Faraday Future

[Papafox]

No matter what your views are of Faraday Future's potential, one must admit that the reveal of a batmobile-looking concept car diffused some of the Tesla-killer negative sentiment that could have sprung from the reveal at CES. We dodged a bullet at a time when uncertainty rules the market, and this is a good thing.

What, then, will be the next positive catalyst that will START Tesla climbing TOWARDS its ATH this year?

My guess is that once all U.S. signature edition Model X vehicles are delivered and the majority of Tesla stores have received Model X demonstrators, the market will perceive that Model X production will have crossed an important hurdle.

I see the Q4 ER as a potential catalyst as well, with record deliveries, which will allow for improved GM on Model S, but I have no idea what the numbers will be. The negative of Q4 is likely heavy spending on R&D and other projects needed to move Tesla forward. Is anyone aware of analyst estimates for Q4 yet? Anyone doing any back of the napkin computations about Q4 yet?

The Model 3 reveal in March could kick TSLA into insane mode, but I am hoping to see us heading upward before then.

 

[MitchJi]

On balance I think FF is a good thing on the scale where perpetuating ICE is a bad thing and that this first presentation was more an error of style than substance.

But the reason that they made that error appears to be that they have no substance.

 

[eloder]

Yea, I don't think FF's concept car was anything that was supposed to be set to go to production in any form. I think it was more about their skateboard platform (which I still can't figure out why it's different from Tesla, since they do a skateboard, AWD, RWD, and variable battery sizes) and that they have deep pockets and are very serious about moving forward. I won't discount them yet, but I view them as far more a problem for legacy automakers than for Tesla.

 

[Julian Cox]

Oh sure, that should go without saying but I'll second it anyway. In the credible threat department, whatever the eventual fate of FF, in the current world of market sentiment FF made total fools of themselves and totally blew it.

 

[madodel]

Here is my humble take on FF: While I'm a bit disappointed with the lack of specifics/engineering/substance of what was shown yesterday, it is still better than not having FF around at all. For a number of reasons:

1) If FF is where it is right now, maybe others see there is a chance to still get into the game. Tesla alone may be intimidating but being better than FF / catching up with FF may be feasible in peoples minds --> this leads to more actors in the field which is good.
2) Even if FF has nothing to show in terms of final products, it still may solve some issues / problems on the margins. This may help eMobility in other companies
3) FF has a billion USD to burn (at least) this means that there is a billion USD more in the industry - knowledge/expertise/careers are built on that. which helps
4) FF effectively took eyeballs and created debate. This is great as Tesla alone can't convince legacy car makers that they need to step up the e-car game

But are the trolls diverting any of their attacks to FF? When that begins to happen then maybe they are for real. The paid shills (not talking about the shorts who just try to manipulate the stock price) only do what they are paid to do. So if the oil billionaires aren't concerned to me its not worth bothering right now.

 

[AudubonB]

With FF not being a publicly-traded company, there's not a lot of reason for trolls to spend time attacking it.

 

[Drax7]

FF, they don't have anything proprietary as far as we know, and they don't have a first mover advantage,
and their product is not priced for wide mass appeal. If they were clever they would invest all their
funds in tesla stock.

 

[jhm]

FF should contemplate Space Y.

MetroSolar!

 

[tlo]

Seriously. What I saw was a Tesla wannabe with no actual innovation so they came up with that ridiculous show car to try and create some sort of "wow" factor. The fact that they wasted so much time building that mess suggests a lack of focus, among other things. They have much to prove.

^ This.

My 2 cents on Faraday and other competition:
The potential of FF is not underestimated, as shown with the amount of anticipation for the unveil. Fact is, they have ZERO product to show (they will sell zero of the FFZERO1 one-seater which is only a shell anyway). Until they do, they cannot be viewed as a competitor based on concept alone. This can be said for Apple, ICE manufacturers, Google, Uber, etc. Concepts and large teams mean nothing until there is PRODUCT. Nissan/BMW have some product, but they are inferior. Google has an expensive research product that they have yet to figure out how to bring to market (whereas Tesla has real users using autopilot). Uber actually stands out in that they have a product that leads the ride-sharing market with their technology/network/scale which will continually disrupt/converge with other transportation industries, so Uber will be a player - but it is yet to be seen how the industries will converge.

Back to FF, this is the clearest look at their strategy thus far - FFs Variable Platform Architecture - YouTube
They are basically taking technology that Tesla already has and turning it into a modular platform. Presumably, they will make their own cars as well as sell this platform to other manufacturers, which makes sense for a startup (similar to Tesla did in the early days).

Problem is, they have no product ready, hence the need to show concept videos and a shell of a one-seater supercar to try to build hype. I have no doubt they have a talented team with great ambition, but it just seems like they set an ambitious target to unveil something at CES and it failed to materialize. We are at least 2 years away from seeing any product from them. It's good that they help build some buzz for EVs, but Tesla still has zero competition at the present time.

