Thứ Hai, 31 tháng 10, 2016

Long-Term Fundamentals of Tesla Motors (TSLA) part 25

  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    If it makes you feel any better, Elon has already said that the Model III is going to be designed with expediency in mind, as opposed to ultimate feature-ness. This is what you are asking for.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    It frustrates me too, but the deeper I think about it, logic about the brand, the product & Elon itself unfolds. If Elon or Tesla did not have this maniacal focus on features that are difficult to design & manufacture, I doubt they would have achieved what they have so far. Their breakthroughs in powertrains is a manifestation of this thought process. The side effect of it is, it may at times cause setbacks, delays. Hoping we cross this hump soon!
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Speaking of falcon wing doors, here are some old time Mercedes cars with falcon wings :)
    Bing Images
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Those are gull wing doors, which have single hinges. The Model X falcon wings are totally invented by Tesla, no other car has dual hinged doors.

    Also, interesting piece of news: Jeep has confirmed that it will soon release a Hellcat powered Grand Cherokee that goes 0-60 in 3.5 seconds. It's suppossed to be out next summer. I think Tesla can get a fair amount of press in the short term if they beat this 0-60 time and release it on time this quarter.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Completely agree with you. Steve Jobs was a maniac about the iPhone's design and manufacturing precision, and that frustrated many engineers. But there probably would have never been the iPhone if Jobs did not push everyone to achieve the impossible. Pretty sure what went on sale in June 2007 was still not 100% what Jobs wanted, but it was close enough to bring his vision to life and was at least one order of magnitude better than any existing phone at the time. Musk is the same time of product visionary and perfectionist. Granted, EV's core advantage is the powertrain -- that what helps the consumer MAKE SENSE of buying an EV. But a great passenger car needs to be more than that. It needs to be a complete package of great user experiences integrated seamlessly. Features like the falcon doors which will (as advertised, hopefully) make day-to-day activities such as putting the toddlers into the back seat a lot easier and enjoyable. That's the kind of design that makes the consumer LOVE the product. These things are by default very hard because we all want convenience and comfort so if it was easy to do it would've been done a long time ago.


    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    I'm not interested in foreign cars or SUVs. I am also not interested in what an ICE can do anymore. It will be fun to see a bunch of videos of a Model X beating the JGC Hellcat in drag races.

    The production Model X looks really good and should be as big a hit as the Model S is/was. Does anyone know if the Model X is capable of winning the MTCOTY? It's not a car so does that disqualify it? To bring it back around to the topic, if it is qualified and wins that award then we'll see a very nice pop in the stock price.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    I am of similar opinion.

    I don't want to buy another gasoline automobile, unless my Honda Civic is wrecked before Model 3 becomes available.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    elon has stated that model 3 will NOT have crazy design issues. It'll be a very compelling but simply to build car. Nothing crazy.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Nope. Those a single hindged doors. Model x is double hindged.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    I don't think it's eligible because it's an SUV, but I'm pretty sure it's a lock for MTSUVOTY.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    It's not enough. The X has to blow people's minds, it has to draw attention like flies to honey. It has to talk for Tesla, who does not do any conventional advertising. When the X starts showing up in mall parking lots and at baseball/soccer/football fields, and people open those doors...there's going to be a serious increase of whiplash in the population. There will be lineups of strangers asking owners questions. Once their attention has been garnered, then they will learn about the fuel economy, the 0-60 times, the towing capacity, etc...

    There is no connection between the two. The Model X was in part purposely delayed because things changed. I've stated a few times in the past, the Model 3 can not be delayed because it's directly tied to the Gigafactory and Tesla's partnership with Panasonic and others.

    The Model 3 isn't going to be in line with a Camry. It's still going to 'premium' compared to any other EV in that price range (ie. Bolt). But yes, Tesla is going to have to pump them out faster and last we heard publically was that they were going to go more conservatively with the Model 3 for version 1.0, so I'm not holding my breath for suicide doors.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest

    All this his hype is your assertion , building the most difficult car in the world is likely a mistake .
    Lets see what the ramp looks like.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    The design challenge for the Model 3 should be how to make it easy to scale mass production. While the Model X may be the most challenging car to manufacture, it would be a triumph for the Model 3 to be the easiest car to manufacture. The easier it is for Tesla to scale the Model 3, the greater the opportunity to move fast as a company in many other directions. Musk should aspire to a lights off factory for the Model 3. That would truly be a marvel.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Does not matter what the ramp looks like other than how it might temporarily affect the numbers at the end of Q4 and/or/maybe Q1. Otherwise it holds no significant meaning. Tesla will make Model X and fill their almost 30k order list and beyond. My hype assertion is that Model X is going to win every major award and steal sales from every SUV maker, and cause the biggest 'oh, ****!' ripple through the auto industry. I'm hoping the ripple is big enough to cause major panic and finally get them off their duffs in time to have an answer for Model 3...but I doubt it.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest


    Model 3 price isn't too far off from a Leaf with quick charging.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    I tend to agree that this is probably accurate. In the last Conference Call, we learned that Model X has only 30% components commonality with Model S. That 30% could easily be the batteries, motors, and electronics systems. Tesla basically had to design everything else from scratch to allow for features like towing.

    I believe that Tesla's original plan was simply to make a taller Model S with AWD, but that this plan fell apart when the engineering team realized that the Model S body/frame/suspension wasn't up to the task. If the goal of Model X is to get people to switch from ICE SUVs to BEV SUVs, the BEV has to be better in most respects. That means towing capability. Also, in the long run, Tesla is going to want to use its own vehicles for delivery and other service. A Model X that can tow 10,000 lbs. (as rumored) would be able to tow a trailer loaded with another Tesla. Right now, Tesla uses ICE trucks for towing deliveries to customers. I see these driving around sometimes and I think it would be great if they could be replaced eventually with Model X.


    I tend to agree with this as well. An electric car should be simpler to build than an ICE car. My guess here is that with Model S selling well, there was massive feature creep in the interior. Elon stated that second row seats were more troublesome than the Falcon-wing doors, which is ridiculous. Those seats better be :cursing: amazing, like more amazing than Honda's Magic Seats.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    I believe Elon stated specifically that Model 3 would be "less adventurous" than Model X.

