And even if true, it doesn't follow for me that "therefor, batteries must become more expensive in general, despite the current trend".
I think you're implying lock-in and extractive profits, rather than rising cost of manufacture. It's an argument for diversity of key industries, and that batteries might become such. I agree with that. But as an argument that (in parent the comment's words) "so, battery prices will skyrocket", it seems a bit thin to me.
battery prices are expected to "Plummet" not "Skyrocket": https://cleantechnica.com/2025/10/15/plummeting-battery-pric...
Batteries are not a differentiated product. They're basically completely defined by 3 numbers: capacity (in watt-hours), power delivery (watts), and weight. Once those are optimized (which is the process going on now), the chemistry, construction, and manufacturing of batteries is basically a solved problem. Any barriers to entry are purely in the technology and manufacturing. About 200 years of industrial history shows that these are not durable barriers to entry: eventually, technology and know-how diffuses, and knowledge of how to make even very complex machines becomes a commodity. (See eg: power looms, memory chips, hard disks, agriculture, TVs, automobiles, drones.)
Durable competitive advantages usually take the form of either a.) complex consumer interface, eg. with software or CPUs b.) network effects, eg. telecommunications, payment networks, software again, utilities or c.) regulations, eg. payment again, airplane manufacturing, healthcare, and shortly software. These are industries where factors outside the company in question ensure that there will only be one or at most a small set of companies in the market.
When you have a commodity product, the only route to extractive profits is to form a cartel and lobby governments or consumers to believe the cartel is in their interests, eg. with oil or diamonds. But this is a hard sell because the cartel is not in their interests. You can generally only fool people for a decade or two before they decide they've had enough and legislate your monopoly out of existence.
People tend to overindex on the software industry when it comes to "maximizing profits" because that has been the big story of the 2010s, ignoring that Big Tech very carefully implemented every play in the "build a monopoly" playbook to get there, and that millions of indie software developers actually do not make a very good living because their products are commodities.
But the rest stands. The barriers aren't that high. How soon it is diversified, depends on how much attention the other countries and companies are paying.
Also chinese companies innovate better and have more efficient supply chains that western ones.
The push to ban chinese automakers is stupid because it punishes customers at the benefit of automakers. Crony Capitalism at its worse.
Yeah because they just steal and copy everything from Western companies and others worldwide. Why spend hundreds of millions and 10 years doing R&D when you can just hack in and steal it? It's the Chinese way.
Chinese hackers took trillions in intellectual property from about 30 multinational companies
- https://www.cbsnews.com/news/chinese-hackers-took-trillions-...
The annual cost to the U.S. economy of counterfeit goods, pirated software, and theft of trade secrets is between $225 billion and $600 billion.
China is the world’s principal infringer of intellectual property, and it uses its laws and regulations to put foreign companies at a disadvantage and its own companies at an advantage.
- https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/china-exec-summary-risk-...
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegations_of_intellectual_pr...
Salt Typhoon is an advanced persistent threat actor believed to be operated by China's Ministry of State Security (MSS) which has conducted high-profile cyber espionage campaigns, particularly against the United States.
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salt_Typhoon
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Aurora
Industrial espionage: How China sneaks out America's technology secrets
- https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-64206950
etc etc etc
And the solution is to punish consumers and enrich GM's totally failed leadership and irrational shareholders by throttling only competition they left(chinese).
Here in europe cars have become so expensive compared to just 10y ago.
Some of it is because of stupid green policies, but most if because EU carmakers have been successful in reducing the competitive pressure from China by the use of tariffs on chinese firms.
Check the ownership of the different brands and you will discover from the dozens of brands in Europe, there are really only a few companies making cars. And the "mother company" then shares chassis between models, engines between models. So you can have a a Lada with a Renault engine, with a Dacia chassis. We see 3 brands, but in reality, its one brand.
* Groupe Renault's owned brands include Renault, Dacia, Alpine, and Lada.
But wait ...
* Stellantis was formed from the 2021 merger of two major auto groups: PSA Group (which included Citroën and Peugeot) and FCA (Fiat Chrysler Automobiles). Therefore, the brands Stellantis owns are now a part of Citroën's parent company, which include brands like Peugeot, Fiat, Jeep, Chrysler, Dodge, and Opel.
You see the issue very fast. If you own many brands, do you compete against each other, or do you "stabilize prices for max profit". Same issue with other brands...
Its like in the US, where if you trace back the brands, like 3 or 4 companies, own like 90% of the known US food brands. And when you have only a few companies, gentlemen's agreements about not competition too much are a thing.
Hey, why are HDD not dropping in prices for the last 10+ years. Well, there are only 3 brands left (with two that are huge). Hey, why did SSD/NVME prices suddenly skyrocket. Well, only a few brands make the stuff, and when one decided to increase prices, all of a sudden the rest also followed. Strange is it not...
We are in the age of monopolies again, and that is linked to a lot of the price issues.
They also hired a ton of european designers for their house brands. They have no need to copy anything.
Yes, the west let this happen, and it’s too late to cry about it, action needs to start happening (and I don’t mean import barriers or a trade war) if we don’t want to be dependent.
Current rates are BYD (17%), Geely (18.8%), and SAIC (35.3%).
> And much like the US found out with rare earths:
Rare earths is not rare at all. China has a cornered the market on processing those minerals for cheap. The problem is that we in the West have no appetite to actually support companies to process those "rare" earths.
And the US is really the last country to even talk about batteries, when the arrested 300+ Koreans that worked to get a US battery plant going.
> They’re playing the long game and western nations seem unable or unwilling to do the same.
Its not just a government issue, its a companies issue. You think that car companies in Europe do not get subsidies? Have you ever looked at how much subsidies they get opening new plants or renovating plants?
Reality is that a lot of car companies enjoyed their little monopolie positions in Europe. Sure, we got a lot of brands, but in reality its a illusion of competition, as most brands are owned by a few big companies.
China had a different situation, where yes, there was subsidies from the government (and a lot of misuse of those subsidies), but you had 100's of car manufactures entering the markets. I mean, we talk about BYD often but BYD was not even a car manufacturer until 2005 ... The result is a strong competition between car makers, what resulted in a lot of technological development and a push to be better then the next guy(s). Constant copy and innovation work. Work to reduces prices to be able to compete better, as remember, their competitor also go those subsidies.
We have this issue with our car industry only to thank to our own car industry. Frankly, i am happy to see the Chinese enter the EU market, for the simply fact that it pushed the EU car makers to actually start innovating again and offering more to the clients.
The issue with competition to dead was a issue in new upcoming industries, like solar. Because their both sides started with the same level vs +subsidies. The car industry is a totally different beast with deep pockets and manufacturing capabilities. So lets not act like "poor EU car makers".
Right, because the other $26k is being subsidized by the party. And much like the US found out with rare earths: once China has the market cornered, the price will rise and/or they’ll use access to their goods as a tool of war.
They’re playing the long game and western nations seem unable or unwilling to do the same.
https://insideevs.com/news/763687/china-zero-mile-used-evs/