Kia using Bosch/Conti/Delphi PCMs) or a Super Nintendo/N64/Sega Genesis/Dreamcast/PS2 based on Hitachi/NEC/Mitsubishi RISC processors(anything using Denso/Keihin/Hitachi/Mitsubishi PCMs).
https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/foru...screen_shot_2019_07_11_at_9.14.20_am.png
Well, if a Tesla uses the same computing and control architecture as an F-35, they would have at least used ARINC protocols as well.
Most cars these days share some commonality with a pre-Intel Mac using the PowerPC architecture(American/European and newer Hyundai/Kia using Bosch/Conti/Delphi PCMs) or a Super Nintendo/N64/Sega Genesis/Dreamcast/PS2 based on Hitachi/NEC/Mitsubishi RISC processors(anything using Denso/Keihin/Hitachi/Mitsubishi PCMs).
Lets talk about spacex for a second
Whats better for America?
To keep buying RD-180's from the Russians - or to award an equally earned contract to an American company?
This isn't "subsidy" or "corporate welfare" - its a contract award.
UD
Whats better for America?
To keep buying RD-180's from the Russians - or to award an equally earned contract to an American company?
This isn't "subsidy" or "corporate welfare" - its a contract award.
UD
Back to BMW since that was the topic before the Tesla gushies took it over.
BMW needs to either ally itself or merge or be merged. That is the trend.
Today's news is showing a likely Ford Volkswagen tie up on electric and autonomous vehicles. That's the trend.
Or, you can stay the same and wither or burn your bridges as some have done.
BMW needs to either ally itself or merge or be merged. That is the trend.
Today's news is showing a likely Ford Volkswagen tie up on electric and autonomous vehicles. That's the trend.
Or, you can stay the same and wither or burn your bridges as some have done.
4WD
$50 site donor 2024
Bet Sikorsky is about to get some .. and the beat goes on, the beat goes on ...
Originally Posted by PimTac
Back to BMW since that was the topic before the Tesla gushies took it over.
BMW needs to either ally itself or merge or be merged. That is the trend.
Today's news is showing a likely Ford Volkswagen tie up on electric and autonomous vehicles. That's the trend.
Or, you can stay the same and wither or burn your bridges as some have done.
BMW has a spotty history with collaborations. The alliance that built the engines for the BMW-era Minis with Chrysler and Peugeot was a flop, so was the Global Hybrid Cooperation with DaimlerChrysler and GM. Their ownership of Rover/Land Rover was short-lived as well.
I can see Toyota buying out BMW or working more with them if the new Supra proves to be a success for both parties. However, Toyota wants Lexus to be more autonomous from the mothership, and they certainly don't want to be seen as snobby if they swallowed up BMW and be the third largest player in luxury cars(BMW, Lexus, Rolls-Royce).
Back to BMW since that was the topic before the Tesla gushies took it over.
BMW needs to either ally itself or merge or be merged. That is the trend.
Today's news is showing a likely Ford Volkswagen tie up on electric and autonomous vehicles. That's the trend.
Or, you can stay the same and wither or burn your bridges as some have done.
BMW has a spotty history with collaborations. The alliance that built the engines for the BMW-era Minis with Chrysler and Peugeot was a flop, so was the Global Hybrid Cooperation with DaimlerChrysler and GM. Their ownership of Rover/Land Rover was short-lived as well.
I can see Toyota buying out BMW or working more with them if the new Supra proves to be a success for both parties. However, Toyota wants Lexus to be more autonomous from the mothership, and they certainly don't want to be seen as snobby if they swallowed up BMW and be the third largest player in luxury cars(BMW, Lexus, Rolls-Royce).
Originally Posted by KrisZ
Honestly I don't understand people's thinking sometimes. Mostly everyone jumps with joy when a foreign company opens up an assembly plant in US because it creates jobs. Heck, I can see many cheering for the Chinese auto makers once they come over here.
