RAN chargers will offer Tesla NACS charging plugs and will turn cash flow positive “fairly quickly”

[DuoRivians]

Sponsored

 

[cdub]

This is wonderful news and something I was hoping they'd do after yesterday's announcement.

 

[amadeoplaza]

I totally get why the press is still referring to it as the Tesla plug, since it was pioneered by them and is widely known as theirs. But whenever they do that, instead of trying to adopt the NACS nomenclature, it makes it sound as though everyone else is conceding to Tesla. It's just optics, but it makes it seem like everyone else is on the back foot.

Update: Oh, and this is great news. Hahaha.

 

[emoore]

Hope they pick up the pace on RAN. The more chargers the better.

 

[lefkonj]

So does that mean dual cables? 1 CCS and 1 NACS? I really wish these companies, not just Rivian, would be more clear but it is crazy times.

 

[1T2022]

because they didn't say it out loud, it implied NACS only

 

[Autolycus]

I totally get why the press is still referring to it as the Tesla plug, since it was pioneered by them and is widely known as theirs. But whenever they do that, instead of trying to adopt the NACS nomenclature, it makes it sound as though everyone else is conceding to Tesla. It's just optics, but it makes it seem like everyone else is on the back foot.

Update: Oh, and this is great news. Hahaha.

Until an independent standards organization adopts the port format and all of the other relevant specifications that are required for both AC and DC charging, everyone else is conceding to Tesla. There are likely agreements in place about certain things, but those aren't public, and agreements can be broken. Just ask all of the property owners who are having a hard time getting Twitter to pay the rent it owes.

 

[echerod]

https://www.reuters.com/business/au...an-adopt-teslas-charging-standard-2023-06-20/

Link to original article

 

[xyskis]

Cashflow positive soon. Does that mean our free charging is going to come to an end? :-(

 

[kylealden]

I totally get why the press is still referring to it as the Tesla plug, since it was pioneered by them and is widely known as theirs. But whenever they do that, instead of trying to adopt the NACS nomenclature, it makes it sound as though everyone else is conceding to Tesla. It's just optics, but it makes it seem like everyone else is on the back foot.

That's because everyone else is conceding to Tesla, and is on the back foot. And it's not just optics

NACS is not a "standard", by which I mean it's not controlled or specified by any standards body. It belongs to Tesla, even if they publish the specs and (allegedly) don't require patent licensing (although it's extremely telling that all current NACS adoptees have closed-door agreements with Tesla.)

Until that changes, it's arguably irresponsible for press/analysts to refer to it as a "standard"; it's a potential liability.

 

[jjswan33]

Cashflow positive soon. Does that mean our free charging is going to come to an end? :-(

I mean it was supposed to come to an end months ago. Even worse RJ plans to open them to non-Rivian's. Both are clearly needed to make them profitable.

This just goes to show that Rivian knows what they are doing. Sticking with diversifying their business with charging and software is smart because they can be more than just a car company. All these silly comments that they should mothball their RAN network were just wrong, they already have been ramping their in house charging kit so time to capitalize on that investment.

 

[xyskis]

I mean it was supposed to come to an end months ago. Even worse RJ plans to open them to non-Rivian's. Both are clearly needed to make them profitable.

This just goes to show that Rivian knows what they are doing. Sticking with diversifying their business with charging and software is smart because they can be more than just a car company. All these silly comments that they should mothball their RAN network were just wrong, they already have been ramping their in house charging kit so time to capitalize on that investment.

Totally agree. I just got my R1S, though. Would love some free charging from uncle RJ!

 

[jjswan33]

Totally agree. I just got my R1S, though. Would love some free charging from uncle RJ!

Time for a central (or coastal) OR road trip then Personally I have been putting those chargers in Madras and Crescent to work exploring the high desert.

 

[xyskis]

Time for a central (or coastal) OR road trip then Personally I have been putting those chargers in Madras and Crescent to work exploring the high desert.

I’ve been exploring the Nordstrom and Whole Foods parking lots ??. Looking forward to taking our R1S on an adventure s00n.

 

[Donald Stanfield]

That's because everyone else is conceding to Tesla, and is on the back foot. And it's not just optics

NACS is not a "standard", by which I mean it's not controlled or specified by any standards body. It belongs to Tesla, even if they publish the specs and (allegedly) don't require patent licensing (although it's extremely telling that all current NACS adoptees have closed-door agreements with Tesla.)

Until that changes, it's arguably irresponsible for press/analysts to refer to it as a "standard"; it's a potential liability.

The part in red is what I want to address. The plug standard and the closed door agreements are two separate things. Right now if I wanted to start an EV company named Fuck Elon Musk using the NACS plug I could. I could charge at any station using that plug that was open. If an EA station put in a charger with NACS plug I could use it without any agreement or even while openly giving Elon a hard time.

The agreement would come into play if I wanted access to the supercharger network which Tesla never said was open to all. Now if I named my company Fuck Elon Musk chances are he's not going to grant me a deal to use his network but that doesn't mean he can stop me from using the plug. I'm sure someone is going to chime in on this comment saying that the "in good faith" stipulation of the opening NACS could mean that Elon could say I wasn't using it in good faith and could sue and stop me but that isn't true.

That In good faith language is a legally understood and defined concept and it basically means I am free to use it so long as I don't make any money off the direct use of it. Like I don't try to patent the charging port or somehow sell the fact that I offer that port as an option. If I am not directly monetizing it I am using it in good faith because it is open to all. That is totally and completely a separate thing from accessing the supercharger network.

The reason all the manufacturers who have switched ALSO have the closed door agreement with Tesla is because at this time the ONLY point in switching is to gain access to the supercharger network. Going forward if enough people switch all chargers even non Tesla ones will offer NACS and therefore standardizing will happen regardless. It's even a good thing for everyone else to adopt regardless if they get access to the supercharger network because putting the ports in the same place on every vehicle would allow all charger manufacturers to put in shorter cords like the superchargers which save money and require less maintenance and won't get damaged as much.

Sponsored