What will be the first day that more posts and replies come in to the Model X forum than the Model S forum?? 99 quatloos or similar prize for the closest guess.
Never going to happen.
MS has a 2+ year head start and will always have more on the road.
How do I collect my winnings?
July 14, 2015.
The day I get my X, the posts will be all from me.
It's the opposite.
Once I got my MS I stopped posting altogether. I was just too busy driving and enjoying my new car. With my MX order I'm back to getting info on when it may start production....so I'm back reading and posting.
Same will happen with the MX.
I won the prize so pay up!
The proof of the pudding will be in the eating. Let's see the ramp after the reveal! If it plateaus, and the delta with "MS" starts to widen, you win. Otherwise, you're the first elimination for falling flat on your face at the starting gate. >:-p
(Reveal of the production model, of course.)
Keep in mind that the MX' volume is projected at 3X the MS', forever.
Given the above, fair guess!
@ Brian H
Funnier is that it took you 4 different posts to get all your thoughts out....HAHA
Trigger happy Submit buttonning.
This is a good question. I for one am spending as much if not more time checking the Model X forum than the Model S forum. After ~2 years on the Model S forum, coming across non-reptitive posts on the Model S forum are hard to come by.
Now to the question at hand. If it is the number of posts per day, I predict that the Model X forum will surpass the Model S forum q3 2015. If it is total posts from time zero, then I think it will be much longer, say q3 2016. By then the Model III forum may start to take over and beat both quickly.
@mdemetri, I think the purpose of the forum is for new adopters to discuss, learn and contemplate a whole new vehicle design from a new car company that doesn't really have a marketing budget. Tesla growth has been mainly due to word of mouth, which the forum helps a lot.
I'm thinking that once the Model III comes out, Tesla might be a more main-stream concept having 2.5 models already under their belt (I consider the Roadster a half model because the body came from Lotus). Therefore, I think the forum will become less used after the Model X and Tesla would probably begin to use more traditional marketing techniques to get the word out.
Each new Tesla owner tells dozens of people about the car. "Traditional" makers would kill in broad daylight for that kind of marketing.
@Brian H, I agree that the word-of-mouth free advertising that Tesla currently enjoys is the envy of the automotive world. However, if Tesla wants to move from selling hundreds of cars/month to thousands/month, they will need more than word-of-mouth to get there.
Right now, they can't keep up with demand, so word-of-mouth advertising is totally fine. But I suspect that in 3-5 years, they'll be able to ramp up production to the point where they will need to do more traditional/mainstream marketing.
vandacca wrote, "But I suspect that in 3-5 years, they'll be able to ramp up production to the point where they will need to do more traditional/mainstream marketing."
Nah. No advertising. It obfuscates.
Tesla Motors illuminates.
What they might do is give owners something for a referral like a free annual service visit or 1 year service extension or some other perquisite. Owners are the best advertisement for the company.
Based of all the information I have read over the past 2 months,an educated guess for the wait time for a Model X if ordered today is 25 months.
@Red Sage and @georgehawley, I agree with you both that Tesla owners are the best advertisement for the company, but if Tesla wants to take the Model III to the next level (i.e. Sell an order of magnitude more than Model-X), word-of-mouth is just not going to be enough. They have to reach more mainstream people and sell them a car (through other forms of advertising, including their retail stores) because even if every existing Tesla owner were able to sell 3 Model III vehicles, that still wouldn't be enough to reach the numbers that they are targeting. Marketing from Tesla, if done right, will illuminate.
@vandacca - I am not so sure about that; I have already sold at least 10 Model III's by word of mouth (i.e. - after a ride in my Model S, the newly enlighten want to buy a Tesla the minute they can afford it).
Yes, false conclusion. Cost per sale is usually about 20% of the total; free publicity and SuperChargers and wildfire word-of-mouth will do fine. A mere order of magnitude more than MX is child's play. Remember that's after 2-3 years of real-world eating of the pudding in public as proof!
"...if Tesla wants to take the Model III to the next level (i.e. Sell an order of magnitude more than Model-X), word-of-mouth is just not going to be enough."
Sure it will. There's this thing called the internet, you see...? Even the NSA and FBI use it. People just can't help but blab on, and on, and on again -- incessantly about the things they like the most. And people love Tesla Motors. Even the ones that hate the company want the cars. And trust that when the Model X starts appearing on TMZ, in red carpet arrival shows, in music videos, in commercials (for other products, like tires), in addition to appearances in movies, and on television it will make the early 1990s rush for an Eddie Bauer Edition Emerald Green Ford Explorer XL look like seniors lawnbowling at Roxbury Park.
