Maybe you should sell this nonsense on the Camry board.The hate is strong in this thread.
It seems like a lot of you possibly just scrape headlines and then build unsupported theories about Tesla.
It's ok, in a decade you'll have forgotten how much you hate them, when that technology starts to permeate into the rest of the auto world.
Matter of fact, I bet you'll retell the story about how you where the only forward thinking guy on your block that could see how Tesla was making the right moves!
Because it is a huge drain of tax revenues on a dead-end technology.Not sure why anyone would root for Tesla to fail.
Is electric any more dead-end than direct-burning of fossil fuel? At least electric can be sourced from non-fossil-fuel.Because it is a huge drain of tax revenues on a dead-end technology.
I could never drive a Bolt or a LEAF without feeling emasculated. Not so with a Tesla or e-Golf.I actually like what Tesla has been doing. They are building electric cars that appeal to a much larger consumer base than just the greenies. They are building electric cars that automotive enthusiasts can appreciate. This is why it's appealing to me. - 2.8s 0-60 - Stylish exterior - Lots of tech - Luxurious interior - OTA updates - AWD option Seriously, I think Tesla has done a good job of making cars that are marketable to people who want more than just an eco friendly commuter car. Look at any of the other EVs that are made by the other companies and they're lame. I would never spend my money on those boring cars but if I did have an extra $150k to burn on an around town ride, it could be a Model S P90D with ludacris mode. However I don't, so I won't be getting one any time soon.
Not rooting for it to fail, just sating the obvious that industries propped up by government subsidies don't deserved to be considered "successes"!Not sure why anyone would root for Tesla to fail.
But we're not giving government subsidies to fossil-fuel burning cars. And Tesla is not really developing "advanced" technology to allow the 100% electric car to be the replacement for the fossil-fuel car. What Tesla is doing is developing/building really cool and stylish electric cars. If some folks in the market want such cars, then they should pay for them, and not the taxpayer.Is electric any more dead-end than direct-burning of fossil fuel? At least electric can be sourced from non-fossil-fuel.
My 2009 Jetta TDI was covered by an "alternative fuel" tax credit. I think it was $750 but I could be misremembering. Anyway when 99.5% of passenger cars are fueled by gasoline, almost anything other than gas can be considered "alternative fuel".But we're not giving government subsidies to fossil-fuel burning cars.
Neither of these three can do 0-60 in 3 seconds. Granted they cost significantly less to buy than a Model S, but even if people want to spent more on performance, Tesla is the only one to offer now...Lots of people with 1000 bucks to buy a car that doesn't exist, from a car maker that can't make more that a few thousand cars per year. Believe the hype or there's a sucker born every minute, I'm not sure which slogan is more appropriate here Tesla is just the next iPhone for the minions, if they really wanted an electric car the 100mile range egolf, Nissan leaf and Ford focus are available right now
It is following the Silicon Valley business model. Burn investors cash to get marketshare, then profit 10 or 15 years later. I don't know if this is good or bad for a car company though. With that being said, the financials of traditional automakers are not that healthy either...When a company with a wildly successful brand name and positive public image is burning through over a billion dollars per year more than they bring in, it is perfectly reasonable to question the feasibility of their business model. When their top selling product is still 18+ months away, all deposits are 100% refundable, and there are competitors planning to enter the market, it is only reasonable to question if the market interest will turn into actual sales or not. The fact is, Tesla does not have the money to last the next 18 months and deliver the model 3 and supercharger stations they have promised. They need to get investors to bet on their future success or they won't even have a chance to try. Their tech is nothing special, and the more established and experienced auto makers are poised to pounce when market acceptance and profitable price points coincide.
There is a huge difference between software and cars. With software, the cost to make another copy is darn near nil. The cost to make another model S is over $100,000. Who knows what the Model 3 costs will be. With software it is OK to lose a lot of money while building a user base since you can run at very high profit margins once you are established. With cars, the profit margins, if any, are limited.It is following the Silicon Valley business model. Burn investors cash to get marketshare, then profit 10 or 15 years later. I don't know if this is good or bad for a car company though. With that being said, the financials of traditional automakers are not that healthy either...
Anyone can put 90 kvh worth of batteries into a car. Tesla can't do anything that the other car companies cannot also do if they choose. The problem is the cost of that range is higher than what consumers are willing to pay right now. Tesla is OK with losing a billion here and there, while "all other car makers" would prefer not to.Range from EV cars from all other car makers is a joke when you see what Tesla can do...
Yes, we did a lot of stupid ****e after the 2008 collapse and to provide government (taxpayer) support for anything that is labelled "green". We should have learned that the government is not good at picking winners and losers (Solyndra?). However, I can't fault Elon for feeding at the government trough if they slop it up for him.My 2009 Jetta TDI was covered by an "alternative fuel" tax credit. I think it was $750 but I could be misremembering.
EDIT: The tax credit on the 2009 Jetta TDI was $1300
The same Bob Lutz that did such a bang up job @ GM in the 2000's?Bob Lutz thinks the Tesla electric car business model is unworkable economically as a stand-alone company. Pretty much all I need to know.
Yes, that Bob Lutz. The same Bob Lutz who's forgotten more about the auto industry than anybody here will ever know.The same Bob Lutz that did such a bang up job @ GM in the 2000's?
