From Automakers To Mobility Providers - Let's Discuss The Future Today

**Lowell** · January-10-18, 11:09 AM

It game is on as to who can move the most behinds and items the most miles—no longer who can sell the most cars. Rapidly approaching are driverless ride-shared cabs, trucks and delivery vehicles.

All automakers now call themselves mobility companies. They are building computers with wheels that will move about in a networked cloud of radio signals.

Ford executive Jim Hackett describes it as “the Transportation Mobility Cloud - that will enable vehicles, bicycles and mass transit to communicate. The vehicles and bikes - even city stoplights and signs - will all communicate with each other through a system that Ford calls “Cellular Vehicle-to-Everything.”

Question: Peek into the future. How do you see this affecting Detroit [=our auto industry] and Detroit [=Metro Detroit community]? How do you think it will affect you?

For instance, every house on a typical street has two, sometimes more cars. Could I see going down to one car if the others were replaced with a fleet of, say, five cooperatively-owned driverless cars? Hmmm…

**Lowell** · January-10-18, 11:38 AM

For instance # 2:

Uber is the official ride-share partner of Little Caesars Arena, the San Francisco-based company said in a news release Tuesday.

As part of the partnership, a designated pickup area and drop-off zone is being established on the West Fisher Service Drive, between Woodward and Park avenues.

http://www.crainsdetroit.com/article...-caesars-arena

**ndavies** · January-10-18, 12:33 PM

Is Uber going to survive? They've already been banned from London, UK. They've lost a huge court case in Europe. The court ruled they are a transportation company in Europe and will have to follow the laws other transportation companies follow in Europe. When do other cities and courts come to the same conclusion?

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/20/b...urope-ecj.html

**Junjie** · January-10-18, 11:27 PM

Originally Posted by ndavies

Is Uber going to survive? They've already been banned from London, UK. They've lost a huge court case in Europe. The court ruled they are a transportation company in Europe and will have to follow the laws other transportation companies follow in Europe. When do other cities and courts come to the same conclusion?

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/20/b...urope-ecj.html

Not only that but they lose $500 million to $1 billion per quarter. Uber is basically a scam to "outcompete" existing taxis and transit by subsidizing huge losses with venture capital infusions that will eventually dry up.

I think a lot of the predictions about self-driving cars are a little silly. Probably less will change than we think. Will anyone who can afford one still want their own car? Pretty much - having your own car means no waiting for your ride to show up, no sharing with strangers who left god-knows-what in the backseat... though of course I'm sure on the margins some people who would love to save the money owning a car [[or owning a second or third car) requires may decide they're better off without. I don't really see how it will be efficient for the "mobility companies" to keep huge roving fleets wandering thinly-populated exurbs and rural areas to be at your door at a moment's notice, so have fun waiting or else buy your own.

I think the auto industry will continue to make cars and people will continue to buy them. I think the increased efficiency of self driving cars will make traffic a little better, but the hugely increased total number of overall cars on the road [[kids, old people, frivolous usage since you can keep playing your iPad while "driving") will probably outweigh that. And I think it's coming less soon than we think.

**Wesley Mouch** · January-10-18, 11:58 PM

Originally Posted by Junjie

Not only that but they lose $500 million to $1 billion per quarter. Uber is basically a scam to "outcompete" existing taxis and transit by subsidizing huge losses with venture capital infusions that will eventually dry up.
...snip...

A scam? Are you on drugs? Uber kicks taxi ass on service quality, for the most part. The only reason taxis aren't in the dustbin of history is politics and graft. Sure, Uber is underpricing. Standard new business strategy. Gain market share. Try to be a monopoly. Lock out the competition. Who cares if Uber gets kicked out of London. There'll be another behind -- unless the vested moneyed interest buy enough politicians to keep torturing their citizens with overpriced monopolies. Its a broken model. But when you're London, you can make mistakes and you're forgiven. Can Detroit dump Uber? If they did, do you think Elon Musk would even open the proposal from Detroit?

Sorry, I just don't understand those who pine for the good old days of taxi service. Especially if you've ever been in a Detroit cab. My last was 30 years ago. Torn seats. Stink. Dirt. Perfume from hell. You want a return to the good ol' days? They weren't good. Taxi medallions are a scam. Commercial insurance for drivers is a scam. Background checks are a scam. Uber's a scam. Sure. Who cares. But what would make you want to defend the taxi scammers against the Uber scammers? I don't get it.

