-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Articles re Tesla—Fact or Fiction?
- Thread starter Robert.Boston
- Start date
Another hit piece on Musk and Tesla, by a guy named Matthew DeBord. As if we were in need of more FUD.
Elon Musk is setting himself up for an epic failure
Nice touch was the Musk picture they used, this must be one of the worst pictures of him. Or the best, if your intention is to talk down someone like Elon Musk.
Elon Musk is setting himself up for an epic failure
Nice touch was the Musk picture they used, this must be one of the worst pictures of him. Or the best, if your intention is to talk down someone like Elon Musk.
Apparently Matthew was already gloating about what he thought was the end of Tesla in 2008:
The Dream of the Electric Car Runs Out of Juice...for Now
The recurring pattern in his articles is that he tries to appear 'balanced', but it is always very clear in which direction he tries to push the reader.
The Dream of the Electric Car Runs Out of Juice...for Now
The recurring pattern in his articles is that he tries to appear 'balanced', but it is always very clear in which direction he tries to push the reader.
Johan
Ex got M3 in the divorce, waiting for EU Model Y!
Matthew de Bord is a tool. Here he is discussing the possibility of a capital raise in 2016 as something undoubtedly negative. Go figure.
Tesla’s new production plan reveals a goal for the company — even if Elon Musk won’t admit it
Tesla’s new production plan reveals a goal for the company — even if Elon Musk won’t admit it
As Robert Heinlein once said in one of his books:
"Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done and why. Then Do It!"
Elon Musk read a lot of science fiction as a kid, so I'm sure he knows the quote.
Some companies have strong visible leaders who set the pace for the entire organization. In the early years Microsoft was an extension of Bill Gates' personality. Apple was the same for Steve Jobs. Tesla and SpaceX are extensions of Elon Musk.
One thing critics consistently miss is how Elon Musk thinks. He breaks everything down into the core principles and builds all his ideas from there. That's how SpaceX got started, he broke down everything in the engineering and the science of space flight to the most basic components and found what errors everyone else had made along the way. He rolled everything back up and realized with a bit of experimentation he could deliver payloads to orbit at 1/10 the cost of anyone else.
He's also a very fast thinker. He did all this on his laptop on a flight home from Moscow. He's always doing this deconstruction of ideas and looking for flaws that can be fixed.
As a result he also is never bound by the past. If you prove to him his most cherished idea is not as good as your idea, his idea becomes yesterday's news. It's rare anyone else can present a better idea to him because he's like a chess master thinking 100 moves ahead and most of the rest of the world can't hold that much data in their mind at one time, or think as fast. However, if he discovers he made a mistake in his thinking, he never forms an ego attachment to his ideas and is always willing to switch to something new.
With the lesson learned on the Model X, he realized manufacturing had too little input during the design process and they designed something that was far too complex for efficient mass production. Some people have lamented the two manufacturing guys who have been moved to other things and the new manufacturing managers coming in. That's probably because he wants stronger personalities who can push back on engineering when they get too fixated.
Most companies get bogged down in the <company> Way and change is always resisted. Not so with Elon Musk and the extension of his personality Tesla. The Model X was too complex, so the Model 3 will be all the things the Model X wasn't (simple and cheap to build) and no complaining. Elon realized he respected industrial engineering too little and now they have a larger role at Tesla. He's probably self educated himself to the level of a master's degree in IE since the Model X was launched.
Elon's infinite flexibility is something very rare and something the pundits just don't get.
500,000 cars by 2018 is a tall order. I am a bit skeptical, but Elon has a history of pulling things off nobody thought was possible, so I'm not going to predict failure.
"Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done and why. Then Do It!"
Elon Musk read a lot of science fiction as a kid, so I'm sure he knows the quote.
Some companies have strong visible leaders who set the pace for the entire organization. In the early years Microsoft was an extension of Bill Gates' personality. Apple was the same for Steve Jobs. Tesla and SpaceX are extensions of Elon Musk.
One thing critics consistently miss is how Elon Musk thinks. He breaks everything down into the core principles and builds all his ideas from there. That's how SpaceX got started, he broke down everything in the engineering and the science of space flight to the most basic components and found what errors everyone else had made along the way. He rolled everything back up and realized with a bit of experimentation he could deliver payloads to orbit at 1/10 the cost of anyone else.
He's also a very fast thinker. He did all this on his laptop on a flight home from Moscow. He's always doing this deconstruction of ideas and looking for flaws that can be fixed.
As a result he also is never bound by the past. If you prove to him his most cherished idea is not as good as your idea, his idea becomes yesterday's news. It's rare anyone else can present a better idea to him because he's like a chess master thinking 100 moves ahead and most of the rest of the world can't hold that much data in their mind at one time, or think as fast. However, if he discovers he made a mistake in his thinking, he never forms an ego attachment to his ideas and is always willing to switch to something new.
With the lesson learned on the Model X, he realized manufacturing had too little input during the design process and they designed something that was far too complex for efficient mass production. Some people have lamented the two manufacturing guys who have been moved to other things and the new manufacturing managers coming in. That's probably because he wants stronger personalities who can push back on engineering when they get too fixated.
