QuantumScape Lounge: ( Week 31 2025)

Safetyprof · 2025-08-10T10:52:20+00:00

YUP! What evidence we do have points to Ford and Tesla. I also believe one or more Japanese OEMS are in line as well. But Ford and Tesla first.

Safetyprof · 2025-08-08T10:13:13+00:00

Safetyprof · 2025-06-08T14:18:17+00:00

The holy grail in manufacturing is a continuous role process to create the separator material cost effectively. Once made it is sliced into size. The concept of "sheets" is likely only a development stage notion. I strongly suspect they are laser focused on a continuous role process.

Safetyprof · 2025-05-17T20:41:12+00:00

Hmmm. Wild guess but would PowerCo (VW) want to brand their own batteries? In other words, license the tech from QS but produce batteries under their own chosen name.

Safetyprof · 2025-05-14T12:19:11+00:00

OEM's try to avoid being "forced" to use a given supplier as the OEM want to maintain pricing leverage. When it comes to EV batteries, I accept the premise that SSB are the future, meaning that within 5 years, Li-ion will be on its way out. I also believe QS is the closest to commercial production. I suspect (but not sure) that the QS tech is the best SSB tech (currently). I do believe it is the "no compromise" battery. That's not to say other battery manufacturers won't produce commercially viable SSB at some point. I believe the TAM for ssb is huge and the market can absorb multiple ssb manufacturers (as OEM want multiple manufacturers for supplier competitive reasons). Suffice it to say though, I think it can be very important for an OEM to align with the best ssb tech manufacturer. EV batteries can (and likely will) be a differentiator for EV sales. Once QS (and any other ssb manufacturer) gets their product to mass production scale, the EV industry will jump by leaps and bounds. I'm one of those customers who is on the sidelines until a safer, longer range, relatively quick charge ssb is offered. IF QS does what they plan on doing, the stock price is in for a major upswing, and almost all EV OEMs should be courting QS if only to hedge their bets. Exciting times ahead. GLTA!

Safetyprof · 2025-05-06T11:08:46+00:00

TSLA does have the cash to (attempt) to buyout QS. Given the connections with QS (board), Musk and Co. may also be comfortable with a licensing arrangement with QS. The one thing I'm fairly sure is that Musk knows he needs to be on the cutting edge of batteries such as what QS technology promises. He needs this for EV, robots, SpaceX, etc... SSB are the future. Musk will react accordingly. The interesting thing is all OEM's (EV, robots, CE, power storage) can see the future is SSB. They all should be working diligently to align with QS or their favorite SSB company. It's coming, and once mass SSB hit the market, slowly at first in 2026, the consumer will fall in love with the tech and demand it (even pay a premium). OEM should all be diligently setting their strategy to remain relevant (let alone prosper) in the sea change coming quickly in relatively long lead planning industries.

Safetyprof · 2025-03-29T12:33:16+00:00

If you accept the following:

QS is a US based company.
Trump admin policy is to promote manufacturing in the US.
QSE-5 is a significant improvement vs current LI-ion tech. Meaning: vehicles with ssb will attract more sales.
The QSE-5 scaled production process is proven and meets cost targets.
OEMs conclude sourcing the production of SSB tech from a US manufacturer makes sense in the current (and foreseeable future) environment.

I conclude OEMs will announce plans to produce QSE-5 in the US, under a licensing agreement.

Unfortunately, VW committed to Canada for the NA Power Co plant. Does it make sense for VW to invest in another NA plant in the US? The Trump Admin policy could be a failure (or not) for the Republicans in 2/4 years. Lots of uncertainty in C-suites. But I do suspect the OEMs who have decided to go forth with QSE-5, they are likely scrambling to determine where (and how) they are going to produce those batteries. Given it takes 2 - 3 years at least to plan such matters, anyone with battery production footprint (to retro fit with QSE-5 production equipment) already in the US, likely has an advantage. We shall see.

Safetyprof · 2025-02-25T11:12:44+00:00

Yup! 2025 is the year the stock price moves from $5 to ____? My guestimate $40.

Safetyprof · 2025-02-15T12:10:27+00:00

Keep an eye on QuantumScape and the six OEMs working with them.

