5 ms·

> There are competitive cars vs tesla for electric It is my belief that those "competitive cars" wouldn't have happened if it hadn't been for Tesla.

Bubble_Pop_22 5y ago
MySpace, BlackBerry come to mind. At least those were new markets. At the end of the day you can't explain love and people love Elon Musk. Guys from all over the world are in a sort weird parasocial relationship with the guy. That never happened with the CEO of MySpace and BlackBerry
- SemanticStrengh 5y ago
  I feel like the growth of people that bash him is higher than people that worship him. In any case there is a parasocial component to it indeed.
  - hackerfromthefu 4y ago
    I think you will find a much bigger 'silent mainstream' of those who Respect him for the significant progress he's brought into our world. Worship and bashing/hate are the domain of the crazies/extremists/zealots who are a vocal minority, really a small proportion of the world. Most people thankfully are more balanced and rational in their perspectives.
SemanticStrengh 5y ago
But why? Did tesla open source key scientific innovations in the scaling of batteries? Don't think so. See e.g. The seres f5 from Huawei. I don't know wether it's great but about the main metric, it has a higher range than teslas (1000km)
- toyg 5y ago
  This is a bit of a "why dropbox when i can rsync" comment. Tesla brought glamour and practicality to a field stymied by boredom and theoretical concerns. They pledged to build an EV people would actually want to use, bringing all the latest tech to drive UX with no regard for tradition. They set to solve consumer problems, and they are succeeding in doing that.
  - lillecarl 5y ago
    Great drive UX as opposed to what? Have you driven a modern Mercedes of the higher price tiers? They're pretty damn great to drive or be driven in (comfort and fun wise), but they don't have gimmicks like the door thing and such. If you're talking about those gimmicks I disagree, and if you're talking about "motor/battery/esc technology" I also disagree, they didn't innovate anywhere, they just hit the right market with their product in my amateur opinion.
    - toyg 5y ago
      If they "hit the right market" it means that market had not been hit before, so by definition they've done something new. I don't have an interest in Tesla nor do I particularly like Musk, but objectively speaking, they must have done something right - they started a mass-car company from scratch in the third millennium, something very very hard; they popularized a technology that had failed to get traction for decades, and have taken the fight to behemoth corporations that had been bearish on the sector's overall future since the '90s. That simply cannot be just marketing or "gimmicks".
  - MisterBastahrd 5y ago
    Glamor? Sure. Practicality? Eh. Maybe for daily commuting. When the IC companies convert over, Tesla shareholders are going to feel a ton of pain. The novelty will have worn off and the company will still pace at a mere fraction of its competitors. And at the very least, they'll all have vastly better QC than Tesla.
    - mensetmanusman 5y ago
- senko 5y ago
  Tesla dragged the rest of the auto industry, kicking and screaming, into the EV business. EV was, at best, a curiosity and definitely nobody's main focus, until Tesla first showed EV cars are not golf carts (with the rooadster) and then that they can be a desirable higher-class sedan (with Model S). If Tesla went bankrupt today, we'd still be firmly on the path to phase out ICE cars. This was totally unconcievable just a few years ago. Tesla did that.
  - hooande 5y ago
    citation needed. many of these companies had documented plans to transition to primarily electric vehicles over a period of many years. why is it that you are so convinced that this market shift was causes by one brand? is there any evidence other than observation?
  - prmoustache 5y ago
    > Tesla dragged the rest of the auto industry, kicking and screaming, into the EV business. I would say that the advance in battery technology, the laws introduced by state of California and north european countries did more than Tesla ever did. Also the Renault Zoe, still top selling EV cars in europe, had her first concept car showed in 2005 and was on sale only 5 months after the Model S in 2012. The Leaf also predates the Model S.The 1st generation Tesla Roadster sold poorly like most other contemporary EVs and most of the sales happened in her last year in 2012. It was as niche as all other EVs in the market in its first 3 years of commercial life. The Mitsubishi i-Miev and its Citroën and Peugeot variant outsold the Tesla Roadster by more than a factor of 10. Almost 30000 cars between 2008 and 2014. What Tesla achieved was showing the wealthy people they could greenwash their way to the same energy wasting life by going EV. A good publicity stunt.
