> I see this all or nothing argument when discussing new stuff.
When did it become popular to start selling beta products? Did it begin when we all bought into social media?
Apple produced a computer, music player and phone that were a polished step up from what was happening before: build-your-own computer, music with insufficient storage and crap interfaces, and blackberries that only targeted business people.
Underpromise and overimpress me. Enough with this overpromising-because-have-to as if that's the only way to innovate or get investment. It isn't the only way and I wish investors would do a little more due diligence to get behind innovators who know what they are doing, not just throwing money at cool things saying they'll be ready by the end of the year over an 8 year period.
Outcomes speak for themselves. Tesla has had their timelines set back years and they're still ahead of everyone else in every category and their products sell like hot cakes. People who actually care about innovation and progress aren't pedantic about slipped timelines, panel gaps or hiccups, ESPECIALLY on projects that are on the cutting edge. If you think investors, most of whom worked their ass off to build their capital, are so gullible, over so many years, then you're not giving them enough credit (unless you think Tesla is misleading investors Theranos style - at which point, I'm off).
As for the whole Apple situation. If all companies tried to do what Apple does all the time, we'd be living in the stone age. Apple is an exception to the rule in that they're perfectionists in their tiny little bubble. Perhaps you didn't catch Apple's abondoned plan to build their own car. Did you hear about Dyson? Making an EV you can actually sell for profit is something even Apple, with all their money and talent, can't do and Tesla does like it's child play. Tesla has has the highest per unit margin of any automaker out there by factors of 3x and more. Apple does not hold a single candle to Tesla.
Tesla is about to overtake companies like BMW who have existed for 100 years. They already outsell Porsche.
And without having entered into major markets like Pickups, Semis and a number of others.
And they make their margin on EV, while many other companies simply lose money on EV and simply hide that fact. Or make minimal margin on the cars and lose money on EV overall.
Only a few years ago it was widely believed that you can't make money on EVs.
Another concept to look at for margin comparison is the fact all the other manufacturers are still playing the dealer network game. Lots of the profits on the cars aren't going to the old manufacturers, it's going to the local dealers.
Tesla doesn't have dealers, so all the dealer profits go to Tesla.
They are caught up when they start outselling Tesla (or heck become available so one can actually buy one).
Great cars (which I don't think Hyundai/Kia are by any stretch of imagination, from piss-poor software to poor charging infrastructure, but let's discount this for now) can exist at great prices all they want, but if I can't get my hand on one and the 500 or so that show up once every few month get gobbled up in seconds, they practically do not exist at all.
And mind you, the disparity in production is not gonna go away any time soon. They're all limited by battery production and unless they make their own batteries, Tesla has long been in the line to buy batteries from anywhere they possibly can, as much as they can. They don't screw around.
BYD is far more of a competitor to Tesla than Kia/Hyandai have been to date.
EDIT: and Tesla is no exemption here - once they have a Cybertruck selling in competitive "numbers", it becomes competitive. Until then, Rivians and Fords are leading the pack (and I must say, beautifully).
>>they're still ahead of everyone else in every category
Your definiton ^ ...
And, in terms of sales, that might be your definition of 'caught up' but it's not mine.
Well-used analagy applies here: if sales are your KPI then I assume McDonalds is your idea of a fine meal. Sorry, no.
And your dismissal of Hyundai/Kia by definition singles you out as far out there in biased land. I've test drove all three (including Tesla) and done the research. The only reason I haven't bought an ioniq 5 is because I simply can't justify it at the moment (my work-life means it'll just sit in the driveway however much I want it). But they are all ... great cars.
I'll say Tesla are great cars with groundbreaking technology, if ugly. But the Hyundai/Kia are now the better cars (interior, build, comfort) and the all around package. Again, unless you count "sales" as the definition of 'in the lead'.
*Disclaimer: I have a driveway where I can charge over night. If you don't have this, perhaps the supercharger network means something to you. That appears to be the only advantage.
> And, in terms of sales, that might be your definition of 'caught up' but it's not mine.
