woodisgood
Optimustic Pessimist
No hail Marys needed here. I sold a chunk of TQQQ to make room for a June '23 call.
Juuuuuust missed the low-hanging Mary Barra joke...
You can install our site as a web app on your iOS device by utilizing the Add to Home Screen feature in Safari. Please see this thread for more details on this.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
No hail Marys needed here. I sold a chunk of TQQQ to make room for a June '23 call.
I know two people personally that aren't going to hold off. They both need cars (one is driving an old jalopy) so the credit isn't a huge deal. Plus I pointed out that it's likely that Tesla raises prices a little once the credit is active.
Now.....if say you're interested in a Model Y and want to place and an order and are given a chance to get it this month instead of a year from now, would you forego the EV credit?
I certainly think Tesla will be just fine with Dec deliveries. Between Hertz buying up all the Model 3 supply on the open market and new orders getting to jump the line, I think they'll be just fine
Tesla is so far ahead maybe they are just an "outlier" and therefore GM is the real leader? Even if you actually considered Tesla an outlier, I still don't think GM can claim the leadership role!
Nothing. Way out of my league.How much would you bid for an Orbital-Class Cybertruck? A kajillion at least?
To be clear, the CT would never leave the confines of the Starship. They would both orbit and return together. "Retrieval" would happen on Terra Firma.Nothing. Way out of my league.
I wouldn’t be too surprised to see him launch one as a test payload but doubt it’ll get retrieved. That’s the sort of gimmick space companies that can’t make it to orbit need to do for publicity.
A while back, I was slightly concerned short-term about folks pushing out their deliveries to take advantage of the upcoming tax credit. But given how long the waiting list is, I imagine there are going to be more than enough buyers willing to skip the line to take delivery this month.I know two people personally that aren't going to hold off. They both need cars (one is driving an old jalopy) so the credit isn't a huge deal. Plus I pointed out that it's likely that Tesla raises prices a little once the credit is active.
Hail MaryJuuuuuust missed the low-hanging Mary Barra joke...
2170 and 4680 versions will either be priced differently or made nearly identical via software. Meaning a LR 4680 model Y will have less battery when it has less weight so the range is the same. The handling will be slightly better on the 4680 but very few people would be able to tell. Or a 4680 will be priced higher with additional range or performance. Or if Tesla wants to be sure demand is there for the 2170, they will INITIALLY give the 2170 model MORE range at the same price point than a 4680. Once things are transitioned over, the 4680 will magically get better.The amount of Cybertruck-related merchandise being released does signal towards, at the very least, a reveal of final design/specs/features. It could signal something more substantial and surprising, such as an earlier start of production or a limited early production run. However, these latter possibilities are difficult to separate from hopes, when Tesla/Elon have publicly pushed back Cybertruck production and expectations due to battery supply. I suspect the only thing that would cause CT production to be pulled forward is a re-evaluation of battery strategy around Model Y. We've assumed Austin Model Ys are going to be, at some point, possibly from the get-go, 4680-based. We've then wondered about the differences between Austin-built and Fremont-built Model Ys - how different will a 4680-based vehicle really be? Could the 2170 and 4680 versions really be sold as equivalent? Then it was speculated that if 4680-based Ys are really going to be that different from the 2170-based vehicles (creating somewhat of an issue for regional order fulfillment - many people will have a preference one way or the other), maybe it will only be Y Performance that will be built in Austin with 4680s.
What if they just decided to keep US-based Model Ys the same across both US factories for the time-being, with the side effect being to free up Kato's 4680 cells for something else? Of course, I'm speculating off the assumption that battery strategy is the primary driver for pushing CT into late 2022, as opposed to any complexities of CT production itself.
I said the range discrepancy is exaggerated. Who might exaggerate the range discrepancy?
You can start with those who depend upon illustrious brand names like Porsche for their funding. This is not a whacko conspiracy theory; it is well-established that companies who owe their existence to brands like Porsche are heavily biased in their favor. I can easily get better than EPA range in either of our Model 3's depending upon how I operate them also. My wife's nearly 4-year lifetime average consumption is below the EPA rated consumption and she is not even a hyper-miler and uses the heat all winter, every day. People just love to dis Tesla anyway they can get away with it.
