-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Articles re Tesla—Fact or Fiction?
- Thread starter Robert.Boston
- Start date
Hogfighter
Professional Lurker
He is certainly entitled to his opinion. My hope is that the other 95% of Texans who do not want a dealer between them and Tesla are entitled to theirs in the assembly.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
Rather ironic since autos are one of very few products that are required to be purchased from a dealer. I'd say that's the definition of a "special exception".
Would you want to buy a car from this man?
Would you want to buy a car from this man?
Last edited:
It looks like Murdock Inc. has rolled out a new Tesla-Basher....welcome to a long, depressing line of snarky, incredulous haters Mr. Lahart. May you prosper as they have.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/tesla-targets-pull-away-from-profits-1429889005
Sorry....he's not new - just looked at his list of articles and it seems he's good for 1 bashing Tesla about every other month....
January's
http://www.wsj.com/articles/tesla-t...-with-potholes-heard-on-the-street-1423763518
December's
http://www.wsj.com/articles/tesla-may-run-slow-on-cheap-gas-heard-on-the-street-1417558869
June of 2014:
http://www.wsj.com/articles/tesla-needs-more-mothers-of-invention-1402690368
Oh....you get the picture. Paragon of objectivity in journalism. Every few months, take Tesla information (including Patent release?), if negative, magnify, if positive, twist to be negative.
:tongue:
http://www.wsj.com/articles/tesla-targets-pull-away-from-profits-1429889005
Sorry....he's not new - just looked at his list of articles and it seems he's good for 1 bashing Tesla about every other month....
January's
http://www.wsj.com/articles/tesla-t...-with-potholes-heard-on-the-street-1423763518
December's
http://www.wsj.com/articles/tesla-may-run-slow-on-cheap-gas-heard-on-the-street-1417558869
June of 2014:
http://www.wsj.com/articles/tesla-needs-more-mothers-of-invention-1402690368
Oh....you get the picture. Paragon of objectivity in journalism. Every few months, take Tesla information (including Patent release?), if negative, magnify, if positive, twist to be negative.
:tongue:
Last edited:
I saw that article. Lahart doesn't mention that the expectations of 500K+ in vehicles volumes in bullish analysts forecasts is only 10% of the volumes implied by Elon's Apple-like market cap comment. While I'm not banking on Elon hitting that mark, there is tremendous upside to the conservative volumes in analysts long range numbers (i.e., they already are factoring the difficulty of forecasting further out in time with the low volumes they use).
The piece came out right after the stock spiked about $2... kind of like it was in the can, waiting for the right moment to be used.
The piece came out right after the stock spiked about $2... kind of like it was in the can, waiting for the right moment to be used.
Johan
Ex got M3 in the divorce, waiting for EU Model Y!
Oh my... Jeremy Cato just wrote the same article again, under another title. Tried to engage with him in the comments. What's wrong with this guy?
Elon Musk is the P.T. Barnum of the Tesla circus - The Globe and Mail
Elon Musk is the P.T. Barnum of the Tesla circus - The Globe and Mail
I must confess I'm puzzled by this thread. Some of you called my article poorly researched, but you don't actually refute anything.
The only thing you 'refute' is my assertion that Tesla could make 500,000. In fact, I didn't say anything of the sort; I only said the factory is huge and used to make 500,000 cars a year, so increasing capacity was a matter of adding equipment, not buildings. Check the article, I haven't edited since a couple weeks ago.
For example, let's take Tesla's claim of being production constrained, which I consider the biggest whopper together with the battery swap.
Do you disagree with the Fed's data that show typical utilization in the US car industry above 80%? The historical average is 75%, but of course that includes some abysmal years that drag down the average.
Do you deny that Tesla had already achieved 1,000 cars/week in September, according to the company's own statements?
Do you deny that Tesla has stopped reporting capacity, and now simply says 'over 1,000/week'?
Do you disagree that Tesla's utilization is comparable to that of the US car industry as a whole, if not lower?
Do you disagree that the US car industry as a whole is not production-constrained? Of course some lines, some vehicles may be production constrained - in which case manufacturers will increase capacity. The industry as a whole is not, and could not be simply due to the diversity in model offerings.
Are you going to address any of the dozens of points I make in my article, or are you going to throw me a snarky one-liner?
The only thing you 'refute' is my assertion that Tesla could make 500,000. In fact, I didn't say anything of the sort; I only said the factory is huge and used to make 500,000 cars a year, so increasing capacity was a matter of adding equipment, not buildings. Check the article, I haven't edited since a couple weeks ago.
For example, let's take Tesla's claim of being production constrained, which I consider the biggest whopper together with the battery swap.
Do you disagree with the Fed's data that show typical utilization in the US car industry above 80%? The historical average is 75%, but of course that includes some abysmal years that drag down the average.
Do you deny that Tesla had already achieved 1,000 cars/week in September, according to the company's own statements?
Do you deny that Tesla has stopped reporting capacity, and now simply says 'over 1,000/week'?
Do you disagree that Tesla's utilization is comparable to that of the US car industry as a whole, if not lower?
Do you disagree that the US car industry as a whole is not production-constrained? Of course some lines, some vehicles may be production constrained - in which case manufacturers will increase capacity. The industry as a whole is not, and could not be simply due to the diversity in model offerings.
Are you going to address any of the dozens of points I make in my article, or are you going to throw me a snarky one-liner?
Hogfighter
Professional Lurker
I enjoy reading these. There are snippets of truth amongst mountains of dung. The need to increase the number of service centers to meet 500,000 cars on the road is a valid point. It's about the only one, though.