The Model X will bring Tesla Motors to the attention of everyone in America that has somehow managed to not notice the introduction of the Model S. The Model X will introduce the world to the practicality of electric transit. That will cause them to research Tesla Motors. By this time in 2017 everyone and their Grandmother's Sister Sarah will be clamoring for the Model ≡.
+1. Red S
Tesla, I believe will be the rare exception that will continue to be back ordered well into the 2020s without a marketing campaign. For starters, there will be about 180,000 to 200,000 S's and X's on the road before the first Model ≡ rolls out of Fremont. That's a lot of photo ops and word of mouth. Great story- Great Company, Great Cars, Eco-friendly, within reach of more and more people yada, yada. All contingent on continued execution on or near to plan. I'm all in.
@mdemetri, @Brian H, @Red Sage, @georgehawley, I would love nothing more than to be proven wrong on this topic. I would love Tesla to continue as they are today and be successful without having to invest marketing resources. However, I feel you guys are assuming a static landscape, very similar to today's market. While the competition today is insignificant, I fear that by 2017 there will be more competition from the likes of BMW, Toyota (Prius), Mitsubishi, Audi, etc.
The thing I love about Tesla is that it was designed from the start to be an electric vehicle, so they have designed a much smarter and more practical automobile. BMW has now done the same and I'm sure most of the automotive companies are feverishly working on new vehicles for 2016/2017. In my opinion, it will take a long time for them to catch up to Tesla, but they can easily compete with Tesla by throwing in more marketing dollars.
I have seen this scenario play out many times. Lotus 123 was much better then Excel, WordPerfect was much better than Word, Netscape was much better than Internet Explorer. Microsoft's marketing machine could decimate the competition, no matter how good the competition was.
I hope I'm proven wrong, but at some point Tesla is going to have to grow up and play the same game as the big automotive companies.
Agree with all your S/W e.g.s, but cars are a different proposition. The clincher in a Tesla sale is a test drive, and almost all potential buyers will have one.
Prediction: Tesla won't be demand-constrained for at least one decade, maybe several, or never. ;)
Folks, I have to agree with @vandacca. To sell anything even half way toward 500,000 cars a year, Tesla will have to change its marketing approach. Even with thousands of happy Model S, Model X and Model ≡ owners evangelizing the products, it will take traditional marketing to bring in that kind of numbers of buyers against the noise of the competition that will be available in the marketplace. The good thing is they have evangelists like us to keep their marketing budget down for now.
vandacca wrote, "While the competition today is insignificant, I fear that by 2017 there will be more competition from the likes of BMW, Toyota (Prius), Mitsubishi, Audi, etc."
Nope. I have no such fear. They'll all keep making hybrids. They might add a handful more batteries to each one. The Prius PHEV might even go over half the battery capacity of today's Chevrolet Volt. There might even be a BMW i5 REX that manages as much as a third the range of the Prius by then. But competition for the Tesla Model ≡? No.
Mitsubishi has yet to bring their most popular hybrid, the Outlander PHEV, to North America. The i-Miev sold 1,197 units in 2013, and so far only 213 this year.
Volkswagen will finally bring an e-Golf to the US. But it is yet another gimped EV, just like all the rest.
AUDI has used the e-Tron monicker for years to promote a move to electric drive. Yet the cars never seem to materialize. And now they say we have to wait even longer... Their 'Tesla Killer' is due to arrive around 2017. We'll see. My guess is it will be another hybrid or turbo-diesel.
vandacca wrote, "BMW has now done the same and I'm sure most of the automotive companies are feverishly working on new vehicles for 2016/2017."
I think BMW is working on another generation of the 3-Series for that time frame, since the current one came out in 2012. They'll probably tune the ActiveHybrid 3 to actually get better fuel economy and range than the 320i that costs $17,150 less than it today. They'll boost the turbos on the 328i so that it gets closer to 300 HP, and the 335i so that it approaches or exceeds 350 HP. BMW charges around 50 grand for the i3 REX -- which has maybe ten miles more range than the discontinued Model S 40. They will have nothing better come 2017.
vandacca wrote, "Microsoft's marketing machine could decimate the competition, no matter how good the competition was."
