TrendForce has released its latest report, “Analysis of EEA Architecture and ADAS Domain Controllers in New Energy Vehicles,” providing a detailed analysis of the evolution of electronic and electrical architectures in new energy vehicles and the current status of ADAS domain controllers. Excerpts from the report are as follows.

TrendForce’s Insights:

1. BEV Platform: the Ideal Carrier for High Integration EEA Development

In recent years, various automakers have been investing resources to enhance the competitiveness of their new energy vehicles, particularly Battery Electric Vehicles (BEVs), by developing BEV platforms.

With the complete elimination of internal combustion engines, BEVs exhibit a higher degree of electrification compared to other powertrain modes, facilitating the design of high-computing power and highly integrated Electrical/Electronic Architecture (EEA).

Furthermore, startup automakers unburdened by traditional internal combustion engine constraints currently lead in the integration of EEA architectures compared to traditional automakers.

2. Domain Controllers are Parts of the Key Components for the Development of Highly Integrated EEA

Currently, domain controllers with varying computational power are widely distributed in the market.

However, electric vehicles equipped with high-performance domain controllers still have prices significantly higher than the average, and given the limited economic scale of new entrants, sustained cost reduction requires continuous investment from more manufacturers and improvement in usage environment.

3. The Economic Scale of BEVs Will be the Main Hurdle for EEA Development

While BEVs are considered the optimal platform for developing highly integrated EEAs, the challenges of range anxiety and high vehicle prices continue to be significant barriers affecting the sustained growth of the market.

This has led to a recent slowdown in BEV demand, prompting automakers to redirect some of their development resources to PHEV and even HEV models. These vehicle types may not necessarily require or be suitable for high-performance chips.

Therefore, if PHEVs and HEVs continue to grow, they could become key factors affecting the economies of scale and widespread adoption of high-performance chips.

Source to media China Timse,  in the realm of China’s mainland new energy vehicle industry, NIO announced on the 20th that it has successfully secured $1 billion in funding through two convertible corporate bond offerings. This move aims not only to reduce existing debt but also to strengthen its balance sheet. In addition, BYD has unveiled the pricing for its electric vehicle model, Dolphin, which is making its entry into the Japanese market.

The starting price for Dolphin in Japan is 3.63 million Japanese yen, approximately $24,565.2 USD. This Dolphin model is BYD’s second entry into the Japanese automotive market. For those seeking a longer-endurance version of Dolphin, the price is set at 4.07 million Japanese yen. Earlier this year, BYD introduced a higher-priced electric SUV in Japan.

Another electric vehicle manufacturer in China, NIO, has disclosed that it raised $500 million through a 6-year convertible bond issuance and another $500 million through a 7-year convertible bond offering. These bonds are categorized as senior unsecured bonds, with a yield of 3.875% for the 6-year bonds and 4.625% for the 7-year bonds.

Upon the release of this news, NIO’s stock price in Hong Kong experienced a sharp 12% drop during the morning session on the 20th. NIO plans to allocate some of the raised funds to repurchase existing debt securities and enhance its financial resilience.

NIO had previously announced at the end of August that they plan to launch their first self-developed smartphone around the end of September. They aim to enhance the attractiveness of their vehicles by leveraging improved software connectivity. During the second quarter, NIO reported a net loss of 6.12 billion RMB, approximately $8.3951 billion USD, compared to a net loss of 2.75 billion RMB in the same period last year. (Image credit: BYD )

(Source: https://www.chinatimes.com/realtimenews/20230920002512-260410?ctrack=pc_main_rtime_p06&chdtv)

In the third quarter of 2023, the passive component industry’s inventory has returned to normal levels. However, it continues to deplete due to sluggish end-demand. Nevertheless, downstream customers in the mobile phone and automotive sectors have begun rebuilding their inventories. Ample Electronic Technology, a major manufacturer of conductive paste and thick-film conductor materials, has already seen a recovery in its August 2023 revenue, indicating that the inventory adjustment process in the passive component industry, which began in the fourth quarter of 2021, has gradually bottomed out over nearly two years.

TrendForce Insights:

• Upstream operations in the passive component industry are rebounding, but true demand recovery awaits.

In the second quarter of 2023, the passive component industry’s inventory approached normal levels. However, due to weak end-demand, Chinese smartphone and PC manufacturers significantly reduced their component inventories in the second quarter of 2023, leading to continued poor performance for passive component manufacturers. It is expected that after hitting the bottom in the third quarter of 2023, operations will gradually improve. However, the timing of true demand recovery may need to wait until 2024, given the persistently sluggish consumer electronics market.