Hello AZC, thanks for posting,
I'll start with this part of your article:
"Building factories takes years. Buying and installing equipment takes months. So if Tesla has the factory for the job, and only needs the equipment, why can't it meet demand two and a half years after starting production? Didn't they know this level of demand was coming? It seems Elon expected to make 500,000 cars in 2020, but he didn't expect to make 35,000 in 2014!"
OK, so can you provide some evidence that installing equipment only takes months? This has certainly not been the case for Tesla as they started the process sometime in 2013 and have still not installed everything from that order. There was an article in December 2013 talking about Tesla getting a tax break.
California gives Tesla $35 million tax break for Model S production. Good move.
And if you read the 10Qs and 10Ks it is pretty obvious all that equipment is not installed yet. If you are actually interested I think there is also a video from last summer with a Tesla exec discussing the factory upgrade.
And, yes, when the factory was opened Tesla planned on producing about 35,000 cars per year in the Model S/X line:
Tesla CEO Elon Musk predicting Tesla Motors profitability in 2013 - Torque News
Here is the specific line from the article:
"In the future, as the Model X goes on sale in 2014, the company expects sales volume to reach 35,000 units per year which would be a 2% market penetration in the luxury car market."
I'm sure there are many other sources. So, it turns out they sold 31,000 Model S instead of 35,000 Model S and X cars. The miss of the original target is failed execution but the extra challenge is that they also had to interrupt production to install a new line to support 50,000+ cars per year (the 1,000/month production they are currently at) and also lay the groundwork for doubling that production rate again with the introduction of the Model X.
Anyway, I can't help but notice the location of most who don't believe Tesla will continue to succeed. It is usually not California or Norway. I would recommend a holiday in Norway and talk to some of the owners before betting against Tesla's success with your own money. Now if you are just publishing articles then nevermind, keep on doing what you are doing, it really doesn't matter at this point.
I'll start with this part of your article:
"Building factories takes years. Buying and installing equipment takes months. So if Tesla has the factory for the job, and only needs the equipment, why can't it meet demand two and a half years after starting production? Didn't they know this level of demand was coming? It seems Elon expected to make 500,000 cars in 2020, but he didn't expect to make 35,000 in 2014!"
OK, so can you provide some evidence that installing equipment only takes months? This has certainly not been the case for Tesla as they started the process sometime in 2013 and have still not installed everything from that order. There was an article in December 2013 talking about Tesla getting a tax break.
California gives Tesla $35 million tax break for Model S production. Good move.
And if you read the 10Qs and 10Ks it is pretty obvious all that equipment is not installed yet. If you are actually interested I think there is also a video from last summer with a Tesla exec discussing the factory upgrade.
And, yes, when the factory was opened Tesla planned on producing about 35,000 cars per year in the Model S/X line:
Tesla CEO Elon Musk predicting Tesla Motors profitability in 2013 - Torque News
Here is the specific line from the article:
"In the future, as the Model X goes on sale in 2014, the company expects sales volume to reach 35,000 units per year which would be a 2% market penetration in the luxury car market."
I'm sure there are many other sources. So, it turns out they sold 31,000 Model S instead of 35,000 Model S and X cars. The miss of the original target is failed execution but the extra challenge is that they also had to interrupt production to install a new line to support 50,000+ cars per year (the 1,000/month production they are currently at) and also lay the groundwork for doubling that production rate again with the introduction of the Model X.
Anyway, I can't help but notice the location of most who don't believe Tesla will continue to succeed. It is usually not California or Norway. I would recommend a holiday in Norway and talk to some of the owners before betting against Tesla's success with your own money. Now if you are just publishing articles then nevermind, keep on doing what you are doing, it really doesn't matter at this point.
None of his facts are wrong, I agree, but there are a lot of "color" words in the article that go beyond the facts to imply that bullish analysts are grasping at straws to maintain high price targets artificially. This slant is particularly strong at the top of the article, suggesting to me that an editor add some top-spin to an otherwise thoughtful piece.
Agreeing with Robert, I wasn't disputing the facts, just the tone, slant and outright conjecture overlaying the facts. After looking back at previous articles, it is a recurring theme. I get people not believing in Tesla or its success, those that are angry at Tesla baffle me.
Last edited:
Johan
Ex got M3 in the divorce, waiting for EU Model Y!
If you're interested you should check out the comments to the article I linked above. The author makes some very bold claims:
Elon Musk is the P.T. Barnum of the Tesla circus - The Globe and Mail
The author goes by Jbc22 in the comments section.
He is just clueless. Please note this claim, which is bordering on libel: The evidence suggests that company is not being entirely truthful about its sales and production, and so-called production constraints.
Elon Musk is the P.T. Barnum of the Tesla circus - The Globe and Mail
The author goes by Jbc22 in the comments section.
He is just clueless. Please note this claim, which is bordering on libel: The evidence suggests that company is not being entirely truthful about its sales and production, and so-called production constraints.
How reliable is this:
Tesla's $13,000 battery could keep your home running in a blackout | Technology | The Guardian
That price... it should be like half, or less. Somethings wrong.
Tesla's $13,000 battery could keep your home running in a blackout | Technology | The Guardian
That price... it should be like half, or less. Somethings wrong.
Maybe not - the battery is something where the price starts high and then works down as they need to generate more demand. The $13,000 was for the pilot project that I believe started in early 2014 so it really doesn't give us any indication as to what pricing the new product will have.
anticitizen13.7
Not posting at TMC after 9/17/2018
I think it's funny that this person Jbc22 says "And on and on. These are facts.", when the statement "The giga factory will NEVER reach... if it opens at all." is quite clearly an opinion, since there is no way to test this statement as true or false in fact.
I can smell the fear in these people like Jbc22 who resort to writing stuff like this, haha.
Similar threads
