Tesla BEV Competition Developments

[wdolson]

I think this is the disconnect. These people talking doom and gloom for Tesla truly believe that there's no real market for EVs and that no more people want to have EVs than already own them. They think it's a tiny niche market and that there's no room for more players.

We know this is wrong, but that's the mindset we're dealing with.

They are thinking in terms of a zero sum game and the current sales numbers for EVs is the sum. Ultimately it is a zero sum game, only so many cars per year are going to be sold, plus or minus a little. But the sum total is vastly larger than the total sales of EVs today, it's the total number of cars sold, of all types.

There is no guarantee Tesla will survive, there are a number of scenarios where they could go under, but having more EVs on the market is the least likely death scenario. Tesla not only is the first with a mass produced long range EV, but they have successfully built a long range charging network for charging on trips that is better than any of the other standards out there. CHadeMo and CCS have the potential to rival superchargers, but they are more of an interface standard than a charging speed standard and maintenance at chargers is inconsistent. The network today is inadequate for long range trips and that will likely hurt competing long range EVs out of the gate. Customers will complain that the fast chargers they were promised weren't there and it will take a while to get the problem fixed.

It's taken Tesla three years to build out the SC network as far as it has. Another car maker throwing wads of money at the problem might be able to fill out a network in a year, but meanwhile their customers will be looking at the competition who already did it.

 

[stopcrazypp]

You just added up the three examples from my post, there will be many more coming.

As I noted above, LG Chem alone will supply 20 brands/companies with EV batteries by 2020.

For example, Hyundai is rumored to launch a longer-range sedan EV by 2017 (maybe even by 2016 as a 2017 MY) etc.

PS: And I'm not even counting large car makers like Ford who sooner or later have to offer new EVs because of the very same emission regulations. The above number just refers to actual signed contracts from LG Chem.

Go ahead and add more examples with realistic projections (I'm using very generous ones here). Saying LG has 20 brands signed up is relatively meaningless without comparing volume, as a lot of those are going to be existing contracts for compliance cars (which are going to be a small fraction of a GWh in annual volume).

As frequently criticized of you, you use what Tesla is building now and then compare to rumors of others and take them at face value. Even doing so, Tesla does not at all look threatened in volume, even just looking at the initial phase of construction.

I found the post I was looking for:
http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/show...tive)/page90?p=1262941&viewfull=1#post1262941

 

[tftf]

Go ahead and add more examples with realistic projections (I'm using very generous ones here). Saying LG has 20 brands signed up is relatively meaningless without comparing volume, as a lot of those are going to be existing contracts for compliance cars (which are going to be a small fraction of a GWh in annual volume).

As frequently criticized of you, you use what Tesla is building now and then compare to rumors of others and take them at face value. Even doing so, Tesla does not at all look threatened in volume, even just looking at the initial phase of construction.

Look, another rumor. Oh wait, it's an offical press release from Hyundai. Another BEV sedan coming in 2016:

Hyundai Motor introduces IONIQ, the first car to offer a choice of three electrified powertrains

• Electric, plug-in hybrid and hybrid powertrains available in a single body type, a world first
• The IONIQ breaks hybrid stereotype by delivering entertaining drive alongside class-leading fuel economy and appealing design
• Global launch set for January 2016 in Korea, followed by Geneva and New York auto shows, an important step as Hyundai Motor works to be global green car market leader


December 7, 2015 – Hyundai Motor has announced the name of its advanced, alternative-fuel compact vehicle due for launch in 2016: the Hyundai IONIQ [pronunciation: a?|?:n?k]. The car will be available with electric, plug-in gasoline/electric hybrid, or gasoline/electric hybrid powertrain – the first car from any manufacturer to offer customers these three powertrain options in a single body type.

(...)

We can see actual sales numbers in 12-24 months how many units these new entrants or updated models (Bolt, Ioniq EV, Leaf 2, upgraded i3, upgraded ZOE, upgraded e-Golf...) will sell. No need to guess.

