Reports first surfaced in mid-December that Honda and Nissan were pursuing a merger, one that would create the third-largest automaker. The merger would enable the two companies to better compete, as well as innovate in the EV space and meeting the growing challenge of Chinese EVs.

“Today marks a pivotal moment as we begin discussions on business integration that has the potential to shape our future,” Makoto Uchida, Nissan CEO, said at the time. “If realized, I believe that by uniting the strengths of both companies, we can deliver unparalleled value to customers worldwide who appreciate our respective brands. Together, we can create a unique way for them to enjoy cars that neither company could achieve alone.”

According to Reuters, talks are on the verge of breaking down over growing issues between the two sides. The biggest emerging issue is the equality of the two companies. Initially, the talks involved the two companies engaging in a true merger of equals. Recently, however, Honda has floated the idea of Nissan being a subsidiary, which could be a deal-breaker.

“The news saying that Nissan did not want to be a Honda subsidiary appears to highlight that control was a contentious issue,” said CLSA auto analyst Christopher Richter.

“Without being able to have control, Honda appears to be walking away.”

Reuters reports that a decision, which was originally slated for the end of January, has been pushed back to mid-February. Mitsubishi Motors, which is a Nissan alliance partner and was originally interested in joining the merger, has signaled it may no longer be interested.

According to an email seen by TechCrunch, Cruise President Craig Glidden informed the company’s roughly 2,100 employees of the news.

“As a result of the change in strategy we announced in December, today we will part with nearly 50% of our Cruise employee base, through a reduction in force,” the email from Glidden reads. “Anyone who has been through a reduction knows that days like this are extremely difficult, and today is no different. With our move away from the ride-hail business and toward providing autonomous vehicles to customers alongside GM, our staffing and resource needs have dramatically changed. Today’s actions align our teams to our new needs, and focus our efforts on continuing to build world-class AV technology.”

The layoffs cap a year of major changes for GM-owned Cruise. One of the company’s robotaxis was involved in a tragic accident in late 2023 in which the vehicle failed to avoid and hit a pedestrian that had already been struck by a hit-and-run driver. The company’s operational permits were rescinded in the the aftermath, over concerns about its safety.

While the Cruise eventually regained legal authorization to resume testing, the company never really recovered from the incident, and GM cut off funding in December 2024.

“GM is committed to delivering the best driving experiences to our customers in a disciplined and capital efficient manner,” said Mary Barra, chair and CEO of GM. “Cruise has been an early innovator in autonomy, and the deeper integration of our teams, paired with GM’s strong brands, scale, and manufacturing strength, will help advance our vision for the future of transportation.”

GM made it clear that Cruise personnel would be rolled into the company’s broader technical teams, but overlap was bound to be a factor. As a result, it’s not surprising the company is laying off as many employees as it is.

Given the number of companies working on self-driving tech, it’s a safe bet many of those employees will be able to find work with some of Cruise’s competitors.

Tesla’s current iteration of FSD requires the driver pay attention and “supervise” the driving experience. In its latest earnings report, Tesla says it is finally ready to launch unsupervised FSD.

2025 will be a seminal year in Tesla’s history as FSD (Supervised) continues to rapidly improve
with the aim of ultimately exceeding human levels of safety. This will eventually unlock an
unsupervised FSD option for our customers and the Robotaxi business, which we expect to
begin launching later this year in parts of the U.S. We also continue to work on launching FSD
(Supervised) in Europe and China in 2025.

It remains to be seen if Tesla can deliver on its promise. The company, and especially CEO Elon Musk, have repeatedly promised unsupervised FSD, only to fail to deliver when promised.

Tesla currently has one of the most impressive self-driving systems, although it’s not without its flaws. The company has faced repeated criticism and investigations related to FSD’s limitations. Unlike most other companies, that rely on a combination LiDAR sensors and cameras, Tesla relies only on cameras for its FSD. Musk has famously opined that “LiDAR is a fool’s errand,” and “anyone relying on LiDAR is doomed.”

Interestingly, despite those sentiments, Tesla purchased $2 million worth of LiDAR sensors in mid-2024. It’s unclear whether that purchase was for competitive research, or if the company is finally implementing LiDAR and using it as the key to unlocking unsupervised FSD.

Reports emerged last week that the two Japanese automakers were exploring a merger, although no official word had been given. In a joint press release, Honda and Nissan executives said the merger would help the two companies further a carbon-neutral and zero-traffic-fatality society.

