Chevy Volt a Failure - GM to Layoff 1,300

That's good stuff.

 

You're not stupid enough to think Tesla's longterm plan is to serve only that market, but if it makes you feel good to be be getting "likes" from Old Tony and the Ayn Rand crowd, knock yourself out.

 

Nah, I like rooting against corrupt cronyism ... The likes are just a little side benefit.

But, hey, you keep judging folks/entities by their stated intentions (i.e., the pablum they gin up for public consumption to maintain their place at the trough). I'm sure it'll work out great for you.

 

I'm not judging anything; simply acknowledging Tesla has built the best, most innovative cars on the planet.

Also, you may want to consider leading the charge against rent-seeking in your own state, which remains a hot mess of crony capitalism.

 

FYI, those "random" models of cars are the top 10 selling luxury cars in the U.S. in 2014. And the Tesla Model S was second on that list by a wide margin.

 

I know you're not stupid enough to think I don't see the little *****-esque misdirect you're trying to pull here. My re-entry into this discussion was prompted by nothing other than your smug little attempt at a put-down of da man's wanting to see more pudding and less puffery.

So I'll get right down to it: Do you or do you not assess individuals/entities by their stated intentions? I suspect you don't -- unless it's convenient. Because otherwise somebody might go dredging up some mission statements from, say, Enron or Halliburton and ask you how long it took you to arrive at the conclusion you didnt like them.

P.S. Whether Enron has built "the best, most innovative cars on the planet" has abso-fucking-lutely nothing to do with the discussion at hand. But, hey, if that play is legal, I'll just add that Tiger Woods can't hit a driver for shit anymore. Top that!

 

Oh hell, Rags, what does that matter? Everyone knows that we should judge those companies based on what they say they aspire to. What are you, some sort of Ayn Randian?

#nuance

 

I have nothing much to add to this thread, other than to note that an acquaintance of mine owns a Model S and gave me a ride recently.

That is one superb freaking automobile. Breathtakingly smooth ride.

If Musk can figure out how to mass produce something even in the ballpark of the Model S for $50,000 -- without endless government subsidies that others can't get -- then we can start talking about revolutionizing the auto industry and I'll be in line to buy one.

But as Ragu has pointed out, early returns aren't promising.

 

This seems like the appropriate place to put this:

Why Toyota's Hydrogen Car Should Worry Tesla Motors Investors -- The Motley Fool

The insurmountable problem, as Toyota sees it, with battery-electric cars
Here's why: After a great deal of research and pondering, Toyota's electric-car experts came to the conclusion that recharging time would prove to be an insurmountable obstacle in the mass adoption of battery-electric cars. Even with Tesla's vaunted "Superchargers," it takes a long time to fully charge a battery-electric car with reasonable range. Everyone seems to assume that recharging times will fall as the technology advances, and perhaps it will.
But Toyota's scientists have concluded that recharging time can't be brought down enough without building massively inefficient chargers that squander the technology's efficiency advantages. That means, they say, that electric cars will remain niche products.

 

True, at least in the USA. Might work in some countries in Europe. But, Americans tend to be short on patience and want things now, not later. The product not only has to compete with gasoline powered cars but also with consumer behavior.

Long way for him to go before he becomes the next Henry Ford.

I'm waiting for the Mr. Fusion car. I've already got the speedometer that sticks at 88 mph.

 

I mean, you don't think Tesla's plan is to produce two models for the rest of its years in business right?

I'm not sure what gives you the impression that I find it amazing that BMW and Mercedes sell millions of vehicles. I'm not an idiot. I completely understand that producing vehicles in various classes aimed at different customers enhances sales.

I also understand that companies like BMW and Mercedes have been manufacturing automobiles for more than 100 years, during which time they have had struggles. BMW intended to be an aircraft engine manufacturer, but was forced to cease production after WWI, so it began producing motorcycles. The company almost sold off its assets to Daimler-Benz in the the late '50s because - wait for it - sales of the 501 (the only model in its lineup) were too small to be profitable. But, they invested tons of money in the development of their vehicles and now - more than 100 years after BMW began producing aircraft engines - it sells millions of vehicles with 34 models across their lineup.

Will Tesla be able to replicate that type of success? Only time will tell. But I guarantee Musk did not start the company with the intention, as you put it, to mass market $100,000 automobiles. If that were his intention, he wouldn't have tried to disrupt the traditional franchise car dealership business model while introducing his luxury sports car. The Model S has always been a stepping stone to developing other models that could reach the mass market.