Feb 5, 2015
Ingenieur Hello guys,
how many of you heard of company called Atieva ?
BAIC acquires stake
Aritcle
Leshi acquires stake
Chinese Internet Company Leshi To Expand Into Electric Cars - Forbes
Check the reviews at Glassdoor:
http://www.glassdoor.de/Bewertungen/Atieva-Bewertungen-E698305.htm?sort.sortType=RD&sort.ascending=false
The company is paranoid about avoiding any publicity, its almost impossible to get info on its tech.
Beside QuantumScape this is biggest threat, but unlike former, their tech is apparently ready for 2016 production.
I will not go into detail (as im not sure i understand what i was told), but its a lot like Tesla but different, its using kind two tiered battery, bigger cheaper battery and smaller more expensive high performance one, which can be quickly discharged and charged (from slower battery) to provide energy even for high KWH motors. The advantage over Tesla is no loss of power from overheating (or much less). This will also enable to use battery types previosly not useable for cars.
My German industry friend thinks this could disrupt whole high performance ICE business like Quartz watches killed the Mechanical ones, being more precise at 5% of the cost.
Imagine seeing cars with P85D performance for 40-50k $.
Neither me nor my friends are Electroengineers so i tried to explain it in a way i understood.
Apparently Audi R8 Etron that will be shown in Geneva next month is somehow related to this tech, i dont know if its still the case with new chinese owners and QuantumScape investment�
Feb 5, 2015
TEG Using power dense cells for a "front end" and energy dense cells for the main storage "back end" is not a new or secret idea.
Neither is using Super/UltraCapacitors for the "front end" with lower power cells feeding them.
I think Tesla is just as capable as the other companies of doing such a thing if they see the business case.�
Feb 5, 2015
Zextraterrestrial pretty sure Tesla has some 2 stage battery designs too
here is one http://www.freshpatents.com/-dt20130725ptan20130187591.php�
Feb 5, 2015
uselesslogin It is hard to believe they are a threat in the short term but if their technology turns out to be the real deal then they may give Tesla someone to compete against. Still, until they start building a gigafactory they will be behind. It would take them some years to catch up.�
Feb 5, 2015
rolosrevenge Why would this be a threat to Tesla? As long as Tesla continues to make great, compelling, fun cars that happen to be electric, they'll be around. The market for cars is huge. Everyone thinks that there are only so many who are willing to drive electric, the problem is that there aren't very many types of electrics. Tesla made a competitive, full sized premium sports sedan. It competes with others in that segment such as the M5 and the A8. A new electric car, if it doesn't fall in that segment, is not a "threat" to the Model S or to Tesla. Quite the contrary, other cars in different segments get more people driving electric which improves the infrastructure for the Tesla drivers.�
Feb 5, 2015
stopcrazypp I don't think the threat to Tesla going forward will be those focusing on high power batteries, but rather it will be mainly based on $/kWh as Tesla is developing Model 3.
The two tiered approach (which Tesla also has patents on, as pointed out) will be useful for metal-air batteries (with lower cycle life and power density), however such batteries have not yet proven to be leading to cheaper costs in terms of $/kWh.�
Feb 5, 2015
uselesslogin For the curious also job postings:
atieva | careers
$131 million in 3 rounds of funding. The most recent being $100 million.
https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/atieva
Anyway it is hard to see how they could be very far along with only $131 million but who knows.
-- edit --
Also apparently 50-149 people. If they have something production ready for 2016 they would have to be working with someone else. A part of me really wants them to be something real but another part of me really doubts it. And I guess I go with I don't think they are a threat even if they are production ready. It would be nice for Tesla to have some competition and electric cars will certainly go mainstream faster if there are 2 players.�
Feb 5, 2015
jerry33 Sounds like another "battery of the week" to me.�
Feb 5, 2015
roblab As Tesla says, "send us a working model along with costs and ramp up statistics. Then we'll talk". Until then, it's just smoke.�
Feb 5, 2015
uselesslogin OK a collection of articles for everyone. Sounds like the first target will be the Chinese market. Leshi, BAIC, and Atieva seem to all be working on the car with greater than 400km range and cheaper than a Tesla. The Seeking Alpha article actually quotes this about Leshi: "The revenue stream from Leshi's EV will be in the form of mobile ads, LBS, O2O and telematic services, which are high margin and recurring." Basically the idea is sell the car at cost make money on the ads. The ads! So about as threatening to Tesla as Xiaomi is to Apple at this point.
http://seekingalpha.com/article/2749205-leshi-is-moving-into-electric-vehicles-negative-implication-for-tesla
China Internet Company Seeks License to Make Electric Car - Bloomberg Business
Leshi Plans To Build Electric Cars
LeTV plots its foray into the auto world with electric car - Headlines, features, photo and videos from ecns.cn|china|news|chinanews|ecns|cns
Leshi kicks off super electric car project_Xinhua Finance Agency
China's Leshi Eyes Connected Electric Car - Forbes�
Feb 5, 2015
Auzie Currently, there are a number of small threats to Tesla business that we have certainty and knowledge of. Any small threat may grow to become a large threat in the future.
We wish to estimate the likelihood of a small threat growing into a large one. There is a large amount of uncertainty inherent in making such predictions. Complex macroeconomic, political, social and business processes that generate these small threats may not be fundamentally different from those that generate one large threat in the future.
Predicting how numerous factors mentioned above will interplay in a complex system to produce a large threat comes down to seeing now something that is not visible yet. I find that contradictory.
In summary, we can only guess.:wink:�
Feb 6, 2015
Robert.Boston Keep in mind that Tesla produces automobiles. It already has a LOT of competition from well-established companies with great technologies and strong name brands. Its biggest business obstacle is widespread acceptance of its car's fuel. The more companies there are that also use this fuel in their automobiles, the more widespread will be the acceptance, allowing Tesla to sell more cars.
No one talks about a market for "diesel cars," despite the fact that there are fundamental differences in the drivetrains between diesel and gasoline cars. I'm not quite sure why so many people think that using electricity instead of petroleum somehow creates a completely different, unrelated market. People cross-shop the Model S and ICE sedans all the time.�
Feb 6, 2015
Johan Tesla finds itself surrounded by electric-car competition - MarketWatch
Journalism at it's finest: Most underestimated threat could be "Sunswift�s eVe, produced by Australian university students as a �demonstrator-of-feasibility.� (And here�s another interesting concept.) The vehicle set a world record for fastest average speed (more than 60 mph) over 310 miles on a single battery charge. Compared with eVe, Tesla�s Model S can reach �only� 265 miles. The eVe can be charged by using a regular wall outlet or an array of solar panels located on its roof and hood. The vehicle weighs only 700 pounds, which is less than the Model S�s battery. Still, it�s worth noting that compared with Tesla, the eVe is a totally stripped down, with enough room for only two people."
