Trump and Elon Drama, Tesla Robotaxi Crash Fallout, More Autonomy IPOs

Executive Summary

This week on Autonomy Markets, Grayson and Walt discuss the escalating feud between Elon Musk and President Donald J. Trump and its potential implications for Tesla’s upcoming Robotaxi launch. They analyze how the federal government could intervene, the risk to the broader autonomy economy, and a little-known clause in a major bill that could create a national AV framework.

Additionally, they explore the hypothetical fallout of a Tesla Robotaxi crash from consumer reaction to regulatory response and cover the surge of IPOs in the autonomous trucking sector from companies like Plus and Kodiak.

Key Autonomy Markets Questions Answered

Key Topics & Timestamps

[00:00] The Implications of the Elon Musk vs. Donald J. Trump Feud 

One week before the Tesla Robotaxi launch, Elon Musk and President Donald J. Trump engaged in a public feud. The conflict is viewed as an “unforced error” on Musk’s part, as he is confronting the power of the US government. While President Trump has a history of bringing former critics back into his administration, the aggressive nature of Musk’s comments is notable.

[04:00] Could Federal or State Governments Halt the Robotaxi Launch? 

There is a risk that federal or state governments could take action to stop the Robotaxi launch. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), under the Department of Transportation, may have the authority to halt the launch. Furthermore, officials at the state level in Texas or federal agencies like the FCC could receive messages to pause programs related to Musk’s companies. The discussion also notes that the SpaceX program is currently seen as being at greater risk than the Robotaxi launch.

[07:00] The Feud’s Broader Risk to the Entire Autonomy Industry 

Any government action against Tesla’s Robotaxi launch could negatively affect the entire autonomy sector, including competitors like Waymo. Such a move would be perceived as a major victory for organized labor, like the Teamsters, who could frame it as the president shutting down automation to protect jobs. This situation creates an opportunity for labor leaders to lobby against the advancement of autonomy.

[09:00] Unpacking the “Big Beautiful Bill” and its Preemption Clause for AVs 

Grayson and Walt discuss a 1,116-page bill that contains language relevant to autonomous vehicles. A specific section provides for “preemption,” meaning no state or local government could enforce laws restricting artificial intelligence systems or automated decision systems for a 10-year period. This would create a national framework, allowing autonomous vehicles to operate and scale across state lines without being subject to varying local regulations.

[14:00] What If a Tesla Robotaxi Crashes? Analyzing the Potential Fallout 

The discussion explores the potential fallout from a significant Tesla Robotaxi crash, using the past Cruise incident as a reference. A key factor in the Cruise incident was that the vehicle did not stop after hitting a person, instead dragging them. It’s suggested that Cruise’s lack of transparency and “coverup” after the incident were more damaging than the crash itself, giving GM an excuse to pull its investment.

[17:00] How Would Consumers and Regulators Respond to a Crash?

In the event of a crash, it is believed consumers would not stop using the service, largely due to a general distrust of the media’s reporting on the incident. The regulatory response would likely involve NHTSA opening a crash investigation. It is not expected that regulators would shut the service down; instead, Tesla would likely pause the fleet voluntarily to conduct its own investigation and issue a software fix.

[26:00] The Global Race: How Europe is Responding to America’s Autonomy Growth 

Europe is paying close attention to the growth of the autonomy economy in the United States. As part of tariff negotiations, European officials have reportedly offered to adopt American autonomous vehicle regulations if the U.S. removes tariffs on auto parts. Adopting U.S. regulations could benefit American companies like Waymo by allowing them to export their technology to the EU and would serve as a countermeasure to China’s growing influence in the region.

[31:00] Waymo’s “Great Highway Unlock” and Google’s Broader AI Strategy 

Google’s CEO, Sundar Pichai, alluded that Waymo’s “Great Highway Unlock” is coming next year, a timeline viewed as a delay. This pushout is believed to be caused by vehicle supply issues rather than technology problems. As Google’s core search business faces increasing pressure from AI competitors, Waymo’s importance as a physical manifestation of Google’s AI capabilities is expected to grow.

[35:00] Autonomous Trucking Heats Up: Plus and Kodiak Join the Public Markets 

The autonomous trucking sector is seeing increased activity, with companies Kodiak and Plus both in the process of going public via SPAC transactions. Different business models are emerging: Plus aims to be a software-only provider, while Aurora has a hybrid model, and others want to do everything. The new IPOs are riding the momentum of Aurora’s technological success and represent a significant market cap opportunity.

[45:00] Could a Product-Focused CEO Revive the Apple Car? 

Amid pressure on Apple to deliver new AI products, the possibility of reviving the Apple car project is discussed. If Apple were to re-enter the autonomy space, its extensive network of retail stores could become a major advantage, serving as showrooms for test rides and using the Genius Bar to build public trust. The question remains whether Apple will take that step to find its next major growth product.

Full Episode Transcript

Grayson Brulte: Walt, one week before the hyped anticipated Tesla Robotaxi, Elon Musk decided to get into a battle royale with President Donald J. Trump. Wow. Wow. Wow. I didn’t see this one coming. The barb’s back and forth like a heavyweight fight. What are the implications of this feud that seems not to be slowing down anytime soon?