**Johnnny5** · January-11-18, 01:13 AM

I think the widespread use of completely autonomous passenger cars is a lot further down the road than expected. We'll definitely see more of the assisted driving such as on the current Tesla and public transit will become more automated, but IMO the big hangup is going to be the inability of a completely autonomous vehicle to anticipate and deal with the unexpected.

How does an autonomous vehicle handle a ball rolling into the road from behind a parked car? Does it know to slow down because there might be a child chasing after it? If there is a child, are they making eye contact with the driver and waiting for traffic to clear or oblivious to the danger and about to jump in the road after it? What about a police officer standing in the road directing traffic around an accident? And maybe the biggest concern for us in the Detroit area. What about those car eating potholes?

There are just so many scenarios while driving that aren't black and white. Every day we have to anticipate the actions of other drivers and adjust our own driving accordingly. Slowing down when we see something that does not look right, moving over a lane when a pedestrian or vehicle is close on the shoulder, etc. Maybe I'm wrong, but I just don't see computers getting over those hurdles in the next 10-20 years.

**Lowell** · January-12-18, 09:25 PM

Ready to hit the road next year.

General Motors
Published on Jan 11, 2018

The Cruise AV is designed to operate safely on its own, with no driver, steering wheel, pedals or other manual controls when it goes on the road in 2019.

**Bong-Man** · January-13-18, 12:30 PM

This new technology should be embraced by the very people who will probably dislike it the most....the baby boomer generation. It will give us autonomy and freedom in our senior years, and spare the younger generations behind us from having the largest group of senile & dementia-filled drivers to ever be on the road. Probably piss off the road rage people big-time too. They can scream and give the finger to the headless drivers on the way home every day.

It also might bring back some form of full-service gas stations. The thought of sending my car alone to get an oil change, fill-up, and car wash sounds very appealing. Might as well pick up some groceries along the way too.

**Richard** · January-13-18, 01:36 PM

^ Well that sux, I was looking forward to my turn at driving in the left lane of the freeway at 45 with my turn signal constantly on.

You always hear of these vehicles being tested in locations that really have no auto manufacturer presence,like Seattle or Boston.

But if the cars are anything like my smart phone it becomes a scary thought,it does kind create somewhat of an evolution in Detroit to more technology verses the actual manufacturing aspect which will become secondary.

Why exactly do they need cup holders in a driverless car?

**EastsideAl** · January-13-18, 03:10 PM

Originally Posted by Wesley Mouch

A scam? Are you on drugs? Uber kicks taxi ass on service quality, for the most part. The only reason taxis aren't in the dustbin of history is politics and graft. Sure, Uber is underpricing. Standard new business strategy. Gain market share. Try to be a monopoly. Lock out the competition. Who cares if Uber gets kicked out of London. There'll be another behind -- unless the vested moneyed interest buy enough politicians to keep torturing their citizens with overpriced monopolies. Its a broken model. But when you're London, you can make mistakes and you're forgiven. Can Detroit dump Uber? If they did, do you think Elon Musk would even open the proposal from Detroit?

Sorry, I just don't understand those who pine for the good old days of taxi service. Especially if you've ever been in a Detroit cab. My last was 30 years ago. Torn seats. Stink. Dirt. Perfume from hell. You want a return to the good ol' days? They weren't good. Taxi medallions are a scam. Commercial insurance for drivers is a scam. Background checks are a scam. Uber's a scam. Sure. Who cares. But what would make you want to defend the taxi scammers against the Uber scammers? I don't get it.

But Uber loses money. Huge gobs of it, every moment they operate. Taxis are profitable, or they disappear. Under its current structure Uber would be out of business in a few days if forced to stand on its own revenue stream. The question is, what happens when the venture capital stream dries up and Uber has to actually make it on its own and attempt to make a profit?

There's no question that their fares will have to rise, at least to the level of conventional cab service, and most likely quite a bit more to sustain anything close to their current service level. And compensation to driver/operators will almost certainly be forced down too.

