2 ms·

I don't know too much detail about Tesla manufacturing, but based on PR I've seen, they are more vertically integrated than other companies, e.g. making certain

I don't know too much detail about Tesla manufacturing, but based on PR I've seen, they are more vertically integrated than other companies, e.g. making certain seat parts that usually would be outsourced to another company. The advantages there are, of course, eliminating dependencies, but also faster iteration time and ability to experiment. Seems like this would make sourcing repair parts significantly more challenging? But, as a tradeoff due to a business model choice, as opposed to being evil.

Someone 4y ago
That may be true (but if the claim they’re asking outrageous prices for repairs is true, maybe not so much), and it may affect the height of damages awarded if convicted, but I don’t think that will influence whether they’ll win or lose this case.
- pfannkuchen 4y ago
  > but if the claim they’re asking outrageous prices for repairs is true, maybe not so much The parts and labor processes for repair may truly be more expensive than traditional manufacturers if they do change frequently. Parts manufacturing would not have as much time to iteratively cost cut, inventory would be challenging to maintain, and more frequent labor retraining would be required. I could see opening this up to third parties adding a lot of friction, complexity and risk, and I could see why management would want to avoid that, so long as customers aren't too unhappy with the current situation. I wonder if this approach is a long bet on eventually reducing the amount of required maintenance to the point where the overall maintenance cost of the vehicle is very low. As opposed to keeping the same amount of maintenance and reducing the per maintenance item cost. We will see if that bet pans out...