Yet, Tesla employs something like 30k people in US, both in manufacturing, design, engineering, programming etc. We're talking high skill level, well paying jobs, not some assembly line type jobs.
I understand not liking the vehicles or even Musk himself, but this is an American company, providing good jobs and careers for thousands. So why are so many have a hostile attitude towards it?
Elon is going to offshore production and import to the US in order to reduce costs. It's doesn't make much sense to be based in the US if you can't generate a return.
Honestly I don't understand people's thinking sometimes. Mostly everyone jumps with joy when a foreign company opens up an assembly plant in US because it creates jobs. Heck, I can see many cheering for the Chinese auto makers once they come over here.
Yet, Tesla employs something like 30k people in US, both in manufacturing, design, engineering, programming etc. We're talking high skill level, well paying jobs, not some assembly line type jobs.
I understand not liking the vehicles or even Musk himself, but this is an American company, providing good jobs and careers for thousands. So why are so many have a hostile attitude towards it?
Elon is going to offshore production and import to the US in order to reduce costs. It's doesn't make much sense to be based in the US if you can't generate a return.
Originally Posted by nthach
Originally Posted by PimTac
Back to BMW since that was the topic before the Tesla gushies took it over.
BMW needs to either ally itself or merge or be merged. That is the trend.
Today's news is showing a likely Ford Volkswagen tie up on electric and autonomous vehicles. That's the trend.
Or, you can stay the same and wither or burn your bridges as some have done.
BMW has a spotty history with collaborations. The alliance that built the engines for the BMW-era Minis with Chrysler and Peugeot was a flop, so was the Global Hybrid Cooperation with DaimlerChrysler and GM. Their ownership of Rover/Land Rover was short-lived as well.
I can see Toyota buying out BMW or working more with them if the new Supra proves to be a success for both parties. However, Toyota wants Lexus to be more autonomous from the mothership, and they certainly don't want to be seen as snobby if they swallowed up BMW and be the third largest player in luxury cars(BMW, Lexus, Rolls-Royce).
Agree. BMW may be the odd man out after it's said and done. I'm sure Berlin would do everything it could to not let that happen.
Originally Posted by PimTac
Back to BMW since that was the topic before the Tesla gushies took it over.
BMW needs to either ally itself or merge or be merged. That is the trend.
Today's news is showing a likely Ford Volkswagen tie up on electric and autonomous vehicles. That's the trend.
Or, you can stay the same and wither or burn your bridges as some have done.
BMW has a spotty history with collaborations. The alliance that built the engines for the BMW-era Minis with Chrysler and Peugeot was a flop, so was the Global Hybrid Cooperation with DaimlerChrysler and GM. Their ownership of Rover/Land Rover was short-lived as well.
I can see Toyota buying out BMW or working more with them if the new Supra proves to be a success for both parties. However, Toyota wants Lexus to be more autonomous from the mothership, and they certainly don't want to be seen as snobby if they swallowed up BMW and be the third largest player in luxury cars(BMW, Lexus, Rolls-Royce).
Agree. BMW may be the odd man out after it's said and done. I'm sure Berlin would do everything it could to not let that happen.
Originally Posted by nthach
Originally Posted by PimTac
Back to BMW since that was the topic before the Tesla gushies took it over.
BMW needs to either ally itself or merge or be merged. That is the trend.
Today's news is showing a likely Ford Volkswagen tie up on electric and autonomous vehicles. That's the trend.
Or, you can stay the same and wither or burn your bridges as some have done.
BMW has a spotty history with collaborations. The alliance that built the engines for the BMW-era Minis with Chrysler and Peugeot was a flop, so was the Global Hybrid Cooperation with DaimlerChrysler and GM. Their ownership of Rover/Land Rover was short-lived as well.
I can see Toyota buying out BMW or working more with them if the new Supra proves to be a success for both parties. However, Toyota wants Lexus to be more autonomous from the mothership, and they certainly don't want to be seen as snobby if they swallowed up BMW and be the third largest player in luxury cars(BMW, Lexus, Rolls-Royce).