Walter Piecyk: I mean, I think a lot of people did expect that, you know, given some of the past relationships in, in the prior administration, that you know, sometimes relationships falter. Even Trump himself, I said, I think, referenced that and said, you know, when people leave, I. They certainly discover all these things that they were very, uh, upset about. So it’s not a complete shock. I think what’s shocking is, you know, just how aggressive Elon took it, um, in terms of the things that, that he was, he was tweeting. And I think before we get into the implications, let’s just say first and foremost, ’cause I, I wanna have an opinion on this, I guess on the record. You know, in my opinion there’s no more powerful entity in the world than the US government. So when, when I hear these takes about like, oh, this is hurts both sides. N no, no, no, this is, you’re going up against effectively the US government with a president that is not afraid to use the power of the US government to the, to the greatest extent. So I think that was just an unforced error. I think, you know, maybe this is our, an early unforced error in, in our, um, you know, in terms of, you know, our podcast this week that we usually leave to the end. Um, and I think, you know, already we’re seeing Elon, I think, kind of recant and even soften up as things kind of died down. Maybe substances, you know, kind of died off and, and I think he’s trying to come to terms with it. So we’ll see what happens today, Friday as we record this.

Grayson Brulte: as a parent and everybody, a lot of people have kids, little kids, they need to take a time out. I don’t know any better way to describe it. Take a time out or if you wanna send the, the tweet on x, put it on the shelf for a minute and think about it because they were coming hot and heavy and, and frankly. It was inappropriate because you and I know there’s only one individual that sits in the Oval Office that’s President Donald J. Trump, not Mr. Musk.

Walter Piecyk: and I, and so I think now we can kind of transition to like what it means. And while a lot of that stuff, my initial reaction was like, wow, you can’t come back from that. Then I kind of reflected, I slept on it, reflected and just note that the vice president. Ted Cruz, Rubio. Many others have said plenty of things about the president, and now they’re a part of, um, the administration. Maybe some are not as as aggressive as, as what Elon, uh, has said, but I think the president has very thick skin, in some respects. Obviously there’s many that think he has thin skin in, in other respects. I, yeah, I understand that . but certainly the ability to kind of bring people back into the fold, and I don’t think up to this point, I don’t think Trump has like burned those bridges. I think there was like a Wall Street Journal report talking about him returning to Tesla. I mean, that is embarrassing journalism in my opinion. When’s the last time Trump stepped, stepped into a car? You know? And the fact that he’s like giving back a Tesla is some reflection of, of anything is, is, you know, I think a bit silly.

Grayson Brulte: Do you know what this is? Walt, years and years ago, there’s a gentleman in new, very, very good reporter who worked for the LA Times, and I said, why do you consistently cover Tesla seemingly every day? He goes, Grayson, the amount of ad revenue and traffic it drives for us. And he used this term bonkers that this is, this is an ad play. They’re, they’re, they’re getting a lot of traffic and making a lot of ad revenue. That’s what this seems like. This doesn’t seem, it’s real journalism to understand what’s going on here. It just seems, it’s a, it’s a, it’s a grab for cash.

Walter Piecyk: oh, you were talking about the journal. I thought you were talking about some of the conspiracy theories. ’cause I did drop into some Twitter spaces yesterday, you know, with some, what I think the term you use is Tesla Stans and there was some like allegations of, oh, this is five deep chess with the president and Elon to try and drive traffic to. What? I mean, come on. That’s, that’s nonsense. So let, let’s, let’s kind of, let’s examine this in two ways though. Let’s assume that the rift. On. Right. And you know, Elon comes back again and is aggressive today and, and they can’t come to terms . let, let’s go through the implications and then after that we’ll go, we will go through the implications that if this, if this passes first thing up is Austin, which is next week. The way I see this is you have NHTSA, right? That is under the secretary, , of the Department of Transportation. I would guess that they have the ability in some ways to halt the launch of, of, uh, the Robotaxi on Thursday next week when, when this thing is expected to go. Is that, is that right? And is there any other federal powers that exist that, that could be executed here? If, if this rift, um, intensified.

Grayson Brulte: There’s always risk. There is risk from the federal government. There’s also risk from the state government. I do not see either the state government or the federal government taking action to stop the robotaxi launch. But clearly it is a risk, and it has to be, has to be analyzed. We’re, we’re gonna have to watch for clues to see where that goes. Right now, we have not seen any truth posts from President Trump. Any indications from Press Secretary or any member of the cabinet about the robotaxi. What we have seen is the SpaceX program coming under fire, both from pundits and from the administration. To me, that is a bigger risk at this time than the, than the Tesla Robotaxis launch.

Walter Piecyk: Sure. And, and, and I’m, I’m dealing with that real time. I mean, as an aside, the FCC, which governs, uh, a lot of what SpaceX does is down to two commissioners. ’cause you’ve had some resignation. So they don’t have a quorum. The current chairman, Brendan Carr is, is, you know, closely aligned, aligned with Trump, and I think wouldn’t wanna lose his job as chairman. So, you know, is gonna continue to, to do whatever Trump’s signals. So I think getting back to your point, whether it’s a local official in Texas who is in line with, with Trump’s views, the chairman of the FCC, in the case of the space, you know, maybe you don’t even need to do anything at NHTSA, at the federal level because these guys would get the messaging, you know, over truth or otherwise to say like, okay, you know, maybe we need to pause on this program that they’re doing. So I think a lot we’ll just have to watch, I think, what happens in the coming days. But, you know, those are perhaps two routes that would potentially create near term risk and, and will be a good gauge of kind of, you know, how this goes. And, and look, it’s not beyond the president. To, to, to do things like that. He literally, you know, truth, I guess as you would say about canceling, you know, some of these government contracts, so clearly the same would go true of like, hey, all of a sudden he says, you know, are we sure we want these cars on our road in Texas? And then someone in Texas who does have the authority to shut it down or NHTSA, does so, so we’ll have to see how that plays out. That’s one risk.

