Who writes this crap? I can't even call it fake news, this is BS!!
Read for laughs : http://www.businessinsider. com/tesla-will-suffer-same-fate-as-ford-2018-1
It’s an opinion prince, and has an obvious bias.
The risks he writes about are still real - though much less likely than he states. Tesla has a huge first-mover advantage, and the Supercharger Network makes every other BarV-manufacturer an also-ran.
For the time-being
GM - or any other large maker - *could* pull out all the stops and copy what Tesla is doing at a much larger scale,”. They have not done so and aren’t likely to do so, so long as they are making their numbers and keeping their core customers (the dealers) happy and profitable.
When they see an opportunity, they’ll take it. Sure, they’ll have to play catch-up. By they have the capacity and the deep pockets and the engineering capability to do so almost at will.
They just don’t have the will.
Tesla will need to stay ahead of some very large, we’ll-heeled and hungry competition in the years to come.
To me, that’s a great thing! It will keep the innovation flowing, and we as customers reap the benefits
Pardon typos - that was done on an iPhone in the midst of dinner and distracting conversation! ;-D
The risks to Tesla the article talks about are real. This is not lost on Musk or the other visionaries guiding Tesla’s future. It’s going to be a fierce battle with some surprise winners and losers. The interesting part is that Tesla wants the others to succeed. I don’t know how that is going to affect the how things will eventually work out, but I expect that Tesla will continue to thrive on the intense loyalty they have earned.
Earned is right. Tesla has working prototypes and a history of turning vision into successful tech. Everyone else has been “revealing” concepts composed of pixels and breathlless “Tesla-killer” specifications backed by hope (or fear) not engineering.
The article grossly misrepresents the state of GM's autonomous car. GM does not have a level 5 car, nobody does. The future isn't now.
As for the rest of the article, it could very well be true. Why hasn't Ford spent any meaningful amount of time on this tech? or Toyota? Toyota had a hybrid car out two decades ago but despite tinkering with an EV in the Rav4, they couldn't care less. They were putting traction packs in cars before Tesla was a company, so the only thing stopping Toyota right now is the will.
Five years from now all the major auto brands will still be around, they'll all have autonomous (at least level 4) cars, and a growing fleet of EV to choose from. Far from crossing the finish line with the model 3, the race may only be starting for Tesla.
If Tesla shows the way to a more sustainable future they would have met their mission statement. As long as they push the other companies to innovate, they'll have a market. So, what's the article about now? To me, this is junk info that says something happened 80-100 years ago, it might happen again. The headline is quite troubling, almost sounding as though Tesla's going to crash tomorrow.
To be fair to Ford, despite a smaller market share Ford is as healthy a car company as any other.
Articles like this are headline grabbers - getting people to read the article.
There is a huge difference between Ford and Tesla. Ford produced their cars at a time when the pace of innovation was relatively slow - and they failed to innovate enough (both from a vehicle technology side and on the business side) to prevent being overtaken by GM.
Unlike Ford, Tesla is innovating at a much faster pace than the established manufacturers - rolling out new capabilities continuously. while the other manufacturers are still locked into their "model year" strategy. Plus, Tesla is willing to install "beta" capabilities in cars, so that future software updates can retrofit existing vehicles with new features (like AP, EAP and FSD).
Tesla has some huge risks - and when other manufacturers start producing competitive long range EVs, unless Tesla addresses those risks, there is a strong possibility they could lose momentum and cede market share. The best technology doesn't always win (like when Beta lost out to VHS).
While Tesla releases software frequently - the process has some major flaws. Owners have no real control over when they receive software updates - and have no information on what's included in the updates (not even knowing what update is ready to be installed before they hit the INSTALL button). And when releases are distributed, they often have major bugs and design flaws.
Today, Tesla is missing major functionality that's present in other cars, sometimes for over 10 years.
The navigation software (which is supposed to be replaced soon) is missing major features like waypoints and route customization - features I had in my our Toyota/Lexus cars over 10 years ago.
Smartphone integration is pretty minimalist - other than providing access to calendar events, the rest of the integration is behind other manufacturers. Items like text-to-voice and voice-to-text for text messaging & e-mails are important safety features - plus they allow use of text messaging & e-mails while the car is moving - which is illegal in a growing number of areas.
