My hope is they keep the dual screens. Remove the air vents and switch to Model 3 style minimalist air vents that are built into the dash. Maybe add a HUD? Wouldn't be too hard.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Tesla, TSLA & the Investment World: the Perpetual Investors' Roundtable
- Thread starter AudubonB
- Start date
My hope is they keep the dual screens. Remove the air vents and switch to Model 3 style minimalist air vents that are built into the dash. Maybe add a HUD? Wouldn't be too hard.
I think eventually with a new chassis. S and X are higher priced vehicles with nice margins but takes long to assemble. I am sure Tesla wants to get those man hours down, and part counts down. The only way to do that is a new chassis. Question is, what is the ROI of doing it now or waiting a couple of years.
sundaymorning
Active Member
Interesting info...
Tesla Order Rate Surges 25% Worldwide, 116% In North America, According To New Data | CleanTechnica
It looks to me (and many others here) like a lot of Q1 was pulled into Q4, and now it is back to "normal"
Tesla entered the quarter with 2,907 cars in transit from Q4, delivered 63,000 cars, and had 10,600 cars in transit to customers at the end of the quarter. This implies 70,693 orders in the first quarter over 90 days, or 785 orders per day.
With 980 orders per day in Q2 so far, according to the leaked internal email, that is a 25% increase over the 785 order per day rate in Q1. This methodology for calculating orders is adopted from twitter user @vgrinshpun.
For those of you who aren’t familiar with @vgrinshpun, he was at one time a very active stats guy on TMC tracking SX demand/production. He was the Troy of TMC in its early days, I trust his estimates 100%, we use to call him “”vlad” for short.
A colleague said before the latest OTA, AP did brake hard in similar merge situation, and he really hated it and disabled AP.
After the latest OTA, AP started to behave as shown on the video(speeding through on the left), and yanked the car to the left one lane when the merging car started the merge. So again he disabled AP.
The lengths of the merge lanes probably do matter to AI. May be this kind of system should display the polygons and red/green to the drivers, such that the drivers know how the system interprets the surroundings.
Nothing specific I suppose, just something that feels more upscale than the 3? I happen to love the minimalistic 3 interior but it just seems like higher cost model buyers usually like a little more. Maybe more trim material options, cooled seats etc.
JusRelax
Active Member
Is it possible that Tesla hasn't yet determined a price yet for the China made Model 3, and is using this contest to determine/garner interest in the model 3 and find out what price level the market is determining for the Model 3? If I were trying to maximize profitability, I'd do something like this to make sure I'm not leaving any profit on the table by selling a car for too cheap compared to how many cars I'm able to produce initially.
I suspect that Tesla is trying to determine the correct price point to match demand with their expected production levels at initial release. As production rises, they will probably slowly drop prices to match demand as well.
I suspect that Tesla is trying to determine the correct price point to match demand with their expected production levels at initial release. As production rises, they will probably slowly drop prices to match demand as well.
Isn't chassis assembly (stamping, welding, painting) highly automated?
Seems like the rest of the component architecture (electrical, cooling, displays, switches, HVAC) would be easier to change, lower cost, and less manufacturing down time to implement versus a full frame update.
Doggydogworld
Active Member
This is bad methodology. As they say:Interesting info...
Tesla Order Rate Surges 25% Worldwide, 116% In North America, According To New Data | CleanTechnica
It looks to me (and many others here) like a lot of Q1 was pulled into Q4, and now it is back to "normal"
...this methodology will be flawed and actually overestimate orders for quarters in which Tesla started with a significant backlog of orders (a backlog implies some cars have been ordered but not yet built and therefore not captured in the in-transit numbers).
They entered Q3, for example, with a huge backlog that was not part of in transit. They presumably entered Q2 with a SR+ backlog. They also say:
However, Q1 2019 is not such a quarter since there was virtually no backlog from the fourth quarter
That's just flat wrong. Europeans placed a ton of Model 3 orders in Q4 that were not included in the 12/31 in transit number.
I don't see how you can conclude anything one way or the other using this approach. Tesla doesn't define or regularly report orders, so it's nearly impossible to map Elon's 50k against quarterly deliveries in the first place. Does the 50k include Model Y? Why not? Also, there's a surge of orders every time Tesla opens ordering for a new variant or in a new region. Q2 had one mid-sized surge, SR+ in Europe and China, and a couple of small ones such as UK opening for orders. Q1 had a large surge from the 2/28 SR intro and price cuts, plus a mid-sized surge from China and a couple of smaller EU markets opening.
I just don't see how you filter through all this and produce a meaningful conclusion.
Dan Detweiler
Active Member
The more I drive my Model 3, the less I want "more". I had to drive a rental Buick for the last 4 days while out of town. Hated, hated, HATED it. Chrome, buttons, knobs, gauges, displays, switches, crap everywhere. Really made me miss my 3.
Dan
EVNow
Well-Known Member
I don't think the 50k includes Y - that wouldn't make any sense in the context of the mail. The mail was to cheer people to produce more 3s, so as such should be talking about 3 (may be s+x if we are generous) orders.