Grayson Brulte: but this is the important, this is the very important thing to highlight. Well, let’s expand the risk pool here. You’re, you’re a great analyst and I wanna expand the risk pool here with you. If the federal government and President Trump took an action to shut down robotaxi, I. It is going to infect the entire autonomy economy, especially have a really negative impact on Waymo because on the risk prop, Waymo goes up, oh, he can president can shut down Waymo, and if any of these moves happened, do you know who the number one beneficiary of all this is? Organized labor. That’s the big overarching risk here. Oh, president could shut down automation, autonomy. It’s a huge win to Sean O’Brien and the Teamsters. That’s the big overarching risk here.

Walter Piecyk: I mean, you just highlighted an increased risk then because if you’re Sean O’Brien, you’re looking at this, you’re, you’re lick your chops as an opportunity to step in and be like, Hey. I’m your buddy. I’m not making nasty tweets about you. Maybe you should be looking at what’s going on in Austin, or, or have a second thought about, you know, the progress that we all hope, um, happens in terms of, of the national framework. Yeah, so it does have broader implications, um, you know, for autonomy in general. I mean, I think that’s a good pivot to, to national framework. Then, you know, if Labor’s fanning the flame, you know, this is an opportunity for others perhaps to step up in the autonomy industry across the board. So if you’re at this kind of critical junction, you know, you need Waymo and, and even the smaller players to, to from, whether it’s trucking or otherwise, to really step up and, and emphasize, emphasize the importance of the national framework.

Grayson Brulte: The industry, uh, has to come together, has to talk about the economic benefits. That’s one of the main reasons why I founded the Council for Economic Resilience to talk about these, these benefits and amplify these benefits. And the industry also needs to, I’ll say it, cozy up to the, the Trump White House, and understand that the Trump White House understands the positive job implications that will come with autonomy. Because, you know, O’Brien’s dialing into that White House saying it’s a job killer, job killer, the industry needs to come from the other side and say, no, Mr. President, sir. Look, look at the jobs that this is gonna create. Sir, you go on truth and you rail against Chairman Powell because you wanna stimulate the economy, sir. Well, here’s an opportunity to stimulate the economy through job growth, through automation and autonomy. That’s a winning message and that’s a message that has to be delivered.

Walter Piecyk: you know, Grayson, the, the crux or the, the origination of this fight is this big beautiful bill. So I’m wondering, you know, a, you know, does Elon have enough clout to even have an impact on the bill? Can it even passed? And, you know, is there anything in that bill that you know has an impact on our industry?

Grayson Brulte: Walt. It is indeed a big bill and it’s called a big beautiful bill for a reason. In fact, Walt, it is 1,116 pages long. I repeat 1,116 pages long, so it’s a very big bill. In that bill, there were some very distinct language as it relates to. Autonomous vehicles, and it’s very important for our audience that I read this here word for word. No, not a thousand pages, but I’m gonna read this word for word. Here we go in quote, in general, except as provided in paragraph two, no state or political subdivision, therewith off may enforce during the 10 year period, beginning on the date of the enactment of this act, any law or regulation of that state or a political subdivision, therefore limiting, restricting, or otherwise regulating artificial intelligence models, artificial intelligence systems or automated decision systems entered into interstate commerce. End quote,

Walter Piecyk: right. Hold on. My, my brain. My brain just shut off. It just got confused. What do all of those legal DC terms actually mean? Grayson? ’cause that was just a bunch of, as you would say, go, go gobbly gook, or what do you say? Dippity doo pity boop.

Grayson Brulte: How’s that?

Walter Piecyk: Translate that for us. Translate that for us, Grayson and please.

Grayson Brulte: In a nutshell? It’s preemption, which no state, county, city municipality can enforce any autonomous vehicle laws. Vehicles will be free to scale, operate, go overstate lines charged for paid rides. It is the basis to get us to a national autonomous vehicle framework. California’s current regulatory environment goes away.

Walter Piecyk: I mean this, that’s what, that’s an amazing thing, right? ’cause we think about all these other ways of things having to, to go o other, methods that we have thought about. And here it is, I don’t wanna say snuck in, but it’s section 43, 2 0 1. So it’s in the big beautiful bill. This opportunity for something that, that really achieves in many ways what we’d like to, to have a, you know, have accomplished. To enable, whether it’s, you know, Elon or trucking companies or whoever to operate in these very restrictive states.

Grayson Brulte: Yes, it’s a very positive step forward. The likelihood of it getting through probably less than 10 to 15% because the Byrd rule in the Senate, but the fact that that language is in there very interesting. Obviously I’m, I don’t know who put it in there, I’m not gonna speculate, and who put it in there is obviously. Put towards artificial intelligence companies, but there is clear language in there for autonomous vehicles, and I spoke to three lawyers today and got confirmation on that, that if this does become law, AVS can scale. So very, very interesting point to highlight that has not been picked up necessarily yet.

Walter Piecyk: I mean, and everyone certainly identifies au um, autonomy as the physical representation of artificial intelligence. So when you think about automated decision systems or however you wanna word it, that certainly has been well documented. As, as being classified into autonomy. So, yeah, I mean, this is, this is why, again, getting back to why we’re even doing this podcast, you know, autonomy being an expression of ai, the thing that’s really gonna change our economy, of course it’s gonna get, you know, the attention, uh, on Capitol Hill, you know, in, in various ways. So now what is it about the Byrd rule that’s gonna, that will strip this out? Can you refresh us on that?

Grayson Brulte: The Byrd Rule is a Senate rule that requires reconciliation packages to focus on budgetary issues like federal spending revenues and the debt limit. This is not that, so that is the Byrd rule in a summary tech technicality in the Senate. So don’t really necessarily see it happening unless politicians or politicians, and they could find a technicality to keep that language in the bill. Unsure at this point.