• AI servers are on the rise, and inductive components are in demand.

General-purpose servers primarily use molding power inductors, with quantities ranging from 20 to 30, an ASP of approximately $0.07 to $0.1 per unit, and a current rating of only 30 to 40A. In contrast, AI servers have power consumption levels generally exceeding 1000W. To improve transient response performance, each AI server requires an additional 10 TLVR (Trans Inductor Voltage Regulator) inductors, with an ASP of around $0.3 per unit. This significantly increases the revenue of inductance components for AI servers compared to general-purpose servers.

• Promising prospects in the automotive market, but validation takes time.

Conventional internal combustion engine vehicles require approximately 300 to 500 MLCCs (Multilayer Ceramic Capacitors), while Battery Electric Vehicles (BEVs) require between 2,000 and 2,500 MLCCs. Self-driving systems will also drive MLCC demand. For instance, in the case of automotive camera modules, the quantity increases from 2 to 10 to 15. From a holistic perspective, non-self-driving internal combustion engine vehicles require around 3,000 MLCCs, Hybrid Electric Vehicles (HEVs) with Level 2 autonomy need over 6,000 MLCCs, and Level 3 Electric Vehicles (EVs) require more than 10,000 MLCCs. This leads to a significant increase in the revenue of automotive MLCCs.

However, entering the automotive sector is challenging and requires at least 1 to 2 years for certification. Nevertheless, once established, it can secure long-term agreements for at least 5 years. Additionally, compared to the slowing growth of the consumer electronics market, the automotive sector offers substantial opportunities and provides a buffer against the cyclicality of passive component industries.

Report to InfoTimes, Chinese electric vehicle giant BYD is making impressive strides in Southeast Asia, not only leaving strong rivals like Tesla far behind but also dominating the market share in the region. Currently, in the local market, at least one out of every four electric vehicles is a BYD.

Industry analysts point out that BYD’s competitive advantage lies in its affordability and high value for money. Early on, the company partnered with large enterprises and conglomerates in Southeast Asia, adopting a distribution model to sell its vehicles. This approach allowed BYD to gradually expand its influence, understand the preferences of Southeast Asian car owners, and navigate the complex local regulations without running afoul of them.

According to TrendForce, in Q2, BEVs alone posted sales of 2.151 million units, marking 39.3% growth YoY. While Tesla maintains the lead with a market share of 21.7%, but BYD trails closely behind with a boosted share of 16.2%. In PHEVs, with the registering sales of 876,000 units in Q2—a striking 52.9% YoY increase. Astonishingly, about 66% of these sales hailed from the Chinese market. In this segment, BYD continued its lead with a whopping 36.5% market share.

In fact, this sales model is not something BYD pioneered. Japanese automakers employed a similar strategy decades ago when entering Southeast Asia. Collaborating with local businesses in a united front, as opposed to competing directly with Tesla, set BYD’s marketing approach apart.

Data reveals that BYD has forged partnerships with various Southeast Asian entities, including Sime Darby, a conglomerate with over a century of history in Malaysia and Singapore, Bakrie & Brothers in Indonesia, Ayala, a renowned conglomerate in the Philippines, and Rever Automotive in Thailand.

Automobile sales consultancy firm Urban Science believes that BYD’s collaboration with prominent local conglomerates helps establish a stable foothold before gaining fame. When Southeast Asian consumers have reservations about Chinese-made cars, knowing that well-known large corporations are involved should provide reassurance, particularly in terms of after-sales service.

Recently, BYD has invested nearly $500 million in building a new factory in Thailand. Starting in 2024, it aims to produce 150,000 electric vehicles annually and export them to various Southeast Asian and European countries. AC Motors, a subsidiary of the Philippines’ Ayala Group, plans to establish more than ten BYD service centers in the Philippines within the next 12 months.

AC Motors emphasizes that the initial focus of its operations is on building brand confidence and encouraging more people to consider buying electric vehicles. Some individuals may have concerns about running out of power with electric cars or find their prices too high.

Currently, Tesla has only opened two stores in Singapore, which caters to a higher-income demographic. However, Tesla is also actively recruiting in Thailand and Malaysia. Leveraging Elon Musk’s personal global influence, Tesla can operate directly toward consumers after leaving the United States, a strategy that sets it apart from other automakers.

