Not only will they appreciate in value, Teslas will earn you money while you sleep. [1]
[1] https://futurism.com/the-byte/ride-hailing-tesla-elon-musk
Meanwhile, Teslas are some of the fastest depreciating cars on the market. And Trevor Milton is going to jail for four years.
https://www.cnbc.com/2023/12/18/nikola-founder-trevor-milton...
Comparing Trevor Milton to Elon Musk is also wild. I still vividly remember the Tesla short seller crowd praising Milton as a genius while declaring Elon as a charlatan.
> "The entire infotainment system is a HTML 5 super computer," Milton said. "That's the standard language for computer programmers around the world, so using it let's us build our own chips. And HTML 5 is very secure. Every component is linked on the data network, all speaking the same language. It's not a bunch of separate systems that somehow still manage to communicate."
- Trevor Milton
Source: https://www.truckinginfo.com/330475/whats-behind-the-grille-...
Why is it "wild"?
Milton is going to prison for, basically, lying about the functionality of their truck. It didn't work like he claimed it did, when he claimed it did. But it's not like they don't have a real truck or a real business; they are testing vehicles right now. Nikola still exists. They have trucks on the road.
So why is that such a stretch to compare things he claimed to things Tesla has claimed? You can perhaps argue about the scale or severity of the different claims, but I'd say exaggerated range claims and full-self-driving are also pretty bad:
https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/tesla-ba...
Also, from your linked article:
"One of the experts, [Gregory Pannone], co-authored a study of 21 different brands of electric vehicles, published in April by SAE International, an engineering organization. The research found that, on average, the cars fell short of their advertised ranges by 12.5% in highway driving. The study did not name the brands tested.."
> The study did not name the brands tested..
I was curious why that is. So I did some digging and found this very reassuring info. I'm sure there's no bias right?
[Gregory Pannone]
-Sr. Engineer General Motors
- Engineer/Intern Engineer/Intern BP p.l.c. British multinational oil and gas
- FCA Fiat Chrysler Automobiles logo Head of Fuel Economy, Performance, and P/T Synthesis Chrysler LLC
Yes, those were the crimes he was convicted of. What's your point?
It's because he lied about the operability of the truck and it cost investors money.
>I'm sure there's no bias right?
Yes, it's all a big conspiracy. Tesla zealots are so thick.
What a very nice and compelling ad hominem argument. It's clear that you're very uninformed.
> Yes, it's all a big conspiracy
Questioning about a possible bias is conspiracy talk now? What ever happened to healthy discourse? It seems the level of your knowledge does not go beyond the news headlines.
Buddy, you started this thread calling me "intellectually dishonest", so don't start crying about "healthy discourse" now.
But sure, lay it out for us: you think that the author of the study is biased. So, what does that mean? Did he fabricate the data? What exactly are you implying?
Because you were and it must have struck a nerve. :)
> So don't start crying about "healthy discourse" now.
But I thought "itsoktocry" is that not true anymore?
Because they dropped the prices of new cars by a lot after supply chain issues resolved, price of lithium and other supplies went down. Why is that a bad thing?
Meanwhile Mercedes-Benz CEO said that residual value is more important to them.
Musk: "So I just can't emphasize again how important cost is," Musk said. "It's not an optional thing for most people. It is a necessary thing. We have to make our cars more affordable so that people can buy them."
Why is cheaper EVs a bad thing? Isn't this the exact thing that's making housing super expensive, that rich homeowners are restricting supply so their home(s) keeps appreciating, leading to folks getting squeezed with home costs and rents going up exponentially.
If you were told by the CEO of the company that your car would appreciate, and instead it depreciated at a rate beyond normal, you don't see an issue with that?
Isn't it illegal to overstate official EPA results? Maybe I'm missing something here.
Moreover, this affects ALL 2024 model year battery electric vehicles. There is a 6-page document here that explains it:
https://dis.epa.gov/otaqpub/display_file.jsp?docid=55592&fla...
This was enacted in 2022 but goes into effect this year:
This new policy is applicable to new testing for 2024 model year and later vehicles. It may be applied to new testing for 2023 model year vehicles. *Vehicles utilizing carry-over data may continue to use data generated under previous policy* for as long as the tests are valid (i.e., no changes to the vehicle requiring new MPGe/range testing are required). *Manufacturers who add a new configuration to a test group for 2024 and later must present new test results using this policy*, but existing data can still be used if it is representative".