Good for you
> Well-used analagy applies here: if sales are your KPI then I assume McDonalds is your idea of a fine meal. Sorry, no.
Thanks for that analogy. Yes, one can brag all they want about the best Italian cuisine they had at a top bistro. It means nothing to most people if: they can't afford it, if they can't get a booking for months. McDonalds delivers round the clock, food that's safe and does it fast. I take McDonalds over all of so called "fine" food any day. I value my time and don't want to waste it, waiting on food.
> And your dismissal of Hyundai/Kia by definition singles you out as far out there in biased land. I've test drove all three (including Tesla) and done the research. The only reason I haven't bought an ioniq 5 is because I simply can't justify it at the moment (my work-life means it'll just sit in the driveway however much I want it). But they are all ... great cars.
I have driven all the above (some through friends and Ioniq 5 by asking a stranger nicely), in addition to BYD, Polstar and anything that's available to drive in Australia, multiple times for some. I've owned a Tesla for the past 2 years and have test driven every other model as well. The handling, software, ambiance and interior of all but Tesla (and specifically Model 3) is vastly inferior. As for handling, they all feel like they'll run away and off the road any moment. I'm sure I'll get used to them after longer drives, but Tesla's doing something there that gives me more confidence when handling.
If any of these was significantly cheaper as to make up for their shortcomings, I'd happily recommend them to friends and family. But as they sit right now, no frigging way.
> if ugly.
I don't know what you're talking about!
> But the Hyundai/Kia are now the better cars (interior, build, comfort)
Interior of all the cars above make me feel suffocated. Their build qualities are definitely good but virtually no one I know actually cares, unless shit's falling off the car. Tesla's quality is only getting better. As for comfort, Model 3 has the most comfortable seat of any car I've ever owned (out of 3).
At least with McDonalds, you know what goes into it. They actually have a nutrition label. Show me the nutrition label of the Italian bistro. If you asked, you'd probably get kicked out because you insulted the chef.
So, actually, I'll be way more confident about my health (that's what it's called, not safety, food safety is about you not getting poisoned) eating at McDonalds, than at some rando uptown joint.
Do you really know though? McDonalds has lied in the past quite a bit. For example, they touted their hamburger meat as 100% beef with no additives for quite awhile, then had to fess up when the truth about Pink Slime came out.
Then when they tried to climb on the vegan/vegetarian bandwagon, they had to quickly admit that their fry shortening had beef flavoring added to it, then switch to an entirely different shortening.
> When did it become popular to start selling beta products? Did it begin when we all bought into social media?
Since forever? You're comparing a new product category with already existing and optimized one. To keep close to the topic, think about the history of ICEs and cars in general: the first ones that got popular were all pretty much beta products.
> Apple produced a computer, music player and phone that were a polished step up from what was happening before: build-your-own computer, music with insufficient storage and crap interfaces, and blackberries that only targeted business people.
That's some pretty revisionist history. Apple made solid, polished hardware, in an established market with plenty of competition. About the only large leap they made was with the first iPhone, and it's considered both transformative and very much a beta version.
People forget just how basic (and sometimes bad!) the original of many things was. And everyone has an iPhone now but they didn’t all buy the first one, neither.
The original iPod was Mac only and FireWire, for goodness sake! People made do and it improved over time.
People want EV transportation because the world population is at risk. So they cut some slack to Tesla. Tesla makes compelling vehicles even if flawed. It's ok because it's a step in the right direction. Nothing wrong with that, or is it wrong to have ideals?
People want point of care testing, and everyone is at risk of dying of cancer. Theranos makes compelling equipment even if it is a little rough around the edges. It's ok because it's a step in the right direction. Nothing wrong with that, or is it wrong to have ideals? Oh wait...
The problem with that, is that “Theranos makes compelling equipment even if it is a little rough around the edges. It's ok because it's a step in the right direction.” wasn’t true, and that’s why Elizabeth Holmes was convicted for fraud.
