Apple Rumored to Invest Billions Into Kia Motors

by Matt Posky

Published: February 3rd, 2021

apple rumored to invest billions into kia motors

While partnering with other industries is essential for the automotive sector, the last few years has shown most nameplates cozying up with the dominant tech firms at a breakneck pace. Just this week, we learned that Ford will be equipping future models with the Android operating system (courtesy of Google) and it wasn’t long before that we were discussing BMW’s arrangement to integrate its business with Amazon Could Services. Even Taiwan’s Foxconn has shown itself willing to get involved with China’s Zhejiang Geely Holding Group — which owns Volvo Cars, Geely Automotive, Lynk & Co, Proton, Lotus Cars, London Electric Vehicle Company, and more.

Now, rumors are swirling that Apple is about to make a gigantic investment into Kia Motors after Korean outlet Dong-a Ilbo (The East Asia Daily) reported that the duo had plans to manufacturer vehicles at the automaker’s American facility in Georgia. The paper stated that tech giant was readying an estimated 4 trillion won ($3.6 billion USD) investment in exchange for Kia building 100,000 electric vehicles per year. However, the mere suggestion has already made Kia money by boosting its share price by over 15 percent on Tuesday.

Though both Hyundai and Apple declined to comment on the validity of any partnership rumors, the latter was known to have been considering options to rejuvenate its stalled electric vehicle program. In fact, Bloomberg noted that market speculation had already begun on a prospective Apple tie-up well before the Kia rumor surfaced.

From Bloomberg:

Reports of Apple considering expanding into vehicles have led to speculation on potential manufacturing partners. The technology giant’s car-development work is still at an early stage, and the company will take at least half a decade to launch an autonomous EV, people with knowledge of the efforts have told Bloomberg News. That suggests the company isn’t in a hurry with partnership decisions.

Last month, Hyundai Motor Co., an affiliate of Kia, backed away from a statement that said it was in talks with Apple, revising it to say only it had been contacted by potential partners for the development of autonomous EVs. The news pushed stock in Hyundai up almost 20 [percent] on the day. Kia shares are now at their highest since 1997.

We’re doubtful that the iPhone purveyor is currently in a position to fast track such a large project, even with help from one of the world’s largest automakers. But Dong-a Ilbo suggested there’s a chance that a deal could be signed as early as February 17th with the first Apple Cars going into production in 2024.

[Image: Kia Motors]

#Apple #AppleCar #Deals #ElectricVehicles #EVs #Hyundai #Kia #KiaMotors #Korea #Partnerships

Matt Posky

A staunch consumer advocate tracking industry trends and regulation. Before joining TTAC, Matt spent a decade working for marketing and research firms based in NYC. Clients included several of the world’s largest automakers, global tire brands, and aftermarket part suppliers. Dissatisfied with the corporate world and resentful of having to wear suits everyday, he pivoted to writing about cars. Since then, that man has become an ardent supporter of the right-to-repair movement, been interviewed on the auto industry by national radio broadcasts, driven more rental cars than anyone ever should, participated in amateur rallying events, and received the requisite minimum training as sanctioned by the SCCA. Handy with a wrench, Matt grew up surrounded by Detroit auto workers and managed to get a pizza delivery job before he was legally eligible. He later found himself driving box trucks through Manhattan, guaranteeing future sympathy for actual truckers. He continues to conduct research pertaining to the automotive sector as an independent contractor and has since moved back to his native Michigan, closer to where the cars are born. A contrarian, Matt claims to prefer understeer — stating that front and all-wheel drive vehicles cater best to his driving style.

More by Matt Posky

Comments

Join the conversation

3 of 8 comments

Inside Looking Out on Feb 03, 2021

The idea is that Kia or Huyndai build cars for Apple. It is not like Apple provides features for Kia/Hyundai. Apple is not Google. Apple's image does not match Kia IMO. Steve Jobs would not cheapen Apple brand that way. If Elon Musk is able to build cars why Apple cannot? Just hire right people.

Like Reply
- SCE to AUX on Feb 05, 2021
  
  "If Elon Musk is able to build cars why Apple cannot?" Several reasons: 1. Passion. Tesla has a patent on this. EV pretenders just talk, and recent history shows how much passion it takes to push through the difficulties to reach viability. A couple shots of money and some smart people isn't enough. 2. The car market is saturated, like pizza shops in my zip code. 3. Building EVs is a great way to lose money for many years. Are Apple's bean counters interested in that? 4. Resources - Apple can't get raw materials any better than the rest of the world's mfrs, and anyone going to work on a mythical Apple car program should think about its long-term prospects. It could actually be hard to fill key positions. 5. Image - Would building cars elevate Apple's image? That's debatable. Cars are a lot more complex than consumer electronics, and complaints and lawsuits follow every car ever made.
  