And then there's screen mirroring - something Musk promised several years ago. The only competing long range EV on the market today - the Bolt (which lacks a long range charging network) has both Apple CarPlay and Android Auto - and while those features may not be that great - that capability is becoming standard with other manufacturers.
Tesla's software shortcoming were understandable 5 years ago when the Model S was first introduced - Tesla was a relatively small company at the time - with limited resources - and trying to aggressively get new capabilities out with a small development team.
It's 5 years later - Tesla now has S/3/X vehicles - plus planning to introduce Y, Semi and Roadster 2.0 over the next few years. And other manufacturers will soon have competing long range EVs - and likely start having long distance charging.
So, is Tesla at risk of being overtaken, like Ford?
Yes - but they still have their future in their hands - and by continuing to innovate at a faster pace than their competitors - they should be able to weather storm (though they will have a challenging period after Tesla loses the $7500 EV tax credit - and will be at a price disadvantage for a while).
If GM is catching up so well, why do they buy EV kits from LG? And pay a pretty price in the process? There’s no good way to make that up in volume...
Anything from SeekingAlpha or BusinessInsider are hardly ever anything authentic. Pretty much just business based opinions to make people like you, think something is going to happen, in the attempt of making you lose any amount of faith in the company, to either not purchase their products, or perhaps sell stock to devaluate the company.
Not that i am trying to suggest anything negative should be ignored, but these particular sources have a very long history of developing extremely opinionated articles that are not a source of fact, but are essentially like a statistical analysis to portray a specific message based on opinion. The information portrayed in the articles might NOT BE WRONG, but the way its interpreted and given to the reader, is in a matter that sends a very specific message that is not a message of fact, but a message of opinion.
@bp - concerning CarPlay and Android Auto, I think Tesla realizes that handy 3rd parties control of a large section of your user experience is a bad choice as cors evolve into computers on wheels. The reason Apple products command a premium is because they control all the hardware and software allowing them to craft unique products. Tesla will never be a mass market EV maker. Instead they want to be the showcase EV maker, creating bleeding edge vehicles that blow peoples minds (doesn’t that that kind of company is a siren call to the most talented EE graduates each year!)
They’re in the catbird seat and soon enough their EVs is going to be just a fraction of their overall revenue as batteries and solar roofs take off in the next few years. I wish I had Tesla’s problems!
Handing not handy!
Oh how I hate autocorrect!
rgrant: Great questions. I believe GM has no intention to make EVs a viable option toward replacing their current best selling passenger cars, CRUZE and MALIBU, ever. They had their own facility to develop electric motors, and closed it, but used the plans they got to farm out the design to LG for some reason. My guess? Probably to sidestep unions for financial reasons.
GM and every other mainstream ICE manufacturer will continue to nerf their EVs to avoid cannibalizing their bread and butter ICE business. You can bank on it. They have too much invested in upper level management, long term supplier contracts, and Union commitments for skilled labor, let alone pressure from dealers to keep up the status quo.
Design is the most obvious way to hold a car back without falling behind in technology. Even serious engineering efforts like the Bolt are studiously compromised in their design to limit their appeal. Unlike Toyota, GM knows how to make a nice looking car... they just won’t do it for an EV. I don’t see this changing any time soon.
bp: ANALysts have been forecasting since at least 2013 that other manufacturers could overtake Tesla 'any time they wanted to'. That has proven incorrect seemingly, as none of them proclaimed their various 'Tesla Killer' would be available in less than three years for some time. Now, in the wake of Volkswagen being caught cheating with diesel emissions testing, and all the rest due to be caught and punished in a similar fashion, they at least appear to be seeking 'green cred' to partial extent. So, it is now pretty much universally stated that 2020 or later will be the release dates of their 'electrified' fleets.
It is a curious situation. From my perspective too many traditional automobile manufacturers have been in 'wait and see mode' for far too long. They ignored Tesla. They ridiculed Tesla. They dismissed Tesla. None of them realized the errors they made, and most don't realize they made any, and none of them will admit those mistakes or act accordingly. Worst of all they believed their own [BOLSHEVIK] regarding electric vehicles. They spent so much time attempting to prove electric drive would NOT work that they missed precious opportunities to design and build products that did.
