Maybe yes, maybe no. But increasing diversity is easy. Tesla runs like a tech company, and that means it can change its business strategy much faster than old time manufacturing companies like the auto OEMs. I think you are dead wrong about the necessity of a multiplicity of car models, but if you aren’t I’m pretty sure Tesla can make the adjustment.
In any case, investment is about balancing risk and reward. I think the balance favors a Tesla investment and you obviously disagree. It simply comes down to that.
I think that has now become a moot point. I think Elon is totally engaged now in the automotive side of Tesla as I suspect he believes FSD is just about ready and the next generation platform is the perfect vehicle to introduce the robotaxi to the masses. Right or wrong, this is the test of Elon’s long-time vision and so I think he is all in. Exciting times!
If I were running the company and believed the robotaxi era had begun I would establish a Tesla-run supervised FSD Robotaxi service in major cities. Run this for a year to generate FSD data for regulators and to get the masses used to the idea of trusting in vehicles controlled by FSD. Once regulatory approval is obtained, gradually pull out the human supervisors.
I would probably target retirement communities as well. Hire college kids to sit in FSD driven robotaxis for a couple of months, then pull them out once the old folks get used to the concept.
Also target university communities. Hire retirees to sit in FSD driven robotaxis for a couple of months, then pull them out once the young folks get used to the concept.
And if this fails? Tesla can still make the $25k car off the same platform. Seems like a reasonable strategy. Start off by testing the robotaxi. If it works, great! Mass produce robotaxis and totally disrupt personal ownership of cars. If it doesn’t work, that’s okay. Pivot to producing the $25K car from an already ramped production line without Osborning sales of the Models 3 and Y.
Recent history says otherwise. Where is the Model 2? CyberTruck was delayed and the launch has gone poorly. Semi was late and we never hear of it anymore. Roadster 2 is late.
That’s an interesting comment for a car company which hasn’t refreshed or expanded its line in a long time - longer than most “old” automotive companies have pivoted and started producing EVs. How long will it take Tesla to start producing Hybrids? (My guess: never.) How about SUVs at a competitive price with mid-level SUVs already on the market? How long did it take to rev up the pickup? (OK, bad example, because Musk insisted it be “really really different. Of course that’s the rap on the >$25k Tesla too, because inside reports say he wants it without steering wheel, or any driver amenities, actually.)
Cool! Then his predictions of 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, and 2023 might come true!
Not fer nuthin, but small cars generally have really small back seats. Don’t think the way to entice customers is to cram them into a tiny space with a kid in front who smells of marijuana smoke from the dorm, and say “See? How great, huh?”
Neither of those statements is true. Increasing diversity of model types involves a lot of work - you have to build factories and design production lines and line up suppliers and all the other myriad things that go into manufacturing a new product at scale. It’s hard to do that successfully - and that’s part of why Tesla’s had such mixed results in trying to do that. They moved the Model 3 and Model Y from introduction to mass production relatively efficiently…but did not do so with either the Cybertruck, the Semi, and the still not in production Roadster.
And whether Tesla runs like a tech company, it’s still an automobile company (at least, the segment that produces automobiles is). Manufacturing automobiles is different than manufacturing consumer electronics. You can’t outsource the manufacturing at scale - the business of being an automaker is the business of manufacturing the auto, which is entirely unlike the business of making cell phones or software. Apple could go from selling 20 million iPhones to selling 70 million in the space of two years, because all they had to do was order more production - automakers have to do the production themselves, and they have to build their production facilities to do it.
Yeah, but if FSD isn’t about ready and we’re not entering the age of the robotaxi, he’s not likely to be interested in doing what needs to be done for Tesla to be a dominant automaker. Because that involves stuff that isn’t exciting and groundbreaking and world-changing. It involves stuff like figuring out incremental variations on stuff you’ve already done (getting to 8-10 models of passenger cars and SUV’s), working on ways to expand marketshare in a mature segment (hint - it probably involves hiring marketing folks and not engineers), etc. It might even involve…hybrids (Heaven forbid!). Musk’s interest in the robotaxi doesn’t make this possibility moot. Musk is “totally engaged” as long as the project is cool, and totally uninterested in a project that is “the Model 3, only slightly smaller and cheaper.”
If the intermediate future of EV’s isn’t robotaxis, but successfully bringing to market the EV equivalent of the Toyota Corolla and Yaris, I can’t see Musk being willing to go there. In his eyes, Tesla isn’t a car company any more - it’s an AI/robotics company that happens to make cars. So if being a dominant EV automaker requires devoting a lot of resources, manpower, and corporate focus to products that aren’t AI/robotic products…seems like something Musk wouldn’t be interested in.
BTW, I think the idea of Tesla building robotaxis, but pivoting to Model 2’s if the FSD tech and regulatory approvals don’t work out, is a fantasy. Musk isn’t going to sign off on building new factories in Mexico and/or Shanghai expansions to build a million or more non-autonomous cars. The design needs of a robotaxi and a “Model 2” are going to be different - plus, the robotaxi is a smaller volume product aimed at the US, while the Model 2 is a mass market product aimed mostly at non-US markets, which means they’ll need different strategies and facilities and supply chains even if they do share the same platform architecture.
I think you might be a little bit over your skis here. Tesla might be a tech company but their product is cars. New car models have long project lead times, there is no way around it.
Tesla has proven time and again it is extremely bad at meeting announced project timelines. They don’t seem nimble at all. New models are consistently years behind schedule. Tesla seems to have a serious systemic problem in this area.
Musk’s prediction of 20 million units by 2030 was discussed quite a bit on this board, which would require a CAGR of 50% or something. However, it appears that sales might actually decrease in 2024. That is not a good sign that Tesla understands the market as well as they claim.
Recent headaches in SF led them being banned for the time being, a lady drug around under the robocar because it couldn’t deal with it, and then to protests, simply plopping a cone on the hood, locked it up , messed traffic up all over town, they just aren’t ready for release. Can’t see them getting better than a live driver… The old London Black Cabs are more the size needed, not a tiny back seat… Even as we’ve Ubered, I call out for a large vehicle for my 6’2" self, and even then some have been snug, hard to enter/exit…
Keep in mind that Toyota and the other western OEMs are getting crushed in China, still the world’s largest car market. They made it up over the past quarter by increasing sales in the US and Europe, but I don’t think that compensates over the long term for being uncompetitive in the Chinese BEV market. Meanwhile, Tesla China sales may be slowing, but they still have very competitive BEV products that are keeping them in play. And what BEVs are the OEMs planning to sell in India, the next big auto opportunity? Meanwhile, emission standards in the EU will be rising in 2025, making hybrids an increasingly more costly product with respect to carbon credits.
I would argue that over the mid to long-term, Tesla understands the market far better than the OEMs. It is the OEMs who are paying Tesla a billion dollars or two in carbon credits that Tesla is then using to do stuff like expand its supercharger network so that customers of OEM BEVs can also contribute to Tesla’s bottom line. Who is taking advantage of whom?
Yes, GM started doing this in the 1940s. I’m not aware of any major manufacturer who doesn’t share platforms across models and even across brands (except Tesla). This does not negate the reality that it takes a long time to develop a new model.
Your point was that Tesla is more nimble than other car companies. I don’t think we have evidence that’s true, at least when it comes to introducing new models. Historically Tesla has had lots of trouble in this area.
“Them” in this case was someone other than Tesla. A competitor called Cruise owned by General Motors. Tesla has not put any robotaxis on the road yet, they are probably waiting until they are closer to perfect than they are right now. And strictly speaking they weren’t “banned”, they voluntarily removed them from service while they continue development (or kill the project as the case is yet to be seen).
The Robotaxi companies claim they already are safer than a human driver. And I believe them. The problem is they keep screwing up in ways that humans typically don’t. They blow through caution tape and hit fire hoses at full speed. In the SF incident, another car hit the pedestrian first which threw her into the path of the Cruise vehicle. The Cruise vehicle then pulled over, which would be the correct decision 99.999% of the time, but not in this case.
If you think about it, the fact cars can drive around without a human driver at all is astounding, but they are still a hazard in certain situations. The public will never accept it until those situations are fixed.
There it is, I’d forgotten ‘them’ already, but remember the headlines, stories of the incident, later the protestor’s gaming then with cones… Partly why I noticed, s I live ~50 miles North, is aNephew’s son was doing test driving for one of the companies, pretty hush=hush, he never said who it was for, but he was involved several years back. To me it’s a long way out before they, any company, are ready…
They’re definitely safer than human drivers. But that is irrelevant. Human psychology is funny, we will accept 100 injured/killed per million miles by human drivers, but we will not accept 1 injured/killed per million miles by robo drivers. If human drivers kill 25,000 a year on our roads, there’s hardly any comments other than “that’s the cost of moving people and stuff around”. But if robo drivers kill 1, there are huge media stories about it for weeks, months, years, and they are forced to shut down until they can “get better at safe driving”.
Are they? I don’t think that’s been established. Sure, Tesla will note that AP/FSD has fewer accidents per mile than the average car in America. But since the average car in America isn’t a nearly-new car with little wear in safety systems (like brakes and tire), isn’t being disproportionately driven in California, and isn’t only being driven during the circumstances that drivers feel comfortable turning AP/FSD on…well, that comparison doesn’t tell us anything about the relative safety levels.
It is very possible that the typical autonomy program is less safe than a typical sober adult human. And they won’t get approved for widespread use unless/until they can prove that’s not the case.
Your skiing is not improving. By some measures it’s getting worse.
See what I mean? Tesla sales in China are not “slowing”. They’re going down. Top seller in China the last couple months? Volkswagen brands. Bigger than BYD, actually. And EV sales? Those are “slowing”.
That’s clever, I’ll say, and if other manufacturers can’t develop their own then it will continue. Are other manufacturers developing their own? I think so. I see several other brands on the roads (as well as Teslas, of course.)
