Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Tesla, TSLA & the Investment World: the Perpetual Investors' Roundtable

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
I don't think it much matters what the final number is

$100 refundable deposit is not a serious commitment to buy.

In 2010 Nissan LEAF looked like a world beater with $99 deposits.

Thanks for the reminder on the Leaf deposits. That makes for an interesting comparison.

According to this article, the Leaf had 19,000 deposits after 1 month which was only 7 months away from the first expected deliveries.

The Leaf has averaged about 50,000 units annually over the past few years, so I think ~200,000 deposits after 2 days bodes pretty well for the Cybertruck.
 
Last edited:
LOL! People will go to any length to make something that is not a problem seem like a capital offense. Using the serial number is pretty standard for the default passwords of wifi router/modems supplied by ISP's around the country. You are supposed to change them to something even harder to guess upon activation.

The Powerwall is no different and is only as secure as your home wifi network it runs on anyway.

Much ado about nothing.

According to the GitHub post the password of the PowerWall UI Managemnet Interface can not be changed...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Johann Koeber
From r/funny:

wjays4lgvc041.png


And the two top comments:

Honestly, this gives me hope that some day, I may see one of these outside my trailer park because, finally, I have been recruited by the star league to defend the frontier against Xur and the Kodan Armada.
...and...

No lie, ive been waiting for this

As a GC the amount of driving i do is ****ing outrageous, 500-1000mi a week

I used to have a Ram, i was spending like 2-300 a week on fuel, so i traded it in for a 4 cyl Tacoma and i cut that down to about a 120 a week on average

Id love to be able to drive a car, but its just not possible, i have to have a pickup.

I will be first in line for this when it goes on sale....the styling is a little wacky imo but the practicality of it just cant be beat

Ford and GM are also coming out with EV pickups fall 2021....

So so so so happy about this, its been a long time dream to have an EV Pickup

Source: 40 years later.
 
soooo based on @LN1_Casey and @Lycanthrope 's coordinated reservations, it appears orders DO give SEQUENTIAL rn's.

So 200k have been pre-ordered in USA alone.

This is big
I don't know if they're sequential. They coordinated timing and were still 119 places apart.

Let's say they orders differed by a minute (could @Lycanthrope and @LN1_Casey confirm max variance between order timing?), that would mean orders would still be going up by 7k per hour (168k per day), which is too much.

I wonder if there is a gap in the order numbers, e.g. each order number is three higher than the last. Tesla could have also just said that the next order number is the previous order plus a random number between 1 and 5, or something like that to obfuscate the real interest.

If we saw a list of sequential order numbers I think the sequential theory would be easier to believe.
 
  • Helpful
Reactions: Lessmog
Put me down as one of those that was initially disappointed when the Cybertruck rolled onto the stage but I've started to come around. My only concerns are how efficient will it be road tripping as I do that quite often. The open wheel wells should have some sort of aero cover that can be easily snapped in place similar to how the Honda Insight had.Honda.jpg
There's also the issue of fitting my hang glider on the roof. Attached is how I've rigged my Model 3 which can hold up to 6 gliders. Would rather not have to tow a trailer for these but it may be no less efficient. It would really solve my ground clearance issues which does impede driving to the top of some mountains.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_0567.JPG
    IMG_0567.JPG
    709.9 KB · Views: 53
They coordinated timing and were still 119 places apart.

Let's say they orders differed by a minute (could @Lycanthrope and @LN1_Casey confirm max variance between order timing?), that would mean orders would still be going up by 7k per hour (168k per day), which is too much.
Right so you had it all correct until you said "which is too much"
Entirely believable to me, for first day reservations


Folks, please...let's put this sequential reservation number thing to rest. For those of you that did not live through the other Tesla reservations, let me assure you. Tesla reservation numbers have NEVER been sequential and do not represent the number of reservations made in any way.

Dan
yeah but this time they are
 
  • Like
Reactions: floydboy
Well here’s this morning “thorough” coverage from the Guardian...


“Elon Musk's net worth plunges $768m in a day after cybertruck fiasco
Tesla’s chief designer smashed the vehicle’s windows in an attempt to demonstrate their toughness“

Honestly, from a pub that purports to advocate the science of climate change and takes no adverts, it boggles the mind that almost all their coverage of Tesla is re “big bad billionaire Elon” and no info on the mission.

It is demonstrative of how deeply ingrained bias against industry as a solutive participant in climate change is.

Fired off the following response to the editor:

“I am a subscriber to your publication and did so after researching objectivity and trying to find a pub less susceptible to influence from adverts (funding source).

While I understand there are many different viewpoints, I see that, generally, any coverage you have on Tesla usually is accompanied by throwing shade at Elon Musk’s bank account size. What the Gaurdian always fails to acknowledge is that the mans wealth is totally committed to his companies, Tesla and Space X.

