GM
General Motors Company
stockNYSE

Jp Morgan (Chase Auto), Bank of America, Captial One, Berkshire Hathaway (Ally Financial), etc The list goes on, they own billions in Ford, GM, Tesla, Rivian Just trace the money

So let’s imagine that GM sells a bunch of their trucks to startup rental companies, and instead of cash payment takes equity in the rental companies. But the rental companies literally are renting these vehicles out at a rate that is less than 1/8th the cost of running the business, even with the sweetheart deal of stock for trucks. If GM does this for even another year, those companies will be buried in a hole they can’t climb out of. This is what I see happening with Nvidia currently. This was a big bet that the rental market is going to be able to demand much higher premiums in the near future.

How is it different than say GM financial

Obligatory apologies for formatting and also Not financial advice. # TL;DR I believe Rivian is being valued like a struggling traditional automaker when it should increasingly be viewed as a technology company that happens to build some damn good vehicles. My short term bullish thesis revolves around three things: 1. **December 9 Autonomy & AI Day:** Rivian is preparing to demonstrate Point to Point autonomous driving, putting it into more direct competition with Tesla FSD. 2. **R2 demand and production:** R2 has received overwhelmingly positive reviews, is already Rivian's highest volume vehicle, and is opening up a much larger consumer market. 3. **The Uber robotaxi partnership:** Uber is backing Rivian's autonomous technology with a deal involving up to 50,000 R2 robotaxis and as much as $1.25 billion in milestone dependent investment. I think the market has priced in Rivian's potential failure far more aggressively than its potential success. # 1. December 9th: Autonomy & AI Day This is the catalyst I'm watching most closely. On December 9, Rivian is hosting its second Autonomy & AI Day, where I expect Point to Point driving to be one of the biggest announcements. For anyone unfamiliar, Point to Point is Rivian's upcoming supervised autonomous driving system part of their Autonomy+ package, that will allow the vehicle to navigate from one address to another, including city streets, traffic lights, highway interchanges, and more. Sound familiar? That's because Rivian is moving into territory currently dominated by Tesla's FSD. Rivian expects a limited release through its Autonomy Early Access Program before the end of 2026, with broader availability for Autonomy+ subscribers in 2027. They are starting with Florida and California before releasing broadly (Mainly because their autonomy team was originally based out of their Miami service center at first then moved once the team became too big for that location) **Why am I bullish about this?** I've personally driven the latest version of Rivian's Universal Hands Free on city roads, and I've been genuinely impressed by how quickly the software has progressed. I've also spoken with Rivian representatives who have expressed a great deal of confidence in the company's software development and autonomy capabilities. Obviously, those conversations aren't proof of future performance. But combined with what I've experienced firsthand and what Rivian has publicly demonstrated, they've made me increasingly optimistic. I've watched the presentations and demonstrations from Rivian's previous Autonomy & AI Day. Comparing those demonstrations with what the company has delivered since then, I think Rivian has made substantial progress in a relatively short period. List the demo videos below. 1. [Rivian — Autonomy & AI Day Presentation](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mIK1Y8ssXnU&utm_source=chatgpt.com) 2. [Everyday Chris — Rivian Autonomy Demo](https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Everyday+Chris+Rivian+autonomy+driving&utm_source=chatgpt.com) 3. [Gjeebs — Rivian Autonomy Demo](https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Gjeebs+Rivian+autonomy+driving&utm_source=chatgpt.com) 4. [The Bearded Tesla Guy — Rivian Autonomy Demo](https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=The+Bearded+Tesla+Guy+Rivian+autonomy&utm_source=chatgpt.com) These are YouTube search links for the respective creators. I couldn't verify the exact video URLs. Rivian is also developing its own autonomy hardware, including its RAP1 processor, alongside its software and AI models. The upcoming Gen 3 platform adds LiDAR to its sensor suite. That matters because Rivian isn't simply purchasing an autonomous driving system from another company and integrating it into its vehicles. It's developing much of the underlying technology itself. And unlike Tesla's largely vehicle focused autonomy business, Rivian already has partnerships that demonstrate the potential value of its technology beyond selling vehicles directly to consumers. Its Volkswagen joint venture is one example of Rivian's electrical architecture and software expertise finding applications outside its own vehicles. The Uber agreement provides an even more direct connection between Rivian autonomy and a future commercial mobility business. To be clear, Volkswagen's partnership is not a confirmed agreement to deploy Rivian's autonomous driving system. **My argument is that Rivian's technology could eventually become as important to its valuation as the vehicles themselves.