-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Why do people really want Tesla to fail?
- Thread starter RedOctober
- Start date
Here is Alex Roy's critique of the 2017 Navigant leaderboard:
Who Is Really #1 In Self-Driving Cars?
Basically, it doesn't say what you think it says.
Man, you didnt read this did you?
It says Navigant rated all programs based on the following:
- Vision
- Go-To-Market Strategy
- Partners
- Production Strategy
- Technology
- Sales, Marketing & Distribution
- Product Capability
- Product Quality & Reliability
- Product Portfolio
- Staying Power
Other factors arent considered and could be important to self driving in the future, and some are outright missing. That is basically true of every study ever and isnt a counterpoint. So yes, you could analyze the situation in a different way, and get a different answer, but the most respected research firm did it like this, and you would hard pressed to say those arent a pretty reasonable set of metrics to use.
Also it's not like Tesla was behind a few, THEY WERE DEAD LAST, and that's before they burned a few more people alive these past few weeks.
Literally this is what it says:
That sounds like a pretty comprehensive set of criteria, but by giving them all equal weighting, Navigant presupposes the car industry will stay pretty much as it is, that self-driving cars will be built and marketed through existing channels, and that new channels/platforms will be controlled or owned by existing manufacturers.
By making technology only 1/10th of any given player’s score, numerous car manufacturers outrank even the most advanced Silicon Valley players, and would do so even if the formers’ R&D budgets dropped to zero.
Two missing criteria? Government relations and data.
Edit:
Error on my part, the up-thread article referenced the 2017 study (2016 data), not the 2018 study (2017 data)
Error on my part, the up-thread article referenced the 2017 study (2016 data), not the 2018 study (2017 data)
Last edited:
What is up with the not reading? You literally took a list from some previous year or something, no idea
Source:
GM Leads, Tesla & Apple Trail Deeply In Navigant Research Self-Driving Report | CleanTechnica
Words contained within Source:
Tesla fans will be distressed to learn that it is ranked dead last among the 19 companies in this year’s survey. How can that be? It is common knowledge that Tesla has the latest and greatest self-driving technology and is miles ahead of everyone else, right? Actually, no, says Navigant. It blames the divorce between Tesla and Mobileye for Tesla’s poor showing. “While Tesla has been aggressive in promoting Autopilot, since ending its relationship with Mobileye, the company has struggled to reach the same level of functionality with its in-house developed system.” Ouch
***
DEAD LAST
My apologies, I didn't realize the linked article was for the 2017 Navigant study.
Explains the cognitive dissonance I had looking at the plot, I thought Tesla was in a different spot. It also doesn't help that the '2018' study is from January and references 2017 data, whereas the 2017 article must be referencing 2016 data with 1/2 MobilEye 1/2 not.
Barklikeadog
Active Member
At least I’m glad that the trolls are locked away in this thread.
Anyways, I’m struck about how frequently low quality bear points get picked up and amplified by media outlets like, well every terrible anti-climate site and then quickly to WSJ and Bloomberg. Used to be LA Times as well, but it seems like their editorial staff has some control over how often really lopsided articles get published.
The truth is that the bear arguments about Tesla, Elon and SpaceX have been wrong since the get go, but it seems that we have the consistent threads that
1. Elon is a fraud
2. Elon/ Tesla is dependent on subsidies
3. Tesla has no demand
4. EVs are more polluting than fossil fuels
5. Tesla can’t make the quantity they are promising
6. (ICE company X) is 12 months from a Tesla killer
7. Tesla quality is at the bottom of all major manufacturers
So Realist why don’t you tell us which of the 7 above points you do not agree with?
Anyways, I’m struck about how frequently low quality bear points get picked up and amplified by media outlets like, well every terrible anti-climate site and then quickly to WSJ and Bloomberg. Used to be LA Times as well, but it seems like their editorial staff has some control over how often really lopsided articles get published.
The truth is that the bear arguments about Tesla, Elon and SpaceX have been wrong since the get go, but it seems that we have the consistent threads that
1. Elon is a fraud
2. Elon/ Tesla is dependent on subsidies
3. Tesla has no demand
4. EVs are more polluting than fossil fuels
5. Tesla can’t make the quantity they are promising
6. (ICE company X) is 12 months from a Tesla killer
7. Tesla quality is at the bottom of all major manufacturers
So Realist why don’t you tell us which of the 7 above points you do not agree with?
Elements of truth?
1) What fraud? I guess the 3800 pounds of of product I'm using to drive to work in doesn't exist.
2) What subsidies? Are there special ones that ONLY Elon is taking advantage of? Are they permanent? Who gets them? (Hint: EV credits are sold by auto manufacturers and the tax credit goes to CONSUMERS and will expire within a year or so)
3) No demand? I guess those 500,000 reservations didn't exist. They must have hired those 70 people in line in front of me at the Tesla Natick MA store back in 2016 and the 80 or so who were behind me.
