Bob Lutz, car-guy-to-the-max, former VP of GM and Chrysler, with time at BMW before that, wrote this recent article --
http://www.roadandtrack.com/car-culture/a26859/bob-lutz-tesla/
The opening paragraph is gloomy:
Tesla's showing all the signs of a company in trouble: bleeding cash, securitized assets, and mounting inventory. It's the trifecta of doom for any automaker, and anyone paying attention probably saw this coming a mile away. Like most big puzzles, the company's woes don't have just one source.
and the prognosis goes downhill from there mentioning competition from Audi, the lack of enough dealers to attract more buyers and other problems.
Related Stories
A rally in Tesla shares [...] briefly vaulted the company's market capitalization past the German luxury carmaker in early Friday trading. The amount of ground Tesla covered was vast: BMW was valued at a $30 billion premium as of early December.
[...] Short interest represented about one fourth of the shares as of the latest quarterly filing.
According to The Drive the three most valuable auto makers are "Toyota, Daimler, and Volkswagen."
Tesla stock sat at $357.32 after market close after trading as high as $376.87 on Friday.
—Silicon Valley Business Journal
related stories:
Tear-Down/Reviews on new BMW i3 Electric Car
BMW X3 May be Emitting a Greater Amount of Poisonous Gases than VW
Electric, Autonomous Cars Will Drive BMW's Continued Growth
BMW Boosts i3 Battery Capacity by 50 Percent—and it's Retrofitable
VW Responds to Diesel Scandal, Says "the Future is Electric"
Bob Lutz Thinks Tesla is Doomed
One in Seven New BMWs Sold in the US is an Electric Vehicle
Elon Musk's "Top Secret Tesla Masterplan, Part 2"
Elon Musk's Tesla Offers to Buy Elon Musk's SolarCity, Shares Tumble
Wall Street Values Tesla Motors at $620,000 for Every Car Delivered Last Year
Tesla Soars on Financials and Ratings
Tesla Stock Price Falls as Sales Target Cut to as Few as 50,000 Vehicles
Tesla Reaches 325,000 Preorders for Model 3, But Can It Deliver?
(Score: 3, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 30 2015, @03:29PM
Fuck this shill.
(Score: 4, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 30 2015, @03:29PM
He's from GM, better known as Government Motors.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 30 2015, @03:30PM
Yeah, fuck this dude.
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 30 2015, @04:03PM
Not going after the messenger here, are we?
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 30 2015, @04:20PM
The qualifications of the messenger are often important. I'm not going to get advice about car maintenance from a data entry clerk. And I'm not going to get business advice from someone whose career is being a VP at two failed companies.
(Score: 3, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 30 2015, @06:16PM
Sure, we all know what happened when we tool physics advice from a patent clerk
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 30 2015, @06:22PM
we get stuck in a dead end for decades?
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 30 2015, @06:49PM
Are you comparing this guy to Einstein?!?
Thats almost like a reverse goodwin.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Friday October 30 2015, @08:59PM
Actually, "Goodwin" is a good name for that.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 30 2015, @08:47PM
Yes, a patent clerk with a college education in physics. Hence, he would have the qualifications for being an expert on topics related to physics.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 30 2015, @06:38PM
Lutz was a product and marketing guy, made it to the top by supporting styling/design and engineering departments -- a very rare career path in the US auto industry (in recent history). At both Chrysler and GM he was not part of creating their big business problems, see a short bio,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Lutz_%28businessman%29 [wikipedia.org]
At Chrysler, he backed the Viper and made it happen (overruling the bean counters). I met him once at an event in Western NY State -- he had driven 6 hours in his Viper for lunch with writer/racer Brock Yates...and then turned around and drove it back to Detroit.
At GM he backed a whole bunch of interesting and successful cars.
He's a car guy, don't get him mixed up with the normal management found in Detroit.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by nitehawk214 on Friday October 30 2015, @07:05PM
The guy has a giant conflict of interest too.
"Don't you ever miss the days when you used to be nostalgic?" -Loiosh
(Score: 2) by BasilBrush on Friday October 30 2015, @05:26PM
“PC guys are not going to just figure this out. They’re not going to just walk in.”
-- Palm CEO Ed Colligan on the iPhone.
Hurrah! Quoting works now!
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 30 2015, @03:31PM
So are we suppose to trust his opinion since he was a VP at two failed car companies? So he has experience in running a company into the ground? Otherwise, why should the opinion of a former VP of Obama Motors matter?
(Score: 5, Funny) by TheRaven on Friday October 30 2015, @03:33PM
So are we suppose to trust his opinion since he was a VP at two failed car companies?
Because, obviously, he's an expert in failing car companies.
sudo mod me up
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 31 2015, @03:18AM
So if he's experienced in running companies to the ground, does that mean Tesla is doomed in the sense it can't be ran into the ground?
