7 ms·

Elon is a fundamentals kind of guy and that drives his strategy. The fundamentals with respect to electric cars from the time he started were: a)electric is a

Elon is a fundamentals kind of guy and that drives his strategy. The fundamentals with respect to electric cars from the time he started were: a)electric is a much better technology than ICE for automobiles. Electric is way simpler, lower center of gravity means better handling, smaller and lighter motors mean more interior space and better performance. Battery tech is a pain point but no CO2 is essential for everyone. b)Large automakers know this but simpler for them translates into less maintenance which means lower profits. Automakers therefore will pay lip service to electrics, drag their feet and kill off any real electric competition if they can. The world's environment is not a shareholder in the large automakers. So his "master plan", (the Truth but not the whole truth) he published in 2006. What he left out was that he knew as he moved to a high volume model that's when the large automakers would try to cut Tesla off at the knees and then go back to resting on their laurels. If his high volume model was mediocre and expensive to build Tesla would be dead in the water. He needed an excellent car but even more than that he needed Tesla's cost to be much lower than the majors could match so they couldn't low ball the market long enough to cut off Tesla's oxygen. When Tesla got 400k Model3 pre-orders that's when he decided to double down on the 'low unit cost/large production investment' strategy for the model3. Making this work is critical to Tesla's strategy. You can be sure Musk and his team put a lot of effort into the production tech knowing it was make or break for Tesla. The Economist is under estimating Musk and they should give him a little more credit given his track record. Telsa is not a slam dunk but it's also nowhere near as fragile as they make out. Musk also has a bit of equity in SpaceX he could lean on if the markets demur at the end of 2019.

dragontamer 9y ago
> The Economist is under estimating Musk and they should give him a little more credit given his track record. Telsa is not a slam dunk but it's also nowhere near as fragile as they make out. Musk also has a bit of equity in SpaceX he could lean on if the markets demur at the end of 2019. https://static.seekingalpha.com/uploads/2018/3/1/37229846-1519910035030181_origin.png https://static.seekingalpha.com/uploads/2018/3/1/37229846-15... Tesla is going to run into issues in 2019 if they are unable to ramp up the Model 3. Tesla lost $1.6 Billion last year, and they only have $3 millionish in cash. Furthermore, Tesla has debt that is due in 2018 (~$300 million or so) and early 2019 (~$900 million). Over the next year, Tesla needs to pay off $1.2 Billion in debt, AND needs to increase revenue by ~$1.6 Billion or so to stay even. They're not exactly in a good situation. I'm relatively confident that Mr. Musk can raise another $3 billion in capital through stock offerings or rolling over their debt in the short term, but those options have some risks involved. Furthermore, people will not want to lend money to Tesla if they think that the company is sinking. ----------- All the while, Tesla has bought SolarCity and also inherited all of its debt and issues. Tesla was having enough issues ramping up Model 3, but now they ALSO have to make the solar company profitable too. It was a bad time to buy SolarCity.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
s2g 9y ago
> smaller and lighter motors mean more interior space and better performance Except you need a whole lot fo heavy battery. The model S is not a light car. You can make anything sound amazing is you ignore every drawback.
- mschuster91 9y ago
  > Except you need a whole lot fo heavy battery. The model S is not a light car. And that heavy battery concentrated at a very low point makes Teslas (or, for that matter, most E vehicles) excellent in handling.
  - ilovecars2 9y ago
    I’m not sure I’d agree. The Model S is quite prone to understeer, and it’s not just slight understeer but real unrelenting understeer. I’m not sure how though because there isn’t a lot of weight over the front axle that would cause the nose to push wide so perhaps it’s because of how the suspension is setup. This is quite unlike the BMW M5, for example.
whatever1 9y ago
Electric/Electronic is not better than ICE. Most of the problems in my modern car come from failures in the electrical / electronic subsystems. Meanwhile my grandpas no bs 1980's Honda Accord is still going with just some lube and gasoline. When you make a motherboard that works properly for more than 5 years, let us know.
- majewsky 9y ago
  1. Electric != electronic. Electrical engines have been a staple of engineering for about 200 years, about as long as ICE. Integrated circuits, on the other hand, have only been around for some 60 years, and while those are pretty reliable on the hardware side, we're still figuring out how to manage the complexity that they enable, and how to make software that's not shitty. 2. One anecdote does not a rule make. 3. "When you make a motherboard that works properly for more than 5 years, let us know." Maybe you should stop buying bottom-shelf. I've seen 10-year-old Thinkpads work like they did on the first day. And my current Asus notebook is already 6 years old and shows no sign of old age at all. Even the battery still holds over 80% charge.
  - dennyis 9y ago
    You’re both right. Industrial electric motors run 24/7/365 for decades in all sorts of harsh conditions. The motors should not be an issue. On the flip side these cars are filled with electronics. Just look at the dash... I don’t trust those to last more than the warranty period. However, I feel the same about most modern cars, especially luxury cars.
agumonkey 9y ago
I recently learned that he was into ultracapacitors in college and very early wanted to go into EVs. He's often portrayed as a rich internet dude that learned rocketry but he had an actual serious background. That's not everything but it's a bit less shallow foundations and Tesla battle is not against the elements but against markets, a tad different.
mgoetzke 9y ago
Zetsche, Mercedes Benz CEO, just admitted to Shareholders that they will switch to electric cars, but it will be bad for their bottom line. That's why they are dragging their feet.
- femidav 9y ago
  The only reason to switch are moronic German politicians, who require fleet CO2 standard and want to ban ICEs completely.
jcranmer 9y ago
> b)Large automakers know this but simpler for them translates into less maintenance which means lower profits. Automakers therefore will pay lip service to electrics, drag their feet and kill off any real electric competition if they can. The world's environment is not a shareholder in the large automakers. If I'm not mistaken, maintenance translates to profits for dealers which are completely different from manufacturers (unless you're talking about Tesla). From the standpoint of the manufacturers, it's in their interest to force people to buy new cars instead of buying them, so they should be making cars that fall apart quickly--except the evidence is that car quality has dramatically improved over the past 40 years.
woodandsteel 9y ago
>Large automakers know this but simpler for them translates into less maintenance which means lower profits. Automakers therefore will pay lip service to electrics, drag their feet and kill off any real electric competition if they can. That might have been the original plan, but nowadays it would be suicidal. That is because the Chinese government is totally committed to EV's. I am sure the mainstream auto execs are totally aware of that.

