Factory is shut for the week of July 27 for retooling for model X?

[AnOutsider]

Am I the only person whose been browsing this thread getting confused thinking who or what is ed?

Eds was an "anonymous leaker" that came here and posted some info. I suppose now the big debate is over whether or not the info was real, outdated or fake.

 

[Blastphemy]

Don't argue with the non-logical. I presented a fact. Others want to disregard that, so they make it into something that is about defending the company. Whatever.

It's my Sig that will be impacted. It really doesn't matter what the future speculation is on this topic. As far as I am concerned, the facts are the facts. People can 'factor them in' however they want.

I wouldn't put too much stock in the various theories and accusations flying around this forum. It's just a bunch of people who are frustrated because they can't get reliable information from Tesla (July configurator? Uh-huh), people on this forum (Eds, etc.), nor the press. So since there's nothing factual to discuss, everyone just posts nonsense and then others get annoyed by that nonsense because one person's speculation doesn't match another person's speculation. And people are so disgruntled that even telling us that there's a shareholder call in two days doesn't alleviate any of the angst because no one can rely on statements made on that phone call to be accurate since a lot of it is just spin and wishful thinking. And still no one has a Tesla Model X in his/her garage.

Who is Eds?

Am I the only person whose been browsing this thread getting confused thinking who or what is ed?

View Profile: Eds - Tesla Motors Club - Enthusiasts & Owners Forum

 

[AnxietyRanger]

Eds was an "anonymous leaker" that came here and posted some info. I suppose now the big debate is over whether or not the info was real, outdated or fake.

I think the remaining debate is solely on whether or not anonymous sources should be considered and how - and should our responsibility be towards Tesla's interests or those of the community, which are not always the same. In any case, that is the debate I'm having, others may be having a different debate as usual...

About Eds itself - since he/she is no longer active in these threads and with Tesla's refutation via bonnie, I guess we have taken Tesla's word for it and see how it all unfolds - at least until the next "source" and next "rumor" of something.

- - - Updated - - -

I wouldn't put too much stock in the various theories and accusations flying around this forum. It's just a bunch of people who are frustrated because they can't get reliable information from Tesla (July configurator? Uh-huh), people on this forum (Eds, etc.), nor the press. So since there's nothing factual to discuss, everyone just posts nonsense and then others get annoyed by that nonsense because one person's speculation doesn't match another person's speculation.

Then again, people said the same of things like mules having an adaptive spoiler, before we got confirmation. Analysis of sources and leaks is a process that gets progressively better, but of course is never fully accurate. It happens in the absence of official information from the company (Tesla in this case), which is a given since it is in Tesla's interest to withhold such information, but not (usually) in the interest of the consumer. This clash of interests creates a "market" for unofficial data.

shareholder call in two days doesn't alleviate any of the angst because no one can rely on statements made on that phone call to be accurate since a lot of it is just spin and wishful thinking. And still no one has a Tesla Model X in his/her garage.

Well, I would say that "spin and wishful thinking" calls for some cool-headed analysis, then! Don't worry, I'll leave that to someone else though. Others are better at the investor relations game.

- - - Updated - - -

Am I the only person whose been browsing this thread getting confused thinking who or what is ed?

Eds is the starter of the Delay in model X launch? thread, who made the quoted-below claims - now refuted by Tesla via bonnie - of Model X delays. Alongside throwawayaccount and Twiddler, one of the alleged sources for the latest round of Model X production rumors.

It is not known publicly who he/she is, however following claims have been made by TMC members of his/her agenda and by himself/herself of sources etc.:

It didn't take me long to figure out with 99% certainty who Eds is (and it adds absolutely nothing to post details here), but even if he wasn't anonymous he has/had an agenda for whatever reason and there's no knowing to what degree his posts reflect an actual situation or not, realistically or not.

But this whole speculation that some early vehicles might be 'less than' later vehicles because some anonymous poster with an agenda

Eds:
Delay in model X launch? - Page 3
Delay in model X launch? - Page 3
Delay in model X launch? - Page 7
Delay in model X launch? - Page 7

As all OEMs do Tesla are committing to “launch” Tesla X in few / couple months. This will be as follows:

1. Build few hundred, mostly, press cars
2. Deliver less than 100 cars to customers by end of the year
3. Call it successful launch of the new model

The real story is as follows:

1. Tesla are still doing design changes to some components as they are realising post RC1 build that they have significant number of “challenges”
2. RC2 build vehicles will be “sellable” vehicles but will have number of prototype components that will not be at final specification and therefore inferior to production components that will come in early next year.
3. Several suppliers do not even have their new machines up and running to provide components; their production tooling is only going to be completed around late Oct / early Nov 2015…
4. Significant challenges in supplier base management. I prefer not to go into details at this point
5. All this is because Elon M does not want to see the share price plummet by announcing that they will miss the launch of Model X this year and that there are number of important issues that they have not resolved/do not know how to resolve yet
6. I would not buy early cars as they will be severely compromised in numerous areas

Tesla's refutation as told by bonnie:

Enough already. I've tried REALLY hard to stay out of the whole 'ohhh maybe we know and maybe we don't, but ...' conversation that leads to exactly nowhere. But this whole speculation that some early vehicles might be 'less than' later vehicles because some anonymous poster with an agenda isn't fun, but is potentially harmful to the company's reputation.

