FSD Timeline Promises (summary)

[rxlawdude]

"“Our goal is, and I feel pretty good about this goal, that we’ll be able to do a demonstration drive of full autonomy all the way from LA to New York, from home in LA to let’s say dropping you off in Time Square in New York, and then having the car go park itself, by the end of next year...without the need for a single touch, including the charger.”

"GOAL" != PROMISE OR ACTIONABLE EXPLICIT WARRANTY.

 

[EVNow]

"GOAL" != PROMISE OR ACTIONABLE EXPLICIT WARRANTY.

This is exactly the issue - haters always misinterpret what ELon says.

I mean, there are plenty of things Elon says - with a lot of conviction - that clearly don't come true. Why not just stick to that !!

Like this one from 2019 Feb ...

We will be feature complete full self driving this year. The car will be able to find you in a parking lot, pick you up, take you all the way to your destination without an intervention this year. I'm certain of that. That is not a question mark. It will be essentially safe to fall asleep and wake up at their destination towards the end of next year

The above first part will be "true" when FSD Beta has achieved GA (like NOA now - still Beta, but everyone who paid for it gets it). So, it is almost 2 years late and unlikely to come true anytime soon ...

 

[daniel]

That's.... almost every company with new products.

See again kickstarter. In many cases they DO NOT make good on what they promise. But they thought they could, and took the $ in good faith.

No. "Almost every company with new products" sells the products they have. They do not ask people to buy the product five or ten or twenty years before the product even exists.

Kickstarter is widely understood to be investments in development, with the promise of a product IF it is successfully developed.

Similarly when you buy stock in a company, it is understood that you are taking a risk. There is no promise of success, and every stock prospectus clearly states that you could lose your money.

You can. Short the stock. Let us know how that works out for you.

Also wrong! Tesla owns the EV market. Failing to deliver on FSD will not tank the stock. Shorting the stock is betting that the company will fail, not that the promise of FSD will never be fulfilled.

I am a total Tesla fanboy. I love my car and I am long on TSLA and have no intention of selling.

My only quarrel with them is that for several years they were selling a pig in a poke, and when they realized they could not deliver, they quietly changed the promise, with no compensation or acknowledgement.

"“Our goal is, and I feel pretty good about this goal, that we’ll be able to do a demonstration drive of full autonomy all the way from LA to New York, from home in LA to let’s say dropping you off in Time Square in New York, and then having the car go park itself, by the end of next year...without the need for a single touch, including the charger.”

"GOAL" != PROMISE OR ACTIONABLE EXPLICIT WARRANTY.

True. NOW that's what they say, because they realized they could not deliver what they were promising for a number of years. NOW they say "This is our goal," but before they were saying "Your car WILL..."

 

[Knightshade]

No. "Almost every company with new products" sells the products they have.

Naah.

Even Apple does pre-orders on phones that haven't been built yet. Heck they sell subscriptions so you can have next years model upgrade set up before there's even a prototype of next years model.

GM, Ford, Rivian, Tesla, Lucid, etc all taking $ to reserve cars that don't exist yet.

Kickstarters entire business model is built around thousands and thousands of projects that need funding before they exist.

This isn't some weird one-off thing only Tesla does.

Kickstarter is widely understood to be investments in development, with the promise of a product IF it is successfully developed.

Same here.

See again all the disclaimers they've attached from the start about software validation and regulation as risks for example.

The first several iterations of the overall software design turned out NOT to be validated, and they had to go back and redesign.

My only quarrel with them is that for several years they were selling a pig in a poke, and when they realized they could not deliver, they quietly changed the promise, with no compensation or acknowledgement.

Do you have evidence they don't, internally, believe they can deliver it?

You've made the claim repeatedly, and been asked for evidence repeatedly, and produced... nothing.

As I pointed out- the more likely explanation in the description change is to reduce the amount of folks they need to make whole if in the future they realize it's impossible to deliver.

If they'd just given up on the old cars they wouldn't still be upgrading their hardware at Teslas expense would they?

