11 ms·

If they can properly pivot into the electric car market, a lot. Ford has all the infrastructure that Tesla is attempting to build now (aside from the batteries

If they can properly pivot into the electric car market, a lot. Ford has all the infrastructure that Tesla is attempting to build now (aside from the batteries, but that is something that Ford could easily partner with another manufacture to get). They know how to mass produce cars (granted right now, ICE cars). That's not an easy feat. They have a large manufacturing and maintenance base that, frankly, Tesla can't replicate. The bet is that Tesla will be the first successful company to market, or that they will hold some patents which will prove valuable in the future. The market is not betting that they'll beat Ford or GM.

adamnemecek 10y ago
What infrastructure do you have in mind? Factories?
- John23832 10y ago
  Factories, dealerships, a maintenance network, etc.
  - adamnemecek 10y ago
    I can't imagine that all of those will remain usable and competitive without major investments. Note that doesn't need dealerships.
    - John23832 10y ago
      Of course Ford would make investments to stay viable... that's how business works.
stellar678 10y ago
<< Ford sells that many F-Series trucks in the U.S. about every three weeks. >> This is why Ford is unlikely to succeed at pivoting into the electric car market. The power and pull inside their company doesn't want them to. It will take superhuman leadership to overcome that force.
- John23832 10y ago
  That makes no sense. Companies seek to be viable in the future. If Ford or GM feel that an electric car is on the horizon and that car will eat their (ICE) lunch, they will pivot. By your logic Tesla would have been locked out of the VC/investment market due to Big Oil. Money flows like water.
  - mikeash 10y ago
    Individuals within a company seek to be viable in the future, which often leads them to reject innovation that might endanger their role. History is littered with companies that refused to pivot into new technology until far later than they should have, because they were too heavily invested in the old way. American car companies suffered from this in the 70s, where they got thrashed by competition from small imports for quite a while before they could be convinced to stop concentrating on land yachts.
    - John23832 10y ago
      Bureaucracy goes out the window when you have an activist investor asking you why you're ignoring clear market trends.
      - mikeash 10y ago
        By the time the trends become that clear, you're often years behind.
        John23832 10y ago
        We are behind, but a competent investor isn't.
        mikeash 10y ago
        Then how did all these companies end up in this position in the past?
mikeash 10y ago
I have heard many times that the traditional car companies are heavily outsourced aside from the drivetrain. If I haven't been misinformed there (quite possible either way!) and this is true, then outsourcing that would leave Ford not adding much value themselves. Even if it would work out for them, Tesla is pushing really hard to be a major battery supplier, so they could end up benefitting either way.
- maxerickson 10y ago
  The Bolt uses a drivetrain built by LG.
  - mikeash 10y ago
    Right, so what is GM bringing to the table there? If the Bolt were to somehow become a best seller, how much benefit would GM see?
    - mudetroit 10y ago
      Lots of design knowledge around vehicles, both from an aesthetic standpoint and in a number of other subsystems. But the bigger point is actually that GM, Ford, and the other major car manufacturers are really giant project management and logistic organizations. They are far from perfect corporations, but don't undersell what they do.
- Arizhel 10y ago
  >I have heard many times that the traditional car companies are heavily outsourced aside from the drivetrain. It's true, but I don't think it matters. Traditional automakers rely on suppliers for all kinds of parts on cars: headlights, wipers, tires, glass, airbags, and many electronic modules (auto-dimming mirrors, blind-spot radars, etc.). However they do tend to always keep the body/chassis and the drivetrain in-house (sometimes they'll outsource the transmission, like to ZF). I don't see how this would affect them moving to EVs. Going from ICE to EV means two giant changes: the chassis (to make room for an entirely different layout, esp. because of the batteries), and the drivetrain. Well, the automaker controls both of those. All those other things, like glass, headlights, electronic safety add-ons, etc., are going to be the same either way. You don't need a different blind-spot monitoring system or windshield wipers or tires just because the drivetrain is electric.
palebluedot 10y ago
Will that actually result in growth for Ford, however? Electric vehicle sales in Ford may displace sales of non-electric vehicles; in other words, the net effect might not be more than zero. This would not really represent growth for Ford, in that case. You are right about some of their resources, however I think it is a mistake to glibly discount the importance of the battery supply and manufacturing (and by extension, the charging infrastructure) -- that is arguably the hardest and most important part of an electric vehicle, and with Tesla's Gigafactories, that could represent an important advantage of Tesla.