I can only repeat what I have been saying/predicting for months: The $25-50k space will get incredibly crowded with PHEVs and EVs from major car brands between 2016-2020.

If these longer-range EVs are in demand, major car makers all have access to billions each year to expand battery production and R&D together with their battery suppliers.

PS: Hyundai is a LG Chem customer but could also source from SK Innovation in the future (like Kia) for dual sourcing options.

 

[techmaven]

Look, another rumor. Oh wait, it's an offical press release from Hyundai. Another BEV sedan coming in 2016:



We can see actual sales numbers in 12-24 months how many units these new entrants or updated models (Bolt, Ioniq EV, Leaf 2, upgraded i3, upgraded ZOE, upgrade e-Golf...) will sell. No need to guess.

I can only repeat what I have been saying/predicting for months: The $25-50k space will get incredibly crowded with PHEVs and EVs from major car brands between 2016-2020.

If these longer-range EVs are in demand, major car makers all have access to billions each year to expand battery production and R&D together with their battery suppliers.

PS: Hyundai is a LG Chem customer but could also source from SK Innovation in the future (like Kia) for dual sourcing options.

Excellent.

Of course, the problem for a Tesla bear is that all of this activity does not mean that Tesla will have a problem - it's that everyone else that isn't electrifying aggressively will have a problem. If the world is moving to electric, then it's better for Tesla, not worse.

 

[tftf]

If the world is moving to electric, then it's better for Tesla, not worse.

I would love to see your economic theory why this is the case.

More competition (some of which hits the market 1-2 years before the Model3 is ready) is good for Tesla? Economies of scale at LG or Samsung are good for Tesla and its giant battery plant?

TSLA bulls should make up their mind: It's either "Tesla is years ahead and no one else is serious about EVs, except for crappy compliance cars" or "everybody offering longer-range, dedicated EVs is good for Tesla". But it can't be both.

PS: I obviously subscribe to neither theory. More EVs may be good for car consumers, but will lead to lower margins for producers, especially in the incredibly competitive $30-50k (upper) mass-market segment.

 

[Johan]

I would love to see your economic theory why this is the case.

So more competition (some of which hits the market 1-2 years before the Model3 is ready) is good for Tesla? Economies of scale at LG or Samsung are good for Tesla and its giant battery plant?

If Tesla commanded a big part of the global auto market one could argue that competition was a threat. They don't. The pie is getting huge and Tesla is eating all they possibly can for years to come. Heard the term "demand constrained" before?

The fact that others get involved gives credibility to both EVs and batteries as the future and accelerates the change that's coming. This is not a bad thing as long as Tesla is leading the pack. When you're demand constrained it's not difficult to uphold some very nice profit margins... You know not all cars are equal and not all batteries are equal. Some people still pay $100k for a Porsche when they could have bought a Skoda at $25k, or $10 for Duracell alkalines when a no-name competitor sells almost the same battery for $5... Go figure.

 

[tftf]

This is not a bad thing as long as Tesla is leading the pack.

How is Tesla leading the pack? It's (still) in a high-end niche with small volumes while others (such as Renault-Nissan: Combined Nissan LEAF Renault ZOE Sales Exceed 280,000 Worldwide ) are selling in the EV mass-market segments long before the Model3 is ready.

And Tesla won't be alone in its high-end EV niche once the German makers (Porsche, Audi, Mercedes...) offer EVs in the same price categories. Tesla will be attacked from both ends.

Tesla also isn't able to execute and ramp up, otherwise the Model X would be on sale since late 2013 (or at least late 2014). I don't see how Tesla's constant delays coupled with more and more competitors offering longer-range PHEVs and EVs (especially in the segment where the Model3 is supposed to launch) can be good for the company.

EVs as a whole are still a small niche in the passenger car market - and that (even if it's a growing) niche is getting very crowded until 2020. There are also giants like Ford or new entrants like Apple that will sooner or later make a move.

