Tesla is going to announce a $50K per year (plus withholdings) option called "James" who will be happy to drive you anywhere you'd like. Overtime after 5 and on weekends.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Model 3 will generate cash flow of $10,000 per year at a minimum on an autonomous taxi platform
- Thread starter lunitiks
- Start date
CarlK
Active Member
Right. If you look at how much you need to pay for a 7/24 chauffeur or how much an Uber driver makes driving just few hours a day that $10,000 a year figure would not sound so far out anymore.
Yes, super modest. You're talking about a ~$100k depreciating asset that only earns $10k/year (presumably that is gross profit above operating expenses) and has a lifespan of probably not more than 5 years before requiring at least a complete interior refurbishing (even those great Tesla polyurethane seats will not last long if used 24/7 as a taxi, particularly a driverless taxi) if not more serious mechanical work from the heavy workload taxis endure. I know EV drivetrains last a long time but this about more than the drivetrain -- those fancy door handles, frameless windows, charge port door, and absolutely everything on the interior will get substantially higher wear than these cars are designed for. Oh, and definitely do not try this with the X and those falcon wing doors.
This is a straw man argument. I don't know of anybody on this forum who claims that driverless robotaxis are impossible or will not happen. I think most people even believe that Tesla may eventually produce such a car. The area of disagreement is whether the cars that they have been selling since 2016 will ever be able to do this in any practical way, and when that might happen if it does happen.
For the record, I answer "probably not ever" and "definitely not before the end of next year". But make note of the phrase "in any practical way" because I think they will very shortly demonstrate some semblance of self driving capability, perhaps this year, perhaps even next week. But it will not be practical in any way that will enable it to operate profitably as a robotaxi.
CarlK
Active Member
My answer was to those who think this will never happen, or will never happen in any reasonable time period. The original post did not mention any timeline. It you are not saying that that there is not point to argue.
CarlK
Active Member
Don't have one. I don't work for Tesla. Although I know Tesla's timeline is asap. Elon does not mess around or take the easy way out.
Last edited:
Leaving aside all the snark in this thread (which is most of the thread) it is hard to deny that IF Tesla is able to achieve a reasonable level of autonomy before the rest of the industry it will be a money printing machine for at least a few years.
Uber is currently charging an average of $2 per mile. If a Model 3 in the Tesla Network charges $1 per mile, averages 15 miles per hour, 12 hours per day, 320 days per year one car will generate revenue of $57,600 per year. Loup Ventures' Gene Munster estimated Tesla's costs under this scenario would reduce net profit to $32,000 per year. Tesla's Multi-Billion Dollar Ride-Sharing Opportunity | Loup Ventures
A Tesla owner who had a car in the system part-time and shared revenues with Tesla would obviously generate less profit, but it's easy to see how an owner might offset the costs of ownership and make a profit.
While it's a fair question whether Tesla will be first to self driving, I think it is pretty clear that if it is it will be profitable for Tesla and Tesla owners who participate in the Tesla Network.
Uber is currently charging an average of $2 per mile. If a Model 3 in the Tesla Network charges $1 per mile, averages 15 miles per hour, 12 hours per day, 320 days per year one car will generate revenue of $57,600 per year. Loup Ventures' Gene Munster estimated Tesla's costs under this scenario would reduce net profit to $32,000 per year. Tesla's Multi-Billion Dollar Ride-Sharing Opportunity | Loup Ventures
A Tesla owner who had a car in the system part-time and shared revenues with Tesla would obviously generate less profit, but it's easy to see how an owner might offset the costs of ownership and make a profit.
While it's a fair question whether Tesla will be first to self driving, I think it is pretty clear that if it is it will be profitable for Tesla and Tesla owners who participate in the Tesla Network.
Let's be honest -- you have no idea what Tesla's FSD system can accomplish.
Nonetheless, it's helpful to clarify assumptions. Here is a range of possibilities:
(1) Tesla's FSD system will not achieve self-driving ever or at least not in any reasonable timeframe. Therefore there is no chance it will generate $ for owners
(2) Tesla's FSD system will achieve self-driving in a reasonable timeframe and therefore will print money.
(3) Tesla's FSD system will achieve self-driving in a reasonable timeframe but won't make money because .....
Obviously if FSD doesn't work then there will be no Tesla Network. I think it is equally obvious that if Tesla is first to meaningful self-driving they will make a ton of money, and that Tesla owners who want to participate in the Tesla Network will also generate significant profits.