�
Feb 6, 2015
stopcrazypp If they want to compare to two seaters, the "400 mile" upgraded Roadster will probably easily smash their record. And the Sunswift is not road legal yet (although they are working on making it road legal, they say it will add a lot more weight to the vehicle).�
Feb 6, 2015
Johan ... But surely it's very close to going in to volume production, right? (I.e. they might build a second one).�
Feb 6, 2015
Auzie If it is built in Australia I feel reassured that this threat will simply die off as the labour cost will kill it:biggrin:�
Feb 6, 2015
austinEV Guys in my spare time I designed a Tesla Killer. It gets 500 miles per charge, seats 12, costs $12k, goes zero to 60 in 3.0s, charges in 60s or with the integrated solar panel. It was SO EASY to do to. Sell your stock, Tesla is going down tomorrow.�
Feb 6, 2015
Gerasimental 'This is the result of some incredible technology, all of which is proprietary, so I can't tell you anything about it. BUT IT WORKS'�
Feb 6, 2015
Skotty The most underestimated threat to Tesla is probably the San Andreas Fault.�
Feb 6, 2015
jhm Hey, Tesla is looking to hire talent. Maybe the next JB is university student in Australia.�
Feb 6, 2015
Robert.Boston Actually, the Hayward Fault. And like so many fretting mothers, we've diagnosed this one up one side and down the other:
Earthquake risk to Tesla Motors
6.0 Earthquake Shakes Northern California - Page 3�
Feb 8, 2015
Skotty lol. I had no idea there was an Earthquake thread. I stand corrected.�
Feb 8, 2015
adiggs My underestimated threat to Tesla is the expense and difficulty of dealing with minor to medium complexity repairs to the vehicle as a result of fender bender / crashes. For me, it's like a worm eating the inside of the apple - it all still looks good on the outside, but on the inside it's... not so good. It's the only issue that has had me thinking seriously about whether to carry through with my Model X reservation.�
Feb 8, 2015
bevguy If it was a lot more expensive to fix Teslas, insurance rates would be higher than other costly cars.
They aren't.�
Feb 8, 2015
RobStark The biggest drivers of insurance rates are personal injury and theft rates.
Based on anecdotal evidence both are very low for Model S. And the cost to repair is very high.
But I doubt most insurance companies have a statistically valid Model S samples. Yet.
Here is a very interesting data point.
Body Shop Needs $100k in new equipment to become Tesla Authorized
According to Green Car Reports
Like other high-end aluminum car manufacturers�Audi, Jaguar, and Range Rover among them�Tesla requires substantial factory training and specialized equipment for its authorized body shops.
Peotter(Body Shop Owner) says he was required to buy about $100,000 in additional equipment and tools to become a Tesla-authorized shop�in addition to equipment he already had in the shop to work on aluminum Jaguars.
He had to buy a special cradle to drop out the half-ton Tesla battery, for instance, in case structural repairs required its removal.
The Tesla factory training class lasts fully three weeks; according to Peotter, it is more in-depth and more intensive than Jaguar�s. It�s also more expensive for the shop.
As a result of these higher training and equipment costs, Peotter�s shop rate for Teslas is higher than its Jaguar aluminum rates--and nearly double the rate of a standard car.
http://www.greencarreports.com/news/...sts-are-higher?�
Feb 8, 2015
Auzie Interesting, thanks for posting.
Thinking about it, it seems that the cost of set up is only high because Tesla cars are ubiquitous amongst repair crowd. If we imagine a situation in which car markets were reversed so bev cars were common and ice uncommon, then setting shop for ice repair would be even more prohibitively expensive.
That cost will go down as bev cars multiply. It might be fair to say that this risk is unlikely to grow but to diminish, as approved repairers multiply.�
Feb 9, 2015
RobStark The article points to two issues:aluminum repair and the "mattress battery."
It seems Bolt has reversed course and will be going with a "mattress" battery.
Any cradle type machine used to remove one "mattress" type battery should be just as good to remove another brand. Unless they specifically design to prevent this.
Second is aluminum repair. I can't imagine a Jaguar or 2015 Ford F-150 authorized shop would not be able to repair at least basic dents on Tesla body panels.
Structural unibody repairs may be a different matter until things become more standardized. It seems Tesla is requiring specific frame machines and jigs for Model S.
I think there are 3 Tesla authorized body shops in greater Los Angeles.
By 2020 with Model 3 in full swing there should be at least 20 IMO.
Competition then becomes real. Three shops in three different areas of Los Angeles is more prone to collusion than competition.�
Feb 9, 2015
AustinPowers I would hope Model 3 will be made from steel and not aluminium. Because even though people might accept ridiculously high repair costs on cars that cost 100K to begin with, I am sure not a lot of people in the market for a Model 3 will accept such costs.
With that thought in mind I can also only shake my head at BMW's decisions to go carbon fiber on the i3 versus steel on the VW e-Golf. Tests show that both cars are almost spot on par as far as efficiency and range are concerned (funnily enough with the e-Golf even being better in a few range-related aspects), yet VW achieves this without the use of any fancy materials for their body panels, making for cheap repairs that on top don't require any specially authorised shop either.�
Feb 9, 2015
RobStark Here in the US, the $25k New Ford F-150 truck body is made with aluminum and sits on two steel rails.
Elon has only said that the Model 3 will not be made exclusively in aluminum.
BMW and VW had different set of priorities for the i3 and eGolf
i3 has a 22 kWh battery and does 0-60 in ~6.9 seconds.
eGolf has a 24 kWh battery and does 0-60 in ~10.5 seconds.
Ultimate Driving Machine vs Das Auto.
No more Fahrvergn�gen
Tesla needs to keep weight down to have good acceleration, the base needs to at least match the i3,and at least 200 EPA miles.
This means some combination of aluminum and high strength steel plus maybe some other light weight materials.�
Feb 9, 2015
Robert.Boston The repair cost is an issue, IMO, but I agree with @RobStark's PoV that this is a transitional issue. The authorized body shops had to spend a lot on equipment and training, and they're trying to recoup those costs. How much would you tack on to repair bills for a rare car from a start-up company? These shops probably figured that Tesla might sell 25k Model Ss and then go out of business, so they set prices to recover those investments as quickly as possible.
Volume of sales will bring two things: more authorized body shops, creating competition; and more certainty that there will be a steady stream of work on Teslas. Both effects will lower repair costs.
As to the Model 3, my guess is that it will have more steel than the Model S, but will retain a lot of aluminum. Elon has set two conflicting goals for the car: a low price and a long range. Steel is cheaper, helping the price, but denser, hurting the range. The Al/Fe ratio will be one of the parameters Tesla's engineers can tune to achieve both goals.
That said, I invested in AA a while back. It seems clear to me that the auto industry is going to be shifting heavily from steel to aluminum as part of its toolbox to hit the new CAFE standards.�
Feb 9, 2015
Lloyd I believe that the most underestimated threat to Tesla is that new owners have a tendency to resort to the old ICE when taking long trips. If everyone does not use them for long trips, then Tesla will not become main stream for transportation.�
Feb 9, 2015
uselesslogin Which new owners? The ones on the forums seems to dislike having to get an ICE rental when they fly and only take the ICE if supercharging isn't practical. Obviously, superchargers will continue to be more practical so this is one I certainly wasn't even thinking of.�
Feb 9, 2015
ecarfan As the Supercharger network continues to expand the issue you describe will disappear. I think that such a use case situation is uncommon now: in a few years it will shrink to zero.�
Feb 9, 2015
Robert.Boston I'm not sure; my wife still prefers to drive the ICE on long distances, even with ample Superchargers, because she wants to get where she's going ASAP. While Superchargers reduce the time penalty for driving an EV, they don't eliminate it.�
Feb 9, 2015
ecarfan That is true for those who like to drive long distances without stopping. For me, I have found that on a San Francisco to Orange County (south of Los Angeles) run the overall time is the same as an ICE. My wife and I like to stop every few hours to stretch our legs and have a snack. We don't like to sit in a car all day only stopping 5 minutes to add gas.�
Feb 9, 2015
dandelot ecarfan:
Our drive from San Francisco to Palm Springs was at least 90 minutes longer (more
on the way south) and part of that is some mismanaging of our time at stops
at SCs.