 

[JohnSnowNW]

I would love to see your economic theory why this is the case.

More competition (some of which hits the market 1-2 years before the Model3 is ready) is good for Tesla? Economies of scale at LG or Samsung are good for Tesla and its giant battery plant?

TSLA bulls should make up their mind: It's either "Tesla is years ahead and no one else is serious about EVs, except for crappy compliance cars" or "everybody offering longer-range, dedicated EVs is good for Tesla". But it can't be both.

PS: I obviously subscribe to neither theory. More EVs may be good for car consumers, but will lead to lower margins for producers, especially in the incredibly competitive $30-50k (upper) mass-market segment.

The more BEVs there are, the more public consciousness moves towards them. It's that simple. If Tesla's have worse value than the competition, then it could be an issue. Otherwise, the more exposure to BEVs the better for Tesla...it really isn't any more complicated than that.

 

[ecarfan]

TSLA bulls should make up their mind: It's either "Tesla is years ahead and no one else is serious about EVs, except for crappy compliance cars" or "everybody offering longer-range, dedicated EVs is good for Tesla". But it can't be both.

Of course it can be both. Your position is absurdly easy to refute. Think about it:
1) Tesla is years ahead of the EV efforts in all other car companies. That is obvious. Tesla is 100% focused on EVs, is selling in all major auto markets (except for India and South Korea but SK is rumored to start soon), remains the only company selling a long range EV over 7 years after introducing its first long range EV, has far more expertise and experience building long range car BMS systems, and is the only company to build an extensive high speed DC charging network (no other car company has even started such a network).
2) Other car companies offering EVs, long or short range, is good for Tesla because it increases public awareness of EVs, validates Tesla's commitment to EVs, and because Tesla offers much longer range and more sophisticated EVs than any other manufacturers to date (OTA updates, huge touchscreen interface, etc.) illustrates how much farther ahead Tesla is compared to the competitors EVs.
At some point another car company is going to offer a long range EV. At the moment it appears that will be the GM Bolt sometime later next year. Great! Finally, over 7 years after Tesla built their first long range EV, the competition has responded. When the full production specs for the Bolt are released then we can at least begin assess how serious a competitor to the Model 3 it really is (it's clearly not an S or X competitor and won't effect Tesla's sales of those models). Of course to do that we need to know in some detail what the Model 3 specs are, and very likely we will have only a rough sense of them by the end of next year, if then.
So it will be some time before we can fairly evaluate the impact the Bolt will have on Tesla sales.
It appears likely that no S/X competitors will be available for sale in 2016, maybe a handful by 2017. In the meantime, Tesla will keep improving the S-X and building out the SC network and the Gigafactory. Competitors will be hard pressed to keep up.

 

[ZsoZso]

I would love to see your economic theory why this is the case.

More competition (some of which hits the market 1-2 years before the Model3 is ready) is good for Tesla? Economies of scale at LG or Samsung are good for Tesla and its giant battery plant?

Yes, it is good for Tesla. The entire EV sales from all manufacturers is still well below 1% of the total car market. At this point more competition simply means faster expansion of the EV market, which also helps Tesla.

TSLA bulls should make up their mind: It's either "Tesla is years ahead and no one else is serious about EVs, except for crappy compliance cars" or "everybody offering longer-range, dedicated EVs is good for Tesla". But it can't be both.

PS: I obviously subscribe to neither theory. More EVs may be good for car consumers, but will lead to lower margins for producers, especially in the incredibly competitive $30-50k (upper) mass-market segment.

