Hello, Allpar Forums member or visitor! If you were a member, you would not see this ad!

Register or log in at the top right of the page...

  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Mercedes-Benz gets reality check from Tesla owners after asking fans if they want electric cars

Discussion in 'Auto News & Rumors' started by Erik Latranyi, Aug 11, 2017.

  1. patfromigh

    patfromigh Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2010
    Messages:
    2,307
    Likes:
    1,001
    It's time to stop the myth that FCA is falling behind. Just because the don't sell EVs to the consumer through retail outlets, doesn't mean there isn't any R&D going on. The PHEV Pacifica didn't pop up out of nowhere. The automotive media bashes Sergio for his statements about the 500e compliance car and dropping the earlier hybrids. If FCA remained locked in to those battery contracts from 2008, they would of been behind both financially and technologically. It has been pointed out elsewhere in these forums that FCA companies offer electric vehicles in other global markets, where it makes sound business sense.

    Daimler cut off the legs from Chrysler's EV progress after 2003when they killed the EPIC. The media likes to overlook how advanced the Chrysler EVs were at that time. FCA doesn't make batteries and not all battery manufacturers make automobiles. I don't think it is necessary for FCA to make batteries if there is a competitive market to supply them.
     
    danbek and Dave Z like this.
  2. JavelinAMX

    JavelinAMX Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2013
    Messages:
    3,636
    Likes:
    1,940
    .

    ICE has infrastructure in its favor.

    It might be a while for anything like a Tesla can make the trip from New York to San Francisco the way a Gasoline/Diesel can with virtually little trouble.

    Part of that infrastructure would include Auto Mechanics and Parts outlets and/or towing for 'just-in-case' moments along that drive

    There really is more to it than a promise of the future. The 'Sweet By-and-By' will be really nice, no doubt. We're here, now, from the original EV's starting in 1896. We're benefiting from the innovation and growth and development since that time. The new EV's have to scale a very nearly vertical wall to negate ICE vehicle advantage. It will be interesting how much time and money will be invested in that effort to reach a more or less 1:1 ratio of actual ease of ownership and operation with/against ICE transportation.

    ... And will there be yet another paradigm shift to another transpo method during the unfolding of this current change? Shall we watch for that?

    .
     
  3. somber

    somber 370,000 miles
    Level III Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2014
    Messages:
    1,106
    Likes:
    1,449
    For me, it's because of the dang tax credit. Every one I see on the road angers me that they reached into my pocket to buy that luxury car. If not for all the incentives (meaning they got where they are fair and square through level competition), I'd love Tesla.
     
  4. DarkSky

    DarkSky Moderator
    Level III Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2016
    Messages:
    2,377
    Likes:
    3,759
    Elon Musk asked the tax credit to be removed because he feels Tesla will do even better without it.
     
  5. MJAB

    MJAB Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,759
    Likes:
    3,053
    Elon Musk is very good business man, especially in marketing and make persons think about great innovations while most of that "revolutionary" innovations are just repainted technologies already existing on the market.

    His goal is to create enough dynamics in Tesla so he can sell his shares (25-30%), get his money and so say that he will continue to "save humanity" in other sectors.

    Tesla does not own core battery technologies, that are owned by electro-chemical companies. So true that Testla Gigafactory has to pay Panasonic for the cells, that are the core component of the batteries. At end of 2016 it was about USD 1.7 billion that had to pay.

    Lithium price in last year increased of 60%, main production is from Argentina, Chile and Bolivia with about 75% of the market.
    Cobalt, main producer Democratic Republic of Congo, in the last 3 months price went up of 63%.
    To add that increasing production is not so fast as some could think and also the impact on environment is not so "light".

    So, massive expansion of low cost or with costs comparable to other energy powered vehicles, are only propaganda.
    For higher price cars there is always room, with whatever energy source could take attention at the time it is proposed.
    I could, better to say some companies, like Audi already does, create a "synthetic" fuels derived from harmful emissions such as CO2.
    The most important part should be the marketing part, paint the synthetic fuels as world salvation technology. An infinite closed loop thanks to the technologies to stop harmful emissions (particles are not a problem since also the diesel cars were not found to emit more than allowed, the contrary under the limits).

    One of core components, the electric motors, are Tesla products. And are also one of the car components on which they have problems.
    Electric motors are here fro more than a century, are manufactured by many actors and in automotive world there are several manufacturers developing new electric motors for automotive application.
    Even FCA has its manufacturer and R&D company, Magneti Marelli.
     
  6. somber

    somber 370,000 miles
    Level III Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2014
    Messages:
    1,106
    Likes:
    1,449
    Yes, the $7500 tax credit is capped at 200,000 per manufacturer. Tesla very soon will bump into that cap and no longer be eligible for the credit, but the next company in line to hit the cap is GM, and they won't hit it for another couple of years or more. During that time, Tesla would be at a disadvantage. So yes, now that Tesla has just about used up all the tax credit, it would like to get rid of it so it won't have to compete with companies that are still eligible.
     
