Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'News' started by Doug_G, May 13, 2013.
Hype alone won't sell EVs
According to this, Model S is a "limited-use vehicle" and a "plaything for people with money to burn"....
Sometimes I think we're beating our heads against the wall. Oh, well, I guess I'll go drive my limited-use plaything another 7,500 all-purpose miles, using electricity I generate myself, and pretend I don't take it personally.
I've had a Hybrid since 2006, and when you do the math it does 25% better than the equivalent ICE. So sure, I saved $3500 of gas over the last 7 years. But it isn't something that is immediately noticeable. It's like dropping HBO from your cable lineup. Meh. You still fill up gas about the same number of times. Yeah, it's a bit less... but... in reality it's not really a big change, considering the vehicle was $3000 more expensive initially.
However, now that I've driven the Model S for even a few months, stopping at a gas station now IS something I notice, and having to pay $100 to fill up my Dodge 1500 (which I never would have given a second thought about before in my life), is suddenly revolting. And I don't just mean in terms of dead dinosaurs - I mean in terms of money.
Sure, I can afford it, and I could in theory also afford to buy a song from iTunes for $100. Not gonna feel good about it though - even if it's "Call me Maybe" (kidding ).
Agreed. I had some hybrids and I was excited about their mpg...but not about driving them. The gas cost was lower, but the car cost more, was less fun to drive, and had no other benefits. It was definitely a tradeoff.
My EVs, on the other hand, have lots of benefits. That's what the naysayers don't see. It is unfortunate that throttle response, low-end torque, smoothness, quietness, and the convenience of filling up in your own garage and skipping oil changes and emissions inspections (none of which applied to a hybrid) are all invisible.
It is kind of like when tablets first came out - all the naysayers could see was that you couldn't get all desktop apps or device drivers, so people scoffed at buying a toy that couldn't do real computer work. But the faster boot times, longer battery life, more natural interface and other invisible benefits have won people over as they have seen them in use. They didn't instantly replace all desktops, but that was never the intention.
I don't think the "replacement" analogy works for tablets. Everything points to them being complementary to desktops and laptops, not a replacement. Virtually all tablet owners also have a laptop and/or desktop. Tablets are a more proper analogy for shorter-range BEVs like the Leaf or iMIEV which are more suitable for people with two or more cars. A Model S however can function as an ICE car replacement.
But the arguments against them as a viable market is similar.
Yes, what you find in naysayers is that almost all of them have never actually deigned to use the technology they are trashing. They are just so smart that they "know" the product well enough from reading a few pieces of information here and there. I've fallen into that trap myself a few times. Most recently, I was wondering what all the fuss was about the iPads. Having used tablet like devices before and found them wanting, I assumed the iPad wasn't much better. Well, I now have three of them.
You can tell from reading that National Post article that the writer has never actually driven a Model S. What will happen is that more and more people will buy the cars to the point that even the naysayers will be forced to ask themselves what all the fuss is about. They will take a test drive, and a lightbulb will turn on.
Personally, I really, really like Elon's quiet confidence in all this. "If you build it, they will buy it" has never been absolutely true, but if you build a great product, have a capital structure that allows you to build products on a nice steady pace until the market takes off, and have no real competition on the horizon, then you will succeed. Elon knows this, and thus isn't wasting money on advertising. There is no need, the market will catch up, it is just a matter of time.
Just more FUD. Ignore it and move on. The folks who read this stuff don't concern themselves with things like facts.
EVs, like all other new, high end technology, will start off accessible only to wealthier people. Anyone remember how much large plasma and LCD TVs cost 10 years ago?
Oh, and this non-sense about it being a limited use vehicle is, well non-sense. I have a Suburban, it used to be my daily driver, now it's a limited use vehicle and the Model S handles almost all of my driving needs. This journalist got it backwards and I expect many others will too before all is said and done and the ICE is relegated to collectors and museums.
In 20 years, we'll dig up these articles and put them in top 10 lists along with articles talking about how the iPhone would never catch on because it was too expensive. My kids will have a good laugh and patronize me while I talk about how I learned to drive on an ICE.
That driving.ca "Going Green" site is clearly nothing but a front for oil and gas interests. Just look at all the articles touting "hydrogen" and "diesel." They even go so far as to deride fuel injection and turbocharging, challenge the efficiency claims of modern ICE improvements, and - seriously, get this - call automotive engines "simple."
Nothing but a PR and propaganda site in a "green" wrapper. Move along...
You should check statistics for tablet sales and pc sales. PC sales are plummeting (even worse than this in Europe):
this ^^^ and you also need to take into account that the author, David Booth, is a consistent Tesla basher whose articles get republished often in print through the newspapers associated with the canada.com network. With no way to leave comments they are obviously interested in spreading their own views without engaging in any debate.