3 ms·

Musk once argued that once full self-driving works, it would be more profitable for Tesla to use these cars for an own taxi service than it would be to sell the

Musk once argued that once full self-driving works, it would be more profitable for Tesla to use these cars for an own taxi service than it would be to sell them to customers. They plan to raise the price even more the closer they (claim to) get to their goal.

KerrAvon 4y ago
My response as a prospective owner would be: great, call me when you actually become Checker Motors and maybe I’ll pay the extra money then.
voakbasda 4y ago
I don’t understand that endgame. I would never want strangers in my car unsupervised. They will be having sex, puking, changing diapers, and worse. Just imagine all of the fluids and smells that they would leave behind. How is this remotely a good idea?
- KerrAvon 4y ago
  You don’t want your $75+ car used as a public restroom? Elon frowns from the throne atop his ancestral government-subsidized emerald mine. edit: typo
- jcranmer 4y ago
  I have some theories. The first part is the general assumption that the endgame of self-driving cars is robotaxis. I don't personally buy this--most people who own their own cars today clearly prefer to own their own cars over relying on taxi services or public transit--but this is dominant assumption you see in newspaper articles and business planning. And I suspect it's mostly driven by greed for recurring service revenue over one-time sales revenue. And the second part is the aspersions to Uber (as a stand-in for all the similar services): renting your own car out as a robotaxi is a lot like being an Uber, except for being the driver part. Of course, Uber itself is basically a losing model that doesn't really compensate enough to cover the wear-and-tear on your car from the extra mileage acting as a taxi, so it's not entirely the best model to be emulating. But how could a $10 billion company possibly be wrong?
- krisoft 4y ago
  > I don’t understand that endgame. I would never want strangers in my car unsupervised. You are misunderstanding the comment you are replying to. It doesn't say "Tesla utilises the car which it sold to you as a taxi". It says that Tesla doesn't sell you a car. And they don't sell you a car because they can make better money by using their factory output as taxis, than by selling it to you. Which means it won't be your car.
- akudha 4y ago
  Maybe they’d introduce a car that not only drives itself, but also cleans itself? :P
- belltaco 4y ago
  Ever heard of something called AirBnB? Or Turo for that matter.
HWR_14 4y ago
I don't understand it at all myself. Assuming you wanted the car to drive 10 hrs a day on average (because of low overnight demand, random charging, maintenance, etc.) a FSD Tesla vs. a new Hyundai Ioniq with a human driver would have the same total costs after 2-3 years (when the hourly salary of the human driver finally makes the Ioniq more expensive). That's what Tesla is talking about competing with in the robo-taxi market.

KerrAvon 4y ago

My response as a prospective owner would be: great, call me when you actually become Checker Motors and maybe I’ll pay the extra money then.

voakbasda 4y ago

I don’t understand that endgame. I would never want strangers in my car unsupervised. They will be having sex, puking, changing diapers, and worse. Just imagine all of the fluids and smells that they would leave behind. How is this remotely a good idea?

KerrAvon 4y ago
You don’t want your $75+ car used as a public restroom? Elon frowns from the throne atop his ancestral government-subsidized emerald mine. edit: typo
jcranmer 4y ago
I have some theories. The first part is the general assumption that the endgame of self-driving cars is robotaxis. I don't personally buy this--most people who own their own cars today clearly prefer to own their own cars over relying on taxi services or public transit--but this is dominant assumption you see in newspaper articles and business planning. And I suspect it's mostly driven by greed for recurring service revenue over one-time sales revenue. And the second part is the aspersions to Uber (as a stand-in for all the similar services): renting your own car out as a robotaxi is a lot like being an Uber, except for being the driver part. Of course, Uber itself is basically a losing model that doesn't really compensate enough to cover the wear-and-tear on your car from the extra mileage acting as a taxi, so it's not entirely the best model to be emulating. But how could a $10 billion company possibly be wrong?
krisoft 4y ago
> I don’t understand that endgame. I would never want strangers in my car unsupervised. You are misunderstanding the comment you are replying to. It doesn't say "Tesla utilises the car which it sold to you as a taxi". It says that Tesla doesn't sell you a car. And they don't sell you a car because they can make better money by using their factory output as taxis, than by selling it to you. Which means it won't be your car.
akudha 4y ago
Maybe they’d introduce a car that not only drives itself, but also cleans itself? :P
belltaco 4y ago
Ever heard of something called AirBnB? Or Turo for that matter.

HWR_14 4y ago

I don't understand it at all myself. Assuming you wanted the car to drive 10 hrs a day on average (because of low overnight demand, random charging, maintenance, etc.) a FSD Tesla vs. a new Hyundai Ioniq with a human driver would have the same total costs after 2-3 years (when the hourly salary of the human driver finally makes the Ioniq more expensive). That's what Tesla is talking about competing with in the robo-taxi market.