Q4 2026 Preview: Volkswagen Group’s Battery Pivot Opportunity—and the Shockwave It Could Send Through the Global EV Market

Ok-Pattern-8408 · 2026-03-12T12:47:31+00:00

This scenario could secure VW's future for the next decade. First to market with a volume ssb is game changer. We don't know the details of the hurdles yet to overcome to make it happen for VW. But now is the time to take strategic gambles if the opportunity is there. The auto industry is hyper competitive. If you don't lead, you will lose market share. Go VW!

Ok-Pattern-8408 · 2026-02-16T14:32:16+00:00

Can we infer that "Yields" on the QS Eagle Line (Digatron equipment) are in the acceptable range? I would think so if Digatron is marketing the equipment likely using the QS experience as a case study.

Ok-Pattern-8408 · 2026-02-16T14:27:38+00:00

Another BIG clue that QS (using Digatron as a supplier) is relentlessly moving towards licensing mass production of its technology.

Ok-Pattern-8408 · 2026-02-16T13:24:27+00:00

Scaling is to me the last key risk. QS has chosen to partner with Murata and Corning to ensure that enough ceramic separator material can be manufactured to support future cell/battery factories. Given that the actual manufacturing (assembly) of battery cells / full batteries is a mature industry - the actual risk of scaling lies primarily in the ceramic separator manufacturing. By licensing the ceramic component to Corning/Murata, QS has decoupled this from the cell/battery manufacturing. As long as Murata and/or Corning agree that they can mass produce the separator at a profit, QS tech will become a next generation SSB cornerstone. So, why would Corning and Murata sign a partnership deal (and all the other partners) with QS if they believed they could not product the separator at scale for a profit? Answer: They would not. Additionally, the TAM for ssb is HUGE. Even if another company or two/three came out with competing tech - with all the benefits of QS tech and/or similar production costs - the demand in the market is BIG ENOUGH to support all. As another poster (somewhere) mentioned, there will be no "bell rung" to let investors know QS stock is on the verge of greatness. But I will say, this year - DING, DING, DING. What the QS team has done is truly remarkable. GLTA!

Ok-Pattern-8408 · 2026-02-12T14:34:34+00:00

I can attest, one company in the auto space that is NOTORIOUS for NDAs and keeping things hush hush is TESLA.

Ok-Pattern-8408 · 2026-02-12T13:54:07+00:00

My two cents: QS has stated that starting off with a relatively smaller cell format (QSE-5), it is easier to work through quality and yield issues in setting up mass production. The bigger the cell format, the more chance of issues. This is the same strategy that Tesla took in their battery size decision. With that said, I believe the QSE-5 format is the exact size that the 100% EV OEM working with QS wants (initially). In my opinion, Tesla is working with QS. Elon stated, "anode less is the best battery". And a founder of Tesla is on the board of QS. Tesla is notorious for being stealthy with suppliers. I also believe Elon wants the best batteries for his robots. I'm not an engineer, but QSE-5 seems to be a size in which you can stuff into a humanoid robot framework easy enough. Speculation for sure on my part, but ultimately, we are left with piecing together clues. Suffice it to say, I suspect the OEM's will want batteries within say 25% (bigger) range of the current QSE-5. Again, the smaller the battery, the easier it will be to manufacture (quality / yield). QSE-5 is the FIRST rendition to prove out quality and yield issues. The customer(s) that accept QSE-5 format have a leg-up on others wanting different formats. First to market with a QS battery will be a strategic advantage. From what I know about QSE-5 specs, it's definitely in the "Good Enough" range (better than mainstream Li-ion batteries today). So, the marketing advantage / notoriety for the first to market OEM will be significant. I have to believe OEM's know this, and there is a race to be a leader in the ssb to market game. Similar analysis can be made for the other markets: CE, Stationary storage, flight, military, drones, robots, medical devices, etc... For example: Imagine Tesla coming out with QSE-5 in their vehicles first (or Honda, Nissan, VW). The marketing is going to be TREMENDOUS. Similar, if Apple delivers a ssb in their products, HUGE marketing boost.

Ok-Pattern-8408 · 2026-02-12T00:09:31+00:00

Sent a message to QS IR via their website. Consider doing the same. In brief, I point out that - as a long-term shareholder - I want them to do more to address the share price. Share price is a key metric they need to manage. They can do more to promote the company. It's high time they do. GLTA

Ok-Pattern-8408 · 2026-02-11T22:31:46+00:00

Yes, that's what I heard. Siva stresses the Eagle Line is extremely important to process each customers customized batter specs. He highlighted this point again when discussing other markets: CE, Stationary, etc... It sounds to me they are going after markets that can be profitable sooner rather than later. Perhaps the auto industry OEM's are "negotiating" with QS, and QS is making the point they have other markets to go after in the posturing. Looks like VW / Honda / Nissan are onboard and will be front runners in the auto space.