All while not accepting that Elon Musk was entirely sincere. He wasn't 'angling to be saved from certain ruin brought on by his folly through having Tesla bought out by a larger company' as so many ANALysts presumed and warned in their self conceived narratives. So many decided they wouldn't fall for it, that they just knew it was a trick, and that they would enjoy watching the whole thing crumble so they could make the most egregious statement from on high, "See? I told you so!"
All these years later, and it still hasn't happened, and those who chose to invest in TSLA have made dough hand over fist, and the ANALysts are angry because their clocks are wrong all day long, and they choose to keep attacking because they can't possibly be wrong on this even though they have never been right, but maybe, just maybe, if they keep at it something horrible will befall Tesla and they can exclaim, "I KNEW IT!!!" But instead, they just look stupid. Day after day, month after month, quarter after quarter, year after year the embarrassment that comes from having undue pride in themselves grows, casting a shadow on their biased 'takes' toward Tesla, exposing their predictions and prognostications and prophesying as the useless drivel it has always been.
They enjoy referring to Tesla as a 'cult'. They refuse to admit their own founding membership in a HaterAde Cult. Some go so far as to claim they only feel disgusted by the unwarranted adulation and praise Tesla recieves in the media, that they have nothing personal against the company, and just feel a professional responsibility to be the voice of reason, offering a singular contrary viewpoint so that the public at large is able to see 'all sides' of Tesla, without the fanboy slant.
They call Elon Musk 'Barnumesque', they say he has charisma, they call him a charlatan, a showman, a huckster, a salesman, a serial entrepreneur... instead of a visionary genius, programmer, economist, engineer, phycisist, self-taught rocket scientist.
Ah, well. Haters gotta hate.
Madatgascar: +42! Correct on all points! The Ultimate Answer to the Ultimate Question of Life, the Universe, an Everything about 'Why Won't Traditional Automobile Manufacturers Work Hard to Surpass Tesla in Time to Prevent Their Own Demise?" Simply put, they don't want to, because true 'Tesla Killers' would also kill off their existing product lines. They are conditioned to believe that is a 'risk' they cannot take, and that it is easier to place roadblocks in Tesla's path and wait for them to stumble, fall, and fail than it is to compete with proper electric vehicles of their own. It's... a STRATEGY.
ReD Couldn't have said it better. Elon is super smart and he's very truthful too. Much more so than anyone in that kind of position. He either dose not say things he can't tell you or he will tell you what he actually believes. A person confident in what he's doing does not need to lie. Everything is actually very simple if you just follow his thought process. A lot of people that do not have the ability to either interpret or to understand what he says and does all got frustrated. No one likes to be stupid, more so for real stupid people.
And yes Tesla wants shared FSD EV on the road asap so each car it makes could replace many ICE cars. GM and everyone else would be crazy to want to do that. All they want is to make cars to supply to the taxi/ride hailing industries besides to not let people to look at it as a low tech company which it really is.
carlk: Thank you. I do wish I could say such things in a less lengthy fashion, though. ;-)
Let's clarify why I despise the characterizations used to disparage Elon Musk...
SHOWMAN -- I doubt Ryan Seacrest has to worry about his job being taken over by Elon Musk any time soon.
CHARISMA -- As a nerd, the most charismatic thing I find about Elon Musk is his willingness to explain things without dumbing them down with analogies. He probably won't be invited to preach on TBN any time soon, or ever.
CHARLATAN -- Those guys sell things that do not exist, and never will. Behold! Tesla Roadster, Model S, Model X, Model 3, PowerWall, PowerPack, Tesla Energy, Supercharger Network...
HUCKSTER -- 'one who sells or advertises something in an aggressive, dishonest, or annoying way' Nah, doesn't really apply. Though I'm sure that those paid by NADA to be NaySayers are certainly annoyed that Elon Musk has aggressively exposed their membership as being entirely unnecessary and shown it is they who are eternally dishonest.
SNAKE OIL SALESMAN -- These guys sell products that are promised to cure ails that they do not. That is more apt for those who continually market HFCEVs as being the zero emissions solution of 'The FUTURE!' without pointing out the grand majority of Hydrogen fuel is acquired through steam reformation of Methane gleaned from petroleum. Electric plug-in battery powered vehicles might get energy from burning fossil fuels, sometimes. More and more often the sources of electricity are becoming cleaner, with the dirtiest fossil fuels being replaced with clean sources. A Tesla can be 'clean' from the nonexistent tailpipe to the Sun. Reformed Hydrogen fuel will always produce Carbon Dioxide as a byproduct, even in the rare instance that Methane comes from biological sources.