Nissan Motor Co., Ltd. (“Nissan”) and Honda Motor Co., Ltd. (“Honda”) have signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) to start discussions and considerations toward a business integration between the two companies through the establishment of a joint holding company.

To further accelerate their efforts toward achieving a carbon-neutral society and a zero-traffic-fatality society, Nissan and Honda signed an MOU on March 15 regarding a strategic partnership for the era of vehicle intelligence and electrification. Since then, the two companies have held discussions aimed at collaboration in various fields.

The two companies plan to integrate their management teams, as well as their automotive tech to become a “leading global mobility company.”

If the business integration can be realized, both companies can aim to integrate their respective management resources such as knowledge, human resources, and technologies; create deeper synergies; enhance the ability to respond to market changes; and expect to improve mid- to long-term corporate value. Additionally, Nissan and Honda can aim to further contribute to the development of Japan’s industrial base as a “leading global mobility company” by integrating Nissan and Honda’s four-wheel-vehicle and Honda’s motorcycle and power products businesses, enabling the brands of both companies to become more attractive and to deliver more attractive and innovative products and services to customers worldwide.

“Today marks a pivotal moment as we begin discussions on business integration that has the potential to shape our future,” said Makoto Uchida, Nissan CEO. “If realized, I believe that by uniting the strengths of both companies, we can deliver unparalleled value to customers worldwide who appreciate our respective brands. Together, we can create a unique way for them to enjoy cars that neither company could achieve alone.”

“Creation of new mobility value by bringing together the resources including knowledge, talents, and technologies that Honda and Nissan have been developing over the long years is essential to overcome challenging environmental shifts that the auto industry is facing. Honda and Nissan are two companies with distinctive strengths,” added Toshihiro Mibe, Honda Director and Representative Executive Officer. “We are still at the stage of starting our review, and we have not decided on a business integration yet, but in order to find a direction for the possibility of business integration by the end of January 2025, we strive to be the one and only leading company that creates new mobility value through chemical reaction that can only be driven through synthesis of the two teams.”

The Mitsubishi Question

Nissan is currently the largest shareholder in Mitsubishi, with a controlling stake of 34%. Although neither company has specifically addressed Mitsubishi, the automaker’s status is a major question in the merger scenario.

If Mitsubishi is included in the terms of the merger, it will help make the combined company the number three automaker in the world, a status that would help it improved its ability to compete at scale. The companies acknowledged the importance of the scale a merger would bring:

• By standardizing the vehicle platforms of both companies across various product segments, the companies expect to create stronger products, reduce costs, enhance development efficiencies, and improve investment efficiencies through standardized production processes.
• The integration is projected to increase sales and operational volumes, allowing the companies to reduce development costs per vehicle, including for future digital services, while maximizing profits.
• By accelerating the mutual complementation of their global vehicle offerings – including ICE, HEV, PHEV, and EV models – Nissan and Honda will be better positioned to meet diverse customer needs around the world and deliver optimal products, leading to improved customer satisfaction.

We will continue to monitor the story as it develops.

According to Nikkei Asia, Honda and Nissan are considering the option to join forces and operate under a holding company. The negotiations have evidently reached the point that the two companies are close to signing a memorandum of understanding.

Both companies have a long and storied history in the automotive industry, but companies are facing growing threats from Chinese automakers, which are subsidized by Beijing to help them better compete on the world scene. This puts traditional automakers at a disadvantage, usually unable to compete at the same price point.

Simultaneously, the transition to EVs has been far more difficult for traditional automakers that many initially believed it would be. Companies like Ford and Volkswagen have had to make substantial changes to their EV plans because of the challenges they have faced, not the least of which is lagging consumer demand.

If Honda and Nissan move forward with their plans, it could help both companies overcome the growing threats they face, and accelerate their research and development moving forward.

GM surprised the industry when it announced it was halting funding of Cruise’s robotaxi efforts, with plans to roll the division into the automaker’s broader tech teams. GM controls roughly 97% of Cruise, but said it planned to buy out the remaining 3% so that it could proceed with the division’s shutdown without hindrance.

Microsoft is one of Cruise’s minority owners and, as such, will take a loss as a result of GM’s plans. Microsoft revealed the news in an SEC filing.

