Tesla's ambitious Robotaxi reveal took place earlier this month at a Warner Bros backlot in Hollywood. The event showcased a driverless coupe with no steering wheel and no pedals that gave attendees rides around the studio. It was a spectacle, but there was a problem. There was a lot of "wow," but not a lot of "how"—and that's not enough for big investors who value Tesla's stock price on the company's ability to solve self-driving.
Welcome back to Critical Materials, your daily roundup for all things EV and automotive tech. Today, we're chatting about investor questions at Tesla's earnings call, Lucid's bet on an autonomy timetable, and how some police departments are turning against their Tesla patrol cars. Let's jump in.
30%: Tesla Must Face Investors After Lackluster Robotaxi Presentation
Tesla's quarterly earnings call takes place after the bell tomorrow and, as always, it's gearing up to be a game show featuring Elon Musk as the host. But unlike a gameshow, it's not going to be the contestants getting grilled—investors have turned the table after a disappointing Robotaxi unveiling earlier this month, and the host will be the one in the hot seat.
Ahead of each quarterly meeting, Tesla asks shareholders to use a site to publicly ask questions and then vote on which should be answered. A quick peek at the voting page reveals a quick look at where investors' heads are at, and it should come as no surprise that they want clarity to the unanswered questions drummed up at the unveiling.
Investors asked for technical details about the Robotaxi, how Tesla intends to scale production of the Robotaxi, and about the production timeline for the Robovan. All great questions considering Tesla didn't touch on deep specifics during the vehicle's unveiling except for an ambitious timeline of a Robotaxi release before 2027.
Still, no technical specifications like battery size, range, or other pertinent details were even hinted at during the presentation.
Folks also have questions about the logistics behind Tesla's launch of a Robotaxi fleet. After all, these cars require maintenance—cleaning between rides, ensuring passengers don't leave things behind after their trips, and general wear-and-tear repairs that wouldn't necessarily be caught unless someone saw the vehicle. For example, what happens if someone vandalizes the center screen and the vehicle can't be controlled? These are all considerations that Tesla needs to think about when deploying the car.
"Can we get more details surrounding the Robotaxi including how will Tesla deploy the fleet?" asked one shareholder. "Will it start with Robotaxi [and then] move onto a subscription model if you own your own Tesla?"
Investors are also interested in understanding how their existing cars can integrate with the fleet of Robotaxis. Musk previously promised that owners of Tesla vehicles with Full Self-Driving hardware could eventually add their cars to the Tesla Network, enabling them to earn passive income of up to $30,000 annually while owners slept. He even went as far as calling it "financially insane to buy anything other than a Tesla."
So, naturally, buyers are now coming to collect with questions about when they could expect to see movement on their "appreciating assets" (despite the cars losing tons of money over the last few years).
Unsurprisingly, there are also a number of questions centered around the robotaxi-adjacent "affordable" BEV that was co-developed on the same platform. At least 45 questions were asked about this vehicle, with the top two representing weighted votes from 2.8 million Tesla shares (worth about $606.5 million at the time of writing).
"Is Tesla still on track to deliver the more affordable model next year?" asked one voter.
Another pondered the same: "When can we expect Tesla to give us the ~$25K, non-robotaxi, regular car model?"
Tesla previously put the $25,000 car on the development backburner after reports that the project was canceled circled the internet. Musk said outlets claiming the car was dead were "lying" though details on the actual car remain scarce.
Now, sure, there's a lot of uncertainty floating around with unknown timelines. That's kind of Tesla's shtick. But investors are running out of patience, especially when the dream of a sky-high stock is being lifted up on the shoulders of Musk's promises. It's also what is prompting investors to ask questions—they want clarity, not flashy displays or headlines. And tomorrow's earnings call could showcase just how serious investors are in getting answers.
60%: Lucid Believes Urban Self-Driving Won't Happen This Decade
Think you'll be kicking it in the back of your EV anytime soon while the car drives itself? Tesla seems to think so with its forward-looking Robotaxi, but Lucid's CEO, Peter Rawlinson? Not so much.
In a recent interview with Semafor, Rawlinson discussed the realities of automated vehicles: where Lucid is with them, and where the industry is struggling. And through it all, the CEO revealed that he's betting that full self-driving in an urban setting won't even happen this decade.
"[People are] significantly underestimating [how hard it is to solve self-driving]," said Rawlinson. "It’s like refining gold to 99.9999%—the first few nines are easy, but it’s that last 0.01%."
Rawlinson is describing the same march of nines that Tesla CEO Elon Musk has been harping on about since 2020. Despite Tesla promising to solve self-driving "next year" nearly every year since 2016, the solution has yet to be fully deciphered. It's hard, and Rawlinson knows that. In fact, he believes the industry is nowhere near close to solving it:
"I can’t see it really happening till the 2030s," said Rawlinson.
