FSD future pricing and Mobileye

[DanCar]

I noticed that Mobileye currently claims that their FSD package in 2025 will cost $5K to OEMs. OEMs will likely charge us >$10K

Mobileye EyeQ Ultra Aims for Level 4 | TechInsights

The ADAS-processor leader is developing a single-chip solution for self-driving cars, along with its own lidar and radars. By 2025, Mobileye hopes its system will reduce the car buyer’s add-on cost to just $10,000.

www.techinsights.com

Inside Mobileye's EyeQ Ultra Chip for Future Self-Driving Cars

Mobileye CEO Amnon Shashua said that, while it looks less potent than chips from rivals Qualcomm and NVIDIA, the EyeQ Ultra chip has more than enough computing power to control...

www.electronicdesign.com

I suppose this doesn't put much downward pressure on Tesla for FSD pricing unless FSD doesn't work and Mobileye does.

 

[diplomat33]

When Mobileye says cost is <$5K, does that mean how much they charge OEMs and OEMs are going to charge us $20K?

I am pretty sure the $5K is what it costs Mobileye to make the hardware and software. Presumably, Mobileye will charge the OEMs a bit more to get their profit. And then the OEMs will add their mark-up to get their profit. It will depend on the OEMs what they decide to charge the consumer. Each OEM will likely charge something different.

Also, the $5k Mobileye says it will cost, is for their L4 or "eye's off" package (ie human does not need to supervise). So we are talking L4/eye's off, not the L2 "FSD" that Tesla is selling now. I think it is hard to say what L4/eye's off would be worth to consumers. Would consumers pay $20k for L4/eyes' off? I don't know.

I do think that Tesla will probably need to drop their FSD price at some point, especially if FSD remains as a L2 system. If it costs Mobileye $5k for L4, OEMs could easily sell the L4 to consumers for less than the $15k that Tesla's FSD costs and still make a healthy profit per unit. So OEMs could easily undercut Tesla. And as I have stated before, I doubt consumers will pay $15k for L2 if they can get genuine L4 for less.

 

[eli_]

If the OEM is going to take liability for accidents (L4+), then I would definitely pay $15k for it, I would pay more than that.

 

[TresLA]

It's the Wild West at this point. Who knows how much customers are willing to pay and how much OEMs are willing to take on. We don't know what we don't know (predicting the future is hard). Most people weren't "willing to pay the extra premium/cost" for a smartphone back in 2005, but look at us now.

Liability and insurance is the big question mark, and we won't know until the dust settles after the first few accidents involving "FSD" systems that officially remove some or all liability from the driver (L3 and above). For awhile now, talks between AV companies/OEMs and insurance have been trying to figure out how this future business model will work.

Right now, we already pay maybe $2k-$10k every 5 years in insurance premiums. If that cost were removed (taken on by OEMs/AV companies, plus the cost of deductibles, etc. after accidents), people might be more willing to pay $20k for a car that you keep for 10 years or sell with the AV system value included in the selling price. This is just talking about "breaking even" over 10 years ownership. There's also the value add of being driven by your car and recuperating that driving/commute time (or so-called "making money with your robotaxi").

 

[JB47394]

that officially remove some or all liability from the driver (L3 and above).

There's no reason that an L5 vehicle cannot leave liability with the owner. The owner would still insure the car with an insurance company, with the actuarial work done a bit differently. If I buy a Tesla and insure with Tesla, they can decide that their L5 automation is so good that they can drop insurance prices to a low level, making it appealing to buyers and also allowing Tesla to make money on the insurance. A legacy insurer may not know how to (or want to) do the actuarial work on an L5 system. Or they may be just fine with it and compete.

 

[TresLA]

There's no reason that an L5 vehicle cannot leave liability with the owner. The owner would still insure the car with an insurance company, with the actuarial work done a bit differently. If I buy a Tesla and insure with Tesla, they can decide that their L5 automation is so good that they can drop insurance prices to a low level, making it appealing to buyers and also allowing Tesla to make money on the insurance. A legacy insurer may not know how to (or want to) do the actuarial work on an L5 system. Or they may be just fine with it and compete.

