You'll get no argument from me that premium-priced cars, like all premium-priced consumer products whatever the tech, are pointless in themselves. What isn't pointless is the potential for decreased costs in the future (see Bolt, Volt 2, Prius Prime), which brings more people to the table and invites competition (which Tesla, to date, hasn't had)edatoakrun said:This is Lutz' actual opinion, his words from that 2011 interview:GRA said:... See http://blog.sfgate.com/energy/2011/11/10/the-chevy-volts-unlikely-father/ as an example...
that's Bob Lutz' opinion, and he's in the best position to know, as he was the Volt's corporate godfather at GM...
And IMO TSLA's BEVs, sold at average prices exceeding $100,000 remain in the realm of the relatively pointless, the more so as TSLA, even after receiving tens of thousands of dollars of additional government subsidies for each car it sells, still remains unprofitable....John Lockner, who was my closest subordinate on this thing — a brilliant technologist and a guy with fantastic common sense — said, “You know Bob, look, we could easily do the same thing that Tesla does. But we’d wind up with a $90,000 to a $100,000 car, which is relatively pointless...
http://www.autonews.com/article/20161031/OEM05/161039992/tesla-s-sale-of-clean-air-credits-may-have-marked-peak-for-marketTesla’s sale of clean-air credits may have marked peak for market
After Tesla Motors Inc. sold $139 million of zero-emission credits in the third quarter, CEO Elon Musk complained that they should be worth more -- if only California’s regulations were tougher. Instead, they may soon be worth less.
The staff of the California Air Resources Board is planning to propose as early as this week that the state’s emissions targets remain largely unchanged through 2025 and then jump thereafter, according to three people with knowledge of their plans...
“When you have a weak mandate, obviously the value of those credits decline,” Musk said on the call. “There were some quarters where we simply cannot even find a buyer for credit. And then when we can find a buyer, it’s typically 50 cents on the dollar.”
Prime seller
The California board said Tesla sold 80,227 credits during the 11 months through August, which accounted for 86 percent of the total. And even at prices below what Musk wants, the sales helped Tesla report a profit excluding some items of 71 cents a share in the third quarter instead of a loss of 18 cents, according to calculations by UBS analyst Colin Langan. Tesla had only about 3,500 credits left as of Aug. 31...
lorenfb said:So now the after effects of the "push" to bias the Q3 results, a very poor month of October:
http://insideevs.com/monthly-plug-in-sales-scorecard/
Summary:
10/2016 U.S. Sales; Model S - 925, Model X - 725, WW ~ 2500 (U.S. about 65% of WW)
YTD U.S. ~ 36K, WW ~ 56K
Average monthly WW sales ~ 5.6K, 2016 Guidance - 80K,
To achieve the 2016 guidance 80K, Tesla must on average deliver 12K per month for the next two months.
The highest historical monthly delivery has only been about 6K per month for U.S. (about 9K WW).
mtndrew1 said:lorenfb said:So now the after effects of the "push" to bias the Q3 results, a very poor month of October:
http://insideevs.com/monthly-plug-in-sales-scorecard/
Summary:
10/2016 U.S. Sales; Model S - 925, Model X - 725, WW ~ 2500 (U.S. about 65% of WW)
YTD U.S. ~ 36K, WW ~ 56K
Average monthly WW sales ~ 5.6K, 2016 Guidance - 80K,
To achieve the 2016 guidance 80K, Tesla must on average deliver 12K per month for the next two months.
The highest historical monthly delivery has only been about 6K per month for U.S. (about 9K WW).
The InsideEVs numbers are solely US sales. At the beginning of a quarter Tesla typically loads up ships with European and Asian market cars so that those deliveries ultimately happen before the end of the quarter. In the last month of a given quarter the company goes on a mad rush to deliver US cars, first with east coast markets and gradually focusing closer and closer to the manufacturing plant to reduce time-in-transit issues. This is frequently discussed on TMC and often results in some dodgy-quality cars coming off the line and being delivered at the 11th hour in order to post solid quarterly numbers.
This quarter, in particular, has the unique distinction of shipping cars with Autopilot 2.0 hardware but without the accompanying software. Even the radar cruise control and auto emergency braking aren't ready yet. A clever way to sidestep this is to ship more than normal abroad at the beginning of this quarter so that by the time the cars are actually delivered the software is ready, or nearly so. It reduces the time that customers are without the affected safety features.
I expect end-of-quarter US deliveries to be nuts (with the accompanying quality blemishes) as they have been every quarter for some time now.
