GM adopts Tesla's NACS standard! Munro begs Rivian to switch

[VSG]

I always thought that was a silly ruling. If they prevented other browsers from being installed I would agree but saying it was anti-competitive because people would use IE and not install other browsers in my simple mind was a huge stretch.

That situation was a lot more complicated than you may realize. MS had OS-specific software components with closed, non-public APIs that it was using for the implementation of its browser. A third party who wanted to implement a browser for Windows would not have access to those components or API, and thus would not be able to create a browsers that was as capable and performant as IE. It was certainly not a level playing field, and not simply a question of bundling/unbundling the browser. Likewise, Windows made use of some IE code as part of the operating system, so you couldn't just uninstall IE. MS also did not make it easy to uninstall IE, so even if you wanted to use another browser you couldn't simply do so.

In the end, however, it was anti-competitive behavior by EVERYBODY in the browser wars which caused problems on the WWW for 20 years, along with millions of hours of wasted developer time trying to make everything work with multiple conflicting proprietary implementations. History seems to be repeating itself just to satisfy Elon's ego, and this will do nobody any good.

Sponsored

 

[MDH]

If Tesla were to provide Tesla Supercharger API access to all oems, this is how seamless billing could work, like with Rivian.

1. Superchargers sees it's a Rivian plugged in
2. Tesla allows charging and bills Rivian
3. Rivian, in turn, bills the customer.

Seamless billing and service at a supercharger without the Tesla app.

Yes, Tesla can charge a surcharge if they want.

No, Tesla shouldn't use the Supercharger network to try to play "kingmaker"--at minimum this would be anti-competitive and should draw in the interest of the DOJ

I believe Ford is using their own ap. The billing goes to Ford but I'm guessing Tesla gets a cut by way of a higher charge rate....which I think is fair.

 

[MDH]

Stellantis should be the domino to fall. I expect an announcement very shortly.

I think you're spot on. As for VW.....?

 

[DuoRivians]

I think you misunderstand. Having a patent is the fundamental basis of our free market. There are patents involved in today's gas pumps. There are tons of components on your Rivian that are patented by other companies. Those patent holders get compensated whether you think it is fair or not.
I agree there are activities that Tesla could engage in that could be deemed anticompetitive, but just because they own the patent doesn't mean they will engage in illegal activity.

Patents allow companies to protect against others to claim their inventions. Patents do not permit monopolistic behavior

 

[MDH]

What about level 2 chargers? Many employers, public spaces, etc have spent lots of money to put in level 2 chargers that are CCS based and require an adapter for Tesla owners. Do those all need to be replaced then? Is there an equivalent NACS charger like the level 2 ChargePoint ones many companies have? ??‍ truly just curious.

side note: I also never want to give Elon a single cent of my money so… ??‍

Isn't great you can operate your EV with no Tesla involvement. Good luck.

 

[mini2nut]

I think you're spot on. As for VW.....?

Yes, I think VW leadership will green light the change as well.

The big question. With changes coming in 2025 who is going to purchase a BEV with the soon to be obsolete charging port? You will need a Tesla charging adapter similar to what I use. We also own a Tesla Model Y and share the charging cord.

 

[Zorg]

Or, if Elon decides, he can basically put Rivian out of business. Seems like a problem to me.
Going to be an interesting 12 months or so as this battle rages on. Bet EA and EVGo are gonna be pretty cautious in their investments until the dust settles here.

That's not how licensing contracts if one knows how to negotiate

 

[MaskedRacerX]

PLUS an agreement with Tesla.

Of course, plus it requires backend service integration, it's not like it's just a physical connector and some "hardware" protocols, there's a whole accounting, control, management implementation on the software side.

Note that this is NOT required for a Magic Dock.

 

[virgnia_rivian]

I was still using UMATIC 3/4 inch tape back then too. ?



Eh. While I'm not a Tesla owner yet I'm delighted on this news. Now Tesla and everyone else will be building Superchargers.



I suspect they'll do an announcement on Twitter spaces again soon too.

We had a client ask about getting a copy of their spot on 3/4. I was like no. The only reason we held on our Betacam decks so long was because of Comcast. Local spots still had to go to tape! I also don’t miss the old days of sitting in a live truck editing deck to deck 60 min to air. But I digress…

 

[Zorg]

I think these closed-door agreements suggest that's not going to happen. Tesla is requiring ransoms from these companies to integrate with their network. I wondered if Ford was going to be the first domino...and now we know the answer.

Are you guessing or asserting?

 

[MDH]

After reading some of (too many posts to read all of..) discussion between this thread and the one for Ford, it is very clear that the both F and GM analyzed their respective business case and going with Tesla's NACS made more sense to both companies.

Additionally, this act by both will force EA, EVgo and alike to up their game and be competitive with Superchargers in terms of availability, reliability and ease of use or go out of business.

While some of you guys are having a real hard time accepting that this is a good thing because its Tesla/Elon originated, the jist and the short of it is a win-win for all of us EV drivers.

My bet is that EA and others will get lot better very quickly and aggregately, we'll have far more access to charge stations throughout the country.

Just hope that Rivian does too.

Well stated indeed!

 

[SANZC02]

That situation was a lot more complicated than you may realize.

Most things are?

 

[Sgt Beavis]

I really never expected GM to do this. Now that it has, CCS is dead man walking in the US. Once a 2nd major charging provider adopts it, it’ll be all over.

 

[Sully151]

Let me see if I get this right.

Ford and GM are adopting the Tesla (NACS) plug.

If a Mach E goes to a Tesla charger, they are billed through Ford, plus an additional fee from Tesla. So a Mach E using a Tesla SC will be paying more than the Model Y charging next to them?

Or, they can go to a CCS charger and simply pay EA fees.

Next, let’s say Rivian agrees to also support NACS, we will have to have an adapter to use a SC, but we can also use a CCS charger without the adapter. This would give Rivian the ability to use whatever charger is available, or less expensive.

 

[DuoRivians]

Let me see if I get this right.

Ford and GM are adopting the Tesla (NACS) plug.

If a Mach E goes to a Tesla charger, they are billed through Ford, plus an additional fee from Tesla. So a Mach E using a Tesla SC will be paying more than the Model Y charging next to them?

Or, they can go to a CCS charger and simply pay EA fees.

Next, let’s say Rivian agrees to also support NACS, we will have to have an adapter to use a SC, but we can also use a CCS charger without the adapter. This would give Rivian the ability to use whatever charger is available, or less expensive.

The use of an adapter seems like a no brainer option for Rivian.

The fact that the adapter isn’t available makes it seem like Tesla isn’t comfortable with that.

Based on what Ford and GM have announced, I think Tesla is only allowing an adapter, if oems also promise to integrate the Tesla plug at some point.

If so, the question is why does Tesla care about the plug integration?

Sponsored