In January 2021, Microsoft announced a minority investment in Cruise, an autonomous vehicle company which is a majority-owned subsidiary of General Motors Company (“GM”). On December 10, 2024, GM announced its intent to realign its autonomous driving strategy, no longer fund Cruise’s robotaxi development work, and pursue the acquisition of minority investor shares. As a result, we expect to record an impairment charge of approximately $800 million in the second quarter of fiscal year 2025. This charge will be recorded in other income and expense and was not included in our second quarter guidance provided on October 30, 2024. It is estimated to have a negative impact of approximately $0.09 to second quarter diluted earnings per share.

It’s unclear at this time what other companies will take a loss as a result of GM’s plans, or how much those losses may amount to. Nonetheless, Microsoft’s disclosure adds yet more intrigue to an already surprising development.

Cruise has been testing its robotaxis in a number of cities across the US. Despite the $10 billion GM invested in it, the automaker is pulling support.

“GM is committed to delivering the best driving experiences to our customers in a disciplined and capital efficient manner,” said Mary Barra, chair and CEO of GM. “Cruise has been an early innovator in autonomy, and the deeper integration of our teams, paired with GM’s strong brands, scale, and manufacturing strength, will help advance our vision for the future of transportation.”

“As the largest U.S. automotive manufacturer, we’re fully committed to autonomous driving and excited to bring GM customers its benefits – things like enhanced safety, improved traffic flow, increased accessibility, and reduced driver stress,” said Dave Richardson, senior vice president of software and services engineering.

GM owns roughly 90% of Cruise, but its agreements with other shareholders raise its ownership to more than 97%. The company plans to buy out the remaining 3%, ensuring there are no roadblocks to the restructuring plans.

The automaker plans to use Cruise’s progress to “build on the progress of Super Cruise, the company’s hands-off, eyes-on driving feature, now offered on more than 20 GM vehicle models and currently logging over 10 million miles per month.”

Interestingly, several Cruise employees told TechCrunch that they were “blindsided” by the decision and learned of it at the same time as the media.

Cruise’s Fate Illustrates the Challenges of Autonomous Vehicles

Cruise is one of the leading autonomous vehicle companies, alongside Waymo and Tesla. As a result, the company has coveted brand recognition, giving it a major advantage over startups entering the space.

Unfortunately, despite its lead in the industry, Cruise was at the center of a major accident in 2023, in which a Cruise vehicle failed to avoid a pedestrian that had been previously struck by a hit-and-run driver, hitting the pedestrian again. California suspended Cruise’s license to operate until additional safety measures could be implemented, and the company suspended all testing nationwide, before eventually resuming in some cities in mid-2024, and California in September.

Nonetheless, Cruise’s issues are indicative of the issues that continue to plague autonomous vehicle efforts. Tesla has repeatedly faced issues, including multiple US government investigations, for claims about its Full Self-Driving claims.

Critics have long said that autonomous systems are nowhere near the level needed to replace humans as drivers, lacking the insight and judgment needed to make split-second, life-and-death decisions that come with operating an automobile.

GM killing Cruise’s robotaxi efforts may be the most damning indictment yet of the entire industry.

Cruise’s Fate a Reminder of GM’s Past Decisions

Cruise’s fate may strike a cord with some individuals, reminding them of the company’s handling of the EV1. One of the first EVs on the market, and the inspiration for Tesla, the EV1 was a revolutionary car that GM prematurely killed off, missing the ability to be the dominant EV maker.

There will undoubtedly be comparisons between EV1 and Cruise, with many questioning whether GM is once again being premature in killing off a promising project.

The NHTSA’s Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) has been investigating a number of incidents in Teslas were involved in accidents when FSD was active, including at least one crash in which a pedestrian was fatally struck. In a letter to the company, the NHTSA acknowledged that Tesla provided the required information in response the ODI’s investigation, including documentation regarding FSD’s operation.

On April 15, 2024 Tesla obliged and briefed ODI, emphasizing its owner’s manual, User Interface, and YouTube (212.5k views) messaging to drivers that the vehicle is not autonomous, that they must remain vigilant, and that they, the driver remain in full control. We note that the driver in Tesla’s YouTube video has their hands very closely positioned on the steering wheel while driving in a manner that indicates a readiness to intervene.

Despite Tesla’s cooperation, the letter goes on to point out that the company’s own promotional posts on social media directly contradict its documentation and official stance regarding FSD.

In the meantime, Tesla’s X (Twitter) account has re-posted or endorsed postings that exhibit disengaged driver behavior. Similar to our remarks in the April 15, 2024 meeting about the April 10, 2024 “Heart Attack” post from @MAXPAULFRANKLIN, we believe that Tesla’s postings conflict with its stated messaging that the driver is to maintain continued control over the dynamic driving task. We similarly observe that these postings may encourage viewers to see FSD-Supervised as a Chauffer or “Robotaxi” rather than a partial automation / driver assist system that requires persistent attention and intermittent intervention by the driver. Example postings are listed below for your information.

