Why almost everyone was wrong about Tesla’s cash flow situation • Hacker News Board

Re: Why almost everyone was wrong about Tesla’s cash flow situation

#241

Post by Marsymars » Sat, Oct 27, 2018, 1:05 AM UTC

moduspwnens14 wrote: post #233

Marsymars wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> * They're taking a risk with the interior of the car, with the lack of gauge cluster and spartan design. To me this looks like what happened when the software industry switched from "as many UI buttons and features as possible" in the '90s to the simplified, "overall user experience" focus we see in modern software. And I want to support that. I guess this is fine if you live in California, but a car that I can't o…

The car doesn't require touching the screen to operate it. The nav / media controls do, but those can be voice operated, too. And a lot of the media controls work from the steering wheel knobs (play pause skip back etc.), also. EDIT: And all Teslas can have their climate control turned on remotely by the app / API, and can be safely warmed up even in an enclosed space (since there are no fumes).

I don't really consider requiring a touchscreen (be it in car, or on phone) for climate controls to be an acceptable replacement for a couple simple mechanical buttons and knobs. In the best case, it's less convenient, and it adds many additional failure cases.

Re: Why almost everyone was wrong about Tesla’s cash flow situation

#242

Post by perl4ever » Sat, Oct 27, 2018, 1:32 AM UTC

esotericn wrote: post #181

antisthenes wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aren't insurance costs way higher than the amortized cost of the car itself? Especially in the UK? > In the US you have the issue that a car might be a hard requirement to get to work. In that case I'd probably just buy two and drive them on alternate days so there's always a backup. As long as you're not paying almost double insurance, this sounds like a good option. You could even rent the other car out on the C2C…

This is the case, yes, but generally insurance companies are aware that you can only drive one car at once and adjust premiums appropriately. That said, in the UK it's hard for me to think of a circumstance in which two cars would be a hard requirement for someone who can't 'afford' a decent car. Here, you probably live in or close to a city. You might not want to cycle in or get a taxi/bus to work every day, but if…

"generally insurance companies are aware that you can only drive one car at once and adjust premiums appropriately."

I'm in the US and that's not my experience. My insurance is fairly cheap, but it did indeed nearly double when I got a second vehicle despite there not being any additional people to drive it.

Re: Why almost everyone was wrong about Tesla’s cash flow situation

#243

Post by perl4ever » Sat, Oct 27, 2018, 1:36 AM UTC

ryandrake wrote: post #101

jartelt wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seriously - I just sold a 1999 Civic with 150,000 miles for $2,000. The car made so many noises and did not feel safe at all. Yet, someone paid real money for it and was happy about it. Most cheap used cars are pretty junky. That is fine if you want a beater to drive to work and back or if you have mechanic know-how. It's a lot sketchier if you want a car to drive your kids around in or if you want to drive on longer…

As someone who prefers cheap cars, one of the keys is basic maintenance know-how. Anyone can learn to do the basics (oil changes, air filter, spark plugs, brake pads, etc.) with a few hours of learning on YouTube. I'd never waste my money on a new car. My current car is 10 years old and it feels so uncomfortable new. I felt like I was spoiling myself when I bought it.

"one of the keys is basic maintenance know-how. Anyone can learn to do the basics (oil changes, air filter, spark plugs, brake pads, etc.) with a few hours of learning on YouTube."

I don't think it makes sense to say that is a key, because the basics have to be done equally on newer and older cars and it's easy to find someone to do them for a reasonable price. The issue with an older car is that it is more likely to have non-routine repairs, which tend to both be expensive if done by a professional and hard to assess how much they should cost.

Re: Why almost everyone was wrong about Tesla’s cash flow situation

#244

Post by perl4ever » Sat, Oct 27, 2018, 1:40 AM UTC

shakestheclown wrote: post #199

derekp7 wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That basic maintenance worked for my Dad, he got home from work at 3:00 pm and also had whole weekends for car/house/lawn/garage/hobbies. I work further from home, with a higher paying job, and get home typically around 6:30 pm. Weekends are spent cramming in other household maintenance, recreational activities for the family, etc. So if having that new car (and spending $80 at the dealer every 3 - 4 months for basic…

I think you are overestimating the time costs of an older, reliable car. I've got a 2003 Honda Civic 200k miles that I've had since it had 13k miles. I'd say it goes to the shop overnight once every 12-18 months for a major issue or something I don't want to deal with, goes to Valvoline for 15 minutes every 3 months or so, drop off at tire store for 2 hrs twice a year, and I maintain things like brakes, spark plugs,…

I can't get it out of my head that I read once that airbags were designed to last ten years. Driving a fifteen year old car seems like having an unexploded munition in my face. At what point is it likely to not work in an accident or to kill you when it does go off? I don't believe it's legal to replace an old steering wheel with a non-airbag one, so there really is no solution that I'm aware of.

I have a 30 year old car, but it doesn't have an airbag.

Re: Why almost everyone was wrong about Tesla’s cash flow situation

#245

Post by moduspwnens14 » Sat, Oct 27, 2018, 1:47 AM UTC

Marsymars wrote: post #241

moduspwnens14 wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The car doesn't require touching the screen to operate it. The nav / media controls do, but those can be voice operated, too. And a lot of the media controls work from the steering wheel knobs (play pause skip back etc.), also. EDIT: And all Teslas can have their climate control turned on remotely by the app / API, and can be safely warmed up even in an enclosed space (since there are no fumes).

I don't really consider requiring a touchscreen (be it in car, or on phone) for climate controls to be an acceptable replacement for a couple simple mechanical buttons and knobs. In the best case, it's less convenient, and it adds many additional failure cases.

The climate system has fewer moving parts than a typical climate control system, so if anything, it is removing failure cases. It is unique—there are videos on YouTube that describe how it works if you’re doubtful.