It is 120 miles between SC locations (on our I-5 to I-210 to I-10 route)
we might have done better at the 80MPH we used to do in ICE vehicle.
But driving at 70 plus charging stops took longer (in S 85) than
in 500-mile-range ICE at 80MPH (in Jaguar S-Type).
And yes we did take a bathroom break every 1-2 hours with ICE.
With Tesla we usually waited till arrival at SC (I was not always
a happy camper at SC arrival
Our first long-ish Tesla trip, so it was a learning experience.�
Feb 9, 2015
kenliles Not much to report on this rumor from an Apple employee statement. But might be worthy of some discussion on possibilities
Rumor: Apple preparing to with new automotive project�
Feb 9, 2015
Robert.Boston While not on-topic here, the rule of thumb when traveling between Superchargers is to drive as fast as you choose. Provided of course that you don't runout of charge! Saving power by driving slowly wastes time because the SCs put power into your car far faster than driving, even reasonably fast, draws it out. Always better to spend an extra minute supercharging than losing a minute driving slowly.�
Feb 10, 2015
Auzie I would be surprised if Apple goes head to head with Tesla, into car making.
They might go into some car related products. It is difficult to reconcile the statement "Apple will give Tesla run for its money" with no direct competition between the two companies though.
My take on the most underestimated threat to Tesla's business is strong US $. Strong $ might seriously eat into revenues and hinder further expansion. I would like to see Tesla slow down on global expansion and focus more on US market until they find a solution for loss of revenue due to strong $.�
Feb 10, 2015
AustinPowers Ok, this is offtopic, but in answer to these acceleration times: 0-60 is not very important on these two commuter EVs.
0-31 times are far more important in daily driving, as that is the acceleration from a standstill at a red light for example to the standard inner-city/town maximum over here.
And interestingly - with a warm engine (which is the way this has to be measured to be realistic) - the 0-31 time of the e-Golf is 3.3 seconds, versus 3.1 of the i3 (and also the P85+ by the way). So almost identical. And having driven all three of the mentioned cars I can only second that it really feels the same. Especially the P85+ disappoints in that respect, as it loses quite a bit of its oomph after the engine gets warm.
And as far as the original topic is concerned. Another possibly underestimated threat is the worry that Model 3 won't get to market quickly enough before the competition has caught up, given Tesla's notorious tendency to not meet published or quoted deadlines/project milestones.
There are now quite a few interesting EVs on the horizon that could hit the market before Model 3 finally arrives.�
Feb 10, 2015
RobStark Getting to highway speeds on highway on ramps is very important.
BMW sold over 16k i3s in 2014.
VW sold a grand total of 9700 BEVs and PHEVs despite having overall 5 times higher volume.�
Feb 10, 2015
AustinPowers True, but for a start, 10.4 for the e-Golf isn't a bad 0-60 time (the Leaf takes 11.5 for example, many everyman ICEs take even longer - our Touran BlueMotion TDI takes 12.8 and certainly doesn't feel underpowered when entering the Autobahn), plus highways aren't the main focus for short range EVs like the e-Golf or the i3 anyway.�
Feb 10, 2015
ggr There's something very wrong in your numbers, I'm afraid. Firstly, the only time motor temp matters is if it is overheating and the software dials back the power, but that certainly isn't going to happen in the kind of city driving you seem to be talking about. So please clarify what you mean by "warm"? I get 3/4 of the way up a 6000' mountain, accelerating out of every hairpin, before the motor or battery overheat.
Secondly, your numbers say that it takes 3.1 seconds for a P85+ to get to 31mph, but only 1.1 seconds to get from there to 60? That's another 29 mph, for an acceleration that's much better than a P85D. I can also promise you that the acceleration feels pretty constant up to that point; you'd certainly notice such a speedup.�
Feb 10, 2015
AustinPowers By "warm" I mean after having driven for about an hour in mixed conditions (inner city, country roads, short stretches of Autobahn). Maybe what it felt to me was off, but a test in a respected motor magazine I read recently (done in conjunction with the independent TUV organisation that in Germany is also responsible for the mandatory tests that your car has to pass bi-annually to be legally roadworthy) confirmed what the cars felt to me. That's also where I got the exact numbers. And by the way, according to that test, it took 3.4 seconds from 31 to 60, not 1.1 seconds. All under "warm" conditions. And I am sure that didn't mean "overheating", because they tested all cars under "cold" and "warm" conditions, just as I did on my test drives. And they explicitly mentioned that the P85+ lost far more in acceleration than the others. And even though I can't confirm the exact numbers from my own experience of course, I can confirm that it certainly felt that way to me too. Not that the P85+ acceleration didn't feel impressive for a car of its size and weight even under "warm" (i.e. after having driven for a while) conditions, but still.
Here are the exact 0-60 times they measured under cold / warm conditions.
Nissan Leaf: 11.1 / 11.5
Smart ED: 10.7 / 10.9
Model S P85+: 4.7 / 6.5
BMW i3: 7.3 / 7.3
VW e-Golf: 10.3 / 10.4
If you are interested, I can mail you the pdf with the complete test, but it is in German.�
Feb 11, 2015
30seconds What was the Tesla time? 6.5? Really?�
Feb 11, 2015
AustinPowers That's what they published.
And as I said, it was a test by a respected motor magazine in conjunction with the independent TUV organisation, not by some automaker trying to dimiss the competition.
The article about the test gave a neutral account of the advantages and shortcomings of all the tested vehicles in the specific areas tested. The Model S scored quite well in many aspects, but the lack of constancy in the power output was explicitly mentioned as a major disadvantage. And these testers are engineers/technical experts. I don't think they would make such statements lightly if they weren't true.�
Feb 11, 2015
30seconds That's a bunch of BS. The magazine article was challenged by the German EV association and the magazine refused to reply or provide any details about the test. Also it is very easy to see that this is a significant outlier to every other article reviewing the model S, any report from an owner, YouTube, or if you didn't believe any of these sources you could go schedule a test drive yourself.
i think it is clear that this report is a bunch of lies.
here is something to refresh yourself with the performance characteristics
Tesla Model S vs BMW M5 Drag Race - YouTube�
Feb 11, 2015
ggr Well, I own a P85, and live in Southern California, and last week was out in the desert at a place called Thermal, where it was 90degF (over 30degC), and I can assure you my performance did not drop noticeably at any time, after driving over the mountains from San Diego and then stop-start traffic up to 50mph along the desert highway 111. At least one Porsche driver could attest to this if I could find him again�
Feb 11, 2015
ecarfan And I'm pretty sure the Model S that beat the M5 from zero to one hundred in that video was not a P85D, but just a P85. The Tesla shown in the video has no rear badge, so probably a very early car, and not a D.
