181–190 of 222 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Tesla seems to have the advantage that investors are willing to supply it with endless amounts of cash to fuel it's unprofitable operations year after year. In its 16 year history, it has never turned an annual profit. It has lost billions and billions of dollars. Tesla just received another $2 billion lifeline infusion earlier this year. Other automakers have to play by more sane financial rules.
That's exactly what the same people also said about Amazon.
Whereas Tesla does indeed have some systemic financial issues.
In other words Amazon could have been "profitable" on a GAAP accounting basis fairly early on, but Tesla would struggle to do that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> When Tesla's competitors stop designing and electric car and start designing a really great car that just happens to be electric then Tesla will have competition. Until then all the supposed Tesla competitors will be a joke. This. I never understood why car manufacturers all make such weird wacky electric cars. When the Model S came out it was such a relief that finally there was a _normal_ looking electric car. Wh…
Tesla is trying to make cars to compete with other makers’ non-electric cars. Other makers are trying to make cars to compete with Tesla, without competing with their own non-electric cars. Currently, it is probably impossible to achieve a good profit margin on a mass-market electric car. Battery costs are too high this early in the manufacturing process. Tesla is willing to operate at the bare edge of fiscal viabili…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They aren't competitors for the Model 3 but rather a Model Y. And not sure why people are so obsessed with range. It's the megapixels/megahertz spec nonsense again. People don't buy ICE cars based purely on MPG but also for exterior/interior design, quality, comfort, brand, support, seating capacity etc and most importantly what the car says about you as a person.
My first EV was an 80 mile Leaf. Now I have a 300 mile Model 3 that I take regular road trips in. To be quite honest, with the range hit in cold weather, (I take the car skiing,) 300 miles per charge just isn't enough. EVs need about 400-500 miles range in order to have mass adoption. Anything less is delusional.
On top of that you can buy ICE cars with 600+ mile range in merely Okish conditions (80-100 litre fuel tank) today as an option. EVs just can't compete with that.
Until they can (and charging infrastructure is such that noone will worry about being able to charge overnight literally anywhere they might choose to go), they'll be competing in a much smaller market.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Model 3 Performance and the Taycan? They are about the same size, 0-100, top speed, range, charge rate etc etc. I'll admit that the Taycan will be very nice looking, but it will also be about twice the price, if going for the same performance.
You don't buy a Porsche for 0 to 100 performance as there are better cars on the market for that. You buy a Porsche because you want the fastest track cars that will best any other car on the Nurburgring. The Taycan will be the fastest production electric car on the Ring.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> That’s sorta Honda/Toyota territory. A kid in my office said the same thing and I have no idea where people are getting this from. A brand new Model 3 costs about as much as an Audi A4, BMW 3-Series, or Mercedes-Benz C-Class. The Model 3 is a compact executive car, and competes directly in that category. It is for the mass affluent. Not the mass market.
If we're talking about the price, you're right. But if we're talking about actually sitting in the car, Tesla is definitely in Honda/Toyota territory.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
the porsche taycan seems like the ideal electric car honestly. If the price is not that ridiculous it'll probably be my first electric vehicle.
>> porsche >> price is not that ridiculous This seems like an insanely unlikely combination.
So where the Taycan as a range places within that is quite relevant. All the signs at the moment are that it will price similar to the 911 ie probably starting at £65-70kish. But we only have one data point which is the £130k for the Turbo trim level.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
People have been saying this for 5 years now and Tesla didn’t even invent the electric car. Also... who complains about how loud a Tesla is?
Dunno, at Autobahn speeds (~155mph) both the 3 and S seemed way noisier than a 3L straight-six BMW 7er. Tons of road noise, tons of wind noise. Although the Teslas had worse tires on them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So the accurate comparison is the i-Pace and the Model Y. Jaguar beat Tesla to market by 12-18 months in the segment. Will be interesting to see if they can capitalize on the head start.
It compares to the Model Y in size but to the Model X on price. This doesn’t seem like a winning combination. Edit: that’s a bit too glib. I’m sure it’ll do just fine as a niche product for a certain group of buyers, which is what Jaguar is all about. It’s just not really competing with Tesla, which is trying hard to go after the mass market.
EDIT- Forgot about Honda and the Korean car makers too.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Uh no, there is at least a six month supply of i-paces at US dealers now because nobody is buying them. The i-pace is actually quite nice, but terrible efficiency and no charger network makes it a tough sell.
> they can't produce enough of them for demand (the waiting list was around 8 months when I left and was growing) > there is at least a six month supply of i-paces at US dealers now Both of those could have been true at different times: dealers ordered large allocations of them thinking they'd dent Tesla's market, then the ex-Jaguar employee left, and as the i-Paces arrived, they simply didn't sell. That sounds logic…