That statement was crafted very well to
'sound good' and succeeds in that arena. It is still a woefully incorrect assessment though. There is a lot more to be said and examined beyond the
'period'. Let me tell you why...
The real
'unicorns' are the ICE vehicles people choose to buy instead of a Model S. They have been fading away in sales over the course of 4-1/2 years. They are going extinct. Good riddance.
Part of the reason why ANALysts, pundits, and talking heads were so confident in claiming the Model S would NEVER manage to reach 15,000 units in annual sales, was that they knew the price segment had been drying out since the financial crisis in 2008. There had been a long, slow recovery process, and high end cars had never fully recovered at all. So the notion that a newcomer would be able to greatly exceed the sales of long established players in that economic environment seemed like a pipe dream to them at best.
For decades we have been told that BMW only builds one thing -- The ULTIMATE DRIVING MACHINE. Except, they don't. Not really. Not anymore. Until about 2012, automotive journalists would routinely award the 3-Series with top-level accolades as the
'benchmark' for an entire class of vehicles, which they felt it defined. They went on to give the rest of BMW's products the same level of respect, pretty much by default.
But then, they were surprised to learn, time and again, that as they tested the 3-Series against its direct competitors, they were finding it harder and harder to come up with some excuse to make the BMW win. That surprised them even further, because for quite some time, maybe a couple of decades at least, even when a BMW lost in purely logical testing results through instrumented testing on a track? They could at least fall back on the tried and true familiar
'feel' of its handling that just seemed to be more
'fun' than anything else on hand. The BMW would win as an Editorial decision, despite the numbers.
Then they found themselves saying something they hadn't expect to ever say about a BMW, though it had become an oft-repeated and near trite observation over other brands,
"It's a better car, but a worse BMW." Somehow, in all the refinements toward improving the cars that led to ever-increasing sales, and much more satisfied Customers, BMW had bred out the
'fun factor' while their competitors had latched onto it and improved upon it in the process. Oops.
Over the years both
Car and Driver, as well as
Motor Trend, have subscribed to the notion that,
"You just can't beat a BMW." But now they know that isn't true. Competitors from Cadillac, Jaguar, and even Alfa Romeo now, have been able to beat the 3-Series, and its performance variant, the M3. That was unexpected. Though it was a long time coming.
Even if one accepts that theorem as true, you must understand that 50% of Tesla's sales thus far would still put them at no less than second place in sales in the segment over the last 4-1/2 years. And that number of sales would still be considered an immense success. Because it would still be 500% of what Tesla Naysayers claimed would be possible for the fledgling company. And, it would still put them over Elon Musk's initial 15,000 unit per annum worldwide projection by well over 3,000 units on average.
Instead of selling 11 years worth of cars in 4-1/2 years, they would have sold 5-1/2 years worth. So, instead of being a ~30-somethingeth billion buckadollar company on Wall $treet, Tesla might 'only' be rated as being 'worth' 15 billion. Trust that wouldn't make Jim Cramer or Cory Johnson any happier.
I concur.
Granted.
Prolly so, but the BMW 7-Series only has a greater range than the 3-Series because it has a larger fuel tank. The smaller 3-Series with a 20.6 gallon fuel tank and it would leave its sibling many miles behind. I am certain that for a given battery pack capacity, the Model ☰ will have a greater range than Model S. So, where a rear wheel drive Model S 60 had an EPA rated range of 208 miles...? A Model ☰ 60 would likely manage 225-to-250 miles instead.
Granted.
Uhmmm... NO. The strategy of attempting to
'protect' the Performance rating of a flagship vehicle is a poor one. For decades Lexus has protected its LS from lower level siblings. Result? Both the IS and ES get their butts handed to them with both hands by the 3-Series in annual sales, year-in and year-out. Even this past year, when the 3-Series
(70,458 units) was off by 25.5% compared to 2015, it still demolished sales of ES
(58,299 units, -10.3%) and IS
(37,289 units, -19.7%). There is finally the F-Sport versions of the IS, but it may be far too little, way too late.
BMW gets to butter their bread on both sides because of 3-Series sales. The 12,918 sales of 7-Series are insignificant compared to that. And the BMW M3 has always blown the doors off the 7-Series and the 5-Series. That is as it should be.
Tesla will not gimp the Model ☰ Performance edition to
'save' Model S sales at all. There's no need.
Yet, I can't find anyone who shares the same feeling about BMW or Mercedes-Benz. Is there any reason, really, to get the 7-Series Alpina with the 3-Series
'M' edition available for half as much? Is there any reason, really, to get the AMG S-Class when you can get the AMG C-Class for half as much? Of course there are reasons. People purchase different vehicles for different reasons. Generally speaking, they get what they need, what they can afford, and what they WANT. BMW/M and Mercedes-Benz/AMG have sorted out long ago that fewer people will want their larger performance cars than the smaller ones. It's not a big deal at all. I'm sure that since Elon has been aiming for 500,000 units of Tesla Generation III vehicles per annum since the first half of 2013 at least, he too has accepted that notion. We can file this under
'DUH' for future reference.
Once again, even if Model S sales fall to half their current level, that will be far more than anyone outside of Tesla thought was possible. They will still hold a solid second place perennially and will often enough find themselves in first place. With a car that had an eight year product cycle and sold through 11 years worth of cars in only 4-1/2. So every one they sell from now on is pure gravy.