- John23832 10y ago
  So if Ford/GM holds on to their huge marketshare with a successful switch to electric, that's a mark against them? Hypothetically, it would cost Ford/GM much less to put a "SuperCharger" at every existing dealership than it would for Tesla's entire basic roll out. Tesla has been successful at marketing thus far, not manufacturing.
  - palebluedot 10y ago
    No, that isn't what I said -- you are moving the goal post now from "a lot" of growth, to "holding on to their marketshare". As matter of fact, that was my whole point: Rather than growing "a lot" they may end up just holding on to their marketshare. Whether that is a mark against them or not is for you to decide, when researching investments.
    - John23832 10y ago
      > No, that isn't what I said -- you are moving the goal post now from "a lot" of growth, to "holding on to their marketshare". Ok true, but Ford is way past "post-ipo". Growth is not the metric to measure them by (they will grow, but no where near as much as Tesla). That's pretty much agreed upon by market analysts.
- bigtunacan 10y ago
  I completely agree with you that this doesn't represent real growth for Ford. Auto sales have essentially reached peak already; people only need so many cars. Honestly, this is what I find so ridiculous about Tesla's valuation. A valuation that puts them as worth more than Ford then needs Tesla to be selling more vehicles than Ford to justify that valuation. All of the existing manufacturers have better infrastructure than Tesla and are getting into the hybrid, electric, and autonomous car marketspace. Even if Tesla survives long enough to make a profit I see no way this company ever justifies it's current valuation. Long term I expect huge price drops in Tesla stock.
cmarschner 10y ago
Ford (and all the other car companies) has also huge liabilities - a huge supply chain and R&D costs around combustion engines, and costly dealerships that revolve around servicing a hugely complicated contraption made up of hundreds of mechanical parts. Much of this will be of zero value in the near future.
- drzaiusapelord 10y ago
  >a huge supply chain and R&D costs around combustion engines You mean largely trouble-free engines that run on ultra-cheap gas? ICE has environmental issues, of course, but the idea that electric is universally superior is questionable. There's no range anxiety with gas and any backyard mechanic can fix most issues. Your locked down $100,000 IoT car is a completely different beast. >Much of this will be of zero value in the near future. Says who? If anything everyone is bearish on electric since gas prices have fallen and how range and recharge times will always be less convenient. Electric might replace gas but it won't be in the near future and nothing stops Ford from launching an electric line of its own. Electric cars are a solved problem if you can convince people to pay the premium and deal with the range anxiety and long recharge times. Ford has already announced an electric Mustang and F-150 on top of the $30,000, pre-rebate, 2017 Focus you can buy today. Tesla has no monopoly on electric tech. The barrier to entry is non-existant for other car companies. edit: saying that the government will ban ICE isn't a market statement its a regulatory hope and for most nations a far off proposal. The idea that Tesla can only succeed with the government literally making their competitors illegal isn't actually a pro-Tesla argument. You guys are much less convincing than you think you are.
  - cmarschner 10y ago
    >Says who It is foreseeable that ICEs will become banned, at least in Europe. Right now there is still too much lobbying by the traditional car makers, but long term there is no other choice for reaching climate goals. Edit: See e.g. http://bigthink.com/scotty-hendricks/the-end-of-the-internal-combustion-engine http://bigthink.com/scotty-hendricks/the-end-of-the-internal... https://www.autoevolution.com/news/germany-asks-eu-to-think-about-banning-internal-combustion-engines-by-2030-111988.html https://www.autoevolution.com/news/germany-asks-eu-to-think-...
Shivetya 10y ago
GM has for the most part done a good job so I am really surprised how much Ford ceded this segment to them. GM announces EV sales at end of the week and I am really curious how well the Bolt is doing at its still in limited number of states but will be in all by fall (September I think). I really don't think there is any difficulty in making EVs now, its finding enough to support the market. While 200 is great for a base range I find it the absolute minimum for any pure EV and to be honest I won't go pure EV till I see 400+ (Drive a Volt now). Not all want/need two cars and even many families are constrained based on size/packaging of the car which led to my surprise when the 3 was a sedan which is not a growing market.
briandear 10y ago
