How ironic. Maybe you should learn how to spell persuasive.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
[POLL] Will base model M3 beat the Chevy Bolt's 238 mile EPA range?
- Thread starter insaneoctane
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Model 3
How ironic. Maybe you should learn how to spell persuasive.
ModelNforNerd
Active Member
OK.....something that's been bugging me, so I'm going to just get right to it:
Short-selling the Model 3 and/or making it "inferior" isn't about leaving S and X as the "classier" vehicles in the lineup.
Right now, it's about getting the most Model 3's out the door and the resulting monetary transactions accounted for.
leaving the range or performance of the 3 as lesser than S or X? Why? What purpose would that serve?
This is going to be all about MARGIN.
If the "alien dreadnought" brings the cost of producing a Model 3 waayyyy down, why wouldn't you try to make it as amazing a car as you can?
just for argument's sake....I've seen out there that the Model S profit margin is ~20% per car. That's great. They've sold roughly 158,000 of them worldwide (as of the end of 2016). Not bad.....except when you consider that the goal of the Model 3 is to push out close to that entire total.....between now and the end of 2018.
As a stockholder, I would be disappointed in Elon if he "neutered" the Model 3 to push people into a higher end vehicle....that many of them wouldn't buy because they can't afford it.
TL;DR: the profit margin on 400,000+ Model 3's will do more for the bottom line than 158,000 Model S's has.
Short-selling the Model 3 and/or making it "inferior" isn't about leaving S and X as the "classier" vehicles in the lineup.
Right now, it's about getting the most Model 3's out the door and the resulting monetary transactions accounted for.
leaving the range or performance of the 3 as lesser than S or X? Why? What purpose would that serve?
This is going to be all about MARGIN.
If the "alien dreadnought" brings the cost of producing a Model 3 waayyyy down, why wouldn't you try to make it as amazing a car as you can?
just for argument's sake....I've seen out there that the Model S profit margin is ~20% per car. That's great. They've sold roughly 158,000 of them worldwide (as of the end of 2016). Not bad.....except when you consider that the goal of the Model 3 is to push out close to that entire total.....between now and the end of 2018.
As a stockholder, I would be disappointed in Elon if he "neutered" the Model 3 to push people into a higher end vehicle....that many of them wouldn't buy because they can't afford it.
TL;DR: the profit margin on 400,000+ Model 3's will do more for the bottom line than 158,000 Model S's has.
erthquake
Active Member
The Bolt is a cynical half-arsed effort by GM enabling them to sell more gas guzzling SUVs--the opposite of Musk's vision for sustainable transportation. If I were Musk, I would want to crush the Bolt sales by making sure the base Model 3 has more EPA range. Icing on the cake would be even more outstanding highway range because of the Model 3's motor and aerodynamics. It might impact their gross margins somewhat, but being the undisputed range king would be invaluable for hype and beating back the FUD from those shorting the stock.
Well, between the cathode foil substrate, heat sink cooling fins, cooling plate, and the pack structural elements that probably makes it an aluminum battery.Aren't they mostly nickel and cobalt?
If you just consider the cells alone the largest metallic element mass may be the copper foil in the anode.
Keep in mind that all of the top selling cars in that list start well under $35K and/or are not going to be competing with the M3. Realistically, the M3 will be competing against ICE cars like the BMW 3 Series with global production at 411,844 in 2016. Musk is predicting Tesla will outsell the BMW 3 Series. Maybe someday hopefully, but I seriously doubt it in the near future. Remember that the starting price is $35K, but the average price will be much higher once they are in full production with all options.
The Bolt is the first "affordable" 200+ mile range EV. Obviously some people have a huge bias based on the company Tesla vs. GM, but if you really want sustainable clean transportation then you should be rooting for all EVs to succeed. If the Bolt sells 30K cars per year that's 30K less ICE vehicles.
