Which is exactly why EVs will be successful. Naysayers don't realize there were 500 new EVs in US driveways in 2010 and 20,500 at the end of 2011. End of this year there will be 60,500+ EV drivers singing the praises of electric driving. You can't put the Genie back in the bottle.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
-
On today's TMC Podcast, we ask the question "What is the Tesla Cybercab?". Join us on YouTube live at 1PM and participate in the chat.
Did Ford Just Crush Tesla Motors?
- Thread starter Kevin Sharpe
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Transportation
Which is exactly why EVs will be successful. Naysayers don't realize there were 500 new EVs in US driveways in 2010 and 20,500 at the end of 2011. End of this year there will be 60,500+ EV drivers singing the praises of electric driving. You can't put the Genie back in the bottle.
EVNow
Well-Known Member
+1
I think some are too optimistic. We have to remember deposit <> sale. There will always be dropouts. Selling 10k+ luxury cars (or for that matter 200k near-luxury cars) is no joke.
I hope Tesla execs are more pragmatic than some enthusiasts here.
Just a reminder, the title of this thread is "Did Ford Just Crush Tesla Motors?" David admits that he doesn't think Ford will be crushing Tesla. How about you? :wink:
Some of us agree that Tesla will be facing serious competition, particularly when releasing the mass market vehicle, but I hope you don't label us kool-aid gulpers if we don't share the opinion that Ford has just crushed Tesla.
Larry
smorgasbord
Active Member
Reading this forum after Model S pricing was announced, one would have thought that many were asking for their deposits back, or at least downgrading out of Signature. The truth was that deposits accelerated and Signatures sold out within about a week. The history is that as each Model S milestone was reached, excitement and deposits increased.
Call me a Kool-aid drinker, but I don't see that trend changing. When people can test drive the cars, deposits will increase. When Signature owners are driving around town and talk to people, deposits will increase. In 2010 BMW sold about 212,000 cars worldwide. Tesla needs to sell 10% of that next year. That doesn't seem a huge stretch.
I think the comparison to HEVs and to much more range limited EVs is misguided. As a 5-series owner myself, I never considered a Prius and would not consider a Volt nor a Ford Focus Energi. Yet, I'm a reservation holder for Model S. I think complaints about the low end Model S are also off-base. Who buys a base BMW 5-series? I suspect that many of the people considering a base Model S are more ideally Gen-3 customers who don't want to wait years for their vehicle. I think it was smart of Tesla to get a version that makes the $50K price point, but really, the ASP for Model S (non-Sig) will be $65-70K. And, that's good for Tesla's profits.
Just FYI, those two statements aren't in conflict. You can easily have had multiple Sig downgrades (or cancellations) and a big increase in overall reservations brought about by the attention drawn by the pricing announcement.
A poll taken on a forum that, by the very act of them being here, means they're amongst the most motivated of the reservations holders. And "very few" relative to what? A personal subjective value about what number was expected to downgrade?
I'm not going to make any claims about any numbers. I'm simply saying the two items, downgrades vs. increased reservations, don't particularly imply anything about each other.
Edit: It's the unfortunate nature of a forum like this that polls that measure any sort of motivation or enthusiasm about Tesla are going to be badly skewed by the self selection bias in the audience. Polls that are sampling personal characteristics are likely to be more representative, such as paint preferences, age, income ranges, etc.
Last edited:
I was going by smorgasbord's post:
There was indeed much uproar and you would have expected many cancellations and downgrades based on that, but they were few.
*shrug*, I suppose it depends on your perspective. The fact that Tesla's Sig pricing caused any downgrades at all I think is a pretty significant statement. You don't see it that way. That's okay.
Luxury is when you buy things you don't really need, you just want.
850,000 cars classified as luxury cars were sold in the US in 2011.
Whats makes a high end luxury car worth ( a lot ) more than a Ford Fusion?
Passenger room?
Smooth ride?
Excellent handling?
Quiet interior?
Powerful acceleration?
Smooth engine?
Quality of construction?
Safety?
Latest technology?
Comfort?
Exclusivity?
Prestige?
The Model S has most if not all of those things over the Ford Fusion, but the big one is electric drive technology.
I believe EVs are the latest and greatest of car technology.
I want one like I wanted a tablet, a smartphone, a laptop, a blu-ray player, streaming video, a flat screen TV, a digital camera, internet, a cd player, a walkman, a computer, a dishwasher, air conditioning...
