I wanted to like this article (because I'm fascinated by the topic) but was frustrated by the lazy, boring writing (no storytelling!) and the listicle format. I almost had to stop at the mention of BCG consultant Brian Collie. Why on Earth would I care what he has to say?
The authors did do some good research though. I wish they just created a fact sheet with the key players in the rows and different important stats in the columns. For example: (1) number of engineers within the organization who are actively developing autonomous technologies, (2) budget size (3) milestones hit, etc.
Instead, I read for a half an hour as the authors danced around the main question: Is someone (like Zoox) going to build an entirely disruptive vehicle/platform/network from scratch? Or are we just going to keep seeing a slow creep of features built into new cars? I think the latter. And I think that if you believe the former, the burden of proof is on you.
This article, ultimately, amounts to a huge pile of oversimplified pseudo-insights. For example, this: "Delivery and taxi services capable of generating huge profits is the end game for all."
Zoox is by far my favorite company to follow. Not only because I know someone who works there (although I have absolutely no inside information) but because they're the only compnay that's truly distinct from the rest of the pack, for the simple reason that they're a legit startup.
I wanted to like this article (because I'm fascinated by the topic) but was frustrated by the lazy, boring writing (no storytelling!) and the listicle format. I almost had to stop at the mention of BCG consultant Brian Collie. Why on Earth would I care what he has to say?
The authors did do some good research though. I wish they just created a fact sheet with the key players in the rows and different important stats in the columns. For example: (1) number of engineers within the organization who are actively developing autonomous technologies, (2) budget size (3) milestones hit, etc.
Instead, I read for a half an hour as the authors danced around the main question: Is someone (like Zoox) going to build an entirely disruptive vehicle/platform/network from scratch? Or are we just going to keep seeing a slow creep of features built into new cars? I think the latter. And I think that if you believe the former, the burden of proof is on you.
This article, ultimately, amounts to a huge pile of oversimplified pseudo-insights. For example, this: "Delivery and taxi services capable of generating huge profits is the end game for all."
Zoox is by far my favorite company to follow. Not only because I know someone who works there (although I have absolutely no inside information) but because they're the only compnay that's truly distinct from the rest of the pack, for the simple reason that they're a legit startup.