2016 Tesla US sales
Q1
Jan 1120
Feb 1820
March 5855 (EOQ)
Q2
April 1595
May 2800
June 5845 (EOQ)
Q3
July 2704
Aug 4685
Sep 7550 (EOQ)
Q4
Oct 1650
Nov ____
Dec ____
The InsideEVs numbers are solely US sales.
This quarter, in particular, has the unique distinction of shipping cars with Autopilot 2.0 hardware but without the accompanying software. Even the radar cruise control and auto emergency braking aren't ready yet.
http://wishtv.com/2016/11/03/2-killed-in-fiery-explosive-crash/2 killed in fiery, explosive Tesla crash
NDIANAPOLIS (WISH) – Two people were killed in fiery, single car crash near downtown Indianapolis early Thursday morning.
...27-yer-old Casey Speckman was driving a Tesla north on Illinois Street when she lost control at a curve, hit a tree and crashed into the side of a parking garage. Speckman and her passenger, 44-year-old Kevin McCarthy, were trapped inside. Speckman was pronounced dead at the scene.
It took crews approximately 15 minutes to free McCarthy, who was rushed to the hospital and died a short time later.
WARNING: Video below may be disturbing to some viewers...
Alfred Finnell Jr. witnessed the crash. He said the vehicle was speeding down the road before it crashed and exploded.
“There was one big explosion first, then there were several little small ones and debris just kept popping up in the air like somebody was at a fireworks display or something,” Finnell Jr. said.
IFD spokeswoman Rita Reith said...
“The car, kind of, for lack of a better term, disintegrated. The debris field is at least 100 yards long,” Reith said. “The batteries and the pieces and parts from the Tesla — all which were on fire when firefighters initially arrived.”
lorenfb said:Yes, and I scaled to determine WW (U.S. / .65).
edatoakrun said:IMO, TSLA's decision to use highly-flammable battery packs will prove unsustainable, if and when it begins mass-production of BEVs.
http://wishtv.com/2016/11/03/2-killed-in-fiery-explosive-crash/
Rebel44 said:lorenfb said:Yes, and I scaled to determine WW (U.S. / .65).
Which shows that you have no clue what you are talking about - it takes a few weeks for those cargo ships to arrive to their destination and prepare them for delivery to customers + Tesla doesnt produce enough to fill whole ships to each destination, so there is a further delay in departure.
Rebel44 said:edatoakrun said:IMO, TSLA's decision to use highly-flammable battery packs will prove unsustainable, if and when it begins mass-production of BEVs.
http://wishtv.com/2016/11/03/2-killed-in-fiery-explosive-crash/
Disagree - those batteries are less volatile (and less energetic, when something happens) than gasoline and have less fires per 100M miles than ICE vehicles.
lorenfb said:Rebel44 said:lorenfb said:Yes, and I scaled to determine WW (U.S. / .65).
Which shows that you have no clue what you are talking about - it takes a few weeks for those cargo ships to arrive to their destination and prepare them for delivery to customers + Tesla doesnt produce enough to fill whole ships to each destination, so there is a further delay in departure.
O.K., since they're in-transit and were not delivered in October, then Tesla's WW 10/2016 deliveries are even
worse than indicated! So implied is that NO overseas deliveries occurred in October, right? That's great for
Tesla with their Mickey Mouse accounting. Just keep on sucking-up the Tesla hyperbole.
Bottom line: So now they have a bigger "nut" for the last two months, since the implication is that all product
other than for the U.S. was on cargo ships in October, i.e. great planning on the part of Tesla!
lorenfb said:Rebel44 said:edatoakrun said:IMO, TSLA's decision to use highly-flammable battery packs will prove unsustainable, if and when it begins mass-production of BEVs.
http://wishtv.com/2016/11/03/2-killed-in-fiery-explosive-crash/
Disagree - those batteries are less volatile (and less energetic, when something happens) than gasoline and have less fires per 100M miles than ICE vehicles.
Guess you haven't followed-up on some Tesla accidents where the heat from the Li-ion battery fire is so intense
that in some cases the car and occupant were totally unrecognizable to the first responders. It's rare for gasoline
and other typical ICEV materials to develop equivalent heat intensities as Li-ion batteries.
Rebel44 said:lorenfb said:Rebel44 said:Which shows that you have no clue what you are talking about - it takes a few weeks for those cargo ships to arrive to their destination and prepare them for delivery to customers + Tesla doesnt produce enough to fill whole ships to each destination, so there is a further delay in departure.