SERIAL ENTREPRENEUR -- There is no company Elon Musk has held an interest in as a Founder that he ever wanted to sell. Zip2 and PayPal were sold at the behest of other investors. SolarCity was sold to Tesla to bring their functionality in-house. That eventuality could be gleaned from statements made in Elon Musk's blog post of the Secret Master Plan from 2006. Note that SpaceX and The Boring Company remain closely held entities. They do not exist as fodder to be sold off to Boeing or AMTRAK any more than Tesla Motors was expected to become part of GM or Ford.
But the internet said Tesla is approaching bankruptcy.
On the last one Elon was removed from CEO position at PayPal because investors wanted to sell the company for a quick profit but he wanted to bring the company further into full internet banking. No one had thought of or believed it could be done at that time. Looking back isn't this what the direction every financial institution in the world is going after now? Elon saw the opportunity before anyone did. He actually could have built PayPal into the dominate financial institution in the world like he did with his rocket and electric car companies.
If he hadnt sold Paypal, he never would have had the capital to start those companies when he did.
Until GM sets up a comprehensive supercharging network they won't represent a large threat to Tesla.
All electric vehicle manufacturers will be a valid competition. There are alot of people who dont need long distance charging, and have no intention to use their car for traveling. (existing statistics? taking a wild guess) So long as the companies develop self-driving capabilities, taxi companies will always be in the market for them. I sure hope that companies invest and develop on a serious matter. Although im a big Tesla fan, i want to see some competition.
andy.conner.e, this is America. What people need has no bearing on what people want. Vast numbers of Americans don't need 4X4 SUVs, but they are still incredibly popular. Americans love the idea of "just in case" and "I fully intend to", so they buy 4X4s that never go off-road, with cavernous cargo space that never gets filled, and long range batteries that never fall below 50% charge. We have more dollars than sense.
Taxis and ride share vehicles don't need "long distance charging" but they'll need SuperChargers more than anyone else. (Charging)Time is money.
Thats for them to figure out. Maybe they work out a deal with Tesla where they get those urban superchargers that are lower power than the cross-country ones. I dont know. Not my problem to figure out. But an autonomous income will be valuable enough, and the offset cost of not paying a driver will easily offset the cost of charging time. If there isnt a 100% time consuming demand, the cars could park and charge for 20 min while there arent people requesting rides.
Well, GM beat Ford because Sloan devised an innovated type of corporate structure which offered them an unparalleled competitive advantage. What are they doing now against Tesla - deciding they want to? That's not a competitive advantage - that's bullshit.
I worked at GM in my early career and watched their market share dwindle from 33% down to the current 20%. They've "wanted to" stop the decline this whole time. It wasn't enough then and isn't enough now. It is possible that GM will have some success though not enough to topple Tesla.
The argument that people buy what the want, not what they actually need is the basis for all marketing companies. It is also the basis for Elon designing a very fast car that looks great.
An interesting corollary to this fact is the national supercharger network. Except for trucking, this is the best example of want over need. This from someone who has driven many, many miles across country in a Tesla over the last 5 years. This also must be part of the calculation of any long-term EV maker.
That fact that Tesla has already built an extensive network that is relatively simple and works autonomously means that replicating Tesla's achievement is incredibly costly and economically stupid. CHAdeMO, CCS, & China are all different standards, but none but the Supercharger standard has really had a consistent development plan.
At some point some car maker will 'throw in the towel' and simply partner with Tesla to utilize their existing network. When this happens, Tesla will become the standard, at least in the US. CHAdeMO is actually declining and the quality of the independent chargers is very suspect, CCS doesn't yet have any aggressive development schedule, and China may be able to force its standard in its part of the world, but will face major hurdles elsewhere.
The Tesla supercharger network is currently the most powerful, most elegant, and simplest economic model out there. The shift to a unified paying model was inevitable and lends tremendous power to its becoming something universal in North America. Then Tesla doesn't have to be more than a notable player in the auto market. They never wanted to be the biggest and they don't have to be to be a major innovator.
