General Motors isn’t so much an automobile manufacturer any more; it’s a tech company.
At least, that’s how CEO Mary Barra wants the public to see it by the time she reaches retirement. Like Ford Motor Company, Mercedes-Benz, and other traditional automakers, General Motors finds itself competing against the likes of Waymo, Uber, and others to try and become first to market with a fully-autonomous car.
But the expense and early limitations of the technology necessitate that such a car get its start in rideshare and ride-hailing fleets, where every square inch of the operating area can be mapped and consumers aren’t forced to bear the burden of the technology’s high costs. GM plans to launch such a service next year with its Chevrolet Bolt EV-based GM Cruise AV, in “many” cities around the globe.
The production car won’t be equipped with a steering wheel or brake/accelerator pedals, using its self-driving hardware and software to drive itself around the clock.
“The technology’s the hardest piece,” Mary Barra said at the CityLab Detroit forum on Monday. “Once we establish that, and we’re on a path to do that next year, then it just becomes how fast we can roll that out.”
General Motors’ self-driving fleets, like the ones on the way from other major players in the autonomous mobility space, will naturally rely on vast seas of data to function smoothly and provide adequate mobility coverage. That focus on information technology quite outside the regular purview of a traditional automaker, and it makes Barra’s comments about wanting GM to be seen as a tech company make a certain amount of sense.
“There’s still a story to be told,” Barra said Monday. “But because of [the bankruptcy that] happened to General Motors late last decade, a lot of people lost confidence in us, so we have to work doubly hard to earn that respect and trust back that we can be a company that not only innovates and grows, but leads.”
Among the obstacles that GM will have to overcome in order to launch its self-driving car services, according to Barra, are insufficient charging infrastructure – Barra says that all autonomous vehicles should be electric vehicles – and how to enable AVs to “see” in inclement weather.
Stay tuned to GMAuthority.com for all the latest autonomous driving news.
(Source: The Detroit News)
Comments
Anyway, Wall Street doesn’t see GM as a tech company, we need only look the share’s price. In this game, Tesla has got more success…
In the future car ownership will be minimal. People will be using car sharing services and GM needs to get on this market soon. New Road
I haven’t said otherwise but they fight against Google, Uber, Toyota,… companies that have more money for this revolution while GM must get rid of Opel, Holden, the reliability of their products to match the same target.
Yeah, which is entirely why Barra is trying to push GM to appear as a tech company…
Enough of this crap, a tech company?…. please if you would say a leader in the automotive technology segment sure. Don’t forgot what got you here in the first place over a 100 years of building CARS.
Yes times are changing but there not changing that fast, that you have to say from one side of your mouth that cars will have no steering wheels and from the other side sell over 100 products at good profit margins that have a steering wheel.
I guess word that key holders at GM are getting tired of her may be true and she is grasping for time.
She is saying this to appease GM Shareholders. The future of automotive is murky, the future for “tech” is bright. She’s not saying that GM doesn’t care about cars (just look at the money being dumped into things like the Sierra CarbonPro or Corvette ZR1) but she is trying to get some of the Wall Street goodwill that Tesla has and bump up the GM Market Cap.
They might as well be a tech company from the looks of this new truck……WTH??? Get her out of there!! The lackluster products GM are putting out, “pods” not cars and trucks, are a direct reflection of thinking like this. Enough of this crap is right!!! I will do my own driving and I prefer something that gets the heart racing. Not an autonomous pod.
I am a very minority stockholder but my vote is to rid GM of Ms. Berra. For goodness sakes, get the people at Dodge to shoot some testosterone into GM!
Not wrong. Ride the wave of change or you might find yourself beneath it.
-GMA in the year 2040-
scott3: GM builds the best self driving hover car!
magirus: Waa, GM self driving hover cars are so unreliable!
Wouldn’t a self driving hover car still be considered a car built by a car manufacturer? No matter what GM wants to call it.
Dear GM you are a Car company ,so how about building great Cars and Trucks. Once you prove to the people your vehicles are second to none then perhaps you can sell them on being a Tech company. Remember what got you where you are. If you fail at making Cars and Trucks there is no way you will succeed in being a Tech company.
Yeah. UBER thought they were a digital company before the courts decided they were a transport company. If GM is now a tech company, why are they still building vehicles?
If you look back GM has had a long history as a leading tech company in many areas.
Many thing we take for granted today were high tech features back in the day, just look at the X job show car.
They worked with the first mass produced auto transmission. The standardization of parts and many many more features.
They contributed much in the aerospace field too even work on the moon buggy.
GM is just returning back to their roots as a tech leader.
The reality is Mary has over seen a era of continued cost cutting while investing in the future tech areas this will pay off in the end.
While the stock has not taken off it has not tanked. Just look. GM has head steady in the $33 to $35 per share. Now look to FCA with all their product like the Hellcat or their new trucks. Yet they struggle at less than half GM stock ay $15.
Also note Honda, BMW, Hyundai all are lower priced stocks than GM.
Things are not as bad as you they appear. Tesla is over priced and Toyota well they have efficiently built boring cars for a long time and their value reflects it. The bottom line is they make a lot of money.
Ford with all their claims on the Aluminum trucks and fancy interiors, they are still at $9 like they have been for a very long time as they are not seeing the profits as they did not cut cost.
Right now there are only three companies that can go it alone or can chose who they work with because they want to not because they have to. Only Toyota and VW are in the same position right now.
Good things will come but the hard boring work needs done first. It is not flashy and it is not sexy but laying the ground work for the future will pay off big at some point.
Even if we never see full autonomous vehicles the technology being developed around it is much like the space program and will,lead to many new features.
This game is won or lost on Wall St and cool cars alone do not move values it is profits and dividends,
Mary is starting to feel the heat from investors, specically funds that are only interested in immediate financial gratification.
As currently structured, investors will not consider GM a tech company. Team this with a muddied vision of where Cadillac is headed; some concern that possibly foray into EVs may be risky without government assistance; and less than awe-inspiring vehicles, specifically the full-sized pickups, and oh yes, shrinking markets in its two largest markets, translate into skittish investors.
Brings back memories of Roger Smith. Chasing after Tech with the purchase of EDS(electronic data system) and Hughes Aircraft at the same time ignoring the core products, Automobiles. We see how that worked out. Core products first and foremost. Make them second to none and the most desirable Cars and Trucks on the market, then you can branch out into Tech and whatever else you desire. Cars and Truck made you what you are now and if you don’t make them desireable and no one buys them then you chances of survival as an Auto company or Tech company are nil.
I’m a Mary Barra fan. But here’s the problem, a tech company wouldn’t be pushing that abortion of an infotainment system out there as a leader. Decontenting your most important product is not the answer. Ford and Fiat are disasters in a lot of ways, but they absolutely get the truck market. At this point in history, the most important aspect of the truck for new buyers is that screen in the middle and what it can do. You know, what a tech company would worry about. You can say capability is king, but all the products are similar in that regard.