On April 11, 2024, Tesla reposted an April 10, 2024 story detailing an individual (@MAXPAULFRANKLIN) who opted to use the “Full Self-Driving capability” to drive him 13 miles from his home to the emergency room during a heart attack shortly after the April 1 free trial became available. Tesla’s posting (1.6M views) stated: “FSD V12 helped owner get to the hospital when he needed immediate medical attention.”

On May 6, 2024, Tesla reposted a May 5, 2024 video depicting a 50 minute drive in FSD from a parking garage after a sporting event. Third party comments on the initial post stated that they “can foresee more drinkers getting home safely” (44k views) and that “FSD will save lives & enable people” (39.9k views) suggest advantages to using FSD while inebriated. Tesla’s posting (4.8M views) stated “$99 / month.”

In addition to the above examples, the letter goes on to list five other posts in which Tesla seemed to endorse the idea that FSD doesn’t require human interaction.

The letter goes on to point out what Tesla’s marketing is similarly conflicted in its description of FSD.

In addition to the aforementioned social media posts, the official Tesla website provides conflicting messaging on the capabilities of FSD-Supervised. On the Tesla store page, the option “Full SelfDriving Capability” is available with feature descriptions including “Automatic Lane Change”, “Automatic Driving”, and the ability for the vehicle to “drive itself almost anywhere”. Tesla does provide a disclaimer on this page that the “features require active driver supervision and do not make the vehicle autonomous.”.

Elsewhere on the official Tesla website however, additional claims are made with no such clarifying statement. If used to gather information on “FSD”, the chat feature ‘Tesla Assist’ will provide a statement that Full Self-Driving “is designed to be able to conduct short and long distance trips with no action required by the person in the driver’s seat”.

There is similar language on Tesla’s dedicated page for the Autopilot suite of features under the section titled “Full Self-Driving Capability”. An additional statement is made that “use of these features without supervision is dependent on achieving reliability” and “regulatory approval, which may take longer in some jurisdictions”.

This statement is accompanied by a video embedded on the same webpage, first showing a statement that “The person in the driver’s seat is only there for legal reasons. He is not doing anything. The car is driving itself.”. Followed by footage of the vehicle operating on local roads with the driver’s hands resting on their knees.

The NHTSA’s letter asks that Tesla revisit its advertising in an effort to be more consistent and accurately reflect FSD’s true driving capabilities.

We request that Tesla revisit its communications to assure that its messaging is consistent with the statements made in its user instructions and appropriate to the level of capability deployed to the public roads.

Tesla and CEO Elon Musk’s claims regarding FSD have caused the company trouble on multiple occasions, with California ruling the company cannot use the term because it misleads customers regarding FSD’s capabilities.

While FSD is certainly an impressive step toward autonomous vehicles, it is just that—a step. At this point in time, FSD does not constitute true autonomous driving tech, and Tesla should be more consistent and open in its messaging about it.

According to ABC7, California’s Air Resources Board (CARB) voted Friday to tighten fuel standards in an effort to reduce pollution. A side effect, however, is that gas prices will rise as a result.

“We know that in order to be successful in addressing climate change, we must continue to reduce our fossil fuel consumption,” said Liane Randolph, CARB chairwoman.

The vote “lays out a plan to achieve carbon neutrality by 2045 that would also result in a 94% reduction in petroleum demand by 2045,” added Randolph.

California Senate Republicans have voiced their opposition to the vote.

“This is going to really negatively impact many millions of people here in California,” said Sen. Brian Jones. “And for this unelected board made up by a group of millionaires to even be considering raising our gas prices right now while Californian’s are struggling under the cost of living here in California, is unbelievable to me that we are even having this discussion.”

Individuals expressed their concerns over the vote, saying it will create unnecessary hardship on citizens at a time when budgets are already stretched thin. Some were also unhappy with what they perceived as an attempt to force them to abandon gasoline-powered vehicles in favor of EVs.

“To vote on it, to make it higher just doesn’t make sense, because we are already kind of getting by. A lot of people live paycheck to paycheck,” said Tanner Ramsey, a Bay Area driver.

“I’m kind of old school. I just like the gasoline better. Also range anxiety. I don’t want to have to worry about if I’m going on a trip six hours away, how many times I have to stop to charge when I can just fill up and be gone in five minutes,” Ramsey said.

