Intuer is correct, the truth comes out in the numbers. Nda make it all a bit confusing and SM don’t annohnce each model launch, when the numbers hit the financial accounts we know for sure.
2021 SM wi have, GM Cadillac, Ford F150 and Mach-E, Mercedes S Class and a launch with BMW providing revenue.
I honestly don’t know what models are in production in 2021 with SEYE tech, any views?
I fully agree. It was late at night. I’ve edited my comment to allow my point to shine through more clearly without what could be seen as personal attacks.
Aston, I believe its the overall costs that is important, they need high performing DMS that uses less space and power and fits with existing systems
You should ask yourself why Qualcomm choose to work with SM not SEYE, happy to debate and answer questions in an honest way but you need to be open to opposing views, otherwise you learn nothing?
Could be many reasons:
or
or
Aston, no chip is favoured by all OEMs, so yes SM needed to widen its reach.
I would find it odd if a tiny DMS company didn’t want to work with a global company who have its snapdragon chip in over 20 OEM.
yes. To me it also looks like SEYE has been more advanced and long-term visioned with this
Krantz said, “We have been very efficient in supporting the most common platforms,” which he cited as a key to Smart Eye’s market strength.
It is really good to get some models on production and that way get cash flow to research and so on. This is of course one of my concerns with SEYE - do they need to raise capital soon again? Latest raise should last for more than 2 years, right? And 2 years should be enough to get things running properly and no extra capital is necessary?
I believe in SEYE tech more than SEE at the moment. @Aston_Livingstone , you might have the latest info about models: was there some models coming out with SEYE tech next year?
Yes and the balance sheet should last to 2022 until break even. In case there are exceptionally good views to market they might have to do more R&D or marketing thus increasing OPEX maybe to 300m SEK a year. So break even could go a couple quarters ahead.
First of all, i would like to thank our international guests. Still, i want to say that for me, reading this thread is kinda hard right now. We are not used to this kind of debates in company specific threads, we mainly focus in that one company. Of course sometimes other companies or their strenghts are discussed but main focus is not debating. So far, i have not seen much proofs or sources for your comments. So, you might have some secret information that companies dont tell via press releases, or you dont. But for me, SEE:s credibility has not increased. Yes, SEE is another big player but bashing SEYE feels odd. Almost like Tesla vs. Nikola in twitter.
So it is “word against word”. I really hope that this doesn`t escalate to “yes - no - yes - no - YES - NO”. In that case i suggest that there is a different thread for SEE.
Seeing Machines - guys, do you have similar calculations?
They are just Viktors guesses, thats no facts.
Can you show me Viktors gueses from say 2017 for 2020? And then what was actually in the 2020 financial accounts from Smarteye?
My view is Viktor over exaggerated the values, so thats why I only take notice of the actual financial from the company
Quick answer to this is that original estimates from 2017 didnt come out as expected but this was due to whole DMS coming later than expected. I believe this same applies for Seeing also? The uncertainty is still existing but the 2024 regulation helps this a lot. Also 2020 and corona could shift the DW income easily by a year.
Viktor is using DW values straight from Smart’s stock exchange releases… so you are basically saying Smart is exaggerating. This would be serious as they would be committing a fraud.
From the table below we could only estimate that e.g. the highlighted are in production if we consider 1 year delay due to corona:
This would make the lifetime value maybe 800 mSEK. Divide that by 7 years as suggested by Smart management and you get 115 mSEK for a year from “most likely in procution”.
To save time: Compare it to H1 slide. Maybe the average is 7,5 m SEK for each quarter in Automotive Solutions? This would make about 30 mSEK a year… yes there is quite a clear difference… This needs more research… most likely reason is that timetable has shifted forward… in Redeyes estimate the revenues seem to stay quite stable but from 2021 it should double and in 2023 it should be 10 times to this year… so we really need to make sure that 2021 we start seeing acceleration in revenues… based on Smart top management comments the existing DW’s are coming out 2021-2023 so I have full confidence
Aston, I do think SEYE use estimates at the top end of the range when announcing.
Is it fraud? Probably not, but its a bit misleading, things always get delayed and maybe Covid is a useful excuse?
The one I think they are misleading is JLR, they won it in 2017 average leadtime is 3 years, so they should be formally informing the market if they have lost that design win (13 models)
Näyttää Lontoon pörssin puolelta löytyvän SEE, mutta Nordea ilmoittaa ettei ole kaupankäynnin kohteena, mutta sen saisi kun pyytäisi. Mutta saakohan tuota oikeasti sähköisen kaupankäynnin kohteeksi…
Another logical explanation could be this: Volumes are very low at first years and especially now during corona year
So during first years we might not get the “average of 115m Sek” of current products.
Here is the press release for that 13 DW in 2017. It doesnt state about NDA but some of Smart’s releases state that NDA’s are forbidding to release the models afterwards.
So how come you come to conclusion that JLR was changed to SEE?
I’m going to be lazy and just ask you: why did SEYE “lose” those models? Is it because JLR moved away from SEYE and made those models with other DMS (this shouldn’t happen, based on the definition of a DW by SEYE which means there exists a binding contract for those models to include SEYE DMS, as I understood). Or is it because JLR did not produce those models, wherein the reason cannot be blamed on SEYE as I doubt a car manufacturer would scrap 13 models because they were dissatisfied with DMS software. A more likely explanation would be financial problems.
If the former is true, it is a big deal. If the latter is true, not so much. Sure, losing the revenue sucks, but it is the bigger picture which matters. SEE and SEYE are competing for future car models, that is what matters. I would assume that the current willingness of a manufacturer to choose SEE or SEYE would give some indication on how future contracts will be distributed.
After a quick search, indeed it seems the reason why JLR hasn’t produced those models is financial problems (or at least that JLR is in major troubles):
Firstly if SEYE announced the win to the markets, which they did, then they need to announce the fact it never materised the revenue they announced, the reason or excuse doesn’t matter to the markets, currently they sit in a position of misleading.
The reason in my view is that JLR went with the cheaper option and then realised it didn’t perform as well as they expected and shelved DMS in those models. I expect they are back out to market for 2024 models.
However JLR didn’t announce the win SEYE did and Viktor wrote reports on it.
Maybe jlr went see (2015) → seye (2017) → cipia (2024)!
How to invest in cipia!
Lets cut this colin like speculation, not worth of our time. Nähdään ensi vuonna 
Jatkoa ketjulle Smart Eye - Eye tracking from Sweden:
Technically, what you are saying does not contradict with SEYE has said. However I’m finding it very hard to swallow that JLR would go from SEE in 2015 to SEYE in 2017 only to drop the DMS (and thus lose DMS until 2024) because the performance wasn’t what they expected. I would think a bad DMS is better than no DMS while the industry is actively making it a standard feature.