    The goal of Tesla is to bring a battery EV to mass market. If Tesla were to go the "crazy premium features" route, we'd probably see investors dumping shares, Gigafactory partners bailing, and enthusiasts rioting in Palo Alto. It would be a near abandonment of the "Secret Plan". I don't think that will happen.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    This is kind of fun to think about. Because at some point, in the midst of answering all those questions, you get to say, "Well, you don't put gas in it, you just plug it in when you get home..."
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    The Model X isn't targeting 95% of consumers. Even the Model 3 will probably be targeting much much less than 95%.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Spot on about the X differentiation. With Musk, delays are inevitable. A 6 month delay, compared to a 2 year delay makes a mountain of difference IMO.

    In my opinion, they will make Model 3 more than compelling..

    Period.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    And Model 3 will be 'premium' compared to that Leaf.

    - - - Updated - - -

    I didn't say that. I said the Model 3 is directly tied to the Gigafactory. That is different. I've also said (in another thread) that the production of Powerpack and Powerwall may relieve some of the partnership pressure. There's no way of knowing what gross margins are going to be for either the car or the stationary storage (we have some guesses by management), but it's likely the car will still have a higher margin. Yes, the car will be more involved to produce. Yes, it's possible that there may be enough business from stationary storage to make up for lower margins etc., etc., But there's even more things involved, like employees and milestones that have to be reached for Tesla to get all the tax incentives etc... from the state of Nevada. So I contend, again, that Model 3 will not be late in terms being talked about by some (as if it's the X all over again). It would only make business sense to include a window of some sort for issues/delays, but it's not some 2 year window. The fact that the Gigafactory is on time/a bit ahead of schedule speaks to the seriousness of the venture. Model 3 is a whole new ballgame and will be viewed by Tesla entirely differently than the X. This is what I believe. I could be wrong. I'm betting I'm not.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest

    Premium compared to Leaf? I find that hard to believe considering there are many features in the leaf that the Model S lacks. Let's just wait and see. We love our leaf. I'm not saying it's better than the Model S but for city driving I like it much better than the model s. MUCH easier to park.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    I emphatically agree with almost everything you said except some of what you said about the GF. The GF being ahead of schedule allows the M3 to be on time. But IMO stating that that implies that the M3 will be on time is going a bridge too far.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Educated guess. Watching Tesla innovate at a significantly greater speed than any other OEM and putting every single resource into advancing EVs (not being sidetracked by having ICE products). Listening to reports of what's coming out next from other OEMs.

    And I clearly stated - let me quote myself for you: "Not a darn thing wrong with a Leaf."

    Right, so why are you objecting to my statement that: "Model 3 will be 'premium' compared to that Leaf."? Color me confused at this point.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Guys, SHORT TERM PRICE MOVEMENTS remember?
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    I'd vote for them communicating delivery dates as "when it's done". I know as-is that they're working harder than just about anybody to get stuff done, no need to discredit this with publicising estimates for things that can't be reasonably estimated. It'll piss off some people but those would be well served going back to trading AAPL.

    As far as the balance between being plain and fancy, might be useful to look at finer points. Simple but done right, again as a shareholder I'd be all for it, but not for a top dog luxury SUV. X isn't just a bridge to when Gigafactory is fully operational and M3 is done. It's a rolling advertisement for the company and possibly a pretty fat long-term cash cow. If X was plain there wouldn't be any reason to make it, just improve S and shoot for faster GF and M3 delivery. I don't know enough internal details to say if that was even in the cards, but for me that looked like a more straightforward path.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    I'd be happy with them saying that as well, however, not going to happen. The outcry from most everyone else would be enormous. As a publicly traded company, investors, analysts et al... are expecting dates to be given so decisions can be made. Just look at the flak Tesla takes for their non-gap reporting, their refusal to say monthly sales numbers, for their distinguishing production vs deliveries, etc., etc.,
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    http://www.wsj.com/articles/tesla-secures-lithium-hydroxide-supply-for-its-battery-factory-1440767689/
    More details:
    http://www.fool.co.uk/investing/2015/08/28/rare-earth-minerals-plc-signs-supply-contract-with-tesla-motors-inc/
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    And... this is why average retail investors like most of us will not be able to invest in SpaceX anytime soon. Elon hates dealing with :cursing: from shareholders, regulators, and other stakeholders who instigate all kinds of drama. I can't say I blame him. These parties often demand hard dates for stuff where it's simply too hazy to accurately predict what will happen.

    I'm as guilty of complaining as anyone else, but I think Tesla's communications could be much better.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    This.

    We have to realize that the majority of the population probably still doesn't know what a Model S is. For a new technology to disrupt a big incumbent, it needs to be *much better* and ~ the same price, or equally good and much cheaper. People are slow to change, and as a mass called society, that is compounded. The Tesla Model S has "disrupted" the world of auto journalists and bloggers. It has opened up a big road into the EV future thanks to record-chattering acceleration, record safety that broke some NHTSA testing devices, a giant tablet as the control center, over-the-air updates, 7 seats if you want them, and other amazing things. But we need more. Society needs more in order to wake up to EVs enough to even drive one. The Model X is MOAR. The gull-wing doors and, presumably, the super-fabulous 2nd-row seats are critical features to get beyond the 0-60 & tech crowd and open up a highway to the masses. So, imho, the delays due to the doors and back seats are likely well worth it.

    tl;dr: disruption doesn't come easy. you have to WOW and go far beyond normal. Model X will open the eyes of non-tech and non-acceleration fanatics who haven't learned about Model S.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    I have seen quite a few posts expressing concern about MS and MX demand (medium and long term) in terms of the M3 Launch. Short term, between now and about the beginning of Q2 2016 it is a possible issue. Of course most of that risk is mitigated by the MX waiting list.

    Beyond that time frame I think that Tesla could be very successful selling only MS's and MX's.

    There was some information posted about the increases in sales with $5k-$10 price reductions. There are at least two ways Tesla will be able to substantially reduce MS and MX prices without reducing profits.
    1. It will cost them less to produce cars with their new assembly line (why else would they plan to stop using a multi million dollar assembly line?).

    2. GF pack reduction costs.

    Would someone please let me know how Tesla handles car deposits (do they spend it, or set it aside somehow)?
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Some of that $1.5B in CapEx with the second production line.

    11363739_996488577069372_1980983454_n (1).jpg
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Mitchji, deposit money is used as working capital, not set aside
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Thanks!
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Not sure where to put this comment, so I will put it in here as it deals with the long term timeline.

    I just had a small chat about the car with a new teacher at our school who saw I had a Tesla poster in my office. He's in his mid thirties, but as he was talking about the car and wanting one he said this: "Oh, the car doesn't use oil?" He didn't realize there was no engine.......

    So it seems until Tesla gets the cheaper "mass market" Model 3 out, the general public will still be clueless on specifics of how it works.

