91–100 of 306 posts
If you're curious, like I was, about the side pole test, here's a video of the Tesla: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BBvH3lysmJA Here's a Prius for comparison (4 stars): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yc0uUx2T37k
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Tesla's PR is many things, but it's not safe. It feels plain and unadorned and yet genuinely enthusiastic and precisely bold. In most big companies the PR people have to cover their asses, but don't have too much ownership of what they say. Whereas for Tesla someone who's not afraid is calling the shots.
Exactly. It is an incredibly refreshing departure from how things are normally done in Corporate America.
Because the difference is not just between people reading good PR vs mediocre PR, but whether people will actually read it. (I.e. if it's not worth doing well, might as well not do it.)
One was even a head on crash at fairly high speeds which killed the other vehicle's driver. The Tesla S driver walked away. Tesla never fails to amaze me.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, I remember beign told at the end of the 90's that if you'd bought 100 shares (~$2000) of Microsoft stock at IPO and sold in '99, you'd have cashed in well over a million dollars. Tesla gives me that kind of feeling at the moment. It probably won't be to the same extent as Tesla's market cap is already quite high. So I can't see them splitting quite as much as MS. But on the other hand, I think they're definitel…
The problem with your thought process is that, unlike microsoft and google or apple, most traders and analysts already treat the company as if it can do no wrong. Analysts calling for price targets of 130 or 160 were predicting sales of 200K+ units per year 2-3 years out, which is a really aggressive target given the size of the addressable markets. On the other hand, it was only in 2011-2012 that wall street gave Ap…
1) Potential for growth
2) Potential for growth that everybody else hasn't already recognized
Tesla is dandy for #1, but isn't looking too hot on #2.
"the front section that would normally contain a gasoline engine is used for a second trunk." I guess somebody has veto'd "frunk". Oh well.
Okay, I am convinced this car is superb. How about we... build more of them? There is a Ford factory here in Australia that is due to be shut down in 2 years, it could be converted, and us Aussies would love to be able to buy this car. I personally promise to buy one if it is built here. The Aussie government might chip in as well.
I'm sorry, but as a car enthusiast who spent much of his younger years devouring every ounce of Road&Track/Car&Driver mags, the phrase "any car ever tested" is a bit over the top... I'm almost positive the McLaren F1 (a car 20 years older) fared better than the Tesla in safety testing and was capable of being driven away after the testing finished... F1 @ 30mph: http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v482/Peloton25/McLare…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They picked a wimpy machine if it broke at 4x. Here's one that can apply 159 tons of force (about 80x the weight of a Tesla). http://www.overbuilt.com/products/car-crushers
Correct me if I am wrong, but that doesn't look particularly like a calibrated testing machine.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
First: SUVs don't survive crashes particularly well -- they're very prone to rollover, which generally makes for a bad day for the occupant. I've witnessed multiple large-SUV vs. Camry (mid-sized sedan) accidents where the Toyota fared far better (walk away vs. ambulance or worse). Weight can be a factor, especially in multiple-vehicle accidents, where the heavier vehicle simply has more momentum and kinetic energy.…
First: SUVs don't survive crashes particularly well This is outdated information, SUVs are now far safer than cars. Death rate (per 1M vehicle years) for 4WD midsize SUV: 23. Midsize Sedan: 51 [1] [1] http://www.iihs.org/externaldata/srdata/docs/sr4605.pdf
What if SUVs just get driven less (due to poor mileage, only being taken out in the snow...)