** If December 9 demonstrates that Rivian is becoming a credible competitor in autonomous driving, I think it could fundamentally change how investors perceive the company. For anyone interested in the technology, here are some useful resources: * [Rivian Autonomy & AI Day official event page](https://rivian.com/events/autonomy-and-ai-day) * [Rivian's previous Autonomy & AI Day presentation](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mIK1Y8ssXnU) * [MotorTrend interview on Rivian's autonomy roadmap, R2 and LiDAR](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4BpZYl1_bR4) * [Rivian's autonomy technology](https://rivian.com/autonomy) # 2. R2: More Than Just Another Electric SUV The R2 is arguably the most important vehicle Rivian has ever launched. It brings Rivian into the much larger midsize SUV market, directly competing with vehicles like the Tesla Model Y. And unlike the R1 platform, which primarily targets the premium SUV and pickup market, R2 gives Rivian the opportunity to reach a significantly broader customer base. The initial reception has been extremely positive. Rivian has continued ramping production in Normal, Illinois, and R2 already became the company's highest volume vehicle during Q3 2026, outselling both R1 and its electric delivery vans. The company is also expanding production capacity as the R2 ramp continues. For those interested in following actual vehicles appearing in the wild, [RivianRoamer's R2 tracker](https://rivianroamer.com/r2) provides a useful look at reported VINs and deliveries. It isn't a complete production count, but it's an interesting way to follow the ramp independently. Here are some independent R2 reviews and ownership experiences: * [Doug DeMuro R2 review](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xUl_0087dyM) * [Out of Spec Reviews R2 coverage](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eCq0nzYJlQ8) * [InsideEVs R2 ownership review](https://insideevs.com/news/812257/rivian-r2-ownership-review-video/) * [RivianTrackr: 2,500 miles with the R2](https://riviantrackr.com/news/rivian-r2-2500-miles/) But here's where things get especially interesting. # The Uber Deal Changes the R2 Story In March 2026, Uber and Rivian announced a partnership to deploy fully autonomous R2 robotaxis. The agreement includes: * An initial plan for **10,000 autonomous R2 robotaxis**. * An option to negotiate purchases of up to **40,000 additional vehicles** beginning in 2030. * Up to **$1.25 billion in Uber investment**, dependent on Rivian achieving autonomy milestones. * Initial commercial deployments planned for **San Francisco and Miami in 2028**. * A target of expanding to **25 cities by 2031**. And this isn't just some hypothetical partnership. Uber committed to an initial $300 million investment following signing, subject to regulatory approval. Rivian also expects to achieve another autonomy milestone before the end of 2026 that would unlock an additional $250 million. [Source: Official Uber and Rivian partnership announcement](https://investor.uber.com/news-events/news/press-release-details/2026/Uber-and-Rivian-Partner-to-Deploy-up-to-50000-Fully-Autonomous-Robotaxis-2026-TViR4R05gi/) Think about what this means. Rivian isn't simply building a cheaper SUV to compete with Tesla. It's building a vehicle platform that could serve both the consumer market and a commercial autonomous mobility network. Uber isn't just interested in purchasing electric SUVs. It's making a substantial, milestone dependent investment in Rivian's ability to develop autonomous driving technology. That doesn't guarantee Rivian will achieve Level 4 autonomy or that every planned vehicle will be deployed. But it does demonstrate that a major mobility company sees enough potential in Rivian's technology to commit to a significant partnership. **If Rivian executes, the R2 becomes much more than another electric SUV. It becomes the foundation for an autonomous vehicle business.** # 3. Why I Think the Market Is Missing the Bigger Picture Rivian is still largely discussed as an EV manufacturer competing against Tesla, Ford, GM, and everyone else. And sure, that's part of the business. But I think that framing misses what Rivian is trying to build. We're talking about a company developing its own vehicle architecture, software platform, AI systems, autonomy processors, and autonomous driving technology. It already has a technology partnership with Volkswagen. It has a major autonomous mobility agreement with Uber. It has launched the R2 into a much larger consumer market. And it is preparing to demonstrate the next major milestone in its autonomy roadmap on December 9. I don't think Rivian needs to prove that it has surpassed Tesla FSD for the stock's perception to change. It needs to demonstrate that it is a credible competitor with a realistic path toward increasingly capable autonomous driving. That's a much lower bar than achieving fully unsupervised autonomy, and I think it could still be meaningful for investor sentiment. The difference between a company the market believes will fail and one the market believes has a credible future can be enormous. Of course, Point to Point could disappoint, the R2 ramp could encounter setbacks, and commercial robotaxis remain a difficult technical and regulatory challenge. But my thesis isn't that every risk has disappeared. **It's that the market may be underestimating how much progress Rivian has made and how quickly the narrative could change if the next milestones go well.** # Conclusion I believe Rivian is approaching a potential inflection point. December 9 could demonstrate that Rivian's autonomy technology deserves to be taken seriously. The R2 is already expanding Rivian's consumer market. And the Uber agreement provides a potential path for that same vehicle platform to become part of a much larger autonomous mobility business. I'm not claiming Rivian has solved autonomous driving, and I'm certainly not claiming the stock is guaranteed to go up. But I do believe the market has been far more willing to price in Rivian's failure than its potential success. **Rivian isn't just an automaker. It's a technology company that happens to make some damn good vehicles.** And I think Wall Street may be about to realize that. Positions: https://preview.redd.it/ou07p2anao1i1.png?width=223&format=png&auto=webp&s=a0ee5577de2788a979ea07d57bad82f06086cd0c

