4 ms·

NASA is betting on both SpaceX and Boeing for its next manned missions, and Tesla has made electric cars fashionable, but there is no reason to expect that a co

NASA is betting on both SpaceX and Boeing for its next manned missions, and Tesla has made electric cars fashionable, but there is no reason to expect that a couple of years from now its cars will be any better than the offering from major car companies. Clearly SpaceX and Tesla are special companies, but it's easy to overstate exactly how special.

tomp 8y ago
They're so special that they both completely revolutionized their respective industries. What makes them even more special, is that neither made any big technological breakthrough. All the technology has been available for years (decades?), just not productionized. Which tells you that the "major companies" in both industries were literally sitting on their asses, enjoying their oligopolistic/monopolistic profits and doing the minimal R&D necessary to maintain them. Shame on them.
- gehsty 8y ago
  I don't think you can describe modern car manufacturing as sitting on its ass.... and I don't think you can describe Tesla as revolutionizing the manufacturing process... I think Tesla has revolutionized the automotive industry by making a desirable electric car, the technology they have within the car is nothing exclusive to Tesla. Other companies can build electric cars, but Tesla made the first truly desirable electric car. SpaceX has 100% revolutionized space flight and I hope this continues.
  - tomp 8y ago
    > by making a desirable electric car, the technology they have within the car is nothing exclusive to Tesla. Other companies can build electric cars, but Tesla made the first truly desirable electric car. This is exactly my point. Tesla didn't happen because of Musk's intelligence, or talent, or ingenuity, or genius. It happened because of Musk's drive. Before Tesla/Musk, electric cars weren't even part of the public consciousness (even though they were completely technically feasible, as you agree). It was a revolutionary idea.
    - nostrebored 8y ago
      They absolutely were. The push for non-gas cars existed before Tesla. Tesla made the commitment to make them cheap (which they've arguably failed to do, especially considering that you're being taxed to fund them, regardless of if you're a consumer). Musk is a world-class rent seeker.
      - varjag 8y ago
        Sorry, electric cars before Tesla were Trabant-like lunchboxes on wheels from 3rd tier/garage makers. They were looked upon as eccentricities like velomobiles or hot air balloons. Nissan Leaf of BMW i3 would not been happening if not a mainstream EV market single-handedly formed by Tesla. You can argue that someone else could have stepped in, but that someone had to be an outsider, not an established car manufacturer. That is something like Tesla and Musk, but with another name.
        rayiner 8y ago
        Toyota offered an electric version of its RAV4, an extremely popular crossover SUV, a decade before the Tesla roadster came out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_RAV4_EV https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_RAV4_EV. But in 1997, gas was cheap and the government wasn't subsidizing EVs to the tune of $7,500-$10,000. It's hard to say what would've happened in a hypothetical timeline. But Tesla didn't invent the underlying technology, the traditional car makers were already working on it. Tesla wasn't responsible for EV subsidies in 2008, it was a combination of exploding gas prices, middle east instability, the Iraq war, and Obama getting elected. Good chance that the EV market would've taken exactly the same course without Tesla.
        JoeAltmaier 8y ago
        A RAV4 would not (did not) capture the public imagination like the Tesla Roadster did. Like it or not, marketing was a huge part of the EV success. And Tesla did that marketing, not the other car companies, which seem culturally incapable of celebrating an EV's performance or coolness.
- rayiner 8y ago