Are we assuming that electric cars are the only future or simply one part of the future? As an example, what work is Tesla doing with hydrogen? Ford is doing quite a lot: https://corporate.ford.com/microsites/sustainability-report-2014-15/environment-products-plan-migration-fcv.html https://corporate.ford.com/microsites/sustainability-report-... We're also making the assumption that charge-battery-drive-the-car is the future Battery power is an evolution of car tech but it isn't a revolution. Tesla is building wired telephones when the majority of the market is using wired telegraphs. A substantial improvement to be sure, but to suggest a company such as Ford is not able to grow is very short sighted-- they aren't standing still either. Tesla could increase production and sales by an order of magnitude and still have a minuscule market share. Of course Tesla will grow, but they don't have a monopoly. The future value of Tesla is certainly greater than today's value, but to discount everyone else because we are analyzing this through a specific lens of perception is a folly.
booleanbetrayal 10y ago
Strictly on the car front (which largely ignores Tesla's real growth potential) ... Ford also maintains an extensive dealer network which can disincentivize some painful adjustments that otherwise might need to be made to be more aligned with future sales, etc. People talk about direct sales for Tesla usually in a negative connotation due to institutionalized friction (re: lawsuits / political favoritism), but I think it's a strong asset in a savvy marketplace, and can illustrate how established infrastructure isn't always for the best. One less mule for the cart to pull, IMO. I also think there are some signs that existing manufacturing practices can be / need to be rewritten around an all elective drivetrain. For instance, Tesla plans to operate its lines at full-speed using some new "invasive" robotic procedures that the full-glass roof of the model 3 will afford. This has dramatic labor and capital consequences for an automaker with a diversified fleet. Might be costly to rebuild the machine that makes machines. https://electrek.co/2016/09/15/elon-musk-confident-that-tesla-can-attain-staggering-20-fold-increase-in-production-speed-in-fremont/ https://electrek.co/2016/09/15/elon-musk-confident-that-tesl...
- John23832 10y ago
  Dealership networks are fiefdoms in a benevolent kingdom. While they get a say, ultimately you go with the will of the manufacturer or you find another car to sell.
skalkin 10y ago
Let me disagree with some of the points: > Ford has all the infrastructure that Tesla is attempting to build now * no battery production facilities * no charging infrastructure * no vertical integration (unlike Tesla, Ford has to sell through the dealershits - I see it as a big disadvantage) > They know how to mass produce cars Yes - but can they produce the car the public will want in three years from now, when affordable all-electric, high-performance, autonomous Model 3s will redefine what modern car means? > They have a large manufacturing and maintenance base that, frankly, Tesla can't replicate I admit that they have some hurdles ahead, but what would stop Tesla from being more efficient at manufacturing than Ford? It is one of their objectives - and their track record is pretty good, to say the least.
- aanm1988 10y ago
  > unlike Tesla, Ford has to sell through the dealershits - I see it as a big disadvantage My, what a strong argument.
  - skalkin 10y ago
    Sorry for not explaining the reasons, I thought they were obvious. First, dealers cut into margins; second, they are not interested in selling vehicles that require very little service; third, they won't be able to provide great customer experience - no one likes negotiating with dealers.
blhack 10y ago
The piece of the puzzle that Ford doesn't currently have is charging stations. Tesla building its supercharger network was a brilliant move because it means that Teslas are comparable to most petrol-fuel vehicles (as far as where you can go), and everybody else isn't. If I buy a Ford, can I drive it to see my family in Northern Minnesota[1]? Because I know that I can take a tesla. That's a really big deal. I know there are 3rd parties in the US trying to compete with tesla's superchargers (a very close friend of mine was an engineer at probably the largest one until they went bankrupt), but as far as I can tell they're nowhere close to Tesla. [1]Originally I said North Dakota, but it looks like even Tesla doesn't have chargers there yet. BOO! Well luckily I have plenty of family in Northern Minnesota too!
- John23832 10y ago
  And Tesla doesn't have a fully viable charging network either? What's the point? Outside SV and major cities, it's a pain in the ass to own a tesla. As for the charging stations, that's an investment that ford would have to make to stay viable, which they would do
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- s0rce 10y ago
  Big gap in Northwest Nevada/Southeast Oregon too, although quite remote, a fun place to drive. I'll stick with my ICE for now.
  - msisk6 10y ago
    There's a big gap in those parts for gasoline, too. Once a few years back I camped out near Fields Station waiting for the store to open 'cause I didn't have enough gas in my Jeep to make it to Burns.