�
Feb 11, 2015
macpacheco Tesla just needs 5% of the total luxury car market. There's plenty of people that are happy to trade a couple dozen supercharger sessions per year for the performance, safety, fun and tech experience of driving a Tesla.Right now Tesla needs to double superchargers worldwide (from around 400 to 800). With 800 SCs in North America, Europe, Asia and Australia, I suspect the real market for MS+MX is above 200k cars / yr, already considering those that are too conservative / old fashioned to go EV. Until they realize that owning a Tesla (vs a similarly priced ICE) costs less than half. Until the penny pinchers that buy an expensive car but keep it for a decade do the math and see that the Tesla could be free if they drive a lot.�
Feb 11, 2015
AustinPowers Where can I find info about that statement?
Update:
I looked it up. But contrary to what you said it seems to be the other way around. And by the way, it wasn't the German EV association. It was a Tesla owners group / fan club. Call that unbiased!
I refuse to believe the TUV would actively provide false measurements. Plus, as I said, I have driven three of the models they tested myself (i3, e-Golf, P85+) and my personal experience was similar to what they described.
Anyway, again as I said, they didn't say the Model S was a bad car because of what they found. Just that some of the other cars tested fared better in that mentioned aspect of the test.
Perhaps they (and I) had a "Monday model".�
Feb 11, 2015
VolkerP The article blended the TUV test results with the tests done by the magazine's own staff. It was a successful move to lend the credibility of TUV to the overall article. They showed an image of a Model S not able to drive from Stuttgart to Munich (250km), but falling short at 186km or so. That was the result of a partial drive/charge test, recharging the car from household outlet (230V/13A) while the HVAC was running, and extrapolating this using sketchy assumptions on how Model S manages its battery. Completely bogus, and that's what caused the uproar.
Where can you find more: TFF Forum - Tesla Fahrer 23.8. Hilden: Die ams im H�rtetest der Realit�t�
Feb 11, 2015
30seconds so then you would agree that the new M5 does 0-60 in about 8 seconds?�
Feb 12, 2015
AustinPowers How should I know? I have never driven an M5, neither new nor old. I can and will only talk about cars I have actually driven myself.
And my final statement about the article: of course I can't confirm the validity of everything they wrote (one reason being that I have no experience in driving a Smart ED, Renault Twizy or Nissan Leaf). But from my own experience on the test drives I did I can say this and I stand by it, because that is what I experienced firsthand:
i3: great and constant acceleration, quite reliable range display, handling around tight corners a bit awkward (didn't feel as planted as one is used to from BMW)
e-Golf: great acceleration up to innercity speed, adequate above that, constant, highly reliable range display (best of the four EVs I have driven), great handling
P85+: brutal acceleration at the beginning, but not as constant, range display not as reliable as i3 or e-Golf, yet far better than Zoe (see below), great handling all around
Plus, not in the test, but from when I drove it:
Renault Zoe: the first EV I drove. Great car, but range display was highly unreliable.
My 2 cents.�
Feb 12, 2015
anticitizen13.7 Most underestimated threat to Tesla is possible sociological shift away from automobile dependence in the coming decades.
Many younger people want to live in communities where cars are not necessary, because cars are expensive and require parking space.
Mitigating forces are established road infrastructure and schools. When people have families, they will want to move out of urban areas with bad schools, and the suburbs are still largely designed for car use.
Hyperloop and stationary storage are hedges against this.
There will also always be a need for some flexible vehicles like fire trucks and ambulances.�
Feb 12, 2015
flankspeed8 agreed. Here in Minneapolis, they have goals of increasing downtown occupancy by tens of thousands, but are not making any additional plan for parking because they are hoping and assuming people will be riding the newly built light rail or biking. Personally I don't agree with this but I am not in charge. If you want me to live downtown, you better provide me easy, safe and cheap parking because I am holding onto my car.�
Feb 12, 2015
bxr140 Its an interesting thought experiment, but I don't see it playing out his way. A widespread shift away from personal transportation will be fought every step of the way, in just about every part of the world. Short of fiancial unatainability, everyone wants their own vehicle. Look at China.
Especially with the lack of transportation options in North America (it's a big place and you need to drive to get pretty much anywhere other than travel within larger city centers), I'd bet that the infrastructure will move more towards Jetsons like automation rather than fewer personal vehicles.
Note that automation solves a lot of parking problems.�
Feb 12, 2015
Robert.Boston My wife and I just moved into the center of a city, and it would be very easy to lose one of our two cars. Too much is still car-centric in America to go all the way down to zero, but it would halve our family's demand for automobiles. With a good ZipCar or similar service around (which we don't have nearby), I could even seen the economic of owning no cars making sense.�
Feb 12, 2015
anticitizen13.7 I realize that my views are contrarian, but there are a growing number of people in America, mostly younger adults, who view personal vehicles as a hassle, not just a big expense. If they absolutely must use a car, then ZipCar or Uber are adequate options.
What will keep personal car markets healthy in the "near long-term", by which I mean 10-15 years, is the U.S. public education system, which is locally funded. Middle class to affluent people who want decent public schools for their children are generally going to have to go to the suburbs, where there is enough tax money to fund school districts. Almost no one I know has been willing to place their children in city public schools, which suffer from chronic funding problems. Violence and influence from misbehaving children from troubled areas of town is a huge concern. This alone pushes parents to run for the verdant hills of suburbia when their children hit Kindergarten age. As long as Suburbia exists, cars will be necessary.
I do see some hints that a small number of parents will keep their families in cities and send their children to charter schools (or if they can afford it, private schools). If gentrifiers are successful in getting city schools to the point of acceptability, more people will stay in the city. And as a consequence, car ownership will decline.
I don't know exactly how this will play out, but I think it would not be prudent to discount the possibility that this could happen and have long-term consequences for the automobile industry as a whole, not just Tesla.
Heck, nobody though Tesla would go anywhere, and they were wrong. I was one of those people who was wrong.�
Feb 12, 2015
stevejust I like the Hayward fault earthquake answer. But to me the answer is really the next gen Nissan Leaf.
Everyone just assumes because the Leaf can't hold a candle to the S, there's no way Nissan can compete. But the difference between the next gen Leaf and the Model III might be a lot closer than anyone imagines. An Audi A3 eTron and a Model III might be true competitors by the time we see the III.
All this talk of an Apple iCar makes me roll my eyes, because they can't even seem to roll out a watch, and that's why more in their wheelhouse than a car.�
Feb 12, 2015
anticitizen13.7 Without a Supercharger-like network to support it, the LEAF would still be stuck in the restricted usage profile of a urban/suburban runabout. I don't discount Nissan, but I haven't seen any indication of progress on their end with an EV that can replace an ICE in the vast majority of usage cases.�
Feb 12, 2015
RobStark
Anything is possible I suppose. But Ghosn is on record as saying next LEAF will be or have the option for double the range. That is 168 miles.
No evidence they are changing the platform. So a modified FWD Versa platform.
Model 3 is aimed at RWD and AWD BMW 3 Series.
Sounds far fetched. Then there is Supercharger Network vs Chademo.
Where is VW sourcing the Batteries to get the price/kWh low enough to make a $36k Model 3 competitor instead of a $36k eGolf?
