I wonder if Tesla is really moving as swiftly as possible.

[Red Sage]

Umm, you did, in the title of the thread. Asking if they are moving as fast as they can is the same as asking if they can move faster.

Exactly. I believe the question that Elon Musk has been asking since the Tesla Roadster was revealed is, "Why is it taking so long for traditional automobile manufacturers to build long range fully electric cars throughout their entire product lines?" I think he knows their answers now, but considers them all hogwash borne of laziness, prejudice, and possibly purposeful stupidity.

 

[Garlan Garner]

Umm, you did, in the title of the thread. Asking if they are moving as fast as they can is the same as asking if they can move faster.

The concept of the title was asking if they are going as fast as they can. Do they have people sitting around doing nothing? Do they have robots sitting around doing nothing? I've watched a few videos of the Gigafactory tour and it appears as though there is an extremely laid back work environment there. AND THATS ABSOLUTELY FINE. I just wonder why things are consistently late. Ok Ok. sure there are lots of blame going around. Vendors being late....etc. However I would like for the question to come from an investors perspective. Should I invest in you? Are you doing the best you can? Are you moving as fast as you can? If so....then why are you so late all of the time? Can you not manage your vendors? Should I invest in Tesla with the consideration that its still a "startup"? Should I still consider Tesla as unlearned in the auto industry? How many cars do they have to sell to exit the neophyte category? None of these questions are a criticism...just questions.

I took a class at Fidelity recently and they asked me to sell my company as an investment opportunity in 3 minutes. My company was easy to sell because I don't sell a production. As long as the sun shines...I make money. However, Tesla sells a product and their existence requires it.

I'm not suggesting that they should go faster.

Are they doing the best that they can? Not suggesting that they should do better.
Do they have all of the money they need? Not suggesting that they make more money.
Do they have all of the robots that they need? Not suggesting that they should buy more.
Do they have a sufficient workforce? Not suggesting that they need to hire or fire anyone.

Its a question - not a suggestion.

 

[Garlan Garner]

Exactly. I believe the question that Elon Musk has been asking since the Tesla Roadster was revealed is, "Why is it taking so long for traditional automobile manufacturers to build long range fully electric cars throughout their entire product lines?" I think he knows their answers now, but considers them all hogwash borne of laziness, prejudice, and possibly purposeful stupidity.

I believe ICE companies aren't building EV's as rapidly as they can is because ICE cars are selling like hotcakes. Planet wise....ICE cars are selling. From a marketing standpoint - why would they build something at competes with their cash cow? I don't know this for sure, but I have a feeling that the only reason why some ICE companies are even selling EV's is because they are being forced to. I really don't think they want to. They are making trillions of dollars off ICE cars.
World's Car Population Hits 1 Billion

I believe that the same argument holds true for as to why renewable energy took so long to get a foothold over Nuclear and Coal as an energy competitor. Its only been a short time that Solar has become affordably competitive to Coal.

 

[ModelNforNerd]

Exactly. I believe the question that Elon Musk has been asking since the Tesla Roadster was revealed is, "Why is it taking so long for traditional automobile manufacturers to build long range fully electric cars throughout their entire product lines?" I think he knows their answers now, but considers them all hogwash borne of laziness, prejudice, and possibly purposeful stupidity.

Because even the traditional OEMs know that retooling and repurposing assembly lines takes capital. They all took quite the beating when the economy tanked. So much so that they're hesitant to break away from what keeps them in business.....churning out the same derivative ICE econoboxes, only "innovating" enough to make sure they're CARB-compliant. Look at VW. They put out "clean" diesels, thinking it was more cost effective to "innovate" the software than it was to truly come up with an actual clean vehicle.

Now that they've been spanked, they decided that they would come to the table and say "hey, we can make EVs to attone for our mistakes".

So why didn't they just make EVs in the first place?

 

[Garlan Garner]

Because even the traditional OEMs know that retooling and repurposing assembly lines takes capital. They all took quite the beating when the economy tanked. So much so that they're hesitant to break away from what keeps them in business.....churning out the same derivative ICE econoboxes, only "innovating" enough to make sure they're CARB-compliant. Look at VW. They put out "clean" diesels, thinking it was more cost effective to "innovate" the software than it was to truly come up with an actual clean vehicle.

Now that they've been spanked, they decided that they would come to the table and say "hey, we can make EVs to attone for our mistakes".

So why didn't they just make EVs in the first place?

That's exactly right. Why spend the capital when they are making trillions? The objective is/was money.

I think we all remember the EV1. Sure - it had amazing range ( for that time ) and excited many customers. They were selling them, however the capital to keep the Car going was just to immense. From repair to warranty's to vendors dropping out - they crushed their unsold fleet.
EV1 was a fantastic idea.....it just cost the company too much.
Why is GM Crushing Their EV

 

[Red Sage]

Its a question - not a suggestion.

