gg_got_a_tesla
Model S: VIN 65513, Model 3: VIN 1913
I doubt if kids growing up would lust after cars as much anymore. There's an interesting thread on that:
Why doesn't the younger generation "love" cars like the older?
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Which direction should Tesla go as a company?
- Thread starter dsm363
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Tesla Inc.
I doubt if kids growing up would lust after cars as much anymore. There's an interesting thread on that:
Why doesn't the younger generation "love" cars like the older?
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
On the other hand I am offended by someone who clings to a single viewpoint and keeps hammering it home :wink: Unless it's the same as mine of course :biggrin:
Looking back (and catching up on the thread) I'm seeing the argument is not around what should be done but instead the order that things should be done. Supercar is on everybody's list, if not now then later.
The question before us is whether Tesla is getting our respective wishlists done in the optimal order. The gears are in motion, we will see soon enough.
Speaking for the moderators, we're rather feeling the same way.
Kevin, if it were anyone else we'd be warning you about trolling. Please stop the hammering. You made your point half a thread ago.
Sorry but you'll have to be more specific.... I have reserved my recent posts to answering specific questions and therefore don't understand this criticism.
Although this thread is entitled "which direction should Tesla go as a company" that is not how the discussion began... we began by discussing the idea that Tesla should have followed a different path to mass produced cars (as I tried to set out in my first post in this thread).
The problem now is that we keep trying to twist this thread around to discuss where Tesla should go next given the Model S and X now exist. Obviously, that's a very different discussion :smile:
Last edited:
So, starting from here ("here" being Tesla with a newly released Model S, a Model X due to ship in 18 months, and a GenIII car in development to compete against the BMW 3-series):
Continued success will rest on four strategic components:
Continued success will rest on four strategic components:
- Development of a sufficient network of service centers. This is tricky; if they build out only to meet Model S/X demand, they will be at the wrong scale for GenIII, but if they build today for GenIII scale, they will be carrying huge overhead costs without the volume of sales to support it.
- Development of a charging network. This is a two-pronged item: (a) work to get widespread commercial networks to support high-voltage charging and (b) develop the SuperCharger network.
- Develop a GenIII skateboard that can support (in chronological order):
- Roadster 3. By building this car as the first on the new skateboard, they can work out the production and design kinks at low volume.
- GenIII (aka Bluestar aka the 3-killer) hatchback
- Continue to leverage the Model S skateboard by adding van/truck, convertible, etc.
bonnie
I play a nice person on twitter.
Totally agree. They've built great brand recognition, have some big wins -- the road is wide open to do each item you've listed.
Currently? Get with the programme old man... That one's been around since I was in junior school...
It's Dope, So Chill : For the Young, Slang's 'Mad' New Words Are Straight Off the Streets of Los Angeles - Los Angeles Times
A valiant attempt but they got one thing wrong: There are not 4 countries in the United Kingdom, there are 3. Wales is a principality and therefore is one level down.
Oh, and while we're at it, it's not a 'fourth' it's a 'quarter'. You know, like that thing that is 1/4 of a dollar.
I agree. I think this has been a good discussion. Thanks. You just really surprised me with the direction you thought Tesla should have taken at first so was trying to understand where you were coming from. Still don't totally agree but see where you think they should have gone now. It is interesting to see what people think what Tesla should do now given the Model S and X are a given at this point.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
What troubles me about this is we are back to the criticism of Tesla building supercars for the rich which get a tax rebate they don't need on the backs of the taxpayer, and it sort of interrupts the progression from Roadster to upscale sedan Model S to GenIII affordable volume car. Maybe attitudes will have changed by then, but I doubt it.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
Well affordable is different for everyone, but obviously a larger number can see a $30K vehicle as affordable, especially with the reduced operating costs. Average vehicle cost in the US for 2010 was around $29K. Plus it follows the progression I mentioned, which I constantly use when arguing, new technology getting better and more affordable with time. Another Roadster doesn't support that argument at all.
The median price* is liable to be much lower though. I certainly agree that a car with a base price of $30,000 is more affordable then one with a base price of $60,000. The affordability definition I was thinking about was: almost every person that has a steady job could purchase one. This doesn't describe most Tesla purchasers of any model--including GIII. The definition of Tesla affordability is something like: almost every middle class and higher person could purchase one. I'm not saying it's bad to make cars priced like that, but as you say, the critics saying that Tesla is a car for the wealthy isn't likely to go away, even when you show that the TCO is similar to that $15,000 car. Apple has the same reputation even though their computers are more or less the same price when subject to a feature to feature comparison with the so-called cheaper brands.
* Median price: The price where 50% of the sales are above the median and 50% are below (I know you know this) :smile:
The sequence of GenIII and Roadster 3.0 is something I waffled on. If you think of Roadster 3.0 as the M3 of Bluestar, then it could go either way. I thought the Roadster update should come first in large part because the opportunity to maintain high margins as Tesla introduces a new skateboard.
My thinking on this has evolved over time. Originally I thought it made most sense to bring out the Gen III first, then derive a Roadster 3.0 from it. It makes more sense to bring out the high volume, potentially game-changing vehicle first... if it's actually possible. That is, if the reduction in battery costs by that time supports a compelling $30k range Gen III car. (Mind you, Tesla has some interesting patents for packs with two types of cells... if that helps reduce pack costs for the same performance it's possible that Gen III is closer than we realize.)
On the other hand, if the steady decline in battery costs do not support a low-cost Gen III car soon enough, Roadster 3.0 could be built first and used as a technology development platform. It would in essence be the first Gen III vehicle, instead of a lower-cost Gen III sedan or coupe, while at the same time making it easier for Tesla to develop that lower-cost car.