Audi can't compete by just issuing press releases.�
Feb 13, 2015
Robert.Boston The more companies that make great EVs, the more the public will accept EVs. I reject the idea that "EVs" are a market, just as "diesel-engine cars" is not a market. Mainstreaming the EV is the best thing that could happen for Tesla.�
Feb 13, 2015
Familial Rhino As this thread shows, there are innumerable theoretical threats to Tesla lurking around every corner. This last conference call, though, made me think of another one. To us believers on this board this will sound like blasphemy, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't consider it.
So, here it is: Elon may change for the worse.
Not his level of ambition, not his style, not his goals. But anyone with his level of achievement, all attained against huge technological and business obstacles, countless cynics, shrewd political enemies, and vast numbers of rabid ideological haters, proving them all wrong in such a spectacular fashion, is constantly challenged from within by a silent and most insidious adversary: hubris.
Elon's larger-than-life presence is, of course, one of his strongest assets. But if the people around him ever start to feel it's unwise to say No to him, no matter how important that No is, it would be the start of a long deterioration, and it would play out in full view of everyone else but himself.
Let me state clearly that I don't think he's there by any stretch, and today I see the risk as only theoretical. But I don't think it is zero. Massive success brings massive self-validation, which can lead one to get lost in their own reality distortion field.
His strongest defense against this scenario is the fact that he is a brilliant physics-trained engineer, and the engineering mindset is to always look for the bad news first. He also trusts the engineers he respects, which are the only kind of people he wants to hire (he spoke derisively about the MBAs and sales-and-marketing types more than once). I hope they do not hesitate to tell him No whenever he really must hear it. As long as he keeps listening, and continues to look forward, and fights to forget his successes soon after he achieves them, he'll continue to make the world a better place (and make us a lot of money in the process).�
Feb 13, 2015
bxr140 For sure there is a growing movement back into city centers...but I'd contest that's an infinitesimal percentage of the population. In the US and around the world, there is a VERY small number of people who have the means but not the desire to own a car, and for almost anyone who doesn't have but comes into the means, they want that car. More importantly, there's really no catalyst on the social/economic/political horizons to change that desire or decades to come...the hipster movement itself isn't enough to drive that change. For personal vehicle ownership to peak and start to trend back down we pretty much need a phenomenon that significantly increases vehicle density and significantly increases alternate transportation options. Basically, something that drives the cost of ownership way [back] up to elite status. The only things that come to mind is a significant rise in the world population.
Very fair point on the state of the American education system.�
Feb 13, 2015
Robert.Boston FWIW, neither of my children (ages 21 and 18) have a driver's license, by their choice, certainly not driven by lack of family finances. The New York Times had a very interesting piece on car ownership trends in the U.S. that makes the case, from statistics and interviews, for "the end of car culture" in America.
�
Feb 13, 2015
adiggs I'm with Robert on this one. I wish with deep passion that the next Leaf is a 168 mile range EV. That isn't yet the 200 mile EV that Tesla feels is the minimum for a regular usable car, but I drive a 175 mile range Roadster (standard charge - 20-25 hidden miles, so really 200 miles), and I know with deep certainty that a 168 mile range EV would be a full substitute. Especially with CHADEMO charging in the Pacific Northwest, it would be MORE usable than the Roadster.
And that means CHOICE in the market. For my market segmentation definition, I have 1 out of production model, 1 in production model, and 1 promised-in-production model this year to choose from (Roadster, S, X). I don't really consider S or Leaf to be a choice, but if the Leaf were 150+ miles, there are plenty of applications where they're close enough that they ARE a substitute.
Note that in my personal market segmentation, BMW, Audi, Toyota, Nissan (incl Leaf), GM, and every other big car maker doesn't exist. So anytime one of them says they want to join the party, I see expansion of choice, and that leads to a massively growing market. Everybody can get involved and sell lots of EV's, and the more involvement, the more that everybody realizes a) it works b) it's ok c) there's money to be made etc..
A 150+ mile Leaf, a 200+ mile Chevy Bolt, and any other longer range EV with some kind of DCFC charging infrastructure / compatibility is nothing but good for Tesla. Even if today they come in the form of promises that may never see the light of day, even the promise and these companies taking their time to build concepts and TALK about a long range EV, is nothing but good for Tesla (and for the bigger problem of electrifying transport).
- - - Updated - - -
See http://www.gapminder.org/videos/dont-panic-the-facts-about-population/ for an excellent view on world population and related topics (as well as a fantastic example of storytelling with data). In the context of your comment, we have good evidence that world population will continue growing to 11B people and then go flat. That process is already under way, and in fact started decades ago when we reached "peak child". There are about 2B people between age 0 and 15 in the world, and that number has beel flat for many decades (60's or so?).
Good info, and Hans is an entertaining fellow - highly recommended.�
Feb 13, 2015
adiggs I didn't get my driver's license until I was 23. Just didn't need it.
The interesting generalization, and maybe your children will make for an interesting experiment to see how this plays out in practice. Does delaying acquisition of a driver's license lead some to not get a license at all? And more importantly, do those that delay acquiring a license elect to get the license, but not get a car (or 2, or 3, ..)?
When I was single and in college, I lived in a town where I could get around faster on my bicycle than I could in a car. I was also willing to ride my bicycle during rainy Oregon winters. Neither of those things are now true�
Feb 13, 2015
RobStark Everyone in my extended family over 18 has a drivers licence and has a car or wants one.
What Western populations tell pollsters/researchers and what they actually do can vary by a very wide margin. The US just purchased over 16.5M vehicles amid alleged less interest in autos and strong demand for Trucks,SUVs and gas guzzlers despite more Americans saying they make more choices with the environment in mind.
The Western population is falling and the rest is rising.
Even if demand slows in the West for automobiles(which I strongly doubt) it won't in China, non-Japan Asia, Latin America nor Africa.�
Feb 13, 2015
flankspeed8 The average age of the U.S. vehicle fleet continues to set records. It is over 12 years now which means people are holding on to their cars longer. Is this a net positive or negative for new car sales? Western population may be falling as a whole, but not in the U.S. I would not discount long term structural change in how we view transportation and personal vehicle ownership.�
Feb 13, 2015
kenliles another report with some details on Apple possible long term Automotive efforts...
"
But people familiar with the company said that the background of the people Apple is hiring � including automotive designers and vehicle dynamics engineers � and the seniority of the executives involved suggest a car could be in the works.
�Three months ago I would have said it was CarPlay,� said one person who has worked closely with Apple for many years, referring to Apple�s infotainment system. �Today I think it�s a car.�
"
Also relates to competing for employees between the two companies
Apple Recruiting Automotive Experts to Work in 'Top-Secret Research Lab' - Mac Rumors�
Feb 13, 2015
RobStark The US population as a percentage of global population is falling.
That the average age of a registered car is older means cars are more durable.
The fleet keeps getting bigger. People don't send road worthy cars to the junk yard.
I strongly discount long terms structural change in how we view transportation and personal vehicle ownership.
