Rivian burned through a lot of cash, then refused to raise more when equity was cheap. Then they issued some relatively expensive bonds. Meanwhile, both my Rivians had extensive quality problems. On-board navigation is a joke and they refuse to implement CarPlay in order to leave the door open to gouge customers on extra services.
Do you believe that is really the reason car makers refuse to implement CarPlay? It does feel strange, this stubborness, I can't see how the can deliver the best technical solution for their customers without implementing CarPlay and Android Auto.
Yeah, but... why? It should be easyer and cheaper to do so. I fail to imagine how much more value they can extract by refusing to use this. What? 50 more measly bucks per car? Obviously, there's something I'm not getting, would love for someone to illuminate me.
Are they imagining there is more value in this than there is? Am I simply underestimating the value potential for having their own thing? Do they want to protect their customer's data? Do they think that NOT having it somehow is a positive differentiator? Do they not know how to make it happen? I am stumped.
What sort of quality problems? I don't really follow ev news but I haven't really heard of any specific issues with them, vs say tesla and their well known issues.
5 comments
[ 4.0 ms ] story [ 26.0 ms ] threadAre they imagining there is more value in this than there is? Am I simply underestimating the value potential for having their own thing? Do they want to protect their customer's data? Do they think that NOT having it somehow is a positive differentiator? Do they not know how to make it happen? I am stumped.