The driver, Paul S, posted a screenshot of his vehicle, saying his Tesla hit the deer at full speed and didn’t stop even after hitting it. He also said he was experience Tesla service at its worst, with the company not having any appointments until January.

Paul S also posted video of the accident, cutting it right before the actual impact, so it’s still safe for work and sensitive viewers.

Despite the accident, Paul S says he’s incredibly thankful for how well-built Tesla vehicles are.

Tesla has had some setbacks with FSD, with the US government investigating FSD collisions, with one involving incident involving a Tesla that struck and killed a pedestrian. This latest incident is not likely to help the company’s case that FSD is as advanced as Tesla would like drivers to believe.

Hydrogen fuel cell technology is emerging as an alternative to electric vehicles, with some automakers believing it has more promise than EVs. Hyundai says Initium is Latin for “beginning” or “first,” a fitting name for the company’s foray into the tech.

“Hyundai Motor’s clear, unwavering commitment to hydrogen over the past 27 years is rooted in our belief in its potential as a clean, accessible and therefore fair energy source for everyone,” said Jaehoon Chang, President and CEO of Hyundai Motor Company. “We are dedicated to pioneering a future where hydrogen is used by everyone, in everything, and everywhere. We invite you to join us on this journey.”

The Initium is designed to provide a 650km driving range while providing a maximum output of 150 kW.

The company says the Initium “marks the debut of Hyundai Motor’s new design language – called ‘Art of Steel’ – embodying the character of HTWO, Hyundai Motor Group’s (the Group) dedicated hydrogen value chain business brand.”

“Our challenge began from the manufacturing stage, where we pushed the formability of steel to the extreme to create a form of art,” said SangYup Lee, Executive Vice President and Head of Hyundai and Genesis Global Design. “With INITIUM, we’ve crafted a more SUV-like design that is both solid and safe, reflecting our dedication to our customers through ‘customer-centric design’.”

Initium’s iconic design integrates the HTWO symbol, representing Hyundai Motor’s vision for a future driven by hydrogen. The ‘+’ inspired graphic as part of Initium’s lighting signature blends with the bumper, creating a distinctive FCEV-specific design cue marked by unique lighting, solid volumes and refined elegance.

Initium’s distinct SUV-like aesthetic seamlessly integrates city living functionality with outdoor adventure capability with its bold lines and solid structure, balancing sturdiness and sophistication. The concept’s 21-inch wheels complement the overall design, with the vehicle’s rugged roof rack adding practicality for those with both urban and outdoor lifestyles.

Other automakers are throwing their weight behind hydrogen fuel cell technology, including GM and Toyota. While natural gas is currently used to produce hydrogen fuel cells, a switch to renewable energy could make hydrogen an even more environmentally friendly option than EVs, especially when considering the environmental impact of battery production.

Millions of existing Teslas are powered by the company’s HW3 computers. According to Electrek, Musk finally admitted in a quarterly results call what the outlet has been saying for nearly a year, namely that the HW3 is not capable of supporting FSD.

We are not 100% sure. HW4 has several times the capability of HW3. It’s easier to get things to work on HW4 and it takes a lot of efforts to squeeze that into HW3. There is some chance that HW3 does not achieve the safety level that allows for unsupervised FSD.

The underlying issue is that the HW3 only has two NN nodes. While one was originally supposed to be there for redundancy, but Tesla has been using both in an effort to make FSD work the way its supposed to. Unfortunately, as Electrek points out, in order achieve level 4-5 autonomy, the vehicle must have a redundant node. As a result, it seemed clear for some time that the HW3 cannot deliver on Tesla’s promise of true FSD.

Musk tried to reassure investors that HW3 computers could be replaced, and that Tesla would do it for free.

If that turns out to be the case, we will upgrade those who bought HW3 FSD for free. And we have designed the system to be upgradable.

Unfortunately, the reality is not so straightforward. The physical design of the HW4 is considerably different than the HW3, meaning it many not be physically compatible with existing vehicles.

The admission is a big deal for Tesla, and underscores the issues the company is having delivering on Musk’s promise of true FSD—despite the many advances the company has made. Until the HW3 problem is resolved, millions of existing Tesla drivers may be out of luck.

The news comes courtesy of MacRumors contributor Aaron Perris, and addresses what has been a long-standing omission from Tesla. As the outlet reports, while Apple users have been able to use their Apple Watch to remotely unlock their vehicles, they have had to rely on third-party apps, as Tesla has been notoriously reluctant to fully support Apple’s ecosystem.

