Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Tesla Approach to Distributing and Servicing Cars

teslamotors.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 139 posts

Re: The Tesla Approach to Distributing and Servicing Cars

#61

Post by tptacek »

ericdykstra wrote: post #60
tptacek wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's an amusing sleight of hand to equate Tesla's run-in with franchise law to Uber's run-in with taxi licensing. Franchise laws are the product of decades of overlapping private/public enforcement of contractual issues between dealers and manufacturers. It seems clear on the face of it that Tesla should in no way be encumbered by the arrangements made between General Motors and its dealers, because Tesla never had d…

The point of my post wasn't to say that types of laws that companies are using to litigate against Uber and Tesla are equal in every way, and I don't appreciate you insinuating that I'm intentionally misleading people. My overall point is that vested interests in many industries are using old laws and regulations to litigate against disruptive companies in their respective industries with the intention of stopping th…

I think my comment was pretty clear:

Incumbents in the automotive industry are trying to abuse existing laws to harm or extract rents from Tesla, but should and probably will ultimately fail to do that, because the purpose of those laws is orthogonal to what Tesla is doing.

Incumbents in the taxi/livery business are wielding their regulations against Uber. But their claims are not as specious. They are encumbered by legitimate regulation, and Uber is in part profiting from regulatory arbitrage. Even if they didn't want to throw up hurdles to Uber, they more or less have to lobby to have their regs enforced on Uber, or else be structurally disadvantaged.

This is a distinction you failed to draw in your comment, which drew a circle around "florist licenses", Uber, and franchise laws and claimed they were all part of the same phenomenon. No, they aren't.

Re: The Tesla Approach to Distributing and Servicing Cars

#62

Post by Shivetya »

sbierwagen wrote: post #23

In case your eye skipped over the “for free” part, I would like to emphasize that again – owning a Supercharger enabled Model S really does mean free long distance travel forever on our high speed charging network. I really wish they'd stop saying this. They're essentially committing to building a nationwide electric car charging infrastructure for $nodollars, and never charging customers to use it, ever. Which means…

Well there is one certain feature of many interstates in the US.... rest areas. NY to LA might not be hard to spread them out on.

Sure you can cross the country for free, provided you want to go this way.

Re: The Tesla Approach to Distributing and Servicing Cars

#63

Post by sbierwagen »

cryptoz wrote: post #38
marshallp wrote: post #35

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.

I don't think Google will enter the space of actually building cars - but they most definitely will partner closely with some of these companies for their self-driving cars.

Well, they'll "partner" with them in the sense of buying the bare car from car manufacturers, but they'll probably be Google Robot Cars.

Re: The Tesla Approach to Distributing and Servicing Cars

#64

Post by apendleton »

tryitnow wrote: post #57
tadfisher wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if you, by some affliction unimaginable, actually don't like the car? Is it worth $300 to determine that?

If you're willing to spend more than $100K on a car, then yes it probably is.

The Roadsters sold for that much, but are no longer on sale. The Model S price is a little over half that. You can get above $100K with the right combination of options, but most sales probably won't be for anywhere near that.

Re: The Tesla Approach to Distributing and Servicing Cars

#65

Post by salimmadjd »

ChuckMcM wrote: post #45
salimmadjd wrote: post #26

I admire Musk and tesla. However, I see two paths for them and none are good. A - fully-electric cars are still too early and will get crushed by hybrids or more efficient diesel/fossil fuel cars. Tesla becomes irrelevent. B - fully-electric is all the rage, and every brand will have one. Tesla will become the victims of their own success. I'm going to assume many of you are going to disagree with me. Mainly because…

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 better car. And tesla doesn't have the same brand loyalty in a very competitive market.

Secondly, if you're buying an electric car for environmental or gas price reasons, there are other options. I can lease a Nissan Leaf now for $199/month. The amount of money I save on daily gas cost driving my Honda will almost come to $199! It means I can have a car for 3 years for free (minus the $2000 singing fee). Tesla just can't compete with that!

