Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Tesla Third Quarter 2018 Update [pdf]

ir.tesla.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 418 posts

Re: Tesla Third Quarter 2018 Update [pdf]

#381

Post by Robotbeat »

maxxxxx wrote: post #294
crwalker wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How long do you think the current Supercharger network will be a large competitive advantage? I agree with Benedict Evan's point that electric charging will become a commodity: https://www.ben-evans.com/benedictevans/2018/8/29/tesla-soft...

I winder if the Spuerchargers will at some point become an outdated liability once (if) other manufacturers decide on a standard. Being a first mover often can become a problem.

They’ve already decided on CHAdeMO and CCS, both of which are usually much slower and have a huge, unwieldy, and expensive plug.

It’s not that hard for Tesla to adapt to a new standard, too. The power electronics are the same, just a different plug and protocol. Tesla’s can connect to a CHAdeMO charger with a relatively cheap adapter.

Re: Tesla Third Quarter 2018 Update [pdf]

#383

Post by Robotbeat »

rconti wrote: post #104
deepGem wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Until other companies step up and install DCFC stations everywhere Disclaimer: I am long TSLA I hightly doubt other car companies are gonna do this in a reaonable time frame (3-4 years). They will rely on the dealer network to build out the chargers and suck up the setup cost. Now dealers can potentially finance this with debt and get this done, but I doubt GM or any car company will be able to get consensus from the…

Porsche said they will "plan to" install 500 DCFC chargers at... Porsche dealers.

This is the same as what Nissan has done. It means cities are well covered but interstates are not.

Re: Tesla Third Quarter 2018 Update [pdf]

#384

Post by Robotbeat »

gonehome wrote: post #82
deepGem wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Until other companies step up and install DCFC stations everywhere Disclaimer: I am long TSLA I hightly doubt other car companies are gonna do this in a reaonable time frame (3-4 years). They will rely on the dealer network to build out the chargers and suck up the setup cost. Now dealers can potentially finance this with debt and get this done, but I doubt GM or any car company will be able to get consensus from the…

The current situation with dealers sucks for non-tesla EVs, they're often inside and not accessible. They have other cars parked in the way, the people at the dealer don't care, there aren't enough chargers etc.

Yeah, dealers regularly park cars in EV charging spots.

Re: Tesla Third Quarter 2018 Update [pdf]

#385

Post by Robotbeat »

compcoffee wrote: post #84
deepGem wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Until other companies step up and install DCFC stations everywhere Disclaimer: I am long TSLA I hightly doubt other car companies are gonna do this in a reaonable time frame (3-4 years). They will rely on the dealer network to build out the chargers and suck up the setup cost. Now dealers can potentially finance this with debt and get this done, but I doubt GM or any car company will be able to get consensus from the…

VW is building out chargers as part of the diesel scandal settlement. https://www.electrifyamerica.com/our-plan

Yeah, and they’re slow rolling it and plan to charge high prices. It’s frustrating to me as an EV owner. But perfectly logical if you want to appear to be doing something while in fact protecting fossil fuel car sales.

Re: Tesla Third Quarter 2018 Update [pdf]

#386

Post by lotsofpulp »

mikestew wrote: post #378
lotsofpulp wrote: post #365

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The person I was responding to was expressing gratitude at having the opportunity to earn 150% ones normal wage per hour. My point is that it’s not enough to offset the opportunity cost. If anything, employers should be discourage from asking for overtime pay at all, and make it 10x regular pay or something instead of 1.5x so that people can enjoy a better work life balance.

The person I was responding to was expressing gratitude at having the opportunity to earn 150% ones normal wage per hour. You working salary at your local tech whatever? How much are they paying you to come in on Saturday? I ask because you seem to have missed the point. And 1.5x is the employer discouragement. Who wants to pay 50% more because of poor planning?

I understand what you’re saying, that 50% is better than nothing. Which obviously, I agree with. My contention is that even 50% is not enough to make up for what the worker gives up. Obviously the lack of opportunities may force the employee to accept the arrangement, but I’m speaking about a work life balance overall.

And there are many positions where the cost of hiring/training/retaining employees is higher than 50%, so it’s more advantageous for employers to just give overtime, which employers obviously utilize. But because an employer can force the employee to work overtime, it’s not clearly a beneficial arrangement to both.

Re: Tesla Third Quarter 2018 Update [pdf]

#387

Post by b_tterc_p »

mobilefriendly wrote: post #342
40acres wrote: post #48

Great numbers and congratulations to Tesla. If we as a country are going to lessen our dependence on fossil fuels companies like Tesla will need to lead the way. Just a side note that Tesla received a ~$500m loan from the US government back in 2009, which was paid back in 2013 (the loan went out to some other automakers for electric vehicle R&D), and I believe the tax break on electric cars are still valid. Tesla is…

The loan was a terrible deal for taxpayers. It enriched early Tesla equity holders -- including foreign Mercedes-- at the public's expense. The govt was taking on huge risk, the loan was vastly bigger than the company's revenues, but taxpayers got no corresponding upside for that risk. A similar loan to Fisker was a $139 million loss for the government.

Government and business aren’t known for considering externalities in their decision making, but it seems noteworthy that the impact of the loan is not a small return, but the survival of a successful electric car and battery company. Would you be alright with providing equivalent money in grants to produce this tech? Because I would argue loans to a business have a better chance of reaching market successfully. Could they have gotten here without that loan? Maybe. Could better terms have been arranged? Possibly. But I think it was a praiseworthy investment nonetheless.

Re: Tesla Third Quarter 2018 Update [pdf]

#388

Post by radiorental »

mikeash wrote: post #292
radiorental wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Plus, what about the Bolt, Volt, i3, Soul EV, or any number of other EVs? Only teslas can charge on the supercharger network afaik. And, Nissan dealers will let other manufacturers car's charge if you pay, ymmv but it happens. Listen, I'm not defending Nissan's setup, I'm just countering the point that there's only the supercharger network.

Some dealers will let any car charge. Some will only accept Nissans. Some will only accept Nissans they sold . It’s a crapshoot.

Plugshare.com is your friend.

Re: Tesla Third Quarter 2018 Update [pdf]

#389

Post by radiorental »

mohaine wrote: post #262
radiorental wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Two things First, I said they're not as accessible. Second, not all journeys are between cities. In fact...

But the journeys you need a quick charger for are. For normal usage you charge at home.

I never charge at home if I can avoid paying for it.

Not everyone lives in a house with dedicated electrical outlets.

Re: Tesla Third Quarter 2018 Update [pdf]

#390

Post by kllrnohj »

nickik wrote: post #268
kllrnohj wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and the fit and finish was just as good if not better than tesla Tesla has the worst fit & finish in the industry. It always comes up with every tear down & deep review of a Tesla car. Tesla's powertrain is largely the only thing they are good at, and has so far been the thing other car manufacturers have struggled to match.

That's just non-sense. If you look at the teardown you will see that Tesla has great electronics (and cheap), best in class battery packs, a fantastic design, great suspension, software integration, innovative air condition, good charging speed and autopilot that is better then most competition. Really the only thing they are not great at is some part of the interior (and not the important console part at the front)…

> Really the only thing they are not great at is some part of the interior (and not the important console part at the front) and that they have a somewhat cumbersome heavy body.

Pretty sure you're oblivious to what fit and finish means based off of this comment. You listed a bunch of stuff that's not fit and finish followed by acknowledging that stuff that does contribute to fit and finish is poor.

Fit and finish are things like panel gaps, paint job quality, interior quality, etc...

And Tesla regularly is pitiful at it.

Post reply on HN