Completely different market focus. None of the advantages or tactics that traditional automobile manufacturers employ will work against Tesla Motors. They only work when everyone accepts that they must 'play by the same rules' and literally 'from the same playbook'. When the Atari ST attacked the Commodore Amiga, all they did was weaken both user bases, so that the IBM AT gained even more market share hand over fist, and the Apple Macintosh swept up the crumbs, while the Apple IIGS faded into the background.
No matter how often people point to the LEAF, Prius, or i3 -- none of them is a serious threat to Tesla Model ≡ at all. Tesla is better off positioning their cars as if they are the only cars in the world, the only ones that matter, and not comparing them to anyone else at all. Test drives by potential Customers will allow them to make their own comparisons, and make their own informed decisions.
Advertising obfuscates. It is designed to sell people things they don't need to buy. Marketing illuminates. It is designed to inform people of things they were not aware of... There is no reason to change the marketing strategy for Tesla products.
People who are potential Customers of Tesla Motors will make their own comparisons, draw their own conclusions, and choose their own categories by which to measure the merit of the products they offer. Tesla's cars will not be for everyone. They will be for a lot more people than Naysayers can perceive. They will be for a lot more people than
vandacca wrote, "I hope I'm proven wrong, but at some point Tesla is going to have to grow up and play the same game as the big automotive companies."
No, no, no, no, no, no... NO. The last thing that anyone or any entity should do in today's world is either 'grow up' or 'play the same game' as everyone else. That expectation always leads to stagnation. You'd might as well suggest that Tesla 'give up' and 'give in' to complacency in favor of innovation.
The path to success for Tesla Motors will not be found by following in the footsteps of others. It will be gleaned by forging ahead as a leader. You can not foster the future with both feet in the past. You must step forward, boldly, into territories that have not been trailblazed by others before. I understand it may seem like a risk to those who don't see the path. Understand that Elon Musk has a vision and has plotted a route to reach it. Nothing will stop him.
Tedsla wrote, "...it will take traditional marketing to bring in that kind of numbers of buyers against the noise of the competition that will be available in the marketplace."
No. Once again, I understand why you may believe this. You have been told about the importance of advertising your entire life. My point is that it is a complete fallacy.
Nothing is promoted to a higher level than the advertising business itself, with signs all over that read, "YOUR NAME HERE!" It is a lie that is perpetuated by an advertising industry that has marketed itself as the 'only chance' and the 'only means' by which anyone can become successful. It is predicated upon the idea that, "The more you tell, the more you sell!" It mandates an automobile racing industry that proclaims, "Win on Sunday, Sell on Monday!" It is continued with the support of a management mindset that is based upon identifying a narrow demographic as the intended audience or target market for your products. It is positively reinforced at every turn due to the presence of print advertisements, radio advertisements, television advertisements, web advertisements, billboard advertisements, poster advertisements, banner advertisements, animated TV BUG advertisements, TV bumper advertisements, playing field advertisements... No one is a bigger fan of advertising than an advertising executive that shows you the charts and graphs of 'results' and then asks for a certified check.
Here the thing is:
If your sales are lower, because you aren't advertising, that means you are doing something wrong.
If your Customers forget you exist, because you aren't advertising, that means you are doing something wrong.
If you are counting on repeat business, and can't get it without advertising, that means you are doing something wrong.
If you must validate the worth of your products by comparing them to those of your competitors in your advertisements, you are doing something wrong.
Advertising agencies will never point out these truths to you. They'll say you need to spend more money -- on advertising. Sure. That will fix... everything.
What? Have you got your head in a jar or what? (Brain actually)
The crossover point between the S vs X posts will take place, wait for it....when it takes place.
Ha Ha!! My guess really is 7-18-2015.
Whats the conversion rate for the Quatloo in US $?
@Red Sage, well written follow-up. I do agree with most of what you've written. I don't believe that traditional marketing/advertising works for people like you and me and probably most people in this forum. However, we are a small minority. Marketing has evolved over many years and while I hate to admit this, I've accepted that it actually does work for the majority of the people. I agree that there are a lot of unscrupulous tactics and techniques that have very questionable results, but there are also highly researched techniques that do have merit.
I'm sure that if Tesla decides to enhance their marketing (beyond sending out emails), they will try to maximize their returns and only use marketing vehicles with proven track records. Maybe it's direct marketing, maybe it's some form of TV or Web marketing, maybe it's product placement, etc.