    - s0rce 10y ago
      Good point, I bring an extra gas can in the bed of the truck but I ended up getting a few gallons in Frenchglen from the store, probably could have made it with the extra I had but didn't want to chance it. It's a lot cheaper and easier to bring extra gas then a spare battery!
stcredzero 10y ago
Ford has all the infrastructure that Tesla is attempting to build now (aside from the batteries, but that is something that Ford could easily partner with another manufacture to get). If that is done so "easily," why is Tesla building a Gigafactory? The bet is that Tesla will be the first successful company to market, or that they will hold some patents which will prove valuable in the future. Patents? Have you been following?
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
jread 10y ago
Aside from batteries, supercharger network, and any true desire to actually build nice electric cars. I drove an electric Ford Focus for 2 years, and it was an absolute terrible afterthought of an electric car. It was downright dangerous on wet surfaces with front wheel drive and batteries in the rear, not to mention the horrendous user experience that is Ford Sync. I drive a Tesla now and couldn't be happier.
- Arizhel 10y ago
  >not to mention the horrendous user experience that is Ford Sync. Well that's what you get for buying a car that has Microsoft software running in the infotainment system. The MS-designed Sync system had all kinds of terrible reviews at the time, and it was so bad that it brought Ford way, way down in the "initial quality" surveys, from #1 down to near the bottom IIRC. Do you not do any research before spending a giant amount of money on a car? I spent several months researching my last purchase, a Mazda (I didn't actually spend several months continuously researching it, but I was doing research and test-drives for several months before committing). To be fair to Ford, though, my understanding is that the latest generation dumped Microsoft and switched to QNX, and should be much improved. While they were using MS, there was no way in hell I'd buy one of their cars. After they switched, I did look into a Focus, but was deterred by all the reports of problems with their DSG transmission.
  - jread 10y ago
    It was a 2 year lease, $239/mo - and California gave a $2500 rebate also, so cost and risk were low. I wanted to try electric and couldn't afford a Tesla at the time.
- Zhenya 10y ago
  Aside from the safety statements, you're comparing a ~$35K car to a $90k+ luxury car? What about a Bolt?
  - jread 10y ago
    My point is I don't think Ford is even remotely taking electric vehicles seriously. With a little better engineering the Focus electric could have been a decent $35k electric car.
sixQuarks 10y ago
Bottomline: Ford is run by professional managers. Tesla is run by a visionary.
thinkling 10y ago
I highly recommend Wired's article about GM's long-term bet in developing the Bolt. It talks about many ways that developing an electric car is not just a matter of adding batteries to your existing expertise in car manufacturing. e.g.: > Nearly everything changes when you opt for a fundamentally different power train, so GM’s greatest advantage—more than a century of experience building cars—was all but moot. Car structure was different, since they were building around a battery, not an engine. The brakes, steering, and air conditioner were powered differently. New systems, from electromagnetics for the motors to onboard and off-board charging, each came with its own learning curve. The engineers didn’t have established tests to follow. Just turning on the car required finding the perfect sequence of electrical signals from more than a dozen modules. “Oh my God, it took us forever to get the first Volt to start,” Fletcher says. https://www.wired.com/2016/01/gm-electric-car-chevy-bolt-mary-barra/ https://www.wired.com/2016/01/gm-electric-car-chevy-bolt-mar...
- bostonpete 10y ago
  Is there an echo in here?
  - thinkling 10y ago
    Thanks, fixed.
- madengr 10y ago
  Though there is more to a card than just the power train. Maybe that explains some of the quality issues Tesla is having with non power train parts such as doors, leaky roofs, etc.
  - John23832 10y ago
    That's an interesting thing to notice. Most of their issue do seem to be more car related than drive terrain. Guess that goes to my point though, being a car manufacturer is much more than making the car.
- batter 10y ago
manarth 10y ago
>> How much is Ford expected to grow? > If they can properly pivot into the electric car market, a lot. And how much of that growth into the electric car market would cannibalize their ICE sales?
kirillzubovsky 10y ago
Tesla has already figured out how to mass produce cars. The move between 200k cars and 200,000,000 cars is hard, but not rocket-science hard, and they can always hire the right people to help. But can Ford figure out how to make cars that drive themselves at 80mph on highway? Having driven in Ford cars, I don't believe they can. They can barely figure out how to make a radio control panel that doesn't suck.