O.K., since they're in-transit and were not delivered in October, then Tesla's WW 10/2016 deliveries are even
worse than indicated! So implied is that NO overseas deliveries occurred in October, right? That's great for
Tesla with their Mickey Mouse accounting. Just keep on sucking-up the Tesla hyperbole.
Bottom line: So now they have a bigger "nut" for the last two months, since the implication is that all product
other than for the U.S. was on cargo ships in October, i.e. great planning on the part of Tesla!
No, point is, that we just dont know, due to complexity of logistics.
Rebel44 said:lorenfb said:Rebel44 said:Disagree - those batteries are less volatile (and less energetic, when something happens) than gasoline and have less fires per 100M miles than ICE vehicles.
Guess you haven't followed-up on some Tesla accidents where the heat from the Li-ion battery fire is so intense
that in some cases the car and occupant were totally unrecognizable to the first responders. It's rare for gasoline
and other typical ICEV materials to develop equivalent heat intensities as Li-ion batteries.
Temperature its not much of a problem (and other flamable materials, beside battery/gasoline, inside the car, play important role) - what causes that much destruction is usually how long did that fire burn. And battery fire develop slower than gasoline fire, so if something happens and you are alive and consious, you have more time to escape.
lorenfb said:You may have missed this one;
And a fire is very likely to ensue, whether BEV or ICE.WetEV said:lorenfb said:You may have missed this one;
Falling a few hundred feet often leads to a fatal stop at the bottom, fire or no fire.
Firetruck41 said:And a fire is very likely to ensue, whether BEV or ICE.WetEV said:lorenfb said:You may have missed this one;
Falling a few hundred feet often leads to a fatal stop at the bottom, fire or no fire.
lorenfb said:Firetruck41 said:And a fire is very likely to ensue, whether BEV or ICE.WetEV said:Falling a few hundred feet often leads to a fatal stop at the bottom, fire or no fire.
The issue is the resulting intensity of the fire caused by the burning Li ion batteries. Do a Google search of other
Tesla fires where the Li ion batteries burning resulted in basically no remnants of the original vehicle other
than melted metal.
Are some unaware of the shipping restrictions on Li ion batteries in place by major freight carriers, e.g. UPS,
the result of Li ion volatility and fire intensity? And then there's the Samsung Note 7 and various Li ion laptop
batteries over the years presenting a safety hazard. Never had major issues with the older battery technologies,
e.g. NiMH, as have occurred with Li ion.
Any car that is fully involved in fire is unsurvivable in a matter of seconds, a steel car may have a steel shell left, aluminum may melt, either way you are very dead, whether your car is powered by batteries or gasoline. Your hate for Tesla is blinding you, or you don't have much common sense/experience.lorenfb said:Firetruck41 said:And a fire is very likely to ensue, whether BEV or ICE.WetEV said:Falling a few hundred feet often leads to a fatal stop at the bottom, fire or no fire.
The issue is the resulting intensity of the fire caused by the burning Li ion batteries. Do a Google search of other
Tesla fires where the Li ion batteries burning resulted in basically no remnants of the original vehicle other
than melted metal.
Are some unaware of the shipping restrictions on Li ion batteries in place by major freight carriers, e.g. UPS,
the result of Li ion volatility and fire intensity? And then there's the Samsung Note 7 and various Li ion laptop
batteries over the years presenting a safety hazard. Never had major issues with the older battery technologies,
e.g. NiMH, as have occurred with Li ion.
Firetruck41 said:Any car that is fully involved in fire is unsurvivable in a matter of seconds, a steel car may have a steel shell left, aluminum may melt, either way you are very dead, whether your car is powered by batteries or gasoline. Your hate for Tesla is blinding you, or you don't have much common sense/experience.lorenfb said:Firetruck41 said:And a fire is very likely to ensue, whether BEV or ICE.
The issue is the resulting intensity of the fire caused by the burning Li ion batteries. Do a Google search of other
Tesla fires where the Li ion batteries burning resulted in basically no remnants of the original vehicle other
than melted metal.
Are some unaware of the shipping restrictions on Li ion batteries in place by major freight carriers, e.g. UPS,
the result of Li ion volatility and fire intensity? And then there's the Samsung Note 7 and various Li ion laptop
batteries over the years presenting a safety hazard. Never had major issues with the older battery technologies,
e.g. NiMH, as have occurred with Li ion.
Enter your email address to join:
