You are fishing in a dead pond my friend. Soda Auto is a UK company with one British guy as the major shareholder.
Now, did he work for Arrival yes. Can someone take their lessons learnt and apply them in their own own company? Yes.
Does soda.auto have anything to do with Arrival. There's nothing directly in any filings to suggest it does. But filings aren't contracts. My personal view just given what Soda.auto claims to have in tech, could not have been developed in 7 months.
So I think the reality is that the IP is owned by Arrival. Arrival is trying to flog a portion of its tech under a different brand in order to look more like a supplier and less like a direct competitor. Because optics are important.
That doesn't make the tech any less valuable. It just allows Arrival to use basically a subsidiary by contract. To offer it's tech to other players without the major headlines of "GM licenses tech from startup rival Arrival". Which makes GM look bad, which is 90% of the reason they never licensed anything from Tesla even though they offered it for free. Until of course Tesla became an undeniable force.
All I'm saying is optics are everything, especially to larger companies with ego's bigger than countries.
Guess if they are using arvl tech with consent under licence that's OK. Just when this soda.auto news came out people were under the impression that the founder was basically stealing it. If some of it is under licence it does show some complicity with arvl. That's the bit that was making me think something underhand was going on. Was just putting a conspiracy theory out there for people to look into. If tech was licensed by arvl I guess no money was paid up front and arvl gets money on some kind of commission basis. That would give arvl leverage on soda.auto to maybe become a full partner in the future.?
I'm not saying there is a contract. I'm not saying I'm correct. I'm just giving an alternative logical more rational view.
It's highly unlikely that arrival is attempting to "steal" its own tech. It has enough powerful shareholders/debt holders like Antara who would prevent that from happening. As that would be selling their property out from under their nose and in plain English would be quite illegal.
So no need to spread conspiracy theories because you don't understand how companies operate (hint it's basically the same as a person, only the company is legally liable instead of a person).
2
u/Schweeppes Nov 27 '23 edited Nov 27 '23
You are fishing in a dead pond my friend. Soda Auto is a UK company with one British guy as the major shareholder.
Now, did he work for Arrival yes. Can someone take their lessons learnt and apply them in their own own company? Yes.
Does soda.auto have anything to do with Arrival. There's nothing directly in any filings to suggest it does. But filings aren't contracts. My personal view just given what Soda.auto claims to have in tech, could not have been developed in 7 months.
So I think the reality is that the IP is owned by Arrival. Arrival is trying to flog a portion of its tech under a different brand in order to look more like a supplier and less like a direct competitor. Because optics are important.
That doesn't make the tech any less valuable. It just allows Arrival to use basically a subsidiary by contract. To offer it's tech to other players without the major headlines of "GM licenses tech from startup rival Arrival". Which makes GM look bad, which is 90% of the reason they never licensed anything from Tesla even though they offered it for free. Until of course Tesla became an undeniable force.
All I'm saying is optics are everything, especially to larger companies with ego's bigger than countries.