Unless you are EV, how much issues can actually be fixed by software updates. ....
Tesla, TSLA & the Investment World: the Perpetual Investors' Roundtable
- Thread starter AudubonB
- Start date
Unless you are EV, how much issues can actually be fixed by software updates. ....
Note that "having OTA updates" is not the same thing as "having OTA updates on a unified vehicle control software stack".
Remember, I-Pace also "has OTA updates", but that didn't let them fix their braking issue OTA; people still had to bring their vehicles in to the dealership to get a software patch. One of Tesla's unique advantages is a unified software stack, rather than having a bunch of independent "boxes" from OEMs that have varying degrees of integration with each other.
Carl Raymond
Active Member
I wonder what the dealers think of this. Should create a nice little triangle (Ford, Dealer, User) of finger pointing the first time there’s an issue.
The Pickup reveal had 2 Trucks - with Cyberpunk Bladerunner In front, and another one in the back.
has there been any discussion of why 2 trucks were shown ?
So what if both trucks are gonna be released at the same time. ....
( ... EM has said that they would do multi product lines at the same time in future ...)
~ Cheers
has there been any discussion of why 2 trucks were shown ?
So what if both trucks are gonna be released at the same time. ....
( ... EM has said that they would do multi product lines at the same time in future ...)
~ Cheers
Not only is it one less ICE purchased, it is one less ICE customer, forever. I don't know the number, but I'm willing to bet at least 9 out of 10 EV buyers never buy another ICE again. For the most part it will be a one way street.
That said, I do know one person who bought a Tesla and was unhappy enough to sell it and buy a Mercedes. In fact, I think she traded it in and had to pay nothing. lol
What I don't agree with is that buying a Tesla is a one way street. I think the Tesla is enough outside the norm that while most people who buy them will be happy, there will be a number that will get tired of the many "issues" and buy some other EV down the road. Right not there aren't really many other options, but I'm interested in learning how GM's charging network is going to work.
I get what you are saying about the upgrades, but that's not at all the same thing as having so much of the car being Beta. I can't tell you how many people complain every time they redo the console layout. That's update, but not at all Beta. The console actually works... if you don't mind the brown ring.
I'm involved with service every week trying to get various problems fixed. I read some stock analyst saying so many millions of dollars of profit came from how they report warranty work. So you can believe they are squeezing the service centers on warranty work. I'm trying to get into a new center and they acknowledged each center is operated differently. To me that means some focus on repair, others focus on profit. I was asked for the time and date of the issue I was reporting and I got the time stamp from when I called the 800 number and the time stamp for when the problem was diagnosed which was when the call was answered 50 minutes later.
I don't think that makes sense. We have lots of hydro from Quebec here in NY, and lots of potential for more solar and wind. Our solar panels on our roof cover most of our electricity use.
Jo-
Member
He said you could put an F-150 in the back of a Tesla Truck on the Semi platform. That truck is not the cybertruck, and the one in the back is a generic F-150 lookalike. No indication they would release two trucks at the same time. In fact, he said if the cybertruck isn’t that popular due to its look, then they would later make a more traditional looking truck.
And OT: this isn’t investment thread material (yet)
The Accountant
Member
The Pickup has not yet been revealed, the reveal will happen in November. Those two drawings you show were done by artists not associated with Tesla.
EVNow
Well-Known Member
Do you not understand that until Tesla got close to pushing out the model 3 none of the major auto makers took them very seriously? They've all had projects running in the background, but the inertia and focus on the same old, same old was operating. Once Tesla made it clear they would actually be selling that $35,000 car and not losing money on every car they sell, the rest of the industry sat up and took notice. I can't recall which company, maybe Ford, fired their CEO because he wasn't doing enough, fast enough.
Another major US auto exec actually publicly proclaimed Tesla would never make it. Well, that may or may not be true, but they will pretty clearly ship at least a couple million EVs in the process.
Just for grins I dropped by a Chevy dealer the other day and asked about the Bolt. They still can't answer basic questions about charging that an educated buyer might ask, like speed of charging at a DC fast charger for example. She did know the fastest it would level 2 charge was 32 amps and the battery was 60 kWh, which I just read has been bumped to 66 kWh in 2020 cars which I would expect are out now. So why didn't she know this???
Clearly they aren't there YET.
EVNow
Well-Known Member
Fortunately GF3 is here - which means Tesla can redirect US manufactured cars to EU.
EU sales are probably incentive driven to an extent. They can always do some judicious deals to increase sales if needed.
Without knowing how much they get per car and how easy it is to sell the car in US instead, it's difficult to figure out what the strategy should be.
BTW, I expect $1B gaap profit by Q4 '20. Tesla may not be that interested in increasing sales in EU by reducing ASP. Esp if FSD has made good progress.
Not sure what that means.