Don't have a tesla myself, (kia e-niro), but weather will have an enormous impact on range, did a ~400km loop last week, 200km up north, used only 14.7kwh/100km, and the 200km back used more than 21.7kwh/100km. (Tailwind vs headwind)
They were also going to appreciate because Tesla cars would operate as autonomous robot taxis by end of 2020, and it wouldn't make sense to sell a car to a consumer for $35,000 when you could have it earning money 24/7 as a taxi.
The case was basically that for every $35k Model 3 that comes off the lot can be sold for a profit up to $35k, or be added to the robotaxi fleet where it can generate whatever revenue it can produce. For example, if every Model 3 could generate $5/h of profit, then running it 24/7/365 would be $44k.
Also electricity isn't free so that's going to be a substantial code and likely several sets of tires.
This may turn out to be true. Tesla Electric customers report making as much as $150 a day[1], this is with Powerwalls, 13.5KWH capacity. Teslas have 80KWH+ capacity, equivalent of 6 powerwalls. Tesla's have a potential to make a decent amount of money from participating in VPP (Virtual Power Plants).
Coupled with the $25/month plan[2], VPP participation will take advantage of cheap power when its available, supply power back to the grid when its extremely profitable.
Will this work for everyone, no, it won't. Some people are fanatic about using fossil fuels. Will it work for a fraction of the people who might be interested in getting paid. It just might.
[1] Tesla Electric customers report making as much as $150 a day: https://electrek.co/2023/07/05/tesla-electric-customers-repo...
[2] With the Tesla Electric Home Charging Plan, you will: Pay a fixed fee of $25/month for vehicle charging sessions between 10 PM and 6 AM: https://www.tesla.com/support/tesla-electric/vehicle
Tesla continues to trounce every other car manufacturer because despite the fact that us fanboys (and bitterboys) are regularly disappointed at underdelivering on the hype, they still produce the most compelling EV for the price when compared to everyone else.
"Shoot for the moon. Even if you miss, you'll land among the stars."
Tesla delivers. That’s above par for the current course. The problem is Musk’s antics create opportunity for competitors. If he could have the discipline he does with SpaceX, Tesla’s long-term prospects would be stronger.
This is short sighted. Their threat profile from new entrants (whether de novo or legacy) is massive. Most people I know considering EVs are not prioritising Teslas. They haven’t ruled them out. But it’s an even comparison between the Tesla on the lot and whatever they need to put a deposit down on for delivery in a few months or even years.
Which means they could publicly promise to do better than everyone else and still meet those promises.
So promising things that are unrealistic (ie Level 5 FSD 5 years ago) is an unforced error, an own-goal that could be avoided but they have chosen not to avoid this over and over.
Tesla and Space X have accomplished more than any other company in the last 70 years within their respective industries.
> Tesla and Space X have accomplished more than any other company in the last 70 years within their respective industries.
That's absolutely not in contradiction to my point.
I believe Musk is also tarnishing the Tesla brand by his antics. I noticed that the association to Musk is kinda turning some left-leaning liberals away from Tesla.
Yes, and? If that was their claim, there'd be nothing to talk about.
Instead, we have all kinds of wild claims, from rocket cars to full-self-driving to amphibious trucks to battery swaps. None of which exist.
That's not even close to reality and not intellectually honest. It's a fact that anything with "Tesla" on the headline gets clicks. A Tesla gets t-boned by another vehicle and the next day will get headlines like:
"Telsa involved in a serious accident" While make/model of other accidents is never mentioned in other accidents even when there's a fatality.
You're just making things up.
We are talking about very specific claims in this thread.
>A Tesla gets t-boned by another vehicle and the next day will get headlines like: "Telsa involved in a serious accident" While make/model of other accidents is never mentioned in other accidents even when there's a fatality.
Show me this article.
Here's one on our very own Hacker News https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38806707
Also incidents blaming autopilot get hundreds of upvotes and comments blaming Tesla, and when it turns out months after police investigation of that incident that Autopilot wasn't involved, that article never gets upvotes.
When it's bad news about a different car brand, we just get a headline like this talking about an "electric vehicle". https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38741228
Same with recalls, Tesla's software update recalls are given disproportionate attention, and don't mention it's a software recall in the headline.
It doesn't "blame" anything on the Tesla; instead, it seems to be praising it for lack of damage and injury to the passengers.
Is this interesting news? Not to me. But I suppose it's relevant being as how the Cybertruck is the most hyped vehicle of all-time, and there are only a handful on the road.
I made all of these headlines up?
https://news.google.com/search?q=Tesla%20accident
Find me the same amount of headlines where another make/model of the vehicle involved in a serious accident is mentioned on the headline itself.
One of a few reasons i won't be buying an EV anytime soon.