Elon Musk had previously said an official Apple Watch app could be in the works, but this is the most concrete report yet that it will see the light of day.

Tesla, and especially CEO Elon Musk, has often bragged about FSD’s capabilities. Unfortunately, the evidence has repeatedly shown that FSD doesn’t always live up to the hype. In fact, California ruled that Tesla cannot even use the term, as it can mislead consumers into believing the technology is more advanced than it is.

After several incidents involving FSD, resulting in at least one fatality, a National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) has identified four specific incidents it is evaluating.

The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) has identified four Standing General Order (SGO) reports in which a Tesla vehicle experienced a crash after entering an area of reduced roadway visibility conditions with FSD -Beta or FSD -Supervised (collectively, FSD) engaged. In these crashes, the reduced roadway visibility arose from conditions such as sun glare, fog, or airborne dust. In one of the crashes, the Tesla vehicle fatally struck a pedestrian. One additional crash in these conditions involved a reported injury. The four SGO crash reports are listed at the end of this summary by SGO number.

The Preliminary Evaluation is accessing the following issues:

• The ability of FSD’s engineering controls to detect and respond appropriately to reduced roadway visibility conditions;
• Whether any other similar FSD crashes have occurred in reduced roadway visibility conditions and, if so, the contributing circumstances for those crashes; and
• Any updates or modifications from Tesla to the FSD system that may affect the performance of FSD in reduced roadway visibility conditions. In particular, this review will assess the timing, purpose, and capabilities of any such updates, as well as Tesla’s assessment of their safety impact.

FSD is a prominent feature for Tesla, one the company has invested heavily in improving. It also serves as a core component of Tesla’s new robotaxi venture. A negative finding by the ODI could deal a devastating blow to Tesla’s plans.

“We are thrilled to partner with Hyundai as we further our mission to be the world’s most trusted driver,” said Tekedra Mawakana, co-CEO, Waymo. “Hyundai’s focus on sustainability and strong electric vehicle roadmap makes them a great partner for us as we bring our fully autonomous service to more riders in more places.”

Catch our chat on Waymo picking Hyundai for its new robotaxi fleet!

Hyundai says Waymo’s IONIQ 5, its “sixth-generation fully autonomous technology,” will be manufactured in the US, a major selling point amid the ongoing geopolitical turmoil between the US and China. The Biden administration is preparing new rules that would ban Chinese automotive components. As a result, the IONIQ 5 being manufactured within the US is a solid reason for Waymo to select it.

“We recently announced the launch of Hyundai Motor Company’s autonomous vehicle foundry business to provide global autonomous driving companies with vehicles capable of implementing SAE Level 4 or higher autonomous driving technology,” said Chang Song, President and Head of Hyundai Motor Group’s Advanced Vehicle Platform (AVP) Division. “There is no better partner for our first agreement in this initiative than industry-leader Waymo.”

Hyundai says it will deliver a modified version of the IONIQ 5, one that is specifically designed for autonomous modifications.

“Hyundai and Waymo share a vision to improve the safety, efficiency and convenience of how people move,” said José Muñoz, president and global COO of Hyundai Motor Company, and president and CEO of Hyundai Motor North America. “Waymo’s transformational technology is improving road safety where they operate, and the IONIQ 5 is the ideal vehicle to scale this further. The team at our new manufacturing facility is ready to allocate a significant number of vehicles for the Waymo One fleet as it continues to expand. Importantly, this is the first step in the partnership between the two companies and we are actively exploring additional opportunities for collaboration.”

The latest recall relates to the rearview camera, with some users reporting delays of up to 8 seconds before an image appears. Federal regulations in the US mandate that rearview cameras display an image in 2 seconds or less.

Catch our chat on Tesla’s digital ‘recall’ for the Cybertruck!

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) posted the notice on its website.

A delayed rearview image reduces the driver’s view of what is behind the vehicle, increasing the risk of a crash.

Tesla, Inc. (Tesla) is recalling certain 2024 Cybertruck vehicles. The rearview camera image may be delayed after shifting into reverse. As such, these vehicles fail to comply with the requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) number 111, “Rear Visibility.”

Tesla released an over-the-air (OTA) software update, free of charge. Owner notification letters are expected to be mailed November 25, 2024. Owners may contact Tesla customer service at 1-877-798-3752. Tesla’s number for this recall is SB-24-00-016.