Of course anything is possible but I sense that Toyota has built up their own family with this in mind. Using the strengths of Mazda, Suzuki, Daihatsu, Subaru among others, they are setting themselves up for a future where if it moves we will build it. They are not just focusing on passenger vehicles. Self driving delivery vehicles, personal transport devices including those for disabled persons and other specialty mobility devices are in their future portfolio right now. Panasonic has joined the family in alliance with Denso to power all this.
Originally Posted by PimTac
Back to BMW since that was the topic before the Tesla gushies took it over.
BMW needs to either ally itself or merge or be merged. That is the trend.
Today's news is showing a likely Ford Volkswagen tie up on electric and autonomous vehicles. That's the trend.
Or, you can stay the same and wither or burn your bridges as some have done.
BMW has a spotty history with collaborations. The alliance that built the engines for the BMW-era Minis with Chrysler and Peugeot was a flop, so was the Global Hybrid Cooperation with DaimlerChrysler and GM. Their ownership of Rover/Land Rover was short-lived as well.
I can see Toyota buying out BMW or working more with them if the new Supra proves to be a success for both parties. However, Toyota wants Lexus to be more autonomous from the mothership, and they certainly don't want to be seen as snobby if they swallowed up BMW and be the third largest player in luxury cars(BMW, Lexus, Rolls-Royce).
Of course anything is possible but I sense that Toyota has built up their own family with this in mind. Using the strengths of Mazda, Suzuki, Daihatsu, Subaru among others, they are setting themselves up for a future where if it moves we will build it. They are not just focusing on passenger vehicles. Self driving delivery vehicles, personal transport devices including those for disabled persons and other specialty mobility devices are in their future portfolio right now. Panasonic has joined the family in alliance with Denso to power all this.
Originally Posted by PimTac
Of course anything is possible but I sense that Toyota has built up their own family with this in mind. Using the strengths of Mazda, Suzuki, Daihatsu, Subaru among others, they are setting themselves up for a future where if it moves we will build it. They are not just focusing on passenger vehicles. Self driving delivery vehicles, personal transport devices including those for disabled persons and other specialty mobility devices are in their future portfolio right now. Panasonic has joined the family in alliance with Denso to power all this.
Toyota along with SoftBank dumped money into Uber, Didi(the Chinese Uber) and Getaround for city dwellers too.
The weird part is that Japanese industry was ruled by a few families and banks. Mitsubishi, Sumitomo, Hitachi and Mitsui ruled industry in Japan. Mazda was part of the Sumitomo conglomerate and Subaru was under the same umbrella as Hitachi/Nissan. Toyota didn't have any formal ties with the major Japanese conglomerates and banks, but they became a conglomerate in their own right and rely on Mitsubishi's finance arm.
Toyota, with their ownership of Denso/Aisin/Advics/Toyoda Gosei/Toyota Auto Body and ties to JTEKT is like what GM and Ford were up until recently when it came to vertical integration. Kinda like GM with Delco-Remy, Delco-Moraine, Fisher Body and Saginaw.
Of course anything is possible but I sense that Toyota has built up their own family with this in mind. Using the strengths of Mazda, Suzuki, Daihatsu, Subaru among others, they are setting themselves up for a future where if it moves we will build it. They are not just focusing on passenger vehicles. Self driving delivery vehicles, personal transport devices including those for disabled persons and other specialty mobility devices are in their future portfolio right now. Panasonic has joined the family in alliance with Denso to power all this.
Toyota along with SoftBank dumped money into Uber, Didi(the Chinese Uber) and Getaround for city dwellers too.
The weird part is that Japanese industry was ruled by a few families and banks. Mitsubishi, Sumitomo, Hitachi and Mitsui ruled industry in Japan. Mazda was part of the Sumitomo conglomerate and Subaru was under the same umbrella as Hitachi/Nissan. Toyota didn't have any formal ties with the major Japanese conglomerates and banks, but they became a conglomerate in their own right and rely on Mitsubishi's finance arm.