(Score: 4, Interesting) by jcross on Friday October 30 2015, @04:22PM
"I think Tesla CEO Elon Musk figured that if factory stores work for Apple, they'll work for Tesla. But the fixed costs for an Apple store are next to nothing compared with a car dealership's. Smartphones and laptops don't need anything beyond a mall storefront and a staff of kids. A car dealership is very different. It sits on multiple acres. You need a big building with service bays, chargers, and a trained sales force, plus all the necessary finance and accounting people. It ties up a staggering amount of capital, especially when you factor in inventory. Under a traditional franchise arrangement, the factory never has to carry that burden. Right now, Tesla does."
He doesn't even seem to know much about how Tesla works. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but I think Tesla dealerships are just basically showrooms and maybe they have some models you can test drive. Anyway, my impression is that it's a much lighter-weight operation than the kind of traditional dealership he's thinking of.
"A big, expensive vehicle with a compromised structure to accommodate gullwing doors can hardly be a sales knockout."
Compromised structure? I think Tesla has the least crushable frames in the industry. I don't know enough to comment on his financial analysis, but the guy seems to be writing off the cuff here without doing much research, and assuming Tesla's situation is similar to his past experience with failed auto makers.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by pe1rxq on Friday October 30 2015, @04:54PM
Even if he was right about the high costs of a dealership the burden still ends up at the consumer who pays for it all. It does not matter how you split the cost between dealer and manufacturer.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 30 2015, @05:54PM
He says the company is "losing $4000 per car" which, if true, means consumers aren't paying enough to cover the costs.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by frojack on Friday October 30 2015, @07:22PM
He says the company is "losing $4000 per car" which, if true, means consumers aren't paying enough to cover the costs.
Yeah, Chevy Volt lost money on every sale too. Except, Chevy was losing close to $40,000 per vehicle. [reuters.com] Lutz knows a thing or two about losing money.
The thing is, Lutz isn't taking into account the massive cost savings that Tesla expects to reap when its battery plant comes on line.
Musk will probably end up selling batteries to Chevy.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 30 2015, @08:07PM
Well until I see an actual source on that, he hasn't show himself to be spot on with the rest of his arguments.
(Score: 2) by mmcmonster on Friday October 30 2015, @08:48PM
Odd. That's probably taking into account the infrastructure Tesla is building in their supercharger network. Or just taking their losses and dividing it out over the number of cars they sell.
I was under the impression that the markup on the base model was around $10k and goes skyward from there. They justified the markup as they were building out the supercharger network.
The thing is, when you are building up infrastructure, profit/loss statements can be made to look as good or bad as you want. If you want it to look good, just slow down infrastructure investments for a quarter.
(Score: 2) by BasilBrush on Friday October 30 2015, @05:10PM
Even with his concept of a full sized dealership, the idea that that is more expensive than an Apple store is ignorant. Apple Stores have the best locations in the best malls in the centres of cities. That's a LOT more expensive. Car dealerships are not in city centres, they are where the land comes much cheaper.
The guy is a shill who's bullshitting. It ain't news.
Hurrah! Quoting works now!
(Score: 3, Touché) by McGruber on Friday October 30 2015, @08:30PM
Tesla's Atlanta showroom is a store inside the Lenox Square Mall. It is just a few steps away from Nieman Marcus and one floor below the Apple Store.
(Score: 2) by BasilBrush on Saturday October 31 2015, @02:22PM
That's an ACTUAL Tesla store. It's not the FANTASY Tesla store that Lutz assumes Tesla must have, because that's what traditional car companies have (through their dealers).
Hurrah! Quoting works now!
(Score: 5, Informative) by Phoenix666 on Friday October 30 2015, @05:10PM
You're correct, Tesla stores are showrooms. There are none of the other costs Lutz is talking about. The one in Long Island has a Model S you can sit in. When I went in last year I wanted to do a test drive but they said you had to schedule that through the website.
Lutz's mind is frozen in the auto business of 40 years ago. He doesn't begin to understand how different Tesla is. There is virtually no maintenance. Over the air software updates keep making the car better after you've bought it. What other car does that? They've also built out huge networks of superchargers, which means they're not only setting the standard for what cars are going to be but what the rest of the infrastructure to support them is gonna be. They're springboarding off the gigafactory into home energy storage, which means they're also helping homeowners hop off the grid into a sustainable energy future.
Nope, Lutz is a mental midget next to the strategic vision of Elon Musk.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 30 2015, @06:00PM
Jeep, for one, has that capability:
(emphasis mine)
http://www.gizmag.com/vehicle-hacking-trends-def-con-23/38858/ [gizmag.com]
(Score: 2) by frojack on Friday October 30 2015, @07:15PM
There is virtually no maintenance.
Well, that's not entirely true. You still have to rotate tires every 5000-ish miles. And there are annual scheduled maintenance tasks.