The Ford Fusion is a good car, it stands up well to some math about how long it takes todays EV to pay for its price premium.
However - if someone gave me a free Ford Fusion, I would yawn.
850,000 cars classified as luxury cars were sold in the US in 2011.
Whats makes a high end luxury car worth ( a lot ) more than a Ford Fusion?
Passenger room?
Smooth ride?
Excellent handling?
Quiet interior?
Powerful acceleration?
Smooth engine?
Quality of construction?
Safety?
Latest technology?
Comfort?
Exclusivity?
Prestige?
The Model S has most if not all of those things over the Ford Fusion, but the big one is electric drive technology.
I believe EVs are the latest and greatest of car technology.
I want one like I wanted a tablet, a smartphone, a laptop, a blu-ray player, streaming video, a flat screen TV, a digital camera, internet, a cd player, a walkman, a computer, a dishwasher, air conditioning...
The Ford Fusion is a good car, it stands up well to some math about how long it takes todays EV to pay for its price premium.
However - if someone gave me a free Ford Fusion, I would yawn.
Norbert
TSLA will win
Kind of funny article. He starts off by admitting that the question of "finally knock[ing] Toyota's Camry off its best-selling pedestal" is not a simple question, and goes on with trying that with Tesla.
After introducing the hybrid-mindset-based concept of a "purist", he again admits:
Ok, was that article really about announcing that Tesla will have competition? If so, then why use the Fusion as an example? Or maybe more a way to make the Fusion interesting by comparing it to the S? And make that hybrid-fashionable stab at Tesla along the way.
All this attitude about "purists"s seems to be about trying to create the impression that it takes a long way to convince an ICE driver of an EV, so that a plugin-hybrid must be in-between. However I think a pure EV has a more direct appeal to an ICE driver as long as the range and/or fast charging are sufficient either along with a second car or by itself. Of course that is in fact a critical question, but it will still be a critical question even with a 40-mile-plugin-hybrid in between. And one that the Model S has a better answer to than any other EV. Although it seems possible that the early-adopters are of a limited number, my personal feeling is that the Model S will become very popular. Besides, battery tech will improve over time and widen the appeal at both the price and the range end of the spectrum. Furthermore Tesla will keep introducing new models on the same platform, and eventually Bluestar.
None of that is addressed in the article. So it seems more like a way of saying a few things about the Fusion in a way that catches attention.
After introducing the hybrid-mindset-based concept of a "purist", he again admits:
Ok, was that article really about announcing that Tesla will have competition? If so, then why use the Fusion as an example? Or maybe more a way to make the Fusion interesting by comparing it to the S? And make that hybrid-fashionable stab at Tesla along the way.
All this attitude about "purists"s seems to be about trying to create the impression that it takes a long way to convince an ICE driver of an EV, so that a plugin-hybrid must be in-between. However I think a pure EV has a more direct appeal to an ICE driver as long as the range and/or fast charging are sufficient either along with a second car or by itself. Of course that is in fact a critical question, but it will still be a critical question even with a 40-mile-plugin-hybrid in between. And one that the Model S has a better answer to than any other EV. Although it seems possible that the early-adopters are of a limited number, my personal feeling is that the Model S will become very popular. Besides, battery tech will improve over time and widen the appeal at both the price and the range end of the spectrum. Furthermore Tesla will keep introducing new models on the same platform, and eventually Bluestar.
None of that is addressed in the article. So it seems more like a way of saying a few things about the Fusion in a way that catches attention.
Whenever I hear the auto press being skeptical about "the public's" willingness to let go of their ICEs (coupled, or not, to an electric drivetrain), I always wonder whether it is the public that is unwilling to let go, or the manufacturers and press, who have made a living out of knowing the subtleties of ICE technology.
I would go so far as to venture that the "lithium ceiling" that the major OEMs have tacitly placed on BEV range is really just their attempt to compartmentalize BEVs into the "commuter car" segment, and to preserve the core of the segment for their specialty, the ICE.
Or am I just being a paranoid conspiracy-spotter?
I would go so far as to venture that the "lithium ceiling" that the major OEMs have tacitly placed on BEV range is really just their attempt to compartmentalize BEVs into the "commuter car" segment, and to preserve the core of the segment for their specialty, the ICE.