Tesla has all 4 characteristics of a monopoly (according to Peter Thiel's definition. worth reading - http://genius.com/Chapter-3-5-of-zero-to-one-peter-thiel-annotated):
1. Proprietary technology - best battery/powertrain/charging tech on the market, touch console, autopilot, etc.
2. Network effects - supercharger network, stores/service network, fleet learning
3. Economies of scale - gigafactory, supply chain, supercharger/stores/service network
4. Brand - best rated car, owner satisfaction, most desired by younger generation

FF, at best, can challenge Tesla on #1. Other competitors like Google/Apple have #4 (already a stretch because they are not known for cars) and none else (though they are working on #1 and can possibly catch up on #2 and #3, but there is no substance).

Contrary to what Tesla says about competing with all cars and not just EVs (true in some ways), I actually subscribe to the view that they are a monopoly on EVs and future transport which is a small but growing market (read above excerpt from Peter Thiel about monopolies "lying" about competing in a larger market).

Not meaning to add to the TSLA bullishness here, but the fact is Tesla is delivering hundreds of Model S's and X's every week to very happy customers, assembling battery packs at the gigafactory, and two months away from unveiling the Model 3. The "competition" is non-existent.

 

[austinEV]

FF should have shown a skateboard. Easier and less distracting. Let the viewer imagine their fantasy car on top. I think they couldn't show a sedan/coupe because that would be the design everyone judges and they don't want to commit to one, so they punted and did a sci-fi "car" because they felt they had to show something.

 

[esk8mw]

FF should have shown a skateboard. Easier and less distracting. Let the viewer imagine their fantasy car on top. I think they couldn't show a sedan/coupe because that would be the design everyone judges and they don't want to commit to one, so they punted and did a sci-fi "car" because they felt they had to show something.

I agree, and this was a major fail. I understand not committing to a design at this stage, but if they would have announced plans to build a __ seater sedan and a __ seater sports car and [other practical use car] with a range up to ___ miles people would actually take them seriously. Mentioning possible performance stats, price and production date would have been gravy.

Instead, they did....that. Together with the faux shadowy secrecy stuff to try and build hype prior to their terrible presentation it all comes off very amateurish. Why are they contracting to build some big factory when they appear to want to make limited run (and hand built?) supercars or whatever? I think they just want to appear "ahead of schedule" to draw a clear contrast to Tesla. It's just dumb all the way around and I'm disappointed. I want more Teslas out there, even if TSLA takes a short term hit on SP because the market doesn't yet understand that competition is good in the long run.

 

[ecarfan]

FF should have shown a skateboard. Easier and less distracting. Let the viewer imagine their fantasy car on top.

I think they did not show a skateboard chassis because they have yet to build even one of them. They possibly have a very rough looking prototype but nothing that they would want anyone outside the company to see.
But even if they had a finished looking skateboard chassis prototype and showed it, it would not have made an impact because Tesla has been producing and selling basically the same thing for over three years now.
So FF made the bizarre decision to try to grab attention by showing a ridiculous Batmobile design that is just a shell with no functional parts. The result was that they look like clueless fools.

 

[Drax7]

An Elon Musk equivalent is what FF needs, and that is so easy to duplicate.

besides the engineering skills, and learning from first principles,
the reckless passion and willingness to fail is not so common.
ff is a joke, starting with their name.

 

[jesselivenomore]

I love it, FF will make a huge investment in manufacturing assets in NV that Tesla can pick up for a song after they go belly-up.

This. The biggest Tesla related development last night.

 

[SBenson]

I think they did not show a skateboard chassis because they have yet to build even one of them. They possibly have a very rough looking prototype but nothing that they would want anyone outside the company to see.
But even if they had a finished looking skateboard chassis prototype and showed it, it would not have made an impact because Tesla has been producing and selling basically the same thing for over three years now.
So FF made the bizarre decision to try to grab attention by showing a ridiculous Batmobile design that is just a shell with no functional parts. The result was that they look like clueless fools.

Effectively they put themselves into this no win situation. Why bother? Why not stay stealth until they have something concrete? That lack of good judgment is also a big teller.

Maybe they didn't expect this level of negative reaction. Maybe they thought we will all be wowed and amazed. In that case too it says they are out of touch with reality.

It's hard to cut them slack no matter how you see it.

And most importantly, why a Fish for the logo?

 

[SBenson]

<<snip>>

Back to FF, this is the clearest look at their strategy thus far - FFs Variable Platform Architecture - YouTube
They are basically taking technology that Tesla already has and turning it into a modular platform. Presumably, they will make their own cars as well as sell this platform to other manufacturers, which makes sense for a startup (similar to Tesla did in the early days).

Problem is, they have no product ready, hence the need to show concept videos and a shell of a one-seater supercar to try to build hype. I have no doubt they have a talented team with great ambition, but it just seems like they set an ambitious target to unveil something at CES and it failed to materialize. We are at least 2 years away from seeing any product from them. It's good that they help build some buzz for EVs, but Tesla still has zero competition at the present time.

