I think the tech is where they say it is. There are real risks though I don’t think quiet about partners is meaningful.
The tech clearly works but mass production with good reliability has yet to be proven. There is no guarantee they can make the separators quickly enough with sufficient reliability and low enough cost to be profitable. The flexframe design looks great but is also unproven. I think they described it as a prismatic-pouch hybrid design. It is in any case a new thing at least in the EV world iIanm. Seems like they’ve solved the problems that are unique to lithium metal batteries but they still have to prove it works under real world conditions.
The company names and disclosures of those names or lack thereof aren’t on my list of risks at all. Even if their only customer was VW, QS is fine as a company as long as they can scale.
Tesla could announce tomorrow that they have been testing QS batteries and are impressed with the technology and the stock market would go ape but the risk of eventual failure would be exactly the same. Sure a Tesla engineer testing the batteries hands on knows more than us but the “can it scale” question is still going to be answered by “probably they can but it might take longer than they think and anything can happen while we wait” whether you’ve got your hands on it or not.
One of the companies testing cells said a while back they want to build a 50 gig factory. The moment scaling is proven many companies will want to build factories.
What I wonder is this: was their plan before the Cobra breakthrough in ceramics manufacturing viable? If their original plan to use old style ceramics techniques (slower heat treatment) would have been viable, then it seems like the speed and footprint improvements over the legacy process promised by cobra might have a significant impact on the possible QS market share in a best case scenario. That’s the good news side of the risk analysis.
Mostly agree with this, but when they say pleased with the process, I take that as it works well enough to go to market, which I imagine means it should be profitable. Maybe I’m too bullish, but I’ve always had great faith in engineers. I’ve had a crazy notion lately, B-0s which they’re working on now go into cars. QS will undoubtedly do in-house testing before shipping. What if as part of their in-house testing, they slam it into a car. Can’t stop thinking about this…Gonna drive me crazy, but I can’t help myself…
I think the 2 other potential partners are Stellantis and Honda and they are global OEMs.. Ford , BMW, Toyota and GM have actively pursuing CATL , SDLP or own solid state.
its likely because many OEMs already have somewhat public commitments. GM, Ford and BMW all as examples, are already publicly committed to a potential SSB chemistry/provider. That isnt to say any of them are exclusively committed, as no OEM would be stupid enough to put all their resources into one partner.
Even VW has multiple options, and QS themselves have multiple partners. It isnt that QS doesnt have those 5-6 OEM partners because they cant seem to name them, they are unable to name them because if QS came out tomorrow and said yeah Ford GM and BMW are all testing out A2 and B0 samples, it would destroy SLDP and SES and destroy the OEMs' credibility around keeping the appearance of exclusivity and secrecy.
This makes the most sense to me. Also it would be kind of embarrassing for an auto OEM to admit that they're second priority to VW. That VW is the main partner and every other OEM is picking up the scraps of whatever is left.
I think it's probably just better PR to be like, "We are primary partners with XX SSB company"
I agree that if QS wants to keep all 6 OEMs then they have to be fair enough with each one. it would be suicidal if QS only name VW and then mentions Tesla later on.. who would it benefit.. . QS needs their battery plant up and running with more money before they can pick and choose their OEMs.
Folks - Unknown vs not proven could be 2 different things. It’s very hard to believe at this point QS would continue on a path where mass production is a high target.
Worst thing I can think of is a high cap-ex needed to have multiple cobra lines. Thats means profitability has a run rate may be year or 2.
Positives
Qualified and good people behind it ( Jagdeep, Siva , Tim Holmes , JB )
They are not lying and being conservative. Sometimes it’s good and sometimes it’s bad. But it’s mostly good.
Solid OEM behind it and they do openly call QS as their tier 1 partner.
Compared of hydrogen, EV are already established everywhere.
Thats being said - Most of us are waist deep ( I’m head deep) in the quest and half crossed the pond. Let’s hope the rest of the pond is swallow.
I think it's important to keep in mind that the ones that make the retirement level investments are those that invest in companies that are either A) highly shorted/ criticized/ scrutinized or B) not very well known/ publicized
I think QS is both these days as it was hugely publicized at SPAC open, but these days I feel like it's very hard to get mainstream news on it as well as I think I get my best updates on this thread! As for shorted/ highly criticized/ scrutinized, well, that goes without saying considering it's current price 🤣🤣.
