3 ms·

You're being awfully defensive about this. Yes, I don't like seeing people throw the "fanboy" word around. It's always meant as an insult, and nearly always use

by eridius 10y ago

You're being awfully defensive about this. Yes, I don't like seeing people throw the "fanboy" word around. It's always meant as an insult, and nearly always used with the intention of dismissing someone's argument without actually countering the points made (usually because they can't). I don't get why you keep trying to accuse me of taking offense at something not directed at me, as if that's even relevant to the discussion. Did I even ever say I was offended? I don't think so. > Because even Elon Musk said so Citation please? I'm not seeing this anywhere. In fact, an article from just 1 week ago talks about how Tesla might achieve GAAP profitability in Q3 - https://electrek.co/2016/09/07/tesla-tsla-could-achieve-gaap-profitability-in-q3-says-elon-musk-a-first-in-3-years/ https://electrek.co/2016/09/07/tesla-tsla-could-achieve-gaap... > and their overall profit margins would be relying on the people that buy the premium modules and upgrades for the model 3 Isn't that true for all cars? If the optional features didn't improve profit margins, dealerships wouldn't be pushing them. > This is an utterly irrelevant question to ask if you want to make a change in the world, even Elon Musk made this same argument, the point of the cars like the Bolt isn't to sell them to people who want to buy an electric car specifically but to anyone who wants to buy a car in general. One of Elon Musk's goals was to push other car manufacturers into making electric vehicles. The fact that a widely-recognized brand like GM is coming out with the Bolt is exactly what Elon Musk wanted to happen.

dogma1138 10y ago
>You're being awfully defensive about this. I'm not being defensive at all =) And you were offended, and defensive, you somehow brought an entire argument about why "doing X isn't fanboyism" when no one talked about it, the only thing anyone said is that saying that there are "Tesla Fanboys" doesn't intrinsically mean that some one is biased against Tesla. Ironically this entire argument is a litmus test for their existence. >Citation please? I'm not seeing this anywhere. Every talk he made about the Model 3, including his plans, eventually the Model 3 may become profitable, but if you think they'll beat the profitability of the large car companies you are really off the beat. >In fact, an article from just 1 week ago talks about how Tesla might achieve GAAP profitability in Q3 - https://electrek.co/2016/09/07/tesla-tsla-could-achieve-gaap.. https://electrek.co/2016/09/07/tesla-tsla-could-achieve-gaap.... Did you read the article, they expect profitability before the Model 3 arrives, then it would dip until the Model 3 production kicks into full gear, this is almost utter contrast to your original claims of the Model 3 being highly profitable. The Model 3 won't lose money, but they expect the profits to come from the add-ons, and the larger profit margins to come from the more expensive Model S and X's this is in Musk's bloody "Plan". >One of Elon Musk's goals was to push other car manufacturers into making electric vehicles. The fact that a widely-recognized brand like GM is coming out with the Bolt is exactly what Elon Musk wanted to happen. Which is exactly what I said. The Future of Electric cars isn't Tesla, it might pave the road there, or help push some companies along, but it would be out paced by the giants once the EV scene kicks into full gear, that is OK. I would still rather own a Tesla because I find it the cooler however living in London considering one costs about as my yearly pre-tax wage (The P90D) and the fact I won't be able to park it anywhere kinda make it impossible. If Tesla is really lucky it would have the same impact that Apple had on mobile phones, maybe it would come to a point where everyone thinks about Tesla when they think about a "cool car", but still the majority of the world would be driving something else, EV but something else.
- eridius 10y ago
  No matter how many times you claim I'm offended, that doesn't actually mean I was offended. Why do you keep making that claim? > the only thing anyone said is that saying that there are "Tesla Fanboys" doesn't intrinsically mean that some one is biased against Tesla. Implying that anyone who brings up those legitimate points is a tesla "fanboy" does in fact imply that you're biased against Tesla. That was my original point. The author didn't say "There exist Tesla 'fanboys'", instead the author very strongly implied that anyone trying to defend Tesla is a fanboy (and thus should be dismissed). You'll notice that after making that list of arguments in favor of Tesla, the author then proceeded to address none of them. After all, why should he, when anyone who makes those arguments is obviously a "fanboy"? And no, I'm not offended. Why would I be? I'm not a Tesla "fanboy". What I am is annoyed. This kind of behavior is a pet peeve of mine (as are most attempts to dismiss an argument by evading it instead of addressing the points), and I bring it up because most people don't, or even leap to defend this behavior by claiming "but there are fanboys!", even though that argument relies on a logical fallacy (the existence of fanboys that defend the company does not mean that anyone who defends the company is a fanboy). > Every talk he made about the Model 3 Again, give me a citation. I've searched and found the exact opposite of what you're saying, and linked it. You need to give me an authoritative link, just claiming this repeatedly is meaningless. > Did you read the article, they expect profitability before the Model 3 arrives, then it would dip until the Model 3 production kicks into full gear, this is almost utter contrast to your original claims of the Model 3 being highly profitable. Yes I did read the article. And first off, I never claimed it would be "highly profitable", please don't put words in my mouth. And secondly, you apparently either don't understand the article or don't understand my argument. Tesla's going to have a dip because of capital expenditures. These aren't per-unit costs. I said Tesla cannot sell cars at a per-unit loss (which is what I've seen a lot of people claiming over the past year), because they don't have any other way to make it up. But GM can sell the Bolt at a per-unit cost (whether they actually are is irrelevant, I'm not sure we'll know that unless GM tells us) because selling the Bolt allows them to sell more profitable gas-guzzling cars and still meet fuel-economy standards, which is something the article itself even admitted. > if you think they'll beat the profitability of the large car companies you are really off the beat Literally nobody has made this argument. I do not appreciate being made into a straw man.