    I could not believe he knew about it and still thought the car had an engine.....speechless I was. I then went on a informational ramble. haha
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    There's a ton of people who think electric means hybrid. It's very strange to me. Partially the fault of all the PHEV marketing I suppose. And because people think tesla and fisker are the same thing.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    http://www.autoblog.com/2015/09/08/tesla-direct-sales-not-dealer-model-greatest-threat/

    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    107 mile range is still pitifully low. What is going to happen when Nissan has to compete against a $35K Tesla Model 3 with a 200 mile EPA rated range? No one will be buying Leafs.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Nissan will have a 168+ mile EPA rated range 2017 Nissan LEAF.

    Even if the MSRP is not significantly lower than Model 3 the transaction price will be.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest

    and availability

    what if the model 3 is really popular, many people want the performance AWD version....Tesla will prioritize those.

    2016 LEAF is the last of the gen 1
    2017 is the gen 2
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    I have no doubt Tesla will prioritize fully loaded versions but they won't delay your order for a base model for years or even a year; months at worst.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Let me start out by saying, it looks like sales of Model S are on fire. And end with saying, that from a future Model 3 buyer, the negative posts are in one of a few categories.

    Majority: I had a problem, service was awesome. I love my car, and the great service.

    Minority: I got exactly what I ordered, but something better came out. My car is still awesome, but I wish I had a heads up.

    Minority: everything is awesome, but how will they maintain this?

    Everyone: I wish there was more communication, especially on time lines and development status.

    The last one is really the only one I would be concerned about, but at least they try to get something done well with the resources they have. That said, I do think they deserve criticism over the P85D and autopilot issues. They have admitted that the P85D was limited, indirectly, and openly admitted that the Autopilot camera has issues in certain conditions. The ludicrous upgrade is another communications failure, and I wish they had put it on the X and called it insane mode, matching the Model S insane mode. Then they could have had a supply of parts ready before announcing ludicrous mode on the S

    Would I still buy TSLA, or a product from them? Yes, but I'm a college student. Also, every hit piece I've seen comes off as a desperate attempt to get ad revenue.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Now some Roadster owners are getting hit with the communication problem: http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/showthread.php/40042-Roadster-3-0/page97

    Apparently, the Roadster 3.0 (upgraded battery pack) that Elon promised some time ago is currently incompatible with Roadster versions 1.0-1.5. Tesla even refunded the deposits of some 1.0-1.5 owners who put down money on the upgrades. The company has said nothing about the fate of these early adopter vehicles.

    I don't know what to say. This feels like Tesla dissing its early customers -- the true believers who helped make everything else at Tesla possible. Hopefully the company will make things right, but broken promises are becoming a disturbing pattern.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Bringing this to the long term thread where it belongs. For context, we are talking about providing shared mobility services through automated driving. I don't think it is controversial to assume these are at least 10, maybe even 20 year out.

    First of all there is no guarantee 1) Tesla will achieve the comparative cost advantages it hopes with the GF 2) and if it does, that the GF couldn't be replicated by other parties in that time frame. 3) technological changes won't make having a large investment in one particular battery production process a net negative instead of a net positive

    But even if those guarantees hold, batteries are quickly becoming a smaller and smaller part of the total cost of ownership, even without a GF. Having a 30% lower cost base on a $24k battery is significant, but it's less important in 10 years time when that battery costs $12k and it's absolutely futile when that battery costs 6k in 20 years time.

    Only if Tesla Motors eats the gross margin when it sells internally to Tesla Shared Mobility. A win for one becomes a loss for the other. Net result for the group however delivers no advantage to stock holders. But there is a negative too : Tesla Shared Mobility has to use Teslas. If one of the competitors invents and patents a breakthrough that makes their car better, Tesla mobility can't use it. As an investor I would much rather have an investment in Tesla, the motor manufacturing company and Uber, the mobility service provider. I simply don't see the huge synergy between the two businesses. If the best we can come up with that Tesla Mobility can buy cars cheaper from Tesla Motors than Uber, why was Hertz not just renting out

    Shared mobility will go through a long period of still needing drivers. That's is a winner takes all market : lyft and uber are expanding as rapidly as humanly possible for this particular reason. Drivers will flock to the network that has the users and the users will go to the network where they have the widest choice of cars.

    If I am standing on the curb my concern isn't if the service is going to charge me $10.50 or $12.10 for my ride, but what service will pick me up in 3 minutes while the other announces 17 minutes before a car is there. Likewise, when I land at Houston airport, I don't want to go find out if this happens to be an AppleCar city, maybe a GoogleCar city, maybe a TeslaCar city. Finally I can see business accounts being developed if shared mobility takes flight and there again, one partner will rule.

    On top of that the transition to fully autonomous driving will be gradually. If not just because there will be regulatory involvement. Maybe California will allow those cars while Illinois blocks. Maybe a Texas road is easier to navigate automatically than a Canadian mountain range. Etc. That's why the importance of the network effect will carry through in my opinion.

    Every single market/technological breakthrough that upsets the traditional seller/buyer relationship counts on the network effect. Google, Facebook, AirBnb, AppStores, ... you name it. If have not seen any compelling reason to assume this market to be any different.

    Finally I want to make it clear that you can call my point of view 'ridiculous' but you are actually the one who is far out of the mainstream. The famous analyst report that highlighted Teslas future in this space gave a pop of $25. Even if we attribute 100% of this movement to the potential of this business, with 125M shares outstanding that's a good $3B valuation of this future market through Tesla. Uber is valued at $50B...
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    I do not understand why owners of cars that were purchased in 2008 are angry that tesla is not able to increase their range by 50% today. How many other car companies offer such fundamental improvements to cars that are 7 years old or even one year old....none. Tesla continues to support the roadster 1.5 cars to their original capability. Let me repeat they are continuing to support the roadster 1.5 version. That is all they are responsible for. It is great that some of the roadster owners are able to get the increase at teslas cost and that maybe available to the others later. I hope current model S owners are not expecting a 450 mile battery at teslas cost in the future. I am sure that tesla is now regretting decision to do the battery upgrade for previous models of roadster.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Because Tesla got their hopes up about an upgrade (they NEVER said that 1.0/1.5 owners would be left out), and even took deposits from 1.0/1.5 owners.

