Well, I certainly agree with that as I think international deliveries will exceed any increase in production. However, firing most of the delivery team seems a strange response to an expected temporary and short-term reduction in deliveries. The costs of termination, rehiring and retraining mean that you wouldn't do that unless you expected a relatively long-term reduction in deliveries (unless you made some big advance in process which meant you could do more with a smaller team - it would have to be a pretty great advance to justify this size of reduction).
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Tesla, TSLA & the Investment World: the Perpetual Investors' Roundtable
- Thread starter AudubonB
- Start date
Well, I certainly agree with that as I think international deliveries will exceed any increase in production. However, firing most of the delivery team seems a strange response to an expected temporary and short-term reduction in deliveries. The costs of termination, rehiring and retraining mean that you wouldn't do that unless you expected a relatively long-term reduction in deliveries (unless you made some big advance in process which meant you could do more with a smaller team - it would have to be a pretty great advance to justify this size of reduction).
Well, maybe not quite so strange if they were hired precisely to handle a planned, temporary short-term increase in deliveries? They were temps to begin with, put briefly. Why keep them on indefinitely while trimming expenses overall?
I fail to see the relevance of your reasoning, to be quite frank. Sorry to be so blunt.
Fact Checking
Well-Known Member
The article you relied on was only about the Las Vegas delivery hub where there were 150 jobs cut, related to Model 3 delivery logistics: it's probably the NA central hub most affected by delivery related job cuts, which allowed you to peddle the 'two thirds of domestic Model 3 delivery staff' lie and false narrative.
The arguments I made apply more broadly to the global picture: probably more non-NA hiring now that global deliveries are increasing, and job cuts in parts of the North American logistics chain that either became superfluous due to more direct deliveries (Tesla bought trucking companies to ship faster and more direct) or became over-sized.
Again this helps Tesla become more efficient and earn a billion dollars of cash every single quarter, again and again.
Last edited:
Man, just now reading that article about the Porsche/Audi reverse engineering of the Model 3, and it's really damning.
"Now a new report from Germany’s Manager Magazin (German and paywall) includes a deep dive into the state of Audi with comments from executives and insider sources. ... The Porsche and Audi engineers have to change [the PPE] because Tesla’s Model 3 has gotten better than they thought."
Read: "Oh f***!"
"The next-gen platform called Premium Platform Electric (PPE) was greenlighted almost two years ago and it is expected to be ready around 2020 or 2021."
Read: "We don't think we can compete until at least 2022, and please God, don't let Tesla keep improving even further during that time..."
"According to the new report, the first version was coming at about 3,000 euros too expensive, which Porsche is said to be able to absorb but Audi wasn’t on board."
Read: "Even our luxury brand can't turn a profit on this thing."
"The battery cell cost is apparently the biggest factor that pushes the cost of the platform higher"
Read: "That battery plant they're building that we're partnering with for 2020/2021 is already obsolete."
"According to the report, Audi and Porsche could delay the PPE in order to improve the cost and be competitive with Tesla."
Read: "Please, for the love of God, Tesla, slow down. Wait, did they seriously just purchase a company to let them lower their electrode manufacturing costs further...?"
"The PPE is becoming increasingly important for Audi according to Manager-Magazin’s report, which describes a failing e-tron program: 'The e-tron as the first electric Audi is not only late. It does not reach some target values and has become far too expensive with more than two billion euros in development costs. The approximately 600,000 cars sold for the break-even are now regarded as an illusion.' "
Read: "You know that thing we keep hyping as a 'Tesla Killer'? It's actually killing us."
"The German automaker is still planning several other vehicles based on the same platform before the PPE becomes available."
Read: "And it's going to continue killing us until we can introduce our now further delayed replacement."
I mean... damn.Is the rest of Volkswagen Group also this clueless and behind the times?
VW and Audi did arrive at a Tennis match with a Table Tennis racket.....
We are just at the start of a very bad awakening for the German Automakers that if they use their strength from the past they will this time not win the challenge they have now with BEVs.
For 10 years now they thought they know exactly what to do although many told them this time it's different. Underestimating the vertical integration benefits and complexity they do not feel comfortable with because its against their well defined business model as well as what the consumer really wants is forgiven as long as there is not choice in the market.