Re: The Tesla Approach to Distributing and Servicing Cars

#66

Post by dave1619 »

Gring wrote: post #16

"The Product Specialists (...) goal and the sole metric of their success is to have you enjoy the experience of visiting so much that you look forward to returning again." This is not the experience I had. Walked into a Tesla store, said I want to test drive a Roadster. Salesman went into that profiling mode that all car salesmen do constantly and no customer likes, asking me all kinds of questions to find out how mu…

I had a starkly different experience when I visited a Tesla store (in Newport Beach). The product specialist was super helpful and we sat in a Model S for 10 minutes while he explained all the features. They didn't have a car to test drive but he apologized and said they were making them as fast as they could.

The store was clean. Lots of people were in and out. And the whole experience did a good job to highlight the innovation behind the Model S (they had an entire powertrain on display).

The Newport Beach store didn't have the Roadster, but if they let me test drive a Roadster for $300 for a half day... I'd jump on it. It'd be a very fun half day and well worth the few hundred dollars.

Re: The Tesla Approach to Distributing and Servicing Cars

#67

Post by ChuckMcM »

salimmadjd wrote: post #65
ChuckMcM wrote: post #45

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…

Ok, I see where you are coming from. But aren't you getting ahead of yourself? The luxury car market is what, 1 million cars annually [1]? So these 'niche' cars which have good margins give Tesla the capital to do the next step which is bring the costs down.

I think folks who drive a model S will pretty quickly understand that Tesla is building a better car, so if someone was in the market, and open to an electric, Tesla is a contender.

I expect the majority of Tesla's sales to be 'status symbol' sales initially (just like Hummer's sales) and later a more durable market will develop. And I think it will benefit from being considered the 'best' you can get, Elon is a pretty compelling figure as well so very trendy.

Where we differ I expect is that I expect they can translate that early success into a broader class of car.

[1] rummaging around in http://online.wsj.com/mdc/public/page/2_3022-autosales.html isn't particularly helpful.

Re: The Tesla Approach to Distributing and Servicing Cars

#68

Post by rikf »

sbierwagen wrote: post #23

In case your eye skipped over the “for free” part, I would like to emphasize that again – owning a Supercharger enabled Model S really does mean free long distance travel forever on our high speed charging network. I really wish they'd stop saying this. They're essentially committing to building a nationwide electric car charging infrastructure for $nodollars, and never charging customers to use it, ever. Which means…

Dont forget that even traditional gas stations make most of their profit from convenience store/restaurants.

Re: The Tesla Approach to Distributing and Servicing Cars

#69

Post by AVTizzle »

tptacek wrote: post #61
ericdykstra wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point of my post wasn't to say that types of laws that companies are using to litigate against Uber and Tesla are equal in every way, and I don't appreciate you insinuating that I'm intentionally misleading people. My overall point is that vested interests in many industries are using old laws and regulations to litigate against disruptive companies in their respective industries with the intention of stopping th…

I think my comment was pretty clear: Incumbents in the automotive industry are trying to abuse existing laws to harm or extract rents from Tesla, but should and probably will ultimately fail to do that, because the purpose of those laws is orthogonal to what Tesla is doing. Incumbents in the taxi/livery business are wielding their regulations against Uber. But their claims are not as specious. They are encumbered by…

"...the purpose of those laws is orthogonal..." "...their claims are not as specious..."

Those claims aren't yours to make. How legitimate or illegitimate any given law is in a given circumstance is arguable and subjective. Thus the court system, lawyers, and the entire judicial branch.

Eric's point - that these cases are all part of the same phenomenon - makes complete sense. Incumbents trying to leverage power to stifle innovation from a new generation of companies. It's simple enough, I don't even see what there is to argue.

Re: The Tesla Approach to Distributing and Servicing Cars

#70

Post by sp332 »

pkulak wrote: post #10
wmf wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The superchargers are free for the Model S, which implies that they may not be free for future models.

Are the chargers really that smart? Do they communicate with the car and know the make/modle/year etc? Which brings up something else. Could a company potentially build a step-down converter to use to charge my Leaf for free? I'm not really sure how much hardware it takes to step down voltage that significantly.

In a standard charger, the car has to negotiate a power level before there is any voltage on the charging pins at all. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J1772#Signaling However while the Model S comes with a J1772 adapter, I'm sure your Leaf doesn't have a "Tesla" adapter.
Post reply on HN