Do you have any idea how few premium brands manage to sell even 15,000 vehicles total in the United States each year? Let alone 50,000 of one model worldwide? This goes back to what I noted before about ICE vehicles in the segment being the true 'unicorns'. They are not long for this world, and soon to disappear. The likelihood of seeing one 'in the wild' will diminish greatly in the next decade. Because rather than switching to full electric, some will choose to become even more
'exclusive' and sell fewer vehicles at higher prices. At least, they will, until completely barred from operating on these shores.
Tesla only intended to sell 15,000 of the Model S per year, and 20,000 per year on the outside. They never had any expectation of reaching or maintaining 50,000 units per year when they designed the car. Some automobile manufacturers, like Rolls-Royce or Bentley, haven't sold that many cars in the past ten years combined, worldwide. But no one claims they have a
'limited market' that cannot bear up to competition, as they have said for years now about Tesla. That makes no sense whatsoever.
The Model S has paid for itself many times over in the sales it has already racked up. If their sales drop to 50% of current levels, that would be 25,000 units worldwide per year. That's 10,000 more per year than their initial expectation. If 60% of those go to U.S. Customers, that is 15,000 units, and enough to hold second place in Class for the duration. All the Model S does now is make money for Tesla. That is a good thing.
You are not the first to suggest this. You are not the first to be completely wrong either.
Each sentence reads as if the Model S is some kind of
'problem' or
'burden' for Tesla to bear. Trust that Acura, AUDI, BMW, Infiniti, Jaguar, Lexus, Maserati, Mercedes-Benz, and Porsche would all be happy as [HECK] if the Model S went away some day. Some of them would probably be happy if Tesla allowed them to build a car of their own around the platform -- now. They would have turned up their nose at the notion five years ago.
The Model S has completely proven its viability through the course of something like 160,000+ units sold in 4-1/2 years. A time frame that had been projected to have covered perhaps as little as 67,500 cars instead, at best. A time period wherein some manufacturers would have been very happy indeed to have moved even 50,000 units of their flagship vehicles in total. And in the face of those numbers, you think Tesla should LOWER the price of their reigning champion flagship? Uhm... NO. That makes no sense at all.
Waitasec... Lincoln? Cadillac? God. Please note that the Tesla Model S outsold EVERY PASSENGER CAR OFFERED BY CADILLAC during 2016. Not some. Not half. ALL OF THEM. Similarly, Model S outsold the two top models from Lincoln: Continental and MKS... COMBINED... by at least a two-to-one ratio. And every one of those cars costs less than a base Model S.
Cadillac has 900+ of their
'independent franchised dealerships' in the U.S. Tesla only very recently opened their 100th U.S. location -- in Michigan. Heck, there are 61 Lincoln and 53 Cadillac locations in Michigan alone. Another 81 Cadillac locations in Texas, where there are also 84 Lincoln locations. There are still 23 States where Tesla has no sales presence at all. But for all that brick and mortar, and acres and acres of cars, and the support of that gigantic distribution network of
'independent franchised dealerships' -- a car from a tech company in California with an average sale price somewhere between $90,000 and $105,000 has outsold everything Cadillac and Lincoln have to offer, except for the MKZ.
I am not into
'luxury' at all. I spent a Summer
(31+ years ago -- woof!) working for my Uncle Will Joe in Beverly Hills, where I was detailing cars for the residents at a condominium complex. There were a lot of expensive cars there. Some classics. Some new. Some ridiculously old. But really, the only actually luxurious cars were the Rolls-Royce and Bentley cars. Everything else paled in comparison. It became apparent that really, everyone else was just doing their own riff, providing a different take, on Rolls-Royce interior design and fitments, using much lower quality materials. Everything in the Rolls-Royce was made from
REAL STUFF. Actual metal switchgear, not shiny coated black plastic. Actual lambs wool headliners, not acrylic fuzzy stuff. Actual hardwood, not a press-formed injected plastic molding. What impressed me was the dedication to the craftwork and choices of materials, not so much the design itself.
Tesla's designers have been adamant that they are NOT changing the interior design language of their cars. I don't blame them one bit. Their cars should look to the future with design, not wallow in the past concepts of Victorian Era stagecoach design. Tesla doesn't have to become another in a long line of copycats to Rolls-Royce or Bentley. The high end Mercedes-Benz products are a real embarrassment in that they blatantly copy Bentley interiors -- right down to the diamond pattern quilted seating.
No one is
'blinded' at all. Those who are
'car guys' have been saying much the same -- about Cadillac -- for most of the past thirty years. Their current styling themes and emphasis on performance were seen as an attempt to lure new buyers. I'm not sure if it has worked or not. But it sure has given them some very nice cars for their lineup. Unfortunately for Cadillac, just as they are offering the very best cars they have ever put on the market, Tesla has come along. DOH! I expect the Model ☰ is going to absolutely decimate Cadillac sales.
OK. If you say so. Welcome.
Well, yeah... Typically, about the only thing that is '
the size of a Buick' is a Buick. My Grandfather had an Electra 225 that was unfortunately destroyed in a crash. That was one of very few cars I have been in that had more than enough legroom for me. Unfortunately, the Buick Century I had once upon a time was nowhere near as good a car and died within a month of my taking ownership.
Ah. So you believe the Model S is a perfect $50,000 car...? Heh. That's really funny.
I think maybe you actually wanted something like this instead:
Not only am I a
'car guy'... I am a GM guy. Growing up it seemed that
'Body by Fisher' was a Family Motto. The first car I ever drove was my Uncle George's Chevrolet El Camino SS -- when I was twelve.