    If you make promises to customers and don't deliver and don't communicate about problems, there's going to be customer resentment. It's a reality of business.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    You misunderstood him. anticitizen was referring to Tesla's communications problems, not any problems with supporting older models. In fact what they're doing for Roadster owners is rather generous IMHO. But Tesla appears to have an inability to improve its rather mediocre-to-bad comms problems. As a long-term investor this concerns me.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Just a tiny little thought as a reminder on how much of a game changer Tesla industry leading battery tech is in reality:
    Tesla battery tech enables biggest and highest quality propulsion batteries in the industry right now.
    BTW this is still valid after more than three years that Model S is on the market and a lot of more years after the Roadster.
    To my opinion this works like something like a multiplier in a multi dimensional space to the favor of Tesla and against the so called competition.
    A higher battery pack cap (kWh) will induce:

    • Longer possible driving range
    • Less charging stations needed due to longer driving range
    • Shorter recharge times due to bigger pack (customer is interested in how many miles can I put in my car in let's say 10 minutes, and the bigger the pack the higher the power that the pack is able to handle during charging)
    • Less traffic at charging stations due to higher charge rate and bigger pack
    • Higher charge rates induce possibility to make battery pack even bigger as powerfull charging infrastructure already in place to fuel the vehicles
    This is working like a feedback loop.
    This is non-linear!
    And this is the reason that it is getting harder and harder for the so called competition to try to play catch up with the success ot Tesla Motors!
    The longer they wait the harder it'll be to catch up!
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    An EDUCATED customer that is.
    An uneducated are still repeating the old BS line of how long from empty to full.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Concerning the question of how much a <50k delivery result would hurt the stock, now I am starting to think it will be negligible. The old reason for the stock to dip down on delivery issues were:

    1) This confirms there is a demand problem!
    2) This confirms that mainstream buyers aren't ready for EV's!
    3) This confirms that TM cannot make cars!

    It was never the lack of revenue that was the concern, but rather the *untold story* that was the fear. But if they do 49k cars, then what? No one thinks they have a demand problem when they are just now starting to address their model X backlog. As for EV's in general, the industry is falling over themselves to reveal tesla killers and put plugs on anything that rolls. And TM has been making EV's for a few years now. The shortfall can and will be easily explained as slower-than-hoped rollout of the new capacity.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    I don't disagree with most of your reasoning. But I think your conclusion is incorrect. Remember the last ER? EM reduced the guidance from 55k, to 50-55k and the SP plummeted. What do you think has changed?

    This might help short-term. Definitely helps long-term IMO:
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    If you believe in an efficient market then the risk of lower deliveries is priced in. I expect a near miss, not 5k. The stock drop (was it a "plummet"? ) was the reaction already.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    I think there will be a drop as is questions Tesla's capacity to expand production in a timely manner to meet 2016 and 2017 production estimates and revenue ramp
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    I argue it USED to do that. Now the situation is far clearer: They have new capacity, largely idle right now waiting for the Model X volume to ramp up. If they miss by 1k (ship say 49k in 2015) They can make up the 1k and more in a subsequent quarter, easily, with the new capacity and demand for the now doubled product lineup. My whole premise is that the old reasons to freak out about a missed delivery number may be obsolete.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Read that ZEV alliance currently expanding in Europe and the states.
    No covering more than a third of BEV new car sales worldwide.
    Does anybody have additional information on the ZEV alliance?
    E.g. countries that might join.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    GM : battery cost $145/kWh now, $100/kWh by 2018

    GM made some interesting announcements today (including having autonomous Volts run around their campus next year). But, this, is what I find very interesting.

    GM warns the Valley: Prepare to compete over driverless cars | The Seattle Times

    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    More competitive with something they're already better than.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    So the cells in the 2016 Volt cost GM less than $2700? Plus ~$900 for packaging. So $3600.

    But it carries a ~$10k premium over a fully loaded Cruze?

    The above numbers are wrong or GM is making money hand over fist on the Volt.

    And should be more than a limited market vehicle. I think even Mark Reuss would rather sell 150k Volts at $29k than 25k at $34k.

    At at $100 per kWh for cell cost the Bolt EV should be no where near $37,500 before incentives.

    GM should be taking over the world at those cost.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    My guess is that their specific energy is pretty low so it's impossible to make a reasonable car with bigger battery. I'd be too heavy and expensive. So even if they don't blow smoke with those prices it's not very interesting, give us a price for a battery with energy density comparable to NCA cells.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    In another article I thought they said that price was at the cell level, not pack level.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    How do you know LG's new battery sp. Density?

    It must be pretty good if they can squeeze enough battery into Bolt to get EPA 200+ miles range. And for Audi etc to claim 300 mile cars.

    - - - Updated - - -

    LG completing a 100 k battery plant in China soon - with little fanfare. Different companies work in different ways.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Wow, I did not see that coming. They seem extremely well positioned, what, with Internet connected cars and young engineers. Who'd a thought GM would be the disruptors.

    Actually, it's quite refreshing to see Grandpa Motors get excited about electric and autonomous vehicles. This is exactly what accelerating sustainable transport should look like. I hope they're serious.

    And now that GM has told the world what it's cell cost is, I hope that Tesla will return the favor. I'm quite tired of having to guess at what Tesla's battery cost is. Besides, I think it would encourage others to join the race, if we all knew how far down the track Tesla has gone.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Anybody who's got batteries in range of $100/kWh in 2018 should be selling into the storage market. They should be able to undercut Tesla's Powerpack price and sell as much as they could make.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    One of the interesting things about the X reveal is that it gives a idea of a next generation Model S. I think and S refresh/ update would fit in great between the release of the X and the Model 3 towards the end of 2016. At that point the S will be 4 years old, the X will be in full production and the 3 will still be a year or so away. This will provide a demand boost for the S as it gets a bit "long in the tooth" so to speak. Plus the work involved in a S redesign should be substantially less than either the X or the 3.

    They could start with a new front end and the panoramic windshield. Maybe other upgrades such as the self opening doors, electronic spoiler, 360 cameras and ventilated seats. Maybe drop the 3rd row seat option and go with an even nicer back seat.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    What ? What exactly is a 100 k battery plant?

    - - - Updated - - -

    image9-570x360.jpg


    Ok googled myself.

    Seems like they had quite a bit of fanfare.

    They say enough cells for "100k EV batteries."

    Presumably that means 100k battery packs. But they don't say GWh or how big in kWh each pack will be?

