Tesla’s First-Quarter Deliveries Plummet • Hacker News Board

Re: Tesla’s First-Quarter Deliveries Plummet

#351

Post by xkjkls » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 9:18 PM UTC

taytus wrote: post #65

baby wrote: post #54

These kind of posts are good publicity right? I don't see any other car company we follow so closely on the market. Tesla is the only name I can see come up again and again here, and guess what, most people on HN are the actual population that is buying teslas.

I'm not so sure about that. You may think Elon Musk is a genius or mega charismatic guy. I see a lot of value on what Musk is trying to achieve, but I think he would have way more credibility if he just stopped overpromising and under delivering. I'm starting to believe people post more and more about Tesla because of that.

It is basically the most controversial stock on Wall Street. There are either people who think this is going to one day be a $1 trillion company or believe this company is quickly going bankrupt. It is one of the greatest Rorschach tests I've ever seen.

Re: Tesla’s First-Quarter Deliveries Plummet

#352

Post by jtaillon » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 9:20 PM UTC

ntsplnkv2 wrote: post #253

azhenley wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I tried the Jaguar I-PACE (a friend just purchased one), but the reason it is a no-go for me is the lack of fast charging. I would be effectively stuck in a one-hour radius from my home. My Model 3 can conveniently do cross-country trips. I really wish Jaguar and Porsche adopted the Tesla charging system (I think Tesla tried to get them to).

> My Model 3 can conveniently do cross-country trips. Not compared to gasoline, though.

Disclosure: I'm a Tesla owner;

I don't understand the point of this argument. Yes, in a ICE vehicle you can reach your destination marginally faster (we're talking about an hour on an 11-hour trip up the I-95 corridor, in my experience), but is that actually an important factor? For 99.9% of trips that are within a couple hundred miles of home, travel time is the same. If time is such an important factor on a long road trip, you should probably just be flying instead. I would venture that the number of people that want to drive > 5 hours, and have a requirement to do so "as fast as humanly possible" is pretty small. In that regard, the Model 3 is a BEV that requires practically zero compromises for both day-to-day and long road trip travelling, which is primarily due to the money and effort Tesla has spent on building the SC network. For that reason, I would not consider another EV besides Tesla until other manufacturers (or whoever) puts their money where their mouths are and builds out a fast-charging infrastructure that enables such long-distance travel.

Re: Tesla’s First-Quarter Deliveries Plummet

#353

Post by tbabb » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 9:20 PM UTC

xkjkls wrote: post #345

tbabb wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think if they could do one thing to improve their chances, it would be to find a check on Elon. A Gwynne Shotwell for Tesla, basically. Someone who can divert his energy towards reality, and stop him from making impulsive, insane mistakes. Example: Trying to ramp up the 3 way too fast, and over-automating their production. Those were undoubtedly very expensive missteps, and if I recall, there were a bunch of top-le…

Is Gwynne Shotwell even the best example? It isn't like SpaceX is really in the best of a financial situation. Information on their financials is limited, as they are a private company, but most information shows they haven't reached a sustainable profit, and many of their ideas of how to reach their valuation (like Satellite internet) have hit snags. Their last loan, they had to cut by $500 million due to lack of de…

They are capital spending very heavily to advance their tech, so a lack of "profitability" I don't think says any more than it does about Tesla-- they would be fools to pocket their profit instead of turning it around to spend on growth.

Re: Tesla’s First-Quarter Deliveries Plummet

#354

Post by xkjkls » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 9:20 PM UTC

mikeash wrote: post #96

saiya-jin wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> most people on HN are the actual population that is buying teslas You overestimate how many people here are willing to shell out those amounts of money for vehicle, and how practical it actually is. Yes, it is a future and whatnot and a lot of cool tech. But for say 20k euro I can have 5 year old BMW 3-er wagon. Yes, not new car, but I get 95% of the car for 1/3-1/4 of the cost. Much better fun to drive (I care muc…

In sorta-rich places like Washington, DC, they’re all over the place.

Yeah, basically in the places that coastal elites exist.

Re: Tesla’s First-Quarter Deliveries Plummet

#355

Post by _red » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 9:20 PM UTC

brohee wrote: post #296

_red wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is helpful that the author quantified some of the issues, however there are many factors involved: * Does the authors CO2 estimates for battery production actually include "mining" or just "assembly"? From reading it, it seems to just include assembly of final components into a battery. * Moving tons of rare-earth minerals from Point A to Point B for battery production requires yet more CO2 output. * Wind + Solar…

Which rare earth are you talking about, and in which quantity?

Those who really care about the environment, know that reuse and recycling are the best approaches. So, you could buy a 15-yr old Toyota or Hyundai, since that carbon footprint already exist. You shouldn't be needlessly creating more deadly CO2.

Further, in terms of energy density: solar, wind, coal, natural gas all pack far less joules per gram than petroleum.

These are inconvenient truths that unfortunately conflict with the slick marketing messages of your luxury golf cart salesman.

