You can install our site as a web app on your iOS device by utilizing the Add to Home Screen feature in Safari. Please see this thread for more details on this.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Sorry, but you are again missing my point. The cost is for the properly scaling Powerwall / Powerpack generation II, following the scaling of the new automotive battery packs. This has nothing to do with the cost of acquisition of SolarCity.
I can't help but feel like TSLA freefall is in part related to the SpaceX static fire explosion.
I don't think so. Not at all.I can't help but feel like TSLA freefall is in part related to the SpaceX static fire explosion.
So basically Tesla shareholders are seeing their shared diluted by the tune of $2.6B for something that should only really cost an additional few hundred millions of investment? Isn't that my entire point? Tesla is doing the heavy lifting here : it's their revolutionary battery tech and their continued innovation like you point out re the P100D pack and their high voltage inverter technology according to Elon that they are going to apply to what is basically an empty shell and sell through their retail channel. What does SolarCity bring to the table? Tesla is more than capable to do development on PW2.0 with their integrated inverter themselves an release a product that is essentially installable by any solar company themselves. And if it really wanted to expand an get an in house installation force to provide a smooth experience, it could raise a much more modest sum from its shareholders and hire the necessary staff themselves (probably straight away from a bankrupt SolarCity)
There's a reason these companies are separate entities. As we are seeing spacex impact Tesla today. It's related because it speaks to a pattern of behavior. Taking risks when doing things correctly would be better. Reusable rockets are good but they should work on reliability of the original ones. Just like Tesla should have avoided the mess with the falcon doors and seats in the Model X
SpaceX has not historically had a reliability problem. They've static fired every Falcon 9 produced at MacGregor, and then again at the launch site. Every Merlin engine on their rockets is running for the 3rd (minimum) time on the actual launch. Out of 28 launches to date, there has been one total loss vehicle failure, and one partial failure to put a tagalong customer's payload in the correct orbit on a mission NASA was paying for, on an actual mission launch. This failure on the pad during static fire testing is exactly why they do static fire testing.
Falcon 9 is not out of line with other rocket designs on a reliability factor. The problem with rockets is that they're low-production and with the exception of SpaceX, you can't get them back after they've been used to triage where failures might occur to better the design for next time.
I assume you are measuring by mission failures. One of these was secondary of course. However, we don't know the status of the payload and unconfirmed reports say that it was not integrated. I wouldn't count it as a failure if the customer's payload was somewhere safe. This is just a test failure. EDIT: scratch that - sounds like full on failure now that SpaceX has commented.So that's three failures plus the first two when the company was started. So five total.
I assume you are measuring by mission failures. One of these was secondary of course. However, we don't know the status of the payload and unconfirmed reports say that it was not integrated. I wouldn't count it as a failure if the customer's payload was somewhere safe. This is just a test failure.
The first 3 Falcon 1's failed. Elon put up his last dollars to make the 4th one happen, (at the same time as he put a bunch of money into Tesla to make sure it survived long enough to get Roadsters out). 4th launch of Falcon 1 was a success, and gained SpaceX commercial customers.So that's three failures plus the first two when the company was started. So five total.
This is what I remember about Elon saying the reason to purchase Solar City is:
Elon said innovative solar roof, integrated battery and inverter, and a single Tesla sales contact point when getting those, hopefully + car and car charger, one install, one payment plan (one contact point). He says that's not as possible with SCTY separate, and reading between the lines, I think he's also avoiding saying Rives wasn't that innovative and only did little better than a mediocre job from the POV of someone with Elon ambitions. Also, Elon thinks SCTY is the right company because he's already involved.