Anyway, there is no denying that (a) Microsoft's marketing played a key role in the company's success; (b) Apple success is not 100% due to great products, but their marketing as well; and (c) the tobacco company's marketing prior to 1980, while underhanded, was still effective in making smoking a sexy past-time.
This marketing would not be directed to you and me, but rather the masses out there that may not be as informed of EV technology.
Thanks for the great discussion!
Word-of-mouth overrides and overrules advertising. Elon's secret for 'branding' to generate it is to make compelling products that people want and buy.
The quatloo conversion rate to USD is whatever I can afford at the time.
I believe a single Quatloo (⟐) is approximately equal to 50,000,000,000 Woolong (₩), or 760,000,000 GUC (⟇), or 100,000,000 Double Dollars ($$), which is maybe 42 Meseta (∆).
@Brian H, you mentioned, "...make compelling products that people want..."
Sounds very similar to Apple's strategy. They have a large marketing budget. :)
I bring up computer related comparisons because Elon was from that industry (PayPal), he uses the same techniques as the computer industry (alphas, betas, Over-the-Air software updates, etc.) and because he is trying to be as disruptive as that industry.
I realize that we may have slight differences in opinion. I'm okay with that. In fact, I hope I'm wrong.
@Red Sage - Your last post reminded me of what it's like to figure out the final cost of a vehicle from a tradition car dealership.
Yabbut -- Apple spent much of its late youth being pushed to the wall by MS and the clones thereof. Early days, but I see no signs of similar pressure on Tesla, yet. Also, this gets into the competition vs transformation issue: I don't recall Apple ever having a 'mission' to remake society, much less opening its patents to facilitate 'collaboration'. On the contrary ...
@Brian H, you have unwittingly proven my point. :) You have bought into Tesla Marketing if you believe that Tesla's mission is to "remake society". That may be a happy side-effect of their actual mission, which is to turn a healthy profit. They are in fact a publicly traded company and much like Apple, they have a loyal following of "fan boys and girls" or disciples to go out and wax poetically about the virtues of their company. Now that is good marketing.
With regards to "opening patents", that is also good marketing. They have only "opened" a few patents all of which are related to the supercharger network, and only if other companies agree to not engage in patent warfare. This was done for the following self-serving reasons:
(a) Firstly, they said they would not sue other companies who use these patents as long as they don't engage in patent warfare. Unfortunately, this statement is not legally binding, and Tesla can quite easily change their mind and sue whomever they wish.
(b) Tesla open-sourced only very specific patents relating to the super-charger networks in the hopes that other companies will build superchargers that are compatible with Teslas. This would allow Tesla drivers to charge at third-party super-charging stations, which is good for Tesla.
(c) Tesla is still a small company and would be vulnerable to patent lawsuits. This "gesture" of good-will may help convince other companies from engaging in lawsuits against them, but l personally don't think it will have much of an effect.
Finally, if you ever get a chance to speak to a true Apple fan-boy, you'll understand that Apple is much more of a transformative company than Tesla. Not only did Apple introduce and popularize the original GUI window interface, the mouse, the touch interface, postscript fonts, the iPhone, iPad, etc. They also did all this while being environmentally friendly and socially responsible, at least much more than their competitors. Their new office building will also use 100% renewable energy. In my opinion, Apple has transformed our lives more than Tesla, but they have been at it a lot longer, so things may change in the next 20 years.
Who knows, maybe we'll all be driven around in self-driving electric vehicles, contemplating our next vacation to Mars. :)
...and one more thing...
There is a good reason why most phones today look like iPhones; most tablets look like iPads; most MP3 players look like iPods; most laptops look like Macbook Pros and Macbook Airs; most desktop interfaces look like MacOS; most touch interfaces look like iOS; etc...
Now that's transformative. If that doesn't convince you, watch the latest keynote from Apple and see how they present themselves as transformers.
Someone using the name vandacca rather uncharacteristically posted, "You have bought into Tesla Marketing if you believe that Tesla's mission is to 'remake society'. That may be a happy side-effect of their actual mission, which is to turn a healthy profit."