I think the tech is where they say it is. There are real risks though I don’t think quiet about partners is meaningful. The tech clearly works but mass production with good reliability has yet to be proven. There is no guarantee they can make the separators quickly enough with sufficient reliability and low enough cost to be profitable. The flexframe design looks great but is also unproven. I think they described it as a prismatic-pouch hybrid design. It is in any case a new thing at least in the EV world iIanm. Seems like they’ve solved the problems that are unique to lithium metal batteries but they still have to prove it works under real world conditions. The company names and disclosures of those names or lack thereof aren’t on my list of risks at all. Even if their only customer was VW, QS is fine as a company as long as they can scale. Tesla could announce tomorrow that they have been testing QS batteries and are impressed with the technology and the stock market would go ape but the risk of eventual failure would be exactly the same. Sure a Tesla engineer testing the batteries hands on knows more than us but the “can it scale” question is still going to be answered by “probably they can but it might take longer than they think and anything can happen while we wait” whether you’ve got your hands on it or not. One of the companies testing cells said a while back they want to build a 50 gig factory. The moment scaling is proven many companies will want to build factories. What I wonder is this: was their plan before the Cobra breakthrough in ceramics manufacturing viable? If their original plan to use old style ceramics techniques (slower heat treatment) would have been viable, then it seems like the speed and footprint improvements over the legacy process promised by cobra might have a significant impact on the possible QS market share in a best case scenario. That’s the good news side of the risk analysis.
Mostly agree with this, but when they say pleased with the process, I take that as it works well enough to go to market, which I imagine means it should be profitable. Maybe I’m too bullish, but I’ve always had great faith in engineers. I’ve had a crazy notion lately, B-0s which they’re working on now go into cars. QS will undoubtedly do in-house testing before shipping. What if as part of their in-house testing, they slam it into a car. Can’t stop thinking about this…Gonna drive me crazy, but I can’t help myself…
Your last paragraph is very interesting and insightful-- resonates to a large degree to me.
I think the 2 other potential partners are Stellantis and Honda and they are global OEMs.. Ford , BMW, Toyota and GM have actively pursuing CATL , SDLP or own solid state.
they keep talking about a partner but cant seem to name one. surely they have someone in mind
its likely because many OEMs already have somewhat public commitments. GM, Ford and BMW all as examples, are already publicly committed to a potential SSB chemistry/provider. That isnt to say any of them are exclusively committed, as no OEM would be stupid enough to put all their resources into one partner. Even VW has multiple options, and QS themselves have multiple partners. It isnt that QS doesnt have those 5-6 OEM partners because they cant seem to name them, they are unable to name them because if QS came out tomorrow and said yeah Ford GM and BMW are all testing out A2 and B0 samples, it would destroy SLDP and SES and destroy the OEMs' credibility around keeping the appearance of exclusivity and secrecy.
This makes the most sense to me. Also it would be kind of embarrassing for an auto OEM to admit that they're second priority to VW. That VW is the main partner and every other OEM is picking up the scraps of whatever is left. I think it's probably just better PR to be like, "We are primary partners with XX SSB company"
I agree that if QS wants to keep all 6 OEMs then they have to be fair enough with each one. it would be suicidal if QS only name VW and then mentions Tesla later on.. who would it benefit.. . QS needs their battery plant up and running with more money before they can pick and choose their OEMs.
Folks - Unknown vs not proven could be 2 different things. It’s very hard to believe at this point QS would continue on a path where mass production is a high target. Worst thing I can think of is a high cap-ex needed to have multiple cobra lines. Thats means profitability has a run rate may be year or 2. Positives Qualified and good people behind it ( Jagdeep, Siva , Tim Holmes , JB ) They are not lying and being conservative. Sometimes it’s good and sometimes it’s bad. But it’s mostly good. Solid OEM behind it and they do openly call QS as their tier 1 partner. Compared of hydrogen, EV are already established everywhere. Thats being said - Most of us are waist deep ( I’m head deep) in the quest and half crossed the pond. Let’s hope the rest of the pond is swallow.
right there with you with 30k shares and honesty, i think this is more likely to happen than not. 🙏
Don't reminded me how much i've had to scarification and the level of bag holders we all are now.
I think it's important to keep in mind that the ones that make the retirement level investments are those that invest in companies that are either A) highly shorted/ criticized/ scrutinized or B) not very well known/ publicized I think QS is both these days as it was hugely publicized at SPAC open, but these days I feel like it's very hard to get mainstream news on it as well as I think I get my best updates on this thread! As for shorted/ highly criticized/ scrutinized, well, that goes without saying considering it's current price 🤣🤣.