Cybertruck owners should apply the update as soon as they are notified of it to avoid any safety issues.

One vehicle regulation that needs to change is, a software update is not a recall. @Reuters knows that, but they also know their readers are stupid, so they can continue to tell lies with their Tesla headlines. Actually, their last paragraph usually does mention a software… pic.twitter.com/koFXmfuKD8

— Maye Musk (@mayemusk) October 3, 2024

California pulled Cruise’s license to test its autonomous robotaxis in October 2023 after one ran over a pedestrian that had been hit by another hit-and-run driver. Although not causing the initial incident, the robotaxi failed to avoid the struck pedestrian.

Listen to our conversation on Cruise robotaxis return to the Bay area. Good news for Cruise!

“Based upon the performance of the vehicles, the department determines the manufacturer’s vehicles are not safe for the public’s operation,” the California DMV said in a statement at the time, citing “an unreasonable risk to public safety.”

Following significant changes at Cruise, including a nationwide pause on testing, a change of CEO, layoffs, and technical changes, the company has once again received the green light to test its vehicles in Sunnyvale and Mountain View.

The company posted the news on X.

The announcement follows similar news of the company resuming tests in Dallas in early June.

A Historical Pattern of Ambitious Plans Falling Short

“We’ve seen a pattern where companies initially set ambitious goals but then shift to partnering with each other when those goals fall short,” said Larry Goldberg, a serial entrepreneur and co-founder of Sapiens Decision. His observation reflects a broader trend within the auto industry, where bold proclamations of market leadership often give way to pragmatic partnerships. For instance, GM’s recent exploration of a global partnership with Hyundai highlights how even the most established automakers are looking to collaborate in areas like EV development and supply chain management.

In many ways, this move reflects the struggles of legacy automakers, particularly in Europe, where one-third of major car plants are running at half capacity or less. As Goldberg notes, “It’s really just a matter of time before these automakers won’t have any choice but to turn to Tesla.”

This has been the story of many companies in the EV race. Automakers such as Volkswagen, GM, and Ford initially set ambitious goals to lead the electric vehicle market, but as those ambitions encountered financial and technological barriers, the need to rely on external partners became more apparent. As Goldberg bluntly put it, “It’s time for these legacy companies to bite their lip and partner with the tech and global leader, Tesla.”

Tesla’s Role in Charging Infrastructure: A Harbinger of Bigger Deals

Tesla has already made waves by opening its Supercharger network to other automakers, a development that many see as the first step toward broader collaboration. Tesla’s North American Charging Standard (NACS) is quickly becoming the industry standard, with companies like Hyundai integrating Tesla’s technology directly into their vehicles.

“Hyundai is going NACS native,” explained Goldberg, “they’re putting Tesla’s port in their cars so they can use any Tesla charger without adapters.” This shift is a recognition of Tesla’s dominance in the charging infrastructure space, and the ease of integrating Tesla’s technology has automakers reconsidering their stance on autonomy partnerships.

As Goldberg pointed out, “Integrating the NACS into the car is an engineering task, but it is not anything heroic.” This suggests that while automakers might hesitate to adopt Tesla’s full autonomy suite, they are willing to begin with more straightforward integrations, like charging infrastructure. However, the bigger technological leap—autonomous driving—may be inevitable.

Struggling Automakers and Financial Pressures

Financial distress is another critical factor driving the need for partnerships. Automakers across Europe and North America are facing declining sales and production challenges. Volkswagen, for example, has been forced to cut workers and is considering shutting down two plants in Germany. Meanwhile, Volvo recently announced that it won’t be able to go fully electric by 2030, opting instead for a mix of hybrids and a smaller number of EVs. As Goldberg put it, “This is not serious business. This is trouble. Very serious trouble.”

GM’s situation is similarly precarious. Once boasting about a $2 billion dividend from its China operations, the company has now lost over half a billion dollars in the Chinese market. Goldberg didn’t mince words when describing the situation: “GM is not a serious company. They’ve been putting up announcement after announcement. Mary Barra [CEO of GM] has been at so many signing ceremonies, it’s laughable. GM will have to partner with Tesla at some point.”

This urgency is underscored by recent reports from Bloomberg showing that a third of Europe’s car plants are operating at less than 50% capacity, a situation that is likely financially unsustainable. As more automakers face these dire financial straits, the option to partner with Tesla becomes not just attractive but necessary.

The Hybrid Strategy: Fool’s Gold or Temporary Lifeline?

