121–130 of 139 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Dont forget that even traditional gas stations make most of their profit from convenience store/restaurants.
I would actually be very interested in a citation for this.
He sold up last year.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Tesla are the Apple of cars. Elon Musk is the new Steve Jobs. The other car companies will have non-tech retards as ceo's and will always be playing catch-up. Tesla only has to fear techie's like google or apple itself entering the space.
>The other car companies will have non-tech retards as ceo's and will always be playing catch-up. This is false. Most car companies have been researching electric vehicles since the 60's or 70's when the first oil crises happened. And as for technology, Tesla is not actually ahead, in neither range nor charge up speed. As an example, this is also a "Startup" thing. An electric bus, that gets better range (everything…
Exactly. They've spent all those years and dollars, and they still have nothing compared to the Model S.
The whole approach seems very much alike to Apple Retail stores strategy. High foot traffic locations, product specialists working not on commission, a lot of service centres - Tesla "Genius" bars. Applying proven working strategy in a different industry is a very smart move from Tesla. I see no reason why it wouldn't work.
>I see no reason why it wouldn't work. The highest end Apple products are still affordable by most people. Sure it might be an expensive investment but definitely affordable. So with great marketing they managed to get not only the previous Apple fans but also managed to convince most people that the markup for an Apple iSomething is worth it. I don't know if the same thing is feasible for Tesla cars which are defini…
The whole approach seems very much alike to Apple Retail stores strategy. High foot traffic locations, product specialists working not on commission, a lot of service centres - Tesla "Genius" bars. Applying proven working strategy in a different industry is a very smart move from Tesla. I see no reason why it wouldn't work.
>I see no reason why it wouldn't work. The highest end Apple products are still affordable by most people. Sure it might be an expensive investment but definitely affordable. So with great marketing they managed to get not only the previous Apple fans but also managed to convince most people that the markup for an Apple iSomething is worth it. I don't know if the same thing is feasible for Tesla cars which are defini…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think this view is misguided. Apple would be foolish to make you prove that you could buy an iPad before letting you play with one, and the same holds true for Tesla. They need to overcome widespread skepticism about purely electric cars, and a large part of that is exposing everyone they can to their cars. Sure, give preferencial treatment to people who have the money to buy one, but let everyone try them out.
It is so much less expensive for Apple to let a prospect try out an iPad than it is for Tesla to arrange a test drive that these two things are effectively apples and oranges.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What are your thoughts on: C - full-electric is the rage, every brand has one and Tesla remains the 'premium' brand ? My thinking is that the new vehicle market is quite large, and Tesla, as an early mover, has a great advantage relative to the other manufacturers. Their disadvantage is that they aren't as well capitalized. Their lack of working capital will kill them if they have to pivot very far from their current…
I think that's what Tesla is hoping for. However, I don't see it happening. Tesla wisely is going after premium buyers, that market is niche by definition. They've done that because car is a major purchase unless if you a lot of money and you are more willing to take a chance on a new car company. But beyond that, it doesn't matter if Tesla is building a better car, it matters if consumers think Tesla is building a b…
There are no cars on the market that even come close to the Model S, the Nissan Leaf has a pathetic 73 mile range. The Tesla is 10x the car the leaf is, performance and luxury-wise, and it get's almost 4 times the range on a single charge. The Model S Signature (equipped with an 85kWh battery for a 300 mile range) MSRPs at $87,900; a Nissan Leaf MSRPs at $37,250. Sure, that's a pretty significant jump in price, but when you consider the fact that the Model S competes with a BMW M5 performance-wise, you see it isn't all that crazy.
Even if you take the 40kWh Model S that will MSRP for $49,900 you can see that it's a way better deal than the Leaf. Sure, the Models is $12,650 more than the Leaf, but you actually get a reasonable range (160 miles) and the luxury and performance that the Leaf just cannot compete with.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Until we figure out how to paint solar cells on flat surfaces, energy will never again be as cheap as it is right now." Oh, really? What about natural gas, hydrated methane and the most important of all, nuclear fusion energy? The universe is filled with billions of billions of billions of stars, it is not that fusion energy does not work, we only have to control it and we will.
We aren't going to see anything nuclear in the near future, sadly. The populace is just too afraid. It doesn't matter that burning coal rains down radiation in the form of C-14- most people don't know that, and remain more afraid of anything with "nuclear" in the name.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We aren't going to see anything nuclear in the near future, sadly. The populace is just too afraid. It doesn't matter that burning coal rains down radiation in the form of C-14- most people don't know that, and remain more afraid of anything with "nuclear" in the name.
Coal doesn't have any C14 in it. It's millions of years old. You're thinking of other elements, like uranium.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think this view is misguided. Apple would be foolish to make you prove that you could buy an iPad before letting you play with one, and the same holds true for Tesla. They need to overcome widespread skepticism about purely electric cars, and a large part of that is exposing everyone they can to their cars. Sure, give preferencial treatment to people who have the money to buy one, but let everyone try them out.
An iPad costs a couple hundred bucks, and is tiny . A Tesla Roadster costs tens of thousands, requires a full-time employee to babysit it during a test-drive, has to be insured, and fills a room. You're not comparing apples to oranges. You're comparing a paper airplane to a 747.
This $300 is definitely not unreasonable.
Musk says, "It is impossible for [dealers] to explain the advantages of going electric without simultaneously undermining their traditional business." But every other technology introduced, from the electric starter in the 1910s to hybrids in the 2000s, has gone through the same process. Chevrolet dealers have explained the advantages of and sold 24000 Volts in the US.
For the attention that is required to encourage people to take a leap from gasoline to electric, it makes more sense for them to focus on their own stores - rather than working with third party dealers.
That's why Apple has their own stores too.
Look how that has worked out. Most profitable retail space on the planet, by square feet.