To increase its visibility, BYD has partnered with Sime Darby Group to launch five BYD by 1826 centers in Singapore, combining car showrooms with delicious restaurants. This innovative approach aims to attract more people to discover the BYD brand through fine dining and, in turn, become part of BYD’s growing community of car owners. (Image credit: BYD)

(Source: https://www.chinatimes.com/cn/realtimenews/20230919001709-260410?chdtv)

Tesla has caused a lot of buzz in the global car market by cutting prices across several regional markets. The US, China, Europe, and Japan have all seen a significant drop in prices of Tesla vehicles, with magnitudes ranging from 6% to 20%. The US, in particular, has seen the largest cut in the average price of Tesla vehicles. The price of the RWD version of the Model Y has come down to USD 13,000, showing a reduction of 19.7%.

Tesla Aims to Increase Market Share and Put Pressure on Competitors

Tesla sold 1.313 million battery-electric vehicles (pure electric vehicles) in 2022 and retained its leadership in this niche segment of the car market. However, its market share for battery-electric vehicles has been shrinking from 24.5% in 2020 to 20% in 2021 and just 17% in 2022. This in part has to do with the rising number of entrants this market as well as the rising number of battery-electric models that are being offered by these competitors. Furthermore, China accounts for more than half of the global electric car market. Therefore, Tesla has found that its sales performance in China significantly affects its overall market share.

In the Chinese electric car market, sales efforts are concentrated on “economical” or affordable models that are priced within the range of CNY 150,000~200,000. Before Tesla initiated its recent price cuts, the starting price of the Model 3 had been at CNY 265,900, which is way above the mainstream price range.

However, the price of the Model 3 has been slashed by 13.5%, with the starting price now arriving at CNY 229,900. Since the price difference between the Model 3 and the competing economical models has shrunk to 15%, Chinese consumers that are mostly residing within the CNY 150,000~200,000 range could be much more receptive to Tesla’s messaging. Also, many Chinese carmakers have lately raised prices on their electric models because of high cost pressure. Tesla is thus expected to benefit by taking the opposite approach for pricing.

Turning to the US, the biggest benefit that Tesla has touted for this round of price slashing is the eligibility of its vehicles in obtaining a tax credit of up to USD 7,500. The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 contains a provision that subsidizes the purchasing of a new electric car with a tax credit. Electric SUV or vans that are priced no higher than USD 80,000 and other types of electric vehicles that are priced no higher than USD 55,000 are eligible. In the case of Tesla’s Model Y, the version with three rows of seats (i.e., a total of seven seats) can apply for the tax credit as an electric SUV, whereas the version with two rows of seats (i.e., a total of five seats) can apply for the same benefit as one of the other types of electric vehicles.

For consumers in the US, the price of the Long Range version of the Model Y in 2023 is now 31.1% lower than it was in 2022 because of the price cut and the tax credit. Besides turning consumers’ heads, Tesla is also putting a lot of pressure on its competitors with this undercutting strategy. After all, Tesla’s vehicle models tend to serve as the base standard for carmakers’ electrified offerings.

Tesla Has a Firm Grasp on Fluctuations in Prices of Key Components, Thereby Making Cost Sensitivity a Competitive Advantage

In addition to discussing the effects of Tesla’s price cuts on itself and competitors, and other important issue that needs to be addressed is why Tesla can lower prices when other carmakers are compelled to raise them. To answer this question, we first turn to Tesla’s profit margin. Compared with its competitors, Tesla has a larger room for profit. Therefore, it can lower prices in exchange for more vehicle sales and market share.

This leads to the question as to how Tesla has attained such a large profit margin. The answer is that Tesla is excelled at managing its cost structure and supply chain. With respect to supply chain management, Tesla takes a different approach and has gotten involved more deeply than do other carmakers. For instance, Tesla directly sources components and do not rely on Tier-1 suppliers for system integration.

By contrast, traditional carmakers assemble vehicles with the finished parts provided by Tier-1 suppliers. From Tesla’s perspective, directly sourcing components and doing its own system integration offer some notable advantages. First, this approach facilitates the adoption of the latest technologies at the component level. Second, Tesla is much more aware of costs and also exerts a greater control over them. On the whole, Tesla has a better sense of the price fluctuations in the upstream than do its competitors.

The degree of Tesla involvement in its supply chain is also reflected in its activities in the global lithium market. The soaring demand and the Russia-Ukraine military conflict caused lithium prices to rise rapidly during the 2021~2022 period. Carmakers now recognize that the only effective way to secure the supply of raw materials and control the costs of these materials is to manage the upstream.

However, Tesla is not simply securing lithium supply contracts. It is also thinking about getting involved in ore mining and metal refining. Tesla’s activities in recent years have led to a capacity crunch in the market for mining and processing lithium ores. Since lithium is incorporated into power batteries through multiple phases of additional processing, carmakers tend to suffer the most when it comes to lack of price transparency.

（Image credit: Tesla LinkedIn）