Will Uber then fade away? Will they be able to maintain something like their current level of service and coverage? Will their service become more like cab service, complete with the under-maintained and under-cleaned cabs? What of the cab service that Uber has and will have forced out of business with its VC supported aggressive under-pricing strategy? Will there then be a shortage of cab/ride service for consumers?

These are not questions of what consumers prefer or may "pine" for, but of what is realistically sustainable under foreseeable business conditions.

**bust** · January-14-18, 08:16 PM

I'm looking forward to doing some work, some exercise, socializing, maybe procrastinating on detroityes -- from inside a self-driving vehicle.

I'll be an early adopter. My wife will be one of the earliest.

She has a drivers license but has always lived in cities where there is so much going on in the streets that driving takes special caution, and never gained the confidence to want to deal with all that. Especially not when where she's lived there are so many other attractive modes of transportation.

I haven't owned a car for a very long time. My wife never has. And there are lots of others like us too. If you know enough people from any of the denser parts of NYC [[or a list of other mostly foreign cities) you know them too.

When it's inconvenient to walk or use public transportation a taxi, Lyft, or Uber is usually all we need. When we need a car or truck for longer, we borrow or rent [[and I drive).

We'd own a car if we lived in Michigan. Probably two. But there are enough good alternatives we don't want one where we are. The benefits of car ownership here don't justify the expenses, the hassles, the risks. When you add them all up those are much more here than in Michigan too.

So bring on the self-driving vehicles! I'll still probably walk and use public transportation more often than not. But I'll welcome another good option, to serve other needs. Life in the big city will only get better.

**royce** · January-15-18, 04:42 AM

Originally Posted by Johnnny5

I think the widespread use of completely autonomous passenger cars is a lot further down the road than expected. We'll definitely see more of the assisted driving such as on the current Tesla and public transit will become more automated, but IMO the big hangup is going to be the inability of a completely autonomous vehicle to anticipate and deal with the unexpected.

How does an autonomous vehicle handle a ball rolling into the road from behind a parked car? Does it know to slow down because there might be a child chasing after it? If there is a child, are they making eye contact with the driver and waiting for traffic to clear or oblivious to the danger and about to jump in the road after it? What about a police officer standing in the road directing traffic around an accident? And maybe the biggest concern for us in the Detroit area. What about those car eating potholes?

There are just so many scenarios while driving that aren't black and white. Every day we have to anticipate the actions of other drivers and adjust our own driving accordingly. Slowing down when we see something that does not look right, moving over a lane when a pedestrian or vehicle is close on the shoulder, etc. Maybe I'm wrong, but I just don't see computers getting over those hurdles in the next 10-20 years.

I completely agree with your points. In addition, how much more expensive will these autonomous cars be compared to the same car that needs a driver? Also, from the what I've seen of autonomous cars, they have additional equipment that makes the cars look unattractive. Will these cars with the added equipment be able to go through an automated car wash?

Right now autonomous cars are being tested on test tracks. How many are on these test tracks at one time? Do the conditions mimic real life conditions? On these test tracks are only a few cars. In a real-life you are dealing with millions of cars on the road at any one-time on the planet. I don't want to be in an autonomous car when the signals go down.

BTW, I remember when the teenage boys on my block used to say to us younger kids that by the time we turned 16 and got our drivers licenses, there would be flying cars. Well, I'm in my fifties now and I'm still waiting for those flying cars to make their debut. Like flying cars, automous cars get our attention regarding life in the future. However, from a practical and economic standpoint, automous vehicles will not be practical and they will be expensive.

**401don** · January-15-18, 11:54 AM

Yesterday I was at a gas station where I filled up and paid at the pump. I then moved my car forward into a parking spot so the guy behind me could fill up while I went inside for snacks. When I got back to my car I noticed the front tire was low so I drove to the air and filled it up. 3 stops in one small lot. Would a self-driving car do that or would I just take over driving?

**Zacha341** · January-15-18, 12:19 PM

Would one be able to afford an self-driving car? I'm a late model car driver as it stands. Have never purchased new... and enjoy driving the older models I choose which give me little problem outside of regular maintenance and wear and tear associated with an older car.

**DeLemur** · January-15-18, 12:56 PM

Ha, hearing a lot of stodgy, "don't change anything" Detroit mentality here. Not how we capture the future guys. Trust that how to wash, fill up tires and move a car after receiving gasoline will be taken care of. Think of the upside too - much calmer traffic, ways to deal with road rage on your long commute or maybe a shorter commute with more car pooling.