Walter Piecyk: So let’s shift now to a, some listener feedback. You know, we’ve, we’ve been profiling Tesla’s upcoming launch. Clearly it’s a major item for autonomy . you know, I think we’ve been relatively balanced there, but everyone’s gonna hear what they’re gonna hear . but we, we were asked to, to discuss, what would happen. If in fact there was a crash and what the fallout would be for Tesla . and, and the question was posed in a variety of ways. So I’m gonna go through ’em one by one, Grayson, and we’ll go back and forth on this. First of all, how would consumers respond? So, well, actually, before we even start with that, let’s define what a crash means. Like what is a material crash in, in the context of this question, is it something fatal? Is it significant? Like, what is, what, what was the crash? Can you refresh our memories on the crash that basically did cruise in, where we all know that what did cruise in was more about the response than the crash, but, you know, let’s, let’s, provide some color or context for what we mean by a crash here.

Grayson Brulte: In relation to the cruise crash, and this is in police reports, this is in a NHTSA filing. The cruise vehicle hit a individual and dragged them. The vehicle did not stop after it hit the individual. That was the key thing, and I wanna h emphasize the drag part. The vehicle did not stop. The same thing happened a few weeks ago. The Zoox vehicle hit an individual on electrified scooter. Did not stop either. We don’t know where that’s going. Did not drag the person, but the vehicle did not stop. The big crutch of this is the vehicle not stopping after it makes contact with a human. That is the big issue.

Walter Piecyk: I mean, that doesn’t seem like a, a remote use case to program your car to say when you hit an object that appears to be a human to stop. So I’m not sure why that this is some edge case that shouldn’t be solved for, but I digress. In the incident for Cruise, did the, did the person that was hit by the car and dragged, did they pass away?

Grayson Brulte: No, they survived and GM paid a settlement, but that individual did survive and it was not life-threatening in injuries as either.

Walter Piecyk: And do you think that had, , Cruise or GM been more open, um, and transparent in that process that they would still be, um, or it would not have been as devastating, you know, to that company? ’cause the, the fact that Cruise is not around today, frankly, I think has a lot more to do with the CEO and their unwillingness to move forward on the test that they have before. I think that’s a completely different issue. Um, but in the case for this, with this, um, with this accident, wasn’t it more about Cruise response than the accident itself?

Grayson Brulte: in my opinion, it was about the lack of transparency getting, if you wanna use the term cutesy with the editing of the video and not being fully transparent, disclosing everything, what happens if you go back to ni Nixon and Watergate? It’s the coverup. And I believe that’s the coverup is what eventually did them in, because it gave GM an excuse to pull out of a, a company and an investment that they were seemingly getting lukewarm on.

Walter Piecyk: so let’s assume that in the, for the case of Tesla, for this, for the purposes of this debate or discussion, that no one dies, but it’s, but it’s something that’s, you know, kind of shocking. Like how could a car not stop after hitting a human? It doesn’t have to be exactly that, but something in that regard, like, why did this car like suddenly dart off the side of the road and, and hit a tree and, you know, injure this, this consumer. Question number one, how do, obviously the press is gonna have a field day with that, right? Um, anything in autonomy first off, and then obviously an an Elon company, you know, even more highlighted, what’s the consumer reaction do you think people would stop taking, um, the, the Robotaxi in Austin if that accident occurred in the first six months?

Grayson Brulte: No, you know why the, the, the, the average American doesn’t trust the media, so I don’t see it having any big material impact. On a consumer wanting to get in that vehicle, simply that the consumer does not trust the media.

Walter Piecyk: I kind of feel like the answer to this is it really depends on the accident. If it’s the car doing something crazy in a normal scenario, then that would have an impact on the consumer. But if the issue is that they, they don’t have that point. 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, like remote, whatever edge case that the car didn’t happen to actually handle perfectly. I actually think the consumer is gonna use their brain and be like, all right, well that was a one-off and I could have easily been killed by a random drunk one-off as well. And I don’t think that that would, you know, I think that would be the result. It depends on like how dumb the car’s response was, and we will have that info, you know, certainly from the, the cameras and, and NHTSA and everything else on the reporting.

Grayson Brulte: People do stupid things. If you, what wasn’t reported when Cruise was operating in Austin, the vehicles were a menace to society. There is a friend of mine who’s a well-known economist, was nearly run over by one. He wrote to Cruise and said, this is exactly what happened. They ignored him. Another time I was in the vehicle in Austin with Cruise. We almost got in four accidents. The ve, those vehicles did not work very well, but yet when I drive my vehicle with FSD, it’s a much better experience than I had. So, translating that, if that’s where Tesla is today, they’re a lot further along with Cruise and I don’t really see any big issues outside of this media firestorm, if you want to call that. But then you have to remember, Elon Musk is not Mary Barra. The guy’s willing to throw jabs, take jabs, and he is not gonna back down. So there’s a big difference there.

Walter Piecyk: I mean, first of all, I, I don’t think we need to denigrate. Cruise at that stage in their technology development. Everyone, you know, moves their technology forward. Had they stuck with it, they probably would’ve been much further along. Again, I just think it’s the nature of the, of the accident. I saw, you know, a video, I don’t know if it’s true or not, or a random Tesla maybe saw a shadow and, and took a quick left turn. That would probably scare people. But if it’s like a random thing where like a random animal fox jumps out and like this, this, you know, edge use case, if that’s what you’re referring to, or if that’s what the accident ends up being, that results in some severe injury, I think the consumers are gonna get through that.

Grayson Brulte: So the logs came out. This goes back to a mutual friend of ours, Chuck Price. The logs came out. Chuck. Chuck walked me through the logs. The individual, this is all in the logs, took control of the vehicle. When it drove off the road autopilot, they disengaged autopilot. So it was not autopilot, FSD that drove into the tree. It was the human, and we have the logs to back that up.