Choice does change everything and as they did a bet they though is a safe one they actually wasted many years on a strategy that is a dead end road. The money lost is not even the issue but the time they lost is.
Also this is now a huge humiliation and Top Managers who did decide on the approach in the past resulting in the mess they are in today are not credible for changing their strategy to the good. Letting them go would be the logic consequence however that means you are loosing time again.
To answer your question, yes, they are that clueless.
BTW, CuriousSunbird - while I disagree with your viewpoint here, I appreciate how respectful you're being while disagreeing with others. Kudos to you for that.
So if I made an EV with a 32km/20 mile range that could charge 0-80% in 15 minutes, would you say that's better than the E-Tron? No, seriously - would you?
Of course you wouldn't. Because the actual measure that makes any difference whatsoever to owners is how far you can drive per minute spent charging. Everything else is just marketing. 80% on an E-Tron pack is less than half of a Model S 100D pack. And yet it consumes vastly more power per unit distance.
You can keep ignoring this fact all you want. That won't make it go away. People will continue to be only affected by how far you can drive per minute spent charging. And charging network distribution too, of course
No evidence like the fact that power-dense cells would weigh the same or more than the entire battery pack - ignoring the fact that the pack contains the car's crash structure? No evidence like the fact that their partner which claims even faster charging times has openly disclosed their cell density?
What planet do you live on, seriously?
Which says absolutely nothing whatsoever about what they're budgeting for warranty replacement costs, which are relative to the percentage of people who actually do a reasonable number of fast charges. In this regard, the terrible state of high-power CCS networks actually strongly works to their advantage. Customers in most of their markets can't fast charge even if they wanted to
The warranty costs won't hit them for years down the road. And since they're only planning on selling a few tens of thousands of vehicles per year worldwide, they could eat the cost even if they had to replace every battery under warranty. Which makes pointing to warranty costs utterly meaningless as a counter. Nissan Leaf has a 100k mile battery warranty, and its degradation is terrible, particularly for those who fast charge often. Why? Because they let their cells get too hot. Nissan just eats the costs, and relies on statistics to ensure that the degradation to still be inside their warrantied bounds for "most" customers until after 100k mi.
1. I doubt you're going to build any EV, but no, this red herring sadly doesn't work either, Karen, as I am not discussing "the actual measure that makes any difference whatsoever to owners" but rather your claim that e-Tron cells are more energy dense than Tesla NCA, which I say is baseless and concocted merely to assist your very stretched theory that Audi/Porsche are abusively frying their batteries as opposed to simply employing competent engineers to design and test same to fulfil their own warranty requirements.
2. I am not ignoring any facts. It's just that you keep desperately attempting to change the subject in order to evade any admission of error.
3. You only talk about power dense cells like LTO as a reductio ad absurdum in order to deflect from the fact we were discussing a comparison between Audi e-Tron NCM-622 and Tesla NCA, in which you made a claim you cannot back up. But maybe you are more interested in trying to move some stock prices than the battery details?
4. Your "frying" speculation remains ill-tempered back-biting. We shall see if e-Tron batteries live up to their warranty, as I presume they will due to Audi hiring competent help.
Last edited:
Man, just now reading that article about the Porsche/Audi reverse engineering of the Model 3, and it's really damning.
"Now a new report from Germany’s Manager Magazin (German and paywall) includes a deep dive into the state of Audi with comments from executives and insider sources. ... The Porsche and Audi engineers have to change [the PPE] because Tesla’s Model 3 has gotten better than they thought."
Read: "Oh f***!"
"The next-gen platform called Premium Platform Electric (PPE) was greenlighted almost two years ago and it is expected to be ready around 2020 or 2021."
Read: "We don't think we can compete until at least 2022, and please God, don't let Tesla keep improving even further during that time..."
"According to the new report, the first version was coming at about 3,000 euros too expensive, which Porsche is said to be able to absorb but Audi wasn’t on board."
Read: "Even our luxury brand can't turn a profit on this thing."
"The battery cell cost is apparently the biggest factor that pushes the cost of the platform higher"
Read: "That battery plant they're building that we're partnering with for 2020/2021 is already obsolete."