My reasons for choosing LR are:
2) improved battery longevity
3) available sooner (and hopefully paid for by state/fed incentives)
999) long road trips. I do long road trips rarely, so I’m perfectly happy to rent a vehicle for them.
Your 4th reason is a reason NOT to get LR.
Same fate as Ford? Ummm, aren’t they the only domestic car company that didn’t need us tax payers, to bail them out?
"Tesla is about to suffer the same fate as Ford!!??"
So Tesla will produce 15 million Model 3's as Ford did Model T's?
So glad Elon was able to pivot away from Paypal. Not that banks don’t deserve to be ground into dirt, but i’m enjoying looking at a fantastic future! :)
We've been long-time Tesla supporters and customers - with a late 2012 S P85 and one of the first S 100D's delivered last year. Plus, we're planning to take delivery of a Model 3 soon.
Today, Tesla is the only real choice for buying a long range EV, since the Bolt (the only other choice) has no easy way to charge on long distance trips - and Tesla keeps making that easier and easier as they add more supercharger and destination charger locations.
And Tesla will maintain this advantage for at least another year or two.
My concern is that once other manufacturers start selling competing long range EVs and they work out long distance charging (which will happen at some point), then Tesla loses much of its advantage.
There is a risk Tesla won't be ready to take on other long range EV manufacturers head-on and offer a product that is at least competitive - and preferably superior - to the other manufacturers.
When we get ready to replace our 100D or Model 3 years from now, I hope Tesla has continued to innovate - and they'll again be our first choice for our next EV.
And if they don't - then they could suffer the fate of other technology innovators who lose momentum and get overtaken. Though it's way too early to predict that fate - since Tesla has time to adjust and be ready for the competition when it comes.
bp, early adopters like yourself are to be admired. It is awesome that you had the vision so early on to make that purchase.
For some reason -in spite of the very real possibilities you mention- I am not worried about Tesla being overcome. That's partially because for Elon to achieve his core goal of sustainable transportation, Tesla will have to be overshadowed, to some degree. In the article I posted over the weekend I pulled an Elon quote from 2008 when he said "Until every car on the road is electric, we will not stop". The fuse has been lit. All car makers now know that they must adopt or die. So for the ones who survive that will be a lot of non-tesla vehicles. Which is exactly what Musk wants.
Still, even if Tesla continues to stumble - and yes they do stumble in their headlong path toward the goal line- it seems like you have a far larger window than 2-3 years... just in terms of building a competitive charging network (unless someone wises up and buys into the Sc network). I also suspect that something will shift at some point, and the car maker (Tesla) will mature into a formidable business model that will stave off true competitors. Of course a lot will have to do with the next generation of battery tech. Who will have it first. And how disseminated will the tech be.
And, there is that "magic" around Tesla. It's palpable. It's that "the idea whose time has come" thing. Tesla has some powerful animal spirits in its corner.
And beyond this speculative opinion just laid out, one thing can be said for sure.... Tesla or no Tesla, Elon Musk will likely be contributing to the betterment of humanity as long as he is alive. :>
bp noted, "My concern is that once other manufacturers start selling competing long range EVs and they work out long distance charging (which will happen at some point), then Tesla loses much of its advantage."
Currently, high end companies claiming to release a Tesla Killer two or three years from now are aiming at the point where Tesla was two or three years ago as a technology goal, and they have zero interest in building a similar of electric vehicles, as theirs will all have limited production schedules if they ever arrive. Further, none of them intend to support a fast charging network to any great extent.
The mass market companies that remain are fully dedicated to ICE and will stay that way. The BOLT is nowhere near as capable or attractive as other GM products in its price range. Ford seems stalled in its Energi plug-in program. Chrysler/Dodge believe they have the inherent right to sell as many gas guzzlers as people will buy regardless of fuel efficiency or emissions requirements, which they feel are universally restrictive. Those are just the American manufacturers.
There is no indication that any traditional automobile manufacturers on either side of the Atlantic or Pacific intend to make a conscious effort to build electric vehicles that are substantially more capable, reliable, affordable, or plentiful than their current ICE fleets. Tesla's advantages remain in place as long as potential competitors refuse to put themselves out of the ICE business. Tesla's primary goal in the automotive world is to convince them to make that change. Soon as they do Tesla has won. Until they do, Tesla will whomp their [BEHINDS]. The classic 'carrot & stick' scenario.
