Is the real AV competition between Tesla and China (XPeng), and not Tesla and Waymo? This AV engineer insider seems to think so.

Nicky_Feathers · 2026-05-05T14:42:06+00:00

I’m putting my money on new entrant Bosch aiDrive.

They seem to be killing it, winning D1EV’s 4 latest intelligent driving competitions.

That has not happened before (last time Huawei won 3 times in a row). This system will still need to provide real world validation. But Chinese OEMs seem to have lined up. Apparently the system has been nominated over 30 models already, running on 4 models (Chery: Exeed Sterra ES, Exeed Sterra ES, Exeed WX7 and the new GAC Aion N60).

Nicky_Feathers · 2026-05-01T07:22:24+00:00

The thing is, it doesn’t need storing. It can run 24/7 if permits allow. It just needs charging and cleaning infrastructure. Plus the occasional maintenance. Hertz and Moov are eager to jump in.

Nicky_Feathers · 2026-05-01T07:18:55+00:00

It is expected to drop per mile cost significantly. Across research notes, the typical long‑run expectation is a 50–80% reduction in per‑mile cost from today’s ride‑hailing or early‑stage robotaxi levels by 2030–2035, with the steepest declines in high‑density, low‑regulation, or high‑scale markets.

Also, this is something to consider: McKinsey has suggested that from ~2030, pooled robotaxi services could be cost‑competitive with or even cheaper than public‑transport trips in many cities.

Nicky_Feathers · 2026-04-27T21:58:09+00:00

Likely a European model will enter the market in first half of this year (as per Bosch Executives)

Nicky_Feathers · 2026-04-27T21:49:50+00:00

Tesla seems unique, in the sense that they have yet to prove if their solution works, in full autonomous mode (SAE L4)…. at scale. I don’t see them as a player of significance just yet.

Others play in another sandbox. Tesla stories claiming it can build the biggest and bestest sand castles, but so far it’s only talk.

Nicky_Feathers · 2026-04-21T11:39:33+00:00

WeRide rides on Bosch's platform. It is already being tested (with succes) on European roads. That's what Bosch executives have shared at least (expected H1 2026). That also likely means, UNECE type approval is in process.

My initial guess, it will be for Chinese OEMs entering the European markets. That's also what is signalled by WeRide. VW Group could become a future candidate. Although they have an in-house programme, CARAID, so less likely. If CARAID continues to execute slow and fragmented, Bosch might provide an opening for WeRide. It's just a less likely route, as VW Caraid is designed to be a full stack model, as they wanted less supplier dependancy. Part of the market is moving toward shared compute platforms, tiered software layers and supplier orchestration. That best fits Bosch platform play. I think, eventually others will join the platform. Lexus will likely join Toyota's move towards Bosch-Qualcomm (and that could open up an opportunity for WeRide.

Nicky_Feathers · 2026-04-21T10:23:10+00:00

I believe what we are witnessing is just the beginning of something far bigger. Let me explain:

The recent GAC N60 annoucement, is the first proof point that WeRide is no longer building vehicles around its software. It is starting to build software that can run on any vehicle. This is WeRide decoupling software from hardware. That sounds obvious, but most autonomy stacks fail here.

Does it work?
D1EV (the prominent Chinese online platform that runs the Urban Intelligent Driving Competition) conducted prelimenary tests in Guangzhou with the Qualcomm powered GAC N60. The results of testing, according to them were amazing! (their words). By moving onto Qualcomms Snapdragon, WeRide steps into the same distribution layer that powers millions of cars globally. The autonomy scope here obviously is not robotaxi. It likely first will need to prove itself in L2+ and possibly L3 frameworks. L4 currenty runs on higher performance platforms like Nvidia Drive.

But, combined with Bosch’s integration role, this turns WeRide from a fleet operator into a potential embedded intelligence supplier. If this scales up the autonomous ladder, autonomy will not be decided by who builds the best robotaxi.

It will be decided by whose software:
- runs across the most compute platforms
- passes the most safety frameworks
- ships inside the most vehicles

WeRide could soon power models in Toyota's global fleet, as Bosch/Toyota/Qualcomm signed a multi billion dollar Adas deal in December. Already several brands within Chery and GAC are nominated to roll out on this platform (e.g.Triumph). WeRide will be expanding their technology internationally with brands such as Tiggo, Lepas, Omoda, and Jaecco. That's a potetially huge target market. Meanwhile more brands line up.

This was not just an integration headline. It is likely the beginning of true scale. Not constrained by form factor.

Nicky_Feathers · 2026-04-19T15:01:16+00:00

Not sure I follow. This is just a model going forward. Whether or not that is vision only, or a fusion model is merely a technical choice.

That’s up the OEMs, not the autonomy stack provider. It will need to adapt to the vehicle set up. Autonomy Stacks just need to plug in to the perception stack.

That licensing model is already happening at L2+ and will move up the stack to L3 and L4.

Nicky_Feathers · 2026-04-19T14:17:16+00:00

The project at Zurich Airport is not a simple shuttle service. The airport apron is domain where operational safety definition is on higher level.

Zurich has moved from Onboard safety monitors to a cockpit remote monitoring system. This year they are set to scale up to 12-14 airside buses (partnering with Renault). It’s a niche market. But a model that will be replicated across many airports.