People can take me at my word or not. But I have permission from a very highly-placed Tesla executive to state unequivocally that the first Signature cars produced will be equivalent to the last Signature cars produced. And I have it in writing. And with Tesla's permission, one other early Signature reservation holder has the same information.

No, I am not going to share that publicly. Nor am I going to name the exec. And yes, some of you will scream 'Tesla DEFENDER!!!'. But some of you will know that I ask a LOT of hard questions of Tesla and I get answers (well, okay, not all the time ). (I didn't make the money to buy these cars by being naive - I shouldn't have to point that out, but some people seem to think I'm not capable of critical thought).

Speculating about something like this, where there is no knowledge other than claims from an obviously bitter anonymous source is potentially harmful. We should be more responsible than that.

 

[NigelM]

Factory is shut down this week to start X production next week

I understand this will be met with the same skepticism as my previous post, and that's ok with me. But, for those that believe....production is going into high gear next week.

@mods: not that big a deal but the thread title has become somewhat anachronistic. 'Next week" now means 'this week'. Perhaps for simplicity sake just add a date?

 

[Vger]

Enough already. I've tried REALLY hard to stay out of the whole 'ohhh maybe we know and maybe we don't, but ...' conversation that leads to exactly nowhere. But this whole speculation that some early vehicles might be 'less than' later vehicles because some anonymous poster with an agenda isn't fun, but is potentially harmful to the company's reputation.

People can take me at my word or not. But I have permission from a very highly-placed Tesla executive to state unequivocally that the first Signature cars produced will be equivalent to the last Signature cars produced. And I have it in writing. And with Tesla's permission, one other early Signature reservation holder has the same information.

No, I am not going to share that publicly. Nor am I going to name the exec. And yes, some of you will scream 'Tesla DEFENDER!!!'. But some of you will know that I ask a LOT of hard questions of Tesla and I get answers (well, okay, not all the time ). (I didn't make the money to buy these cars by being naive - I shouldn't have to point that out, but some people seem to think I'm not capable of critical thought).

Speculating about something like this, where there is no knowledge other than claims from an obviously bitter anonymous source is potentially harmful. We should be more responsible than that.

I take Bonnie on her word here, not just because I know her, but because she is an appropriately interested party. She has SigX #2, so she has every right to get an assurance in writing from a Tesla exec that HER car will not be compromised. Eds.'s comments might have made sense in the environment of 2012, but after 6-9 months of very visible road testing, about which we do not know the half (nor probably the 1%), I think they are specious, at best.

Thanks, Bonnie, for putting your own reputation capital on the line to shoot down this FUD.

 

[lg_golfs]

Eds was an "anonymous leaker" that came here and posted some info. I suppose now the big debate is over whether or not the info was real, outdated or fake.

I am an anonymous leaker as well thanks to Depends!

(Bows) Will be here all week. Unlike the tours.

 

[gizmoboy]

About Eds itself - since he/she is no longer active in these threads and with Tesla's refutation via bonnie, I guess we have taken Tesla's word for it and see how it all unfolds - at least until the next "source" and next "rumor" of something.

Totally my opinion here, but it's phraseology like that above (emphasis mine for clarity) which undermines your statements that you believe bonnie and instead suggests that other (more gullible) folks have foolishly decided to accept this information of dubious provenance. Not that you said that, of course, and you'll deny that you ever said or meant that, if I'm reading your style correctly, but the backhanded compliments and subtle wordplay certainly suggest that mindset in you. Your obvious intelligence further suggests to me that this is intentional and not inadvertent.

Another example of the phrasing (both precise, factually correct... and subtly insinuating of mistrust):

Tesla's refutation as told by bonnie:

(Emphasis again mine.)

I mention this only on the off-chance that it is actually inadvertent writing style and not argumentation. (If it's intentional, then it'll obviously be disputed and nothing will change.)

 

[bonnie]

Totally my opinion here, but it's phraseology like that above (emphasis mine for clarity) which undermines your statements that you believe bonnie and instead suggests that other (more gullible) folks have foolishly decided to accept this information of dubious provenance. Not that you said that, of course, and you'll deny that you ever said or meant that, if I'm reading your style correctly, but the backhanded compliments and subtle wordplay certainly suggest that mindset in you. Your obvious intelligence further suggests to me that this is intentional and not inadvertent.