  The moralizing is unwarranted. Tesla, for example, happened when it did because of several convergent phenomena: 1) Increasingly more expensive gas and more rigorous fuel-consumption standards. 2) Massive increase in lithium ion battery production from consumer electronics; 3) A willingness of VCs to bankroll years of massive losses; 4) A federal program of offering massive subsidies to electric cars. These things didn't exist 15 years ago. (Which is not to say that Tesla doesn't deserve a lot of credit for capitalizing on them, but Tesla's success is not evidence that existing car manufacturers were "sitting on their asses." It's also just factually wrong. Toyota and GM both produced electric cars in late 1990s, early aughts, way before Tesla was founded. But at the time, consumer surveys showed that they would only buy electric cars if they were sold for tens of thousands of dollars less than a gasoline car. All those phenomena closed that gap: exploding gas prices made gasoline cars relatively more expensive; federal and stage governments offered up to $10,000 in total incentives for buying an EV; and lithium ion battery technology resulted in major improvements in weight and range.)
  - tomp 8y ago
    1) Oil was pretty expensive since 2005. 2) Everyone could capitalize on that. 3) Existing big car companies could finance R&D themselves. 4) According to Wikipedia, incentives started around 2011, way after Tesla was funded and probably before other car manufacturers started moving. The fact remains that none of the existing car manufacturers decided to even try to compete with Tesla until it was painfully obvious that Tesla's going to "make it" (i.e. Model S) and that consumers love their electric cars. That happened about 5 or so years ago. Not 10 years ago. Not 15 years ago. It happened because of Tesla/Musk, and would likely be very much delayed if it wasn't for him. They had a chance to improve technology, satisfy consumer demand (Apple showed a decade ago that consumers don't know what they want) and help save the planet, but they didn't. Shame on them. Edit: I don't want to be argumentative, I think we mostly agree. I'm just saying that the rest of the companies all missed a huge market opportunity, same as I keep saying for all computer companies that make shittier laptops than Apple...
    - rayiner 8y ago
      > 1) Oil was pretty expensive since 2005. 2) Everyone could capitalize on that. 3) Existing big car companies could finance R&D themselves. 4) According to Wikipedia, incentives started around 2011, way after Tesla was funded and probably before other car manufacturers started moving. You're just completely wrong on the chronology. The federal tax credits were in place for the 2009 tax year: https://www.tesla.com/blog/tax-incentives-why-roadster-costs-less-its-sticker-price https://www.tesla.com/blog/tax-incentives-why-roadster-costs.... The Roadster was released in late 2008 (only 150 units shipped in 2008). Almost all of Tesla's capital raise came after 2010: https://www.forbes.com/sites/jimcollins/2018/04/25/a-brief-history-of-tesla-19-billion-raised-and-9-billion-of-negative-cash-flow/#39b773523d65 https://www.forbes.com/sites/jimcollins/2018/04/25/a-brief-h.... > The fact remains that none of the existing car manufacturers decided to even try to compete with Tesla until it was painfully obvious that Tesla's going to "make it" (i.e. Model S) and that consumers love their electric cars. Again, your chronology is completely wrong. By the time the Model S came out, GM had already been selling the Chevy Volt for almost two years. And throughout both cars' run, the Chevy Volt has been selling at approximately the same volume as the Model S (both car sold 110-130k units through the end of 2017). The Nissan Leafs also came out in 2010, and more Leafs had been sold as of the beginning of 2018 than total Tesla vehicles. To recap: other car manufacturers (GM and Toyota) were first to market with EVs, in the late 1990s. They were also first to market with mainstream popular EVs, in 2010, two years before the Model S.