The courts would decide this. For example, if it's sold as an L5 vehicle/system, then maybe it doesn't even come with a steering wheel. If no steering wheel, I can see owners going to court saying, "I can't be held responsible since I have no way of preventing the accident. Liability lies completely with the AV system/OEM!" We could view this similarly as riding a bus or other public transport system. There are even "AV" busses, monorails, etc. right now. If they're involved in an accident while you're riding, you are not held liable.

 

[eli_]

There's no reason that an L5 vehicle cannot leave liability with the owner. The owner would still insure the car with an insurance company, with the actuarial work done a bit differently. If I buy a Tesla and insure with Tesla, they can decide that their L5 automation is so good that they can drop insurance prices to a low level, making it appealing to buyers and also allowing Tesla to make money on the insurance. A legacy insurer may not know how to (or want to) do the actuarial work on an L5 system. Or they may be just fine with it and compete.

I think the current theory is that the OEM will have to take liability, even in L3 cases. Mercedes supposedly is going to accept legal liability for their L3 highway offering, and with L4/L5 it should be no question.

Arguably the only meaningful difference between levels is who takes liability because you could have an advanced system that drives all roads perfectly but it's kept at L2 only because it requires the driver to be engaged and therefore take liability for accidents. It becomes less about the technology and more about the legal side.

 

[JHCCAZ]

If the OEM is going to take liability for accidents (L4+), then I would definitely pay $15k for it, I would pay more than that.

I think that if you want it, the price will be $[TBD]k plus an ongoing subscription fee that rolls in the insurance premium.

You will not get what is essentially insurance liability protection for the life of the car just by paying $15K or whatever price. Note also that the entire industry wants to move to subscription pricing for any options that involve ongoing services. Anything that involves online streaming, online connection, online updating or online event support will be candidates for subscription pricing. Additionally, anything that can be unlocked in software even if ongoing support isn't important, will be a candidate for subscription pricing.

This is a clear industry trend but it's still early days, so it remains to be seen if the business model will stick in the face of customer reaction and Market competition.

 

[Bladerskb]

I noticed that Mobileye currently claims that their FSD package in 2025 will cost $5K to OEMs. OEMs will likely charge us >$10K

Mobileye EyeQ Ultra Aims for Level 4 | TechInsights

The ADAS-processor leader is developing a single-chip solution for self-driving cars, along with its own lidar and radars. By 2025, Mobileye hopes its system will reduce the car buyer’s add-on cost to just $10,000.

www.techinsights.com

Inside Mobileye's EyeQ Ultra Chip for Future Self-Driving Cars

Mobileye CEO Amnon Shashua said that, while it looks less potent than chips from rivals Qualcomm and NVIDIA, the EyeQ Ultra chip has more than enough computing power to control...

www.electronicdesign.com

I suppose this doesn't put much downward pressure on Tesla for FSD pricing unless FSD doesn't work and Mobileye does.

Actually the equivalent of what Tesla currently offers in FSD Beta is Mobileye's Supervision. They are both L2 Door to Door ADAS.

The supervision hardware is also standard in the cars that support it. The OTA software package for example cost $5k on the 2021 Zeekr 001, this is compared to Tesla's $15k FSD Beta price tag.

The bill of materials (BOM) for SuperVision according to Amnon Shashua is under $1,000.

So yeah, definitely a stark difference in price.

 

[JHCCAZ]

The forum is full of statements that Tesla will never bring L4+ because they will never accept liability. I find this very odd, and probably just a result of not thinking things through.

Liability (and collision and underinsured/uninsured protection etc.) for L4 has a statistically-determined cost that is perfectly amenable to actuarial determination of the risk, the profitable price and the market business model - actually even more so than insured vehicles and drivers, because of the increased level of monitoring telemetry and the ability to play back evidence of what happened in an accident.

They will know quite well that the AV is a safe though not absolutely perfect driver. Also, it will become very difficult for the other party to claim the fault is on the AV and distort or misremember what actually happened. Watch Wham Bam Tesla Cam on YouTube for a preview as well as for entertainment. Note also that additional data of steering, braaking, accelerometers and motor activity, possibly microphone audio, will be available in the aftermath of an accident.

Further to this point, Tesla is actually more likely, not less likely, then other OEMs to "accept" liability because they are already offering an insurance product that is tightly coupled to the car's software. They didn't get into that business just to cover manual driving of their cars which they don't expect to last for many years longer, nor to insure FSD "supervisor drivers" in the interim prior to robotaxi availability.