It is a Utopia constructed in the minds of social engineers with little bearing on the aspirations and wants of most people.�
Feb 13, 2015
ecarfan I remain skeptical that Apple has plans to design and produce a completely new car. I do think that Apple is serious about becoming more involved with car companies and integrating their Apple car software into other vehicles.�
Feb 13, 2015
kenliles me too�
Feb 13, 2015
kenliles some more interesting details; 1000s of employees, an electric car code named Titan
"Apple CEO Tim Cook reportedly green-lighted the project almost a year ago, and company executives have already begun to meet with potential contract manufacturers, including Canadian firm Magna Steyr. Apple iPod and iPhone designer Steve Zadesky, formerly of Ford, is said to be running the project. "
Apple has - report�
Feb 13, 2015
Auzie Me too. My guess is that they wish to get into car tech market because it is huge and no one is seriously there apart from Tesla.
The things that come to my mind, that Apple could be considering:
Car infotainment system - car iPad that could be fitted to any car, front and back seats
Car central control system - similar to Tesla's large screen. Fitting these to existing cars might be a hurdle, but it could be sold to car makers to be fitted to new cars
Car self-driving system - retrofittable (??? doubtful, too difficult) or to be sold to car makers to be fitted to new cars
Car to phone, car to car, car to home communication and traffic integration system - retrofittable gadgetry, enormous market, my bet is on this
Making electric cars
Perhaps Apple team is at this stage just contemplating their potential products. They might be just speculating at this stage on the best way and products with which to enter this market.�
Feb 13, 2015
kenliles Agree. I think all of the above are being evaluated. Including making electric car, but very early of course and with a different take than Tesla even if it comes to pass. Regardless I beleive the two efforts will eventually complement, validate EV, and leverage against each other (including Apple Store dealerships). Anyway, gonna be a blast to follow. I can't think of a better catalyst for a Tesla frankly�
Feb 13, 2015
Auzie I just struggle with the idea of Apple breaking into new frontiers that are very remote to its core capabilities. Making electric cars would be such new frontier. Such frontiers may be more likely to be broken by newcomers rather than well-established businesses or individuals. It takes a lot of hunger and drive to be a pioneer.�
Feb 13, 2015
anticitizen13.7 10-11 years ago, people were skeptical that Apple would break into mobile phones. I remember articles being published saying Apple had no expertise in phones or dealing with mobile phone companies.
EVs are of course a much greater leap for Apple than the leap from iPod to iPhone. Automobiles require incredibly high Capex, and the regulatory red tape is far far worse than for a mobile phone. Apple would also face very tough questions from investors accustomed to 40% gross margins.
In the near term, I don't see Apple as a threat to Tesla. If Apple just started its automotive program late last year, as the rumors indicated, I doubt we would see a finished product before 2020. An established major automaker like Honda or Toyota needs about 5 years per generation of car, and that's with established factories and supply chains, and institutional knowledge of design requirements. If Tesla is already way out ahead from GM and Nissan with the Gigafactory and Supercharger network, they are light years ahead of Apple.
I see Apple entry into the EV market as more of a threat to GM, Nissan, and others, who might see employee defections. Working for Apple on a brand new project (without a lot of baggage, and with a virtually unlimited budget) has to be a seriously tempting prospect.
In the long term, an Apple EV would help build the market for EVs and legitimize the move away from ICE.
I am skeptical that Apple would move into automobiles, given the high risk and low margins, but anything could happen.�
Feb 13, 2015
Familial Rhino Apple is established in consumer electronics, but when it comes to cars, they are a start-up. As far-fetched as it sounds, in the medium-to-long term Apple might prove to be a much stronger competitor to Tesla than all other car companies.
First, the very fact that they have no car-making history is a tremendous advantage, one which Tesla also enjoyed. When you have no legacy car business to protect, you are free to be as bold and innovative as you need to be. Second, if there is one thing that is truly Apple's core expertise, it is marrying software and hardware for an almost flawless user experience. Third, Tim Cook is a logistics god. Very few companies, if any, can match Apple's logistics prowess. And fourth, what other market is there that Apple can go into that would allow them to keep growing at their current rate? The global consumer electronics market had total revenues of $253.9bn in 2013. The automotive market in 2014 was $4 trillion.
Apple certainly has the resources; they have more available cash than all automakers combined, and they are hungrier than ever. If they want to do it, they can do it.�
Feb 13, 2015
flankspeed8 As much as I love Apple and their products, for some reason an Apple car just is not appealing to me.�
Feb 13, 2015
Familial Rhino Also, Apple's nemesis, Google, developed a serious foothold in the auto space with their self-driving technology. Apple cannot afford to sit still. They need to stay bold and aggressive. By definition, this will mean continue taking big risks. They will not remain at the top of the heap selling iPhones forever, and this is a company that wants to be around for another 100 years.�
Feb 13, 2015
Auzie Having no car making history is a double edge sword, cuts both ways. Tesla is on a learning curve now, learning the best way to manage new products release, logistics issues, customers expectations management, global market management, pricing management in various markets, etc. Despite that, I agree with you that benefits of no legacy outweigh the losses.
Tim Cook has achieved too much in his career to be hungry. He may be just looking for a small desert. He does not even strike me as a desert guy. I could be wrong.
That leaves us with happy Apple, with plenty of cash, good supply chain expertise, great electronics, great brand. It may not be enough to push Apple onto treacherous road of making electric cars. Maybe they will make some attempts until they have a better idea of what it takes. Anyway, without a ready product, they are behind Tesla and unlikely to catch up.
Imho the main Tesla competitive edge is their manufacturing innovation. I find their growth so far excellent considering product and supply chain complexity. If they can keep the pace it will be very difficult for any follower to catch up. All these manufacturing robots are greatly reducing the cost, improving product quality and increasing the reliability of manufacturing.
Second competitive edge is a dual motor powertrain. We have not seen the best of it yet. The possibilities of improving the d drivetrain performance have just opened up, it will get better and better as Tesla engineers learn and translate that learning into both old and new products.�
Feb 13, 2015
kenliles I think in the approaching world, EV Cars ARE consumer electronics. Remember the product Apple would enter the market with would transport itself.
I agree with the other points you make...
I would caution readers, right or wrong, agree or not, Jobs defined Apple (and laid multi-decade plans) as a user experience company intersecting technology and humanities. And specifically with capital resources to deploy that vision at scale beyond any pre conceived business. Now with something approaching $200B cash, deploying a consumer electronics automobile worldwide is but a development and logistics excercise. They may not in the end do this, or may partner (Tesla or otherwise); but the fact they can employ 1000 employees to 'explore' the idea Tesla employs to accomplish, without even a noticeable ripple is a testament to the fact we are headed to an all EV fleet in the decades to come and is ONLY a leveragable asset to Tesla and TSLA. It's my estimation Elon couldn't be more pleased and in fact already knows why Apple is reverse poaching employee talent, and has already computed the strategies for how Tesla will advantage to whatever Apple does with those employees....
Great discussion. Thanks�
Feb 14, 2015
marvinat0rz I think an Apple that tries to do electric cars is a real long-term threat to Tesla. All existing car companies are (determentally) reluctant to adopt EVs due to a vested interest in combustion engines. Apple does not, and has great expertise in industrial design, software, global supply chain & distribution and familiarity with power electronics. Most importantly, Apple has $200 billion in cash (and growing) that it would perfer to invest rather than lose value to inflation. Apple could easily afford 30 gigafactories, and have a strong incentive to use their ridiculous amount of cash in one of the very few industries that are capital intensive enough to challange them.