4) More polluting? Even if from 100% coal, the efficiency of a utility company makes for LESS pollution than an ICE which is only 22-25% efficient.
5) Can't make the quality? They break the machines designed to test their crashworthiness and the car they delivered to me seems pretty close to perfect.
6) Other car companies are the ones making the unfulfilled promises
7) You'll never convince me that Tesla is worse than Fiat-Chrysler.
So what "elements" of "truth" were there?
1) What fraud? I guess the 3800 pounds of of product I'm using to drive to work in doesn't exist.
2) What subsidies? Are there special ones that ONLY Elon is taking advantage of? Are they permanent? Who gets them? (Hint: EV credits are sold by auto manufacturers and the tax credit goes to CONSUMERS and will expire within a year or so)
3) No demand? I guess those 500,000 reservations didn't exist. They must have hired those 70 people in line in front of me at the Tesla Natick MA store back in 2016 and the 80 or so who were behind me.
4) More polluting? Even if from 100% coal, the efficiency of a utility company makes for LESS pollution than an ICE which is only 22-25% efficient.
5) Can't make the quality? They break the machines designed to test their crashworthiness and the car they delivered to me seems pretty close to perfect.
6) Other car companies are the ones making the unfulfilled promises
7) You'll never convince me that Tesla is worse than Fiat-Chrysler.
So what "elements" of "truth" were there?
1. Elon is a fraud
I think he is an excellent PR guy who tiptoes very close to the line of fraud and probably accidently stepped over a few times. I think he is a complete charlatan and liar though. I don't think that is questionable.
2. Elon/ Tesla is dependent on subsidies
I mean, this is basic economics. EV's have a 7.5k discount in them, so clearly subsidies play a part since they have absorbed over a billing in FIT credits, half a bill in direct govt funding. I mean until we see them operate without subsidies I think the best bull argument is "we don't know yet" and even that one is shaky.
3. Tesla has no demand
This isnt true obviously, but i would say that bulls have a distorted reality of how much demand there really is for a 45k+ car, and how many of the 450k reservations thought they were getting a 35k car less a 7.5k fed credit, which will likely be zero.
4. EVs are more polluting than fossil fuels
EV's are stored energy, that energy was created somehow. Here is a link to a Tesla supercharger being powered by a diesel generator.
Almost Friday Funny – Tesla is apparently recharging ’emissions free’ electric cars with a diesel generator
Now, EV's are half the battle, so I am totally for them, however there is a gross misunderstanding about how EV's help the environment. EV's that burn far less fuel and utilize a minimal amout of cobalt and lithium would be terrific, but thats not what Tesla does. Tesla builds HUGE batteries because it wants its cars extra fast! This isnt about the environment, its a distraction mechanism.
With that said the shift from ICE to EV in general is a very positive thing.
5. Tesla can’t make the quantity they are promising
Which promise?
This one? 200k model 3s in 2017?
Elon Musk: Tesla Model 3 Production Target Is Up To 200,000 In Second Half Of 2017
5k a week in Q4?
Everyone should have zero doubt about 10k/wk in 2018?
A million cars produced by 2020?
5k/week by Q1 2018?
5k a week by Q2 2018? now sometime in July?
No capital raises need to fund the model 3?
Roadster profits will fund the Model S?
Model S will start at half the price of a roadster?
I need you to be more specific
6. (ICE company X) is 12 months from a Tesla killer
ICE company X, Y, Z, A, B, C, D, E, F that is already heavily capitalized, knows mass production, has basically unlimited access to cash, and HASNT used up its FIT Credit for US customers yet?
I mean, you have to admit, it's not a great thing for Tesla, but Tesla definitely primed the market for them at least.
7. Tesla quality is at the bottom of all major manufacturers
I mean, subject to opinion, tell you what. I will just let you have this one and pretend they are middle of the pack.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
A charlatan who produced the Roadster, S, X, 3, supercharger network, Gigafactory, Fremont factory, Powerwall, Powerpack, solar roof, etc. I'll take a "charlatan" like that all day every day. How does your productivity stack up, "Reality"?
I think the better claim here would be the SpaceX accomplishments, which are cool and possibly revolutionary (albeit never really going to be profitable in the private sector).
As far as Tesla goes, cars/batteries/solar power have been around for decades. If being an expert in technology from 1990 makes u not a charlatan, then i guess you are right.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
I wanted to keep it Tesla specific, but yes, in addition to everything he's accomplished with Tesla there is also SpaceX. Clearly no charlatan by any rational metric. Real, industry changing products across multiple industries.
Funny that you think EV/battery/solar technology hasn't progressed since 1990. That explains a lot.
um, which of those areas did Tesla improve? Please for the love of god say solar roof tiles.
They literally buy the same batteries as everyone else, only they are married to the obsolete 18650 li-ion batteries that the majors arent married to.