"Man, that's all you had to say! AUDI!" -- Samuel L Jackson as Jules, 'Pulp Fiction' (1994)

I think Investors have all answered those questions by either paying close attention to Elon Musk's statements or reading the 10-Q for TSLA. Those who tend to not be satisfied with the answers are Speculators instead. Each will do as they will.

 

[Red Sage]

That's exactly right. Why spend the capital when they are making trillions? The objective is/was money.

Yes. The short sighted objective was simply 'making money', one quarter at a time. They presumed that ICE would 'Always be KING!' by default. So, they didn't bother asking how they would make money in the future. Instead they chose to purposefully delay, prevent, and defer the future for as long as possible. Making sure anything other than ICE was on the backburner, or hidden away in a closet.

 

[Garlan Garner]

"Man, that's all you had to say! AUDI!" -- Samuel L Jackson as Jules, 'Pulp Fiction' (1994)

I think Investors have all answered those questions by either paying close attention to Elon Musk's statements or reading the 10-Q for TSLA. Those who tend to not be satisfied with the answers are Speculators instead. Each will do as they will.

Forgive me for being verbose - its my nature.

We can easily look up who Teslas investors are if we want, because they publicly hold stock. What we don't know are the investors Tesla might have if they could deliver on time - or deliver enough vehicles to elevate long wait times.

 

[Red Sage]

Because even the traditional OEMs know that retooling and repurposing assembly lines takes capital. They all took quite the beating when the economy tanked. So much so that they're hesitant to break away from what keeps them in business.....churning out the same derivative ICE econoboxes, only "innovating" enough to make sure they're CARB-compliant. Look at VW. They put out "clean" diesels, thinking it was more cost effective to "innovate" the software than it was to truly come up with an actual clean vehicle.

Now that they've been spanked, they decided that they would come to the table and say "hey, we can make EVs to attone for our mistakes".

So why didn't they just make EVs in the first place?

I think that there may be a management idiom that goes something like, 'Fear the FUTURE!' It's closely related to the 'Bird in the Hand...' philosophy. There are situations wherein people are more comfortable clinging to proven, lasting, trusted notions of how business should be conducted. They become rather complacent and limit their perspective to only known parameters. Thus, they develop an abhorrence to both risk and innovation. That leads to an abandonment of research and development. The stagnation that results is hidden behind a wall of unethical business practices meant to protect market share. And that is a strategy that is exposed as being inadequate in the face of new technologies coming to market from those who were willing to take the risk that entrenched firms deemed 'not worth the effort'. Oops.

 

[ModelNforNerd]

I think that there may be a management idiom that goes something like, 'Fear the FUTURE!' It's closely related to the 'Bird in the Hand...' philosophy. There are situations wherein people are more comfortable clinging to proven, lasting, trusted notions of how business should be conducted. They become rather complacent and limit their perspective to only known parameters. Thus, they develop an abhorrence to both risk and innovation. That leads to an abandonment of research and development. The stagnation that results is hidden behind a wall of unethical business practices meant to protect market share. And that is a strategy that is exposed as being inadequate in the face of new technologies coming to market from those who were willing to take the risk that entrenched firms deemed 'not worth the effort'. Oops.

Well, if you're a shareholder, what looks better on the balance sheet?

Continuous profit, or spending large amounts of your cash reserves on capital improvements?

It's human nature to think the bigger balance sheet is the more attractive option.

we all know you have to spend money to make money, but if your current "cash cow cycle" (ie, the money you've already invested is still paying out) is still going strong, then why disrupt that for something that may be a risk?

Of course, with nearly 400,000 pre-orders, BEVs seem less risky thanks to Tesla, and shareholders and execs from other OEMs have taken note.

 

[3Victoria]

What is smart in the short term may not be best in the long term. If the big three want to be around in the long term, then they had better be planning for it

 

[dsvick]

Are they doing the best that they can? Not suggesting that they should do better.
Do they have all of the money they need? Not suggesting that they make more money.
Do they have all of the robots that they need? Not suggesting that they should buy more.
Do they have a sufficient workforce? Not suggesting that they need to hire or fire anyone.

Its a question - not a suggestion.

You may not be intending to suggest anything, however your posts and the way that you ask the questions make it seem as if you think that they are not doing all that they can do to produce the Model 3 on time. Things like this statement:

I've watched a few videos of the Gigafactory tour and it appears as though there is an extremely laid back work environment there

It's a construction site, for a variety of reasons they do not move quickly on construction sites. There are safety issues, quailty issues, planning resource management issues, and many more. So you will never see workers running around slinging beams and girders all about or pumping concrete like it's coming out of super charger. Everything has it's pace, I'd much prefer that they take their time, do it right, and not delay things with accidents or other haste induced problems. What may look laid back or too casual to you may in fact be break-neck speed.