 

[t3sl4drvr]

This thread goes in circles. Couple of people in this thread seem to be completely tone-deaf about the fact that Tesla did advertise Full Self-Driving as something one will receive if they paid a significant amount of money for the feature. Furthermore, Tesla CEO has frequently confirmed FSD as L5 and has provided series of delivery timelines that their customers and investors were led to believe to be true.

Let's stop going back and forth on the above facts and focus on practicalities on how to hold Tesla accountable.

 

[drtimhill]

True. NOW that's what they say, because they realized they could not deliver what they were promising for a number of years. NOW they say "This is our goal," but before they were saying "Your car WILL..."

The psychology of all this is interesting...

Scenario A: An investor promises you a 100x return on your investment in 12 months. You actually get a 25x return, and are mad at the investor for breaking his promise and under-delivering.

Scenario B: Another investor promises a 10x return on your investment in 12 months. You actually get a 12x return, and are super-happy the investor did a great job and over-delivered.

So you are happy with a 12x return, but angry about a 25x return.

This is basically what is going on with Tesla. Tesla promised 100x and people are mad they are only delivering 25x. Meanwhile, right now, everyone else is talking about 10x and are not even close to delivering anything. Not Waymo, Nvidia, MobileEye, Ford or GM.

 

[Daniel in SD]

The psychology of all this is interesting...

Scenario A: An investor promises you a 100x return on your investment in 12 months. You actually get a 25x return, and are mad at the investor for breaking his promise and under-delivering.

Scenario B: Another investor promises a 10x return on your investment in 12 months. You actually get a 12x return, and are super-happy the investor did a great job and over-delivered.

So you are happy with a 12x return, but angry about a 25x return.

This is basically what is going on with Tesla. Tesla promised 100x and people are mad they are only delivering 25x. Meanwhile, right now, everyone else is talking about 10x and are not even close to delivering anything. Not Waymo, Nvidia, MobileEye, Ford or GM.

I think the people complaining think they got a negative return. Meaning they wouldn’t have invested if they knew what the return would be (unlike your two scenarios).

 

[EVNow]

rue. NOW that's what they say, because they realized they could not deliver what they were promising for a number of years. NOW they say "This is our goal," but before they were saying "Your car WILL..."

No - that is the quote from 5 years back.

Happy Five Year Anniversary to this quote:

 

[EVNow]

Tesla CEO has frequently confirmed FSD as L5 and has provided series of delivery timelines that their customers and investors were led to believe to be true.

This is not a "fact". There were long debates about it in the past if you want to dig up.

 

[rxlawdude]

This thread goes in circles. Couple of people in this thread seem to be completely tone-deaf about the fact that Tesla did advertise Full Self-Driving as something one will receive if they paid a significant amount of money for the feature. Furthermore, Tesla CEO has frequently confirmed FSD as L5 and has provided series of delivery timelines that their customers and investors were led to believe to be true.

Let's stop going back and forth on the above facts and focus on practicalities on how to hold Tesla accountable.

Didn't you file suit yet? Why do you care what internet posters say? Why continue this?

You claim promises were made. Prove it with a preponderance of the evidence. In court.

 

[idriveacar]

The psychology of all this is interesting...

Scenario A: An investor promises you a 100x return on your investment in 12 months. You actually get a 25x return, and are mad at the investor for breaking his promise and under-delivering.

Scenario B: Another investor promises a 10x return on your investment in 12 months. You actually get a 12x return, and are super-happy the investor did a great job and over-delivered.

So you are happy with a 12x return, but angry about a 25x return.

This is basically what is going on with Tesla. Tesla promised 100x and people are mad they are only delivering 25x. Meanwhile, right now, everyone else is talking about 10x and are not even close to delivering anything. Not Waymo, Nvidia, MobileEye, Ford or GM.

Tesla has not delivered even 1X of what they promised with FSD. Even among the few who have the feature, it provides _negative_ value since it doesn't make the task of driving easier.

Meanwhile Waymo has operational robo-taxies, and many other companies are racking up thousands and thousands of miles with few disengagements. Also consider that the robo-taxi companies are driverless, whereas FSD is not and will not be when it is delivered.

