Hacker News Reader

Comment by harigov | Hacker News Reader

It seems to me that Waymo is following a model similar to Android albeit charging for it instead of giving it away for free. Anyone with basic understanding of technology knows that its not a sustainable model, in the long term. I wouldn't blame Honda for thinking for itself.

View on HN

"Anyone with basic understanding of technology knows that its not a sustainable model" -> Please explain this. I have a basic understanding of technology and this is not obvious to me.

The model being described is one where the company at the center of the network eventually captures ~100%+ of the profits deriving from the products that OEMs build on that platform. The reason is that the traits that define the product for the consumer are all controlled (or eventually co-opted) by the platform, leaving OEMs (what Google wanted Honda to be in this example) no room to differentiate. This leaves the OEMs with very little pricing power, which drives margins lower. Lower margins lead to less innovation. This is why it's hard to sustainably be an OEM in a market like this.

Examples:

-- Wintel --> Microsoft + Intel financially did much better financially than the legions of PC makers who designed, built, and sold products using the Wintel foundation

-- Android --> Similar, with Google reaping the profits.

Right now, Waymo looks like it wants other companies (Honda, Chrysler, Jaguar) to provide it with dumb boxes on wheels. Waymo wants to play different dumb-box-on-wheels providers against each other so it can get the cheapest box-on-wheels.

Waymo then installs it's fancy software on these boxes and uses it's Google connection (Maps, Waze, etc) to put people in those boxes and charge them a hefty profit, at least for a few years while it's the only provider. Waymo wants to be in control and collecting profits, while manufacturers subsist on small margins.

Obviously, this isn't a good situation to be in for Honda etc

It doesn't seem that unreasonable for waymo to expect that car companies would want to sell cars - that's what Honda has been doing for the last 60 years.

If you fast forward, and assume that at some point most cars would be self driving, then you can see why Honda would want to sell more than just the dumb parts.

Aren't cars today mostly "dumb" boxes anyway? (And yet there seems to be enough competition in the field)

I'm thinking what sells will be different when most cars are self-driving. For one, most people probably won't own a car. The buyers will be companies like Waymo, Uber, and Lyft. That's a very different dynamic. Basically saying Honda doesn't want to sell a commodity with small margins.

If you're just hailing a ride, you care a lot less about the brand of car and it's amenities. You care more about the overall ride share service, price, etc. Very little of which Honda would have any effect on if they don't have some skin in the self-driving tech.

True, it might squeeze the profits from some car manufacturers.

I do see a future in very high end & privately owned cars, which will quite possibly generate even higher margins for some manufacturers. Plus there will be a whole new world of innovative design opportunities in the self driving cars realm, in which the self driving part might end up being be the boring and somewhat commodity part.

Cars today have 10's of microprocessors in them and hundreds of millions of lines of code. Not exactly "dumb", but I take your meaning to be "absent AI features".

This is a great description of what Waymo is doing, and why Honda/GM etc. don't want to become a commodity provider (thus letting Waymo capture most of the value).

From Waymo's perspective, that's exactly the scenario they want. Focus all your resources on developing a tech advantage that others can't match, and have others in the ecosystem serve the lower-margin stuff.

If this sounds familiar, recall Google Search and Web Content.

'Commoditize your complement': https://www.gwern.net/Complement

All of the auto companies have watched the mobile phone market going from a situation where the companies that build mobile phones (Nokia, LG, Ericsson) etc. had high margins to a situation where almost the entire market has been commodified by Android (Google). They don't want the situation to repeat itself with cars, so they are heavily investing in software and technology development to prevent it.

Android didn't commodify phone hardware. There are Android phones in different price ranges, from $1000 ones like Galaxy Note 9 and Pixel to $100 ones.

And the margins on basically all of them are low to very low. Like a typical commodity market.

Android is not "given away for free". AOSP is, but that's pretty unusable / unsalable as is, outside of China. Google Play Services and the google apps cost real money, and include a license to the "Android" name and logo. A phone that just has AOSP cannot be called an Android phone.

interesting. so hardware manufacturers like Samsung are actually paying Google to put Google Play Services and various Google apps onto their phones? how much do they pay (is that a known value)?

The rumour I heard was $10.

The Oracle trial exposed Android revenue to the public. "Google's Android operating system has generated revenue of about $31 billion and profit of $22 billion since its release, an Oracle Corp lawyer told a U.S. court hearing the software company's copyright lawsuit against Google.Jan 21, 2016"

Some of that was from the Play Store and some from Ads, but it seems likely most of that was from licensing.

> wouldn't blame Honda for thinking for itself

Seems right. I bet Honda wants an actual piece of the action in exchange for its world class quality control and production line expertise, not just a role as a commoditized car manufacturer.

Not just charging for it, but requiring they get complete data dumps from the cars on which they run, too:

https://www.androidpolice.com/2015/10/06/report-claims-googl...

The article you just linked retracts itself by calling data collection "utter bullshit". It seems that your desire to attack Google overrode actually reading what you post.

>Steering this story straight - we take privacy very seriously and do not collect the data the Motor Trend article claims such as throttle position, oil temp and coolant temp. Users opt in to share information with Android Auto that improves their experience, so the system can be hands-free when in Drive, and provide more accurate navigation through the car’s GPS.

"pretty much bullshit" (not "utter bullshit") is AP's characterization of Google's response to the article. It was not retracted.

Do not think so. Waymo is rolling out their own robot taxi service in Arizona right now.

It was leaked they will roll out in San Fran and Mount View next.

They have up to 82k cars on order. It sounds more like they want to buy smartphones from others and then add their chip and then "rent" use of the phone.

If that makes sense.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com