Well, actually... I'm pretty sure that the company's mission is outlined in their original SEC filing when they became a publicly traded entity. Unlike other corporations, it does not list profit as a motivation, or even an expectation. Tesla Motors and the officers of the company are very careful to point out any and all possible risks of failure, no matter how remote, while at the same time being optimistic about their goals. They never project a time or date for issuing dividends. They instead continually speak about how the company will reinvest for the sake of expansion, for years to come. I don't think the goal is to 'remake society', but instead to change the paradigm of transportation and move the world away from fossil fuels and toward sustainable, renewable energy, such as solar power. So really, the 'happy side-effect' of building a really cool product is that you can make a profit -- not the other way around.
The person apparently called vandacca also wrote rather inaccurately, "Not only did Apple introduce and popularize the original GUI window interface, the mouse, the touch interface, postscript fonts, the iPhone, iPad, etc."
No. Xerox introduced the original Graphical User Interface, at least ten years before Apple Lisa or Macintosh were developed. It was a field trip to Xerox facilities that made Apple's founders aware of the potential for that technology. Xerox created the mouse, and the digitizer stylus, and icons for a GUI. That was NOT done by Apple.
What Apple popularized, along with Commodore and Tandy, was the notion of using a personal, home computer based on microprocessors used as the CPU.
PostScript is a vector graphics programming language. It was adopted to the use of different typestyles on computer systems. It was not developed or invented or created by Apple in any way, shape, or form.
Touch screen interfaces were not developed by Apple.
@Red Sage, yes Xerox did invent the mouse and a rather rudimentary GUI interface, but they never introduced it to the world. Apple was given a Xerox demo and realized they had a diamond in the rough. They took that idea and expanded on it and made it a finished product. I guess that was one of the lessons that Steve Jobs learned when they first tried to sell the Apple I.
The same was true of pretty much everything Apple has released. They see the importance of certain individual features and bring together many other elements to release a finished product that is greater than the sum of it's parts. Technically they don't invent individual elements, but they figure out how to make them work together. But I don't want to get into another long post on what is the 2nd tangent to the original post. :)
Anyway, don't get me wrong, I do like most Apple products and Tesla cars. So much so, I've put down a deposit on the Model S and now the Model X. I like the fact that these vehicles are smartly designed from the ground up as an electric vehicle, rather than slapping batteries in an ICE design. In my opinion, this is the first time the automobile has seen a significant change in many decades.
Back to the original thread...I was shocked yesterday when I read a new Model-S thread that was only 2 days old. There was already 4 pages of comments, which surprised me for such a new thread. Maybe the Model X forum will become much more popular once there are cars on the road.
My guess: Nov 11, 2015 is the first day when there are more Model-X posts than Model-S. Maybe there will be days Model-S takes the lead again, but by January 2016, the Model-X thread will have consistently more posts.
Not to put too fine a point on it but I believe that a guy named Englebart invented the mouse at Stanford Research Institute but why clutter this fine thread with facts. When Tesla merges the Model X and S threads next year, the lottery will be moot or kaput, whichever comes first.:-)).
The share market is profit oriented, as are most shareholders. But your insistence it was created and continues to expand to maximize profit is projection. Profit is earned return for effort expended and value provided. It is fine as a goal -- but you can't take it with you, even if you're Pharaoh. Read 'Ozymandias' a few times, aloud.
Elon and his supporters controlling TMI are foregoing cash in favour of reinvestment. To others' dismay, he has said he'd be happy to be put out of business by better EVs made elsewhere, so he could spend more time on multi-planetarianism. ;p
Brian H and @Red Sage I hope you're right.
With regards to Nov 11, 2015, I hope I'm right and get to spend my 99 quatloos on some nice winter tires for my Model-X. :)
Dan: Sell a few cars while you are waiting.
georgehawley, I've already sold a Model-S to my younger brother, although I feel a bit guilty because he missed out on all the new features like powered-rearview mirrors, parking sensors, lane departure warning, speed assist, etc. I've also educated many more and there is a chance that 2-3 more Model-S will be arriving in my neighbourhood.
Of course, when I actually have a Model-X to show, it will be easier. ;)
You are living proof of the power of word of mouth advertising. If every owner who buys a Model S this year persuades another person to order one, that could produce enough demand along with Model X reservations to sell out for 2015 (maybe 60 K vehicles?) If every 2015 purchaser and 2014 purchaser persuades one person to buy a Tesla, production capacity for 2016 (maybe 100K vehicles) will be nearly accounted for and so on. Then there are overachievers like you. Tesla may advertise someday but production capacity will have to grow each year by more than the cumulative number of prior shipments, dependent on my buy one, sell one a year premise, which doen't seem very demanding. I don't see that happening for a while.