GM Maven scaling down - failure?

By
Automotive Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs) are trying out different business models from its traditional new/used car sales, and financing to a broader definition of mobility provider. GM's Maven is one of such trials that was successfully expanding its business since its launch in 2016. Maven expanded its target customer and geographic area; from easier hour-to-hour car rental model like Zip Car to a peer-to-peer car sharing like Getaround, from its hometown Ann-Arbor to different areas in north America. Below milestones were Maven's 3-year expansion history, which recently has announced to stop scaling. According to WSJ, Maven decided to scale down in weaker markets such as Chicago and Boston to focus on its stronger markets. It confirmed that it will continue operation in cities like Los Angeles.

But is this a sign that OEM is failing in becoming mobility providers? I don't think so.

The reason of GM deciding on Maven was based on the OEMs acknowledging the shift in mindsets about the car ownership (survey results such as millennials not planning to buy a car in the future) and nearing future of autonomous cars. GM had been able to make a successful turnaround from its chaper 11 bankruptcy in 2009, and in ten years been able to make proactive investments in areas it needs to be a successful player in the autonomous vehicle market, and Maven was part of the larger strategy.
Maven and Maven gig stemmed from such larger strategy of the company. Thinking of competition, once autonomous driving is commonly deployed in public roads and used for ride sharing and car sharing service, the strongest player could be the ones who dominate the platform, not the OEMs nor the autonomous driving technology companies. Easily said, companies like Uber and Lyft could be the winners as they have the closest link to the customers, where GM doesn't currently have any data of. Thus, Maven is there for GM to learn the new market (in)directly and get the company prepared for the new market, and thus I don't think it is a sign of failure but a sign for a more focused approach in allocating its resources.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular on the Blog

Final Policy Guidelines

By
Students, I was exceedingly pleased with the quality of your final presentations and wanted to share them publicly.  Here they are: Ridehail (TNCs) - Presentation , Guidelines Micromobility - Bikeshare and Scooter Share - Presentation , Guidelines Freight and Goods Movement - Presentation , Guidelines   Courier Network Services - Presentation , Guidelines Real Estate and Curb Management - Presentation , Guidelines Future Shared Vehicles - Presentation , Guidelines Mobility as a Service - Presentation , Guidelines
Read more

Take to the Streets! The (AV) Revolution is Coming

By
Image
When I think about new mobility and new technologies that enable it, I get most excited about the possibilities to remediate or reverse the inequities and injustices caused by our current autocentric transportation and land use regime. Our transportation system currently and historically on the biggest tools enabling systemic  injustice and exploitation in the United States and globally. Those who control our transportation system have turned it into the largest contributor to the climate emergency, perpetuator of environmental injustices, and catalyst for exploitation and expropriation of oppressed communities Consider the freeway riots, suburbanization and white flight, hyper-gentrification, and pollution burden. Transportation planning is implicated in all of these processes. It will also be instrumental in dismantling them. If we collectively organized ourselves, we could already have livable cities, mobility justice, and (significantly) decarbonized transportation system...
Read more

In TNC wage war, econ 101 is on the driver’s side

By
Image
Hold on tight, passengers, it’s gonna be a bumpy ride We frequently read and hear that ride-hailing companies like Uber and Lyft are money-losers and are unlikely to be profitable in the near future. However, given that both companies are trading on public markets with a combined worth of more than $80 billion, investors must be thinking they will reach profitability at some point. The question is whether this profit will come from higher prices charged to passengers, or lower wages given to drivers. In a recent New York Times Upshot piece, Austan Goolsbee, a well-known economist and former adviser to President Barack Obama, makes the case that, in this scenario, passengers will be footing the bill. Goolsbee substantiates his claim in a way that those of his of economics-trained ilk know how to best--via the theory of "relative price sensitivity." Economic theory predicts that those who are more sensitive to prices changes will pay less, while those who are less pr...
Read more