Re: Tesla’s First-Quarter Deliveries Plummet

#356

Post by xkjkls » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 9:22 PM UTC

modzu wrote: post #227

Animats wrote: post #218

They had an order backlog, and they filled it. Now, like the rest of automotive, they're sales-limited. All the big US auto companies have been able to make more than they can sell since 1956. (In the spring of 1956, supply caught up with pent-up WWII demand. Then came the era of chrome.) Tesla is in a business where many customers just want to pay their money and drive away with a car. Not "preorder" and wait for mo…

if you're in the market for a new car what makes you think being able to get one immediately is a priority? a car is one of the largest investments an average person will make. i love that i'm not going to be hustled by a car salesman (the archetype of the sleazy conman) and can make decisions independently when buying a tesla. honestly a few months seems really reasonable given the time spent making the decision?

Honestly, most people don't buy cars that way. They buy a new one when their current car has entirely reached end of life. Either they get into an accident that totals the car, or something breaks that fixing it would be financially not worth it. Most people don't have the luxury of waiting years for a new car.

Re: Tesla’s First-Quarter Deliveries Plummet

#357

Post by xkjkls » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 9:29 PM UTC

tbabb wrote: post #353

xkjkls wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is Gwynne Shotwell even the best example? It isn't like SpaceX is really in the best of a financial situation. Information on their financials is limited, as they are a private company, but most information shows they haven't reached a sustainable profit, and many of their ideas of how to reach their valuation (like Satellite internet) have hit snags. Their last loan, they had to cut by $500 million due to lack of de…

They are capital spending very heavily to advance their tech, so a lack of "profitability" I don't think says any more than it does about Tesla-- they would be fools to pocket their profit instead of turning it around to spend on growth.

The fact that they could fulfill their whole loan that they wanted, and that they lost many important government satellite contracts recently seems to indicate that this is a business that hasn't reached a stage that it isn't out of the woods.

According to certain investors, this is a business worth $30 billion. That's not a company that should be struggling with these things.

United Launch Alliance had similar revenues (right around 2.5 billion) in 2018, but most only value them at $3 billion. This 10x multiple of their most obvious competitor doesn't seem to make sense.

Re: Tesla’s First-Quarter Deliveries Plummet

#358

Post by kasey_junk » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 9:39 PM UTC

justtopost wrote: post #89

kasey_junk wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am definitely uneducated & also unlikely to ever buy a luxury car at the Tesla price point. But if I weren’t what electric car would I buy?

You would not buy electric if well versed in automotive tech. Notice few if any mechanics drive ecars.

Few if any mechanics drive luxury automobiles at the Tesla price point.

Re: Tesla’s First-Quarter Deliveries Plummet

#359

Post by Rebelgecko » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 9:44 PM UTC

gnicholas wrote: post #238

SEJeff wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Disclaimer: I do own a Tesla, and it does not drive like any other car I've drove or ridden in during my lifetime. My Dad says it is like being in a space ship. No, no, and no. Would I like Mercedes/BMW/Lexus/Audi/Jaguar to have electric vehicles? Yes I absolutely would! But would you have over the air updates, a push towards self driving (even if they're not there yet!), and a very strong push towards sustainable ma…

Not only do ICE car companies not issue OTA software updates, some use the same software for driver assist features for years in a row. I had heard good things about Subaru's EyeSight system and went to check out the 2019s Outback. I was floored to learn that the system is no smarter than it was in 2017, when this version came out. Are they not learning from the millions of miles their customers have driven in the la…

Some people actually prefer a car whose characteristics stay similar after they buy it. Sometimes these updates are beneficial, like when Tesla improved the braking performance by 20% after getting ragged on by Consumer Reports. But on the other hand I would be pissed if I bought a car that started trying to kill me after an OTA tweaks some weights in a neural net(e.g. https://www.reddit.com/r/teslamotors/comments/8a0jfh/autopil...)

Re: Tesla’s First-Quarter Deliveries Plummet

#360

Post by ajross » Thu, Apr 04, 2019, 9:48 PM UTC

xkjkls wrote: post #340

ajross wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point was more that Tesla has already scaled beyond the level where "these companies know how to build cars" is reasonable spin. Tesla's building plenty of cars, making money doing so, scaling rapidly, and can only be expected to be doing better still by the time those competitors arrive in the market. That's not to say that they won't be highly competetive cars, they might (I for one certainly hope they are). Bu…

They still have only 1! factory. Compared to any almost any other automotive manufacturer that is a bespoke operation.

I didn't say they were big, I said they had scaled to a level where they were competing very well in volume with established brands (c.f. the Jaguar example above) and that by extension, this senseless prognostication that "Tesla is going to fail because they can't scale" is stale spin and you guys need to find new arguments. They scaled.

I mean, yeah, they built one big (heh, giga) factory instead of a few smaller ones. Your argument seems to be "OK, fine, they built one big factory, but they for sure can't build another!". And that's silly.