Edmonds.com [edmunds.com] has a write up of maintenance issues on a 2013 Tesla after a cross-country road trip.
Some of these were teething issues for this particular car. (Drive unit replacement, etc).
But others are routine maintenance, wiper blades, cabin air filters, cooling system, brake pad checks, software updates, etc.
This Story [teslarati.com] explains some maintenance issues that another driver saw, as well as an actual Annual Maintenance bill [cloudfront.net]. Most of this bill seems like stuff you would have to bitch to the dealer to have it checked on any other car.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 3, Informative) by mmcmonster on Friday October 30 2015, @08:39PM
I've own a Tesla for about 19 months now (got it in 3/2014). Put 37k miles on it.
I had my first service at a year (~24k miles). They replaced the tires and suggested that I rotate the tires in the fall so they would last longer. They also replaced the wipers and changed out some bolts and fasteners.
My second service is in a couple weeks. They're going to rotate the tires. I also chipped the windshield so they're going to probably replace it (a truck kicked up a rock or something).
Software updates happen over-the-air and I've received 3 or 4 per year since I got the car. None of them had to be done at the service center. Typically I get a software update notification when I turn the car on and schedule it for 2am the following night (time is adjustable). Kind of like an OS update on my desktop computer or phone.
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Friday October 30 2015, @09:08PM
I work with a guy who's had a Model S since they became available. He says he spends more, per mile, on the tires than on everything else combined.
Looking at the picture in GP's post, someone likes their car enough to spend $600 on getting stuff lubed and fluids changed. I guess it comes with the "can afford a Tesla" territory, but it's hardly a do-it-or-walk expense for the owner.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 30 2015, @09:33PM
$600 for that! holy crap, cost of ownership is high
(Score: 2) by mmcmonster on Friday October 30 2015, @08:44PM
Tesla test drives are hit-and-miss. I walked into a dealer in late 11/2013 in Manhattan and asked a few questions. No other customers in the store, so the salesperson offered me a test drive. It was a weekday at 3pm or so.
I went another time a month later at King of Prussia mall and because of how busy it was in the store, they asked that we schedule a test drive for my wife another day (the demo cars (they had three) were booked for the entire day).
Of course, like any auto dealer, the test drive is in their top-of-the-line model. Truly an awesome drive.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Thexalon on Friday October 30 2015, @05:01PM
Hey, Carly Fiorina thinks that qualifies her to be president of the United States for some reason. And a strikingly large number of people seem to agree with that.
For some reason people think that just because somebody has done a high-status job, they're qualified for another high-status job, regardless of how badly they've bungled the first high-prestige job. I tend to subscribe to a different theory: Any society that tolerates shoddiness in high-status jobs like "professor" and fails to reward quality in low-status jobs like "plumber" will have neither pipes nor ideas that hold water.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Friday October 30 2015, @05:24PM
Hey, Carly Fiorina thinks that qualifies her to be president of the United States for some reason. And a strikingly large number of people seem to agree with that.
If you ignore all the people shes' shafted for personal gain (admittedly a lot of that is due to the absence of adult supervision at HP and Lucent. If you don't want Fiorina to do something, then don't reward her for doing it), she still stands out from most of the crowd as being well spoken, intelligent, and able to think on her feet. If I hadn't been personally laid off due to a Fiorina enrichment exercise (HP/Compaq merger which resulted in a decline in both companies's fortunes), I might be inclined to give her the benefit of the doubt too.
Any society that tolerates shoddiness in high-status jobs like "professor" and fails to reward quality in low-status jobs like "plumber" will have neither pipes nor ideas that hold water.
Worthy quote there.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Thexalon on Friday October 30 2015, @05:48PM
Isn't the president (whether of a business or of the government) supposed to be adult supervision rather than requiring adult supervision? I've got idea: How about picking a candidate that doesn't shaft other people for personal gain, rather than giving those who would shaft others even more power to shaft even more people?
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Friday October 30 2015, @06:36PM
Isn't the president (whether of a business or of the government) supposed to be adult supervision rather than requiring adult supervision?
No, I think it's both. I think a big part of the silliness, routine to politics in democracies, is the lack of adult supervision by the electorate.
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Friday October 30 2015, @09:31PM
Point being, why would we hand authority and responsibility to somebody who has repeatedly demonstrated cannot handle authority and responsibility? Because that's just plain stupid.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 2) by Anne Nonymous on Friday October 30 2015, @03:32PM
Lutz is kind of an asshole. He may or may not be correct about Tesla, but he's still kind of an asshole.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by TrumpetPower! on Friday October 30 2015, @03:42PM
...Tesla has an insanely long waiting list of people spending absurd amounts of money on their cars, and the factory is working overtime just to keep close to meeting demand. They're the most talked-about car company, the one with all the exiting new features like an autopilot and zero-footprint gullwing doors. And you have to spend twice as much on a car to get one that even comes close to the 0-60 MPH times of a Tesla -- but the car is literally the safest ever manufactured.