"According to the report, Audi and Porsche could delay the PPE in order to improve the cost and be competitive with Tesla."
Read: "Please, for the love of God, Tesla, slow down. Wait, did they seriously just purchase a company to let them lower their electrode manufacturing costs further...?"
"The PPE is becoming increasingly important for Audi according to Manager-Magazin’s report, which describes a failing e-tron program: 'The e-tron as the first electric Audi is not only late. It does not reach some target values and has become far too expensive with more than two billion euros in development costs. The approximately 600,000 cars sold for the break-even are now regarded as an illusion.' "
Read: "You know that thing we keep hyping as a 'Tesla Killer'? It's actually killing us."
"The German automaker is still planning several other vehicles based on the same platform before the PPE becomes available."
Read: "And it's going to continue killing us until we can introduce our now further delayed replacement."
I mean... damn.
BTW, one more thing on this topic. Volkswagen Group's plans for competing with Tesla have been almost surely assuming the continuation of the status quo, re: tariffs. But the US is in the early phases of a tariff war with the EU; it was postponed for negotiations. And re: the auto tariff, the EU has already offered to throw it to the wolves to avoid a trade war. The Trump administration thinks that's not enough - they also want the EU to open up more to US agricultural exports, which the EU is resisting.
10% cheaper Teslas on Volkswagen AG's home turf is not going to play well.
Fact Checking
Well-Known Member
Note that sedan imports from the U.S. to Europe and the 10% tax on them are a minimal item, compared to European car exports to the U.S.
European carmakers were threatened with a 20% tariff for U.S. imports - that would have been rather devastating to BMW, Daimler AG and even Volkswagen - exactly at a time when they need steady streams of income the most.
So signalling that the 10% tariff on U.S. made sedans could go away was an easy enough sacrificial concession for the EU to make.
@avoigt, are you able to find any original quotes from the "Manager Magazin" article?
I feel this article is important enough that its translation to English should not be left to random journalists or complete unknowns...
Sean Wagner
Member
Dead horse. Brick wall. Still interesting. From the article about Audi's current corporate travails [though they're still generating nice profits, just not nice enough it seems], quote:
"Auch die gut 50 ausgewählten e-tron-Tester im Konzern melden – bei allem Fahrspaß – noch zu viele Probleme. Insbesondere das Laden sei häufig problematisch. Auf den e-tron sei man nicht gerade stolz, wird Entwicklungschef Rothenpieler zitiert."
>> The roughly 50 select corporate e-tron testers are indicating that despite the inherent "Fahrspass" [need I translate?] there still are too many problems. Especially charging is often problematical. Audi isn't exactly proud of the e-tron as per their head of development [!] Rothenspieler... <<
What strikes me again is how much turmoil there has been and potentially remains at the top.
The revisions to the next, more generally suitable platform for EVs due to Tesla's "unexpected" cost engineering acumen are most revealing.
"Auch die gut 50 ausgewählten e-tron-Tester im Konzern melden – bei allem Fahrspaß – noch zu viele Probleme. Insbesondere das Laden sei häufig problematisch. Auf den e-tron sei man nicht gerade stolz, wird Entwicklungschef Rothenpieler zitiert."
>> The roughly 50 select corporate e-tron testers are indicating that despite the inherent "Fahrspass" [need I translate?] there still are too many problems. Especially charging is often problematical. Audi isn't exactly proud of the e-tron as per their head of development [!] Rothenspieler... <<
What strikes me again is how much turmoil there has been and potentially remains at the top.
The revisions to the next, more generally suitable platform for EVs due to Tesla's "unexpected" cost engineering acumen are most revealing.
I wish they'd stop putting PHEV's in with BEV's. PHEV's are NOT electric cars at all.
Fact Checking
Well-Known Member
Man, just now reading that article about the Porsche/Audi reverse engineering of the Model 3, and it's really damning.
"Now a new report from Germany’s Manager Magazin (German and paywall) includes a deep dive into the state of Audi with comments from executives and insider sources. ... The Porsche and Audi engineers have to change [the PPE] because Tesla’s Model 3 has gotten better than they thought."
Read: "Oh f***!"