To answer Lowell's question, this is terrible for Detroit auto sales and must create a reduction in auto purchasing but I don't think the bottom will drop out. Do you want to take a ride share to your vacation home with the kids? Nah. How about a ride share when showing visitors in town Detroit? Probably not. How about an auto ride to Lowes to pick up some 8 foot pieces of wood? Yes, an extra long pickup truck please and I'll finish my shopping list on the way there.

How optimized will our lives become? More so. But people are still going to want to control their lives and routes and identities. If I'm taking my girlfriend on a nice date I'm certainly not taking the Grade 3 autonomous vehicle. Maybe I take the Grade 1 luxury one. Maybe I take the Mustang I use on weekends.

**ndavies** · January-15-18, 01:02 PM

Automated cars are being tested on the road. I passed a Waymo driverless Pacifica last week on 12 mile in Novi. Uber has an engineering facility in Wixom tasked with developing/purchasing driverless cars. They took over the building my current employer used to lease. That site is just an office building. All testing would have to be done on the roads. The big 2.5 all test cars on the road here in Michigan.

One of the larger issue of robocars is access control. How do you give someone else access to the vehicle, How do you revoke it? How do you give your 13 year old permission to take the car to the store at 3:00pm and then stop him from "borrowing" the car at 2:00 am?

Another issue is relinquishing control in say a parking lot. The lot would have much higher capacity if cars could be juggled around without the owners presence. How does a robocar navigate through customs at the boarder? How do Police pull the vehicle over? Who gets the ticket? Is it the vehicle owner or the manufacturer who programmed the car?

There are many strange scenarios that need to be covered before they become reliable.

**Lowell** · January-21-18, 12:47 PM

I recently bought a simple robot floor sweeper. Sitting watching it buzzing around my feet and house, I realized I was getting a glimpse of the coming driverless vehicle revolution.

It backs off objects, never striking them, senses steps, gently bump-feels its away along walls when ordered to clean corners. Then, when its energy is depleted, returns to its electric feeding pod for recharge.

All that's before applying the extensive smartphone app controls.

I'm see fleets of similar self-feeding driverless pods cruising our streets toting people and packages.

What fascinates me most is not the awesome tech of this future but the social impact it will create--think Model T level disruption.

Human - robot conflict seems inevitable. Even little stuff like complaints of driverless cars smartly grabbing all the free parking in idle times. Sabotage seems likely too.

**Lowell** · January-21-18, 01:20 PM

And if that's not enough how about driverless vertical takeoff-landing vehicle. This from today's Freep article from the Auto show:

Jon Rimanelli, founder and CEO of Airspace Experience Technologies, showed of his company's Mobi-One, a working model of a planned 30-foot-long on-demand electric aircraft, which would take off and land vertically. Rimanelli said the company is working on an agreement with Uber Technologies [[a message seeking comment was sent to Uber representatives) and hopes to deliver 50 by the fall of 2020, depending on Federal Aviation Administration certification.

An average ride in the autonomous flying machine would cost $75 and carry up to four passengers and one safety pilot. It would have a 65-mile range and travel at 150 miles per hour on a single electric charge.

The big question, aside from why this shot at vertical transportation is likely to truly take off, is whether the Airspace X is a flying car. Rimanelli echoed what a few other experts on the topic have suggested.

“We don't believe in flying cars because they don't make for great cars or great aircraft. They're two totally separate modes of transportation,” Rimanelli said.

**Richard** · January-21-18, 01:48 PM

Who would have ever thought that a cartoon called the Jetsons would be the blueprint of the future.

With flying cars and mass production would we not end up with the same situation as now? Stuck in traffic in the air verses on the ground,the aspect of playing bumper cars in the air is kinda added twist.

I can see going to the airport and taking a quick 5 person shuttle that flies you to the destination city to city then drives you to the address.