    - senko 5y ago
      Zoe was a concept car, as was VW eUp. At the time, established car companies were doing concepts that looked like golf-carts and taking about "e-mobility". Look at i-Miev and the Roadster and tell me which one do you think a typical car lover would love more. If you think that would've taken over the car market .. then you're definitely not in the same circles I am :-) Other car makers started paying serious attention only when Tesla inexplicably didn't go under and Model S started to be a success.
- JohnBooty 5y ago
  Zoom out a little and try and think about the bigger picture. In many industries, you can see these "bar-raisers." Starbucks didn't invent coffee, but they created a mass market for a more premium sort of coffee in a country that previously didn't see coffee as something more that a thing you chug down in the morning so you can wake up. Nintendo didn't invent video games, but they raised the bar for home consoles after the "great video game crash" and have repeated the feat several times since despite rarely if ever being on the cutting edge of tech. And so on. Tesla did something similar. Previously, electric cars and hybrids were seen as dorky and decidedly uncool by most. Tesla changed that public perception. It's hard to imagine the "luxury" electric car market existing without them. Perhaps another company might have accomplished the same feat, but Tesla was the first one to pull it off. From a raw innovation standpoint, these advances are huge because by creating new market segments, they ensure a flow of money into those markets. Tesla's expense has paved the way for billions if not trillions of dollars into EV R&D and battery R&D. That matters, a lot.
- JoshCole 5y ago
  To answer your question, they did open source their innovations. In the future you should consider not asking rhetorical questions that you don't know the answer to. Also, when you don't know the answer, you probably shouldn't pretend to know. Other people might make the mistake of thinking you are informed rather than a productive citizen of the society which exists in your imagination. As to why - ICE dealers didn't want to lose recurring revenue streams and ICE manufacturers didn't want to disrupt the means through which they would service the loans that they took out to build out their present ability to manufacture at scale. The incentives were perverse and in some cases still are perverse enough that the ICE industry has to be forced to help kill itself off, rather than dying willingly because it is right.
lupire 5y ago
Nissan was selling the Leaf after the Roadster but before the S/X/3/Y. The Leaf and the 3 basically met in the middle at the same time at about the $45K price point for similar cars. Tesla was only first in the category of outrageously expensive cars for virtue-signalling rich people who fake-care about evironmentalism. And fake self-driving.
- sokoloff 5y ago
  I bought a top-spec 2015 LEAF for $33K before $10K of incentives. If someone paid $45K for a LEAF around the 3's launch, it better have had $10K in cash in the trunk. Looked at another way, if the LEAF and 3 cost the same, would many people have bought the LEAF?
- SyzygistSix 5y ago
  Similar cars? Sure, they both have four wheels and are electric. I don't see many similarities though. Tesla's emergence put the world on track to end ICE cars at least a decade sooner. That is a lot of CO2 that will not be put into the atmosphere. Getting people with expendable income to fund it is both a smart strategy and very equitable. Their recharge network still sets them apart as well.
sudosysgen 5y ago
That is quite unreasonable to expect. The Renault Zoe came out at around the same time as the Model S and had over 150km of reasonable range, at half the price a Model 3 sells at today. It was already competitive.
- alvah 5y ago
  I doubt many people choose between the two though, they're very different propositions.
- kortilla 5y ago
  150km of range is wet shit
  - SemanticStrengh 5y ago
    no it was 210 km
  - sudosysgen 5y ago
    150km of real world practical range is more than adequate. It's only 50% less than what the model S was when it came out, which is more than enough for the majority of people in the world.
    - kortilla 4y ago
      > It's only 50% less Do you realize how bad that is? People had to adapt to the S limitations.

Bubble_Pop_22 5y ago

MySpace, BlackBerry come to mind. At least those were new markets. At the end of the day you can't explain love and people love Elon Musk. Guys from all over the world are in a sort weird parasocial relationship with the guy. That never happened with the CEO of MySpace and BlackBerry

SemanticStrengh 5y ago
I feel like the growth of people that bash him is higher than people that worship him. In any case there is a parasocial component to it indeed.
- hackerfromthefu 4y ago
  I think you will find a much bigger 'silent mainstream' of those who Respect him for the significant progress he's brought into our world. Worship and bashing/hate are the domain of the crazies/extremists/zealots who are a vocal minority, really a small proportion of the world. Most people thankfully are more balanced and rational in their perspectives.

SemanticStrengh 5y ago

But why? Did tesla open source key scientific innovations in the scaling of batteries? Don't think so. See e.g. The seres f5 from Huawei. I don't know wether it's great but about the main metric, it has a higher range than teslas (1000km)

toyg 5y ago
This is a bit of a "why dropbox when i can rsync" comment. Tesla brought glamour and practicality to a field stymied by boredom and theoretical concerns. They pledged to build an EV people would actually want to use, bringing all the latest tech to drive UX with no regard for tradition. They set to solve consumer problems, and they are succeeding in doing that.
- lillecarl 5y ago
  Great drive UX as opposed to what? Have you driven a modern Mercedes of the higher price tiers? They're pretty damn great to drive or be driven in (comfort and fun wise), but they don't have gimmicks like the door thing and such. If you're talking about those gimmicks I disagree, and if you're talking about "motor/battery/esc technology" I also disagree, they didn't innovate anywhere, they just hit the right market with their product in my amateur opinion.
  - toyg 5y ago
    If they "hit the right market" it means that market had not been hit before, so by definition they've done something new. I don't have an interest in Tesla nor do I particularly like Musk, but objectively speaking, they must have done something right - they started a mass-car company from scratch in the third millennium, something very very hard; they popularized a technology that had failed to get traction for decades, and have taken the fight to behemoth corporations that had been bearish on the sector's overall future since the '90s. That simply cannot be just marketing or "gimmicks".
- MisterBastahrd 5y ago
  Glamor? Sure. Practicality? Eh. Maybe for daily commuting. When the IC companies convert over, Tesla shareholders are going to feel a ton of pain. The novelty will have worn off and the company will still pace at a mere fraction of its competitors. And at the very least, they'll all have vastly better QC than Tesla.
  - mensetmanusman 5y ago
senko 5y ago
Tesla dragged the rest of the auto industry, kicking and screaming, into the EV business. EV was, at best, a curiosity and definitely nobody's main focus, until Tesla first showed EV cars are not golf carts (with the rooadster) and then that they can be a desirable higher-class sedan (with Model S). If Tesla went bankrupt today, we'd still be firmly on the path to phase out ICE cars. This was totally unconcievable just a few years ago. Tesla did that.
- hooande 5y ago
  citation needed. many of these companies had documented plans to transition to primarily electric vehicles over a period of many years. why is it that you are so convinced that this market shift was causes by one brand? is there any evidence other than observation?
- prmoustache 5y ago
  > Tesla dragged the rest of the auto industry, kicking and screaming, into the EV business. I would say that the advance in battery technology, the laws introduced by state of California and north european countries did more than Tesla ever did. Also the Renault Zoe, still top selling EV cars in europe, had her first concept car showed in 2005 and was on sale only 5 months after the Model S in 2012. The Leaf also predates the Model S.The 1st generation Tesla Roadster sold poorly like most other contemporary EVs and most of the sales happened in her last year in 2012. It was as niche as all other EVs in the market in its first 3 years of commercial life. The Mitsubishi i-Miev and its Citroën and Peugeot variant outsold the Tesla Roadster by more than a factor of 10. Almost 30000 cars between 2008 and 2014. What Tesla achieved was showing the wealthy people they could greenwash their way to the same energy wasting life by going EV. A good publicity stunt.
  - senko 5y ago
    Zoe was a concept car, as was VW eUp. At the time, established car companies were doing concepts that looked like golf-carts and taking about "e-mobility". Look at i-Miev and the Roadster and tell me which one do you think a typical car lover would love more. If you think that would've taken over the car market .. then you're definitely not in the same circles I am :-) Other car makers started paying serious attention only when Tesla inexplicably didn't go under and Model S started to be a success.
JohnBooty 5y ago
Zoom out a little and try and think about the bigger picture. In many industries, you can see these "bar-raisers." Starbucks didn't invent coffee, but they created a mass market for a more premium sort of coffee in a country that previously didn't see coffee as something more that a thing you chug down in the morning so you can wake up. Nintendo didn't invent video games, but they raised the bar for home consoles after the "great video game crash" and have repeated the feat several times since despite rarely if ever being on the cutting edge of tech. And so on. Tesla did something similar. Previously, electric cars and hybrids were seen as dorky and decidedly uncool by most. Tesla changed that public perception. It's hard to imagine the "luxury" electric car market existing without them. Perhaps another company might have accomplished the same feat, but Tesla was the first one to pull it off. From a raw innovation standpoint, these advances are huge because by creating new market segments, they ensure a flow of money into those markets. Tesla's expense has paved the way for billions if not trillions of dollars into EV R&D and battery R&D. That matters, a lot.
JoshCole 5y ago
To answer your question, they did open source their innovations. In the future you should consider not asking rhetorical questions that you don't know the answer to. Also, when you don't know the answer, you probably shouldn't pretend to know. Other people might make the mistake of thinking you are informed rather than a productive citizen of the society which exists in your imagination. As to why - ICE dealers didn't want to lose recurring revenue streams and ICE manufacturers didn't want to disrupt the means through which they would service the loans that they took out to build out their present ability to manufacture at scale. The incentives were perverse and in some cases still are perverse enough that the ICE industry has to be forced to help kill itself off, rather than dying willingly because it is right.