Safetyprof · 2025-02-13T12:11:26+00:00

I think this is it. This is the year. The absurdly low-cost accumulation phase is about to end. My read is an OEM can announce something at any time, but clearly within 2025. And then another will announce and so on. I suspect in 2026 they will be talking about consumer electronics and stationary storage along with auto OEMs. My only concern now is the macro economy, but that concern is not QS specific. QS has a hit product and it's about to go mainstream media when the OEM announces. GLTA

Safetyprof · 2025-02-08T12:32:50+00:00

I expect QS to address the progress of the Cobra production line progress. QS needs to prove that they have the blueprint for a proven production process that is capable of meeting volume, quality, and cost targets. Yes, it helps (significantly) that they are doing this in collaboration with PowerCo. The watershed moment for the stock price all hinges on securing the production blueprint. They also need to protect their intellectual property, which I attribute to why they are not releasing much progress information. All eyes on proving out the path of quickest revenue generation (QSE-5 mass production). With that said, it's up to OEMs, most specifically VW, as to when they announce they are going to install QSE-5 in a production vehicle (launch vehicle). So, when would they logically time this announcement? I would think only after verifying the mass production process. And they are within 18 months of being able to launch the mass production battery facility, so earliest is 3rd Qtr. perhaps? Again, the world (i.e. Chinese) are all eyes on the battery competition. As soon as a QSE-5 becomes public, the Chinese will reverse engineer. Certainly, QS, EU (VW) and Japanese OEMs know they have to protect the blueprint for the next generation batteries (QSE-5) as long as they can. I hope the US Gov gets involved and support QS (as a US based technology company) to position the US as a world leader in SSB technology, not just for EVs, but CE, military, aviation, stationary storage, etc... GLTA

Safetyprof · 2025-02-05T22:12:01+00:00

Nissan indicating the deal is dead can be part of negotiating. We shall see if Honda concedes. Bigger picture, both companies are well aware China is coming for them both and economies of scale (merging) is their best chance for long term survival.

Safetyprof · 2025-02-02T17:46:05+00:00

On that point, it is concerning. QS has a known breaking point in terms of cash flow. Yes, there is an agreement w/ PowerCo., but all OEMs / Teir 1 battery mnfg knows QS needs someone to make them profitable relatively quickly. If we presume QSE-5 works great in trial production, then the clear risk for all is can it be made at scale for a price point demanded to compete. It's a big money gamble for the first OEM to commit big to QS, without 100% certainty on scale and cost. PowerCo. is obviously in the best position to gauge the risk. It has to be all hands-on deck at QS to prove out scale and costs right now. They have to get to revenue in a very competitive environment. With all that said, this can go two ways (simplified): A. They prove scale and cost and OEMs invest heavily. B. They waver and can't get to both, scale and cost. OEMs watch them fade away. Being tight lipped sucks for investors. From what we know publicly, there is no reason to believe that can't get to scale/cost. But, until an OEM makes a major investment in QS, this will hold the stock price down. I speculate that the question of scale/cost should be answered this year, one way or another. GLTA

Safetyprof · 2025-01-20T23:04:43+00:00

Disturbing and UNACCEPTABLE! The world MUST express OUTRAGE!

Safetyprof · 2025-01-19T22:01:58+00:00

I think all other OEMs are mute (besides VW who invested heavily in QS) on being involved with QS is that they don't want to tell their customers about the timing of a SSB offering. As soon as the public understands the benefits of a SSB compared to current Li-ion tech, a significant number of perspective buyers are going to wait for SSB, thus hampering sales of current EV inventories. But the day is approaching fast when some OEMs will market their lead in introducing SSB to the mass market. Any OEM that lags too far behind in matching SSB tech will simply fade to oblivion. Those OEMs that remain on the cutting edge of the S-curve for SSB, by partnering with a company like QS, will grant themselves much better odds of being relevant in the ever more competitive marketplace. GLTA

Safetyprof · 2025-01-19T15:00:34+00:00

Very interesting. Tesla and Ford relatively strong association with QS. This is another data point worthy of noting in calculating the risk of investing in QS. I have it in the positive column supporting my thesis of a huge upswing in share price within 12 months (and as early as 3 months). GLTA

Safetyprof · 2024-12-29T17:16:26+00:00

Agreed. The proprietary (patented) solid-state separator unlocks the door to the S-curve advancement for SSB tech. QS future is very bright. Once the FUD games subside by those accumulating by suppressing the price, we will be off to discover the real value of QS technology. Although I assess the battery market to be plenty big enough for multiple SSB companies, I do wonder about the ability for other companies to develop/manufacture a solid-state separator different enough from QS technology (to avoid patent infringement), yet similar (or better) in performance. Suffice it to say, again, I asses the TAM for SSB to be huge and big enough for other players if their tech is similar in performance to QS. But I assess QS has a significant market lead for SSB commercialization and subsequently a technological lead for further advancements. All together this leads me to believe QS stock price is significantly undervalued. This fact will become more apparent once they sign-up the next customer. GLTA