    For cars how big to travel how far? This could be a relatively tiny .5 GWh facility or something as big as a quarter the size of the GF. Presumably this will use Chinese minerals and imported African minerals. We know these will be clean and ethically sourced too.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Tesla will have PACK prices that low by 2017.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Pretty sure Tesla is targetting $100/kwh in 2020, and that is production cost.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    TSLA investors will soon see that other battery companies/suppliers aren't sleeping until 2020. The numbers are directly quoted from GM's IR page and they are indeed at the cell level:

    http://phx.corporate-ir.net/External.File?t=1&item=VHlwZT0yfFBhcmVudElEPTUxOTQwNzR8Q2hpbGRJRD01OTYxNTU=

    See page 52.

    LG Chem has supply contracts with many large car brands across the globe. There will be many factories. Supply for GM's Bolt is just one of the first supply contracts to be fulfilled in 2016-2017.

    If I read GM's slides ("6 for 16", page 99) correctly the GM Bolt is indeed intended for production by late 2016 already.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    I'm pretty sure that's too high. I'm planning to start a thread, in the next few days on Tesla's battery pack costs in which I think I will make a compelling case for $100 or less per kWh by 2017.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Thanks. They are claiming $145 cell cost at launch for Bolt in slide 54. Its impressive considering they don't own the GF and risks associated with it (investment, operations, and must be humming to see profit). So at that cost for GM, LG may not be far behind Tesla. One advantage to LG is that their operations are in Asia where they get environmental and labor benefits.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    I'm just going by the guidance from Tesla's management which is $100/kwh (I assume production cost) by 2020 which is already a very large cost reduction. You wrote that Tesla will hit $100/kwh by 2017 in a very confident tone, I'm just saying that we should stick to the guidance and let it be clear when we are speculating so readers aren't mislead and we don't muddy the discussion with speculative assumptions.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Quick update on the recent news on the exhaust fraud in the long term thread as this is no longer short term topic, but still has impact on auto stocks and TSLA:
    - Focus on diesel ICE, as emmission of NOX particles is a big issue for diesel ICE as they have different combustion temperatures compared to gasoline ICE.
    - Main focus is Volkswagen Group with currently VW, Audi, Seat, Skoda as brands that have used diesel ICE engine type EA 189 (emission class EURO5).
    - Now also VW utility vehicles involved (link).
    - Volkswagen officially admitting 11 million vehicles invoved globally. These vehicles use Volkswagen diesel ICE EA 189, that was build from 2009 till 2014.
    - Basic system SW used by the cheating device is from BOSCH, altered by Volkswagen.
    - As Volkswagen states, new production diesel ICE from this year (with new emission class EURO6) are not involved in this fraud.
    - Switzerland decided to stop new car sales for all Volkswagen Group vehicles beginning Monday next week (October 5th), open end (link).
    - France joining other states like Canada, USA and Germany (Braunschweiger Staatsanwaltschaft) in taking legal action against Volkswagen Group.
    - France wants already paid subsidies for eco friendly vehicles back from Volkswagen group (link).
    - Volkswagen Group USA boss Micheal Horn invited to US Congress October 8th with EPA representatives invited as well.
    - Volkswagen reducing capacity in their factory in Puebla in Mexico, no more working on Saturday shifts.
    - Volkswagen owner families Piech and Porsche using this turmoil to install "family friendly" persons in important positions such as Volkswagen Group CEO Matthias M�ller, Volkswagen Group CFO Frank Wittwer and chairman of the supervisory board Hans Dieter Poetsch, retail investors and government officials in Germany not happy with these decisions. E.g. P�tsch could be involved in this exhaust fraud during his time as member of the board! comment link
    - Volkswagen now recalling 225000 vehicles in Sweden.
    - US fine up to $18 billion, compensations could exceed this number.
    - SW including the defeat switch is from year 2005 (link).
    - In 2005 Ferdinand Piech, as chairman of the supervisory board, wanted to implement "Pumpe Duese" ("pump-nozzle injection system") technique for the diesel ICE, despite of other manufacturers implementing modern common rail technique.
    - The final test drive of 1.6l and 2.0l diesel ICE EA 189 before production was done by Ferdinand Piech and others in South Africa during 2005 (this is the real story, amazing).
    - Volkswagen Group cancelled their annual shareholder meeting, that was planned for November 9th, because of exhaust gate.
    - First German shareholders taking legal action against Volkswagen Group (link).
    - Up to $35billion fines in Australia, almost 700000Euros per vehicle sold (link).


    - - - Updated - - -

    ^This, please.
    Difficult enough to dig up the facts every time in all that misinformation in public media.

    And BTW I love to hear everybody's speculations and assumptions as well, but please mark em as such!

    Thank you all so much in advance!
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    That should be enough to stop them doing it again.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Unless you can find a quote, I believe it's an _aim_ by _2025_ of $100/kWh.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    From A quick search I found this Tesla Projects Battery Costs Could Drop To $100/KWH By 2020 - HybridCars.com otherwise I'm just going by memory where I recall hearing the $100/kwh number several times. Haven't heard any expectation for 2025 by Tesla, do you have a source?
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    GM CEO Mary Barra speaking at its Global Business Conference had some interesting slides.
    mary-barra-2015-global-conference-350x214.jpg


    bolt-battery-cost-lg-chem-750x249.jpg



    volt-profit-maring-increase.jpg






    Gen 2 Volt profit per car will increase $3500 over Gen 1.


    volt-bolt-gm-slide-750x247.jpg
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    @RobStark - now this is the kind of positive and interesting news that I like spending my time discussing.

    That looks like a matter-of-fact presentation by somebody that's at LEAST mostly in - maybe all in. I like the shaping the future slide, where they talk about aluminum to steel welding. I would expect that to be exceedingly difficult. It also sounds like a technical ability that would enable a company to use a mixture of steel and aluminum throughout a car - getting the strength of steel where that's needed and cost ineffective to do it some other way, while easily getting the weight benefits of aluminum where that is cost effective.


    I'll answer the obvious comment - yes, it's obvious that a rigid and quality automobile can be built out of aluminum. Let's remember that these slides are talking about relatively low cost vehicles and include information about what looks like significant weight savings. If you're selling at the $100k range, the available construction and materials options expand. At low cost, steel is hard to beat.


    Anyway - I like it. Some competition to keep Tesla nimble and moving (ok - the promise of the possibility :)).
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Ok this is fantastic. $3500/car more on gen 2 volt. Now only thing left for GM is to use the money to fund a supercharging network.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Lets keep in mind Tesla has said at least 30% cost reduction for the GF in 2017 and 50% by 2020.

    Elon also said it would be disappointing if the industry had not gone below $100/kWh by 2025.

    Tesla, to my knowledge, never put a dollar figure on their cell cost. They only speak in percentages and speak about the industry as a whole in terms of dollars.