Walter Piecyk: It doesn’t matter, Grayson, it doesn’t matter. We don’t have to, we don’t, we don’t have to defend every single video that’s out there that’s for the Tesla Stans to do. All I’m saying is if that is, if it’s an accident like that, that will have an impact. But if it’s an edge case, I mean, I think consumers are smarter than that. Let’s move on to regulators, though. They have a different bar and that bar may change, or that bar may be different now, depending on what the company’s relationship is, you know, with the president of the United States. But let’s assume a normalized relationship with the administration. How would the regulators respond for an edge case accident That’s, you know, dramatic but not necessarily fatal.

Grayson Brulte: NHTSA would open an invest a crash investigation. Depending on the severity, it could be an NTSB investigation. Investigation would be opened, most likely. This is hypothetical. Tesla would issue a quote unquote software recall, or if you want to say, uh, an update if you want to use that term to fix what that is. But nine out of 10 chance you are gonna get a NHTSA investigation to go through that.

Walter Piecyk: I need more specifics than that. It happens, you know, whatever on, ’cause the, the question was within the next six months, September 10th, it’s on the news I put on the Today Show. Here’s this accident. Does NHTSA shut them down that day? Or do they, when you say they do an investigation that sounds like something that’s nine months out, what is there immediate reaction? What’s the timeline for how this is dealt with from a regulator standpoint?

Grayson Brulte: I do not see the regulators shutting it down. I see Tesla pause in the fleet for, for a period of time and being proactive. I do not see N the fleet to be shut down. I’m not an expert on that, so I don’t want to to give an opinion, but if you look at historical context, every time this happens, the companies voluntarily shut the fleet down for an extended period of time. So I’m assuming that’s what Tesla would do, but I am not an expert on that.

Walter Piecyk: and then I guess, look, if it is something fatal and it is, and it does appear initially that it’s the car doing something wacky in a normal operating procedure, look, I would guess that, that, that thing would be, first of all, I believe that Tesla would shut things down immediately. And I think if not, the regulators would step in. But again, it really goes to the, to the nature of the accident. And I think people that are not believers. In Tesla’s ability to accomplish this technology feat or imagining that it’s gonna be like just a normal scenario, I’m just going down the street and all of a sudden I’m gonna just drive into a telephone pole. Yeah, I agree. That like, if that happens, this thing is gonna go on pause by the company itself. I don’t think the company’s gonna keep pushing forward if one of their cars just randomly drives into a telephone pole when they happen to be going down the street. However, if they hit some, like edge use case, like that’s clearly an edge use case. I can just make up random things about turtles and rabbits and birds or whatever it is. Um, you know, a lacrosse stick coming from the sky, you know, falling out of a biplane. I don’t know. Um, you know, it’s, it’s all, it’s all the context of what it is. And I think this gets back to what we discussed last week in this belief that Tesla doesn’t have a, a, a culture of safety. They don’t want their cars fucking driving off the road, hitting telephone poles out of the blue.

Grayson Brulte: No, they, they, they don’t. You’re right. The context matters. The context will do everything at the end of the day. Tesla has to sell cars to, to, to make revenue, to invest. And if the cars go, as you said, quote unquote, wacky, they’re not gonna sell any more vehicles. It’s gonna have a fundamental impact on their business to fund their AI and robotics ambitions.

Walter Piecyk: And lemme just restate that. Um, again, for our longtime listeners, they know this now. So sorry for saying this for the 18th time. I own a Tesla y, hardware three, you know, you know, I don’t have the latest software, 12.6. I use it every single time. I’ve used it in hard reign. I’ve used it in the fog, I’ve used it at night. Uh, I’m safe with it, right? I stay alert. There’s never been, it, it, it drives. Equal, if not better, than my Waymo experience. In terms of the feel of the ride, it never, in my experience, this is anecdotal, does anything random like just, you know, makes a quick right or a left turn to drive off the road? I think there was a couple of months ago when it wanted to pass a, you know, a truck on a windy local road, which I said, okay, that’s a little bit too aggressive. And I, and I reigned it back in . but beyond that, like it works in these, in these normal scenarios. Now maybe the edge case is that like, oh, 99% of the time you’re going down the highway and it’s not gonna turn into a telephone pole. But that 0.001, I don’t think that’s the way that this technology works. I think the times it’s gonna get tripped up is when it deals with something it just hasn’t dealt with before. I don’t know. We’ll, we’ll see. We’ll see how it goes. But look, now we’re at least on record, we’ve addressed these listener questions about what happens. And at the end of the day, like this is an American company and you know, let you know, which employs a lot of people in the United States and is, and is putting forward a technology for our country competing with, you know, what China’s doing. I think it’s actually sad that, that there are some people that are actually hoping for crashes not only to be rooting against an American company, um, but rooting effectively for someone to potentially get injured. Just to prove your point that you are right. That’s sad.

Grayson Brulte: It’s pathetic, Walt. It’s pathetic. And that goes to the thing that we’ve talked about for the last several weeks where, uh, they say, oh, he elon’s scared or Tesla’s scared. They want to. A controlled environment. They have to, because you’re gonna get some wackadoodle that would go in there and try and crash a vehicle to prove a point. At the end of the day, it, it, it’s the, the brand is so polarized and people are polarized. The thing that we need to watch for. Do people, when these vehicles start operating in Austin, do people try and do, I’ll say it, while stupid things to cause a vehicle to try and do something so they can prove a point and they can be validated with their, I’ll use, that’s a very strong word. I don’t like kids using it, but it is true in this case, their hatred of this brand. That’s a risk.