I agree with all that, except for the fact that Tesla is still be run as a startup. As long as Musk is in control that is likely to continue since he clearly is not interested in anything else. That's not saying Musk has to remain in charge indefinitely. So if Tesla grows to be a fourth place US automaker and changes their mode of operating, they can continue for some time. But eventually they either have to change their mode of operating or they won't be able to sustain continued growth. Running a company that just produces the same number of cars each year is very different from running an exponentially growing startup.
Personally I think the Tesla killer will be their lack of good service and support.
wipster
Gold Member
Boy that's what I want, whooshy sci-fi whistling noise when I hit the throttle... and adjustable even! Makes you feel like you're not even in a electric car...
I'll pass thanks
hacer
Active Member
I didn't mean to imply that there are never any limits to trading. Member firms are always supposed to remain within capital limits on their trading. I believe that in the U.S. member institutions are supposed to follow FINRA's rule SEA 15c3-1 which establish risk limits on positions relative to the capital of the member institution. They're supposed to have their own risk desks that track their exposure and keep their trading within the prescribed bounds. I believe that it is self policing in the U.S. except for the occasion audit or an actual failure. I think that it's different in Europe because the failure of Baring's Bank with resulting counter-party losses caused the EU to pass laws requiring actual supervision by a third party.
Member's capital is more or less a measure of their net worth (which is typically self-computed and audited annually) and they simply have to keep total risk exposure within the limits allowed by their capital. Mostly the risk exposure rules are there for control of risk on derivatives which are always created from thin air, but also for securities that are bought with loan proceeds. Regardless that capital is theirs and remains under their control. It is not transferred to any third parties. This is totally unlike a retail investor who's money or securities remain on deposit with the broker and their is no way for them to do anything with it while it is supporting a trade.
So in my example of shorting 30,000 shares it would go like this: say it was done at a price of $300. During settlement the short seller would receive $9 million, and fail to deliver anything. If they are obeying the FINRA rules, they will need to verify that their working capital has about 20% (a made up number I'm not going to lookup the risk requirements) of that, or $180k. The check and they have $200 million capital so it's all good. They are of course free to reinvest that $9 million in other securities, repos, swaps etc.
Krugerrand
Is Cat
Unfortunately, most of his followers are in the northern hemisphere, and it's not exactly tree-planting season anymore
Trees can be planted in any month with an ‘r’ in it. As long as you can get a hole in the ground and refilled, you can plant a tree. You actually water the tree enough to freeze the roots with it. Have done this several times, the trees do great. They’re dormant and when the water around their roots thaw they have the water they need right off to get a good start.
@Right_Said_Fred why do you say another two years? All they have said is that production in GF4 is to start in 2021. That could be in as little as 14 months or as many as 26 months. If you use GF3 as an example if they announce in December and break ground in January they could start making cars in January, 2021. (Just slightly slower than "China speed".)
Everything you say is true... but... They ARE forced to change so they will. At this point the wind is in their sails and they are making headway.
Your concern about their capital is very overstated. A large percentage of the car is still a car be it an ICE or an EV. Only the motor and battery are different in reality. People convert literally any car made to an EV by replacing the motor and adding the battery. Done. Do you really think the major car makers can't figure out how to do that?
Electric cars made by the majors might get 5% less range, or have half the horsepower, but these things are not essential. They do know how to design cars people want to buy. Don't you think Toyota will know how to sell EVs? They presently sell some 10 million (ballpark) cars a year. In a few years every size and shape of vehicle they sell will be an EV.
This isn't just going to hit Tesla. I expect some present brands of cars to go away or be assimilated by the Borg.
Krugerrand
Is Cat
When a passenger asks how to open the door, I actually tell them it's a mechanical aptitude test (I used to actually call it an intelligence test). I've found once you say that they figure it out real fast!
I just pretend I don’t notice or hear them fumbling about and then once seated inside I rate them on a scale of 1-10 on how they did. If they score less than a 7, they don’t get to be my friend anymore. I got standards.
Antares Nebula
Active Member
There are three major components to the modern car:
1. EV Powertrain
2. Autonomous / Semi-Autonomous
3. Smart car / CarOS (for car control features, OTA, and consumer media consumption, games, apps, ads, etc., like iOS or Anrdoid)
Although current OEMs are not yet experts in EV powertrains, they do understand large scale auto manufacturing and can transition to this role (if committed).
But 2 and 3 are out of their wheelhouse. Current OEMs do have various driver assist systems, but autonomous software is really on another level. And their various car software platforms are merely comparable to feature phones (and not smartphone platforms), and not at all comparable to Tesla's carOS.
For this reason, I do believe that it will be Software/Tech players that will deliver 2 and 3, and not the traditional OEMs. So you have of course Tesla. Then Waymo may partner with OEMs, where Waymo brings 2 and 3 and OEMs bring 1 (similar to Android and Samsung). Apple, my guess, is trying to do all three like Tesla. So, a good guess for the future players would be Tesla, Apple, and Waymo (with partnerships).
Similar threads
- Locked
- Poll
- Locked
