Announcing our new "CLUBS" section where you can join or create a Rivian club or group! You can use this new feature to conveniently plan and discuss local events, gatherings or other club/group related topics.
So we encourage you to join (or start) special-interest and regional-based Rivian clubs at: https://www.rivianforums.com/forum/group-categories/clubs-groups.1/
No, but you would see noticeable behavior from Rivian to indicate there were issues. For example, they'd be actively trying to sell EDVs to anyone and everyone they could instead of running very deliberate pilot programs that they are very secretive about. They are not acting like a company in dire need of moving units right now, so it is reasonable to assume that they are not.
You sure about that? Sure seems like that to me especially with their R1 vehicles. They’re practically giving them away for free these days with super low lease deals and incentives.
To be fair, nearly every manufacturer does this with prior 'model year' vehicles.
No “FUD” just contrarian thinking on this message board. I understand we all love the company and the vehicles but don’t look past what’s right in front of you. Everyone will defend Rivian to the end on here but I open the floor for healthy debate.You have no information but you want to sound the alarm, some might call that FUD
You have to remember that the deal with Amazon is cost+ and the price to produce these is going down, by the end of the decade I wouldn't be surprised if it is half of what it is today. As a result Amazon has no incentive to take on more vans faster than they need/want them.
You have consistently moved the goalposts. This discussion was specific to the EDV, reference Amazon being a bad partner and not acting in good faith. You stated they were not, and said they were reducing orders. When confronted with a lack of evidence to support this claim, you shifted to their failure to increase orders, instead of an actual decrease in orders, to support your position. When confronted with reasonable analysis as to why they would do that, you have now shifted to the R1 to confirm your unfounded reasoning.
If Apple does take over Apple (so to speak) and if they lock out Andriod/google, I guarantee there will be a class action lawsuit. I don't think RJ would want that. I think both OS's can live in the entertainment system.
(scratches head) Which laws would an OEM be breaking if they chose to allow only one specific phone to access convenience functions?
I remember that. They got sued by the government because they weren't allowing OEMS to uninstall Internet Explorer.Antitrust laws.
Ask Microsoft...
The vehicle would still be fully functional with allowing only one brand of phone or using no phone at all as it has a vehicle-specific touch-screen interface and is a vehicle, not a laptop or desktop, and the pairing of a specific brand of phone to get enhanced functionality in no way prevents safe execution of the main purpose of the vehicle - transportation. Preventing alternative browsers on consumer computers is entirely different as much of the purpose of those systems is generally communication with the internet.Antitrust laws.
Ask Microsoft...
Do individual consumers (or a class of individual consumers) have a cause of action under anti-trust law? Microsoft was definitely sued by the US DOJ. Other prominent anti-trust suits have been brought by DOJ or state AGs.Antitrust laws.
Ask Microsoft...
