Magiver has been predicting the end of Tesla since 1984.
Your barking. I’ve accurately pointed out the precarious financial position it’s been in since day one. That is not a prediction of failure its a statement of fact. If Musk was a CEO in any other company he would have fired a long time ago.
It’s a monumental undertaking to start a car company from scratch. To say it’s a complex business would be an understatement. The difference between profit and loss is based on thousands and thousands of variables which are themselves based on razor thin cost margins.
Tesla has done very well to get this far but it has not profited by it’s efforts. It needs to make a profit going forward to survive. That’s not a prediction.
It’s also not a prediction to say Tesla is vulnerable to market forces such as battery technology or recalls.
Tesla is definitely playing catch-up with GM in one way. GM’s already gone bankrupt and Tesla hasn’t even done it once!
Oh, wait, I also forgot Magiver’s earlier suggestion that Tesla should cannibalize its 2170 battery production to prioritize the Powerwall, as though that’s the key to profitability.
Yes, that would be a sound business decision. Please explain why it’s a bad idea to shift from a division that’s losing money to one that makes money.
Dude, c’mon. I’m never afraid to be critical when I think Tesla has made the wrong decision, but you’re being totally unreasonable.
We’ll just forgot that it took them 4 years to build 2,250 cars or the $460 million government loan didn’t keep it alive during it’s 14 years of continuous financial loss.
The price/sales ratio for Tesla is 7.8 and for GM it’s .3.
They need to generate a profit going forward to survive.
Tesla came closest to making a profit with their high performance cars. The model 3 is currently a financial drain on them and their wall charger makes money.
What’s unreasonable about shifting assets from products that lose money to products that generate a profit? Tesla has a fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders.
I would genuinely like an explanation of your opinion.
It’s not like this is a strange concept to Tesla. Their first production run so far has been the higher optioned car. They’ve already fucked the little guy who wanted an entry level Tesla. Back of the line for you pal. why not extend that process by bringing on the dual motor and add Ludicrous mode. Make fewer cars for more profit and shift battery production to the wall.
MotorWeek review (video of episode not available yet)
http://www.motorweek.org/reviews/road_tests/2018-tesla-model-3
Brian
I’m getting close to being the in the market for a new car and I’ve been thinking about a Tesla. I’ve been kind of on the fence because of their manufacturing difficulties but more because of their poor reliability (according to Consumer Reports). But this post has decided me – no way I’m going to get a car with an API, especially one as apparently poorly designed as Tesla’s. Designing a secure API is no trivial task, and Tesla has apparently not even made a half hearted effort at doing it right. A few minutes of Googling turned up reports on security flaws in their API, which is a home brew contraption not based on any industry standards like OAuth. Some of these reports are rather old but I haven’t found anything to indicate that Tesla has improved things.
Strange that you would say that, given quotes like the following from your very own links:
As for flaws in the API, they revolve entirely around one thing: they do not easily permit third parties to access the API without sharing your password. That’s not great, but has a very easy solution: don’t use third party tools. Frankly, this is just super-obvious security 101–don’t give out your passwords to just anyone.
I use my own tool and never had to share my password with anybody (I also use HTTPS for everything). As such, I’m not vulnerable to any of the issues mentioned in your second link. Of course, the same is true for anyone that sticks entirely to the built-in app.
If you think other cars without publicly documented APIs are secure, you’re deluding yourself. It took GM years to fix a wide-open exploit in OnStar–one that could even disable the brakes!
BTW, there’s no such thing as a car “without an API” these days. They all have APIs; you just don’t know about most of them. And about 40% have wireless connections like OnStar or Tesla’s service.
Oh, and the Tesla API was never really intended for use by third parties. It’s always been “use at your own risk”. It was documented by people reverse-engineering the phone app. That’s why it doesn’t have features like revoking tokens.
Given this, it’s surprisingly straightforward and secure for a private API–most private APIs do real dumbshit stuff like having backdoor passwords, sending passwords over unencrypted connections, etc… It would be nice if Tesla allowed real third-party access, but in the meantime I can use it myself with no real risk.
Any thoughts about how the next crop of EV to be released over the next year or so will impact Tesla (and the Bolt for that matter).
The electric Volvo XC40, the Audi e-tron Quattro, the Hyundai Kona electric and its sister the Kia Niro and more …
Well, my first thought is that they’re all crossovers/SUVs and thus don’t interest me :).
Aside from that, I don’t see any dealbreakers among the ones you mentioned, but at the same time none of them tickle me the way Tesla does. Any one of the deficiencies would be ok, but all of them together leave them pretty far behind.