adamnemecek 10y ago

What infrastructure do you have in mind? Factories?

John23832 10y ago
Factories, dealerships, a maintenance network, etc.
- adamnemecek 10y ago
  I can't imagine that all of those will remain usable and competitive without major investments. Note that doesn't need dealerships.
  - John23832 10y ago
    Of course Ford would make investments to stay viable... that's how business works.

stellar678 10y ago

<< Ford sells that many F-Series trucks in the U.S. about every three weeks. >> This is why Ford is unlikely to succeed at pivoting into the electric car market. The power and pull inside their company doesn't want them to. It will take superhuman leadership to overcome that force.

John23832 10y ago
That makes no sense. Companies seek to be viable in the future. If Ford or GM feel that an electric car is on the horizon and that car will eat their (ICE) lunch, they will pivot. By your logic Tesla would have been locked out of the VC/investment market due to Big Oil. Money flows like water.
- mikeash 10y ago
  Individuals within a company seek to be viable in the future, which often leads them to reject innovation that might endanger their role. History is littered with companies that refused to pivot into new technology until far later than they should have, because they were too heavily invested in the old way. American car companies suffered from this in the 70s, where they got thrashed by competition from small imports for quite a while before they could be convinced to stop concentrating on land yachts.
  - John23832 10y ago
    Bureaucracy goes out the window when you have an activist investor asking you why you're ignoring clear market trends.
    - mikeash 10y ago
      By the time the trends become that clear, you're often years behind.
      - John23832 10y ago
        We are behind, but a competent investor isn't.
        mikeash 10y ago
        Then how did all these companies end up in this position in the past?

mikeash 10y ago

I have heard many times that the traditional car companies are heavily outsourced aside from the drivetrain. If I haven't been misinformed there (quite possible either way!) and this is true, then outsourcing that would leave Ford not adding much value themselves. Even if it would work out for them, Tesla is pushing really hard to be a major battery supplier, so they could end up benefitting either way.

maxerickson 10y ago
The Bolt uses a drivetrain built by LG.
- mikeash 10y ago
  Right, so what is GM bringing to the table there? If the Bolt were to somehow become a best seller, how much benefit would GM see?
  - mudetroit 10y ago
    Lots of design knowledge around vehicles, both from an aesthetic standpoint and in a number of other subsystems. But the bigger point is actually that GM, Ford, and the other major car manufacturers are really giant project management and logistic organizations. They are far from perfect corporations, but don't undersell what they do.
Arizhel 10y ago
>I have heard many times that the traditional car companies are heavily outsourced aside from the drivetrain. It's true, but I don't think it matters. Traditional automakers rely on suppliers for all kinds of parts on cars: headlights, wipers, tires, glass, airbags, and many electronic modules (auto-dimming mirrors, blind-spot radars, etc.). However they do tend to always keep the body/chassis and the drivetrain in-house (sometimes they'll outsource the transmission, like to ZF). I don't see how this would affect them moving to EVs. Going from ICE to EV means two giant changes: the chassis (to make room for an entirely different layout, esp. because of the batteries), and the drivetrain. Well, the automaker controls both of those. All those other things, like glass, headlights, electronic safety add-ons, etc., are going to be the same either way. You don't need a different blind-spot monitoring system or windshield wipers or tires just because the drivetrain is electric.

palebluedot 10y ago

Will that actually result in growth for Ford, however? Electric vehicle sales in Ford may displace sales of non-electric vehicles; in other words, the net effect might not be more than zero. This would not really represent growth for Ford, in that case. You are right about some of their resources, however I think it is a mistake to glibly discount the importance of the battery supply and manufacturing (and by extension, the charging infrastructure) -- that is arguably the hardest and most important part of an electric vehicle, and with Tesla's Gigafactories, that could represent an important advantage of Tesla.