Most companies get bogged down in the <company> Way and change is always resisted. Not so with Elon Musk and the extension of his personality Tesla. The Model X was too complex, so the Model 3 will be all the things the Model X wasn't (simple and cheap to build) and no complaining. Elon realized he respected industrial engineering too little and now they have a larger role at Tesla. He's probably self educated himself to the level of a master's degree in IE since the Model X was launched.
Elon's infinite flexibility is something very rare and something the pundits just don't get.
500,000 cars by 2018 is a tall order. I am a bit skeptical, but Elon has a history of pulling things off nobody thought was possible, so I'm not going to predict failure.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
It's easy to predict Tesla won't hit 500K by 2018, it seems more difficult for some to understand that it doesn't matter if it's only 400K or so.
Krugerrand
Meow
That's a key point. Anything under 500,000, even 499,999, will be labelled a fail by a significant group of people and thus they'll completely miss the actual success of all those 354,127, or 406,003, or 299,620 EVs on the road and all that they will mean for Tesla and the world. And that's okay. Be happy you (general) aren't the one viewing the world as a half empty glass, because wouldn't that be a very sad way to live?
The Blue Owl
Endangerous Herbivore
An article on Elon Musk and executive compensation:
Tesla’s Elon Musk is doing for executive compensation what he did for electric cars
Tesla’s Elon Musk is doing for executive compensation what he did for electric cars
If you read the earnings call transcript, he doesn't say 500,000 cars in 2018, he says hit a 500,000/year run rate in 2018. That's a big difference.
Elon, I'll turn it over to you.
Elon Reeve Musk - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer
All right. Thank you. I think the most important point here that we want to make is that we're advancing the Model 3 build plan substantially, and just the overall volume plan, with Tesla aiming to get to the half million unit per year run rate in 2018 instead of 2020.
Read more: Tesla Motors (TSLA) Elon Reeve Musk on Q1 2016 Results - Earnings Call Transcript
Elon Reeve Musk - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer
All right. Thank you. I think the most important point here that we want to make is that we're advancing the Model 3 build plan substantially, and just the overall volume plan, with Tesla aiming to get to the half million unit per year run rate in 2018 instead of 2020.
Read more: Tesla Motors (TSLA) Elon Reeve Musk on Q1 2016 Results - Earnings Call Transcript
Thanks for this. It's a very big difference, and almost certainly means significantly less than 500k vehicles in 2018.
pz1975
Active Member
I thought this at first too, but then I rechecked the shareholder's letter after the call and it uses the term "total unit build plan" rather than "per year run rate" to describe the 500K goal for 2018.
From the shareholder's letter (http://files.shareholder.com/downlo...E45227BA/Q1_2016_Tesla_Shareholder_Letter.pdf)
"Additionally, given the demand for Model 3, we have decided to
advance our 500,000 total unit build plan (combined for Model S,
Model X, and Model 3) to 2018, two years earlier than previously
planned."
I personally give more credence to the official letter than what is said during the call.
So, if Model S/X run rate continues at 50% growth YoY, we are talking 180K units total for 2018, which means 320K Model 3 total unit build plan. Tesla also said 100K-200K model 3 to be built by end of 2017, so 100K to 320K ramp from 2017 to 2018 is 320% growth within 12 months... If they can confidently say this, they must be much further along on M3 ramp plan than they lead on thus far.
You seem to think that you know the meaning of the words "total unit build plan". I certainly don't
.
Johan
Ex got M3 in the divorce, waiting for EU Model Y!
You seem to think that you know the meaning of the words "total unit build plan". I certainly don't
General utilization of the term "total unit build plan" in a MFG environment indicates a plan to produce a specific number of finished goods within a specific time period. This is not the same as an exiting run rate, which implies production capacity planning.
can anyone comment, with numbers, on a story on Seeking Alphalfa, by Alberto, that the 89 gigawatts used by superchargers in last year equals ~1,000kWh/vehicle. i suspect decimal points were dropped or something
Johan
Ex got M3 in the divorce, waiting for EU Model Y!
Assuming the 89 GWh figure is correct and is for the whole year 2015, then the approximate 1000 kWh figure per car is correct. There had been some 78.000 or so Model S delivered cumulatively up until dec 31st 2105, of which not all but most are SC capable. 1000 kWh per car would suggest perhaps some 12-15 typical supercharges per car in the year, considering I would guess a typical charge is around 50-60 kWh but we have to put in at least 20% overhead for the SC stations because the efficiency isn't great (lots of waste heat).
89 GWh of solar power is pretty cheap.
ok, no decimal points dropped. author assumes 20cents/kWh, which sure seems high to me. I have about given up on SA
Johan
Ex got M3 in the divorce, waiting for EU Model Y!
Even assuming this high cost of electricity that would work out to $200 per car. Tesla sold Supercharging as a $2000 option on cars where it didn't come included with the large battery pack. That would mean, very crudely, that on the 11th year Tesla starts loosing money on supercharging (this is not taking in to consideration the construction and maintenance cost of the SC network). But then again I'm pretty sure that Tesla knows that it will be a lot less than 10 years before they are 100% self supplied with cheap solar + storage for their entire SC network.
Similar threads