Coming from Lutz...his bitching is pretty much a ringing endorsement for Tesla. They're clearly defining the future of the automotive industry, and Putz and his multiple spectacular business failures are the past....
b&
All but God can prove this sentence true.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 30 2015, @03:49PM
"Insanely long" relative maybe to the sales of other EVs. But the amount of reservations they have is a fraction of 1% of the total sales of any other successful car model.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 30 2015, @04:09PM
This kinda reminds me of iphone. It wasn't something to be taken as a serious competition. At least according to the official competitor propaganda..
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 30 2015, @04:21PM
Except that the iPhone outsold its contemporaries when it was first released.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 02 2015, @09:19AM
That was a single device carrying the weight of the whole platform - it doesn't need much sales to show up as a peak in the graph against manufacturers who put out a dozen devices each month. Especially if you restrict the data to its best-selling market.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by mth on Friday October 30 2015, @04:16PM
If there is any waiting list at all, that contradicts the "mounting inventory" statement from the article.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 30 2015, @04:23PM
Not really. They have a waiting list for models not yet released which doesn't then mean they can't have a backlog of inventory for models they are currently making.
(Score: 2) by Lunix Nutcase on Friday October 30 2015, @04:25PM
Not really. If I'm in the waiting list for a Model X how would that preclude having mounting inventory of Model 2s?
(Score: 2) by Lunix Nutcase on Friday October 30 2015, @04:42PM
Obviously that should be Model *S*
(Score: 2) by captain normal on Friday October 30 2015, @07:30PM
Tesla carries no inventory. All cars are ordered online, then built to order.
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts"- --Daniel Patrick Moynihan--
(Score: 2) by Lunix Nutcase on Friday October 30 2015, @08:51PM
Not true. They sell cars from inventory both new and pre-owned.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 30 2015, @04:43PM
How so? How would being in line for a Model X have any effect on the inventory backlog of the Model S?
(Score: 2) by mmcmonster on Friday October 30 2015, @08:52PM
I'm curious about the mounting inventory issue.
From what I understand, it's still 1-2 months for a Model S delivery, suggesting they have no inventory on them either.
You certainly are getting a custom build when you order the Model S, not looking at their inventory and picking something that is close to matching what you want in options.
Where is this mounting inventory?
(Score: 2) by Lunix Nutcase on Friday October 30 2015, @08:58PM
You can buy inventory cars. You can even find posts about people talking about it.
(Score: 2) by captain normal on Friday October 30 2015, @07:28PM
Yeah...and just how many Dodge Vipers have you seen on the streets?
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts"- --Daniel Patrick Moynihan--
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Hyperturtle on Friday October 30 2015, @04:19PM
Yes, it sounds like listening to the Heartland Institute complain that a solar plant using 5% natural gas for energy use during non-peak periods to smooth the load is a terrible carbon polluter so stop all solar and use oil and coal, proven technologies with thorough research on helping you and your family of four vote against government corruption and invest the fossil fuel industry.
Any competitor to established norms are corrupt and Evil.
(Score: 5, Informative) by daaelar on Friday October 30 2015, @04:37PM
I'll bite. I don't necessarily agree with Mr. Lutz, but I'm not a fan of the Model S. My wife and I went to test drive one, fully intending to buy the dual-motor variant. The sales agent took one look at me (30-year-old engineer in jeans and t-shirt) and rolled her eyes. She didn't have answers to any of my questions and never followed up with any. After driving the car, I left the "dealership" quite unhappy. They've made some outright terrible design decisions. That 17-inch touchscreen cannot be turned off. It's a huge distraction while driving. The rear windshield is so tiny as to be near-useless. Their suggestion, when I mentioned this, was to leave the rear-view camera open on the touchscreen. I guess they don't understand that said camera is fixed-perspective? Or that I don't want a light-emitting screen blinding me at night? They also have an over-aggressive regenerative system. I currently drive a Prius, so I'm used to regenerative systems. The Tesla model, however, is so severe they call it "one-pedal driving" in that it actually turns your brake lights on when you release the throttle. That seems quite dangerous, and also counter-intuitive to preserving power if I want to coast. These decisions are fundamental to the company, as they're still present in the Model X. I'm really hoping Audi and BMW can one-up them. I don't care about the 0-60 times or automatic driving or "ludicrous mode". I don't really even want my car linked to a smartphone app. I wanted a nice, fully electric AWD vehicle and was willing to pay for it. However, it seems they just aren't there yet.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Marco2G on Friday October 30 2015, @07:34PM
Well, while your eyperience certainly is valid, don't you think that lynching a whole company with the failings of one sales rep is a tad overzealous?