Walter Piecyk: and on the flip side of that, you’re gonna have the, like the Tesla bulls that, that if the reaction is an accident. It is traumatic that are gonna immediately, and we’ve seen this with all the videos that have already occurred, immediately allege that the person is, is motivated that they probably, let me see the logs, they probably grabbed a hold of the wheel. Thankfully we do have this technology in terms of cameras. I don’t know if they’ll have the internal, internal camera data. Um, but yeah, that’s gonna, there’s gonna be a lot of noise on both sides. You know, one side alleging someone, you know, forced this thing to have an accident. The other end. Look, at the end of the day, all we care about is the truth here. You know, we obviously want this technology to move, move forward. Yes, we are rooting for autonomy to work. Why? ’cause it is a major game changer for our economy and for, you know, a lot of things in terms of productivity. So a hundred percent we root for every single one of these companies, you know, to succeed. So we’ll just have to deal with the noise in the case of Tesla because of. You know, a CEO that, by the way, I’m not, I don’t feel sorry for him. He has brought this on himself. He is a polarizing figure because he has made himself a polarizing figure. So he has brought this on himself in the unforced error category.

Grayson Brulte: Yes. And we root for everybody. And we’re, and I give credit to us. Walt, we’re probably one of the only outlets that looks at Tesla from a, a neutral perspective and highlights the, the good, the bad, and the ugly. And we talk about everything. But they’re an American company that has done a lot of good for American society. They employ people, they fund, they fund pensions, they fund little leagues. They fund church outings. They fund all sorts of things. They don’t get enough credit for that. But it is America that’s building autonomy and you know, who’s paying attention to America’s growing autonomy economy. Of all people Europe. Europe is beginning to pay attention to this, and the tariff is back and forth on the auto parts. So the imports, sorry, the export of auto parts into the United States. Europe’s saying, president Trump, we will adopt American autonomous vehicle regulations if you remove the tariffs. I said, holy cow. Wow. I’m gonna sound like Phil Rizzuto the scooter. Holy cow. Is this so America can export autonomy to Europe? Or why is autonomous vehicles now part of this tarrfis negoation.

Walter Piecyk: we talked about this many, many episodes ago in terms of opening up to some of the Chinese technology companies and you know, what are they developing internally? You have Wayve, obviously that’s very impressive. I sent you a LinkedIn post from someone bragging about like, don’t sleep on AV in Europe. And he is referencing effectively Chinese technology that they’re integrating, um, in Europe. Um, you know, when the dust settles and all the tariff noise at the end of the day, you know, it’s in. In my opinion, at least eus best interest to align with the US And historically what I’ve seen in Telco is, you know, they’ve effectively, you know, there’s been alignment, you know, between the eu, um, where European countries and the UK prior to that, you know, and the us. So it, it, it certainly, it certainly makes sense.

Grayson Brulte: it, makes sense. And th this is, this is a hypothetical. If they do adopt us, regulations potentially could benefit Waymo. ’cause Waymo could then export their technology to the eu. And for the, if I’m an EU commissioner, that counteracts China’s growing influence there. ’cause I’d much rather, if I’m the eu, I much rather have America as a partner than China, which is a global adversary as a partner.

Walter Piecyk: I would think that they, uh, understand that and perhaps some of the noise from a couple of months ago was from the early tariff stuff. Again, I understand it right. It was certainly instigated by our president. With his whiteboard of taxes. So I understand it. Um, but I think as things hopefully settle down and normalize, you know, this should benefit Waymo and, and obviously Uber who’s got operations in Europe.

Grayson Brulte: Again, it’s a, it’s a benefit to America. Staying on the Waymo theme here for a minute, Sundar Phai was out at a conference this week. He made a statement about Waymo. He alluded that the great highway unlock is coming next year. We, I know we talk about that. Do we potentially get the Great Highway unlocked by December 31st, 2025?

Walter Piecyk: when I look at that statement or hear that statement, when you say next year, when you and I were thinking it was like, you know, should be like next month or next week given, you know, I actually saw those cars, uh, on the whatever road that was in in California. I saw their easy passes in there. So to me that next year is a pushout in terms of expectation. And I continue to believe that the primary reason for that is the supply of vehicles. And, and that is, that is the holdup. Um, I do not really think it’s technology. I could be wrong. Um, I don’t think it’s the technology, but, um, look, Google itself, you know, Sundar was also, I don’t know when this podcast was recorded. He was on the decoder, you know, and when he was asked about the drop in search, which, you know, you’ve, I’ve referenced here in the past in terms of this relates to Waymo, right? If their core cash flow generating business is having problems, there’s gonna be more focus on Waymo and the decisions there. And when he was asked about this on decoder, you know, there was a big, a lot of tap dance in, in terms of the AI’s impact on what’s going on in search. So, you know, I think as time moves forward, I’m a big believer in ai. I think that puts Google at great risk, Chachi pt, um, specifically. Perplexity, I think has at least had some more progress more recently with Samsung. This is gonna, for Google, this will increase the importance of Waymo, especially since they, they frame Waymo as a manifestation of ai, right? So if you think of ai, Hey, AI is the thing that’s killing me on search. But look, I’ve got the physical representation of AI in Waymo. So that, that I think, gets pushed more and more forward, you know, in terms of the storyline for Google, whether it gets spun out or not, you know, we can debate that on another podcast. Um, but certainly it’s gonna become part of the narrative, on earnings calls, on investor calls and so on and so forth.

Grayson Brulte: And you know what? You just un unveiled to us. If everybody was wondering where you’re from, you gave a clue, Walt easy pass. There’s only one part of the country that EPAs is there, so we know you’re from the Tri-state area. I got you this one in the, the highway you were on in California. WW was the 1 0 1. At that same conference, Dara made comments that, that Uber wants to continue to invest and support and grow the AV ecosystem. Do you think there’s a potential, another partner, another deal coming soon?