John23832 10y ago
So if Ford/GM holds on to their huge marketshare with a successful switch to electric, that's a mark against them? Hypothetically, it would cost Ford/GM much less to put a "SuperCharger" at every existing dealership than it would for Tesla's entire basic roll out. Tesla has been successful at marketing thus far, not manufacturing.
- palebluedot 10y ago
  No, that isn't what I said -- you are moving the goal post now from "a lot" of growth, to "holding on to their marketshare". As matter of fact, that was my whole point: Rather than growing "a lot" they may end up just holding on to their marketshare. Whether that is a mark against them or not is for you to decide, when researching investments.
  - John23832 10y ago
    > No, that isn't what I said -- you are moving the goal post now from "a lot" of growth, to "holding on to their marketshare". Ok true, but Ford is way past "post-ipo". Growth is not the metric to measure them by (they will grow, but no where near as much as Tesla). That's pretty much agreed upon by market analysts.
bigtunacan 10y ago
I completely agree with you that this doesn't represent real growth for Ford. Auto sales have essentially reached peak already; people only need so many cars. Honestly, this is what I find so ridiculous about Tesla's valuation. A valuation that puts them as worth more than Ford then needs Tesla to be selling more vehicles than Ford to justify that valuation. All of the existing manufacturers have better infrastructure than Tesla and are getting into the hybrid, electric, and autonomous car marketspace. Even if Tesla survives long enough to make a profit I see no way this company ever justifies it's current valuation. Long term I expect huge price drops in Tesla stock.

cmarschner 10y ago

Ford (and all the other car companies) has also huge liabilities - a huge supply chain and R&D costs around combustion engines, and costly dealerships that revolve around servicing a hugely complicated contraption made up of hundreds of mechanical parts. Much of this will be of zero value in the near future.

drzaiusapelord 10y ago
>a huge supply chain and R&D costs around combustion engines You mean largely trouble-free engines that run on ultra-cheap gas? ICE has environmental issues, of course, but the idea that electric is universally superior is questionable. There's no range anxiety with gas and any backyard mechanic can fix most issues. Your locked down $100,000 IoT car is a completely different beast. >Much of this will be of zero value in the near future. Says who? If anything everyone is bearish on electric since gas prices have fallen and how range and recharge times will always be less convenient. Electric might replace gas but it won't be in the near future and nothing stops Ford from launching an electric line of its own. Electric cars are a solved problem if you can convince people to pay the premium and deal with the range anxiety and long recharge times. Ford has already announced an electric Mustang and F-150 on top of the $30,000, pre-rebate, 2017 Focus you can buy today. Tesla has no monopoly on electric tech. The barrier to entry is non-existant for other car companies. edit: saying that the government will ban ICE isn't a market statement its a regulatory hope and for most nations a far off proposal. The idea that Tesla can only succeed with the government literally making their competitors illegal isn't actually a pro-Tesla argument. You guys are much less convincing than you think you are.
- cmarschner 10y ago
  >Says who It is foreseeable that ICEs will become banned, at least in Europe. Right now there is still too much lobbying by the traditional car makers, but long term there is no other choice for reaching climate goals. Edit: See e.g. http://bigthink.com/scotty-hendricks/the-end-of-the-internal-combustion-engine http://bigthink.com/scotty-hendricks/the-end-of-the-internal... https://www.autoevolution.com/news/germany-asks-eu-to-think-about-banning-internal-combustion-engines-by-2030-111988.html https://www.autoevolution.com/news/germany-asks-eu-to-think-...

Shivetya 10y ago

GM has for the most part done a good job so I am really surprised how much Ford ceded this segment to them. GM announces EV sales at end of the week and I am really curious how well the Bolt is doing at its still in limited number of states but will be in all by fall (September I think). I really don't think there is any difficulty in making EVs now, its finding enough to support the market. While 200 is great for a base range I find it the absolute minimum for any pure EV and to be honest I won't go pure EV till I see 400+ (Drive a Volt now). Not all want/need two cars and even many families are constrained based on size/packaging of the car which led to my surprise when the 3 was a sedan which is not a growing market.