I went there, just like you, in regular clothes. I had an extremely nice chat with the sales rep during the drive and when his next appointment fell flat, he stood there and chatted with me for over an hour and told me about pros and cons (!) of Tesla Model S cars. At no point did he ever let on that he thought about this as wasted time even after I made clear that I would probably not be able to own a Model S due to financial reasons.
The aspects of the car you mentioned are completely a matter of getting used to it and taste. The rearview camera combined with the side mirrors leaves next to no blind spot on the car.
Yes, there are certain design 'issues' and some of them seem to have to do with the Steve Jobs mentality of Musk: If it doesn't fit into his philosophy, it doesn't go into the car no matter the demand.
Still, even after driving it the Tesla is the first car I actually yearn for. I'm sorry that your mileage varied, but come on... it's to be expected that a product can't be perfect for everybody.
(Score: 1) by daaelar on Saturday October 31 2015, @12:50PM
Oh, I'm not out to lynch a whole company on one sales rep. As I stated, I don't agree with Mr. Lutz that the company is doomed. I was simply offering a counterpoint to the parent post. There can be both good and bad people at the same company and that doesn't mean the whole company is rotten. However, your point about the "Steve Jobs Menatality" is what really puts me off. The design of the S went further with the X. I really wish the S didn't have those issues because I dearly want to buy one. The drivetrain and the charging system are phenomenal. I just wish the cabin design was less "look at me!" and a little more conventional. Who knows, maybe the Model 3 is something I'll like, though I secretly want an updated Roadster to come out with the old interior and the new drivetrain.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 30 2015, @09:21PM
California and ten other states are requiring automakers to sell "zero emission vehicles" such as electric cars. As the parent post implies, BMW has been selling an electric car, the i3. The entry of Audi to the luxury market, when Tesla is planning its offer a model for the masses, may not prove fatal for Tesla.
references:
http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/zevprog/zevregs/1962.1_Clean.pdf [ca.gov]
http://www.ucsusa.org/clean-vehicles/california-and-western-states/californias-zero-emission-program.html [ucsusa.org]
http://www.bmwusa.com/bmw/BMWi [bmwusa.com]
(Score: 1) by daaelar on Saturday October 31 2015, @12:54PM
I really wish some of these automakers would start selling outside of California. I live in NJ and there's plenty of folks here who would like to have full EVs. Two of my neighbors drive Volts and many others drive various Toyota/Lexus hybrids. Unfortunately, most of the full plug-in or even alternative fuel (looking at you, Honda Clarity) simply aren't available outside of California. I drive 10 miles round trip to work. I'm the perfect candidate for an EV, yet my only choices are the Tesla or a whole bunch of really tiny, really ugly concept-to-production vehicles. The i3 and the Leaf aren't exactly my cup of tea.
(Score: 2) by Nerdfest on Saturday October 31 2015, @02:17AM
Lighting the brake lights when you come off the accelerator is going to exacerbate traffic problems as well. I find that every time someone hits their brakes the person behind the does the same at about the same point but the reaction delay adds about a second to the duration. I'm pretty confident in my opinion that this is a major cause of the domino effect in heavy traffic on highways. They really should change that behaviour, at least as a default.
(Score: 2) by TheGratefulNet on Saturday October 31 2015, @04:28AM
that touch screen bullshit is a show-stopper for me, too. not that I can afford the car now, but if I could - I'd still think twice about that stupid laptop screen in the middle of the dash. great for the 'press on glass' generation but I'm a grey hair and pressing on glass without real buttons is totally unfulfilling for me.
I didn't know you could not turn it off. that would make me hate it even more!
I like a lot about the car. and I like how new the company is (not old school guys); but the lappie screen is really a usability nightmare. nothing there to let you feel your way like tactile buttons do. guis on screens are for lazy programmers who can't decide on a stable and fixed array of buttons, knobs and gauges.
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
(Score: 3, Insightful) by ikanreed on Friday October 30 2015, @04:50PM
So you and lutz contradict on the facts.
He says "excess inventory."
You say "Customer waitlist"
One of those has to be factually wrong(or Tesla is incompetent in a basically absurd way).
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Friday October 30 2015, @04:57PM
"the factory is working overtime"
In manufacturing, "overtime" shouldn't be much of a consideration. Three shifts, with enough extra people to keep it running 7 days per week. It might be easier to accomplish with a 4th shift, but the plant needs to run 24/7 with little if any "downtime". Most individuals working in the plant should be averaging 42 to 45 hours per week, some essential personnel might average a little higher. If they are paying more overtime than that, then they aren't properly managing the manufacturing facility. If there is a _no_overtime_ policy, they aren't managing things correctly either. Overtime should be monitored, and more people recruited if the overtime begins to get excessive, but it really shouldn't be higher than about 10%, or below 2 or 3%. That is manufacturing.