I understand asking the questions and wanting to know what the answers were. I wanted to know why it would take a year and half from the reveal to getting productions started. I read the answers here and did some research - problem solved. This thread has over 17 pages and (now) 332 responses, and the same questions are still being asked, maybe slightly differently but still asked. The fact that the thread hasn't died really implies that you and maybe some others really think that they could be moving faster.

 

[Garlan Garner]

You may not be intending to suggest anything, however your posts and the way that you ask the questions make it seem as if you think that they are not doing all that they can do to produce the Model 3 on time. Things like this statement:

It's a construction site, for a variety of reasons they do not move quickly on construction sites. There are safety issues, quailty issues, planning resource management issues, and many more. So you will never see workers running around slinging beams and girders all about or pumping concrete like it's coming out of super charger. Everything has it's pace, I'd much prefer that they take their time, do it right, and not delay things with accidents or other haste induced problems. What may look laid back or too casual to you may in fact be break-neck speed.

I understand asking the questions and wanting to know what the answers were. I wanted to know why it would take a year and half from the reveal to getting productions started. I read the answers here and did some research - problem solved. This thread has over 17 pages and (now) 332 responses, and the same questions are still being asked, maybe slightly differently but still asked. The fact that the thread hasn't died really implies that you and maybe some others really think that they could be moving faster.

The Gigafactory tour videos showed Tesla workers. Not construction workers. I don't understand what you mean "construction site" concerning the tour videos.

Do the number of posts in the conversation bother you? Does the length of the discussion bother you?

 

[Red Sage]

Well, if you're a shareholder, what looks better on the balance sheet?

Continuous profit, or spending large amounts of your cash reserves on capital improvements?

It's human nature to think the bigger balance sheet is the more attractive option.

we all know you have to spend money to make money, but if your current "cash cow cycle" (ie, the money you've already invested is still paying out) is still going strong, then why disrupt that for something that may be a risk?

Of course, with nearly 400,000 pre-orders, BEVs seem less risky thanks to Tesla, and shareholders and execs from other OEMs have taken note.

To my eyes, a bunch of dough sitting in a bank somewhere doing nothing but accumulating interest and dust is not so attractive. Others might be more of the Scrooge McDuck persuasion, and choose to take a swim through all those bills and coins. Getting things DONE to ensure growth of capacity and expansion of product lines and extension of Service Centers and erecting new Tesla Stores seems to be an absolutely necessary expense that is needed to properly validate both current and projected price points for TSLA.

There are 13 Buick configurations, 43 Chevrolet, and 18 from Cadillac. Mercedes-Benz has 73 vehicle configurations on offer in the US. No one should fault Tesla Motors for attempting to reach a three car roster while hoping to expand that to perhaps five or six.

I saw my third Toyota Mirai on the road just yesterday, only days after I spied my fourth Model X. Which of those is truly a risk? The one that will be manufactured at a rate of 3,000 units over the course of three years -- worldwide -- or the fully electric SUV that can blow the doors off a Dodge Hellcat? It's a matter of perspective, though perhaps weighted by perception, pride, and prejudice. I know full well which one I believe has a future to look forward to.

I believe that certain automotive execs have taken note of the calendar, checked the full validity of their golden parachutes, and plan to bail out long before they are required to actually plan for the future of their companies in a meaningful fashion. They want to be long gone before the hard times are obviously upon them. They'll want to leave before either governmental regulation or market pressure require they make significant changes to product lines that will result in multiple consecutive quarters of expenditures numbering into the billions.

Others though will stand pat with ICE. They'll ride that horse all the way to pasture and into the sunset.

 

[Lex]

Probably re-iterating something already posted but certain parts of the plan need to happen in order. eg. Model X was something to keep busy while Gigafactory was being planned so that Model 3 gets to the right price point.

And from what I've heard about working for Elon Musk you bet that the people who need to be working hard right now are doing so.

 

[Garlan Garner]

Large investors know what a healthy company looks like.

If capital depicts health, then it just does.
If profit depicts health, then it just does.
If satisfied customers depicts health, then it just does.
If keeping your promises depicts health, then it just does.
If profit margins depicts health, then it just does.
If........, then it just does.

As much as I have a sentimental desire for Elon and Tesla to succeed, I can't do anything for them personally. Investors can. Investors can hurt and investors can help. The SEC can help and the SEC can hurt. My personal tesla purchases aren't going to do hardly anything for the company as a whole.