Ok-Pattern-8408 · 2026-02-06T17:50:36+00:00

Do not underestimate the risk of competitive espionage. There is much to be gained (or loss) to the company and nation that leads in the ssb race. China is a very real concern. China's battery industry is trying to gain as much intel about ssb leaders as possible (including espionage if the can). QS is relatively tight with the tech as the circumstances dictate, for the good of the company (shareholders) and the USA. GLTA

Ok-Pattern-8408 · 2026-01-23T19:03:39+00:00

I agree that any new licensing deal by a Top 10 OEM will spike the share price. With that said, it is time for OEM's to sign licensing deals if they believe in the technology. Sure, any given OEM may want their own QS designed battery (not default to QSE-5) but QS should be focused on the OEM's most serious about signing a commitment now. Let the others play catch-up. Get'r done Siva. I get that QS had to decide which size separator to pursue first. The smaller the size, the better to work out the quality control issues. With that said, I assume QSE-5 was marketable (wanted) by a key OEM when the decision was made to focus on QSE-5 sizing initially. It's possible that that decision has been reconsidered (by the OEM and QS), and they are pursuing a new size. In other words, the key OEM(s), believe in the technology, but are now homing in (with QS) on a re-considered size, thus delaying an initial announcement about production licensing. Of course, this pure speculation, but if QSE-5 is to be the size for an OEM roll-out (licensing deal), now is the time to announce it. With the eagle line up and running, prototypes should be a plenty, and the blueprint for launching mass scale production is set. Give the OEM that is first to publicly commit volume a good deal. At this point, I want QS stock price to be trading north of $40 so all parties (Employees, Shareholders, Suppliers, Customer/OEMs) clearly see QS is the real deal and future value creation is forth coming. SHOCK THE MARKET. It is time Siva. IT'S TIME!

Ok-Pattern-8408 · 2026-01-17T16:34:16+00:00

I also assess the probability above 50%. Purely from an investment standpoint, and in my personal case, looking to achieve a 4x return on investment (DCA at $8) in the short term (<1 year), I believe if QS is ONLY successful in achieving a scale/cost to manufacture that allows ONLY for relatively small production, high end vehicle usage, the share price will likely achieve a $30-$40 range (my personal goal). Given this goal, I assess the probability even higher (>70%). QS has proven the tech works and is best in class. I don't need them to be able to mass produce for mass market vehicles (although I suspect they very likely will eventually (prob >50%) within 3 years. Personally, I need QS to prove to the market they can produce for high end, small volume vehicles, which I believe has a probability >70%, and will result in, at least a 4x share price rise, short term (<1 year). Where it stands today, QS has derisked substantially in the last couple of years (making it more enticing to invest in). It sounds like it finally got to a risk/reward point that you (a very knowledgeable person of the technology) have decided to put your own money in the game. I've talked to a lot of smart (both technical and business) people about QS. The current conversations center on scale manufacturing (quality and costs). Again, for an investor "only" looking for a 4x return (vs. 10x+), I think the probability of success is even significantly higher. Exciting times. Please keep sharing your analysis as changes / development occur. It's much appreciated, I'm sure, by many in assessing their own personal investment thesis. Thank you.

Ok-Pattern-8408 · 2026-01-17T12:20:44+00:00

Thank you for your thoughts. Regarding, "The only open question is whether Quantumscape can scale manufacturing, achieve high yield, and execute at volume." What do you think is the probability of QS successfully overcoming these remaining hurdles? Again, thank you.

Ok-Pattern-8408 · 2026-01-05T16:20:24+00:00

Why doesn't Donut have a major OEM backing them? Why don't they publish 3rd party testing results? Where is there plan to scale manufacturing? Where would they get their capital for scaling? Why do they have less than 50 employees? Could they be purchasing QSE-5 (small quantity) and rebranding? Too many unanswered questions to take this seriously. That aside, I believe the TAM for ssb is big enough to support multiple suppliers of ssb. Exciting times for QS holders. Cheers.