**hybridy** · January-21-18, 06:27 PM

Originally Posted by Wesley Mouch

A scam? Are you on drugs? Uber kicks taxi ass on service quality, for the most part. The only reason taxis aren't in the dustbin of history is politics and graft. Sure, Uber is underpricing. Standard new business strategy. Gain market share. Try to be a monopoly. Lock out the competition. Who cares if Uber gets kicked out of London. There'll be another behind -- unless the vested moneyed interest buy enough politicians to keep torturing their citizens with overpriced monopolies. Its a broken model. But when you're London, you can make mistakes and you're forgiven. Can Detroit dump Uber? If they did, do you think Elon Musk would even open the proposal from Detroit?

Sorry, I just don't understand those who pine for the good old days of taxi service. Especially if you've ever been in a Detroit cab. My last was 30 years ago. Torn seats. Stink. Dirt. Perfume from hell. You want a return to the good ol' days? They weren't good. Taxi medallions are a scam. Commercial insurance for drivers is a scam. Background checks are a scam. Uber's a scam. Sure. Who cares. But what would make you want to defend the taxi scammers against the Uber scammers? I don't get it.

Thank you Wesley! Uber and Lyft were started out of necessity by millenials in large cities not needing to own a personal vehicle. They preferred experience over things. Those companies outgamed cab companies at their own game. Think of executive transportation to metro-$75 ea way. Uber does that in same experience for 1/3 price...I won’t even consider cabs [[I’m a millennial). Its merely a nicer mouse trap. Why on earth wouldnt these companies continue on? Time will tell how all these snapchats and the like weather and adapt just like Compaq of the dot com era. Over regulation by cab companies and municipalities is an exercise in futility. Airbnb and the like aren’t retreating so easily. Naysayers likely have never needed or used these services.

**hybridy** · January-21-18, 10:18 PM

Originally Posted by hybridy

Thank you Wesley! Uber and Lyft were started out of necessity by millenials in large cities not needing to own a personal vehicle. They preferred experience over things. Those companies outgamed cab companies at their own game. Think of executive transportation to metro-$75 ea way. Uber does that in same experience for 1/3 price...I won’t even consider cabs [[I’m a millennial). Its merely a nicer mouse trap. Why on earth wouldnt these companies continue on? Time will tell how all these snapchats and the like weather and adapt just like Compaq of the dot com era. Over regulation by cab companies and municipalities is an exercise in futility. Airbnb and the like aren’t retreating so easily. Naysayers likely have never needed or used these services.

Also my friend living in latfayette place car insurance is 6x more for one car than coverage for me with 2 newish vehicles. Completely unattainable to a family staying long term with shit services, horrific schools, overt racisim/harassment from [[those who stayed-gentrifier) and minimal services. Why bother ? Honest assement...not a troll tho

**Hypestyles** · January-22-18, 07:02 AM

bring the factories back to the city.

**mwilbert** · January-22-18, 10:45 AM

Uber is both a useful service and an uneconomic one. The cost of providing the service is way more than they charge. Most analysts I have seen think it will never be profitable until they are able to eliminate the drivers, hence their interest in automated driving.

If there were widely available, cheap, mobility services, you have to expect it would reduce the need for car ownership, particularly in relatively densely populated areas. The big question is whether the transition will be pretty gradual [[technology improves slowly, costs come down slowly, people change habits slowly) or quick [[you hit an inflection point and suddenly using a mobility service becomes the obvious choice for a big chunk of the population). I don't know the answer to that one.

**Lowell** · February-04-18, 01:29 PM

This from auto legend Bob Lutz:

"Bob Lutz, a brilliant and accomplished executive who was probably responsible for the creation of more great vehicles than I’ve sat in. Speaking at a “Why Driving Matters” panel coinciding with a week of classic car auctions in Arizona, Lutz predicted human driving will be outlawed in major cities in 10 years, when private vehicles are replaced by anonymous transportation pods that deliver you like a UPS package, then move on to the next number in their queue."

This was part of an interesting "love of driving" article today's Free Press.

**Lowell** · February-04-18, 01:37 PM

From same the article cited above:

“People want driverless performance when they’re commuting and maybe on long road trips, but they want the option to drive themselves.”

"The sweet spot for autonomous vehicles is what engineers call level 4 autonomy, Krebs adds. That means vehicles that can drive themselves but still have controls for the driver. Level 5 is a vehicle with no controls for the driver.

"In 2040, IHS Markit forecasts, only 25% of global auto sales will be totally autonomous vehicles with no driver controls.