by eridius 10y ago

dogma1138 10y ago

>You're being awfully defensive about this. I'm not being defensive at all =) And you were offended, and defensive, you somehow brought an entire argument about why "doing X isn't fanboyism" when no one talked about it, the only thing anyone said is that saying that there are "Tesla Fanboys" doesn't intrinsically mean that some one is biased against Tesla. Ironically this entire argument is a litmus test for their existence. >Citation please? I'm not seeing this anywhere. Every talk he made about the Model 3, including his plans, eventually the Model 3 may become profitable, but if you think they'll beat the profitability of the large car companies you are really off the beat. >In fact, an article from just 1 week ago talks about how Tesla might achieve GAAP profitability in Q3 - https://electrek.co/2016/09/07/tesla-tsla-could-achieve-gaap.. https://electrek.co/2016/09/07/tesla-tsla-could-achieve-gaap.... Did you read the article, they expect profitability before the Model 3 arrives, then it would dip until the Model 3 production kicks into full gear, this is almost utter contrast to your original claims of the Model 3 being highly profitable. The Model 3 won't lose money, but they expect the profits to come from the add-ons, and the larger profit margins to come from the more expensive Model S and X's this is in Musk's bloody "Plan". >One of Elon Musk's goals was to push other car manufacturers into making electric vehicles. The fact that a widely-recognized brand like GM is coming out with the Bolt is exactly what Elon Musk wanted to happen. Which is exactly what I said. The Future of Electric cars isn't Tesla, it might pave the road there, or help push some companies along, but it would be out paced by the giants once the EV scene kicks into full gear, that is OK. I would still rather own a Tesla because I find it the cooler however living in London considering one costs about as my yearly pre-tax wage (The P90D) and the fact I won't be able to park it anywhere kinda make it impossible. If Tesla is really lucky it would have the same impact that Apple had on mobile phones, maybe it would come to a point where everyone thinks about Tesla when they think about a "cool car", but still the majority of the world would be driving something else, EV but something else.

eridius 10y ago
No matter how many times you claim I'm offended, that doesn't actually mean I was offended. Why do you keep making that claim? > the only thing anyone said is that saying that there are "Tesla Fanboys" doesn't intrinsically mean that some one is biased against Tesla. Implying that anyone who brings up those legitimate points is a tesla "fanboy" does in fact imply that you're biased against Tesla. That was my original point. The author didn't say "There exist Tesla 'fanboys'", instead the author very strongly implied that anyone trying to defend Tesla is a fanboy (and thus should be dismissed). You'll notice that after making that list of arguments in favor of Tesla, the author then proceeded to address none of them. After all, why should he, when anyone who makes those arguments is obviously a "fanboy"? And no, I'm not offended. Why would I be? I'm not a Tesla "fanboy". What I am is annoyed. This kind of behavior is a pet peeve of mine (as are most attempts to dismiss an argument by evading it instead of addressing the points), and I bring it up because most people don't, or even leap to defend this behavior by claiming "but there are fanboys!", even though that argument relies on a logical fallacy (the existence of fanboys that defend the company does not mean that anyone who defends the company is a fanboy). > Every talk he made about the Model 3 Again, give me a citation. I've searched and found the exact opposite of what you're saying, and linked it. You need to give me an authoritative link, just claiming this repeatedly is meaningless. > Did you read the article, they expect profitability before the Model 3 arrives, then it would dip until the Model 3 production kicks into full gear, this is almost utter contrast to your original claims of the Model 3 being highly profitable. Yes I did read the article. And first off, I never claimed it would be "highly profitable", please don't put words in my mouth. And secondly, you apparently either don't understand the article or don't understand my argument. Tesla's going to have a dip because of capital expenditures. These aren't per-unit costs. I said Tesla cannot sell cars at a per-unit loss (which is what I've seen a lot of people claiming over the past year), because they don't have any other way to make it up. But GM can sell the Bolt at a per-unit cost (whether they actually are is irrelevant, I'm not sure we'll know that unless GM tells us) because selling the Bolt allows them to sell more profitable gas-guzzling cars and still meet fuel-economy standards, which is something the article itself even admitted. > if you think they'll beat the profitability of the large car companies you are really off the beat Literally nobody has made this argument. I do not appreciate being made into a straw man.