Or am I just being a paranoid conspiracy-spotter?
Hi Robert,
In so far as this particular member of the press is concerned its just about coming up with an eye-catching title to inject some controversy and attract readership. He apparently has succeeded in that regard, and I suspect other members of the press are similarly motivated.
With regard to the manufacturers, I think you give them too much credit for developing a Machiavellian strategy. They are merely starting with a price point that they think they can sell, and that turns out to be a commuter car.
Larry
dmckinstry
Model X 2019
I've never been a Sig. reservation holder, and I'm only guessing. But, I suspect a lot of Sig. downgrades weren't caused by the pricing, but by the realization that they didn't have the flexibility in picking the options they wanted, without paying extra.
EVNow
Well-Known Member
See my response on 1st page : Did Ford Just Crush Tesla Motors?
The thread has gone somewaht OT. The koolaid comment was not for the topic but for some other statements made in this thread (like people will only upgrade - no downgrades).
Well we all agree on that; the 160 needs rapid charging access.
I guess I'm in a different situation because I'm willing to pay the premium to stop using fossil fuels entirely. I'm not a true no-fossil-fuels purist -- I'm not getting rid of my gas stove yet, and I'm keeping my gas dryer until it dies -- but I did resolve not to buy another fossil-fuel powered appliance apart from a stove. My electric lawnmower is lovely, but I'm still waiting for an electric snowblower to come out. Part of it is that I really do expect fossil fuel prices to go up quite spectacularly in coming years. Part of it is that electric appliances are simpler, last longer, and are less finicky. In your case you have all that ICE maintenance on the Ampera. I guess this is fine for 'car people', but nobody in my family has *ever* done oil changes on the recommended schedule.
The Model S is probably, in fact, unduly complicated for a BEV, in order to interface with standard automotive parts (having an entire automotive lead-acid battery, really?).
I keep expecting Nissan to do exactly that, and I don't know why they haven't. Perhaps they will in a couple of years. I expect that would eat Bluestar's market.
Frankly, a lot of us made noise because there were a few important things which upset us, but that didn't mean we *wanted* to downgrade or cancel.
Now, the fact that there were only a few such things, and it's a small company, means we figured they might actually fix them. A bunch of us are stockholders too, and would like Tesla to keep its reputation -- reputation is worth more than gold. And indeed, Tesla has *already* fixed some of the issues raised:
(1) It is now clear what the price for the Performance model is;
(2) It is now clear that the Signature has a substantially different, and more expensive to make, interior from the Standard
(3) It is now clear that a number of things are standard even without the "tech package"
Dealing with the wheel downgrade ("but Tesla keeps your money") issue would probably satisfy nearly all the remaining unhappy Signature reservers; offering Supercharging to 40 kWh buyers (even at a much lower "miles per hour charged" rate, it would still be a vast help) would satisfy most of the rest. That's not really very many issues.
They still need 3-phase home charging for the European market, of course.
A reputation for unaccountability, nonresponsiveness, and price-gouging, is something to be avoided. So are other unpopular mistakes. Part of the reason for making noise is specifically to help Tesla avoid these. *If* we, the early adopters, help Tesla get things right, *then* Tesla will have a much easier sell when it comes to the more discriminating general public. A low rate of downgrades doesn't necessarily mean that the noise was gratutious; some of it is of the "I'm still buying it, but I can't talk anyone else into it any more unless you fix this" variety.
Norbert
TSLA will win
The wheel downgrade is the same for non-sig performance, and I think expresses what Tesla considers a strongly preferred configuration. Personally I have no problem with it, with the non-sig performance appealing to me. Often packaged-options don't seem to offer downgrades, and the signature isn't meant to offer a way of saving money, but of exclusivity. If I had a problem with it, I'd discuss it with Tesla directly, but I think Tesla does have the right to offer package deals without negotiating price reductions for "no-cost options".
Although some may suspect differently, I take this as a technical decision. With the current battery technology, one can't have everything, and Tesla needs to protect a certain level of quality.
Tesla's not rushing things. Elon doesn't need an endless supply of customers. His business plan is spread out over plenty of time for the simple necessity of electric cars to take hold, and he'll have a company known for extraordinary advances and luxury. It's not as though the other luxury car makers started off at the top of the heap, gross-sales-wise. They bided their time as well.
