Which direction should Tesla go as a company?

[stopcrazypp]

Following Citizen-T's comment. What we have established is Tesla will built the Gen III and also a Roadster successor, so that isn't really up for debate.

But what's up for debate are two separate issues:
1) Should Tesla build a car under Gen III (presumably an economy car, thus exiting the premium-only direction Tesla is currently heading).
2) Should Tesla build a supercar above the Roadster (which would probably sell closer to the hundreds, extremely low volume).

Personally, I think a supercar above the Roadster probably won't change things very significantly for Tesla. More likely is the Roadster will be like the 911 and you can option it up to the most extreme performance (maybe an extra step above the Performance/Sport version).

As for the model under Gen III, I think Tesla can do it and still remain a premium brand if it's like the 1-series. The core issue is if Tesla should remain a premium brand (likely more profitable) or become a large automaker instead. Personally I think Tesla will do better as a company by remaining a premium brand (more profitable, likely easier to keep the customer experience good and less likely to stagnate as a company).

 

[Ardie]

Several years ago, GM did have a concept model of a "skateboard" platform similar to what Tesla is using now. GM's wild idea was to use the same skateboard as a plaftorm for several different interchangeable body styles.

If Tesla has taken this idea to heart, then we may indeed see a convertible, a station wagon, a pickup truck, all based on the same skateboard platform as the Model S or Model X.

And it probably wouldn't hurt if they developed an electric humvee and/or cargo truck for the military.

- - -

But which direction do I think should Tesla go, as a company?

I'd say that there is probably enough pent-up demand for an electric car that the Model S and Model X will probably make Tesla gobs of money without them needing to come out with anything else ... for a while.

After that, its not for me to say, until I get on their board of directors.

But I can still wish for an inexpensive electric commuter car that would beat the pants off the Nissan LEAF.


-- Ardie
I want Tesla to merge with SpaceX so I can get my Jet Pack.

 

[Yggdrasill]

Tesla should definitely remain a premium brand. Electric cars currently can't be competitively priced in the lower end of the market, and still have decent range. (Tesla shouldn't even think of going below 200 mile EPA range in it's cars, with the biggest battery. That will dilute the brand too much.)

Once battery prices drop and Tesla has a strong foothold in the premium market, then Tesla can start looking at entering the lower end market, preferably through another brand, like Saab or whatever is attractive at the time.

 

[daniel]

But I can still wish for an inexpensive electric commuter car that would beat the pants off the Nissan LEAF.

Battery price is the obstacle. A car that beats the pants off the Leaf will cost more than the Leaf. Nissan is a big company with all the resources that implies. Tesla can beat them on technology, but probably not on price without sacrificing range. What Tesla might be able to do is match the range and price of the Leaf while delivering higher quality. Maybe. Or match price and range but beat the Leaf on performance.

 

[Larry Chanin]

First, what should Tesla do:

charging:
1. They should sell the supercharger hardware at cost, and have people on staff to assist those who would develop locations to install them. Many members of the community would volunteer their time to help Tesla develop the charging network.

Hi Rich,

Good idea. I'm sure members of our Tesla club would volunter to help out. One of our members does this professionally.

Larry

 

[Jason S]

That really big factory they purchased for a song really changes what is possible for Tesla, imho. The lower-end couldn't be done without it.

I like the 'premium brand' concept. I also imagine a highly motivated somebody could purchase a couple of Model S performance cars and build a supercar out of the pieces. Tesla could, if they wanted. The purpose of such a car is primarily marketing, however. And the marketing seems sufficient at this point: Tesla is the gold standard for BEV and the Model S will be the benchmark. Anything else is better than or worse than within the segment, and the Model S compares well outside of the BEV segment. It is a good place to be. But maybe the Leaf or Prius is really the one in that position. I don't think a supercar gets a manufacturer in that position however.

So is the Model X a good place to go next? The US market likes that kind of car, but the rest of the world seems like like smaller cars. However I don't see Tesla as the kind of company to release a smaller car with a similar range to a Leaf, so now gotta wait for battery technology to get better... which is the current plan again. I keep circling around the directions and come to the conclusion the current plan is good if Tesla wants to be the BMW or Mercedes of BEVs.

Riffing on that idea we come to the "AMG" version of Tesla. Maybe the supercars could be done as a side shop funded from the marketing and R&D budgets. Start with smaller races like Pike's Peak and go further. Supercars could be sold 'as is' once the races are done or supercar versions of current chassis could be done under these low volume guys. But it does seem prudent to do that *after* making a profit on main line of business, not instead of.

 

[Grendal]

Battery price is the obstacle. A car that beats the pants off the Leaf will cost more than the Leaf. Nissan is a big company with all the resources that implies. Tesla can beat them on technology, but probably not on price without sacrificing range. What Tesla might be able to do is match the range and price of the Leaf while delivering higher quality. Maybe. Or match price and range but beat the Leaf on performance.

I agree with your point. Sure Tesla could make a car that is competitive and similar to the Leaf, but why bother? There is still plenty of market out there that isn't directly head to head against Nissan and all their resources and money.

