The end game for many is to go out of business, get bought up by competitors and consolidate like _intended_ outcome of other PRC industrial policy. Set up competitive enviroment to force producers speed run to a $250 model-T while everyone else could only make cars for $1000. The entire point is to have so much competition to force manufactures to improve processes/drive down prices/affordability in short time and then settle with a few large but sustainable survivors that are globally competitive / can compete with western incumbants. Entire EV stack also interesting in that it sells EV piles, other electricity infra. Eventual autonomous driving = large network sensor fusion = cheap EVS with lots of sensors can push PRC telco/surveillance hardware, semi/data etc etc. Lot's of high value industiries, also dual use, and we can extrapolate where that could go.

I disagree. I doubt most people want autonomous driving. It's mostly a solution looking for a problem.

Depends what "autonomous driving" means. If it's "sit in the drivers seat responsible for any accidents but not doing anything until the system gives up or fails" for many thousands of dollars then yeah, I don't think the majority of people want that. If it's "as if someone else was driving, even in corner cases, and you don't take the risk/liability directly since you're not in control" for a couple thousand then I think the vast majority want that. Doubly so if driving yourself remains an option for enjoyment when desired.

That combined with a non-subscription-based price. You pay for the product, you take it home and you own it. If it’s a couple thousand/year, it’s a non-starter.

Like iPhones they’re not needed but once people try it they’ll want it, approximately universally.

I think both options would e nice.

The end game is: sell cheap cars to the rest of Asia, Africa, South America, the Middle East. Own the future of transportation. Profit. Transport is going to electrify FAST in the coming years. Autonomous is a red herring.