(Score: 2) by DECbot on Friday October 30 2015, @10:42PM
Last I heard, it was two shifts, with production 6-days a week and with maintenance and engineering coming in on Sunday for line upgrades and such, and maybe an operator to do a run off. Your manager is supposed to ensure you have two days off each week, but the mentality out there is to come in on your days off to get stuff done.
cats~$ sudo chown -R us /home/base
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Friday October 30 2015, @11:32PM
The main reason I hate shutting the plant down, is things never start up smoothly. Two weeks ago, it was the air compressor, last month it was the cooling tower, also last month one of the machines lost it's memory. The robots sometimes spaz out. It's always something at startup time, large or small. First shift loses at least a half hour of production, they might lose half the shift if things don't settle down. To much humidity in the plastic is a very common problem. First shift maintenance comes in three hours early to turn the dryers on, and that is just not enough.
Ehhh - I can't tell them how to run the plant, but some of this stuff should be so obvious. It's better to staff the plant with a skeleton crew, producing the minimum, just to keep everything running, than to shut down and start up again.
(Score: 2) by DECbot on Saturday October 31 2015, @02:34AM
Compared to automotive, semiconductor startup after a fab slowdown is much worse. Years ago back when I was still in semiconductors, our customer idled their dram/nand flash plant for the month of December to clear some of their inventory and ideally save some cash. Since production was slow, none of the equipment had any of its PMs due (after XXX runs do pm yyy). So once production started ramping up again, every thing was failing for particles, requiring reactive maintenance for everything and it took about 3 months before the fab started running smoothly again. So much for saving money.
cats~$ sudo chown -R us /home/base
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 30 2015, @03:47PM
Apple or Google/Alphabet are prime candidates. The fact that they are starting up their own car operations makes them more likely to be interested in buying Tesla, not less.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by SanityCheck on Friday October 30 2015, @04:07PM
You may be right, but I rather not have that happen. See I want a fuckin' car, not an Ad-laden, piece of spyware on 4 wheels. If neither one touches Tesla, I will be very very happy.
(Score: 2) by BasilBrush on Friday October 30 2015, @05:19PM
Well that's only an argument against Google. But I wouldn't want to see Apple buy them either. Because it'll be far more interesting to have Tesla and Apple as competitors, seeking to outdo each other.
Hurrah! Quoting works now!
(Score: 2) by SanityCheck on Friday October 30 2015, @05:37PM
Well let me write an argument more tailored towards Apple:
"Siri, please navigate me to nearest McDonalds"
"I'm sorry, I cannot do that as you have not subscribed to google Navigation"
(Score: 3, Touché) by BasilBrush on Friday October 30 2015, @06:31PM
Why would Apple care if you're subscribed to Google Navigation.
Hurrah! Quoting works now!
(Score: 2) by SanityCheck on Friday October 30 2015, @06:38PM
Freudian slip :/
(Score: 3, Interesting) by urza9814 on Friday October 30 2015, @05:51PM
Really? [apple.com]
(Score: 4, Insightful) by BasilBrush on Friday October 30 2015, @06:29PM
Yes really. Apple has iAd as a tiny part of what they do. Google is a company who's entire business is advertising.
Hurrah! Quoting works now!
(Score: 3, Insightful) by novak on Friday October 30 2015, @08:26PM
I also wouldn't want an apple product because I hate the walled garden. If you think it's not a big deal, look at how fast software updates bog down and kill an iphone. Now imagine this happening to your ~three-year old ~$50k car.
I really can't imagine buying a something as much of a long-term investment like a car from companies as notoriously unreliable and user-hostile as google or apple with their planned obsolescence and constant change for change's sake.
novak
(Score: 2) by BasilBrush on Saturday October 31 2015, @10:20AM
look at how fast software updates bog down and kill an iphone.
They don't tend to. It was a problem once, with the 4s or the 3gs or something. But generally not a problem. It's more of a thing with PCs.
I'm afraid if you think Apple is unreliable and user hostile, you are just plain wrong. Apple consistently gets the highest customer satisfaction scores in the industry.
Hurrah! Quoting works now!
(Score: 2) by novak on Monday November 02 2015, @01:46AM
It's more of a thing with PCs.
Ah... No. A five year old desktop is still completely functional and overpowered for most applications (not high end gaming, photo editing, HPC, but most stuff). And most of those PCs could easily be upgraded cheaply to do at least some higher end functions.
Apple consistently gets the highest customer satisfaction scores in the industry.
So 99% of the industry is crap. I don't especially mean the hardware industry- but Apple isn't just in the hardware industry, and their hardware doesn't play with any other software. To me, that's already user hostile. On top of that, Apple's software lately has been floundering, to say the least. I've never been impressed by their UIs (unlike many, admittedly) but lately they've been packing in even more eyecandy for zero benefit. That's the definition of "change for change's sake," and what broke some of the old iphones, if I recall. I suppose Apple is less user hostile than google and microsoft, if that's what you're arguing.
novak
(Score: 2, Insightful) by jlv2 on Friday October 30 2015, @04:08PM
The Model S is an exceptional vehicle and a pleasure to drive. I've test driven it twice. I wish I was willing to pay that much for a car, as I would own one now. Instead, I settled for a Nissan LEAF for 1/3 the price. Thus, I still need to take an ICE when I drive on trips of 400+ miles since the LEAF can't do it in a reasonable time, whereas the Model S can (there are Superchargers all along the eastern US interstate system now).