briandear 10y ago

Are we assuming that electric cars are the only future or simply one part of the future? As an example, what work is Tesla doing with hydrogen? Ford is doing quite a lot: https://corporate.ford.com/microsites/sustainability-report-2014-15/environment-products-plan-migration-fcv.html https://corporate.ford.com/microsites/sustainability-report-... We're also making the assumption that charge-battery-drive-the-car is the future Battery power is an evolution of car tech but it isn't a revolution. Tesla is building wired telephones when the majority of the market is using wired telegraphs. A substantial improvement to be sure, but to suggest a company such as Ford is not able to grow is very short sighted-- they aren't standing still either. Tesla could increase production and sales by an order of magnitude and still have a minuscule market share. Of course Tesla will grow, but they don't have a monopoly. The future value of Tesla is certainly greater than today's value, but to discount everyone else because we are analyzing this through a specific lens of perception is a folly.

booleanbetrayal 10y ago

Strictly on the car front (which largely ignores Tesla's real growth potential) ... Ford also maintains an extensive dealer network which can disincentivize some painful adjustments that otherwise might need to be made to be more aligned with future sales, etc. People talk about direct sales for Tesla usually in a negative connotation due to institutionalized friction (re: lawsuits / political favoritism), but I think it's a strong asset in a savvy marketplace, and can illustrate how established infrastructure isn't always for the best. One less mule for the cart to pull, IMO. I also think there are some signs that existing manufacturing practices can be / need to be rewritten around an all elective drivetrain. For instance, Tesla plans to operate its lines at full-speed using some new "invasive" robotic procedures that the full-glass roof of the model 3 will afford. This has dramatic labor and capital consequences for an automaker with a diversified fleet. Might be costly to rebuild the machine that makes machines. https://electrek.co/2016/09/15/elon-musk-confident-that-tesla-can-attain-staggering-20-fold-increase-in-production-speed-in-fremont/ https://electrek.co/2016/09/15/elon-musk-confident-that-tesl...

John23832 10y ago
Dealership networks are fiefdoms in a benevolent kingdom. While they get a say, ultimately you go with the will of the manufacturer or you find another car to sell.

skalkin 10y ago

Let me disagree with some of the points: > Ford has all the infrastructure that Tesla is attempting to build now * no battery production facilities * no charging infrastructure * no vertical integration (unlike Tesla, Ford has to sell through the dealershits - I see it as a big disadvantage) > They know how to mass produce cars Yes - but can they produce the car the public will want in three years from now, when affordable all-electric, high-performance, autonomous Model 3s will redefine what modern car means? > They have a large manufacturing and maintenance base that, frankly, Tesla can't replicate I admit that they have some hurdles ahead, but what would stop Tesla from being more efficient at manufacturing than Ford? It is one of their objectives - and their track record is pretty good, to say the least.

aanm1988 10y ago
> unlike Tesla, Ford has to sell through the dealershits - I see it as a big disadvantage My, what a strong argument.
- skalkin 10y ago
  Sorry for not explaining the reasons, I thought they were obvious. First, dealers cut into margins; second, they are not interested in selling vehicles that require very little service; third, they won't be able to provide great customer experience - no one likes negotiating with dealers.

blhack 10y ago

The piece of the puzzle that Ford doesn't currently have is charging stations. Tesla building its supercharger network was a brilliant move because it means that Teslas are comparable to most petrol-fuel vehicles (as far as where you can go), and everybody else isn't. If I buy a Ford, can I drive it to see my family in Northern Minnesota[1]? Because I know that I can take a tesla. That's a really big deal. I know there are 3rd parties in the US trying to compete with tesla's superchargers (a very close friend of mine was an engineer at probably the largest one until they went bankrupt), but as far as I can tell they're nowhere close to Tesla. [1]Originally I said North Dakota, but it looks like even Tesla doesn't have chargers there yet. BOO! Well luckily I have plenty of family in Northern Minnesota too!

John23832 10y ago
And Tesla doesn't have a fully viable charging network either? What's the point? Outside SV and major cities, it's a pain in the ass to own a tesla. As for the charging stations, that's an investment that ford would have to make to stay viable, which they would do
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
s0rce 10y ago
Big gap in Northwest Nevada/Southeast Oregon too, although quite remote, a fun place to drive. I'll stick with my ICE for now.
- msisk6 10y ago
  There's a big gap in those parts for gasoline, too. Once a few years back I camped out near Fields Station waiting for the store to open 'cause I didn't have enough gas in my Jeep to make it to Burns.
  - s0rce 10y ago
    Good point, I bring an extra gas can in the bed of the truck but I ended up getting a few gallons in Frenchglen from the store, probably could have made it with the extra I had but didn't want to chance it. It's a lot cheaper and easier to bring extra gas then a spare battery!

stcredzero 10y ago

Ford has all the infrastructure that Tesla is attempting to build now (aside from the batteries, but that is something that Ford could easily partner with another manufacture to get). If that is done so "easily," why is Tesla building a Gigafactory? The bet is that Tesla will be the first successful company to market, or that they will hold some patents which will prove valuable in the future. Patents? Have you been following?