  7. DarkSky

    DarkSky Moderator
    Level III Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2016
    Messages:
    2,377
    Likes:
    3,759
    Yep, he admitted that it puts them at a disadvantage. Once the credits are removed from every manufacturer there will be an even playing field and he thinks Tesla will do even better with that.
     
  8. somber

    somber 370,000 miles
    Level III Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2014
    Messages:
    1,106
    Likes:
    1,449
    "Since we've already lapped up our 1.5 Billion dollars from US taxpayers for the electric vehicle tax credit, let's have an even playing field." This, along with the carbon credit extortion from the other automakers, makes Tesla one of the most parasitic companies I can think of right now.
     
    danbek likes this.
  9. danbek

    danbek Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2008
    Messages:
    670
    Likes:
    725
    And they do all of this with other people's money and have yet to make a dime.
     
    wtxiceman, somber and Erik Latranyi like this.
  10. KrisW

    KrisW Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2015
    Messages:
    1,194
    Likes:
    2,063
    I have a major problem with the idea of subsidising wealthy people to buy toys, and thereby skip paying their fair share of the cost of the roads (In the USA, an average of 30c of the pump price of a gallon of gas is taxes that pay for maintenance of the road infrastructure; the exact amount varies state to state).

    A subsidy should only ever be for those who cannot afford to pay for something. Most of Tesla's owners can well afford the unsubsidized price of their cars.

    The only luxury aspect of the Model S is the silent drive. The exterior styling and the cabin design is underdeveloped, and that big touchscreen is nothing more than a cost cutting measure, as anyone who's ever had to get a quote for custom plastic part tooling will tell you. Safe operation of a car requires eyes-off controls, and that remains true regardless of how many times Tesla owners try to justify the system. Try driving on a busy European highway where high speed lane weaving is the norm, and tell me you don't need eyes up.
     
    somber and danbek like this.
  11. Erik Latranyi

    Level III Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2003
    Messages:
    11,054
    Likes:
    10,699
    That is the real problem.....Tesla should not be in business. It is a money-losing operation that would not exist without taxpayer support. Investors would not stick around this long for a company that cannot make a profit.

    The price disparity between EVs and ICE will keep the technology on the fringes for longer than most believe. With low fuel prices, you can buy a larger ICE vehicle that is more convenient than an EV......and with better quality.
     
    JavelinAMX, somber and danbek like this.
  12. GasAxe

    GasAxe Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2008
    Messages:
    4,601
    Likes:
    5,508
    History is filled with technological or social leaps (along with massive failures) that are subsidized by governments or mega-rich individuals/families. I think we are seeing a shift to large groups of individuals who can take up the mantle of funding profitless business ventures as long as it meets their social ideals. The life of the business can be extended, but not indefinitely.
     
    aldo90731 likes this.
  13. aldo90731

    Level III Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2010
    Messages:
    5,997
    Likes:
    9,969
    Toyota did it, too, with the Prius.

    When you look at the 2004 Toyota Prius, the one that took off, it didn't take a master degree in accounting to notice that the numbers didn't add up: compact exterior, the interior room of a midsize car, state-of-the-art hybrid engine technology, 40 MPG...all for a starting price of $20,000. Or roughly the same price as a 4-cyl Camry, offering comparable interior space but delivering 50% better fuel economy.

    There were rumors at the time that Toyota was subsidizing the price of Prius to help it stick in the market, but the rumors were thoroughly suppressed. I am convinced the rumors were true on the simple fact that there's no way Toyota could build a state-of-the-art hybrid vehicle, with two motors, regenerative braking, etc., and sell it for the same price as a regular midsize car.

    But Toyota had to vehemently deny subsidizing Prius because if the US government got wind of it, it would have levied costly anti-dumping charges on Toyota and stopped hybrid engine technology on its tracks.

    Ultimately, Prius's value proposition was artificially made irresistible by a Toyota leadership focused on the long-term end-game. We can debate whether it was the right or the wrong thing to do. But for Toyota and millions of Prius owners, my sense is they would argue it was the right thing to do.
     
    somber and GasAxe like this.
  14. JavelinAMX

    JavelinAMX Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2013
    Messages:
    3,636
    Likes:
    1,940
    The early Prius models (late 90's) were Butt ugly. They didn't project forward thinking in their appearance. I very much preferred looking at the then Honda Insight (even though the Insight was a two-seater). 'Yota, at that time, was bigger, better heeled (in monetary terms), and had the stubborn determination of the proverbial Ox. Honda's Insight fell by the wayside.

    Later on, Prius took on some of the forward look styling once found on Honda's stuff.
     

Share This Page

Loading...