I just believe that if we want Tesla to succeed....we have to be cognizant of who can help them do that. What is their motivation to invest in Tesla. I believe its profit. Very few investors are eager to invest in long time profit losers - unless they are in it for the long haul.

I am of the opinion that Tesla acquired a lot of their initial investors because of their ability to convince them of future success. That past enticement might be running out - Concerning investors.

 

[Red Sage]

Forgive me for being verbose - its my nature.

We can easily look up who Teslas investors are if we want, because they publicly hold stock. What we don't know are the investors Tesla might have if they could deliver on time - or deliver enough vehicles to elevate long wait times.

I gave this post a thumbs up, because I presume you meant to write 'alleviate' there...

Nothing wrong with being verbose -- especially when you have something to say. (Confidentially, have you seen my posts?) Just noting that one line summed up the rest very well. Plus, I never pass by an opportunity to quote Samuel L Jackson.

 

[Red Sage]

Large investors know what a healthy company looks like.

If capital depicts health, then it just does.
If profit depicts health, then it just does.
If satisfied customers depicts health, then it just does.
If keeping your promises depicts health, then it just does.
If profit margins depicts health, then it just does.
If........, then it just does.

As much as I have a sentimental desire for Elon and Tesla to succeed, I can't do anything for them personally. Investors can. Investors can hurt and investors can help. The SEC can help and the SEC can hurt. My personal tesla purchases aren't going to do hardly anything for the company as a whole.

I just believe that if we want Tesla to succeed....we have to be cognizant of who can help them do that. What is their motivation to invest in Tesla. I believe its profit. Very few investors are eager to invest in long time profit losers - unless they are in it for the long haul.

I am of the opinion that Tesla acquired a lot of their initial investors because of their ability to convince them of future success. That past enticement might be running out - Concerning investors.

I am by no means a 'large investor', but I know what I like. I could understand concerns about profitability for Tesla Motors if I perceived them as a company that solely took money from investors, with no other income stream, and throwing it into a fire pit. Instead, my perception is that unless there is a new offering of TSLA, most who trade the stock on a daily basis do absolutely NOTHING for Tesla Motors whatsoever. The money that changes hands is from one seller to another buyer, with associated fees going to their representative brokers. Those who bought TSLA in early July 2010 through about January/March 2013 and have held it ever since -- that's who I personally identify as INVESTORS. And a bunch of those people would realize a significant profit on TSLA simply by selling 20% of their current holdings and letting the rest ride. Daily trades on Wall Street contribute not one thin dime to Tesla Motors operating revenue. Meanwhile, Ford (F) was at $9.86 five years ago and closed today at $12.11. Yay. Which would you have rather dropped $15,000 into in September 2011? Yeah. I thought so.

 

[Red Sage]

I believe ICE companies aren't building EV's as rapidly as they can is because ICE cars are selling like hotcakes. Planet wise....ICE cars are selling. From a marketing standpoint - why would they build something at competes with their cash cow? I don't know this for sure, but I have a feeling that the only reason why some ICE companies are even selling EV's is because they are being forced to. I really don't think they want to. They are making trillions of dollars off ICE cars.
World's Car Population Hits 1 Billion

I believe that the same argument holds true for as to why renewable energy took so long to get a foothold over Nuclear and Coal as an energy competitor. Its only been a short time that Solar has become affordably competitive to Coal.

I see your point, but... Manual shavers are still selling, even though electric shavers are available on the market. Though I certainly expect that electric cars will replace ICE vehicles in short order as the new purchase of choice, there are plenty that believe ICE will be around as a market leader in transportation for at least another 100 years (yes, that makes me laugh too). So established automobile manufacturers should not 'Fear the FUTURE!', but prepare for it instead. Because if you can have a full fledged gasoline fleet sold next to a diesel product line, and you offer CNG alternatives and hint at a future of HFCEV, you should be able to accommodate the best of them all in fully electric vehicles as well. Better for your company to be associated with the best of all options than solely with technological dead ends or ancient expiring options.

 

[LectrikPower]

The concept of the title was asking if they are going as fast as they can. Do they have people sitting around doing nothing? Do they have robots sitting around doing nothing? I've watched a few videos of the Gigafactory tour and it appears as though there is an extremely laid back work environment there. AND THATS ABSOLUTELY FINE. I just wonder why things are consistently late.

Given Musk's reputation I find it hard to believe that anyone would get away with putting out an average level of work.

This has been covered before but it bears repeating. Musk operates on the "demand 150%" and get a much better product than if you demanded 100%. This leads to lateness but the final product is better and probably done in less time than it would have taken to get to that level at 100%.

I don't know if he could operate any other way.