Another example of the phrasing (both precise, factually correct... and subtly insinuating of mistrust):


(Emphasis again mine.)

I mention this only on the off-chance that it is actually inadvertent writing style and not argumentation. (If it's intentional, then it'll obviously be disputed and nothing will change.)

"Words are hard."

 

[schonelucht]

People can take me at my word or not. But I have permission from a very highly-placed Tesla executive to state unequivocally that the first Signature cars produced will be equivalent to the last Signature cars produced. And I have it in writing. And with Tesla's permission, one other early Signature reservation holder has the same information.

That's a surprising statement from that exec given that it's been reported that the model S undergoes on average about 20 changes every single week, even now. I am wondering why they are abandoning this tried process of continual integration. Maybe they found the hard way that what works for software doesn't necessarily work equally well for hardware development?

 

[ecarfan]

Factory is shut down this week to start X production next week

That's a surprising statement from that exec given that it's been reported that the model S undergoes on average about 20 changes every single week, even now. I am wondering why they are abandoning this tried process of continual integration. Maybe they found the hard way that what works for software doesn't necessarily work equally well for hardware development?

I am confident that Bonnie is not stating that the first and last Sig X will by perfectly identical but that for all practical purposes they will be functionally and cosmetically the same. You are over-analyzing her wording and drawing conclusions that are unwarranted.

 

[gizmoboy]

I am confident that Bonnie is not stating that the first and last Sig X will by perfectly identical but that for all practical purposes they will be functionally and cosmetically the same. You are over-analyzing her wording and drawing conclusions that are unwarranted.

Agreed. I read that as "equivalent in the sense that they will all be using 'production grade' parts" -- or, possibly, prototype parts (but they'll all be using the same caliber of parts).

In other words "the early recipients are not being knowingly screwed." (And this, frankly, was the point of the anyonymous poster's sinister message.)

What s/he didn't say is whether the non-Sig Xs will be better than the Sig Xs... :tongue:

 

[JST]

That's a surprising statement from that exec given that it's been reported that the model S undergoes on average about 20 changes every single week, even now. I am wondering why they are abandoning this tried process of continual integration. Maybe they found the hard way that what works for software doesn't necessarily work equally well for hardware development?

Note that "equivalent" does not mean "identical." I have no doubt that Tesla has provided assurances to the first Sig purchasers that their cars won't be immediately obsolete by changes made to the later ones...but I also have little doubt that whatever language Tesla is using in those assurances, they've left themselves enough latitude to make running production improvements and corresponding minor design changes.

I think everyone needs to calm down and think things through critically. Is it likely that the info about problems with the Model X launch is fabricated or exaggerated? Probably. Is is possible that Tesla is running into issues with suppliers who are having trouble delivering? Sure--I mean, it's not exactly unprecedented. Look at all the cars that were built without next gen seats. Is it also possible that there are last-minute design issues that they are still working on solving? Sure--again, that's not unprecedented. See, e.g., autopilot, or the drive unit issues, or the sunroof issues, or the frunk dent issues, or the control arm issues, or any number of other similar things.

We won't know for sure until we get some additional info--maybe this week, maybe not.

 

[bonnie]

That's a surprising statement from that exec given that it's been reported that the model S undergoes on average about 20 changes every single week, even now. I am wondering why they are abandoning this tried process of continual integration. Maybe they found the hard way that what works for software doesn't necessarily work equally well for hardware development?

I am confident that Bonnie is not stating that the first and last Sig X will by perfectly identical but that for all practical purposes they will be functionally and cosmetically the same. You are over-analyzing her wording and drawing conclusions that are unwarranted.

Agreed. I read that as "equivalent in the sense that they will all be using 'production grade' parts" -- or, possibly, prototype parts (but they'll all be using the same caliber of parts).

In other words "the early recipients are not being knowingly screwed." (And this, frankly, was the point of the anyonymous poster's sinister message.)

Note that "equivalent" does not mean "identical." I have no doubt that Tesla has provided assurances to the first Sig purchasers that their cars won't be immediately obsolete by changes made to the later ones...but I also have little doubt that whatever language Tesla is using in those assurances, they've left themselves enough latitude to make running production improvements and corresponding minor design changes.

You guys nailed it. I would never ask for assurances that Tesla will not continue innovating and I made that very clear. I LOVE that they continue innovating. I made sure that the language I suggested left the door open for innovation & didn't insist on some unreasonable expectation.

I have zero expectations that the Model X made exactly a year after mine won't be even better (it better be!) ... but I'll have a year's worth of fun on mine that they'll never be able to recover .