The CEO recognized that autonomy is one of Lucid's weak points. Despite the company having "the best car in the world from a mechanical standpoint," its semi-autonomous driving software is nowhere near making it an industry leader in self-driving. Lucid is working on it, though, even if it is difficult.
As for the problem itself, you have to give it to the industry for trying. Nearly every automaker worth its weight has been throwing piles of cash at it—and so have other companies. There's Google-adjacent Waymo, Nvidia, Intel, and more. All of these major tech companies know just how valuable solving autonomy will be. The problem is actually achieving what they've set out to do.
Accounting for every burnt-out stoplight. Every human driver that merges without a turn signal. That person who runs out into the road after a runaway ball. Or the unexpected traffic cone in the middle of the road to warn about a deep pothole. There are just so many edge cases to solve for—and that's the true march of nines.
Will Lucid be the company that solves self-driving on its own? Probably not. That's why it's turned to Nvidia for its DreamDrive Pro today. But recognizing that it's an industry problem is the first step to solving it.
90%: California Cops Say Tesla Patrol Cars Not Ready For Crime Time
When it comes to chasing down criminals, Teslas might have the speed to catch up, but not the right moves to take them down. And after a few California police departments have put them to the test, not all squads are convinced that the electric automaker has what it takes to stand up to the day-to-day needs of law enforcement.
This might come as a shocker after numerous police departments have started to make the switch, however, an investigation by SFGate revealed that some departments are reporting that Teslas are "nearly unusable" for the folks in blue.
One precinct finding its own Teslas to be a bit of a problem is Menlo Park, a department that just so happens to be located a stone's throw (about six miles) away from Tesla's engineering headquarters in Palo Alto. The department has three Long Range Model Ys that were outfitted for police duty—these cars would be the test subjects for a study on Teslas being a viable patrol vehicle for the station.
Now, to be clear, Menlo Park did consider other alternatives like the Ford Mustang Mach-E, however, the Model Y was chosen specifically due to their "advertised range and larger size." But as the officers quickly found out, once the cars were fitted for police use, the interior space quickly became an issue.
For starters, the partition between the front and rear seats significantly limited the room available to the front passengers—something already compromised when two officers in full gear were seated together. In fact, with bulletproof vests and duty belts equipped, the officers were forced to sit at an angle due to the center console. The department called the passenger seat "nearly unusable" because of equipment overhang issues.
Then there's what officers are calling "smart car" challenges.
The department also called out the delay when attempting to jump in the car and immediately shift to drive—something that police may need to do when quickly taking off to chase a suspect. There were also weird nuances like the vehicle coming to a premature stop when pulling off to the side of the road and approaching cars. The ability to manipulate door handles, keep lights on during traffic stops, and ensure that the vehicle would lock and unlock when needed were all also underlined problems.
The "Autopilot interface" was also called out to be a negative experience, perhaps referring to the overall touchscreen-centric control plane of the Model Y.
Menlo Park wasn't alone in complaining about these cars. The Ukiah Police Department also had its fair share of complaints, including the $150,000 price tag to purchase and outfit two Tesla Model 3 patrol cars that would take "months" to get ready for service.
Chief Cedric Crook said that another major concern was the transport of suspects and prisoners. The vehicles' rear seats are only large enough for one person, according to the Chief. And when transporting them over long distances, the need to charge in "unsecured public charging stations" was a risk to officers. In the end, the two cars purchased for Ukiah PD are now being re-purposed for administrative staff.
I get it—the idea of a green patrol car is appealing. It's great for the taxpayers who save money on gas and for the environment when cars aren't spending their entire shift idling. And let's face it, the idea of a quick zero-to-60 is appealing to just everybody involved (except maybe criminals trying to run). But at the end of the day, departments seem to be split on whether or not their Teslas are ready for Crime Time. Maybe we can all just agree that the electric police cruiser is still a work in progress.
100%: Are EVs And 'Smart' Cars Going To Cause Hiccups For Specialized Vehicles?
You know, Menlo Park brings up a good point—new software-centric EVs are becoming more difficult for companies to use for specialty vehicles. It's not like you can add custom software controls to a big infotainment screen, or cut through the floor to build a wheelchair-accessible EV van. These modern platforms are causing a bit of a conundrum for companies that are used to doing things the old-school way.
That being said, what's the solution here? Should OEMs be receptive to opening up their software platforms to developers like upfitters who outfit police cruisers? Or maybe they should offer OEM accessibility options for folks who need it.
Let me know in the comments what kind of similar problems you foresee being caused by EVs' new software-centric "smart" vehicles.
Contact the author: rob.stumpf@insideevs.com