There could probably be a symbiotic relationship between Tesla and an automotive Apple. The auto market is huge. But Apple could be a real competitor to Tesla. If they were successful, we would at best see an electric car duopoly, with would reduce the long-term maximum sales that Tesla could achieve. I think this is a more likely long-term result that Tesla capturing the vast majority of the electric car market. The tech world seems to consistently create duo- or trio-polies (sp?) when new industries are staked out. Think web search, CPU manufacturing, GPU manufacturing, smartphones and others. However, this doesn't imply that Tesla would be a bad investment. I just say it's something to look out for.
Apple is at this point the most likely serious long term competitor to Tesla. I also think that a perceived serious initiative on their part could negatively impact the stock price, due to a lower growth expectancy for Tesla. However, there is a long way to this point. Tesla has a world-leading expertise on EVs, an organization and design team that's been thinking about this for a decade and also years of effort in developing and building both a global charging network and distribution network. This is not something that even a capital-rich competitor can duplicate in a couple of years, but I can believe it's a possibility in a longer timeframe. Think Microsoft entering the console market, writ large. This might sound like a ridicuous comparison. But continued human economic growth, increased automation and the exponential improvements this entails, ensures that we will see larger and larger investment projects. I've outlined a case where the incentives indicate that this could happen.�
Feb 14, 2015
Familial Rhino Couldn't have said it better myself.
There is a long way ahead of Tesla, too. The stock price reflects the expectation that Tesla is willing and able to walk that very long walk. I wasn't ever concerned about other auto manufacturers threatening Tesla, because they live mostly in the past, and to the extent they see the future they are very slow to adapt. Apple is a different story. There is no leaner and meaner predator out there. I hate to say this, but Apple doesn't have much to learn from Musk; what he is trying to do to GM, Apple did before to Nokia.
As to the idea that Apple must be satisfied and complacent because it is so big, this is what Cook had to say about it:
I am very afraid of a beast that looks like a dinosaur, but has the speed of a cheetah and the agility of an owl. (On the other hand, if I can become his best friend...)
Anyone else who doubts Apple is a serious and likely threat to car manufacturers should read the WSJ article linked below. It's a Google search, follow the first result to go around the paywall.
Apple Gears Up to Challenge Tesla in Electric Cars
We live in very interesting times.�
Feb 14, 2015
yesla What if self driving cars mean people dont need to own cars?
ultimately better for the world and would suite Tesla's goals well... but it would also kind of slash the auto manufacturing industry�
Feb 15, 2015
AustinPowers ++++1
Would one really want to buy a car from a company known for
a) employing slave labor to produce their products - and don't anyone try to call what working is like at Foxconn anything else than modern slavery?
b) selling highly overpriced products even though they are made by a)? Or would you buy a Nissan at the price of a Bentley? Strangely enough, when it comes to Apple, people seem to switch off their brains. An iPhone costs three to four times as much as similar smartphones from competitors (who also produce at Foxconn like most of them do), yet is an iPhone three or four times better? I dare say no. And I know many people who have had iPhones and now buy from other companies because they say when it comes to value-for-money, Apple is just ridiculous.
c) collecting all your driving data and doing god knows what with it. That's bad enough on any modern smartphone, but would you want that in a car???
Cars by Apple, Google or running on software by Apple, Google, etc.? Thanks, but no thanks.
(Then again, I don't even like the idea of having a browser on a car. A car is for driving, not surfing the web. There are enough accidents already caused by idiots playing with their mobiles while driving. Optionally offering even more things to take away your attention from what is the purpose of a car in the first place is the worst thing that has happened to cars in the last few years imho.)�
Feb 15, 2015
Karma I may be missing the point here, but with all the news of smart car hacking, I wonder if the under-estimated threat isn't another BEV manufacturer, as much as it could be a group like "Anonymous" hacking into our cars and causing massive damage?
Just a thought...I wonder what types of firewalls and anti-theft/hacking TM has built in, or will upload into our cars?�
Feb 16, 2015
Auzie I wonder what are the health effects of using insane mode on a daily basis.
Also is Tesla likely to become a getaway car of choice.:biggrin:�
Feb 16, 2015
kenliles it's a secret plot to audition suitable's for the Mars colony trip;�
Feb 16, 2015
Robert.Boston FWIW, they'll need good EVs for colonies on Mars. No ICE vehicles there!�
Feb 16, 2015
kenliles true enough!�
Feb 16, 2015
bonaire In general, the biggest threat to the EV industry which would include Tesla is .... apathy.
People in general can be very apathetic and not really care about something new, including if there are both political and environment aspects to it. I think the EV industry itself will fall under a category of "this is optional".
Lot of interest in things like Mars (noted above) but such a thing is also "very optional" to humanity. To think that Mars is some place where we could "colonize" is currently irrational. Until gravity-based propulsion is figured out and harnessed, using rockets to go anywhere is just not going to work for any sort of thing other than missions that are one-way and very small scale. The real answer is trying to figure out how those (debatable topic) "little grey guys" get around the stars and do it that way. So, for me, Mars is "optional".
If we figure out new forms of energy on a large-scale, there is far less need to colonize any other planets because then we can start to treat this one better.�
Feb 16, 2015
green1 And this is exactly why Tesla made a great car that just happens to be electric, instead of making an "EV" They know that most people don't care about an EV, but they know that people DO care about having a great car. People may not rush out to replace what they're driving now, but it will eventually need replacement, and if a great vehicle just happens to be an EV, they'll buy it.�
Feb 16, 2015
ecarfan Mods, can you move this post over to the SpaceX forum? I think there would be interest. ;-)
@bonaire, obviously Elon disagrees with your stated position, as I'm sure you know. His reasons for wanting to colonize Mars are not limited to concern over global warming and its impact on terrestrial life forms. He is also concerned about the inevitable large asteroid impact that could wipe out most of humanity and send earth civilizations back to near Stone Age conditions, but with solar radiation levels so reduced by the time they reach the surface that agriculture could be very difficult.�
May 12, 2015
Kwillscherer1026 Apparently coming out of the shadows soon.
"Representatives remain tight-lipped about the details, but at some point Atieva decided to shift focus and design a consumer EV from scratch. For the past 7 months, the company has been hiring engineers to build its design team from about 100 to 300 key personnel. It recently moved to a larger facility in Menlo Park, CA and is actively looking for more real estate to develop vehicles."
Interesting to see Atieva luring Tesla engineers with subtle digs at how hard it is to work at Tesla: "Welcome to a better place to do your life�s work." and "Work with automotive industry legends, not for them."
Next they'll include something about paternity leave.
Charged EVs | EXCLUSIVE: Stealthy EV startup Atieva ramps up hiring, including many top ex-Tesla engineers�
May 12, 2015
SteveG3 Thanks for posting this K. It will be interesting to watch. Good to see- I doubt any of the incumbent automakers (with the exception of Nissan) will make a large move to EVs for at least a decade. As to the topic of this thread, unless Atieva has a stealth trillion in cash to build 200 GigaFactories, I don't see any threat to Tesla.�
May 12, 2015
ecarfan I wish them luck, but they have a long way to go.