  Like
ToolGuy on Feb 06, 2021

Magic 8-Ball says: "Reply hazy, try again." A couple of perspectives: https://www.macrumors.com/roundup/apple-car/ https://www.wsj.com/articles/kia-is-preparing-to-build-apple-cars-in-the-u-s-11612498065 [Some of the comments (on the WSJ page) on the WSJ article are priceless - I mean predictable] (Pssst... the secret decoder ring looks a lot like a skateboard.) Anyway, tiny little Apple and Kia-Hyundai-Telluride-Genesis-Ioniq can do what they want in 2024, it doesn't matter, because GM intends to reinvent itself by 2035... or 2040. Here's some background music* while you ponder, inspired by the California of the South: https://youtu.be/qIp9TwSEgFg *Recorded in a different place and time, 1997 Switzerland (when GM was #1 on the Fortune 500, Apple didn't crack the top 10, and you could lease an EV1 with lead-acid batteries). [We could talk about who did and did not make 'phones' in 1997, but who has the time? We're all busy making conventional cars in the conventional way.]

Like Reply

Recent Comments

Slavuta Autonomous cars can be used by terrorists.
W Conrad I'm not afraid of them, but they aren't needed for everyone or everywhere. Long haul and highway driving sure, but in the city, nope.
Jalop1991 In a manner similar to PHEV being the correct answer, I declare RPVs to be the correct answer here.We're doing it with certain aircraft; why not with cars on the ground, using hardware and tools like Telsa's "FSD" or GM's "SuperCruise" as the base?Take the local Uber driver out of the car, and put him in a professional centralized environment from where he drives me around. The system and the individual car can have awareness as well as gates, but he's responsible for the driving.Put the tech into my car, and let me buy it as needed. I need someone else to drive me home; hit the button and voila, I've hired a driver for the moment. I don't want to drive 11 hours to my vacation spot; hire the remote pilot for that. When I get there, I have my car and he's still at his normal location, piloting cars for other people.The system would allow for driver rest period, like what's required for truckers, so I might end up with multiple people driving me to the coast. I don't care. And they don't have to be physically with me, therefore they can be way cheaper.Charge taxi-type per-mile rates. For long drives, offer per-trip rates. Offer subscriptions, including miles/hours. Whatever.(And for grins, dress the remote pilots all as Johnnie.)Start this out with big rigs. Take the trucker away from the long haul driving, and let him be there for emergencies and the short haul parts of the trip.And in a manner similar to PHEVs being discredited, I fully expect to be razzed for this brilliant idea (not unlike how Alan Kay wasn't recognized until many many years later for his Dynabook vision).
B-BodyBuick84 Not afraid of AV's as I highly doubt they will ever be %100 viable for our roads. Stop-and-go downtown city or rush hour highway traffic? I can see that, but otherwise there's simply too many variables. Bad weather conditions, faded road lines or markings, reflective surfaces with glare, etc. There's also the issue of cultural norms. About a decade ago there was actually an online test called 'The Morality Machine' one could do online where you were in control of an AV and choose what action to take when a crash was inevitable. I think something like 2.5 million people across the world participated? For example, do you hit and most likely kill the elderly couple strolling across the crosswalk or crash the vehicle into a cement barrier and almost certainly cause the death of the vehicle occupants? What if it's a parent and child? In N. America 98% of people choose to hit the elderly couple and save themselves while in Asia, the exact opposite happened where 98% choose to hit the parent and child. Why? Cultural differences. Asia puts a lot of emphasis on respecting their elderly while N. America has a culture of 'save/ protect the children'. Are these AV's going to respect that culture? Is a VW Jetta or Buick Envision AV going to have different programming depending on whether it's sold in Canada or Taiwan? how's that going to effect legislation and legal battles when a crash inevitibly does happen? These are the true barriers to mass AV adoption, and in the 10 years since that test came out, there has been zero answers or progress on this matter. So no, I'm not afraid of AV's simply because with the exception of a few specific situations, most avenues are going to prove to be a dead-end for automakers.
Mike Bradley Autonomous cars were developed in Silicon Valley. For new products there, the standard business plan is to put a barely-functioning product on the market right away and wait for the early-adopter customers to find the flaws. That's exactly what's happened. Detroit's plan is pretty much the opposite, but Detroit isn't developing this product. That's why dealers, for instance, haven't been trained in the cars.