lupire 5y ago

Nissan was selling the Leaf after the Roadster but before the S/X/3/Y. The Leaf and the 3 basically met in the middle at the same time at about the $45K price point for similar cars. Tesla was only first in the category of outrageously expensive cars for virtue-signalling rich people who fake-care about evironmentalism. And fake self-driving.

sokoloff 5y ago
I bought a top-spec 2015 LEAF for $33K before $10K of incentives. If someone paid $45K for a LEAF around the 3's launch, it better have had $10K in cash in the trunk. Looked at another way, if the LEAF and 3 cost the same, would many people have bought the LEAF?
SyzygistSix 5y ago
Similar cars? Sure, they both have four wheels and are electric. I don't see many similarities though. Tesla's emergence put the world on track to end ICE cars at least a decade sooner. That is a lot of CO2 that will not be put into the atmosphere. Getting people with expendable income to fund it is both a smart strategy and very equitable. Their recharge network still sets them apart as well.

sudosysgen 5y ago

That is quite unreasonable to expect. The Renault Zoe came out at around the same time as the Model S and had over 150km of reasonable range, at half the price a Model 3 sells at today. It was already competitive.

alvah 5y ago
I doubt many people choose between the two though, they're very different propositions.
kortilla 5y ago
150km of range is wet shit
- SemanticStrengh 5y ago
  no it was 210 km
- sudosysgen 5y ago
  150km of real world practical range is more than adequate. It's only 50% less than what the model S was when it came out, which is more than enough for the majority of people in the world.
  - kortilla 4y ago
    > It's only 50% less Do you realize how bad that is? People had to adapt to the S limitations.