    Navigant Research and UBS have put Tesla's current cost at $180/kWh at the cell level.

    So the gauntlet has been thrown down for Panasonic/Tesla's new chemistry and GF. The bit about "much less capital and volume dependency" is down right smack talk. :biggrin:

    And yes aluminum to steel welding is impressive.


    Why the 2016 Volt starts at only $175 less than the 2015 Volt is beyond me.

    GM is saying "$3325 for me and $175 for you."
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest

    $145/kWh is fantastic. It shows that once again, several analyst companies have vastly overestimated battery costs.

    PR Graphic_ES_5_19_15.jpg
    :rolleyes:
    bolt-battery-cost-lg-chem-750x249.jpg

    - - - Updated - - -

    Direct link to slides: (11 MB)

    http://phx.corporate-ir.net/External.File?t=1&item=VHlwZT0yfFBhcmVudElEPTUxOTQwNzR8Q2hpbGRJRD01OTYxNTU=
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Thank you for posting those slides - some good stuff in there. Slide 24 indicates that 60% of auto industry profit comes from the luxury and full size truck segments (and maybe 1/7th of the units). It's GM talking, but if you listen carefully, you can hear the whole car industry telling us why they are watching Tesla so closely.

    And why Model X may be more disruptive than Model S. And combined - there isn't much of the bulk of industry profit that Tesla isn't really well situated to help themselves to.


    Slide 27 - my reading of that slide is that GM is either confused on who their customer really is (I don't think they are). More likely, they know exactly who their customers are (they call them "dealer-partners"), and also realize how dangerous that is for the company to be separate from the end consumers of what they build. GM is trying to dance that narrow ledge that keeps their actual customers (dealer-partners) happy, while getting closer to the consumers that buy what they make.


    Slide 59-67 - details about Cadillac in particular, and it's place within the larger luxury market. Worth reading for the incremental knowledge of the market that Tesla is in today - units, average selling prices for different big brands, and so forth. I think that we can view these slides as describing the addressable market Tesla will have available when Model 3 arrives - I had a harder time picking out direct competitive information for Tesla relative to Model S / X today.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    On the other hand the aluminum bodied Ford F150 starts at $27K.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    That sits on a steel frame.


    frame_R02.jpg
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    I'm just speculating. They seem to be sticking with pouch cells which have been WAY worse than cylindrical cells in both energy density and specific energy. They might have caught up some but I doubt they're a match yet.

    Check out this report from 2014:

    http://advancedautobat.com/industry-reports/2014-Tesla-report/Extract-from-the-Tesla-battery-report.pdf

    Page 9 has a table comparing who's doing what as of last year.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Sure, but it shows you can use a lot of aluminum in a lower priced vehicle.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    The average striking price on a 2015 F 150 is a tad over $41k and typical F150 volumes are 700k units per year.

    And the F150 average striking price does not include the pricier heavy duty F250 or F350.

    This year slow ramp up of steel frames by supplier will likely hurt volume this year but get back to normal next year.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    The ASP of the 3 will likely be over $45K, and it's a physically smaller vehicle, aiming for similar volume eventually.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Model 3 can't be put on a steel frame.

    Model 3 will be unibody. AFAIK Tesla can't weld steel to aluminum.

    The steel frame is where the F Series puts the vast majority of its stress on. If it was 100% aluminum it would be much more expensive.

    Jezus F-ing Kris Kringle if the economics only work with F Series volume.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    I'm not claiming they are going to be equivalent, just that there is an example of relatively low cost vehicles with high aluminum content. The 3 doesn't need the strength of an F150.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Boy, there's a lot of stuff in that photograph.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    That's exactly what I thought looking at that pic! Designed by Rube Goldberg.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Quick update on ExhaustGate including news from the weekend.

    - Financial experts of the Wolfsburg automobile company currently checking a worst case szenario for financial impact of ExhaustGate including financial impact of rating downgrades, slump in sales or unexpectedly high penalties, compensation claims, repair costs and others.
    - VW Group has currently about 21.5 b Euro in cash, could be as much as 25 b Euro including recently approved sales of shares in the company LeasePlan and Japanese automaker Suzuki.
    - Credit Suisse warned of a possible capital raise at Volkswagen, with the above mentioned cash cushion I would nto expect this at least short term.
    - Factories in Salzgitter (Germany) and Mexico no longer working their Saturday shifts.
    Link (Google translate) for the above mentioned statements.

    - France is considering to reduce the subsidies paid for diesel fuel.
    Minister Segolene Royal said in French television channel France 5: "We should abolish the financial benefits for diesel in the next five years."
    This should encourage consumers to buy environmentally friendly cars. More than half of all vehicles on French roads are diesel.
    Link (Google translate, at 06:54h) for the above mentioned statements.

    - VW Australia stopped sales of vehicles with 1.6 or 2.0-liter EA189 ICE (with "Pumpe Duese" tech and not Common Rail tech) because of exhaust gate:
    "The ban on sales will remain in force until we have solved the problem of exhaust gas vehicles," said VW Australia.
    - Spain wants it's money back, VW Group has to pay back subsidies received during recent years because eco friendlyness of cars that is not there in reality.
    Link (Google translate) for the above mentioned statements.

    - Looks like VW Group used SW modules from both companies Continental and Bosch as system SW to get basic info from the sensors and so on.
    - Important point: Looks like Vokswagen Group implemented module on top of low level components developed by Continental and Bosch, thus this could remain a VW Group issue and not spread to other car manufacturers via suppliers Continental and Bosch!
    - Several VW engineers have consistently testified in interviews to have installed the software manipulation in 2008 right before series production of diesel ICE 189 EA, which was developed at VW since 2005.
    - VW Group still searching for middle management responsibles.
    - SW switch was installed because VW was not able to meet both the exhaust emission standards and cost estimates for the diesel ICE 189 EA. Therefore it had been decided to use the manipulation software. Otherwise, the most important for the group motor project would therefore need to be stopped.
    - Rumor about Ulrich Hackenberg from management involved in deciding to use the SW.
    - Rumor about 2.0l SW from Bosch could be fixed by SW update (no idea how that should work, as they could have done that during recent years alredy).
    - Rumor about 1.6l SW from Continental more difficult to fix, need hardware to be installed in the corresponding vehicles.
    Link (Google translate) for the above mentioned statements.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Big thanks for your informative updates!
    But ... umm ... maybe an edit is in order here?
    (Btw I for one forgot to sign your reputation star the other day)
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Yes, did not pay attention, wrong number, copy and past error;)
    Thank's for pointing out!
    Currently adding more info.
    (BTW thank's for reputation point;) )

    Thank's averybody else for providing such valuable content here.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Has there been any talk of reviewing the emissions standards, as a result of this exhaust scandal?