 

[Knightshade]

This thread goes in circles. Couple of people in this thread seem to be completely tone-deaf about the fact that Tesla did advertise Full Self-Driving as something one will receive if they paid a significant amount of money for the feature.

Mainly because every time they ask someone for any evidence Tesla does not intend to deliver that eventually they're met with silence.

"It's taking a while" for something with no promised delivery date isn't much of an argument.

And then some folks turn it to 11 and scream FRAUD AND SCAM while again, providing 0 evidence of such.

 

[S4WRXTTCS]

Tesla has not delivered even 1X of what they promised with FSD. Even among the few who have the feature, it provides _negative_ value since it doesn't make the task of driving easier.

Meanwhile Waymo has operational robo-taxies, and many other companies are racking up thousands and thousands of miles with few disengagements. Also consider that the robo-taxi companies are driverless, whereas FSD is not and will not be when it is delivered.

1X = 100%
I think you meant .01X

What's hilarious is they gave their customers work to do under the disguise of "help make it better" after making them qualify to do this work with the infamous safety score.

It's truly a nutty world.

 

[daniel]

Naah.

Even Apple does pre-orders on phones that haven't been built yet. Heck they sell subscriptions so you can have next years model upgrade set up before there's even a prototype of next years model.

GM, Ford, Rivian, Tesla, Lucid, etc all taking $ to reserve cars that don't exist yet

And Apple delivers those phones. GM and Ford deliver those cars. I ordered my iPhone before the release date. I was not charged until the phone shipped.

When I ordered a Nissan Leaf I paid a $100 refundable deposit. The car was not yet available to customers, but examples existed. The technology existed! They didn't charge me for the whole car. Just $100 to hold my place in line. When they f***ed up the order and could not deliver, I cancelled my order and got a prompt refund of my $100.

Lucid is taking refundable $300 deposits on its car. If you change you mind or get tired of waiting, you get your $300 back. You don't pay for the car now. Pretty sure GM and Ford do something similar if you reserve a car that doesn't yet exist. I don't know about Rivian.

Tesla never offered to take a refundable deposit on FSD. It charged full price. For a technology that didn't even exist. And still does not exist. Which, of course, is why they're no longer selling the promise of a driverless car. They're selling an enhanced version of Enhanced Autopilot, a level 2 driver assist system, which aspires to function in city driving, still at level 2: Fully-alert driver required at all times. But which they're still calling "Full Self-Driving," though it is not that at all.

 

[DarkandStormy]

This is not a "fact". There were long debates about it in the past if you want to dig up.

Elon was asked at Autonomy Day (2019) if he meant level 5 and he said yes.

It's a fact.

 

[S4WRXTTCS]

Mainly because every time they ask someone for any evidence Tesla does not intend to deliver that eventually they're met with silence.

"It's taking a while" for something with no promised delivery date isn't much of an argument.

And then some folks turn it to 11 and scream FRAUD AND SCAM while again, providing 0 evidence of such.

I don't think a fraud or a scam has to necessarily be intentional.

You can easily find yourself in trouble if you misled people, and failed to deliver a product within a reasonable time period.

There was never a promised delivery date, but there was a lot of communication from the CEO of the company that it wasn't that far out. Tesla also used threats of the FSD price going up to get people to buy in. We also know Tesla told consumers one thing, and regulatory bodies a different thing. Basically the two faces of FSD.

The terms fraud, and scam seem to weighted with the idea of intent that people don't want to use those terms.

Tesla's also in a much different place now then they were then so the optics on it are completely different. We're likely not going to see it as a fraud because its completely unnecessary, but maybe the hype was necessary back in late 2016.

So instead of a fraud we see it as the failing of an egomaniac. Someone too stubborn to let go of it, and around the marry-go-around we go where each time some of us drop off. I'll probably be getting off in 2023 (contingent on Rivian delivery dates). So that's only around 6.25% of my life span waiting for FSD.

What bums me out about EAP/FSD isn't the cost of it.

I can live with a $8K oops or a $10K oops.

