Member Info for redindi

Beef Other than cost, why would JLR, a premium brand, also risk reputation damage? Imagine the sales pitch "yes, this is the finest DMS system, designed to detect fatigue and distraction. However, don't use it above 40mph as it doesn't work". I think SmartEye has a serious problem, selling both to mid/high OEM's and dependent on location and legislation, that could even be an issue with low end OEM's. You can see why SmartEye are investing into getting an auto grade chip.

Sebs Good point. Other than Geely and Hyundai, Aptiv are now in bed with SEE which also brings JLR back into the mix. I think JLR would consider itself to be mid/high performance. No wonder Viktor is concerned!

Can you imagine SmartEye DMS in a Porsche? Doesn't it do over 40mph plus when you turn it on?

Oops!

Terry Indeed it would appear it does need our tech urgently, maybe Apple is one of the driverless set-ups expected to conclude discussions before our year end? Shame about NDA's. How come Geely don't require an NDA whilst every other OEM, including Byton, do require one? Especially after Audi, as regards Geely.

And Seeing Machines said 'Casper? Never heard of him' in reply!

Terry And in between all that there was the first signs of nad news from Fleet (21/05/18) which didn't seem so bad at the time but now we know differently. Whether by revenue from BdMS, borrowings, strategic investor, placement or whatever SEE needs to put the funding issue to bed. And then, yes, with the amount of news we hope will land, the SP will leav past highs behind. Today's a good start which could have been even better, with a better worded RNS.

Terry That's what happens when you say you've won a contract worth US $4.26 million and although acknowledging significant upside neglect to say the upside could be worth up to 47 times the minimum quoted. If Carlsberg or some other Scandinavian company issued the RNS :......

Auto production in 2017 for PSA was 3.63 million

It's almost as if the $4.26 million is a non-returnable deposit (I doubt engineering costs are substantial, just leave Aptiv to it) and that $20 a vehicle is in addition, maybe!

Until today

S2020 And also mentioned in the BMW RNS. So, until the general rule of thumb was non-chip - engineering milestone payments, Chip - no engineering milestone payments. Hmmm

SG You could well be right. However, what differentiates this RNS from the RNS' in relation to the Byton and Ford is the mention of engineering milestone payments. That is lacking in the earlier chip wins. Is FCA following a Cadillac route in offering it as an optional extra whereas Ford and little old Byton are including as Standard, hence the engineering milestone payments as a minimum revenue payment? That may make sense as regards SEE getting something for their work but it's hard to make sense of it if FCA seem obliged to follow Ford, but not all the way? No doubt FCA will soon have to or lose face and customers.

If you disregard engineering milestone payments, the $4.26 million mentioned at $20 a pop equates to 213,000 vehicles or 42,600 each year for 5 years. There is not one existing model in the Jeep range that sells such low a number, either US or worldwide. Too many known unknowns. Also, the RNS mentioned models, ie plural, which clouds the issue further. To cloud it a bit more, Tesla Models S and X had a combined 2018 sales of around 51,500. Close but no cigar unless very competitively priced and also doesn't leave much upside but could be viewed as strategic in its own way. I do believe it's FCA but unless the $4.26 million relates purely to engineering milestone payments, the figures don't add up!

Again, to put into context, Safestocks says the design win is in relation to the Jeep. In 2018, total Jeep sales were 973,000 which at US$20 a vehicle is $19.46 million or over a 5 life cycle $97.3 million. As per the RNS text, the only guaranteed payments are engineering milestone payments. So the A$6 million relates only to engineering milestone payments? Is this an over or understatement?

To put into context how understated SEEs figures are, SEE has stated it's A$6 million which equals US $4.26 million and $200 million as stated by Safestocks is roughly 47 times the contract value quoted by SEE, with caveats. As for the other RFQ's.... Overstated???????

shallwe I don't believe SEE will be in it's current form by 2022. I'm sure a buyer will have the resources to continue SEEs market position.

GB2 If correct that would leave SEYE with possibly two Tier 1's, Visteon (Geely) and maybe Mobis for Hyundai /Kia as against SEEs 6 (I believe) Tier 1's which gives a good pointer to how it's going. Looking at the SmartEye BB, I note one poster says SEE is overstated. I would it's the exact opposite!

http://www.safestocks.co.uk

I believe it's another indicator of market segmentation/fragmentation (as per Semicast) between mid/high and low. The Big 3 x 3 (mid/high mainly) and others in those segments can't afford not to use a solution that works at all speeds and not only up to 40 mph. Hence why I can see SEE winning all 6 (including the existing OEM) of its RFQ's this half. Meanwhile SEYE will pick up business elsewhere!