RJ Scaringe: Just in the nature of the question, you made a point that we’ve made for a while, which I really agree with, which is the — a key element to deliver a really strong autonomy platform and something to continue to grow and get better over time is controlling the perception stack. And by controlling the perceptions to access the cameras and radars in particular, it allows us to have early fusion of that information and the early fusion of information allows us to not only best perceive the situation around the vehicle, but to create the best response that the best controls for what the vehicle should do next. And the challenge with systems that are built through a collection of third-party sensors or third-party source software is that, that learning loop and the opportunity to leverage the entirety of the sensor set and the perception stack becomes far more limited.
And so we’ve architected our autonomous platforms and in particular, what’s to come on our future platforms around really controlling the entirety of all of the data coming in and then also really control how we use a lot of training models to continue to drive progress into the platform. Now as you point out, those training models there’s lots of ways to run them, but ultimately it requires a build out over time of a large, very large clusters of CPUs to help train and build the robustness into our, into our driving models.
Adam Jonas: Thanks, RJ.
Operator: Thank you. Our next question comes from John Murphy with Bank of America. Your line is open.
John Murphy: Good afternoon, guys. Just a first question RJ. Now that we’ve got the two and the three unveiled and the 3X, we’re kind of at a point where we’re looking at a four to five to pardon maybe six vehicle portfolio. I’m just curious as we get through the ramp of the two and then the three — the 3X, how you think you’re going to manage this portfolio? Is this going to be portfolio returns over time and it’s reinvested in or is it going to be something that sort of continuous improvement, software defined vehicles and there’s not going to be these refreshes over time. Just curious how you kind of see managing what’s becoming a pretty robust and complete portfolio at this point?
RJ Scaringe: Yeah. Thanks, John. The R1 platform really represents the flagship product for us as a company and was our handshake with the world as in terms of introducing Rivian as a brand to customers. But importantly because of its positioning as a flagship product. Its price point is such that it doesn’t allow us to access the largest part of the market. And so our mid-sized platform, which underpins the R2 and R3 products is really important for us as a company at the launch of that platform with R2 in the first half of 2026 represents a step change in the scale of the addressable market we can go after as a business. And what we’ve demonstrated so far and what you’ll continue to see from us for our products, whether that be R1, R2 or R3 is a really heavy focus on using software to continue to make the vehicles better and better over time.
And so as I noted in my opening remarks, we’ve had over 30 over there updates on the R1 platform since we launched the vehicle. And this has led to a really vibrant customer community that there’s a number of folks online following these releases that track every detail and it creates a moment of excitement for our owners when they see the vehicle get better every couple of weeks. And so this is something we’re absolutely going to maintain and is foundational and core to us as a business and we think creates a very different type of ownership experience relative to what we’ve historically known as is owning a car.
John Murphy: And maybe just to follow up on that. I mean, there’s folks that make phones that basically black bricks that change form factor and look on a product cycle basis that’s one to two years. I mean do you think that vehicles can really stay somewhat status in physical form and not be outdated sort of a four to five year cycle? I mean just that’s kind of where the crux is where I’m trying to get. We’re looking at full product portfolio, traditionally return every five to six years, you believe that is now very different, but we’re also seeing some this in phones that are black bricks that they realize they have to actually show us a form factor as well as we’re just going to buy them. It’s early days for the product portfolio, but I’m just — I’m just curious about the philosophy there.
RJ Scaringe: I think, this is a nuanced element here. But historically, when we thought about a product lifecycle, the product would launch and it really wouldn’t change much until the update came out, which would be, as you said, often four, five years between your product like — product launching and its update coming out. And what we believe is the product needs to get better over time. And I talked a moment ago about software, but there’s also going to be hardware improvements that occur over time. So that’s compute, that sensor set and also, of course, improvements in how we build the vehicles, so cost and efficiency improvements. And so we’re already realizing that today. We don’t think of the vehicles as a static product, but rather something that continues to get better, continues to improve on cost structure and really the nature of what the vehicle looks like has a lot to do with just the approach of the company and the brand.
And for us, we’ve really emphasized building a timeless design that’s not something that’s of the moment or something that feels old, six months after it’s released. And we think that timeless element of the design actually provides us the opportunity to make less significant exterior design changes while we continue to make progress with what’s under the skin.
John Murphy: Okay. And if I could just ask one follow-up on that 827 from Illinois. There $2.25 billion lower capital for the normal plant versus the Georgia plant, it doesn’t sound like you’re changing that even though you’re getting to 827 from Illinois just yet. But if you were to pro forma, how much lower capital performing for that, what would you roughly think it would be? I mean, it sounds like there’s other things where that capital is not going just directly to the plant, but it goes to other infrastructure, but how much do you think more do you think you could lower that capital?
Claire Mcdonough: John, I think the most direct comparison as I mentioned in my prepared remarks is the upfront cash that we’ll receive from the State of Illinois, which is roughly $100 million this year. Both Georgia’s incentive package as well as Illinois had payroll incentives, tax incentives associated with each of them. But in the near-term, I would pinpoint that as being incremental to the $2.25 billion of savings that we communicated when we revealed R2.
John Murphy: Okay. Thank you very much, guys.
Operator: Thank you. Our next question comes from Dan Levy with Barclays. Your line is open.