In practice, I rarely adjust the climate setting after setting it to the temperature / orientation I want, but I suppose everyone is different.

To me it feels a lot like when many used to claim they could never get an iPhone because they prefer a physical keyboard. But I suppose we’ll see how the industry responds over the next few years.

Re: Why almost everyone was wrong about Tesla’s cash flow situation

#246

Post by Marsymars » Sat, Oct 27, 2018, 2:41 AM UTC

moduspwnens14 wrote: post #245

Marsymars wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't really consider requiring a touchscreen (be it in car, or on phone) for climate controls to be an acceptable replacement for a couple simple mechanical buttons and knobs. In the best case, it's less convenient, and it adds many additional failure cases.

The climate system has fewer moving parts than a typical climate control system, so if anything, it is removing failure cases. It is unique—there are videos on YouTube that describe how it works if you’re doubtful. In practice, I rarely adjust the climate setting after setting it to the temperature / orientation I want, but I suppose everyone is different. To me it feels a lot like when many used to claim they could…

Yeah, it removes the mechanical failure cases, but I've never had that happen with any of my vehicles. OTOH, I'm pretty regularly in situations where I'm parked in cold temperatures without having cell coverage in a warm location where I can wait for the car to warm up. (And normally, I don't need to "wait" for the car to warm up, I turn car on, set blower to max defrost, clear snow/ice from windshield, and go. Once/if the windshield is clear, I turn blower down for some quiet, and turn off compressor to save on fuel/range, as appropriate.)

Hooking that all up to voice operation sounds fine though (though preferably customizable, so I could have a single command to say, turn on seat warmers, turn blower to max, set output to windshield) - I never use voice operation for my phone because it's obnoxious to so in public, but that's not a problem if I'm in my car.

Re: Why almost everyone was wrong about Tesla’s cash flow situation

#247

Post by rasz » Sat, Oct 27, 2018, 5:30 AM UTC

mixmastamyk wrote: post #161

ghaff wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah. It used to be a lot worse believe it or not. But, still, anything over about 10 years old in the Northeast and other snowy regions are pretty much at EOL. I made the mistake with a prior vehicle (which I bought used) of doing a couple fairly major repairs when it was about 12 years old and it ended up being just a cascading set of failures due to rust.

Isn't that what the "under body" coating supposed to help with?

no, its cosmetic, water ingress between the layers and eats the car in a way you cant see

@19:30 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=INNMrAGl0Bg

@4:15 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nn-cqoVYQR0

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLZJS6Md1UOg2Wsc48Hr7x...

Re: Why almost everyone was wrong about Tesla’s cash flow situation

#248

Post by kreetx » Sat, Oct 27, 2018, 7:41 AM UTC

thewhitetulip wrote: post #172

kreetx wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm no expert on Tesla's economics, but on the "running close to the edge" point I would think it's not about being forced to be there, it's just the leadership trying to innovate as much as possible for each of its products -- the result of which being close to the edge is. In other words: they could have spent much less -- but why not do as much as possible if you know you'll survive. This strategy might, of course…

They are lucky and capable enough to pull this ou5 that's why it is a good time for them. If even one thing had gone wrong they'd be in big trouble.

I don't really agree with you. I think there were a million things to do, and in how many you can try something new and untested depends on how much buffer you have. Some of these new things come in batches, like the automation thing they tried with Model 3 that didn't work out and was reverted. And even this was probably a calculated risk.

Re: Why almost everyone was wrong about Tesla’s cash flow situation

#249

Post by zhte415 » Sat, Oct 27, 2018, 8:41 AM UTC

petre wrote: post #59

InTheArena wrote: post #7

This seems like a good breakdown - but it's also that Tesla (like SpaceX) runs really really close to the edge every time they do a product launch. How many people doubted SpaceX until the Falcon 9 flew? How many until the Falcon 9 landed on land? How many until Falcon 9 Heavy launched? How many are still doubting until Falcon 9 completes it's first manned mission? How many doubted Tesla until the Roadster shipped? T…

> hyperbolic VW statements about "delivering a car as good as any Tesla at half the cost" this morning. This while launching yet another compact SUV, based on the Polo platform w/o 4wd and the the base model using a three-cylinder one liter engne. Give me a break VW.

So, another Polo model then.

Is it called an SUV, interested to see.

Re: Why almost everyone was wrong about Tesla’s cash flow situation

#250

Post by binarybits » Sat, Oct 27, 2018, 1:17 PM UTC

TekMol wrote: post #186

binarybits wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Author here. What do you mean by "short?" The piece is 1,500 words, which is about double the length of a typical newspaper column. I'm not going to get into the exact economics, but Ars writers write about a piece a day, and the average piece gets tens of thousands of visitors. Revenue per article (for most mainstream news site, not just Ars) is significantly better than $0.001 per visitor. High-end advertisers are…

Hey, great to meet the author on HN! First of all, let me say that I liked the article. I am the one who posted it to HN after all. Maybe "short" was not the perfect word to express what I mean. I mean that the message/idea is kind of short. It's almost like a showerthought "See this chart? It looks like they are in the red all the time. But think of it this way: They build success after success. They could have been…

Mainstream news sites aren't going to give you the kind of super-deep insights you're going to find in academic research or trade press or whatever. 90 percent of any site's audience knows very little about any given topic, so laying out obvious-to-insiders ideas in a clear way is a significant value for the average reader. Ars readers are more technically savvy than most sites but most of them are not experts on corporate finance.

I do not know very much about the specifics of Ars's ad sales strategy. I would guess Google pays more to established sites. Also, if you're seeing a Google ad that might be because they didn't have a higher-paying direct-sale competitor for that particular impression.