Any true Tesla Killer is likewise an Acura Killer, Alfa Romeo Killer, AUDI Killer, BMW Killer, Bugatti Killer, Buick Killer, Cadillac Killer, Chrysler Killer, Dodge Killer, Ferrari Killer, Ford Killer, Genesis Killer, Honda Killer, Hyundai Killer, Infiniti Killer, Jaguar Killer, Kia Killer, Lamborghini Killer, Lexus Killer, Lincoln Killer, Maserati Killer, Mazda Killer, McLaren Killer, Mercedes-Benz Killer, Mitsubishi Killer, Nissan Killer, Porsche Killer, Subaru Killer, Toyota Killer, Volkswagen Killer... ICE KILLER.
The other advantage that Tesla has that by law can not be duplicated or "over taken" by the other companies, is their business model. By law, car companies have to split the profit on their cars with their dealers. Apart from the U.S. Supreme court abolishing the franchise laws, that will never change.
Tesla also doesn't upsell you at every turn. I don't see any dealer being able to comprehend such a concept. I and others have said this before too. Unless the car companies can come up with a way for a dealer to make up for the lost revenue from parts and the service of ICE cars, the dealers are not going to buy any EVs from the car companies.
In Europe a number of traditional car companies have come together to set up a fast charging network. Yet, there is absolutely no talk of that being done here in the states. So, what is the difference.....? In Europe car companies can sell directly to their customers. Dealers here in the states don't want anything to be done to make owning an EV, easy because then you will stop buying the cars they make more money on.
jordanrichard: Both Friends and Family members have defended the purchase of the ICE jalopies they love for decades using the statement, "I can work on it myself!" That's cool and all, assuming you have the skill and time, especially if you enjoy the tinkering and wrenching. It never occurs to them that a car is something they shouldn't have to work on, though. To them, it's just 'normal'.
Red, trust me, I get what your friends and family are saying. I am a graduate of Busted Knuckle Garage university. Now you can chose to not tell them this, but the days of the "shade tree mechanic" are quickly coming to an end. Unless they want to spend for example $8,000 a year to have access to proprietary diagnostic software for a Mercedes, they aren't going to be able to do anything with their cars short of fluid changes and brakes.
Modern ICE cars have so many sensors and limp modes that if something acts up, they have to have the proprietary code/computer to read it to be certain they replace the right component. then there are all of the computer reset procedures that have to be done. The basic job of replacing a car's battery is no longer a simple yank in and out endeavor. If the car is without any battery power for more than a certain amount of time, the computer needs to be reset.
When the posts start getting this long, thats when its time to leave.
"Tesla also doesn't upsell you at every turn."
Tesla has definitely been trying to upsell me (and a lot of other people according to this forum) out of a Model 3 and into a Model S or X.
Definitely too long posts now.
andy.connor.e wrote, "this long"
Wow. Eight characters is too much? I've had ATM PIN numbers that were longer...
@ReD - a lot of the tinkering and wrenching isn’t to fix anything, but more to fine-tune the operation to one’s own preferences.
Though I agree that a car is something you shouldn’t *have* to work on
I don’t think i’d Enjoy a car that I couldn’t tinker with, at least to some extent. There’s always *something* that can be tuned a bit. I hope. Preferably without losing the warranty, Utah i’ll Risk it to fet
This would be awesome as ford had a double short squeeze which sent shares up 100 fold.
When major automakers start to build pure electric full sized pickups and suvs......then Tesla might begin to suffer from competition. I just don't see that happening anytime soon. Meanwhile, Tesla just keeps slowly rolling on with its future plans and leads the way forward.
"This would be awesome as ford had a double short squeeze which sent shares up 100 fold."
Really?? Today's price for F was $12.18. 5 Year high was $18.12 in July 2014.
Remind me when the stock was $0.18 ...
I found this spread for Ford Motor Co (F) stock using the MAX tool at Google...
_0.80 ___ December 19, 1980
33.10 ___ February 12, 1999
12.18 ___ January 12, 2018
For some reason it shows no results prior to January 20, 1978.