Last edited:
The ARK model from the original post is available here:
TashaARK/ARK-Invest-Autonomous-Taxi-Price-Per-Mile-Model
If you were to use Gene Munster's $1.00 per mile price, the ARK model generates annual numbers of:
- costs: $26,046 (5 year straight line depreciation)
- revenue: $116,100
- net profits: $90,054 (pre-tax)
CarlK
Active Member
Uber has 2 million drivers. They will be totally replaced by self driving cars because they can charge less not to mentioned not everyone likes the idea of getting into a stranger's car. That means a requirement of 2 million self driving cars plus more because of expanding market from the better and cheaper service. Let's say this happens right at April 2021, or whatever you want to believe, people will fight to buy the FSD car which Tesla certainly will increase the price accordingly. People who already own one with FSD will see theirs to become a ride hailable car with increased value overnight. Every car that is capable of that will be needed at that point. That's why Elon said it's an appreciable item and also reason why Tesla will not allow lease end purchase.
That premium will gradually decrease when more FSD cars from Tesla and perhaps other companies (Waymo does not sell cars and I can't think of another company that is even close to it at this point) come to market. Those who bought one at or before that turning point will benefit from it the most.
Just want to add it's hilarious that often people with absolute no business or technology insight trying to make themselves look smart by citing totally irrelevant cases like Theranos, Enron or Madoff to prove absolutely nothing. With every Theranos, Enron or Madoff there are tens if not hundreds or Google, Facebook, Amazon or Buffet.
That premium will gradually decrease when more FSD cars from Tesla and perhaps other companies (Waymo does not sell cars and I can't think of another company that is even close to it at this point) come to market. Those who bought one at or before that turning point will benefit from it the most.
Just want to add it's hilarious that often people with absolute no business or technology insight trying to make themselves look smart by citing totally irrelevant cases like Theranos, Enron or Madoff to prove absolutely nothing. With every Theranos, Enron or Madoff there are tens if not hundreds or Google, Facebook, Amazon or Buffet.
Last edited:
Cheburashka
Active Member
CarlK
Active Member
Your insurance will cover it. I remember Elon mentioned a few years ago Tesla could offer insurance plans if regular insurance companies do not offer reasonable rates for self driving cars. That could be built into the TeslaNet too. Rest assured that the first principle thinker has thought of everything.
Insurance rate should be getting lower with self driving cars when accident rate becomes much lower than today's. Warren Buffet whose Berkshire Hathaway owns insurance companies had cited self driving car as a potential disruption force for the insurance industry.
Last edited:
Playing devil's advocate here. Why should I pay to insure a driverless car when I am not driving or being a passenger? Unlike current state of driving where the human driver is responsible for the action, why should the owner be liable for an accident caused by a self driving car whose skill is not trained by the owner, but by the people who develop the car? Shouldn't the OEM ultimately be held liable?
CarlK
Active Member
OEM certainly could do that and build it into cost of the car but owners to provide insurance is much easier to manage.
mrbulk
Member
Sure sounds appealing...if I could just get past the idea of strangers in My car, especially if they are allowed to sit behind the wheel to "monitor", you know, just in case the dreaded "Take Over Immediately!" warning comes on.
And when I consider the possibility that most or maybe all ride hailers will do so simply because they themselves can't afford a Tesla (or any other reasonably nice car), that's when the hairs on the back of my neck all start straining for the ceiling.
And when I consider the possibility that most or maybe all ride hailers will do so simply because they themselves can't afford a Tesla (or any other reasonably nice car), that's when the hairs on the back of my neck all start straining for the ceiling.
That is indeed a difference between Tesla and others in the conversation. Elon has said they prefer ”your insurance” to be responsible if a self-driving Tesla crashes (with the only exception being some clear system-wide bug on their part) while other premium manufacturers have talked about being responsible for their Level 3 and above cars entirely when the car drives.
Then again there is very little real discussion from Tesla about car responsible driving beyond that and the flippant ”Level 5 capable hardware” comments from Tesla in late 2016 so it is hard to tell what Tesla’s plans actually are beyond Level 2...
Maybe we will learn more on the 22nd.
True, for Tesla. But definitely not for the car owner. What happen if it does have an accident while operating as an autonomous taxi and that result in significant jump to your insurance premium? Would you be okay with that even though you are not responsible for the operation of the car? Or worst yet, if something happened to the passengers or the other parties involved in the accident, who is financially liable?
BTW, I don't see this as a Tesla only question, but an industry wide question that needs to be addressed. And as autonomy continue to propagate into different modes of transportation, this question will only get harder IMO.
Similar threads