"The next-gen platform called Premium Platform Electric (PPE) was greenlighted almost two years ago and it is expected to be ready around 2020 or 2021."
Read: "We don't think we can compete until at least 2022, and please God, don't let Tesla keep improving even further during that time..."
"According to the new report, the first version was coming at about 3,000 euros too expensive, which Porsche is said to be able to absorb but Audi wasn’t on board."
Read: "Even our luxury brand can't turn a profit on this thing."
"The battery cell cost is apparently the biggest factor that pushes the cost of the platform higher"
Read: "That battery plant they're building that we're partnering with for 2020/2021 is already obsolete."
"According to the report, Audi and Porsche could delay the PPE in order to improve the cost and be competitive with Tesla."
Read: "Please, for the love of God, Tesla, slow down. Wait, did they seriously just purchase a company to let them lower their electrode manufacturing costs further...?"
"The PPE is becoming increasingly important for Audi according to Manager-Magazin’s report, which describes a failing e-tron program: 'The e-tron as the first electric Audi is not only late. It does not reach some target values and has become far too expensive with more than two billion euros in development costs. The approximately 600,000 cars sold for the break-even are now regarded as an illusion.' "
Read: "You know that thing we keep hyping as a 'Tesla Killer'? It's actually killing us."
"The German automaker is still planning several other vehicles based on the same platform before the PPE becomes available."
Read: "And it's going to continue killing us until we can introduce our now further delayed replacement."
I mean... damn.
BTW , I find the level of financial and business plan details leaked in the Manager Magazin article absolutely amazing:
- The 3,000€ cost difference is something probably only top level executives and their closest staff would know.
- Even the teardown firm is unlikely to have had access to Audi's and Porsche's own production costs, which are very sensitive, closely guarded secrets.
- Similarly only people at the highest levels would know about the PPE schedule and the delaying effects it has.
- The 2 billion Euros capex of the new E-Tron factory and its EV supply chains and the 600,000 sales break-even target was not disclosed before, neither the fact that they now consider the target "illusory". These too are C-suite, board level of information, never, never leaked unintentionally.
- Only VW executives would know about both Porsche and Audi margins.
- Note that only Audi and VW executives know the E-Tron preorder numbers, which have to be poor for them to declare the 600,000 break-even sales target "illusory" before sales even start ...
The following is pure speculation:
- The E-Tron is in trouble and they have nothing else for years.
- No Taycan problems were leaked - but Taycan isn't a mass production platform.
- What was the purpose of the leak:
- Trying to drum up political support and taxpayer money?
- Trying to prepare the market for bad financial results?
- Trying to explain the expected market failure of the E-Tron?
- Do they have to write down the E-Tron? Or delay it to 2020?
Sean Wagner
Member
You can register for a free premium month. There really are some nuggets, although it must be recalled this is pulling together all the negatives for something of a sensational hit piece. The real negatives and real positives are what matter, and presently, not all of them are knowable.
Sean Wagner
Member
Audi's aggressive cost-cutting targets over the next several years, recently upped again, and simultaneously high and higher levels of investment in EVs have not been appreciated enough, I think.
Which is not to say they guarantee success.
And once more, the numbers demonstrate how efficient Tesla is at transmuting capital into cars [though Deepak Ahujah has recently and quite rightly drawn attention to it].
Which is not to say they guarantee success.
And once more, the numbers demonstrate how efficient Tesla is at transmuting capital into cars [though Deepak Ahujah has recently and quite rightly drawn attention to it].
Fact Checking
Well-Known Member
Does Manager Magazin have a history of hit pieces? Isn't Volkswagen AG one of their biggest advertisers?
If it's not typical then my guess is that the E-Tron is in even more trouble in reality: big delays, more cost overruns, or maybe even complete write down in favor of the VW I.D. platform?
@KarenRei's estimates suggest very poor EPA range: which, combined with poor U.S. charging infrastructure and probable U.S. dealership sabotage would make it a very hard sell in the U.S. at its target premium price range.
These leaks could be part of a carefully orchestrated campaign by VW top management to break the bad news, piece by piece.
(The evident pro-E-Tron trolling here on TMC would support the notion of such a campaign as well.)
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