Walter Piecyk: I mean, hopefully they do something with Wayve As as we predicted. But yeah, I think, I think Uber will continue to make partnerships. You know, Dara was, when we was interviewed, he also kind of took a shot, I don’t know, maybe it was at us directly or not, but talked about the press and investors. I think we kind of crossed that a bit on both sides, creating drama about their relationship with Waymo. Um, oh, there’s no drama. There’s no drama. And like, I mean, to me that’s, it’s, it’s, this is what management teams say. Don’t, don’t look behind that. Don’t look behind that curtain. There’s no, there’s nothing to look at here. I mean, I had the same thing kind of. With Aurora be like, oh, it means nothing that the driver is back in the driver’s seat of your, of the truck. Nothing. I mean, look, I’ve been doing this a long time. Sorry. I will determine what I think is drama and you know, what is an actual risk to your business, right? And certainly investors care a great deal if Waymo is your partner five, 10 years from now, or they’re not. Because if they’re not, you know, that is an existential threat, uh, to your business. That’s not drama. That’s just, that’s reality. And Aurora, same thing, like the fact that there’s a driver there. Yeah, you better disclose if that driver ever touches that wheel, but that, that does actually matter, I think, you know, for investors to understand, you know, what’s going on in the progression of, of that technology.

Grayson Brulte: Aurora’s getting competition in the public markets. Kodiak’s in the process of going, going public, and then this week it was announced, plus through a $1.2 billion SPAC transaction. They’re joining the public markets with Aurora. What are your thoughts on pluses transaction?

Walter Piecyk: Well, I, I appreciate the segue, but I definitely don’t think that Aurora cares about additional public companies, but they do care about competition. But Aurora has a very high opinion of themselves and where their technology is and believes that they are many, many years ahead of anyone, you know, in, in the market . it’s been really fun to con, continue to dive in on, on trucking and, and understand the different models. That work, and we’ll get to plus in a minute in that IPO in a minute. But, you know, some of these companies, they just wanna be software and like, plus, and that they’ll expect even the OEM to do things like service and remote assistance and, and last mile delivery. And then there’s others like bot Auto that wanna do everything. And then there’s like Aurora that’s kind of in the middle where they’re gonna do their own remote assistant and each of them carry different margins. And as a result, different revenue. And from my standpoint, like I’m still figuring it out. And by the way, at the end of the day, these are all business models. It ultimately comes down to the technology, if the technology works. So each of these people can, each of these companies can adjust their business model. If sales don’t materialize in the way they’re trying to sell or if the OEM relationship continues to stall, they’re all capable, I think of, of making, you know, those, you know, those changes. In a perfect world. I’d love if these companies did nothing, you know, do the plus model where you’re just super high margin, right? And everyone else is doing everything. If they’re doing stuff for you, owning the car, paying for the technology, paying for the service, paying for the remote assistant. I don’t know if that’s plausible or not, but that to me gets the highest multiple. It is a truly software type multiple, and that, that I think is what makes plus as a concept, very attractive. What, what, which, which is your favorite model of the multiples that are out there in trucking specifically?

Grayson Brulte: My favorite model, the the model that’s going to scale, the model that’s going to win. I don’t have an opinion on which model is going to win yet. I do have concerns around some of the models that are, uh, too reliant on things, but at the end of the day, we, we do not have a model where I’m like, okay, well we gotta champion this. We, we have to champion this because I believe that there’ll be multiple models in the market that will be successful.

Walter Piecyk: I mean, it’s interesting that you say that because one of my concerns that’s, that’s arising to me as my very brief experience with PACCAR and, and Volvo frankly, is just the reliance on an OEM. And you know, if that halts your ability to ramp your revenue, that ends up being, I think, problematic. So we’ll see how those things work out. But I think, you know, while there’s benefits clearly over the long term getting to scale, I. You have to get to the point where you get to scale. You know? And, and getting to that point, you can’t just keep raising capital, raising capital when there’s other technology companies out there that are, that are hitting that will hit these same milestones at some point and raise capital. So I think I’m not sold one way or another. I’m just nervous that these OEMs are kind of a, a, a blocking point in, in enabling this kind of technology to move forward . in many cases, a lot of ’em deal with it. Like plus has their OEM relationships, you know, obviously, um, Torc is owned by their OEM effectively, right? Don Burnett, no connection, no real true reliance on the OEMs, but we’ll get to there. Dominic Kodiak is, sorry. Um, what I’m referencing, and then Aurora obviously has, has this reliance, so, I’m a little bit more concerned there.

Grayson Brulte: The risk has been known in the industry.

