3 ms·
"lose the market" is I think, a rather "Intel everywhere" take on what market share means. He would not "own" it the way he owns Tesla's current segments, true.
by ggm 2y ago
"lose the market" is I think, a rather "Intel everywhere" take on what market share means. He would not "own" it the way he owns Tesla's current segments, true. But in the long term he won't own Tesla's market share, because in the long term the other car manufacturers who do make onshore and won't be behind sanctions will compete.
This is like "Ford won't make a VW beetle competitor because .." battles of the 60s. Did it mean Ford lost the small car market? No. it shared it.
If our model is there is porche so we don't need any other sports cars, we're pretty close to a planned economy model no? Why are we making saloon cars if a truck can do it all? Why do we have SUV if a tractor and trailer can carry more people &c &c.
I do not expect to see headlines saying "Ford, GM, BMW and Renault have closed their factories because they can't compete, and why bother trying"
- thesuperbigfrog 2y agoIt is exactly like the article states: 'Tesla dropped its plans for a human-driven $25,000 car. [Musk] said in an Oct. 23 earnings call that building the affordable EV would be "pointless" unless the car was fully autonomous.' 'His latest remarks came in response to an investor asking: "When can we expect Tesla to give us the $25,000 non-robotaxi regular car model?" Musk responded: "We're not making a non-robo," before he was interrupted by another Tesla executive. Musk later added: "Basically, I think having a regular $25K model is pointless. It would be silly."' Tesla is choosing to not compete in the human-driven $25K EV market. If they choose not to compete in that price point, other car makers will fill the market at that price point. Tesla will continue to compete at higher price points, so they are not closing any factories, but it will be interesting to see what EVs dominate the low-cost market.