-Why is the issue related to electric vehicle business models so acute? First, we went from a purely individual value to a value both individual and collective. These objects emit less CO2, less NOx, less fine particles, less noise. Second, these objects objectively have a lower individual value for end customers. Of course, driving comfort is improved but this improvement cannot be appreciated without testing it. Customers mainly perceive a loss in value linked to a higher sell price and a reduced autonomy. The key issue is to raise the individual value of electric vehicles to sell them to the end users. For that matter, there are four major levers. First, local authorities are asked to contribute through bonus systems to reincorporate the positive externalities created by electric vehicles. Second lever, the value of the car is not only the car itself. This goes through the implementation of an electromobility system: charging infrastructures of course but also booking services for charging terminals, charge roaming, home connection, recycling services for the batteries' second life, etc. Third lever, value perception. It might sound silly but value exists only when it is perceived. There is an issue at first: even if electric vehicles potentially offer a calm, silent driving, this value cannot be sold via any TV ad. Customers need to be educated. It takes some time before customers can understand that electric vehicles are not only about golf carts and learn to use them in a smart way. The last lever is to improve electric vehicle concepts. Since we are at the beginning of the innovation process, electrified cars are suboptimal compared to what fully integrated products could be after a hundred years of improvement. If the vehicle's dominant design is not rethought around electricity, customers compare both and only realize that it is the same thing for a higher price and less autonomy. Vehicles must be rethought so that they are not only electrified thermal vehicles. Toyota is a typical example. With hybrid vehicles, they managed to create an actual concept which is not simply a "hybridized" normal vehicle. In this respect, we do not only design a product which must be massively sold in a pre-existing system. We rather deploy a full electromobility system which must tackle head on the two specificities of electric vehicles. First, its systemic aspect in the sense that a certain number of partners must be associated and contribute in guiding their product roadmap. Then, its disruptive aspect in the sense that we must think about the distribution of an electric experience for potential pools of customers who are not used to it. But we face the chicken-and-egg problem. Infrastructures and services such as smart charging only have value when a critical mass of customers is reached and customers will only become a critical mass once an electromobility system already exists. So, we must prime the pump. In that case, either you are Tesla and you can prime it thanks to your attractiveness on the stock market which allows you to burn cash and install your own system, or you can do it in a more prudential and partnership-based way. Henceforth, the design and deployment of the electromobility system does not follow the same dynamic than the development of a classic product. During the development of a classic product, first we develop advanced engineering technologies, then this work stops to start product development before a distribution on the market. In our case, we simultaneously design an electromobility system and scale it up. The automotive industry perfectly knows how to increase the production speed of a product. But evangelizing and training the general public to an electric experience takes time. To distribute this electromobility system over territories, outlets must be installed everywhere, incentive traffic rules must be implemented, etc. Negotiations must be conducted with city halls, highway companies, electricity suppliers. All this requires time and energy. We move from a program focused on the product management to a program focused on a disruptive platform management. The latter has two specificities. First, its scope is greater than the product by including the development of infrastructures and the spread of the customer experience. Second, it takes place before and after the commercial launch which is very unusual for a development program. This platform leadership goes through an active role in infrastructure development, in additional business such as the second life of batteries, and in reliable mapping systems and roaming. The interoperability of the charging terminals is indeed a key factor. There is a technical interoperability since there are different kinds of outlets and powers. I will not come back to it. But apart from this, there is a commercial interoperability which means that electric vehicle owners must be able to access any charging terminal no matter the mobility service provider to which they subscribed. In concrete terms, if I own a Bolloré card, I must be able to charge my vehicle on stations operated by Sodetrel and vice versa. At the heart of a two-sided market between charging station operators and mobility service providers, electric mobility platforms appear. French manufacturers and other partners have created GIREVE which designed two offers aimed at each of these two partners. On one side, GIREVE makes charging infrastructures visible for all the operators. On the other side, GIREVE makes its data available to service providers in order to allow customers to display and access the GIREVE database. This study is based on the "travel-transport" survey and shows the importance of certain levers in the distribution of electric vehicles. It shows the essential importance of external levers to the vehicle itself to make a certain population of potential buyers compatible. Indeed, by constantly focusing on battery autonomy, we forget that the main lever to adopt electric vehicles involves actors who are not car manufacturers: first and foremost, local authorities and highway companies, as well as an access to bus lanes or dedicated lanes, or the implementation of dedicated parking spaces. The vehicle's autonomy is only the sixth lever to adopt electric vehicles. We see that the activation of these levers strongly increases the number of buyers whereas when they are not activated, the market tends to remain low. Furthermore, this scaling up requires pioneer investors to acknowledge the evangelization value of the initial investments. To avoid being stuck in the chicken-and-egg problem, the ripple effect of services such as electric taxis or car-sharing vehicles must not be neglected. This has even been assessed as benefits for car manufacturers. Someone riding an electric taxi or driving a car-sharing vehicle experiences electric driving and becomes familiar with the product. This person progresses in the purchase funnel. Last point, the territorial aspect of electric vehicles requires reviewing the homogeneous sale principle of commercial departments. Indeed, pools of customers compatible with electric vehicles are not equally distributed over the territory. It seems preferable to target a few highly compatible territories to implement a strategy to distribute the electromobility system instead of the traditional blockbuster logic which assumes that every customers and territories are already compatible with the product. To conclude, we can retain that, first, the value of electric vehicles depends on the distribution of the product but also on an associated electromobility system. Secondly, the activation of levers external to car manufacturers is essential for this distribution: cities, highway companies, etc. Thirdly, the spreading of an electric experience within customers is at the heart of this distribution strategy. Finally, in order to deploy this system, project management principles must be largely reviewed.