These damn internet idiots. This guy is a genius. Helping customers that need your product with capital is a great thing. Ever heard of FORD credit, GM finance, Best Buy Credit, Lowes Credit….all in store credit cards. Somebody willing to loan the capital needed to buy the product they need to build a need is what drives the world. It’s especially advantageous if you have the capital and the product as you grow your cash by charging a decent rate, protect your growth and income by keeping a customer and most importantly you help stimulate the economy and keep entrepreneurs going. It’s always the same, poor folks call it borrowing money, rich folks call it raising capital. All the same. Good for Jensen!!!!

If GM finances a fleet of cars and trucks for an unprofitable startup developing autonomous driving and autonomous trucking with the sole purpose of entrenching GM assets in those future autonomous vehicle fleets, is that also circular financing and fraud? Because that exact scenario happened for *YEARS* during the frothiest part of the self-driving hype cycle. Every. Single. Major Automotive OEM and tier 1 supplier was throwing cash, equity, and assets into every Tom, Dick, and Harry who was in any way shape or form involved with the DARPA Urban Challenge. Also, if the price of NVIDIA chips was kept artificially high, then NVIDIA literally has competitors. Very well capitalized ones. Google, AMD, Intel, and Qualcomm could ***ALL*** have jumped on the opportunity to undercut NVIDIA and take massive, *MASSIVE* chunks of their marketshare.

Practically all auto debt is sold in a secondary market. The lenders buy the car notes from dealers. The demand is real. With NVDA, the demand was manufactured by financing that would not have otherwise been there. GMAC used to finance most General Motors car purchases; but they made interest and people mostly paid their car loans. Then the Great Recession happened and GM had to get bailed out. We shall see

If GM gives you a 0% loan to buy their overpriced vehicles - is that their own money to buy their own product? OP- you are so regarded.