Toyota, with their ownership of Denso/Aisin/Advics/Toyoda Gosei/Toyota Auto Body and ties to JTEKT is like what GM and Ford were up until recently when it came to vertical integration. Kinda like GM with Delco-Remy, Delco-Moraine, Fisher Body and Saginaw.
Originally Posted by PimTac
Perhaps even more than that. The Japanese conglomerates are all encompassing. Mitsubishi makes everything from ball point pens to nuclear reactors. A modern day General Electric of sorts.
Did they start making parts to support their automobiles yet?
Perhaps even more than that. The Japanese conglomerates are all encompassing. Mitsubishi makes everything from ball point pens to nuclear reactors. A modern day General Electric of sorts.
Did they start making parts to support their automobiles yet?
Originally Posted by ArrestMeRedZ
Originally Posted by PimTac
Perhaps even more than that. The Japanese conglomerates are all encompassing. Mitsubishi makes everything from ball point pens to nuclear reactors. A modern day General Electric of sorts.
Did they start making parts to support their automobiles yet?
I don't know. You tell us.
Originally Posted by PimTac
Perhaps even more than that. The Japanese conglomerates are all encompassing. Mitsubishi makes everything from ball point pens to nuclear reactors. A modern day General Electric of sorts.
Did they start making parts to support their automobiles yet?
I don't know. You tell us.
A few years back, Mitsu was infamous for not having an adequate spare parts distribution network in the US to support their vehicles. Hence my question - they may have improved, I just don't follow the subject anymore.
If anything, Mitsubishi Motors is separated from the main Mitsubishi Group - Nissan controls MMC, Daimler owns Mitsubishi Fuso(the truck/bus department of MMC). Nissan is now supporting Mitsu cars, but it takes a while to integrate operations. It's like how Volvo Cars is separate from their namesake company(AB Volvo) but still has some ties to it.
Last edited:
Mitsubishi really hasn't had a good presence in the US for some time. Their loan scheme back in 2000 really hurt them.
They have focused on the Asian markets and the emerging markets where their strength really is. Nissan buying them was perhaps their best option available.
They have focused on the Asian markets and the emerging markets where their strength really is. Nissan buying them was perhaps their best option available.
Originally Posted by UncleDave
Do you feel the other auto companies did not receive "corporate welfare"?
UD
I do. But I don't feel that their entire existence is based almost entirely on it.
I am not even remotely "happy" about the bailouts, but these were at last valid and proven companies that had produced insane profits at one point in time, for a very long time. They weren't frontier or fringe investments.
Tesla was a venture capital investment that didn't even pay off for the US government.
Do you feel the other auto companies did not receive "corporate welfare"?
UD
I do. But I don't feel that their entire existence is based almost entirely on it.
I am not even remotely "happy" about the bailouts, but these were at last valid and proven companies that had produced insane profits at one point in time, for a very long time. They weren't frontier or fringe investments.
Tesla was a venture capital investment that didn't even pay off for the US government.
Originally Posted by UncleDave
Lets talk about spacex for a second
Whats better for America?
To keep buying RD-180's from the Russians - or to award an equally earned contract to an American company?
This isn't "subsidy" or "corporate welfare" - its a contract award.
UD
It isn't.
I said it was a combination of corporate welfare and being in the right place at the right time.
Had a space shuttle not exploded and our nation had no backup plan at all, chances are low that he would have a lucrative contract.
Were it not for corporate welfare, both companies would have never made it. Were it not for SpaceX contract, both would never have made it. Both blocks were required to keep them both afloat. Take away either one and either company comes crashing down.
Musk using the SpaceX money to keep Tesla afloat was more a form of in-house corporate welfare. He was both the beggar and the donor.
Lets talk about spacex for a second
Whats better for America?
To keep buying RD-180's from the Russians - or to award an equally earned contract to an American company?
This isn't "subsidy" or "corporate welfare" - its a contract award.
UD
It isn't.