It is not a zero-sum game within EV buyers. It is all about transitioning transportation from ICE to EV. Even if all the announced cars really do get delivered in real numbers and not just compliance numbers in the 2016-2020 year range, they are still 3-7 years behind Tesla, who started delivering EVs in non-compliance numbers from 2013. So as of this moment, nobody else is really serious about EVs, since there is no long range EV (full solution as a single car) on the market apart from Tesla. Nissan Leaf has significant numbers but it a sub-100 mile city-car, suitable only as a second car in a family. On the other hand, if other manufacturers really will start offering long range EVs in significant production numbers that will be good for Tesla. Being a single player as a young car company makes it hard to convince the masses that EV is a viable technology. If people see choices from several major manufacturers, that will raise confidence and they will start cross-shopping the available offerings and some of them will end up buying a Tesla, who would not have considered it otherwise (those who would only consider ICE cars at this moment).

- - - Updated - - -

How is Tesla leading the pack? It's (still) in a high-end niche with small volumes while others (such as Renault-Nissan: Combined Nissan LEAF Renault ZOE Sales Exceed 280,000 Worldwide ) are selling in the EV mass-market segments long before the Model3 is ready.

Model S sales in 2015 exceed Leaf sales (22K vs 16K):
Monthly Plug-In Sales Scorecard

Which is totally mind-blowing if you consider that the average per-unit sale-price is somewhere 3-4 times as high.

 

[dalalsid]

I would love to see your economic theory why this is the case.

More competition (some of which hits the market 1-2 years before the Model3 is ready) is good for Tesla? Economies of scale at LG or Samsung are good for Tesla and its giant battery plant?

TSLA bulls should make up their mind: It's either "Tesla is years ahead and no one else is serious about EVs, except for crappy compliance cars" or "everybody offering longer-range, dedicated EVs is good for Tesla". But it can't be both.

PS: I obviously subscribe to neither theory. More EVs may be good for car consumers, but will lead to lower margins for producers, especially in the incredibly competitive $30-50k (upper) mass-market segment.

Here is something I posted on another thread:

Tesla plans to use 35GWh for three models - S/X/3. If LG makes 35GWh, they should be able to supply 3 models. Maybe 1 car manufacturer that is serious or 3 that are not serious. If LG wants to do what tftf thinks it will do, it needs 350GWh, not 35GWh. It will take an order of magnitude more capacity than LG, Samsung, BYD, AESC and the rest of the world are planning combined by 2020 for the 20 or so models that tftf thinks will compete with Tesla. In short there is almost certainly no way any car manufacturer is competing with Tesla unless they exclusively tie up a battery manufacturer for the foreseeable future. If LG starts supplying anyone except GM, there goes any hope of GM outdoing Tesla. So all the noises that LG is making about supplying EV powertrains is bad for GM. If Samsung supplies anyone except BMW, then that's bad for BMW.

This is how Tesla is ahead of everyone else. By planning to be the master of their own battery supply. Simply because there aren't enough suppliers to provide everyone with enough batteries to go around if the switch to EVs is serious.

 

[tftf]

Model S sales in 2015 exceed Leaf sales (22K vs 16K):
Monthly Plug-In Sales Scorecard

These are U.S-only numbers!

The valuation of a company is dependent on global sales numbers and profits, how many Model S are for example sold in Japan (where LEAF sales are obviously very strong)? And besides that the LEAF is in the middle of a product transition, it had slow sales in recent months since buyers waited for the larger battery option.

PS: I'm not comparing the two cars other than that, obviously two very different price segments, just pointing out issues with your quoted statistics.

 

[Johan]

How is Tesla leading the pack? It's (still) in a high-end niche with small volumes while others (such as Renault-Nissan: Combined Nissan LEAF Renault ZOE Sales Exceed 280,000 Worldwide ) are selling in the EV mass-market segments long before the Model3 is ready.

And Tesla won't be alone in its high-end EV niche once the German makers (Porsche, Audi, Mercedes...) offer EVs in the same price categories. Tesla will be attacked from both ends.

Tesla also isn't able to execute and ramp up, otherwise the Model X would be on sale since late 2013 (or at least late 2014). I don't see how Tesla's constant delays coupled with more and more competitors offering longer-range PHEVs and EVs (especially in the segment where the Model3 is supposed to launch) can be good for the company.