This is annoying. This is the narrative that will take hold in the immediate, and a whole bunch of stock prices are going to go down as a result. Here’s the part that doesn’t make any sense… ***the demand was there***… so… why would they lower prices? Customers showed up wanting to buy tons of NVIDIA silicon, NVIDIA took the opportunity sell it to them at higher prices, and subsidized that expecting return on that later. This happens with automakers all the time. They practically all have their own financing arm of their business now, because they have to. Practically nobody can *actually afford* a car, and the cost to develop and produce a car is crazy high, so the margins are usually terrible. Those margins can be boosted by the automaker making extra revenue on the backend of the sale by issuing the debt to buy the car in the first place. They also all only finance the vehicle purchase if you buy the vehicles they make. GM Finance won’t give you money to lend or lease a Nissan. Does this inflate the price of any individual vehicle? Yes, because the purchase is now subsidized. So, you can either borrow to pay more your giant pickup truck, you can get a cheaper smaller econo-truck, or go without. If your demand is high, then you may be inclined to borrow and pay more. **That’s how** **it’s** **supposed to work. It isn’t a scandal.** If this glut of chips “scandal” made any sense, then AMD, Intel, and Google could have spent all this time absolutely ***decimating*** NVIDIA’s marketshare by just massively, massively undercutting them. There’s a price difference where you will just eat having to port away from CUDA, for absolute certain. CUDA is mostly a convenience, it’s ecosystem gravity, that’s why it adds value to NVIDIA GPUs. It’s not some kind of core technological IP itself. If all those other semiconductor makers wanted to dethrone NVDIA, this glut of chips “scandal” would have been prime time to do it. Looking at the prices of AMD RX and Intel ARC GPUs tells me demand was driving the cycle and NVIDIA was goosing their bottom like exactly the same way GM finance gooses GM’s. Demand-side subsidies make prices go up. That’s why subsidizing healthcare, education, etc. drive prices up. The demand is inelastic. Now, like I said, this is annoying because this dumb narrative will drive sentiment and sentiment will drive stock prices.

This. I'm profitable (but by no means rich, just enough to pay for my rent and necessities in a pretty small/old apartment that I share with roommates), and champ in Overwatch. They seem completely unrelated, but I noticed so many parallels. 1-3% of day traders are profitable, and I sit at the top 0.1% of all players in ranked (stay with me now). The thing I've always said to people in Overwatch is that FAR more people can reach Grandmaster (top 1%), but the reason no one does is because no one tries to actually do the things that make you improve. Everyone just grinds, hundreds of games in a season, thousands of hours, only to remain hardstuck at a mediocre rank and get mad at others, saying GM or champion is realistically impossible and to give up. But I have not seen ANY of them reveiwing their own gameplay, stopping after 3 losses, taking a step back, focusing on one aspect at a time, etc. **Sounds AWFULLY familiar with day trading.** Many people claim it takes "years" to be profitable, and that's if you even get to be at all. I'm not going to say how long it took me, but I'll say it surely didn't take "years" nor did it feel particularly any more difficult than learning a new skill or instrument. "Oh but in day trading you're going against traders who have multiple monitors who work in hedge funds blah blah" and I also am going against former and current pro players who play at the world cup level who get coaching from coaches who have years of coaching the best of the best. I'm just someone who plays Overwatch for fun, yet I'm competing at a similar enough level in ranked and getting into the same lobbies as some of them. It's literally just a doomer mindset with an ego too big for their own good preventing them from seeing the obvious mistakes they're making. **This applies to both Overwatch/gaming and trading, and watch me get downvoted with people telling me I'm lying or that this is AI.** It will further prove my point.

His succession assumption is like LeBron leaving the Cavs in 2010 and assuming the GM has a back up plan and can replace him one for one. Jensens don’t just grow on trees. OP did not DD well enough.

GM anach

Nio has the same company structure as basically GM with multiple car brands, but with NIO they always separate them and bash on one or the other or bash on them all while with GM. They batch them altogether into one and they do a total delivery. They don’t break them down. This is total stock manipulation in misinformation, and false news..