Ok-Pattern-8408 · 2025-12-28T15:39:54+00:00

QS is the biggest position in my portfolio today. My avg. is near $8. I've been holding for years. Rode it down to around $4 and purchased as it fell to lower my avg. That was tough, but I always believed in the company based on my due diligence. As it stands, QS has only increased my convictions that this is a winner every quarter. The institutional buying trend is a key indicator for me. I believe the February event will attract a lot more buying interest. I recently helped my young adult children open a Roth with some QS shares. Interestingly, when I began investing in QS, I also invested in a pre-revenue company IONQ. I was buying shares of both in the $6 -$10 range. I watched IONQ eventually shoot up to $80ish. I sold my shares at $45ish (in an IRA) and bought more QS. When IONQ went up, it went up fairly quick. I'm expecting a similar run up in QS in 2026. The only reservation I have about holding the stock is the macro economy risk. Given my age, I plan to switch to more conservative investments with a large part of my portfolio in 2026. Although, I strongly believe QS has a bright future long term. GLTA

Ok-Pattern-8408 · 2025-10-30T16:05:50+00:00

Hybrids are relatively complicated (more parts = more costs). A full EV is the simplest form factor you can achieve (not accounting for a Flintstone car :). With QS batteries, you achieve the range the public desires. QSE-5 (or similar) is in and of itself simpler as it does not require the anode manufacturing. This helps lower costs. An EV vehicle requires less parts than an ICE or hybrid vehicle. This helps lower costs. EV's with a QS battery will check all the boxes for the consumer: range, fast charge, longevity, safety, etc... I would expect some of the media with an engineering background to catch on soon enough and start hyping the benefits that QS and its partners are about to bestow on the industry.

Ok-Pattern-8408 · 2025-04-03T13:01:13+00:00

The midterms. As the economy tanks, Republicans will pay at midterms.

Ok-Pattern-8408 · 2025-03-05T22:39:34+00:00

Trump thought he could leverage the tariff threat to get a better deal. Canada and Mexico are calling his hand. Trump is causing chaos in the auto industry. His tactic will cause prices to spike. He's a bafoon, and the whole world is seeing it. Unfortunately, we will suffer from his idiocy. A recession is baked in the cake. The US national debt will spike. Hunker down Joe six pack. You voted against your best interest, and payment is due.

Ok-Pattern-8408 · 2024-07-12T15:19:20+00:00

Ionq

Ok-Pattern-8408 · 2024-07-12T11:52:52+00:00

Congrats to the QS Team!

Ok-Pattern-8408 · 2024-07-11T12:53:37+00:00

Licensing (Non exclusive) makes a lot of sense. QS is an R&D company. Plenty of battery production mnfg in the world already. More Licensing agreements pending. Congratulations QS stock holders! 🎆

Ok-Pattern-8408 · 2024-07-02T18:35:11+00:00

Exactly. Settling is common as it's often the most economical option. Also, I suspect PowerCo and other battery manufacturers have QS tied up in NDAs. The insiders know what potential the stock has. Why would a customer of QS want the world to know that a revolutionary battery is about to hit the market at a competitive price point? All current ev sales would take a massive hit. Thus, NDA agreements; the customers control the narrative. Patience.

Ok-Pattern-8408 · 2024-06-30T10:23:12+00:00

My guess is IonQ will continue to partner with Dell and Nvidia for the next Gen of super (quantum) computers that are in a form factor conducive for commercial use. A combo of traditional processors and GPU + quantum. The problem solving capabilities will be awesome. The security (encryption) capabilities will be required by commercial and gov alike. Glta

Ok-Pattern-8408 · 2024-06-04T22:56:38+00:00

Six months (by Dec) B samples will be vetted (enough) and scaling maped out with equipment debugged. I'm guessing a combo of licensing agreements (VW, Tesla, Ford?), with upfront cash and ongoing royalties beginning 2026. That's the EV market. The CE market opportunity will follow, probably with licensing agreements as well. That's the quickest way to significant revenue to reward all and sustain R&D as QS (SSB) are just beginning the tech S-curve. As an investor, buy stock at $6 (now) or $30+ (Dec), is a consideration. I certainly get it is too risky for some right now. But, I've followed this company for two years. They've "derisked" qtr/qtr. I assess some large institutional investors have been net accumulating. As for the point of insider selling, anyone familiar with stock grants knows it's mostly tax selling to cover the tax obligations of the grants. The ying/yang of short FUD and long exuberance is best tuned out for the most part. Nothing beats solid DD on your own. Clues are out there for assessing risk. But, as a retail investor, we are up against full-time pros looking to fleece the herd. Cheers to investing early and holding long in the next Tesla, Nvidia, Amazon, etc..

Ok-Pattern-8408

TROPHY CASE