Tesla’s mission is “Accelarate the worlds transition to sustainable energy”. The Guardian purports to support the effort to mitigate climate change and yet you publish a story that speaks to a paper loss of stock value on an individual instead of a story about a zero emission vehicle (drive it on renewables) that replaces the largest problem vehicles in terms of CO2 emissions that is priced lower than its competitors!

Tesla has done more to move the CO2 mitigation needle on energy and transportation industry in the last 6 years than any other auto OEM. They lead with constant innovation of substance as opposed to marketing fluff and compliance measures that results in products that help to eliminate carbon from both the energy and transport industries.

How is that the least 4 stories (as I see in the app) were written to throw shade at a person rather passing info on a company of people dedicated to building a company that blazing a clear path the economic solutions the climate change.

People generally will only change behaviors when they see an easier path than they than they are on. Rather than illuminate this path by the Guardians ridiculous and useless coverage of Tesla and its efforts, the path it appears to haven chosen is to support those who wish to obfuscate and confuse information of real solutions to climate change and thus feed the Fossil Fuel industry strategy to introduce fear uncertainty and doubt re the science that says their industry is dead.

Your readers deserve useful objective information that provides objective information on solutions to the single most important problem Homo sapiens has managed to get itself into. It is absolute that the the source of this change is our collective use of fossil fuels that’s it. Stop burning the hydrocarbons and the additional CO2 stops being ADDED to the atmosphere period end of sentence.

The hard part becomes keeping a learned lifestyle. Fusion power from the sun is our answer in the form of renewables (wind & solar) with the former missing link of storage and transport. These are Tesla’s mission and reason for it’s existence and what motivates Elon Musk and it’s 48k employee’s, how bout you get one of your reporters to tell that story. The story that categorically demonstrates that a transition to sustainable energy and transportation builds our economy provides massive good safe employment and democratizes energy rather than destroying it as the fossil fuel industry would have us believe.

As the Guardians business model is built to foster integrity and objectivity, I would expect better from its reporters and editors.

Respectfully,

David A. Israel”

Fire Away!
 
I'd be surprised if those make it to production. I expect 3/Y style handles. It might have just been easy parts bin engineering to swap out the exterior face of the S/X door handles and mount them on the prototype, for extra wow. If they DO make it production, I hope they will have come up with some better (cheaper / more reliable / etc) version of the mechanics of the door handle (and apply it to S/X too).
Those handles have been reliable on my S. I'd like to see them on the production vehicle. If the auto-presenting doors are included, then the handle reliability doesn't really enter into the picture (might be tough on the cars you park next to though).
 
  • Helpful
Reactions: BioSehnsucht
Sorry if this has already been discussed, it's been hard to keep up with this thread recently. Some people are raising concerns about the safety aspects of the Cybertruck and how economical any repairs would be. With the panels being very costly and difficult to replace (insurance cost concerns) and a lack of crumple zones. The vehicle perhaps being too damaging to others in a crash? Any thoughts on this?
 
Well here’s this morning “thorough” coverage from the Guardian...


“Elon Musk's net worth plunges $768m in a day after cybertruck fiasco
Tesla’s chief designer smashed the vehicle’s windows in an attempt to demonstrate their toughness“

Honestly, from a pub that purports to advocate the science of climate change and takes no adverts, it boggles the mind that almost all their coverage of Tesla is re “big bad billionaire Elon” and no info on the mission.

It is demonstrative of how deeply ingrained bias against industry as a solutive participant in climate change is.

Fired off the following response to the editor:

“I am a subscriber to your publication and did so after researching objectivity and trying to find a pub less susceptible to influence from adverts (funding source).

While I understand there are many different viewpoints, I see that, generally, any coverage you have on Tesla usually is accompanied by throwing shade at Elon Musk’s bank account size. What the Gaurdian always fails to acknowledge is that the mans wealth is totally committed to his companies, Tesla and Space X.

Tesla’s mission is “Accelarate the worlds transition to sustainable energy”. The Guardian purports to support the effort to mitigate climate change and yet you publish a story that speaks to a paper loss of stock value on an individual instead of a story about a zero emission vehicle (drive it on renewables) that replaces the largest problem vehicles in terms of CO2 emissions that is priced lower than its competitors!

Tesla has done more to move the CO2 mitigation needle on energy and transportation industry in the last 6 years than any other auto OEM. They lead with constant innovation of substance as opposed to marketing fluff and compliance measures that results in products that help to eliminate carbon from both the energy and transport industries.

How is that the least 4 stories (as I see in the app) were written to throw shade at a person rather passing info on a company of people dedicated to building a company that blazing a clear path the economic solutions the climate change.

People generally will only change behaviors when they see an easier path than they than they are on. Rather than illuminate this path by the Guardians ridiculous and useless coverage of Tesla and its efforts, the path it appears to haven chosen is to support those who wish to obfuscate and confuse information of real solutions to climate change and thus feed the Fossil Fuel industry strategy to introduce fear uncertainty and doubt re the science that says their industry is dead.