The more serious EV companies, the better!�
May 12, 2015
mershaw2001 How cool would it be if they licensed the supercharger network?�
May 12, 2015
Lloyd I'll bet that this is Apple's venture into the EV market!! Progressing under the radar is typical for them!!�
May 12, 2015
ecarfan I doubt that company is owned or funded by Apple.
Apple would keep their EV efforts inhouse, I think.�
May 12, 2015
anticitizen13.7 I suspect this is not Apple's project.
Having a booth at SAE World Congress and advertising openly is not exactly flying under the radar. The article also says the company was looking to go from 100 [edit: article says 12 former Tesla engineers = 10% of team, or 120 people total] to 300 key personnel, while Ars Technica reported that as of February 2015 there were already "hundreds" of people working on Apple Car at Apple facilities (http://arstechnica.com/cars/2015/02/report-apple-has-several-hundred-staffers-building-an-electric-car/), including a prominent veteran of Ford Motor Co.
For new product categories (like iPhone and Apple Watch), design and initial R&D is kept very secret (small number of people working in isolation, tight access control to physical facility).
I would actually be very excited if Atieva comes up with something novel to go against Apple and Tesla. The barriers to competing with Tesla are very high though. A car factory, a Gigafactory for batteries, and a Supercharger network will be difficult to compete against. I'll keep my eye on Atieva, but it's impossible to evaluate their competitiveness without any specifics.�
May 12, 2015
ecarfan IfAtieva is a serious new EV company, and also Apple is really going to build an EV (I'm still not certain), I love it! Who would have predicted just a decade ago that the San Francisco Bay Area could would become ground zero for a new generation of automobile manufacturers?
From our perspective now it seems fairly obvious: cars are transitioning to being EVs controlled by software, so why not in the Bay Area. But a decade ago it was not so obvious.
That said, I don't think anyone besides Tesla is going to manufacture cars in the San Francisco Bay Area because there are no large areas of land to build a new factory on and costs are too high. But there is a lot of smart engineering and software talent available.�
May 12, 2015
blakegallagher I get that from the engineers perspective. I really appreciate Elon's insane drive and that he expects that from everyone around him. As an investor it is really great for the company. It is also one of the reasons I don't work at Tesla right now. With a family and my commitment to them there is no place for me on any team anywhere near Elon�
May 13, 2015
Auzie I really do not know what Tesla's culture is like, but I would be very surprised if people writing these news articles knew more than me. Speaking with few have been or current employees is not enough to provide an insight into Tesla's culture. The culture is usually evaluated by conducting extensive employees surveys, and even these may be misleading. Past employees are more likely to be biased against the company.
Also, it seems to me that newspapers might be emphasizing sensationalistic quotes and perhaps misquoting or taking out of context.
It is unfair to broadcast one-sided sensationalistic comments with no opportunity given to the other side to respond. It is unfortunate that Elon is cornered with these public statements into having to respond. It is hurtful, damaging and a waste of his time.
All I can say on this topic is that Elon's actions speak much louder about who he is than any books or newspapers articles on him or on Tesla ever will.�
May 13, 2015
Ingenieur The will not be build in California, they develop only the powertrain, battery tech and some infotainment features, most of the software is being made by Chinese LeTV.
The company is now apparently valued at ca. 2 Billion $ btw, up from 800 Mio last round, so its not too shabby.
So while they claim that they building the car, they actually just make part of it.
My understanding is that they have 2 Directions:
1. China EV Market, obviously they plan to export cars worldwide later.
2.Licensing Battery/Powertrain tech to others, most notably it appears VW is among the companies licencing it, they will most likely never tell publically, but this will most likely leak in a few years time.
So one car will be a Sedan from BAIC Motors coming late 2016, targeting Model 3. And LeTV plans to offer a premium 4 door coupe under its own brand, kind of Internet car with close to dozen touchscreens across the car. I think if anything, the car they develop is for LeTV, which will be kind of showcase of their tech, price supposed to be close to high end Tesla in China while BAIC will offer car for the unwashed.�
May 13, 2015
v12 to 12v Sacramento was ground zero for EVs in the 1990's. That is where all the "garage bands" and rock stars would go to show their projects and collaborate.�
May 13, 2015
Kwillscherer1026 I think a company could complete in the high end EV market without copying Tesla's exact business plan. Especially if a new company just wants to make luxury vehicles at top prices. And you don't need a gigafactory to make money at luxury prices.
Imagine three years from now when Tesla is really focused on Model 3 rollout, and the Model S is essentially 5-6 years old. A new company could take a share of the luxury EV market with a fresh new design. All other things being equal, of course.
It's hard to imagine, but definitely possible. There are a lot of high-end buyers who just want the newest thing.
Totally agree. I really admire the drive and contribution to the world that people like Elon make, but I could never do it. Not at that level. Being a regular entrepreneur is hard enough on my health and family. The extreme drive, and subsequent achievement, seems to come with a huge personal cost.�
May 13, 2015
Zextraterrestrial but without a charging network the high end EV will be a local only car unless there are major changes in energy storage.�
May 13, 2015
SteveG3 K, I don't see Atieva or any other startup having volume production in the tens of thousands in under 5 years. By 2020, I think we will see the Model S and X offered with 400 miles of range, and SuperCharging down to 15 minutes or less. At that point, essentially the only remaining attribute the S/X (and any similar EV from a startup or anyone else) wont meet or decidedly exceed ICE vehicles in their price range at is the loud noise of an engine some enjoy with their ICE cars. What I'm saying is, Atieva would not be poaching on Tesla's 10% of the market, but rather with Tesla, Atieva would be gobbling up as much of the ICE market as they had production capacity for (of course, some exceptions, those without plug access, or those that really like the sound of a roaring engine). I wish Atieva well, there's plenty of room for them.�
May 13, 2015
anticitizen13.7 I have thought about Atieva some more, and I think the company intends to do exactly what they say in their marketing materials: "designing and creating a breakthrough electric car in the heart of Silicon Valley."
I believe that this means a (1) relatively low volume, high-performance vehicle (2) implementing "early adopter" tech like new battery chemistry (3) reflecting design that is less mainstream and more daring.
Based on the vague concept image/animation on the company's website, their product appears to be a 2-door sports car with semi-covered rear wheels like a 1st Generation Honda Insight.
With Tesla no longer building the Roadster, and Tesla preoccupied with Model X and Model 3 for the next few years, there is a market for a Roadster successor. Think about it this way: Tesla is going to be focused on going mainstream. Elon has stated that Model 3 will focus less on "daring" design and more on bringing existing Tesla strengths to a more affordable car. The ex-Tesla engineers who worked on the Roadster and initial Model S probably want to go in the other direction... MORE daring. There's probably plenty that these engineers wanted to do with Roadster and Model S that couldn't be accomplished due to time and budget constraints. Atieva is their chance to realize their dreams.
With private funding and no pesky institutional shareholders to please, the Atieva team may have the time and flexibility to accomplish what they want.
I do not see this company as direct competition to Tesla in the near term. It would take years, probably close to a decade, to build up to where Tesla is today, even if they wanted to take this path.
I do see this company as potentially pushing the envelope a lot more than Tesla in terms of design. That may mean vehicles that are slightly odd or even weird in addition to being awesome. In any event, I wish them well and look forward to seeing their product.�
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét