Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
While some are still sitting on the fence waiting for Tesla's stock to tank a la Facebook they have missed an opportunity to make serious money. The stock price was $29.41 on August 24, 2012, today it is $161.84. If my math is right, that is a 450% increase in one year.
There's clearly brilliance associated with Tesla, in terms of the design, product, the business execution, and the marketing. We'll only know in hindsight whether or not Tesla stock is in a bubble phase.
In this 8/24/2013 NY Times article, a reporter posed this question to a Tesla Manhattan Assistant Sales Manager--
Yes, I’d love to buy a Tesla. But:
a. I live in New York City and park in a public garage;
b. drive on weekends to a house in rural upstate New York, far from any current or planned Tesla charging station;
c. can afford only one car;
d. occasionally make longer car trips far beyond the Tesla range; and
e. the base Tesla S costs $71,000 before rebates.
How would you respond to these objections? Read the full article to get the sales manager's response at: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/24/business/wondering-if-tesla-can-get-there-from- - - -here.html?adxnnl=1&ref=automobiles&adxnnlx=1377371253-5Pv6NSP2dC0ENDy7p6fHGA
And a final quote "...Before the first-quarter results, people were betting Tesla wouldn’t last the year. Now the question is, These guys are for real, but how big can they be? There’s been a seismic change. The auto industry hasn’t seen anything this disruptive since the dawn of the Japanese manufacturers.”
That is a textbook case of Wall St. stockbroker puffery IMO, with little reflection upon actual automotive history. This is not what the NY Times said, it's what Morgan Stanley said.
it is this very kind of published hyperbole that is going to hurt Tesla.
Let's unpack this a bit:
1. "With a charging station installed in my barn"...
Zoning? Building permit? Contractor? Cost of equipment?
2. "Mr. Berkley said that if I adhered to 55 miles per hour on the highway, I was likely to get 230 miles.
Hot day? AC on? Very cold day? Heat on? Right-lane driving with trucks for 230 miles? Really?
3. "Mr. Berkley showed me a map of the country with current and planned high-speed charging stations, where Tesla owners can recharge the battery in 30 to 40 minutes at no cost. "
Note the term "planned" charging stations. There are now less than 20 in the USA. Also note the term "no cost", which is not true, since the charging system necessary to receive a quick charge like this is a $2,000 option. On top of the $10,000 extra batteries the salesman just recommended.
4. "He estimated that every $1 of electricity is the equivalent of $5 in gas".
NOTE: Yes if you're paying .07 per Kwh. if you're paying .12, like me, it's more like $4 a gallon.
So let's come back to reality and take a hard look.
Impressive car? Yes. Actual cost to the shopper in this article---probably close to $100K with the options and 220v charging station installed in his barn.
Will he make it to work and back on one "fill"?---maybe,, maybe not.
Point well taken and thanks for the deconstruction although I don't quite agree with your rebuttal. I was a bit intellectually lazy and omitted that important information as I thought the [...] preceding the quote would suffice to indicate that something was skipped.
The article made a compelling point though. In the event of a power failure you'd be up the creek without a paddle.
By the way, I'd like to share this YouTube video that explains why Apple, The Wright Brothers, and Dr. Martin Luther King succeeded while others who had more capital, more scholars and equally gifted orators had failed or were not as persuasive. http://youtu.be/mqZyg2XAmDk
At best, it is a better mousetrap.
Yeah, the electronics should age really well in 30 or 40 years. Good luck with that.
At least the [non-permissible content removed] (and worked in "wealth management", shocking!) looking sales manager didn't try the story of the time you'll save not being at a gas station, and valuing that at $100/hr against the running costs, like Tesla itself tried when their creative math scheme came out a while back.
I'm NOT trying to diss the car by posting these things, only showing a bigger picture than the current media hype.
NHTSA disputes Tesla's advertising:
""The agency's 5-Star Safety Ratings program is designed to provide consumers with information about the crash protection," NHTSA said in a statement. "NHTSA does not rate vehicles beyond 5 stars and does not rank or order vehicles within the star ratings."
Tesla Employee Reviews:
http://www.indeed.com/cmp/Tesla-Motors/reviews
The employee stuff sounds typical for startups, and really, many companies in the US overall now, as workers seem to be valued less over time.
Your concern is understandable but no need to panic, as Tesla explained its alternative financial reporting approach in its letter to shareholders.
"Here Are The Four Items In Tesla’s Second Quarter Earnings That Turned A $30.5M Loss Into A $26.2M Profit"
http://www.ibtimes.com/here-are-four-items-teslas-second-quarter-earnings-turned- - -305m-loss-262m-profit-1377617
GAAP is one those nebulous and contentious accounting concepts. There generally is agreement on most accounting measuring and reporting issues but Revenue Recognition is not one of them, that is why, this a big FASB project under review for massive change. Stay tuned.
I think an article on the company from the investment newsletter "Seeking Alpha" (see MarketWatch) sums up the company and the stock well by saying "Tesla is a great company with a world-class product and very pricey shares."
As they should be for taking such a contrarian position. Perhaps they are not aware that Tesla is only utilizing only 20% of its facilities and has the physical plant capacity to produce in excess of 500,000 vehicles.
Tesla's strategy is clear.
1. Demonstrate the feasibility of a long range EV (the Roadster)
2. Develop a high performance sedan for early adopters, good enough to compete with BMW, Audi and MB (the Model S)
3. Produce a less expensive mass market EV vehicle (the Model E)
They have proven the technology is flawless, and given the strong demand for the EV, the only major hurdle left is to build more fast charging stations to saturate the market. And if there are enterprising individuals or companies out there, they should get into the business of developing solar and wind power driven charging stations. (Oil companies are you listening?)
er...i didn't get that memo....when did this happen?
'17 Chevy Volt Premiere
Until EVs sell at $30K and can go 300 miles on a charge, don't hold your breath for any upsurge in EV sales worth noting.
Why did I pick that number? Because that's what a very nice gas car with a 12 gallon tank costs.
BMW, Audi and MB do not sell their vehicles at that price range and yet they are extremely successful in the U.S.
The Tesla is a premium brand and as such its product demand a premium price. To follow the footsteps of Ford and GM by introducing yet another "average" car is a prescription for economic suicide. That's the beauty of capital, a product for every purse.
Anyone who can produce a 300 mile range, $30K EV will become rich beyond measure.
A Tesla cannot even compete with a Lexus LS 460 on range. Basically a Tesla S is a Lexus LS 460 with a 10 gallon gas tank.
Well, if this is just a competition on range, then yeah- I guess you're right, but it would be fair to add that a Tesla
... gets filled up every night for you in your garage, and that the company will fill up for you for free if you want to drive it on a longer trip.
I've heard that the BMW i3 is going to be marketed with the deal that it includes, free every year, 2 weeks worth of 'loaner' of a regular BMW. so you can borrow an X5 and go on a family ski trip. Brilliant!
I do wonder if this recharge free-ride can be sustained indefinitely if we assume that the recharge infrastructure grows as they intend for it to do so. Will these costs for electrical energy go down? Unlikely. So consequently, will these free-ride costs then retard the expected lower price of admission as more mass production takes hold? Likely. Will this affect mass production numbers, thereby slowing the extensiveness of recharge stations throughout the nation? Definitely.
Any guesses on what a new $90,000 Tesla S with 60,000 miles will be worth in, say, 2018? Will it depreciate more or less than a $90,000 Audi, BMW, Lexus or Mercedes?
Didn't Tesla guarantee resale through a set period, like 3 or so years? After that it might be tough - and used models won't get the subsidy gift.
Don't be to quick to make that statement. Considering that the average driver drives less than 40 miles a day on average and the Tesla has that and much more. That means that on any given day a Tesla driver leaves their garage with a full tank that will take them where they are going.
The time spent plugging in the Tesla every night would likely be less than driving the Lexus to the gas station and filling it up once a week or so.
Now let's look at the Tesla range and its limitations. In this year I drove three trips where the round trip would have been longer than the Tesla's range. Yet one of those trips currently has a quick charging station I would say 2/3rd's to 3/4th's the way there, so it would not have been to big of a deal charging there both ways.
Another one of those trips was well within the Teslas range one way and the destination now has charging stations. So it would be no issue driving there, charging the first night I am there so I have power to drive around the several days I was there and one more time the night before I leave so I could get home.
So in reality just one trip this year I couldn't have taken a Tesla, but then we could have taken the wifes car or even rented one.
Now contrast that with other EV's there are maybe a doze trips that I could have taken with a Tesla that would not have been possible with any other EV. Friday, as an example, I dropped my wife off at a womans conference in Wisconsin about 85 miles or so away. Teslas can be had with more than enough range to do that round trip, no other EV could do that.
So I do think that Tesla is a game changer simply because it is taking the EV from something that needs to be charged almost daily to something the average driver can drive for a week between charges. If Tesla can make a more economical car that gets the same ranges as the S model for half the price everyone else will be scrambling to extend their ranges to match Tesla.
If Tesla survives or not it has changed the game.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
I don't agree. The reason is that 'the game' is using two entirely different stakes.
If they had a $35k car that also had a 280 mile range, then that would be a little closer to being a game-changer.
Furthermore, I think that you have to extrapolate a little more about the realities of owning an EV, than you have. People are busy...we're busier now than we were a decade ago and a lot busier than half a century ago. We have things to do, places to be...unexpected derailments, unexpected delays..in traffic, picking up the kids at school "Oh, you'll have to pick up Deanna at the clinic cuz she tripped and broke her arm on the front steps of the school...not to worry though, it's only an extra 20 miles out of your way from your usual route home...But...oh ya...there is that construction going on on Route A, that might delay you a little extra. Oh, you're in the EV and only have enough charge to get home directly from here, eh?"
That sorta thing...before you know it, what you think is a workable level of range ability starts to show its shortcomings in the real world, where real, unplanned things happen. Like a cold front blowing in and the temp dropping to 10 instead of the 32 that was forecast. The 32 you could live with because you knew you had enough charge for that temp. But the heater, defroster, wipers etc etc are all sapping the last 15 miles you thought you had cuz of the real world happening the day before and you never got a chance to plug it in..
The kicker, is that for all that inconvenience, you just paid two to THREE times more for your car than your neighbour did for his TDI Passat that he only has to fuel once per month..
The game changer is that they do have the 200+ range.
Furthermore,
All those things are issues if you are driving the Mitsubishi EV that gets 60 miles on a charge, not on a Tesla with a 260 mile range and you have only driven it 25 miles. That's why I think it's a game changer.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
But on top of that, (and mostly), because this is not a car an average person can afford to purchase. If someone has practically unlimited funds then there are tons of potential game changers in the world. If next to no one can afford the purchase then it gets the ol' who cares sorta thing, ya know?
The 1924 model Doble Series E steam car could run for 1,500 miles (2,400 km) before its 24-gallon water tank needed to be refilled; even in freezing weather, it could be started from cold and move off within 30 seconds, and once fully warmed could be relied upon to reach speeds in excess of 90 miles per hour!
Why did it fail? Same reason as the Tesla S --it's not a game changer. Too expensive, too complicated to repair, too expensive to operate, lots of messing around.
These charging stations are a) not free, because you have to buy the supercharger as an option on the car and b) there are less than 20 of them in the whole country.
If you charge at home, your running costs will equal those of a hybrid.
Were the Doble Model E the same price as a Buick of the day, and as easy to operate, well then, we might see Dobles on the streets today.
so the Tesla S has no MSRP advantage, no range advantage, and no operating cost advantage over a Lexus hybrid.
What it does have is the "cool factor" and a lot of status at the moment. That's it.
Elon Musk plans Tesla road trip from LA to NYC (CNet)
"Musk took to his Twitter account on Wednesday to announce that he has finalized a family road trip that will take him from Los Angeles to New York City. According to Musk, he plans to complete the trip in six days and travel 3,200 miles in his Tesla Model S. During the trip, he'll spend just nine hours charging.
"At 1.5 hours per day, we will only ever need to charge when stopping anyway to eat or sightsee," Musk said on his Twitter account. "Never just for charging, itself."
Game changing really just boils down to marketing, right? That, and not fighting with your siblings and parents over the family business.
Actually I can see this car making the cross-country journey, but to say it will stop "not just for charging" is disingenuous in my opinion. The point is YOU HAVE TO STOP whether you want to or not after, perhaps, 300 miles (we presume Mr. Musk has the highest capacity batteries available).
Here again, it has to be the equivalent of a gas car. Until the Tesla can a) cost $40K b) go 300 miles, and c) charge up in 10 minutes, it's not going to get any market share except the market share of "first users"---until then (and I hope to see it) once those first users are all satisfied, that's it for market expansion.
Ferrari is highly successful as a boutique car builder---so much so, that they are purposely CUTTING BACK on production so as to charge more for their cars! They sell "only" about 7300 cars a year and do very well, thank you.
But they aren't a "game changer"--just a well run manufacturer of stunning and interesting cars.
This, to me, is where Tesla should presume to go to remain alive.
The only problem with my scenario is that EVs aren't particularly exciting to drive, at least not like a Ferrari. Ferrari owners call the engine the "music" built into each and every car. Tesla sings very quietly.
Flying JSpago's, run the generator for an hour and get yourself and your car recharged.A unit sufficient enough to pump a fast charge into the Tesla would just SUCK fuel...and be a noisy one I think..
edit - Leaf owners brag that they can buy (and tow, haha) an accessory trailer and gen set that will keep them mobile at apprx 60 to 70% duty cycle if memory serves..
Then there's Solar Roadways just around the corner.
Then we are just going to have to disagree. I for one just cannot see any situation where I will have an unforeseen circumstance that would require me to drive over 200 miles in a day.
Under the worse circumstances an EV would at worse get no less than half of it's stated mileage in a charge. Now the worse EV out there for range would mean that I would use about 90% of the power on a round trip commute giving me little, if any, room for any unexpected used of power.
However if I had the Tesla with the extended range I could drive the entire week of commuting and not use 70% of the available range under the 50% rule stated above. That means even with unforeseen circumstances that would require more power usage, forgetting one day to charge it or the very uncommon power outage, the Tesla wouldn't have any issues getting me where I want to be.
That is what makes it a game changer.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
What "game" has changed exactly?
If anything, it sounds like the argument is that I should pay $2000 for a solar-powered wide screen TV that shuts off after 9 PM because, gee, I don't watch late night TV anyway.
It failed for the same reasons that all steamed powered cars failed. As ICE's evolved they became far more economically feasible over the steam powered cars.
As for the Tesla being too complicated to repair, too expensive to operate and lots of messing around that's not true. EV's have the advantage of being simpler with far fewer moving parts so they happen to be easier to repair and operate (when was the last time you saw an electric car getting an oil change?).
so the Tesla S has no MSRP advantage, no range advantage, and no operating cost advantage over a Lexus hybrid.
If you want to talk about MSRP then forget the Lexus hybrid go for something like the Chevy Spark. For the price of the cheapest Lexus hybrid you can get a Chevy Spark and enough gas to drive over 165K miles.
As for range, that is pretty meaningless for most people 90% of the time.
As for operating costs the Tesla would be less than the Lexus. Looking simply at fuel costs going by EPA estimates and the cost of electricity and gas in my neck of the woods the Tesla would be about 5 cents per mile cheaper to fun on fuel alone. Add to that the fact that an electric drive train is easier and cheaper to maintain than an ICE the Lexus would be more expensive to run.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D