It's a fallacy that Tesla's EPA range is inflated compared to other brands when talking about "real-world range". This is an area that is easy to cheat and difficult to disprove because the testing parameters are so subjective, and the tests are often done on days with wildly different temperatures. The EPA test, on the other hand, is a well-defined drive cycle and cheating comes with the risk that you will be caught and exposed. The rest is just anecdotal, informal 'testing' that they are calling "real world".
We know they don't give Tesla a fair shake in the editorial comments, why would you believe they suddenly become objective when doing 'real-world' range tests? And why would Porsche hobble their own results by not driving the car below 20% state-of-charge for the purposes of EPA range tests? It's a theory that makes zero sense. I shouldn't even have to take the time to explain this, and it amazes me how easily people believe garbage 'data' even when repeatedly shown how unfairly these organizations treat Tesla.
I'm sure Car and Driver's advertising customer (Porsche) felt they were getting good bang for their advertising money when they read C&D gave them a 'real world' range almost 20% better than their EPA rating. That was music to their ears. It helps to have friends in places like C&D, especially ones not bound by the strict parameters of EPA range tests! Anyone who still thinks C&D can be trusted to provide unbiased info is living in a delusion.
If I were Tesla I would start making the performance model Y out of Texas that way there is clear delineation between 4680 and 2170. Then I would bring online a standard range model Y based on 4680 LFP. Once these are available you leave the long range for last that way you dont overlap and then create a situation where some "new" model y's get better anything than another. At some point they will be able to retrofit all the Model Y lines in Fremont to have 4680 and structural pack, at this point you end up with another demand lever of extended range model Y or a reduced cost to the customer.2170 and 4680 versions will either be priced differently or made nearly identical via software. Meaning a LR 4680 model Y will have less battery when it has less weight so the range is the same. The handling will be slightly better on the 4680 but very few people would be able to tell. Or a 4680 will be priced higher with additional range or performance. Or if Tesla wants to be sure demand is there for the 2170, they will INITIALLY give the 2170 model MORE range at the same price point than a 4680. Once things are transitioned over, the 4680 will magically get better.
The point is, there are a lot of levers Tesla has to control demand.
This should probably be prefaced with who the author is and their likely perspective. From wikipedia:A fair review of Tesla's FSD beta from Larry Magid at the Mercury News. From actual experience! Ain't that refreshing? (a Google search then following that link will let you read it). TL;DR impressive but scary and nowhere near ready for robotaxi.
In 1994 he wrote the first popular publication on Internet safety called Child Safety on the Information Highway for the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. That was followed in 1998 with Teen Safety on the Information Highway. Both publications have been revised and reprinted many times. He serves on the advisory boards of PBS Kids, the Family Online Safety Institute and the Congressional Internet Caucus, The Hub (children's TV network) and the Facebook Safety Advisory Board.
Magid is also the founder of SafeKids.com and SafeTeens.com, and co-founder and CEO of ConnectSafely.org. His technology website is LarrysWorld.com. All three websites provide information about Internet safety.
This works so long as Texas early production will be able to supply *all* of the Model Y Performance shipping. Otherwise you have the same problem.If I were Tesla I would start making the performance model Y out of Texas that way there is clear delineation between 4680 and 2170. Then I would bring online a standard range model Y based on 4680 LFP. Once these are available you leave the long range for last that way you dont overlap and then create a situation where some "new" model y's get better anything than another. At some point they will be able to retrofit all the Model Y lines in Fremont to have 4680 and structural pack, at this point you end up with another demand lever of extended range model Y or a reduced cost to the customer.
2170 and 4680 versions will either be priced differently or made nearly identical via software. Meaning a LR 4680 model Y will have less battery when it has less weight so the range is the same. The handling will be slightly better on the 4680 but very few people would be able to tell. Or a 4680 will be priced higher with additional range or performance. Or if Tesla wants to be sure demand is there for the 2170, they will INITIALLY give the 2170 model MORE range at the same price point than a 4680. Once things are transitioned over, the 4680 will magically get better.
The point is, there are a lot of levers Tesla has to control demand.