EVs as a whole are still a small niche in the passenger car market - and that (even if it's a growing) niche is getting very crowded until 2020. There are also giants like Ford or new entrants like Apple that will sooner or later make a move.

Aah... you're mixing your tenses.

Let's talk about the present tense first:

I said Tesla is leading the pack, not "will lead the pack".

They are leading the pack because they have no competition in their current niche, which is a high-end, long range BEV. This is an undisputed fact and if you have no competition then not by my opinion but by my very clever deductive inference they are leading the pack.

With regards to battery production and battery based products other than cars (but let's agree that in order to build cars you need a lot of batteries) I too believe they are leading the pack. This is because they have the most aggressive plans I know of of scaling up battery production capacity (together with their partner Samsung) in the Gigafactory. Now, we all know of your calculations claiming only 14% of the Gigafactory has been built. My argument is based on the fact that 14% of a factory is more than 0% of a factory, and to get to 100% you usually must pass the 14%-stage (in my experience is very uncommon for production facilities the size of some of the world's largest known structures to suddenly appear out of thin air).

Now let's switch to the future tense:

You say "Tesla won't be alone in its high-end EV niche once the German makers (Porsche, Audi, Mercedes...) offer EVs in the same price categories". I would be careful to say when, but rather "if". And when/if these other OEMs are ready to offer such a vehicle, what makes you think Tesla hasn't moved further forward with regards to features, capabilities, price/value for money? Tesla is a moving target. I choose to base my predictions about the future on the current state of affairs and what Tesla has shown us being capable of v.s. what the other auto makers you mention have shown us being capable of in the last few years. You are obviously basing your predictions on some other weighting of the known facts, which is perfectly fine, but please don't confuse your assumptions with facts.

Last let me adress your statements about how Tesla will suffer massive competition in the "mass-market segment". My belief, again opinion not fact, is that Model 3 will be a high-end mass market car. You seem to think for some reason it will be a general mass market car. I base my analysis on words straight from the horse's mouth: Elon has said time and time again that the Model 3 will be directly plotted against the BMW 3-series. The BMW 3-series is, at best, an upscale or high-end mass market car. Don't confuse medium sized car with cheap car. What are you basing your analysis on?

 

[Ugliest1]

And Tesla won't be alone in its high-end EV niche once the German makers (Porsche, Audi, Mercedes...) offer EVs in the same price categories. Tesla will be attacked from both ends.

So... Tesla has delivered in its high-end EV niche. German makers have delivered... press releases. Paper tigers, if you will.

Tesla also isn't able to execute and ramp up, otherwise the Model X would be on sale since late 2013 (or at least late 2014). I don't see how Tesla's constant delays coupled with more and more competitors offering longer-range PHEVs and EVs (especially in the segment where the Model ≡ is supposed to launch) can be good for the company.

So... you're calling Tesla out on inability to execute and ramp up. And yet, you take at face value Audi's years of EV press releases, and the recent other German makes' published "intentions" of producing EVs. One could also interpret that the German makes have an even worse "inability to execute and ramp up". Forget ramp up, how about producing an actual working car?

EVs as a whole are still a small niche in the passenger car market - and that (even if it's a growing) niche is getting very crowded until 2020. There are also giants like Ford or new entrants like Apple that will sooner or later make a move.

So... again... Tesla is actually producing right now. You mention vague, possible (not necessarily probable) future intentions to "make moves". Oooooooh, shudder.

I like this thread for its entertainment value. And at this point, it actually is highly entertaining. I do enjoy @tftf's blithely unabashed, non-passionate, even-keeled (I can't say "factual", because facts are normally bent out of all recognition) responses to others' posts that go to great lengths, with actual facts, showing how wrong @tftf is. In five years, who knows, perhaps @tftf will be proven correct; it's a murky future. But the "wrong" stuff, IMHO, is equating Tesla's actual production to everyone else's words on paper and future promises. No you can't really trust Tesla's predicted future timelines either -- have to wait and see -- but the point is NOBODY should get the free ride in public consciousness until they actually produce. Tesla has a track record of DELIVERING - perhaps later than original predictions - but they have delivered on all the major stuff. And begun to change the world.

