Tesla Inc - Discussion about the company and CEO.

[JSH]

Originally Posted by Piotrsko

If they try to make anything here, they need to empty the building some. Wonder where they get the car railcars or the infrastructure to load ditto. The railcars are end loaders, not side loaders like box cars.

Where is "here"

Double-decked end-loading rail cars are typical for transporting automobiles. You contract with a rail company for them. All that is needed to load vehicles is a ramp that adjusts to the two levels. The infrastructure is minimal.

[ksa8907]

I like Tesla, I think they've done a great job at pushing the envelope and bringing technology and EV's to market MUCH faster than would have happened without Tesla.

However, Tesla really needs to focus on being profitable. I feel that Elon, and he has said this, doesn't really care if Tesla is around in 10 years as long as it has served its purpose of advancing EV's.

I would guess there is/will be a struggle in power when they have to decide between profitability and technological advancement, new products, etc.

[Hersbird]

Originally Posted by ksa8907

I like Tesla, I think they've done a great job at pushing the envelope and bringing technology and EV's to market MUCH faster than would have happened without Tesla.

However, Tesla really needs to focus on being profitable. I feel that Elon, and he has said this, doesn't really care if Tesla is around in 10 years as long as it has served its purpose of advancing EV's.

I would guess there is/will be a struggle in power when they have to decide between profitability and technological advancement, new products, etc.

Their fanciful promises take EV advancement away from legitimate products already available. Leaf sales tanked noticeably the instant the $35,000 Tesla (which meant $27,500 or less after tax credits) was promised for example. They also have done this advancement with 5 billion in taxpayer support. They have a duty to give back to the people at this point.

[redpoint5]

Tesla has no duty to be charitable. Their duty is to be profitable or die.

If the public didn't want to give the money to them, they shouldn't have given it.

I'm against the regressive subsidy to the wealthy in particular, but what do I know?

[ksa8907]

Originally Posted by Hersbird

Their fanciful promises take EV advancement away from legitimate products already available. Leaf sales tanked noticeably the instant the $35,000 Tesla (which meant $27,500 or less after tax credits) was promised for example. They also have done this advancement with 5 billion in taxpayer support. They have a duty to give back to the people at this point.

I dont see the Nissan leaf as legitimate actually. An air cooled EV battery is like an air cooled engine in a traditional vehicle. I mean it works... until it doesn't.

The Nissan leaf should sell at a significant discount to other EV's since it lacks active thermal management. It is priced lower but not enough for me to consider it.

[RedDevil]

Tesla is not aiming to put the Leaf out of the market, but rather all ICE cars.
An obligation to preserve the Leaf would make that quite hard, obviously...

[Hersbird]

I guess it's nobody's obligation NOT to be a snake oil peddler by the laws of man. Good luck with that long term.

[redpoint5]

Except that snake oil promises to do something it doesn't, while Tesla promises their EV is suitable for use as an EV, and it is.

[RedDevil]

False accusations are free, right?

[JSH]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

Except that snake oil promises to do something it doesn't, while Tesla promises their EV is suitable for use as an EV, and it is.

A friend of mine has a 2016 Model X. She paid $8000 for Autopilot + Full Self Driving. She was promised an over the air software update in 2-3 years that will turn her car into a fully autonomous vehicle. How long should she have to wait before Tesla is forced to refund that $8000?