<<snip>>

This is valid. The video in itself is pretty impressive (not knowing any specifics or engineering behind it). But is this validated in any shape or form? or is this too a figment of imagination?

So now what stops Tesla from doing this more-modular approach? If indeed this is a better approach than the Tesla approach, aren't they giving away the only advancement that they might have made? Tesla with it's resources today can easily replicate or even further fine tune this approach right?

I'm still not sure why they had to come out of stealth mode? Are they looking for investors? more talent? or just got pushed by the big daddy?

 

[Julian Cox]

This is valid. The video in itself is pretty impressive (not knowing any specifics or engineering behind it). But is this validated in any shape or form? or is this too a figment of imagination?

So now what stops Tesla from doing this more-modular approach? If indeed this is a better approach than the Tesla approach, aren't they giving away the only advancement that they might have made? Tesla with it's resources today can easily replicate or even further fine tune this approach right?

I'm still not sure why they had to come out of stealth mode? Are they looking for investors? more talent? or just got pushed by the big daddy?

The FF skateboard is exactly what any manufacturer would opt to do if it was unconstrained by the need to avoid competing with ICE vehicles. The variability of it speaks to a philosophy of seeking to amortize R&D over a range of options as opposed to seeking a design optimization for a specific role.

Tesla's philosophy on the other hand is to tackle tough engineering challenges head-on as a method of adding novel value and gaining competitive advantage. The same philosophy is more self-evident at SpaceX.

This may seem like a trivial difference but it isn't.

Vehicles as good as a Model S or a Model X don't just happen as a result of pouring a bigger battery into any platform until it achieves a desired range. As the battery weight goes up the vehicle performance, efficiency and handling goes down and the cost goes up. If the cell-level energy density goes up to compensate then the safety profile and the cycle life typically goes down and the cost goes up. If you simply wait for a low cost, long cycle life, high energy density, excellent safety profile cell to show up on the market then sure you can make a vehicle like a Model S, just ten years later. The real work (genuine innovation) starts at the intersection of competing design priorities like this.

Anyone can set out to do a CAD drawing of the FF platform or even to produce one and anyone can run the math to prove to themselves that an AI EV with a million mile service life pulling 300 Wh per mile average will wipe out the economics of gasoline. So far nobody is even close to Tesla's execution of that future in reality. FF is simply on the right track (which is way better than most). How they cope with the hard work between having the right idea and producing something that works both engineering wise and economically and in a timely fashion remains to be seen. The chance of FF producing a vehicle that a consumer would purchase in preference to a Tesla is I think extremely low indeed, and that will hamper them severely unless they can somehow avoid direct competition with Tesla by for example taking on the hard work of tackling a particular vehicle type that Tesla is not tackling or selling a service or into some niche where Tesla is not selling. An off-road vehicle or a Chinese government block-buy contract for example. Whether they are smart enough for that remains to be seen. The variable platform thing seems to suggest a desire to take shortcuts at a time when it is possible to get established with solid technical foundations and that does not bode extremely well to my mind. I think the default outcome for FF is to become a design workshop for third parties. If they want to become a vehicle or transit service brand in their own right (i.e. anything like Tesla) then there is work ahead both in engineering and in terms of management that was not on display at CES.

 

[Blip]

Has this become the FF Short-Term thread? :-/

 

[MattFishbach]

And most importantly, why a Fish for the logo?

Their logo is 2 capital F's, drunkenly falling over to the right. No doubt this symbolizes all the drinking they've been doing the last past six months instead of building a credible prototype.

 

[erha]

Probably not worth it spending more time discussing FF, but I've got a few things to mention.

Looking at the web page and videos of FF they have done a nice job with web design and videos. However, it is impossible to find any details about their plans. I really don't see their need in gathering a lot of attention right now. I wouldn't be surprised if they have spent all their time doing design and PR up until now. I think (not completely sure) that I even saw a sponsored post either on Instagram or Facebook lately. What a waste of money at this time...

Looking at their about page, they list some of their key people. Nick Sampson, their Senior Vice President of R&D and Engineering, worked for Tesla but was let go in 2012 before the Model S was released. Bloomberg reports back then that Musk, referring to Sampson, said he “asked basically for Nick’s resignation” because there wasn’t a “good fit for him within the organization.” Their Vice President of Global Manufacturing, Dag Reckhorn, is spelled Dag Rechhorn at the same page by the way. The about page also says they are aiming for 500 employees by the end of 2015, while I've read other places that they claim they are already 750.

I did have a quick look at their current openings. They have a lot of open positions apparently, but there are, apart for a few exceptions, no description of the positions listed. And for the few positions with descriptions it is only a couple of keywords. For engineering they are hiring all over autonomy, machine learning, electrical, aerodynamic and infotainment. They are also hiring a lot of PR, designers, social media and the likes.

This company is going to burn a lot of cash and I doubt we'll ever see a product. Looks like a bunch of amateurs. I hope I'm wrong, but I really don't see how even big pocketed Chinese investors can save this company.