You think so? He’s tweeting as much as ever. X is hiring content moderators, restoring blue check marks, and going through a bunch of other policy changes (reversions). He’s reincorporating the company in a different state. He’s just come through a horrendous quarter and the stock is off by a third. He has 2 models which look long-in-the-tooth, a pickup that’s off the road for a bit, and two models in development, neither of which is a gimme. Competitors are launching, so it’s not as though he’s able to focus merely on FSD, which he’s been yammering about since 2015.
And if/when FSD becomes practicable, it’s going to be a while before it’s approved nationally and even more before it’s “accepted.” People knew how to make elevators for hundreds of years, yet it was only used for freight until the 1850’s when Otis demonstrated a perfectly safe method for transport of people. More people probably died falling down stairs, but people kept using them until elevators “got accepted” which took years. It’ll go faster this time, I suspect, but it isn’t gonna happen overnight.
Yes. They are. Not because they are so awesome at scenarios, but because they have no emotions and they have split second reaction time. They don’t have a “bad day” and drive badly because of it, they don’t have someone annoy them so much that they drive erratically, and they don’t allow the guy tailgating them to reach a state of road rage. They also have no ego, so it doesn’t matter to them one whit if someone pulls in front of them unfairly. And aside from their goal of reaching the specified destination, they have a primary goal, all the time, of not hitting something, and to do their utmost to avoid something hitting them.
Of course all the above is only one of the building blocks to full autonomy. But after using FSD for a couple of months, I can safely say that at this point it is indeed safer than just a human driver alone. But with the current technology we are are still a ways away from full autonomy.
You are probably right, but at least I haven’t reached the point of suggesting that Tennessee is significantly influencing the automobile market.
Disruptive technologies and companies never progress smoothly. I also rode the Amazon roller coaster, not as successfully as with Tesla but still a fun ride, and I remember many dark quarters when it looked like Bezos had failed. Its the nature of the beast.
But look, I understand where you are coming from. You don’t believe that there is much future in autonomous driving or robotaxis. You believe the most Americans are going to hang on to their gas cars for a long time to come. You discount the importance of software in the next generation of vehicles and that AI is overrated in general, let alone with respect to automobiles. Basically you believe that the auto status quo is the cat’s meow (thought I’d use a phrase consistent with your thinking).
From that perspective of course there is no way that Tesla can succeed.
I think this is where we talk past each other. You have a very short time window for investments. VW had a couple of good months in China so it’s China problems are over. Tesla had a horrendous quarter so it is on its way to collapse. Autonomous driving won’t happen overnight so significant advances in FSD are irrelevant.
I thought it was obvious. Tesla is not making a diversity of models because the lack of models isn’t the problem. The primary issue and the only one really worth focusing on is the affordability of models. This year will be the first when mass produced battery prices will be low enough to produce a profitable BEV priced below $30K (without incentives) that outperforms the equivalently priced ICE/hybrid. And that’s only if a company knows how to efficiently produce a BEV. Why produce a bunch of vehicle variants that either lose money or sell at the same high price range and so cannibalize each others sales while also raising the cost of production?
Depends on what you call a model. Models built on different platforms with different drive trains take a long time to develop. In the ICE age, models were frequently differentiated by the size and power of the engine. Here for example is a partial list of Toyota engines and the models they are used in: List of Toyota Engines - Specifications, Problems, Maintenance Info on MotorReviewer.com
Contrast that with the simplicity of a BEV where the main differentiator is the size of the battery. Tesla takes so long to introduce new models because each model represents a quantum leap in technology, both at the vehicle level and with the gigafactory designed to produce it. I have no doubt that if Tesla wanted, it could do what BYD does and produce new models every few months. With BEVs it is not that hard if the changes are mainly ornamental and incremental.
First of all, the automation to date always allows the human to override. So the automation assists when it can assist. Second of all, this type of software, when it experienced BSOD (“Blue Screen Of Death”) simply STOPS. When your PC experiences BSOD it stops working and doesn’t kill you, same with the car. I also suspect that people didn’t understand my post, or that I didn’t write clearly enough. I am saying that Human+Automation is safer than Human alone*. And right now there is no such thing as Automation only, even those services over on the west coast have humans looking after the cars as they drive along, and can remotely “help” them when necessary.
* It is very surprising to me that anyone would argue against this. It’s like arguing against antilock brakes, against rear view cameras, and against rear cross collision avoidance, etc.
Really? I can’t think of a single example of this. For example, a Rav4 comes with three engine options but they are all still called a Rav4.
The Rav4 shares the same platform as the Camry, which also has a couple different engine options, but Camrys are all still called Camrys. They are different vehicles with a different consumer demographic.
In fact, your link shows that multiple Toyota models share the same engine. So it isn’t the engine the differentiates the models.
Can you give me some examples where manufactures changes the engine size and also changes the model name?
Actually, scratch that. My point is that car models take a long time to develop. That’s an objective fact. It doesn’t matter how many engines Toyota has, it is still a fact. Even a refresh of an existing model takes a long time and costs a lot of money. Cars are complicated to design and build. That’s the reality.