    In July, France 2 (public national TV channel) broadcasted a documentary on "the dangerous French Diesel exception":


    It's eye opening:
    - they measure NO2 emissions in some of the most popular places in Paris and find over 5x the European city limit on NOx emissions (1000 vs 200 ppm). Their detector couldn't even keep up with the level of emissions!
    - the emission lab director of PSA (9th auto manufacturer in the world) admits in front of the camera - after multiple lies - that the car they're testing exceeds the NO2 limit (1700 ppm vs 200). According to PSA, the car is a prototype that should be cleaner than the car they're actually selling.
    - they show that the emissions tests conducted by the European Commission are a big joke and that not one auto manufacturer passes them. The interviewee doesn't dare to claim it's a huge fraud but he makes it clear to the journalist that it's his opinion.
    - there's also a clip of Arnaud Montebourg (ex-French Minister of the Industry) saying that the government needs the prior agreement of the auto manufacturers (!) before considering any change to the tax on fossil fuels.

    It's outrageous that this documentary had almost no echo in the media and didn't trigger any cause any reaction from the government and the auto industry.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Will be interesting times with the problems the European car industry now faces, as it will get more and more difficult to conform to the announced 2019 emmission standards. Specially now Europe will start to enforce them using realistic tests.

    With the big gap between lab test and realistic tests (and that is 'just' CO2) :

    Mind-the-gap.png


    Interesting article :

    VW rivals risk bigger blow as emissions scandal hits diesel

    Some quotes :

    The average CO2 limit for European carmakers' fleets will fall from 130 grams per km to 95 grams in 2021 -- a goal carmakers say cannot be met if diesel sales fall significantly.

    The industry now faces a hefty bill just to "commercialize technology that may have a limited long-term future," Morgan Stanley analyst Adam Jonas said. "On top of this, they have the burden of developing alternative powertrains at the same time."

    Goldman Sachs believes a regulatory crackdown could add 300 euros per engine to diesel costs that are already some 1,300 euros above their gasoline equivalents, as carmakers race to bring real NOx emissions closer to their much lower test-bench scores.

    That threatens the very existence of small diesel cars, which currently account for about 60 percent of European sales by PSA and Renault, and 40 percent of Fiat's. Premium and larger models -- a bigger part of VW's sales -- can more easily absorb the extra outlay and still turn a profit.



    These additional costs will level the field for BEV's a bit.

    Only way out, to my opinion, is innovation. One would think this crisis would force the European industry to invest in BEV's.
    However, it seems like Tesla's Model 3 will be in a good position to take market share for the diesel market in 2018 / 2019, as (accoording to this article) the solution is considered to be hybrids, not BEV.
    Some even do not seem ready to move to suitable hybrids in time.


    Some more statements in the article:

    PSA:
    Without a partner, PSA would struggle to meet sudden new investment demands to upgrade its diesels and rush plug-ins to market. Its current hybrids are large, costly and diesel-powered, with rechargeable petrol-electrics not due before 2019.


    Renault :
    Soon after Ghosn's 1999 arrival from parent Renault, Nissan shelved its hybrid plans to focus on battery-only cars -- so far a mass-market flop -- and is now the only major Japanese carmaker without its own rechargeable hybrids. A revived program will launch plug-ins around 2018."Renault may have made a strategic error in betting entirely on electric vehicles over hybrids and its exposure to diesel is the highest of any global manufacturer," Exane BNP Paribas analyst Stuart Pearson said.

    VW :
    "Longer term, on the other side of this mess, VW has the stronger price point and margins to pay for plug-ins," said Pearson, who expects European hybrid sales to pick up swiftly from their current 2.2 share of the market and overtake a declining diesel in the next decade.


    Fiat :
    The diesel fallout also challenges Fiat Chrysler, which has no plans for mass-market hybrids. CEO Sergio Marchionne regularly jokes about selling battery-powered Fiat 500s at a loss to satisfy California regulators.
    Along with Renault and GM's Opel, Fiat relies heavily on Lean NOx Trap (LNT) technology whose real-world emissions are a larger multiple of legal limits, and harder to fix, than the Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) exhausts prevalent in Peugeots. VW models are more evenly split between the two.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Looking at Model X pricing, I detect a subtle, or not so subtle, change in Tesla's strategy. I think they're adjusting for the realization of growing inequality out there. The rich are getting v rich indeed. Even as America (and much of the rest of the world) stagnate in overall economic growth, the number of millionaires is exploding. Therefore, if the long-term strategic purpose of Model X is to generate cash-flow to help pay for the eventual mass-market roll-out, why not optimize it for that. In that scenario, the right pricing strategy is contingent on just how price elastic things are at the top end. They may have calculated that boosting the price 40% may not drop sales by 40%... perhaps only by 10% (or even zero if they can sell all they can make.) 25% gross margin on a $140k car is obviously better than 25% on a $100k car. If they achieve $35k margin per car, vs $25k and achieve 10% fewer sales than they would have, they're still generating 26% more cash to operations than they otherwise would have.

    So if they've successfully created the vehicle every rich family will lust after, they may end up achieving two things:
    - larger than expected cash-flow over the next two-three years
    - enhanced brand 'desire'.

    So long as they remain committed to massive cost-reductions for Model 3, I can live with this. You can call it the Robin Hood strategy. Extract extra margin from the rich to build a runway for the poor.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    I agree with your thesis that Tesla can and should continue to sell for high prices and high margins to fund their business, since they cannot boost production yet. But, you seem to be saying that a model X is 40% more than a model S? That isn't right, they are comparable. The only model X that will be made [This quarter] are maxed-out option vehicles. Musk said the difference is only about $5k for similarly equipped models.

    Edit: added this quarter.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    There has been no change in strategy.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    You're missing that they are only launching the expensive versions of the X. A typical X bought now will be at $140k or thereabouts. A typical S is about $100k. de facto, that's a huge shift.... and the only logic to do it is for cashflow... and that only works if pricing is somewhat inelastic up at that top end... which I think is the case.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    You're missing that a "typical" Model X sold this quarter, right at the very beginning of production, is atypical. You're making a comparison between a car with its full range of options in production and purchasable, with a car that has barely started production and is using scarcity to force purchases to be of maxed out cars.