Now, if you want to assert that Tesla will not rush to be first to take liability for some intermediate feature like Mercedes "L3 Traffic Jam Highway We're Leading the World", that that I might agree with.

Regarding the thread topic of Mobileye, I think more or less the same arguments would apply technically. However I don't know that Mobileye has ever made moves to get into the insurance business as Tesla is doing. What they might do is to provide monitoring and forensic software hooks and try to extract some ongoing revenue by supporting the kinds of things I mentioned. I'm sure they are also thinking about selling up front to OEMs, versus a subscription model that could provide stable revenue and lower the pricing barrier to entry for both the OEM and the vehicle owner - and this could include software features designed specifically for insurance support.

 

[gaswalla]

Isn’t the statement by Mobileye in regards to the cost to the auto manufacturer? Mainly the cameras and computer and any other hardware would cost $5000. From a Tesla perspective, it appears that their cost for acquiring and installing a relatively similar level of technology is significantly less.

 

[richguy]

I noticed that Mobileye currently claims that their FSD package in 2025 will cost $5K to OEMs. OEMs will likely charge us >$10K

Mobileye EyeQ Ultra Aims for Level 4 | TechInsights

The ADAS-processor leader is developing a single-chip solution for self-driving cars, along with its own lidar and radars. By 2025, Mobileye hopes its system will reduce the car buyer’s add-on cost to just $10,000.

www.techinsights.com

Inside Mobileye's EyeQ Ultra Chip for Future Self-Driving Cars

Mobileye CEO Amnon Shashua said that, while it looks less potent than chips from rivals Qualcomm and NVIDIA, the EyeQ Ultra chip has more than enough computing power to control...

www.electronicdesign.com

I suppose this doesn't put much downward pressure on Tesla for FSD pricing unless FSD doesn't work and Mobileye does.

If the point of FSD is safety; then when FSD is completed Tesla insurance should be full replacement for incidents requiring greater than $XXXX for both injuries and repairs. The insurance should last for the "life time of the vehicle"...whatever that is? Maybe the insurance cost might go up, but replacement and
injury / death cost should last.
Once the life time of the vehicle is exceeded, an owner should be able to buy a different plan that requires pictures and inspection of the vehicle as well as inspection of the drivers accidents/incidents. Maybe the location of where the vehicle is used normally (long trips?), how many drivers, how many passengers
should all be involved in the cost evaluation? i.e. if I lived in Spokane, WA (known for people running red lights), normally carried two kids and wife besides myself, drove 40 miles per day, two drivers, lots of potholes in the streets, medium signage along the roads, lots of intersections in residential areas with no stop signs, traffic patterns are not too confusing, navigation maps get updated every two weeks, road closures posted every two days online, traffic cameras
are mounted on high traffic intersections, only one "on ramp" to a major road that is dangerous. All these things could be evaluated for the cost of insurance.

 

[diplomat33]

From recent Mobileye conference with Morgan-Stanley and Goldman, SuperVision costs roughly $1,500 to $2,000 to the OEM.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1706296794143969616

 

[Silicon Desert]

I noticed that Mobileye currently claims that their FSD package in 2025 will cost $5K to OEMs. OEMs will likely charge us >$10K

Mobileye EyeQ Ultra Aims for Level 4 | TechInsights

The ADAS-processor leader is developing a single-chip solution for self-driving cars, along with its own lidar and radars. By 2025, Mobileye hopes its system will reduce the car buyer’s add-on cost to just $10,000.

www.techinsights.com

Inside Mobileye's EyeQ Ultra Chip for Future Self-Driving Cars

Mobileye CEO Amnon Shashua said that, while it looks less potent than chips from rivals Qualcomm and NVIDIA, the EyeQ Ultra chip has more than enough computing power to control...

www.electronicdesign.com

I suppose this doesn't put much downward pressure on Tesla for FSD pricing unless FSD doesn't work and Mobileye does.

yes that could be, yet I am so old that I remember the day when seatbelts were optional cost. Power steering was optional cost. Power brakes were optional cost. automatic transmission, GPS, etc etc. Eventually, there might be a day when FSD is so common that they throw it in for free in order to be competitive. Of course, I might be dead first.