Hacker News Reader

Comment by taeric | Hacker News Reader

The odds that these companies don't have moats to protect their tech is... very unlikely?

I think it's similar to Tesla entering the automotive world. The existing automakers had some moats, but they also had a lot of legacy responsibilities and liabilities that Tesla did not have (existing warranties, lawsuits, recalls, parts stock, maintaining support for old vehicles in various internal software systems, updating software on old vehicles when age related problems arise, retiree pensions/healthcare, etc).

A newcomer in the heavy equipment space will have similar challenges and advantages. Funny enough, a lot of heavy equipment works very similar to cars with their CAN (and other) Buses for control and feedback.

I mean... Tesla still makes up a minority of vehicles out there. And without government investment, they almost certainly would not have made it to where they are, now?

Yes, Tesla was valued more for potential growth. But it was also the kind of potential growth that I'm not sure is viable outside of consumer spaces.

They are outselling BMW and Mercedes but that doesn’t put them in top10.

In total car sells, or just in EVs? Because a quick search online shows each of those still sold considerably more than Tesla. :(

How much of a moat can you have guarding input into controls used by humans?

The material sciences involved in building a lot of this machinery is nothing to scoff at.

...steel? You don't need to build machines to implement this technology.

Are you serious? Building a good excavator is almost certainly more than just having the material. Similarly, knowing how to deal with the earth will have more than a few curves based on the composition.

You said "material sciences", pretty vague and confusing, but please go on and on.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com