Sorry, I was being sarcastic. I doubt anyone put a deposit down on a Bolt. ;-)
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
- Status
$25 for TE is a bit low but I can understand since volume production hasn't ramped yet
Chickenlittle
Banned
They are not taking deposits or orders yet so none. Can't reserve either yet. No pricing yet. I expect tesla haters are all EV haters and will not order bolts either
Interesting read nevertheless, although many of the assumptions she writes confidently about re Tesla Energy didn't work out or are still up in the air. For example the Powerwall having a 10kWh capacity or being a turn-key system including an inverter.
racer26
Active Member
Sarcastic or not, I think my estimate of 100x greater demand is... Approximately accurate. If anything, erring on the side of too generous to the bolt.
Are you sure? Patience may just reward the market to the competition. The latest PV magazin (German publication on solar energy) lists 312 battery storage solutions for solar energy, available right now in Germany. The powerwall is simply one of the many competitors. At the same time we are quibbling in this thread if pre-orders for the lonely competing car product, the Bolt (which must still show that it can actually compete) are 100 or maybe 200 times lower. That's the difference between Tesla Automotive and Tesla Energy in a nutshell for me.
I have not seen credible evidence that any competitors are ahead of the curve. Nothing is 100 percent sure but given a variety of factors -- including GF trending toward 300 percent of plan (150 GWh by 2020 v. 50 GWh) -- TE looks like a far better bet than it was even one year ago.
Last edited:
Really the only thing that matters in the storage game is $/kWh. And I don't think anyone can compete with the Gigafactory on price.
(Also durability, of course, where Tesla is as good as the competition. So it can be disregarded.)
(Also durability, of course, where Tesla is as good as the competition. So it can be disregarded.)
The Chinese can easily match Tesla's price to the user, gigafactory or not.
The only chinese company that might be anywhere near Tesla is BYD. I'm not convinced they will have lower costs than the Gigafactory, though maybe they will take less profit. Even if they are competitive relative to Tesla, the market is not likely to be saturated over the next decade, there's plenty of room for both BYD and Tesla.
RobStark
Well-Known Member
For the same quality or even near the same quality, I doubt it.
They will simply sell at a loss. They did it for PV and it worked out. They'll just do it again for batteries. Or they'll build their own Gigafactory. Or partner with Panasonic even.
You can only sell at a loss until you run out of your money. Or your competition runs out of their money first.
I don't see any chinese company capably of outrunning tesla on losing money. Tesla has been doing it for 10 years already
RobStark
Well-Known Member
Google "Chinese Solar Panel Bankruptcy"
Several Chinese solar panel companies have declared bankruptcy over the last five years.
Chinese solar company profits probably do not exceed the subsidies from the Chinese government to dump product on the world. But we should all thank China for subsidizing solar installations all over the world.
The Solar City Buffalo Gigafactory is proof that dumping product does not give you a permanent advantage.
BTW This is the same nonsense we hear about Tesla. If BEV manufacturing is financially viable then Toyota,GM, and VW will jump into the market and kill Tesla. If the Supercharger Network made sense Toyota,GM and VW could easily fund a better high speed charging network on their own and kill Tesla. ETC ETC ETC
Yes, and several still exist. This is a strategic market for the Chinese government and they are willing to do whatever it takes. They can easily outspend Tesla and compensate that way for slightly lower efficiencies.
We will see about that. I admit I didn't follow SolarCity but it seems that factory only got off the ground due to state help and SolarCity is being bailed out by its richer brother (quite literally you could say).
Except that there are already 312 competing products on the German market with a total installed base of over 50k system so far. That's the crucial difference. The facts on the ground show there is zero competition for the car business and there is tons of competition for the storage business. It's quite clear to me which of the two is hard and where Tesla has its unique advantage as opposed as not even having a product rolling out besides a few token installations.
RobStark
Well-Known Member
Solar Panels were a strategic market and the Chinese have since pulled back and let several solar panel companies fail including the second largest.
Edit Efficiencies are not slightly lower. Chinese panels are ~14% while the new SC Silevo panels are going to be 22%-24%. With few panels necessary the savings on soft cost is multiplied.
1)The Chinese Solar and Battery industry exist because of the State.
2) Only if you believe the anti Elon Musk conspiracy theories. By which I mean that is pure nonsense. There is a better case to be made that TSLA shareholders are ripping off Solar City shareholders.
Tesla did not invent the electric car.
There are literally over 50 domestic automakers in China that participate in New Energy Vehicle subsidies.
Tesla does not only compete against BEVs but also ICEv. There are over 40 competitors outside of China.
Tesla Motors has tons of competition but it is inferior competition.
Tesla Energy has tons of competition but it is inferior competition. And its unique advantage is the GF.
Building a second GF without Tesla's help in direct competition with Tesla is an even crazier business proposal than Tesla's original case for building the GF.
Last edited:
This is internally inconsistent. Either the GF provides a unique advantage in a multi-billion market that's rapidly growing and then building a second one is a sound business move. Or it doesn't and then it isn't.
RobStark
Well-Known Member
Tesla is projecting massive growth. Much more than the consensus on Wall Street or in Square Mile.
To build a second economically viable GF without Tesla's help in direct competition to Tesla you must believe growth is going to be at least 1.7x what Tesla is projecting the minimum growth necessary to be successful.
Chinese companies don't have to convince Tesla or me the second GF is viable. They have to convince themselves and then their financial backers. I believe this to be true but the vast majority in the business world do not. And that is a problem for getting a second non Tesla GF built.
The key difference here is not only will Tesla be first but they will have two internal customers for their batteries. Tesla Motors and Tesla Energy. One can carry the other if growth is a bit slow in their segment for a while for whatever reason.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