dragontamer 9y ago

> The Economist is under estimating Musk and they should give him a little more credit given his track record. Telsa is not a slam dunk but it's also nowhere near as fragile as they make out. Musk also has a bit of equity in SpaceX he could lean on if the markets demur at the end of 2019. https://static.seekingalpha.com/uploads/2018/3/1/37229846-1519910035030181_origin.png https://static.seekingalpha.com/uploads/2018/3/1/37229846-15... Tesla is going to run into issues in 2019 if they are unable to ramp up the Model 3. Tesla lost $1.6 Billion last year, and they only have $3 millionish in cash. Furthermore, Tesla has debt that is due in 2018 (~$300 million or so) and early 2019 (~$900 million). Over the next year, Tesla needs to pay off $1.2 Billion in debt, AND needs to increase revenue by ~$1.6 Billion or so to stay even. They're not exactly in a good situation. I'm relatively confident that Mr. Musk can raise another $3 billion in capital through stock offerings or rolling over their debt in the short term, but those options have some risks involved. Furthermore, people will not want to lend money to Tesla if they think that the company is sinking. ----------- All the while, Tesla has bought SolarCity and also inherited all of its debt and issues. Tesla was having enough issues ramping up Model 3, but now they ALSO have to make the solar company profitable too. It was a bad time to buy SolarCity.

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

s2g 9y ago

> smaller and lighter motors mean more interior space and better performance Except you need a whole lot fo heavy battery. The model S is not a light car. You can make anything sound amazing is you ignore every drawback.

mschuster91 9y ago
> Except you need a whole lot fo heavy battery. The model S is not a light car. And that heavy battery concentrated at a very low point makes Teslas (or, for that matter, most E vehicles) excellent in handling.
- ilovecars2 9y ago
  I’m not sure I’d agree. The Model S is quite prone to understeer, and it’s not just slight understeer but real unrelenting understeer. I’m not sure how though because there isn’t a lot of weight over the front axle that would cause the nose to push wide so perhaps it’s because of how the suspension is setup. This is quite unlike the BMW M5, for example.

whatever1 9y ago

Electric/Electronic is not better than ICE. Most of the problems in my modern car come from failures in the electrical / electronic subsystems. Meanwhile my grandpas no bs 1980's Honda Accord is still going with just some lube and gasoline. When you make a motherboard that works properly for more than 5 years, let us know.

majewsky 9y ago
1. Electric != electronic. Electrical engines have been a staple of engineering for about 200 years, about as long as ICE. Integrated circuits, on the other hand, have only been around for some 60 years, and while those are pretty reliable on the hardware side, we're still figuring out how to manage the complexity that they enable, and how to make software that's not shitty. 2. One anecdote does not a rule make. 3. "When you make a motherboard that works properly for more than 5 years, let us know." Maybe you should stop buying bottom-shelf. I've seen 10-year-old Thinkpads work like they did on the first day. And my current Asus notebook is already 6 years old and shows no sign of old age at all. Even the battery still holds over 80% charge.
- dennyis 9y ago
  You’re both right. Industrial electric motors run 24/7/365 for decades in all sorts of harsh conditions. The motors should not be an issue. On the flip side these cars are filled with electronics. Just look at the dash... I don’t trust those to last more than the warranty period. However, I feel the same about most modern cars, especially luxury cars.

agumonkey 9y ago

I recently learned that he was into ultracapacitors in college and very early wanted to go into EVs. He's often portrayed as a rich internet dude that learned rocketry but he had an actual serious background. That's not everything but it's a bit less shallow foundations and Tesla battle is not against the elements but against markets, a tad different.

mgoetzke 9y ago

Zetsche, Mercedes Benz CEO, just admitted to Shareholders that they will switch to electric cars, but it will be bad for their bottom line. That's why they are dragging their feet.

femidav 9y ago
The only reason to switch are moronic German politicians, who require fleet CO2 standard and want to ban ICEs completely.

jcranmer 9y ago

> b)Large automakers know this but simpler for them translates into less maintenance which means lower profits. Automakers therefore will pay lip service to electrics, drag their feet and kill off any real electric competition if they can. The world's environment is not a shareholder in the large automakers. If I'm not mistaken, maintenance translates to profits for dealers which are completely different from manufacturers (unless you're talking about Tesla). From the standpoint of the manufacturers, it's in their interest to force people to buy new cars instead of buying them, so they should be making cars that fall apart quickly--except the evidence is that car quality has dramatically improved over the past 40 years.

woodandsteel 9y ago

>Large automakers know this but simpler for them translates into less maintenance which means lower profits. Automakers therefore will pay lip service to electrics, drag their feet and kill off any real electric competition if they can. That might have been the original plan, but nowadays it would be suicidal. That is because the Chinese government is totally committed to EV's. I am sure the mainstream auto execs are totally aware of that.