But on the whole I agree, we can't conclude much from the email in terms of actual % increase. We can just say it looks like there are more orders in Q2.
dc_h
Active Member
No. This is in ludicrous mode already. It does look like production could start late Q3 or early Q4 though, which is crazy looking back to January's Shanhai swamp.
I'm just asking questions! With no agenda or anything, honest!
"Hey, aren't you guize super concerned that Elon might be embezzling money to fuel is underground mole people plans? What? I'm just asking a question!"
jhm
Well-Known Member
I wonder how this would impact Tesla if they were to build the drive units in China and ship them back to US. Might that get around REM export issues?
dc_h
Active Member
It's possible and possible that initial pricing will be a bit above long term pricing plan. A 20 to 25% cut from today's price will be very profitable, since that will just cut out the current tariff cost and labor and local parts will reduce overall costs. In the short term, why not charge based on depreciation costs at 50% of production capacity and then cut prices moderately as production starts to hit stride. There should be at least a quarter of SR+ backlog in China. Seems like building capacity for China and Greater China region shouldn't happen well into 2020 and that would be the time you drive pricing down to the long term plan.
Balancing pricing to block out competitors and getting big day 1 deposits and maximizing profit on day 1 production would be an interesting discussion with Elon, Zach and their core team. I'd guess they price about 10% above long term plan.
Pros and cons:
Even 50,000 pre-orders is 125 million in cash and assures 2 quarters of production as they ramp from hundreds of cars a week to 3000 cars a week. Less than 50,000 pre-orders could be sold by tslaq as a sign the plant will have no market to sell to.
Aggressive pricing could create 100,000 or more pre-orders and cover plant loan costs for the year and make Shanghai cash flow positive on day 1, but likely leave a couple hundred million on the table.
Aggressive pricing could Osborne more LR and Premium cars, but these markets are differentiated. Probably at least 20% of LR\Premium consumers would be on the fence.
The wild card is the chatter about moving Y production up to end of 2019. That would leave Tesla short of capacity at least until GF3 is completely built out. I love the idea, but it seems unrealistic and wishful.Aggressive pricing could create 100,000 or more pre-orders and cover plant loan costs for the year and make Shanghai cash flow positive on day 1, but likely leave a couple hundred million on the table.
Aggressive pricing could Osborne more LR and Premium cars, but these markets are differentiated. Probably at least 20% of LR\Premium consumers would be on the fence.
Pras
Member
Feels like TSLA wants to break out but is kept subdued. The pressure keeps building. One day!
Joanne
what a dope!
uh..excuse me
umm.. I'm sorry
this is.. this is kind of embarrassing but.. there's no toilet paper over here
Elon
(from the stall on Elaine's right)
are you talking to me?
Joanne
yeah.. I
I just forgot to check
so if you could just spare me some
Elon
no I'm sorry
Joanne
what?
Elon
no I'm sorry, I can't spare it
Joanne
you can't spare it??
Elon
no there's not enough to spare
Joanne
well I don't need much, just 3 squares will do it
Elon
I'm sorry I don't have a square to spare, now if you don't mind
Joanne
3 squares? you can't spare 3 squares??
Elon
no I don't have a square to spare, I can't spare a square
Joanne
oh is it two-ply? cause it it's two-ply I'll take one ply, one ply, one, one
puny little ply, I'll take one measly ply
Elon
look, I don't have a square and I don't have a ply (flushing and leaving)
Joanne
no no, no no, don't don't, I beg you
p.s I will turn everything into a Seinfeld reference.
MartinAustin
Active Member
1) If orders open per expectations, I wouldn't be surprised to see 500,000 Model 3 orders from the China factory to be announced at the June 11 shareholders meeting.
2) S+X just got their refresh for 2019. There are two refreshes in one year? What is this talk about 400 miles for? They're not switching S+X to 2170 until a) they absolutely have to [which is a LONG way from being true, it's still the sales leader in large Luxury cars] and b) Gigafactory production issues have been solved for the entire product line including Powerwall+Semi+Y. S+X are absolutely at the back of the line for 2170.
Why don't people look at this CNBC hit piece as nothing more than that? It's from Lora K who has written little other than garbage concerning Tesla. Her articles always look "potentially possible" on the day of publication but when looking back you can see how much of her stuff is just plain wrong or fabricated. And just like her other garbage, it's based on claims of interviews with people whose names are missing from the article.
2) S+X just got their refresh for 2019. There are two refreshes in one year? What is this talk about 400 miles for? They're not switching S+X to 2170 until a) they absolutely have to [which is a LONG way from being true, it's still the sales leader in large Luxury cars] and b) Gigafactory production issues have been solved for the entire product line including Powerwall+Semi+Y. S+X are absolutely at the back of the line for 2170.
Why don't people look at this CNBC hit piece as nothing more than that? It's from Lora K who has written little other than garbage concerning Tesla. Her articles always look "potentially possible" on the day of publication but when looking back you can see how much of her stuff is just plain wrong or fabricated. And just like her other garbage, it's based on claims of interviews with people whose names are missing from the article.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