(Score: 4, Interesting) by BasilBrush on Friday October 30 2015, @05:22PM
I wonder why no one has come up with battery trailers for rent. Ones that connect to the EV to extend range. You'd just hire one when you needed the range and hitch it up.
Hurrah! Quoting works now!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 30 2015, @06:07PM
@BasilBrush - 100% Agree!
I was hoping they would put the chargers in there rear, not in the side of the vehicles. Then you could put the small trailer hitch and have the power port available native. We already have a number of nation wide truck rental places that could expand their business too (offering one way trips and such.) You could even have 2 different models, a pure battery pack extender or a high efficiency diesel so you can fill up if doing extra long hauls without needing to swap the trailers.
(Score: 2) by BasilBrush on Saturday October 31 2015, @02:15PM
Yeah, a lot of the EVs have gone for familiarity with ICE cars with the fuel port on the side. Much like the whole shape of EVs currently mimics ICE cars when they don't need to.
The Leaf though went different with the charger at the front under the marque badge. Even worse for this concept!
But trailer hitches come equipped with a socket for car electrics. I guess there would be another high voltage one installed the other side for this purpose.
Hurrah! Quoting works now!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 31 2015, @08:40AM
Toyota developed one, but it appears to have died with the electric Rav4.
Rav Long Ranger Hybridizing Trailer [evnut.com]
(Score: 2) by BasilBrush on Saturday October 31 2015, @02:09PM
Interesting. Perhaps it's just too soon for this to take off. Not enough EVs on the road to sustain the concept yet.
Hurrah! Quoting works now!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 30 2015, @04:18PM
The have 'prefect" score on Consumer Reports: http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/tesla-model-s-p85d.htm [consumerreports.org]
Actually, went over 100, to 103 so Consumer Reports had to change the scale.
"Would" you buy it again: 97% yes. Looks like it wioes the floor with all other brands BMW, Mercedes, GM... http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/tesla-model-s-p85d-owner-satisfaction.htm [consumerreports.org]
Maybe Bob Lutz is jealous, or they are trying to do with Telsa as car companies did with Tucker. Maybe it is just T at the start of name, oh wait Toyota!
PS: Telsa are built in the old GM plant in Fremont, CA. Then that plant was changed to New Motors when GM and Toyota where building the same car on the line for badging for each brand, The Toyota version sold more and at a higher price then the GM, even though they were incidental and rolled of the same line. Now, Toyota is one of suppliers to Telsa. Small world.
PS: last year: http://www.greenoptimistic.com/last-nail-tesla-toyota-partnership-20141031/ [greenoptimistic.com] Maybe Telsa news is a Hollow-weenie based April Fools joke?
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 30 2015, @05:54PM
Why do you insist on spelling it "Telsa"? Tesla.
(Score: 2) by SanityCheck on Friday October 30 2015, @06:39PM
Used to happen to me all the time back in High School playing C&C Red Alert: "Damn those Telsa Coils!"
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 30 2015, @06:22PM
Not that I'm a big fan of Consumer Reports, but you missed their latest downgrade --
http://www.consumerreports.org/cars/tesla-reliability-doesnt-match-its-high-performance [consumerreports.org]
As part of our Annual Auto Reliability Survey, we received about 1,400 survey responses from Model S owners ...
The main problem areas involved the drivetrain, power equipment, charging equipment, giant iPad-like center console, and body and sunroof squeaks, rattles, and leaks.
Specific areas that scored worse on the 2015 model, compared with the 2014 model in last year’s survey, were the climate control, steering, and suspension systems. Complaints about the drive system have also increased as the cars have aged—specifically for the 2013 model, which was the car’s first full model year. (See more details on the Tesla Model S model page.)
But those problems mostly still fall under Tesla’s four-year/50,000-mile bumper-to-bumper warranty (and eight-year/unlimited mileage battery and drivetrain warranty), so they are generally being corrected at no cost to owners.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 30 2015, @07:22PM
You also missed a point. There are squeaks, hence noisy.. but one person I think hit it on the head...
The car is quiet, so all the normal squeaks are now heard that are in all cars.
(Score: 4, Touché) by Beryllium Sphere (r) on Friday October 30 2015, @04:43PM
Have you ever bought a car because the experience of buying from a dealer was so enjoyable?