Your readers deserve useful objective information that provides objective information on solutions to the single most important problem Homo sapiens has managed to get itself into. It is absolute that the the source of this change is our collective use of fossil fuels that’s it. Stop burning the hydrocarbons and the additional CO2 stops being ADDED to the atmosphere period end of sentence.

The hard part becomes keeping a learned lifestyle. Fusion power from the sun is our answer in the form of renewables (wind & solar) with the former missing link of storage and transport. These are Tesla’s mission and reason for it’s existence and what motivates Elon Musk and it’s 48k employee’s, how bout you get one of your reporters to tell that story. The story that categorically demonstrates that a transition to sustainable energy and transportation builds our economy provides massive good safe employment and democratizes energy rather than destroying it as the fossil fuel industry would have us believe.

As the Guardians business model is built to foster integrity and objectivity, I would expect better from its reporters and editors.

Respectfully,

David A. Israel”

Fire Away!

I used to actually subscribe to that rag and canceled over their coverage of Tesla, SpaceX and Musk in general. Inexplicable given their stated positions on all things you mentioned.
 
I used to actually subscribe to that rag and canceled over their coverage of Tesla, SpaceX and Musk in general. Inexplicable given their stated positions on all things you mentioned.

I here that a new Tesla Plant is coming to Hurt, Virginia. Ground has already been broke.....Is this true? I live a 1/2 mile from site.
 
Well here’s this morning “thorough” coverage from the Guardian...


“Elon Musk's net worth plunges $768m in a day after cybertruck fiasco
Tesla’s chief designer smashed the vehicle’s windows in an attempt to demonstrate their toughness“

Honestly, from a pub that purports to advocate the science of climate change and takes no adverts, it boggles the mind that almost all their coverage of Tesla is re “big bad billionaire Elon” and no info on the mission.

It is demonstrative of how deeply ingrained bias against industry as a solutive participant in climate change is.

Fired off the following response to the editor:

“I am a subscriber to your publication and did so after researching objectivity and trying to find a pub less susceptible to influence from adverts (funding source).

While I understand there are many different viewpoints, I see that, generally, any coverage you have on Tesla usually is accompanied by throwing shade at Elon Musk’s bank account size. What the Gaurdian always fails to acknowledge is that the mans wealth is totally committed to his companies, Tesla and Space X.

Tesla’s mission is “Accelarate the worlds transition to sustainable energy”. The Guardian purports to support the effort to mitigate climate change and yet you publish a story that speaks to a paper loss of stock value on an individual instead of a story about a zero emission vehicle (drive it on renewables) that replaces the largest problem vehicles in terms of CO2 emissions that is priced lower than its competitors!

Tesla has done more to move the CO2 mitigation needle on energy and transportation industry in the last 6 years than any other auto OEM. They lead with constant innovation of substance as opposed to marketing fluff and compliance measures that results in products that help to eliminate carbon from both the energy and transport industries.

How is that the least 4 stories (as I see in the app) were written to throw shade at a person rather passing info on a company of people dedicated to building a company that blazing a clear path the economic solutions the climate change.

People generally will only change behaviors when they see an easier path than they than they are on. Rather than illuminate this path by the Guardians ridiculous and useless coverage of Tesla and its efforts, the path it appears to haven chosen is to support those who wish to obfuscate and confuse information of real solutions to climate change and thus feed the Fossil Fuel industry strategy to introduce fear uncertainty and doubt re the science that says their industry is dead.

Your readers deserve useful objective information that provides objective information on solutions to the single most important problem Homo sapiens has managed to get itself into. It is absolute that the the source of this change is our collective use of fossil fuels that’s it. Stop burning the hydrocarbons and the additional CO2 stops being ADDED to the atmosphere period end of sentence.

The hard part becomes keeping a learned lifestyle. Fusion power from the sun is our answer in the form of renewables (wind & solar) with the former missing link of storage and transport. These are Tesla’s mission and reason for it’s existence and what motivates Elon Musk and it’s 48k employee’s, how bout you get one of your reporters to tell that story. The story that categorically demonstrates that a transition to sustainable energy and transportation builds our economy provides massive good safe employment and democratizes energy rather than destroying it as the fossil fuel industry would have us believe.

As the Guardians business model is built to foster integrity and objectivity, I would expect better from its reporters and editors.

Respectfully,

David A. Israel”

Fire Away!

Hear, Hear! Logged in specifically to give this post the 'Love' it deserves!
 
Can anybody link to The Guardian's coverage of the stock price increase and effect on Musk's net worth when the stock climbed at a fair pace from $180 in June this year? No? Thought not. Elon must be gutted that his net worth is back to where it was earlier this month. :rolleyes:
Ah, that'd be the net worth of his TSLA holdings. His personal net worth went up by about $35B this month with the launch of the first Starlink satellites. :D