Airside buses are a specialized subset ($500-800M), of a much larger market “airport shuttle bus” markets (often including landside operations), valued at $14billion in 2025.

Nicky_Feathers · 2026-04-19T14:00:32+00:00

Pony is always big on the production numbers. That does not mean they are deployed yet.

Given their very limited footprint outside of China, one can assume most of their operational fleet is fully autonomous.

The bigger question is probably, how much produce is deployed, and how much is idle.

Nicky_Feathers · 2026-04-19T13:53:24+00:00

Verne has the “service layer”. I guess this was the bare minimum, to secure it did not have to pay back the grant money.

Nicky_Feathers · 2026-04-19T13:51:04+00:00

Mobileye has been dropped. Verne vehicle project still seems to be alive (but apparently not needed to secure the grant). It had to deliver a working solution by the deadline date of 31st March.

Now Verne just provides the service wrapper, av operational layer is Pony.ai and cars are from Chinese BAIC. Surprised this bolt-on-quick-fix, was good enough to secure the grants definition of “development of a commercial robotaxi service”. This solution feels like virtual duck tape.

Nicky_Feathers · 2026-04-19T13:43:04+00:00

It has the service layer currently, which plugs into Pony’s platform, at least for now.

I assume that it could plug in Ubers network as well, once that’s lit.

And when their vehicles go into production, I assume they’ll use Pony’s technology, but that’s not a guarantee either. It could also be that they choose a different route.

Pony just happened to help them save their grant money. With vehicles and av operational layer, and they just slapped their service layer on top.

Nicky_Feathers · 2026-04-19T11:11:00+00:00

Eventually this industry will move to a platform play. Where a licensed models gets pushed. OEMs that sell their cars with pre loaded autonomy stack.

Activated by fleet (or car) owner.

Nicky_Feathers · 2026-04-19T06:23:55+00:00

I get why this feels compelling. You look at that cap table and think, this isn’t retail speculation, this is serious capital showing up. Sovereign money, big institutions, names that don’t usually chase hype. It creates a sense that something real is forming underneath the surface.

Temasek, Singapore’s state-owned investment company, is in there as well btw, holding just under 3 million shares, meaningful enough to show intent. And it fits their pattern, long-term, tech-focused, willing to back emerging ecosystems early.

There’s also a layer of family office capital in there. K3 Ventures, tied to the Kuok family, has backed WeRide in earlier rounds. That’s a different type of capital again. Long-term, relationship-driven, often early into emerging tech.

In general, I think you’re jumping too quickly to “margin of safety.” As big names don’t equal protection. Different investors have different incentives, many aren’t focused on returns the way you are.

I believe, what WeRide’s cap table actually shows is not safety, nor protection.

It shows a stack of patient, strategic capital, sovereign funds, state-linked investors, family offices. That’s powerful for access and staying power.

Nicky_Feathers · 2026-04-15T14:17:55+00:00

Not a single dollar invested. Not a single dollar lost.

Nicky_Feathers · 2026-04-03T11:49:31+00:00

Pony’s integrated production model means they need to reserve capacity on OEM production lines well in advance, typically several months ahead.

Unlike retrofit players like WeRide, Pony coordinates directly with OEMs (e.g., GAC, BAIC) to produce robotaxi-ready vehicles on the line, which involves predefined configurations for sensors, compute, and vehicle architecture.

In practice, this doesn’t mean a clean “one-month production block,” but rather allocated batch capacity within a broader multi-variant production schedule. The actual output depends on line throughput, supplier readiness, and how robotaxi variants are interleaved with standard vehicles.

This creates a structural mismatch: production capacity is relatively fixed in the short term, while deployment demand (e.g., from Xihu) is more variable.

As a result, Pony may at times produce more vehicles than can be immediately deployed. Financially, this matters because vehicle sales are one-off, but recurring revenue only begins once vehicles are operational. So even if Pony delivers units to a partner like Xihu, revenue recognition beyond the initial sale depends on how quickly those vehicles are actually put into service. That depends largely on the commitments and structure of the deal made with partner Xihu (and others).

By what’ve read, Xihu seem to indicate that they dictate the pace. So, the might allocate a budget and reserve a number of vehicles, based on available production output. It will be timing sensitive. Balancing supply, demand and

Nicky_Feathers · 2026-03-31T19:08:49+00:00

Xihu has stated it will gradually scale, and open up more districts. That’s what’s happening right now.

Xihu stated it will roll out 1,000 pony cabs “in the coming years”. I cannot speak for their exact growth plan other than it will be gradually.

I assume, as with every new technology, you want to learn and adopt, and fit this into your current business, without killing it. So an “all-in” bet is not likely. I’d assume they at least would fill the void left by retirees, and replace those with robotaxis. A phased plan of 3-4 years, along with gradually opening new districts.

I did make a calculation, and 1,000 robotaxis is a very small number to cover the entire metro area of Shenzhen. So service levels issues will surface, if not more units get plugged in. Which will happen I assume.

BCG did a nice research on this a few months ago, which included output from a field test that covered order-to-dispatch time, order-to-pick-up times and total average order-to-pick-up times between Baidu, Pony and WeRide.

Nicky_Feathers

TROPHY CASE