But, what sucks is that in all this time it was never really all that much better than AP1 back in 2015.

Technology that works is supposed to blend into the background to where you don't even think of its existent despite using it every day. But, that never happened with EAP/FSD.

It was always this weird "hey, I'm here to say hello" kind of thing.

In a lot of ways FSD Beta was the official transfer of FSD from being a functional expectation to FSD being an adventure. We use it not because it works, but because it's interesting.

Which in my case is exactly what I paid for, and so its more of a "what you wished for might not really be what you want" kind of thing. Someone else likened it to a crazy girlfriend. That's probably about right.

 

[EVNow]

Elon was asked at Autonomy Day (2019) if he meant level 5 and he said yes.

It's a fact.

This exact item has been debated to death. That question wasn't a simple question and it was not clear what he said yes to.

As I said, search if you want to. I don't want to rehash the arguments.

 

[Knightshade]

I don't think a fraud or a scam has to necessarily be intentional.

It [B}literally does[/B]

Here's an example from California civil code:

Codes Display Text

“Fraud” means an intentional misrepresentation, deceit, or concealment of a material fact known to the defendant with the intention on the part of the defendant of thereby depriving a person of property or legal rights or otherwise causing injury.

Note the word intentional

Tesla also used threats of the FSD price going up to get people to buy in.

But then it did go up

That's... like.... the literal opposite of fraud.

Weird argument to bring up in this.

We also know Tesla told consumers one thing, and regulatory bodies a different thing. Basically the two faces of FSD.

Nope.

People keep mixing up the eventual L4+ product Tesla sold pre 3/19 with the City Streets code (often called FSDBeta) that they described in the CA DMV docs.

Those are not the same thing

One is certainly a stepping stone to the other, but that's about it.

What bums me out about EAP/FSD isn't the cost of it.

I can live with a $8K oops or a $10K oops.

But, what sucks is that in all this time it was never really all that much better than AP1 back in 2015.

Having driven both (those vastly less on AP1) I disagree with this idea pretty strongly.

AP1 is much nearer (and still inferior to) basic AP- which is free these days.

EAP is a finished product BTW, and has been since 2019. Buyers got everything they paid for in full.

Those buyers who also added FSD only paid ~$3000 for it (give or take 1k depending on timing).

Folks who paid 8-10 post 3/19 got... all the EAP features basic AP does not include... plus FSD. So again essentially the same price for the post-EAP stuff.


The idea anybody paid 10k and got nothing is much nearer fraud than anything Tesla has done here.

 

[EVNow]

Elon was asked at Autonomy Day (2019) if he meant level 5 and he said yes.

It's a fact.

This exact item has been debated to death. That question wasn't a simple question and it was not clear what he said yes to.

As I said, search if you want to. I don't want to rehash the arguments.

Like this one ...

That is a lie.

He actually said "yes" to a question that had two(3?) parts
- L5
- Not geofenced
- End of the year

We have talked about this before - but Musk has never talked explicitly about L5 that I'm aware of. He was primarily answering the 2 & 3 of the above. He had repeatedly talked about those 2 parts in the autonomy day quite a bit. But in the entire 3 hours he nevered talked about levels (AFAIK).

So, fairest interpretation of what he said was Tesla would be FSD FC end of the year - definitions being Tesla's own as they have put it down on the website now, not some esoteric level definition from SAE.

ps : Reminds me of how the media crucified Gore for "saying" he invented Internet - which ofcourse he never did.

 

[Daniel in SD]

Like this one ...

What about this one?
"the basic news is that all Tesla vehicles exiting the factory have the hardware necessary for level 5 autonomy so that in terms of the connector cameras and compute power it's every call we make, on the order of two thousand cars a week, are shipping now with Level 5 meaning hardware capable of a full self-driving or driverless capability so it will take us some time you know in the future to complete validation of the software and also get through required regulatory approval but the important thing is that the foundation is laid for the cars to be fully autonomous at a safety level we believe to be at least twice that of a person may be better so I think that's probably unexpected by most that it's happening right now"