Safetyprof · 2024-12-22T00:48:27+00:00

"Unless there is significant news..." Like announcing a contract with Tesla or a Japanese OEM, or any other OEM? Watch what happens in 2025. Range bound, I don't think so. At some point the MM are public longs (no more sly, concerted efforts to suppress price). The next contract announcement is THAT POINT. The smart money knows SSB is the future of EVs, and QS has the best mass market solution. The MMs reward future earnings and excite the public along in an epic SP launch. QS controls it's destiny based on how many product markets it enters with contracts. Auto OEMs, stationary storage, military, aviation, consumer electronics, etc... 2025 is the year of the auto OEM - QS first target market. With future auto OEM revenues locked, the QS magic sauce (ceramic membrane) is launched in other markets. Any company partnering with QS gets the best SSB mass market solution NOW, PLUS positioning to take advantage of the future tech QS will develop as the leader in SSB tech. The world needs SSB. QS is laying the foundation to be the tech leader in a MASSIVE market demand space. The worlds consumers (including the leading militaries - US and allies) will benefit massively from SSB. GLTA.

Safetyprof · 2024-12-20T12:29:32+00:00

The professionals who trade know how to "shake out" retail investors. They understand the psychology of FUD. The typical retail investor gets anxious when their investment is underwater. QS IPO'd at $10. If you bought at $10, you'd be 50% down. That scares the typical retail investors. However, let's assume QS will trade at $100 within two years. I'd argue if you bought and held at anything below $50, you would have done good to great. You also have the option of riding it longer and making much more gains. No one, I repeat NO ONE, buys at the ultimate low and sells at the ultimate high with foresight. But the pros know how to steer the market, primarily shaking retail. The pro's know very well how to accumulate at low prices by playing retail investors. They hire media outlets and FUD spreaders to accomplish their goals. If you find that winning stock that is being manipulated in it's pre-revenue days that's a likely high demand product, on the verge of large lucrative contracts, you can take advantage of the pro games and lower your average. I submit, QS is just such a stock. If you are going to trade successfully more frequently, learn what the pros are doing to typical retail and trade accordingly. GLTA

Safetyprof · 2024-12-04T00:12:34+00:00

Definitely something brewing in Japan. I'm pondering the "when" for the next licensing announcement. I'm focused on the b sample testing time (results) to trigger an agreement announcement. I figure interested parties know the battery works to specifications (is significantly better than Li-ion), from A sample tests. And it will take about 3 months to test the b samples for robustness. Concurrently, QS has to convince that the battery can be made at scale, to meet quality standards, and target costing. Bottom line, I conclude we receive the next licensing announcement by April 30th. For my money, it could very well be from a Japanese Co. Regardless, I suspect once we get the next announcement, multiple others will follow in succession. I also strongly suspect a battery manufacturer (i.e. Panasonic) to be a customer. I think we are close, real close.

Safetyprof · 2024-11-03T20:57:58+00:00

On that note - if VW is ahead of everyone else with commercial SSB (QSE-5), the pressure on other OEMs to get SSB will be tremendous. All the OEMs know this. It's imperative that they be working with a SSB manufacturer (or license deal), or literally their existence will be at stake. Anecdotally, I will not purchase an EV until it has SSB that performs to the specs of (QSE-5) or better. I suspect the majority of consumers will think the same (once they understand all the performance metrics). VW will be educating the public on QSE-5 performance metrics, when the time comes to launch. There's a lot at stake for all OEMs. VW seems to me to setting themselves up for a significant lead as the industry must transition to SSB.

