GM Promises Cars in Two Years. Retail Traders Promise Profits.

General Motors wants to build a car in two years. Artificial intelligence will help. So will simulation. So will software.

Software. At a car company. Sure.

The pitch is simple. Crash the car in a computer first. Save the real metal for later. Fewer clay models. Fewer prototypes. More laptops.

Here is what the headline actually says. GM aims to do this. Aims. Not has done. Not will do. Aims. I aim at the gym every January. My abs remain theoretical.

Two years is fast for Detroit. These are the people who once needed a full product cycle to move a cupholder. Now they want to ship a whole vehicle before your phone contract expires.

Retail traders will read this and buy the stock. They always do. The words "AI" and "software" hit their brains like a dog whistle hits a golden retriever. Ears up. Tongue out. Wallet open.

Nobody in that group knows what a development cycle is. Ask one. He will say it is a type of bicycle. He will be closer to the truth than his price target.

Consider the mock-serious analysis. A shorter cycle means lower costs. Lower costs mean better margins. Better margins mean a bump in the stock. Or the stock drops two percent because someone on a podcast sneezed. Both outcomes are equally predictable, which is to say, not at all.

GM will tell you the simulation is very advanced. The simulation cannot simulate a recall. It cannot simulate a dealer markup. It cannot simulate you, standing in a parking lot, asking why the touchscreen has gone dark.

The car will be designed in two years. The regret will take considerably longer.

Photo by Hyundai Motor Group on Unsplash