Lucid Group Forum: Community User: voodoo

Where Tesla’s Faltering I think that there’s no question Lucid owes a majority of its early success to Tesla. Tesla essentially created the market for Lucid and, maybe even more importantly, got investors to pay attention to them. All of that attention allowed Lucid Motors to raise $4.4 billion in its SPAC merger with Churchill Capital. That money was enough for Lucid to bring the Air to market, continue development work on its SUV, and expand its production footprint. That’s something that Tesla never had and will be immensely powerful for Lucid Motors. Now, I’m not saying that Lucid has an easy road to mass production, far from it, but there’s no question that it’s easier than Tesla’s was. This is the first stage in which Lucid is benefiting from Tesla’s prior struggles. Though, a good start means nothing if the company can’t build on it. This is where I believe that Tesla is simply holding the door open for Lucid Motors. Tesla has seemingly become lazy and no longer has that fire to continue innovating. I can’t say I blame them, they’ve got several years on their closest competition and their cars are some of the best in the category. Well, perhaps before the Air came to market.

The rate of innovation in the EV sector is currently one of the most impressive global efforts I’ve ever seen, as is the rate at which the market is expanding. Since 2015, global sales of EVs have grown at an average rate of 50%. Yet, this is heating up. Global EV sales in 2021 are expected to rise 83% over last year, increasing the rate of adoption as more options flood the market. In order for first-movers to be successful, there needs to be substantial interest in the market. This plays into Tesla’s hands. However, the extreme level of growth in the market necessitates more competition. This opens the door for others to combat Tesla. Let’s come back to the idea of rapid innovation as well. Companies like Nano One (OTCPK:NNOMF) and SES (IVAN), both of which I’ve covered, are looking to introduce industry-shifting innovations. They’re not alone either. CATL, a Chinese battery producer, is on the verge of becoming the country’s second-largest company. CATL is on pace to spend nearly $1 billion on R&D this year, up 115% over the first half of last year. In this market of rapid innovation, it is nigh on impossible for any one company to stay at the forefront. The EV industry has failed what The Harvard Business review deemed the two most important litmus tests in determining whether a first-mover truly has any advantage. Not great news for the incumbent leader, Tesla. Though, I argue that there is more that can bring down the power of a first-mover. Complacency can create opportunities for others to thrive. In the next section, I will discuss how Tesla’s complacency, as well as a few other factors, mean that there are more reasons than a highly innovative and quickly-growing market for Tesla to fall.

“But for every academic study proving that first-mover advantages exist, there is a study proving they do not. While some well-known first-movers, such as Gillette in safety razors and Sony in personal stereos, have enjoyed considerable success, others, such as Xerox in fax machines and eToys in Internet retailing, have failed. We have found that the differences in outcome are not random—that first-mover status can confer advantages, but it does not do so categorically. Much depends on the circumstances in which it is sought.” I find this last sentence to be particularly powerful, as every industry is vastly different and allows for alternate outcomes. There will always be some level of unpredictability, dumb luck if you will, though The Harvard Business Review identified two factors that seem to reliably indicate whether or not the first-mover advantage will last. “The pace at which the technology of the product in question is evolving and the pace at which the market for that product is expanding” are these two critical factors.

First-movers are often assumed to carry a lasting advantage. This is not the case and, especially with the EV market, the first-mover advantage is not a powerful long-term asset. Tesla’s success has made Lucid’s challenge far more effective than it otherwise would’ve been, creating a market for the car and the investor interest required to fund the company. Lucid looks to be a far more nimble company than Tesla, allowing it to take the industry’s rapid evolution in stride, with a superior vehicle platform. Lucid Motors (LCID) only recently began delivering its first vehicles to customers, yet it has already received the laurels of MotorTrend’s 2022 Car of the Year. The vehicle’s industry-leading drivetrain technology, great design, and solid build quality earned it that title. Yet, Tesla (TSLA) remains the king of the EV. Of course, one car with limited volume isn’t going to change anything, though that’s not the way things are set to stay. I wrote on Lucid’s growth prospects some time ago, so that’s not the focus of today’s article. Instead, I’m here to discuss why Lucid Motors is well-positioned to surpass Tesla due to a rapidly eroding first-mover advantage. In an article on Tesla I published earlier this year, I discussed how the brand’s cache is already starting to slip. While we can sit here and debate that General Motors (GM) was actually the first EV manufacturer with its EV1 back in the ’90s, I think we all know that Tesla really earned that title. This article will discuss why that may not be such a good thing. The First-Mover Fallacy Oftentimes, the first-mover in a major new market is identified as said market’s future leader. It’s easy to see why, as they’re often associated with the market that they’ve created. Yet, think web browser and you probably think of Alphabet’s (GOOG) Google Chrome. Think of email, you’re again most likely going to think of a Google product -- this time Gmail. Social media? Facebook (FB). Cell phone? iPhone. You get the idea. What’s one thing all of these different products have in common? None of them were the first to market. Yet, despite this, they’ve all become the pinnacle of each of their respective markets. So, the big question is “Why?” Why are none of these transformative first-movers the leaders of their industry? Well, there’s not really one blanket answer. A 2005 publication to The Harvard Business Review discusses the idea of this fallacy.

☝ kann das bitte einer aufmachen und reinstelen

Das war auf den zukünftigen börsenwert gemeint 🤣🤪😜

https://seekingalpha.com/article/4471273-lucid-motors-lcid-stock-surpass-tesla?mail_subject=lcid-lucid-motors-is-set-up-to-surpass-tesla&utm_campaign=rta-stock-article&utm_content=link-2&utm_medium=email&utm_source=seeking_alpha

Man braucht Lucid mit Tesla nicht vergleichen, allein das Design von Lucid ist zeitlos, das sieht jeder auf den ersten Blick. Schaut euch die Felgen von Lucid nur mal an, einfach nur Endstufe sowie das Design. Wen interessiert hier Tesla? Hier ist Lucid, die Gegenwart und die Zukunft.

Lucid hält sich top, das ist (meiner Meinung) tesla 2.0 sonst wären wir schon lange unter den 30$. Halten, halten und nochmal halten!

Daspepe du kommst noch auf deine 100 %

Vor allen halten die sich auch gepflegt zurück 😅😅🤞

Jeder fährt hier seine eigene Strategie. Andere Meinungen lesen und hinterfragen kann manchmal nicht schaden. Hier liest man oft wie toll Lucid ist und wie weit die Luci noch steigt. Jetzt ist die Luci aber schon so weit oben, dass der Fall sehr schmerzhaft werden kann. Die, die bei 100% ihren Einsatz rausgenommen haben, haben alles richtig gemacht und verlieren keine Nerven mehr.

Jeden Tag diese rein raus Diskussion nerven ohne Ende 😒 alle ignorieren 👍

Die hätte ich gerne zusätzlich 😬. Der Kurs muss ja nicht heute auf 40 fallen, so lange bis es so weit ist parke ich das Geld woanders.

Lucid hält sich besser als Rivian. Das liegt daran, dass es bei rivian schlechte news gab und bei lucid nix, also ruhig bleiben. Dürfte bei 52 Dollar bleiben heute