Another intriguing development is the renewed focus on hybrid vehicles, particularly in Europe and China. Hybrids, which combine internal combustion engines with electric drivetrains, have grown faster than fully electric vehicles globally. Yet Goldberg was adamant that this strategy is a dead end: “Hybrids are Fool’s Gold,” he declared. “The more brands glom onto this hybrid stuff, the worse they’re going to lose.”

Even BYD, the Chinese EV leader, has seen its hybrid sales grow faster than its EV sales. But Goldberg views this trend as a temporary distraction: “It’s going to take some time for this to play out, but hybrids are not the future.” As Tesla continues to lower the costs of its electric vehicles, legacy automakers relying on hybrids may find themselves even further behind.

Tesla’s Technological Leadership and OEM Tiering: The Future of Partnership

Tesla’s technological leadership goes far beyond charging infrastructure. The company has made significant strides in electric drivetrains, battery technology, and advanced driver-assistance systems (ADAS). Automakers who choose to partner with Tesla stand to benefit from these advancements, but such partnerships would involve deeper integration than traditional supplier relationships.

Goldberg described Tesla as what he calls a “tier 0.5 supplier,” meaning Tesla isn’t just providing parts but is actively involved in designing and engineering subsystems for its partners. This level of collaboration is unprecedented in the auto industry. “Tesla will come in and partner with an OEM to provide not only the design but support in incorporating that design into their vehicles,” Goldberg explained. This is a step beyond traditional tier 1 suppliers, who typically manufacture and assemble major components but don’t collaborate as deeply on the engineering side.

The Inevitable Shift: When Will Automakers Partner with Tesla for Autonomy?

The big question remains: when will automakers partner with Tesla for autonomy? According to Goldberg, it’s not a matter of if, but when. “At some point, some of the OEMs will have to partner with Tesla,” he said. The financial pressures and technological challenges are simply too great for many automakers to overcome alone. Goldberg believes that within the next two years, Tesla’s manufacturing costs will fall below that of internal combustion and hybrid vehicles, making Tesla’s technology even more attractive.

“Sometime in the next two years, Tesla’s manufacturing costs will fall below that of the ICE and hybrid vehicles. When that happens, the earthquake we’re seeing now will become a full-blown tectonic shift.”

As Tesla continues to pull ahead in the race for electric and autonomous vehicles, the rest of the auto industry may have no choice but to follow. For many legacy automakers, partnering with Tesla could be the only way to survive in a full self-driving world.

According to Futurism, citing a Business Insider, Tesla employees in the Autopilot division were uncomfortable with some of the direction they were given.

“There were some times we were told to ignore ‘No Turn on Red’ or ‘No U-Turn’ signs,” an employee said, on condition of anonymity to protect their job. “Those were the [kinds] of things that made me and my coworkers uncomfortable.”

“The general response was along the lines of ‘Mind your business and your pay grade,'” the employee added.

While the desire to make Autopilot drive more naturally may be an admirable goal, one of the promises of autonomous driving is improved safety over human drivers. Unfortunately, if true, directing employees to train Autopilot to ignore basic traffic laws is not a sustainable path toward safe autonomous driving.

Volkswagen is the world’s largest automaker, but the company is warning that economic factors and increased competition from Asian competitors have impacted its financial performance. A company spokesperson broke the news, via The New York Times, saying nothing was off the table.

“In the current situation, even plant closures at vehicle production and component sites can no longer be ruled out without swift countermeasures,” the company said. “The situation is extremely tense and cannot be resolved through simple cost-cutting measures.”

Volkswagen and the unions representing its workforce arrived at a deal designed to save the company $11 bilion by 2026. The Times reports the company is warning that those measures fall short of what is needed to turn things around.

The company also made clear that much of the issues it is facing revolve around the overall competitiveness of the European auto market, as well as Germany itself falling behind in manufacturing.

“The European automotive industry is in a very demanding and serious situation,” Oliver Blume, chief executive of Volkswagen, said in a statement. “Germany in particular as a manufacturing location is falling further behind in terms of competitiveness. In this environment, we as a company must now act decisively.”

Needless to say, the statements from Volkswagen’s executives are not sitting well with the unions.

“We will fiercely defend ourselves against this,” Daniela Cavallo, a prominent union leader, said in a statement. “There will be no plant closures with us.”

One thing is clear: Volkswagen has a tough road ahead of it.

“The company — and the VW brand — are in a very dangerous situation,” said Ferdinand Dudenhöffer, director of the Center for Automotive Research.