 

[ohmman]

I have zero expectations that the Model X made exactly a year after mine won't be even better (it better be!) ... but I'll have a year's worth of fun on mine that they'll never be able to recover .

Translated: A Sig in hand is worth two in the bush/production queue.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

Totally my opinion here, but it's phraseology like that above (emphasis mine for clarity) which undermines your statements that you believe bonnie and instead suggests that other (more gullible) folks have foolishly decided to accept this information of dubious provenance. Not that you said that, of course, and you'll deny that you ever said or meant that, if I'm reading your style correctly, but the backhanded compliments and subtle wordplay certainly suggest that mindset in you. Your obvious intelligence further suggests to me that this is intentional and not inadvertent.

Another example of the phrasing (both precise, factually correct... and subtly insinuating of mistrust):

(Emphasis again mine.)

I mention this only on the off-chance that it is actually inadvertent writing style and not argumentation. (If it's intentional, then it'll obviously be disputed and nothing will change.)

gizmoboy: Words are hard and posters get the third-degree on TMC a lot, that's for sure.

But unless it was not clear: I am not arguing against Tesla's clarification as told here - as I *am* taking their word for it. For me the Eds case is closed, unless something new surfaces. Nothing else is suggested by my words.

Not that you are completely incorrect, though: Where there is reservation in my compliments of bonnie is that I felt the clarification from Tesla via bonnie came packaged with her argument against considering unofficial information, which I don't agree with obviously as I feel it too defensive of Tesla and unnecessarily (and unfairly) dismissive of unofficial sources. So I can't in good conscience go ahead and 100% agree with bonnie's message, since I don't, for reasons expressed.

Unofficial sources serve a purpose and our interest as consumers. However, equally important is we prioritize information and revise things as we learn more - which I am doing all the time, this latest clarification included. We have now learned more and for that part, I thank bonnie for bringing a new piece of data on the Model X saga to TMC. In actual fact, that is something I have asked more of her all along, which she has usually declined. I disagree merely with her editorial on unofficial sources.

So, I am taking Tesla's word on the issue of all Model X Signatures being equal - at least in every way that counts - and I trust bonnie to have summarized here fairly and accurately. No ifs, buts or maybes there.

- - - Updated - - -

You guys nailed it. I would never ask for assurances that Tesla will not continue innovating and I made that very clear. I LOVE that they continue innovating. I made sure that the language I suggested left the door open for innovation & didn't insist on some unreasonable expectation.

Edit: I had not read the above message before making my latest reply. The response to JST's message and the bolded part sounds a little iffy to me.

 

[NigelM]

But unless it was not clear: I am not arguing against Tesla's clarification as told here - as I *am* taking their word for it.
<snip>
So I can't in good conscience go ahead and 100% agree with bonnie's message, since I don't, for reasons expressed.
<snip>
So, I am taking Tesla's word on the issue of all Model X Signatures being equal - at least in every way that counts - and I trust bonnie to have summarized here fairly and accurately. No ifs, buts or maybes there.
<snip>
...part sounds a little iffy to me.

Sorry, you lost me at "words are hard".

 

[bonnie]

Edit: I had not read the above message before making my latest reply. The bolded part sounds a little iffy to me.

Really? How so?

Bottom line, as others (thanks vger and others!) have noted, I have a lot of skin in the game with Sig #2. Obviously I'm locking down what matters to me personally, not for the sake of some silly forum disagreement or to bother proving anyone wrong. I happen to subscribe to 'people can argue and disagree with you all they want, the truth is still the truth'.

Believe what you want.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

But unless it was not clear: I am not arguing against Tesla's clarification as told here - as I *am* taking their word for it.
<snip>
So I can't in good conscience go ahead and 100% agree with bonnie's message, since I don't, for reasons expressed.
<snip>
So, I am taking Tesla's word on the issue of all Model X Signatures being equal - at least in every way that counts - and I trust bonnie to have summarized here fairly and accurately. No ifs, buts or maybes there.[/

Sorry, you lost me at "words are hard".

I guess you are intentionally not even trying to understand me, then.

In any case, in it original form I take Tesla's clarification that Eds is wrong - I take their word for it. That was my point. While disagreeing with bonnie's stance of dismissing unofficial sources.

Now, with the latest page (which I hadn't read), quite a bit of disclaimers and room for changes have suddenly surfaced I don't know what to think of. I made my post prior.

 

[gjunky]

Wow, those last few pages are a lot of talk about nothing. What does any of this have to do with Factory shutdowns?

 

[bonnie]

Wow, those last few pages are a lot of talk about nothing. What does any of this have to do with Factory shutdowns?

Hahaha. We got nuthin.