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

jread 10y ago

Aside from batteries, supercharger network, and any true desire to actually build nice electric cars. I drove an electric Ford Focus for 2 years, and it was an absolute terrible afterthought of an electric car. It was downright dangerous on wet surfaces with front wheel drive and batteries in the rear, not to mention the horrendous user experience that is Ford Sync. I drive a Tesla now and couldn't be happier.

Arizhel 10y ago
>not to mention the horrendous user experience that is Ford Sync. Well that's what you get for buying a car that has Microsoft software running in the infotainment system. The MS-designed Sync system had all kinds of terrible reviews at the time, and it was so bad that it brought Ford way, way down in the "initial quality" surveys, from #1 down to near the bottom IIRC. Do you not do any research before spending a giant amount of money on a car? I spent several months researching my last purchase, a Mazda (I didn't actually spend several months continuously researching it, but I was doing research and test-drives for several months before committing). To be fair to Ford, though, my understanding is that the latest generation dumped Microsoft and switched to QNX, and should be much improved. While they were using MS, there was no way in hell I'd buy one of their cars. After they switched, I did look into a Focus, but was deterred by all the reports of problems with their DSG transmission.
- jread 10y ago
  It was a 2 year lease, $239/mo - and California gave a $2500 rebate also, so cost and risk were low. I wanted to try electric and couldn't afford a Tesla at the time.
Zhenya 10y ago
Aside from the safety statements, you're comparing a ~$35K car to a $90k+ luxury car? What about a Bolt?
- jread 10y ago
  My point is I don't think Ford is even remotely taking electric vehicles seriously. With a little better engineering the Focus electric could have been a decent $35k electric car.

sixQuarks 10y ago

Bottomline: Ford is run by professional managers. Tesla is run by a visionary.

thinkling 10y ago

I highly recommend Wired's article about GM's long-term bet in developing the Bolt. It talks about many ways that developing an electric car is not just a matter of adding batteries to your existing expertise in car manufacturing. e.g.: > Nearly everything changes when you opt for a fundamentally different power train, so GM’s greatest advantage—more than a century of experience building cars—was all but moot. Car structure was different, since they were building around a battery, not an engine. The brakes, steering, and air conditioner were powered differently. New systems, from electromagnetics for the motors to onboard and off-board charging, each came with its own learning curve. The engineers didn’t have established tests to follow. Just turning on the car required finding the perfect sequence of electrical signals from more than a dozen modules. “Oh my God, it took us forever to get the first Volt to start,” Fletcher says. https://www.wired.com/2016/01/gm-electric-car-chevy-bolt-mary-barra/ https://www.wired.com/2016/01/gm-electric-car-chevy-bolt-mar...

bostonpete 10y ago
Is there an echo in here?
- thinkling 10y ago
  Thanks, fixed.
madengr 10y ago
Though there is more to a card than just the power train. Maybe that explains some of the quality issues Tesla is having with non power train parts such as doors, leaky roofs, etc.
- John23832 10y ago
  That's an interesting thing to notice. Most of their issue do seem to be more car related than drive terrain. Guess that goes to my point though, being a car manufacturer is much more than making the car.
batter 10y ago

manarth 10y ago

>> How much is Ford expected to grow? > If they can properly pivot into the electric car market, a lot. And how much of that growth into the electric car market would cannibalize their ICE sales?

kirillzubovsky 10y ago

Tesla has already figured out how to mass produce cars. The move between 200k cars and 200,000,000 cars is hard, but not rocket-science hard, and they can always hire the right people to help. But can Ford figure out how to make cars that drive themselves at 80mph on highway? Having driven in Ford cars, I don't believe they can. They can barely figure out how to make a radio control panel that doesn't suck.