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Friday October 30 2015, @05:07PM
Not exactly - but I've known people to pay a little more to support a home town dealership, rather than the mega-dealership at the state capital. I've also known people to avoid dealerships because they were treated shabbily. The dealer can and does make a difference in a lot of sales.
I've not bought a new car in years, I buy program vehicles, or fairly new used cars. I've been treated poorly at some dealerships. I've also found that some dealerships are less honest than others. I have a dealer that I keep returning to, because he has always give me good deals, he treats me well and respectfully, and he also makes good conversation. Not to mention, he almost always has a pot of fresh coffee ready for customers.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Friday October 30 2015, @05:17PM
Me, I would rather never walk into or deal with another dealership in my life. As such, I'm delaying any purchase of a new car until Tesla comes out with the Model 3. Never looking back after that.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2) by BasilBrush on Friday October 30 2015, @05:24PM
I buy used cars, and purely because I hate the idea of both dealerships and haggling with a private trade, I always buy them at auction.
The fact that it's cheaper that way is a side benefit.
Hurrah! Quoting works now!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 30 2015, @09:45PM
No, never. And I don't buy from a dealer, ever. I made a promise to myself a long time, ago, always buy used and never pay more than you have cash for. So, I'll always have used vehicles, and have to do maintenance, but that's ok - I like working on cars.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Coligny on Saturday October 31 2015, @03:07AM
Nearly cancelled a purchase because of the dealership for my current car. Should have they are assholes. But the car is great so... (Only one Mitsubishi dealership in my part of town)
Honda lost me to chainsmoking countryside hicks dealership.
Suzuki guys didn't have time to speak with me, just threw me the keys and a map for a test drive... On my own !?
Would have stayed with Nissan who felt like family... But the car lineup was/still is appaling... Plus the CEO (Gargamel) is a grade A basterd.
If I wanted to be moderated by mor0nic groupthinking retards I would still be on Digg and Reddshit.
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Tuesday November 03 2015, @12:50PM
What's wrong in that. A mate here was eyeing up a 'vette on a friday afternoon, the dealier threw the keys at him and just said "don't come back till the tank's empty". He bought it on the monday morning. The last thing you want is a dealer going blah-blah-blah in your ear.
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 3, Interesting) by gman003 on Friday October 30 2015, @05:58PM
The first major claim is that company-owned stores are intrinsically unprofitable. This may be the historic trend, but it is not impossible. This can be proven simply by commutation - a business's profitability does not depend on who owns it, and there are a large number of franchised car dealerships making quite a bit of profit. An intrinsically unprofitable business will be unprofitable no matter who owns it. In fact, the laws of economics indicate that, all else being equal, a franchised dealership should be *less* profitable than a manufacturer-owned one, due to additional overhead and inefficiencies.
Moreover, many of the costs of a traditional dealership are not born by Tesla. Because they serve more as a try-before-you-buy for a limited number of models, they require far less real estate (the cost is slightly offset by the increased cost of delivering direct-to-customer, but this is negligible at current sales volume). As the cars require significantly less maintenance than combustion-engine cars, they require far less service center throughput, meaning fewer, smaller service centers.
One conclusion he makes is correct: Tesla needs to produce a lower-cost, high-volume vehicle. Where he errs is in his proposed technical design. He starts by (correctly) identifying the battery as the largest cost in the bill of materials. Reducing the battery size reduces capacity, which reduces range. To compensate for the reduced range, he proposes a combustion-engine generator. While this would indeed decrease the sale price of the car, it would also drastically increase ongoing costs - chiefly in maintenance, negating all the advantages of Tesla's current business model.
Tesla's *actual* plan starts from the same point. They need a high-volume, low-cost car, and the biggest cost to reduce is the battery. So they're going long on high-volume, with the Gigafactory, to drive down the cost of batteries without compromising capacity. This could also make them profitable even if other companies make better electric cars and drive them out of the market - by owning the factory that produces the parts, Tesla will profit from almost any electric vehicle, or even high-electric-capacity hybrids.
In short, these suggestions are what one would expect to see from a traditional car company executive: make the car more like a "traditional" car, make the company more like a "traditional" company, and then over-extrapolate on historic trends to arrive at a conclusion that directly contradicts actual economics.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 30 2015, @08:13PM
Ford received a loan of $5.9 billion from the government, to re-tool its factories.[1] GM and Chrysler received $17.5 billion in bail-out funds in 2008.[2] In 1980 and 1981, Chrysler had received $1.2 billion in loan guarantees from its Uncle Sam.[3] Supposing Tesla faces insolvency, could it be in the public interest to bail them out?
[1] http://www.factcheck.org/2011/09/ford-motor-co-does-u-turn-on-bailouts/ [factcheck.org]
[2] http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2012-10-09/ford-would-have-shut-without-auto-bailouts-rattner-says [bloomberg.com]
[3] http://www.nytimes.com/1983/08/12/business/us-to-sell-its-chrysler-warrants.html [nytimes.com]