This has turned into a bit of a rant. Oh well. I'll press 'send' anyway.

 

[techmaven]

These are U.S-only numbers!

The valuation of a company is dependent on global sales numbers and profits, how many Model S are for example sold in Japan (where LEAF sales are obviously very strong)? And besides that the LEAF is in the middle of a product transition, it had slow sales in recent months since buyers waited for the larger battery option.

PS: I'm not comparing the two cars other than that, obviously two very different price segments, just pointing out issues with your quoted statistics.

2015 YTD, as tracked by EV Sales:

EV Sales: World Top 10 October 2015
Leaf is 38,908
Model S is 36,302
Renault Zoe is 13,623

EV Sales usually is a bit of a laggard with Model S numbers, usually estimating low by quite a bit.

If you add up Leaf + Zoe is 52,531. That doesn't make the Model S "small volumes" in comparison to the Leaf + Zoe. Matter of fact, on a GWh basis, Leaf + Zoe is about 1.2 GWh through October, while Tesla shipped about 2.9 GWh. On a revenue basis, it also isn't close as the Model S revenues are a bit more than double the Leaf + Zoe combined.

 

[stopcrazypp]

Look, another rumor. Oh wait, it's an offical press release from Hyundai. Another BEV sedan coming in 2016:



We can see actual sales numbers in 12-24 months how many units these new entrants or updated models (Bolt, Ioniq EV, Leaf 2, upgraded i3, upgraded ZOE, upgraded e-Golf...) will sell. No need to guess.

I can only repeat what I have been saying/predicting for months: The $25-50k space will get incredibly crowded with PHEVs and EVs from major car brands between 2016-2020.

If these longer-range EVs are in demand, major car makers all have access to billions each year to expand battery production and R&D together with their battery suppliers.

PS: Hyundai is a LG Chem customer but could also source from SK Innovation in the future (like Kia) for dual sourcing options.

Again, press releases mean nothing with no volume projections. And we are comparing battery production rate in GWh, not the number of individual models. You continue to hand wave away any quantitative comparison of this. Have you ever tried realistically to see how many annual GWh LG Chem actually have signed up for production in 2017?

In GWh, Tesla is by far the #1 battery consumer in the EV market today (and thus Panasonic remains #1 as a producer). The plant they are construction even in the first phase has multiple times more volume than what they use today. I am just not seeing how Tesla's position as a #1 battery consumer (and soon producer) is threatened by the announcements so far.

 

[jesselivenomore]

If the vast majority of car buyers were asking themselves: "Which EV should I buy?" Then, competition might be a problem for Tesla.

The problem is, nobody is asking that. In fact, only a very small subset of car buyers are even asking: "Should I buy ICE or EV?"

The vast majority of car buyers only ask themselves: "Which ICE should I buy?"

So if more and more supposed EV "competition" arrives and EV awareness increases, it will grow that small subset of car buyers asking: "Should I buy ICE or EV?" Only then will more people ask: "Which EV should I buy?" So by then, even if a small percentage of those people answer "Tesla", it will be a big increase compared to today, where again most people as simply asking: "Which ICE should I buy?"

 

[30seconds]

Look, another rumor. Oh wait, it's an offical press release from Hyundai. Another BEV sedan coming in 2016:



We can see actual sales numbers in 12-24 months how many units these new entrants or updated models (Bolt, Ioniq EV, Leaf 2, upgraded i3, upgraded ZOE, upgraded e-Golf...) will sell. No need to guess.

I can only repeat what I have been saying/predicting for months: The $25-50k space will get incredibly crowded with PHEVs and EVs from major car brands between 2016-2020.

If these longer-range EVs are in demand, major car makers all have access to billions each year to expand battery production and R&D together with their battery suppliers.