- Although most are advertising fast charging (100-150 kW), it is based on the CCS network, and in the US even 50 kW stations are not that common. At the moment, it is nowhere close to the Supercharger network.
- Range isn’t necessarily at Tesla levels. The XC40 for instance is likely to have a 300 mile range, but on the NEDC cycle, which is famously unrealistic. Real range is likely <200 mi. I get an actual 300 mi at highway speeds.
- Tesla still has by far the best head unit in the industry.
- No Autopilot.
- A year+ away.
All that said, they all seem pretty interesting in a Bolt sort of way–maybe not that super-exciting, but decent enough to be a practical car and makes sense for buyers that like that form factor and don’t really value the Tesla experience.
Ahh, I see you said “impact” and not just general thoughts…
Well, my answer doesn’t change all that much. Tesla has the advantage that there are tens of thousands of Model 3s on the road already, and hundreds of thousands of Model S/Xs. So there’s not a whole lot of uncertainty in what you get.
The body style may be the biggest factor here. It’s true that crossovers/SUVs are more popular than sedans, and the X is too expensive. Tesla is going to ship as many Model 3s as they can make for now, but the Model Y is going to face stiffer competition, and that’s going to have to pick up some slack after they make progress on their backlog.
So–I dunno. I think Tesla will continue having the superior product, but when you take factors like reliability, availability, and uncertainty into account, there’s clearly going to be a market for the alternatives.
Ultimately, I think there will be some jostling around but Tesla will find their sweet spot and continue to thrive there. They don’t need to take over the industry any more than Subaru or Porsche or whoever hasn’t taken over the industry (or Toyota, for that matter).
Regarding Superchargers–
Ravenman and others have made the point earlier that fast charging is really an overrated need; charging at home is such a benefit that it more than makes up for any extra time on the road. Not to mention convenient topping off with mid-level charging during normal errand running. It is inertia and unwillingness to change or even consider a change in routine that causes this mindset. I totally agree with all of this.
However, there is always room for improvement, and so I would not discount Superchargers completely. For my own particular situation–the most common long trip I make is ~280 mi, and then perhaps some extra miles at my destination (my parents and several old friends). This puts me somewhat over the Model 3’s range, particularly if I want to have some margin.
I could charge at my parents; that is an option, but I kinda prefer not to use their electricity, and it’s inconvenient to use their hi-amp outlet (a 14-50 for welding out in a separate shop). Not impossible but just slightly annoying.
My solution was to just stop at a Supercharger. Not for a full fill-up; just to put an extra 80 miles or so on it to give me a comfortable margin. There’s one just off the highway exit I use, but there are half a dozen others that would have worked as well. The car can easily navigate to any of them, telling me which are in range and the current usage (number of occupied vs. total slots). Actually using one is completely seamless–just drive up and plug in. There is no credit card to swipe; no horrible little pad to enter my zip code or PIN or whatever; no fuel grade selection; no obnoxious screen blaring advertisements at me. And of course no gross nozzle to monitor.
Just plug in and walk away. Or in my case, relax in the climate-controlled car listening to music and fiddling with my phone. After less than 15 minutes, I had more than enough range and left. My credit card (already entered on Tesla’s site) charged me $5 for the juice (also shown on the car’s screen so that there are no surprises).
None of these little aspects are dealbreakers if missing; I can live with swiping a card, or navigating manually, or having to guess at occupancy, or taking 2-3x as long to charge, or whatever… but this stuff adds up. There is great value in having a seamless experience. For all the crap I give Apple in general, the reason they are popular is because they work very hard on the total experience. Tesla has taken the same lesson to heart.
If Tesla has a problem here, it’s that all these little factors are not completely obvious to prospective buyers, and so Superchargers may be undervalued in this respect. This may be balanced out by fast charging being overvalued in the sense of overall frequency of use; hard to say there. Maybe it comes out in the wash.
The charging network of Tesla, sueperchargers and destination chargers, is an advantage that Tesla has over competitors. The actual need is probably much lower than the perceived need, but it’s one of those things that gives peace of mind.
Obviously, because Tesla isn’t going to give up on the Model 3 to become a Powerwall company, and the key to the Model 3 is attaining volume.
Taking decisions to cut volume dooms the Model 3, for a product that has a gross cost of about half of what Tesla hopes to net in Model 3 sales, and for which the market is probably like a tenth of that of a car.
I mean, get real. This is like saying that sixty years ago, Raytheon should focus on its lucrative TV tube business and not bother with that really hard radar stuff.