tomp 8y ago

They're so special that they both completely revolutionized their respective industries. What makes them even more special, is that neither made any big technological breakthrough. All the technology has been available for years (decades?), just not productionized. Which tells you that the "major companies" in both industries were literally sitting on their asses, enjoying their oligopolistic/monopolistic profits and doing the minimal R&D necessary to maintain them. Shame on them.

gehsty 8y ago
I don't think you can describe modern car manufacturing as sitting on its ass.... and I don't think you can describe Tesla as revolutionizing the manufacturing process... I think Tesla has revolutionized the automotive industry by making a desirable electric car, the technology they have within the car is nothing exclusive to Tesla. Other companies can build electric cars, but Tesla made the first truly desirable electric car. SpaceX has 100% revolutionized space flight and I hope this continues.
- tomp 8y ago
  > by making a desirable electric car, the technology they have within the car is nothing exclusive to Tesla. Other companies can build electric cars, but Tesla made the first truly desirable electric car. This is exactly my point. Tesla didn't happen because of Musk's intelligence, or talent, or ingenuity, or genius. It happened because of Musk's drive. Before Tesla/Musk, electric cars weren't even part of the public consciousness (even though they were completely technically feasible, as you agree). It was a revolutionary idea.
  - nostrebored 8y ago
    They absolutely were. The push for non-gas cars existed before Tesla. Tesla made the commitment to make them cheap (which they've arguably failed to do, especially considering that you're being taxed to fund them, regardless of if you're a consumer). Musk is a world-class rent seeker.
    - varjag 8y ago
      Sorry, electric cars before Tesla were Trabant-like lunchboxes on wheels from 3rd tier/garage makers. They were looked upon as eccentricities like velomobiles or hot air balloons. Nissan Leaf of BMW i3 would not been happening if not a mainstream EV market single-handedly formed by Tesla. You can argue that someone else could have stepped in, but that someone had to be an outsider, not an established car manufacturer. That is something like Tesla and Musk, but with another name.
      - rayiner 8y ago
        Toyota offered an electric version of its RAV4, an extremely popular crossover SUV, a decade before the Tesla roadster came out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_RAV4_EV https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_RAV4_EV. But in 1997, gas was cheap and the government wasn't subsidizing EVs to the tune of $7,500-$10,000. It's hard to say what would've happened in a hypothetical timeline. But Tesla didn't invent the underlying technology, the traditional car makers were already working on it. Tesla wasn't responsible for EV subsidies in 2008, it was a combination of exploding gas prices, middle east instability, the Iraq war, and Obama getting elected. Good chance that the EV market would've taken exactly the same course without Tesla.
        JoeAltmaier 8y ago
        A RAV4 would not (did not) capture the public imagination like the Tesla Roadster did. Like it or not, marketing was a huge part of the EV success. And Tesla did that marketing, not the other car companies, which seem culturally incapable of celebrating an EV's performance or coolness.
rayiner 8y ago
The moralizing is unwarranted. Tesla, for example, happened when it did because of several convergent phenomena: 1) Increasingly more expensive gas and more rigorous fuel-consumption standards. 2) Massive increase in lithium ion battery production from consumer electronics; 3) A willingness of VCs to bankroll years of massive losses; 4) A federal program of offering massive subsidies to electric cars. These things didn't exist 15 years ago. (Which is not to say that Tesla doesn't deserve a lot of credit for capitalizing on them, but Tesla's success is not evidence that existing car manufacturers were "sitting on their asses." It's also just factually wrong. Toyota and GM both produced electric cars in late 1990s, early aughts, way before Tesla was founded. But at the time, consumer surveys showed that they would only buy electric cars if they were sold for tens of thousands of dollars less than a gasoline car. All those phenomena closed that gap: exploding gas prices made gasoline cars relatively more expensive; federal and stage governments offered up to $10,000 in total incentives for buying an EV; and lithium ion battery technology resulted in major improvements in weight and range.)
- tomp 8y ago
  1) Oil was pretty expensive since 2005. 2) Everyone could capitalize on that. 3) Existing big car companies could finance R&D themselves. 4) According to Wikipedia, incentives started around 2011, way after Tesla was funded and probably before other car manufacturers started moving. The fact remains that none of the existing car manufacturers decided to even try to compete with Tesla until it was painfully obvious that Tesla's going to "make it" (i.e. Model S) and that consumers love their electric cars. That happened about 5 or so years ago. Not 10 years ago. Not 15 years ago. It happened because of Tesla/Musk, and would likely be very much delayed if it wasn't for him. They had a chance to improve technology, satisfy consumer demand (Apple showed a decade ago that consumers don't know what they want) and help save the planet, but they didn't. Shame on them. Edit: I don't want to be argumentative, I think we mostly agree. I'm just saying that the rest of the companies all missed a huge market opportunity, same as I keep saying for all computer companies that make shittier laptops than Apple...
  - rayiner 8y ago
    > 1) Oil was pretty expensive since 2005. 2) Everyone could capitalize on that. 3) Existing big car companies could finance R&D themselves. 4) According to Wikipedia, incentives started around 2011, way after Tesla was funded and probably before other car manufacturers started moving. You're just completely wrong on the chronology. The federal tax credits were in place for the 2009 tax year: https://www.tesla.com/blog/tax-incentives-why-roadster-costs-less-its-sticker-price https://www.tesla.com/blog/tax-incentives-why-roadster-costs.... The Roadster was released in late 2008 (only 150 units shipped in 2008). Almost all of Tesla's capital raise came after 2010: https://www.forbes.com/sites/jimcollins/2018/04/25/a-brief-history-of-tesla-19-billion-raised-and-9-billion-of-negative-cash-flow/#39b773523d65 https://www.forbes.com/sites/jimcollins/2018/04/25/a-brief-h.... > The fact remains that none of the existing car manufacturers decided to even try to compete with Tesla until it was painfully obvious that Tesla's going to "make it" (i.e. Model S) and that consumers love their electric cars. Again, your chronology is completely wrong. By the time the Model S came out, GM had already been selling the Chevy Volt for almost two years. And throughout both cars' run, the Chevy Volt has been selling at approximately the same volume as the Model S (both car sold 110-130k units through the end of 2017). The Nissan Leafs also came out in 2010, and more Leafs had been sold as of the beginning of 2018 than total Tesla vehicles. To recap: other car manufacturers (GM and Toyota) were first to market with EVs, in the late 1990s. They were also first to market with mainstream popular EVs, in 2010, two years before the Model S.