 

[gg_got_a_tesla]

Yes, stopping with a mass-market yet premium small EV sedan that goes against the BMW 3 and the Lexus IS makes sense.

 

[tdelta1000]

Tesla Motor should move in the direction of getting the Model S on the road, product refinement, getting the Model X up to speed for release, and final development, introduction and production of the Gen III platform. After, Tesla Motors completes these tasks, I think TM should produce a low run (250 unit) all carbon fiber beast.

 

[Zextraterrestrial]

Tesla Motor should move in the direction of getting the Model S on the road, product refinement, getting the Model X up to speed for release, and final development, introduction and production of the Gen III platform. After, Tesla Motors completes these tasks, I think TM should produce a low run (250 unit) all carbon fiber beast.

0-60 2s
weeeeeeee




or they could make some buses/ motor coaches and replace mach of the loud noise in bigger cities!

 

[daniel]

I think when you start getting down around 3 seconds the problem is not power or torque, it's keeping the wheels on the ground. I suspect that below 3 seconds you need a propulsion system that does not depend on wheel-to-ground traction. I.e. propellers or reaction engines. And I'm not at all sure that propellers could do it.

 

[vfx]

I'm tired of the "toys for rich people" criticisms (even JP says it about the S) Another supercar would continue that meme.

Maybe in a year Tesla puts together a Skunk unit that makes racing noise with a series of cars. A 'fastest" car for Bonneville, ring car, a 1/4 mile drag car, basically breaking speed and performance barriers worldwide.

 

[tdelta1000]

0-60 2s
weeeeeeee
or they could make some buses/ motor coaches and replace mach of the loud noise in bigger cities!

Gone in two seconds would be nice but TM will have to be concerned with the power draw. Going with the bus motors and battery packs could very well be another avenue.

 

[Kevin Sharpe]

I'm tired of the "toys for rich people" criticisms (even JP says it about the S) Another supercar would continue that meme.

With respect, IMO anyone who can buy a Tesla is 'wealthy' whether that's a Roadster, Model S, or Model X.

One of the reasons I would have liked Tesla to focus on Super Cars and sell power train technology is because I believe that mainstream car companies will produce much lower costs cars than Tesla. Lower cost means more cars get into the hands of more people.

 

[VolkerP]

I believe that mainstream car companies will produce much lower costs cars than Tesla.

They need to re-design from the ground up for electric drive and take their 3rd party suppliers with them. It is a big hurdle to overcome - mentally - for them. IOW they don't want to produce low-cost electric cars in numbers, and have the profit for the most valuable part - the drive train - go to Tesla.

 

[gg_got_a_tesla]

Kevin, what's so wrong with Tesla aspiring to become a 'mainstream' car company itself by adopting the multi-model, eventually-mass-market strategy that it has? That's probably the way many of the major established companies started once upon a time?!

A pure play EV company with a growing lineup of cars (which will become more affordable over time) is a great way to build a brand that's here to stay.

 

[Kevin Sharpe]

Kevin, what's so wrong with Tesla aspiring to become a 'mainstream' car company itself by adopting the multi-model, eventually-mass-market strategy that it has?

Nothing wrong with the aspiration... I just think they could have gained more EV traction by focusing on industry wide take-up of the Tesla technology by third parties. Today, Tesla are actually competing with potential high volume customers... I know I'm not alone in this view... I've heard it many times from Tesla insiders all over the globe.

I tried to set out my wish list here;

http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/showthread.php/8797-Which-direction-should-Tesla-go-as-a-company/page2?p=146635&viewfull=1#post146635

It's completely academic of course :smile:

 

[ckessel]

Today, Tesla are actually competing with potential high volume customers...

Today, Tesla doesn't compete in any high volume market, so that statement seems a bit of exaggeration.

Edit: unless, like AnOutsider notes, you're referring to things like the Rav4Ev. Though, those are in such tiny numbers I don't see them as competing with high volume cars in the same market niche.

 

[AnOutsider]

Tesla is powering daimler and toyota at the moment. It would seem they are already doing what you suggest. The Model X competes with the Rav 4 EV, yet they're powering it. The Model S competes with any number of Mercedes vehicles. I can see the logic of stepping back and making friends in the hopes of doing "bigger business", but at the same time, those companies aren't really taking EVs seriously #1 and #2 they're doing their own thing in-house (GM, Nissan). So, first step: make EVs a serious contender in the marketplace and increase demand. Then, if those other companies can't keep up (which seems to be the case so far), they can then provide powertrains to them.

 

[Warrenbonz]

I'd like to see Tesla (or a Tesla side brand) post office delivery vehicles in the future. Perhaps on the Gen III platform.
Seems to me EV's are perfect for delivering mail and that it would be a great learning experience for the public when they ask their mail carrier "so how do you like your new truck?" I think it could really spread the word about EV's.
Because most mail trucks travel few miles in a day the vehicles could have small battery packs allowing for a competitive acquisition cost for the post office. With the lower running costs of an EV I think the economics could really work well for the post office.