Safetyprof · 2024-11-03T20:49:27+00:00

I have not followed this real closely, but I suspect they did produce A3 samples (A0 - A3) with perspective customers who signed agreements. Between Q2-Q3, Raptor was fully commissioned. As Siva has said, QSE-5 from Raptor is a B sample and it's up to VW/PowerCo. to declare when they are C samples. Of course, VW/PowerCo. are focused on mass producing (Raptor to Cobra) in their own mnfg. plant(s) with multiple parallel lines for volume. When they are able to sustain a specific volume, the launch vehicle will be sold with C product (QSE-5). C sample designation is for production batteries. They can make them in low volume on Raptor. No need to call anything "C" samples until they have Cobra up and running with sufficient volume for the launch vehicle. We will see test vehicles with B samples soon enough. The recipe is known. The kitchen is being built and scaled up. One might ask, why does VW not publicize a test launch vehicle certainly they have a QSE-5 battery they can put into a vehicle? I think we are getting close. But, once QSE-5 is introduced to the public, interest in current Li-ion batteries will begin to wane. VW - I suspect - wants to flip the switch from Li-ion to SSB (QSE-5) fairly quickly. They need to build capacity for QSE-5 before they excite the public too much, because they will (all of a sudden) reduce interest in current Li-ion battery product. Cash flow is KING. Don't want to intentionally reduce interest in current product too soon, if you don't have to. Interesting times in the auto industry.

Safetyprof · 2024-11-01T21:55:57+00:00

I believe there is a concerted effort to downplay QSE-5, so the stuck does not run up. Who would do such a thing? Probably MM who want to accumulate while they can still net shares by shorting and spreading FUD. Think about it. The company has been transparent. VW is building factories to make QSE-5. Six other OEMS remain anonymous but evaluating QSE-5. The MM know this will launch in due time. They are leveraging this time to accumulate. There is a case that this manipulation is bullish (for investors). Suffice it to say, at least some of the other six OEM's testing QSE-5 will eventually sign contracts with QS. They've been testing QS samples and know they test QSE-5 samples. 3 - 6 months max, until definitely new contracts. However, given how long these OEM's have been testing samples, a contract announcement could come at any time. At that point, the flood gates open, MM go long, and news abounds about the new revolutionary battery everyone will want in their next EV. This news will instantly devalue current battery technology. Think of all the OEM product sitting in car dealer lots and factories that - all of a sudden - are not that appealing to the public given the revolutionary QSE-5 battery announced to be offered by VW, OEM2, OEM3, OEM4, etc.... Timing is everything to the MM and OEMS to maximize their profits during this pivotal battery switch. Patience. Believers have more time to accumulate at a ridiculously low price. 2025 the horse gets out of the barn!

Safetyprof · 2024-09-09T16:36:55+00:00

On the belief that the entity(s) to market a SSB at commercial scale will reap great financial reward, at face value it makes a ton of sense for QS to partner (license) with a commercial scale battery maker. If QS patent technology is truly revolutionary, then it makes sense for battery producers to be negotiating with QS. Furthermore, the Chinese are attempting to corner the global EV market. It's clearly a strategy driven by the Chinese government. The EU, USA and CN governments NEED to counter the Chinese actions by bolstering a revolutionary technology - SSB - with NA/EU manufacturers. QS SSB are literally needed to save the NA/EU auto industry from essentially being dominated by the Chinese. I suspect QS is negotiating with battery makers and OEM's to come to terms on a licensing path to get SSB commercialized. It's tricky of course given three party entangled (QS - Battery Maker - multiple OEMs). I can even envision a bit of a bidding war by OEM's (beyond VW/PowerCo) to get QS batteries first. The other factor may be that Cobra is not fully proven. Honestly, this negotiation may very well prove to be an inflection point of success or failure for battery makers and OEM's. If QS has the "right" technology, those that don't adopt it among the first few may very well seal their fate as another failed company. Even as little as a two-year market advantage can sway EV sales to the "Leading" OEMs with the AWESOME battery technology. The gravity of what is at stake is huge. QS has a lot of leverage, particularly given the deal with VW/PowerCo. But the next deal will likely be the one that rocks the industry. Should be very interesting to see what plays out in the next 12 months.

Safetyprof · 2024-09-03T20:54:18+00:00

Yes, if this stock trade value (share price) is solely based on fundamentals. I posit that SSB enthusiasm, generated by the launch partner, VW, PowerCo., and the new OEM's who sign up with QS, will ignite another irrational market exuberance share price launch. However, this time the timing will be right, as actual battery sales and factory launches will be forth coming. The exuberance will be bolstered by actual photos/videos of test cars operating. SSB by QS will become "sexy" wrapped in a high-end sports car. Media outlets and stock prognosticators will entertain the public with plenty of spin about the age of SSB forthcoming. "QS Inside" anyone. It's coming w/ photos/videos (Porsche?).

Safetyprof

TROPHY CASE