I said it was a combination of corporate welfare and being in the right place at the right time.
Had a space shuttle not exploded and our nation had no backup plan at all, chances are low that he would have a lucrative contract.
Were it not for corporate welfare, both companies would have never made it. Were it not for SpaceX contract, both would never have made it. Both blocks were required to keep them both afloat. Take away either one and either company comes crashing down.
Musk using the SpaceX money to keep Tesla afloat was more a form of in-house corporate welfare. He was both the beggar and the donor.
Originally Posted by DoubleWasp
Originally Posted by UncleDave
Do you feel the other auto companies did not receive "corporate welfare"?
UD
I do. But I don't feel that their entire existence is based almost entirely on it.
I am not even remotely "happy" about the bailouts, but these were at last valid and proven companies that had produced insane profits at one point in time, for a very long time. They weren't frontier or fringe investments.
Tesla was a venture capital investment that didn't even pay off for the US government.
Im going to agree to disagree - they would be gone if not for the loans, bailouts, subsidies, and bankruptcies, and special tax breaks like 176.
Tesla paid its loans back in full to the gov. Ford hasn't yet, and GM got to kiss off its investors and start over.
Its all on the stockholders at this point and what they are willing to accept.
Originally Posted by UncleDave
Do you feel the other auto companies did not receive "corporate welfare"?
UD
I do. But I don't feel that their entire existence is based almost entirely on it.
I am not even remotely "happy" about the bailouts, but these were at last valid and proven companies that had produced insane profits at one point in time, for a very long time. They weren't frontier or fringe investments.
Tesla was a venture capital investment that didn't even pay off for the US government.
Im going to agree to disagree - they would be gone if not for the loans, bailouts, subsidies, and bankruptcies, and special tax breaks like 176.
Tesla paid its loans back in full to the gov. Ford hasn't yet, and GM got to kiss off its investors and start over.
Its all on the stockholders at this point and what they are willing to accept.
Last edited:
Originally Posted by DoubleWasp
Originally Posted by UncleDave
Lets talk about spacex for a second
Whats better for America?
To keep buying RD-180's from the Russians - or to award an equally earned contract to an American company?
This isn't "subsidy" or "corporate welfare" - its a contract award.
UD
It isn't.
I said it was a combination of corporate welfare and being in the right place at the right time.
Had a space shuttle not exploded and our nation had no backup plan at all, chances are low that he would have a lucrative contract.
Were it not for corporate welfare, both companies would have never made it. Were it not for SpaceX contract, both would never have made it. Both blocks were required to keep them both afloat. Take away either one and either company comes crashing down.
Musk using the SpaceX money to keep Tesla afloat was more a form of in-house corporate welfare. He was both the beggar and the donor.
What corporate welfare did spaceX get that any other company in the space/ vertical market doesn't?
I don't disagree the two kept tesla alive, but thats the prerogative of any private companies owner to do with tech money and profit what he wishes- he was smart enough to build a better mousetrap and won his contracts accordingly.
UD
Originally Posted by UncleDave
Lets talk about spacex for a second
Whats better for America?
To keep buying RD-180's from the Russians - or to award an equally earned contract to an American company?
This isn't "subsidy" or "corporate welfare" - its a contract award.
UD
It isn't.
I said it was a combination of corporate welfare and being in the right place at the right time.
Had a space shuttle not exploded and our nation had no backup plan at all, chances are low that he would have a lucrative contract.
Were it not for corporate welfare, both companies would have never made it. Were it not for SpaceX contract, both would never have made it. Both blocks were required to keep them both afloat. Take away either one and either company comes crashing down.
Musk using the SpaceX money to keep Tesla afloat was more a form of in-house corporate welfare. He was both the beggar and the donor.
What corporate welfare did spaceX get that any other company in the space/ vertical market doesn't?
I don't disagree the two kept tesla alive, but thats the prerogative of any private companies owner to do with tech money and profit what he wishes- he was smart enough to build a better mousetrap and won his contracts accordingly.
UD
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked