Tesla CEO Elon Musk confirms talks with Apple, says acquisition is unlikely at this point

[Justin Kahn]

After wide speculation surfaced recently regarding Apple being interested in acquiring electric car company Tesla, CEO Elon Musk has recently been publicly quoted saying that this is not the case, sort of.

Musk said that he and Apple did indeed meet recently but that he was not willing to disclose the details of the talk. He said he can't "comment on whether those revolved around any kind of acquisition," in an interview recently with Bloomberg. When asked during that interview whether or not Tesla was up for sale, Musk responded saying that while the company would consider discussions along these lines, it would have to be a deal with like-minded individuals and that even then there isn't currently a scenario that makes sense. At this point the Tesla CEO says the company is focused on creating a "compelling mass market electric car."

Initial rumors regarding Apple's interest in Tesla spawned from a San Francisco Chronicle report that said Musk met with Apple's head of mergers and acquisitions (and possibly CEO Tim Cook) in the Spring of last year. While the idea of Apple purchasing Tesla was floated around quite a lot, it sounds as though there is a chance it could have been more to do with integrating Apple's iOS tech into Tesla vehicles. Apple has previously made similar deals with major automotive companies like Ford, Audi and General Motors, among others.

When asked about integrating Apple's tech into its vehicles, the Tesla CEO told Bloomberg the company would certainly consider implementing Android and iOS software, but it just isn't the company's focus at this point. "That's somewhat peripheral to the fundamental goal of Tesla, which is to accelerate the electric car revolution, to make it happen," Musk said in the interview. It seems almost inevitable that these technologies would get integrated into Teslas in some way or another, but an acquisition seems a little bit more unlikely at this point.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/55752-tesla-ceo-elon-musk-confirms-talks-with-apple-says-acquisition-is-unlikely-at-this-point.html

 

[davislane1]

Unrelated observation: Ever notice that tech blogs cover everything Tesla related but hardly ever cover developments with non-EV brands in spite of other offerings having just as much (or more) technology?

 

[MilwaukeeMike]

Unrelated observation: Ever notice that tech blogs cover everything Tesla related but hardly ever cover developments with non-EV brands in spite of other offerings having just as much (or more) technology?

Well, Elon has said that he considers Tesla a tech company, not a car company. If the tech blogs agree, that would explain their favoritism. It also helps explains why their stock is so high. Yesterday investors were talking of a crash (again). They say its' way over-valued and when comparing it's margins and earnings to BMW and Ford etc, it should be trading at less than half of what it is. (their stock didn't crash yesterday, it went up 7% overnight after their earnings were reported better than expected.)

But compared to tech companies it's not so crazy. Tech companies lose money while they grow and no one freaks out. Twitter has yet to turn a profit and no one is freaking out about it being over valued.

 

[9Nails]

I think Tesla falls into a tech category because the Non-EV cars are viewed more as mechanically oriented technology. (Dynamic cylinder deactivation, constant velocity transmissions, direct injection, etc.) Maybe Godzilla (Nissan GT-R) is packing more tech-related stuff in it than a Tesla? But hey, Tesla's have a cool tech interior with totally digital center console. And the life of the combustion engine is finding power in abundance so they are focusing more on efficiency where the pure electric car is still something of the design of techie / future dream.

Apple's going to find someone to partner with in a car design. And it's going to be a slick design that's out of people's price range. That's my guess.

 

[davislane1]

I think Tesla falls into a tech category because the Non-EV cars are viewed more as mechanically oriented technology. (Dynamic cylinder deactivation, constant velocity transmissions, direct injection, etc.) Maybe Godzilla (Nissan GT-R) is packing more tech-related stuff in it than a Tesla? But hey, Tesla's have a cool tech interior with totally digital center console. And the life of the combustion engine is finding power in abundance so they are focusing more on efficiency where the pure electric car is still something of the design of techie / future dream.

Most vehicles in that segment (and certainly above it) pack more techno juice than a Tesla...And that's really my point. Outside of the power source, a Tesla is no different than any other car on the market. In terms of computer tech and engineering, it's completely ordinary as a mid-range luxury car and as a performance vehicle it's technologically boring, considering the degree of computer engineering that goes into cars like the GT-R and the more recent McLaren P1 (among others).

It seems to me that many of these blogs are missing truly fascinating content for no reason other than the fact that Elon Musk has designed the world's prettiest battery pack.

 

[Guest]

If apple somehow managed to acquire Tesla in the near future, there will be patent wars between apple/tesla with many vehicle manufacturers because apple/tesla has patented their iCar/iTesla design as "four wheeled vehicle in a form of sedan with integrated hi-tech device inside" LoL

 

[OliTheG]

If apple somehow managed to acquire Tesla in the near future, there will be patent wars between apple/tesla with many vehicle manufacturers because apple/tesla has patented their iCar/iTesla design as "four wheeled vehicle in a form of sedan with integrated hi-tech device inside" LoL

Well, given that they have a patent for a phone with "a thin profile" and "a look of simplicity" and "a rectangular screen" (that is the actual language used, it's bewildering) and are currently in the process of patenting fake email generators that have existed for 10 years, I genuinely wouldn't be surprised.

 

[Skidmarksdeluxe]

I'll just cross Apple equipped cars off my list of future vehicle purchases.

 

[Guest]

I'll just cross Apple equipped cars off my list of future vehicle purchases.

I hate Apple products like the next man, Not to mention the company, but would almost certainly rather have them in my car than anything Android related, that should tell you how much I like Google to claim to like Apple more. This comment of mine will be sure to gain a few 'angry' responses, but to stoke the fires some more, Google ranks about as high on my list as Will smiths Character ranked to his boss (Sykes) in the movie Shark Tale, and I quote: **Clears throat**
"I'm getting there, I'm getting there... There's coral, there's rocks, there's whale poop, and then there's you."

 

[Guest]

If Apple buy Tesla then its the end of a great company.

 

[MilwaukeeMike]

Most vehicles in that segment (and certainly above it) pack more techno juice than a Tesla...And that's really my point. Outside of the power source, a Tesla is no different than any other car on the market. In terms of computer tech and engineering, it's completely ordinary as a mid-range luxury car and as a performance vehicle it's technologically boring, considering the degree of computer engineering that goes into cars like the GT-R and the more recent McLaren P1 (among others).

It seems to me that many of these blogs are missing truly fascinating content for no reason other than the fact that Elon Musk has designed the world's prettiest battery pack.

I think a lot of it also has to do with Elon Musk. He's a tech guy, not a car guy... he came from Paypal. He's also half a celebrity. He's done cameo's in Iron Man and he has other companies like whatever that space rocket thing is he does. Tesla has a cool name, cool logo, they have things called Super chargers... they're basically the perfect storm for a media frenzy.

They're also a bit of an underdog, and people like underdogs. Other small car companies haven't done so well. They can't beat the big companies with years of experience in safety and reliability. But Tesla's are safe, and they've gotten near perfect reviews from consumer reports and the like. People love stories about the little guy who's extremely talented who rises up and beats the big established player at their own game. That's why Tesla is so popular in the blogs. They're a good story.

 

[stbecker]

This is more of a reach than building a watch or a gaming system, but it does show how Apple is interested in expanding revenue with the next great idea (even if already in production). Apple products just work and with a simplicity such that my 5-yr old can successfully navigate across different devices. I imagine that is exactly what what people are looking for in the automobile industry.

As for Tesla, they've found their niche. With the ball rolling (paying off their loans, expanding production, etc) watch for Telsa to expand their market base. And by that I mean a less-expensive base model that is within the reach of a larger consumer base. They haven't done so yet because their production couldn't effectively monetize a larger demand -- shoot, there are still thousands who've paid to wait in line for the "luxury" variants.

The most common misconception I've seen with Tesla is comparing their vehicles to other manufacturers in a completely different price range. Understand the difference between a $70-$100K Tesla Model S and a $1M McLaren P1. My laptop has roughly the same CPU frequency as Tianhe-2, but the latter supercomputer also has over a million cores and cost about $400 million -- probably not the best comparison to make.

 

[davislane1]

The most common misconception I've seen with Tesla is comparing their vehicles to other manufacturers in a completely different price range. Understand the difference between a $70-$100K Tesla Model S and a $1M McLaren P1. My laptop has roughly the same CPU frequency as Tianhe-2, but the latter supercomputer also has over a million cores and cost about $400 million -- probably not the best comparison to make.

The price range, target market, and function of the actual products are only relevant if we're talking about reviews (hence why a $900 56" HDTV gets seriously reviewed and a $24,000 86" UHDTV does not). The final products are not comparable, but their technology absolutely is.

The quantum gap between a Model S and a P1 is precisely what I was highlighting. Consumer computers and multi-million dollar supercomputers both get pretty balanced coverage in the techsphere and the majority of tech blogs will go the extra mile to inform their readers how impressive those $400 million behemoths are. Where there is a significant development, it is covered. The same cannot be said of their coverage of automotive tech. As mike pointed out, most of this probably has to do with Musk himself.

 

[Guest]

"The most common misconception I've seen with Tesla is comparing their vehicles to other manufacturers in a completely different price range. Understand the difference between a $70-$100K Tesla Model S and a $1M McLaren P1..."

I don't think you read his comment carefully. In case (if) you missed it, he clearly (read: literally) pointed out what he's trying to say at the first line.

 

[Hasbean]

iCar, expensive rehash of existing technologies. Every gas station will have a queue of Apple fanboys waiting for the next version iGas. Forget about trying to start the iCar without iTunes. You'll need to jailbreak it so you can turn without signalling.

 

[Jad Chaar]

I could never see Apple buying a car company.