Walter Piecyk: that’s fine and we have to believe that they will get there. But again, it speaks to the risk that they are not there today. So we have a, a current manifestation of, of the challenges that you have with the un. Aurora’s got plenty of cash. They have a technology that I believe works. So there should be a path to get there, but these are just additional friction points for companies that you prefer not to see in the long term. It may turn out better because let’s say four years from now when everything’s scaling, those relationships are enabling them to sell or to buy five, 10, 15,000 trucks a year. And Don Burnett is going to be trying to like, negotiate with an OEM to try and get that volume and he can’t get that volume. Who knows? We’ll have to see how that plays out. But for the near term, they have to show. Now that we’ve seen, like you get to a technology investor, in the case of Aurora, you, you show the technology works. The next focus is clearly gonna be on how you’re getting to the scale and the volume to get to profitability. Let’s spend a little time on plus though, plus the, the, the person that’s spacing this a little controversy in the past, but you know, as a known SPAC winner, he has his most recent one. I think an energy company backed by Sam Altman. So clearly that one went well. You know, they had zero redemptions. Uh, in the case of how Plus is doing the spac, unlike Kodiak, which is also doing a spac and they have a pipe where they’re effectively have at least a hundred million in. And it looks like based on how the stock’s performing is gonna get more, plus it’s like no pipe. You know, our reliance is on this SPAC King. So, you know, there was no redemptions for Sam Altman. So if we get no redemptions for our spac, which is the ticker on it, is uh, I think CCIX, then they could have a couple hundred millions in their, in their back pocket. And, and in my history with them, you know, I met with them at CES, they were looking to raise a hundred, 150 million, same type of thing. This obviously is probably the easier path to getting money and even more money. They’re effectively riding the coattails of aurora’s successful technology. Kodiak’s successful or in at least initial success, it seems like, with their spac. So I think they’re kind of going on that, and obviously this is a manifestation of AI with a SPAC guy, that that is their sponsor that is known, um, as an ai. So I think it’s, it’s the right decision for them . you know, we actually have taken investors into Sea Plus the, we’ve had people ride in their truck, um, in California, you know, doing, doing test rides. So I think they’re doing everything they can to, to queue it up, um, appropriately. We’ll just have to watch ’em. And, and for our listeners, just look at the spac and as long as that thing can kind of stay above 10 bucks, you’ve got a pretty good shot at, at getting, you know, a decent amount of cash out of, out of the spac, whether it’s, you know, Kodiak, which is, I think theirs is a A CT or, or, um, you know, or now plus, which is.

Grayson Brulte: a clear indicator that there, there’s interest in the market, plus has the relationship with international. So 2027, those trucks will start rolling. It seems that 2027. Could become the golden age for autonomous trucking. ’cause that’s when Torc is going. There’d be more competition in the market. So Kodiak’s in the process of going public plus is in the, in the process of going public. Aurora’s already public. Does one of these is call it junior league players, do they try and step up and and ride this market wave as well?

Walter Piecyk: It’s a good question. I mean, there’s certainly plenty of SPACs out there. IPO market itself is, I think seemingly better . you know, and a lot of these companies are at a stage where they need a couple hundred million dollars to get to that, that kind of next level. So yeah, I think you’re gonna, assuming Plus and Kodiak Go well, are gonna continue to see momentum into that market. Right. And look, these, these companies are, are. Effectively the asking the market to support a billion, billion and a half of, of enterprise value. When your, your comp is aurora, you know, which is ahead, debatable how much ahead, but ahead. But the discrepancy in, in valuation there is like 12 billion. You know, is there that much of a dis discrepancy in the technology? People from Aurora will tell you? Absolutely, yes. Honestly, it’s impossible for me to evaluate that . not an engineer not looking at the code, you know, we’ll just have to see how this, this, this stuff progresses.

Grayson Brulte: What’s very clear is that autonomous trucking is a topic that we’re gonna continue to cover here on autonomy markets. ’cause it is a, it is growing market and I personally find it a fascinating market.

Walter Piecyk: and I actually think that investors are just overly obsessed with for good reason. The Tesla launch next week and Waymo and the kind of the implications for Uber. ’cause that’s what they traffic in most. This trucking portion of autonomy is also has major implications, you know, for the economy in a number of different ways, but also can represent massive market cap opportunity, you know, to consider. So, you know, we are gonna be spending more time on, on, on trucking and I, and I would recommend that people, you know, spend the time themselves in understanding the different companies and the opportunity that exists there.

Grayson Brulte: As we spend more time on trucking, you know what we could do? We can get Autonomy Markets keep on trucking trucker hats, and then we can really be rocking and rolling on this. A lot’s happened in the autonomy markets. We had a a big emphasis on political what ifs or what could happen this week, next week. Politics aside, what do we need to look for in the autonomy markets?

Walter Piecyk: I mean, first and foremost, the Austin launch. Is it gonna happen on Thursday the 12th? I think, you know, Uber’s gonna be out there talking about implications for them at some point. There’s some conferences. Um, you have also in my world, WW DC, which is the big developers conference for Apple . you know, I was at io, which was interesting, and, and now you’ve got WWDC, which I will, you know, be looking at virtually. I mean, for Apple, as you may recall, last year promised a lot about ai, which didn’t materialize, and there’s been increasing pressure on what’s going on at the company. They’ve obviously underperformed the market. I was listening to a podcast this week, Brian Chesky, of Airbnb, you know, who’s close to Johnny Ives. Um, close to Sam Altman, introduced the two perhaps to make a competitive product, but talked about the apple risk that exists and basically said they need a product guy, right? Cook’s gotta go. He didn’t say that, but he is like, effectively he was implied and they need a product guy. So. Imagine Apple gets a product focused CEO back in, obviously not gonna happen at WWC this week. What if we a product guy, would they, would they revive the Apple car if autonomy is effectively this great manifestation of ai? I..

Grayson Brulte: Why not? It’s a growing market. It’s an opportunity because. Apple needs a growth product. At the end of the day, there’s all these reports that they’re gonna go into glasses, so that’s a possibility. We know the Vision Pro. Unfortunately, you got stuck with one buying one. It didn’t work out very well, so they need a consumer product. I’ve thought about this for years. If Apple does go into autonomy Their greatest advantage that nobody has outside of Tesla, the Apple stores, those can effectively become showrooms for test rides. To expose the public to that technology and the Genius Bar can, can get over the hump of public trust and adoption by walking through individuals. That’s an advantage. It fits right into the Apple ecosystem. The question is, will Apple ever take the plunge again?

Walter Piecyk: We will have to wait and see.

Grayson Brulte: We’ll have to wait and see. And while we wait and see, Walt and I will be here every single Saturday at 10:00 AM Eastern to break down the autonomy markets for you. The future is bright, the future autonomous, the futurist autonomy markets, and to the individuals that listen that are starting to quote us on stage. Thank you.