Hi, this is Amnon. About the standardization, I think the BMW alliance made a very, very interesting comment about the need for standardization. If you have 30 car manufacturers trying to compete one against the other in such an ambitious project, which in my view, it’s no less than sending a man to the moon in terms of being able to reach level four autonomy in a safe manner. There should be some consolidation in terms of deciding on a uniform standardization on what sensors are going to be in the car, how they are going to be placed, what software stack is there. I am not talking about sharing source codes of a function, but how it is broken down into components such that when the day comes, when there is an accident, one can clearly demonstrate that you are using the state-of-the-art, rather than each one is competing against the other. It will hurt the entire industry, reaching a consolidation in terms of standardization of ideas, let’s call this, is something that is natural. And I believe that will naturally evolve in the coming few years.
Ziv Aviram
Tavis, this is Ziv. Regarding your question on aftermarkets, usually we work in three layers in aftermarket. The first one is moving awareness and selling products to the end user. Then after a couple of years, we shift it to multiples like insurance companies and distributors. Some markets, we reached regulation. And this is one of the drivers that pushed the revenue up in the aftermarket is our ultimate goal in creating revenue throughout the markets. And we are very active in big markets to create this kind of government involvement, including United States and China and Israel and other countries.
Tavis McCourt
Thanks.
Operator
Your next question comes from the line of Rich Kwas from Wells Fargo. Your line is open.
Rich Kwas
Alright. Good afternoon. Amnon, on the standardization just a follow-up on that, there has been some recent reports that the Japanese government, the European Union are working pretty closely on trying to create a standard and just want to get your thoughts on what you are seeing from a regulatory standpoint as it relates to the North American market and whether you see that converging here in a year, coming 1 year or 2 years with regards to the global market working together, it seems like North America would have to participate there to accelerate this, but what’s your views on that at this point?
Amnon Shashua
My view is that standardization would not arrive from regulatory bodies. They don’t have the knowledge and their hands on legacy of building these kinds of systems. The standardization would come from the participating parties, the parties that actually build the technology. This is where the standardization could arrive. And then the regulatory bodies would need to approve those systems once they are on the road. But I don’t see standardization coming from committees sitting and deciding what sensors are going to be there and how the problem is going to be broken down. It’s actually – actual partners that are building the technology would need to talk to each other to reach standardization.
Rich Kwas
Okay. So that would mean that OEMs – global OEMs, from a soft regulatory standpoint, would really have to work together collectively?
Amnon Shashua
Exactly.
Rich Kwas
Okay. And then just a quick follow-up Ofer, on as we think about operating expenses, so there was a better than expected this quarter, you are spending a fair amount on R&D this year for REM and other initiatives, do we think – as we think about longer term over the next couple of years, we think about a similar increase in growth in operating expenses or is there seem to be may be some better leverage coming as it relates to some of the volume you realized recently?
Ofer Maharshak
Hi Rich, this is Ofer. So we do not change our long-term estimates in terms of CAGR and the target for 2019. And as we commented last call, we are spending as much as needed, mainly its R&D spending. But we believe that our long-term goal is sustainable in terms of R&D and operating expenses. We are hiring and we hired in the first half of the year significant amount of engineers. We will continue to hiring and we will continue hiring in the next years. But nothing of these hires that we think are going to jeopardize the long-term plan that we established before.
Rich Kwas
Okay. Thank you.
Ziv Aviram
So we are going to take two or three more questions, but please hold your question to just one.
Operator
Your next question comes from the line of Samik Chatterjee from JPMorgan. Your line is open.
Samik Chatterjee
Hi. Thanks for squeezing me in here. So just one question quickly, don’t really want to go back to the Tesla issue, but more ask about what reaction you have seen from other OEMs to the accident, I believe GM has deviated like the Super Cruise launch to refine technology, have you seen any other and OEMs sort of indicating that they want [indiscernible] the technology more may be push out some launches?
Amnon Shashua
I think the GM announcement is not related to the Tesla crash. I think the car – other car manufacturers have plans and are working along their plans, and those plans have unchanged. It has no affect on the plans of the other OEMs.
Samik Chatterjee
Okay, great. Thank you.