Last edited:
Simple. With a backlog of ~400k cars, supply is a real issue for about a year if everything goes well. With so many people chomping at the bit to get a new model 3 and with federal tax credits of $7.5K, Tesla has no incentive to build any low-margin cars for a long time. Once the hundreds of thousands of buyers willing to pay more for higher margin cars have been exhausted then the $35K configuration will come out. I don't think we'll see a $35K Tesla for a LONG time...
This may suck for folks wanting the $35K car, many who might have waited in long lines, but this is just business. Don't shoot the messenger!
Didn't Tesla announce the only options initially will be paint color and wheels? I also read that Musk said he learned from the Model X and wanted to make the initial roll-out of the Model 3 as simple as possible. That suggests limited bells and whistles to reduce reliability issues until production stabilizes. Then start adding new optional features incrementally and raising the price (and margin) accordingly.
I think there will be a lot of bad press and reservation cancellations if the initial production cars are significantly more than the $35K Musk promised.
Limited choices is key. Is putting in a 75kWh battery more complex than 60 kWh? No, but it increases margin. Glass roof is all we have seen, and we now know that it is "optional" aka we will be charged for it. I just don't see the $35K car for a long while....
I think he said something to the effect of that's all that the configurator will be. I think most have taken that to mean that things like bigger battery (rumored) and glass roof (all we've seen so far, listed as an option on tesla.com/compare) will be what they make first. So just because color and wheels is all you can choose from doesn't mean it's going to be a base model.
Well, I guess we can just agree to disagree. We'll know soon enough. For what it's worth, I hope that I am wrong.
N5329K
Active Member
erthquake
Active Member
It's a net loss, as far as I'm concerned, if it allows GM to sell 30K Tahoes, Suburbans, etc. GM has no interest in meaningfully advancing sustainable transportation:
Virtually all automakers (except for Tesla) are asking China to slow down electric car mandate
Well at least Tahoes and Suburbans are a heck of a lot cleaner than Toyotas.
Increasing economy 2 mpg on large pickups and SUVs has done more for the environment than all the EVs and hybrids combined.
Toyota makes gas hybrids so they can sell very dirty trucks. GM makes EREVs and BEVs so they can sell cleaner trucks.
Another vantage point is to say that GM has no choice but to meaningfully advance sustainable transportation. China, Europe, and California etc. will be requiring GM and other traditional car makers to build large numbers of all-electric cars whether they want to or not. One hopes that the US federal government won't be derailed more than 4 years by Trumpism.
GM, realizing this, has been ahead of most of them in providing longer battery range and performance in their PHEVs and BEVs so far which is the direction we need them to be moving towards.
EVNow
Well-Known Member
That is a weird way to explain how spewing toxic gases into the air we all breath is better than not spewing toxic gases.
That's your opinion that they have no interest, but clearly it's not GM's main interest, nor should it be. As a public corporation they're interest should be making their shareholders the most money. They do this by providing products that the market demands at a price that's profitable. It's very simple. If the market demands EVs and they can make them profitably then GM will be happy to sell them.
If the Bolt is successful then GM will likely expand their EV portfolio to other segments, such as SUVs. If it ends up losing money then they will slow walk EV development and continue making ICE vehicles and fighting to slow regulations. So we should all hope the Bolt succeeds.
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
But you go into chicken and egg scenarios and also whether the Bolt is a compelling product in the first place at its price point. There are definitely those that feel the Bolt design is the wrong direction and it is the fault of that design that limits its appeal (not the EV part).
The market does not in general demand "EVs" over ICE cars. It's far easier and more profitable for GM (or any other traditional automaker) to sell traditional ICE cars. The automakers have always used the excuse that there is no demand for EVs to pare back regulation (since previous decades). But the issue is more they didn't even try to make EVs that would be appealing. Tesla came along and flipped that around.
And of course they want to eat the cake and have it too. They all claim they are advancing sustainable transportation even when they do barely over the minimum.
Similar threads
- Article
