3 ms·

I strongly moved out of Tesla when at the same time, Semi wasn't moving forward, Cybertruck seemed questionable and somehow they decided against Model 2 (afford

I strongly moved out of Tesla when at the same time, Semi wasn't moving forward, Cybertruck seemed questionable and somehow they decided against Model 2 (affordable model). Not going for a mass market Model 2 was really where I lost interest. I never believed in the FSD beyond some additional revenue, but instead of focusing making a nice product, they just used it as a beta. I really hopped they wouldn't just do 'a truck' but would quickly build a single line to build a trucks, a large SUV and a van on one platform. But the Cybertruck hard-locks you into a very limited and unique construction. The fundamental technology of the Cybertruck seems pretty good to me, but I would want them to build multiple vehicles on that kind of platform. Between Pickups, Vans and large SUV, you would be hitting 3 huge markets. Another issue is that they used their good efficiency numbers to put smaller batteries into the car. This worked while other were not very efficient. But the competitors were willing to put a bit more battery into the car and thus ended up with sometimes better range. There were a bunch of other issues stacking up that I think they never really fully figured out. The biggest sin of all is Robotaxi. I just never fucking worked. Going all in into Robotaxi instead of, cars that can actually be sold is crazy. They somehow believe that Robotaxi will collapse the car market by 80%, and then of those left over 20% the Model 3 and Model Y can dominate that. Completely idiotic analysis in my opinion, from many different perspectives. I already pulled out most of it before Musk went full politics. And then I eliminated the position when Musk went all in on Trump. It was a good investment as it lasted.

duxup 2y ago
It does seem like Tesla hit a home run of sorts and sort of keeps swinging for the fences rather than trying to bat for a good average.
- panick21_ 2y ago
  Hyperfocus is one of Musk big strength. Like it was for Jobs. The power of saying no. Having a clear vision and focusing the company on that. When Tesla was working on 3/Y they had that. And it really worked. But as a car company after you have a car like that, you need to move into many niches large and small. And you can't have the overall company focus on any one project. You need a pipeline of new cars, new upgrades and so on. And then the thing they did seem to primarily focus on, FSD, didn't work nearly as well as Musk thought. He got obsessed with thinking AI was on an S-Curve upwards and it would just be solved fast.
m463 2y ago
I read the book "Ludicrous" and found it interesting. It said that what tesla was doing was creating a prestige brand known for advanced yet not affordable features. If they made affordable versions, people would assume it would be like the high-end tesla and better than a comparable car from another manufacturer. However, the high-end tesla vehicles were not really validating the musk "master plan" of affordable cars with the same characteristics. A similar affordable car would have to have reduced features and capabilities, and it might not be profitable (because tesla is not cost efficient). Nissan took the affordable ev route long before tesla and wasn't very successful. And now other brands and the supply chains are catching up, making ev versions of their cars, with the desirable features and established manufacturing.
- panick21_ 2y ago
  I haven't read the book but I'm not really sure I agree. Tesla were affordable in a car market where the avg new car was the cost of a Model Y/3. And they sold really well. I don't think we can imply anything about what people would have assumed if they had released a cheaper car. That all depends on positioning and market. On the high end, they didn't provide enough differentiation with the X/S. Not upgrading them quickly enough and not pushing more into luxury to compete with more expensive German cars and Lexus. But that's not a huge part of the market. > because tesla is not cost efficient Tesla is plenty cost efficient, the reality is, nobody can make a huge profit on a cheap car. And most can't get even close. Tesla with their integrated strategy could have made a compelling 25k car, it would just need more options then the normal Tesla approach. But its worth doing just to get to scale and capture that large market. Because once you establish yourself their, its gone be harder for others to move in. And then bring cost down over-time. > Nissan took the affordable ev route long before tesla and wasn't very successful. I mean not really. They dipped their toe into it and never moved beyond the initial generation. So I don't think its a fair comparison. > And now other brands and the supply chains are catching up, making ev versions of their cars, with the desirable features and established manufacturing. The established manufacturing doesn't totally hold up. Because building EV is so different that upgrade cost are huge and some of the best competitors use new factories as well. I do agree that Tesla failed to provide some features that they really could and should have provided. Like a 360 view around the car for example.

duxup 2y ago

It does seem like Tesla hit a home run of sorts and sort of keeps swinging for the fences rather than trying to bat for a good average.

panick21_ 2y ago
Hyperfocus is one of Musk big strength. Like it was for Jobs. The power of saying no. Having a clear vision and focusing the company on that. When Tesla was working on 3/Y they had that. And it really worked. But as a car company after you have a car like that, you need to move into many niches large and small. And you can't have the overall company focus on any one project. You need a pipeline of new cars, new upgrades and so on. And then the thing they did seem to primarily focus on, FSD, didn't work nearly as well as Musk thought. He got obsessed with thinking AI was on an S-Curve upwards and it would just be solved fast.

m463 2y ago

I read the book "Ludicrous" and found it interesting. It said that what tesla was doing was creating a prestige brand known for advanced yet not affordable features. If they made affordable versions, people would assume it would be like the high-end tesla and better than a comparable car from another manufacturer. However, the high-end tesla vehicles were not really validating the musk "master plan" of affordable cars with the same characteristics. A similar affordable car would have to have reduced features and capabilities, and it might not be profitable (because tesla is not cost efficient). Nissan took the affordable ev route long before tesla and wasn't very successful. And now other brands and the supply chains are catching up, making ev versions of their cars, with the desirable features and established manufacturing.

panick21_ 2y ago
I haven't read the book but I'm not really sure I agree. Tesla were affordable in a car market where the avg new car was the cost of a Model Y/3. And they sold really well. I don't think we can imply anything about what people would have assumed if they had released a cheaper car. That all depends on positioning and market. On the high end, they didn't provide enough differentiation with the X/S. Not upgrading them quickly enough and not pushing more into luxury to compete with more expensive German cars and Lexus. But that's not a huge part of the market. > because tesla is not cost efficient Tesla is plenty cost efficient, the reality is, nobody can make a huge profit on a cheap car. And most can't get even close. Tesla with their integrated strategy could have made a compelling 25k car, it would just need more options then the normal Tesla approach. But its worth doing just to get to scale and capture that large market. Because once you establish yourself their, its gone be harder for others to move in. And then bring cost down over-time. > Nissan took the affordable ev route long before tesla and wasn't very successful. I mean not really. They dipped their toe into it and never moved beyond the initial generation. So I don't think its a fair comparison. > And now other brands and the supply chains are catching up, making ev versions of their cars, with the desirable features and established manufacturing. The established manufacturing doesn't totally hold up. Because building EV is so different that upgrade cost are huge and some of the best competitors use new factories as well. I do agree that Tesla failed to provide some features that they really could and should have provided. Like a 360 view around the car for example.