    So in the sense that ASP of X in Q4 is going to be in the 132-142K range, what you say is true. And in the sense that Model S does indeed carry a ~$100k ASP, that is also true. If Tesla were only selling performance Model S's (or P's with Ludicrous) and all options, then Model S would also carry an ASP of 132-142k.


    Your conclusion is that Model X is ~40% more expensive than Model S. That is an apples and apple pie comparison - not really comparable even if there is a superficial relationship.

    In comparable terms, Model X is on the same price scale as Model S. Elon has said X is about $5k more expensive than S when similarly configured. We're unable to make that assessment for ourselves as production pricing for Model X hasn't been released. But we do know that a maxed out S and X are awfully close together in price - the one meaningful point of comparison we have available today.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Tesla did the same thing with the S: 85, 60, 40-whoops.
    Tesla did the same things with the D: P85D, 85D, 70D.

    Tesla has a large number of backorders so they will be able to fulfill the high-end specs first.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    very accurate analysis.
    What is amazing is that a comparable X is only $5K more than an S but the X is significantly larger, has more expensive Falcon Wing doors, fancy pedestal-style second row seats, powered front doors, far superior air filtration system, some tow capability is standard, and a much larger and more costly windshield. I'm surprised the comparable price difference isn't greater.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    It means that they have learned some lessons how to build a car.
    There are things in X that are simpler and cheaper than their analogues in S.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    FCA has a Chrysler Town and Country PHEV minivan coming in late 2016 and a CUV version badged as a Jeep coming in late 2017.

    FCA US is preparing its Windsor plant to make an electric minivan
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    I'm still so confused....it's a hybrid....which means there's still an engine....I would have thought with the advances Tesla has shown the world, that automakers would work extremely hard to catch up and skip this whole hybrid level, but I guess not.....so what? in 20 years they will make an all electric van?
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    I keep asking my friends "would you by an electric car, next time?". Those who don't know %#* about EVs say "hell no, the tech isn't ready". Those who are familiar some EVs like the Renault ZOE say "they would if the driving range exceed 500 km if the country has as many superchargers as fuel stations". Those know about the S, the 3 and the X say "they will, as soon as superchargers can be found all along the highways". Even though the supercharger network keep expanding, the charging tech improves, and every parking can be turned into a charging station, the lack of superchargers in every service area is a huge concern for them. So they expect to buy hybrids until 2020.

    Here in France, Bollor� will install 16,000 super-slow chargers by 2019. And a European auto manufacturer is said to discuss with Tesla about a supercharger partnership - probably Renault. That's all we know.

    So when the 3 is revealed and Tesla succeed in ramping up production, I think they should figure out a plan to have a fast-charge standard accepted by most countries (US, Europe, China) and work with partners to implement it and communicate.

    - - - Updated - - -

    I'm a happy user of Autolib (official electric car sharing service in Paris). I can rent a car anywhere in the capital and its bordering cities, and pay for the time spent in the car. It's great because I don't need to buy a car and I can check-in and out anywhere, at any time. A EV owner can also participate in this program by purchasing a Car Charge subscription (1� per charging hour).

    I'd love Autolib to make the charging network independent from the car sharing service, so that Paris (and other big cities) would build a huge urban supercharging network available to anyone and compatible with any EV. On-demand services like Autolib, Uber and the Google Self-Driving Car Project could just plug-in the network. The same could be done for all service areas in Europe. A "plug-and-pay" system (similar to Android tap-and-pay and Apple Pay) could be implemented in all EVs and charging stations so the car can park itself, let the snake charger fill the battery and the car pay for the kwh.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    It will be the first minivan with a plug. It is a large step in the right direction. We don't need another sub 150 EPA mile AER compact/subcompact PHEV/BEV.

    PHEVs are a gateway drug to BEV.

    All cars with plugs are a good thing.

    Even ones we don't "need" like the Fiat 500e BEV.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    I guess so, if that's the way it has to go....but the industry moves so slow that I'm afraid with what's going in with our environment, it will be too late.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    In the short term PHEV's can be a good thing. But IMO investing in the technology is a strategic mistake. Long term it is based on the belief that battery costs will remain high. Tesla is working towards producing BEV's for less than ICE's. They are closer than most people think. When they get to the point where a 90kWh BEV is cheaper than an emissions legal ICE how is something like an BMW i3 PHEV going to make sense?
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    I guess my thought was too general, because this is what I'm talking about. Thanks to Tesla, we can skip the whole PHEV level.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    From CNBC-TV18 on Twitter:

    Why India? China was the easy guess.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Because he's met with the bosses of both countries, and Modi is more cooperative?
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Maybe also because China already has a huge solar industry while India's is still much smaller. Both gigacountries need colossal amounts of renewable energy right now. Therefore, India may present a somewhat more tempting opportunity for Musk Enterprises on a larger scale, with synergy effects of power generation as well as storage and electric transportation.

    My 0.02 rupees.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Does India require a local partner to open up an assembly plant like China does?
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    No. Modi has shown that he is willing to cut all red tapes as long as business wants to invest money for long term. Maruti-suzuki, Tata, Ford are opening new plants in Gujarat because of his lucrative package. Going head to head, he gives offers most companies cannot resist as long as the commitment is long term.
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    I agree that the M3 is dependent on the GF.

    I also emphatically agree that it won't have the delays associated with the MX for this reason:
    But if you believe that the GF is dependent on the M3 you are (IMO) grossly underestimating the potential of stationary storage:
    There are studies, commissioned by utilities showing that prices of $350kWh are below deeply disruptive and this market is huge:
    That represents a huge number (264 million) of Tesla 100kWh Powerpacks.

    And that doesn't even include Peakers, for which a California study found that batteries:
    �
  • 1/1/2015
    guest
    Yep, Tesla Energy is a huge part of making sure that the gigafactory stays busy once various portions of it are completed. I think the timing of Tesla Energy is brilliant in that it provides a reason for the gigafactory until sufficient demand is made by Tesla vehicles as the gigafactory expands. After all, if the gigafactory starts producing in April, 2016, at least a year will pass before Model 3 comes online. Looking at the profit margins associated with Tesla Energy vs. Tesla vehicles, however, I think we will see Tesla Energy on the low side until the gigafactory is running at top form and significant economies of scale are present. This is one of the reasons why Tesla vehicle production must increase as the gigafactory production capabilities increase. In other words, it's a matter of not only demand for the gigafactory cells but also for creating demand for cells that can yield suitable profit early on.
    �
    • Người đăng: vào lúc

    Không có nhận xét nào:

    Đăng nhận xét

    Đăng ký: Đăng Nhận xét (Atom)