PS: Hyundai is a LG Chem customer but could also source from SK Innovation in the future (like Kia) for dual sourcing options.

What are your revenue estimates for 2016, 2017 and 2018 for tesla? I haven't seen that you shared any.

 

[Grendal]

Fundamentally Tesla has no competitors. There will be no competitors in the near future either. Absolutely no other car manufacturer has any intention of making a competitive vehicle because they do not want to take away sales of their ICE vehicles. This includes Nissan, GM and BMW that currently have successful EVs and EREVs. Those companies and every other manufacturer that are creating EVs are doing so to position themselves for the future. So there will be a lot of talk about making a Tesla competitor vehicle and some companies might make a really great EV that they can point to and use in marketing. The fundamental reality is that none of them intend to sell 100,000 of them or more. GM, Nissan, and BMW will be happy to have a nice EV or EREV that they sell in reasonable numbers and getting their CARB ZEV credits. None of those companies are trying to change the world. They are just responding to a market demand which luckily positions them for a more electric future. Selling a few hundred cars or even a few thousand cars is nothing compared to the millions of cars sold every year. Tesla is positioning themselves to sell millions.

The thing that hard core investors miss is the motivation aspect. Tesla is not a business that is about making money. Making money is just a consequence of achieving the company goals. That is why Tesla is spending every extra dime they have on growth. That is also why Tesla does not cut corners. This confounds most institutional investors and a lot of businessmen as well. You follow those people up with the ones that think that Tesla is just a big scam designed to bilk someone out of their money somehow. Meanwhile Tesla will keep trying to build the best car in the world and keep confusing outsiders. Doesn't any of these people read Tesla's Mission Statement?

 

[techmaven]

Fundamentally Tesla has no competitors. There will be no competitors in the near future either. Absolutely no other car manufacturer has any intention of making a competitive vehicle because they do not want to take away sales of their ICE vehicles. This includes Nissan, GM and BMW that currently have successful EVs and EREVs. Those companies and every other manufacturer that are creating EVs are doing so to position themselves for the future. So there will be a lot of talk about making a Tesla competitor vehicle and some companies might make a really great EV that they can point to and use in marketing. The fundamental reality is that none of them intend to sell 100,000 of them or more. GM, Nissan, and BMW will be happy to have a nice EV or EREV that they sell in reasonable numbers and getting their CARB ZEV credits. None of those companies are trying to change the world. They are just responding to a market demand which luckily positions them for a more electric future. Selling a few hundred cars or even a few thousand cars is nothing compared to the millions of cars sold every year. Tesla is positioning themselves to sell millions.

I don't believe this is the case. For example, we deride Toyota right now, but I suspect Toyota will choose to compete when certain key metrics are in place. Their collaborate with Tesla and personal relationship with Mr. Musk gives them a specific insight, as does Daimler's interest in Tesla. In the meantime, they have millions of hybrids, light PHEVs, and gasoline cars to sell. Toyota's view is likely somewhere in the early to mid 2020's before all the right metrics are in place. They get to collect lots of credits and government money to continue down the HFCV route too until that is settled one way or the other. It makes sense for them to hedge every which way.

The difference is whether or not Tesla grows up to be a major automaker in the meantime. The problem for the Tesla bears is that by the time the others choose to compete, Tesla will be a significant automaker. The party keeps going well into the 2020's and they are looking for Tesla to be demolished well before then. There is a large expanding pie that is the electric vehicle market and the analogues of music players (iPod) and its relationship to NAND flash, as well as smartphone disruption are useful to examine, but obviously there are very key differences.

BTW, if you really care about how well Tesla's plan is executing, note Musk's demeanor in the last couple of months especially what he says about the future of Tesla and how it relates to the lean times of 2008. If your investment thesis is going to be predicated on Musk not seeing this through, you really should dig up some interviews about 2008 and his absolute commitment to making Tesla work. That's the biggest reason why the big guns have thrown it in with him and he gets the taps opened wide whenever he asks.