Now, I’m not happy that Tesla is still calling the driving assistance software “autopilot” given some governments are criticising this name choice as misleading, but it’s not like the (limited and not ready) software is completely fictional — it can actually get people from A to B by itself, even if though it really isn’t at the quality level where this is a generally wise replacement for most humans, but only for, e.g. impaired humans in a medical emergency and even then it’s really only sane on highways (old story, but probably still illustrative based on the published safety statistics): https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/aug/08/tesla-mod...
However, considering Tesla as an EV company rather than as an AI company: it does what it says on the tin. There’s no secret gasoline tank hiding inside the batteries.
It was true. They had 2-3 working tests running on their machines by the end of the company. They sold over 100.
In my mind, this is the same as advertising "the human is only there for liability reasons" on an L2 ADAS system.
As to what Tesla is, the moment people accept that it's an EV company, I will be happy. The market currently does not, largely due to the insane promises of the company's CEO.
Let's not forget that Elizabeth Holmes was acquitted of defrauding patients. She was convicted of defrauding investors. What's the difference?
What a disingenuous analogy to make, between Tesla that has delivered time and time again and surpassed expectations, led the market for the past 10 years and continues to outsell all of its century old competitors, with Theranos which burnt investor money and never produced a working machine, ever.
"We want FSD some day and are working on it" is aiming high.
Calling it's driver assist Autopilot, calling its software FSD, repeatedly saying "FSD is coming next year" is overpromising, misleading marketing and lying
> Calling it's driver assist Autopilot, calling its software FSD, repeatedly saying "FSD is coming next year" is overpromising, misleading marketing and lying
OK, finally an actual example and the one I expected.
TL;DR is that if Tesla was in fact doing anything the regulators found to be hurting the customers, they would be forcing Tesla to make changes (and they have re FSD in some minor ways). It's fun to make a big deal about nothing but no one is buying FSD and thinking, Tesla robbed me $10K. They get it, play with it, it doesn't do what they promised, they can get a refund for the FSD package, and even a full refund for the entire car. People tend to keep their Teslas, so that's a non issue.
Majority of people don't buy Teslas for promise of FSD (in fact, most don't even believe it). They buy it because right now, it's a great car. As far as delivering great cars is concerned (which is the vast majority of cases), Tesla has delivered time and again.
Also, Tesla has never lied about FSD, only missing deadlines. If anything, their progress has shown anything but any attempt to lie to customers. They are moving as fast as they can and no one in the industry comes close.
I'll be happy to see, for once, someone talk about misleading marketing about anything but FSD. You can take FSD away any day and it won't make a blip of difference to Tesla's sales or margins.
Also, regulators are catching up to "FSD" in many places, but they work slowly. They are also catching up on the promised ranges - unlike "mpg," there is no standard by which the range of an EV is required to be evaluated. All of these rules take a LONG time to put in place.
As far as a refund on the package is concerned, I'm not sure you can actually get one. A friend of mine paid the $10k as a "line jumping fee" to get his car 4 months earlier, and I assume that most informed buyers treat the FSD package the same.
> The Model 3 sedan was being described on Tesla’s Korean website claiming 'can drive more than 528 km on a single charge'. However, on its US website, Tesla describes Model 3's performance as "Go anywhere with "up to" 358 miles of estimated range on a single charge." 358 miles equates to about 576 kms, and much less than what Tesla claimed in South Korean markets. After local media raised the issue and the regulator stepped in, Tesla changed the range from ‘more than’ to a ‘maximum’ 528 kilometres.
What??!! 576km is not much less than 528km, it's more! So Tesla was in fact correctly indicating that the range is more than 528km, because it is! Either this is awful reporting or there is a mistake in there. Also saying "can drive more than" instead of "up to" isn't necessarily an exaggeration, it may simply be a mistake in wording of the website. I give them the benefit of doubt here because I've never seen Tesla advertise range like that. It's often a single number with a testing methodology suffix (like EPA). There is no "up to" or the like qualifiers.
As for the second link, super interesting content. But EPA has certified the range and all other manufacturers are free to do what Tesla does to make their range more appealing. Nothing fishy going on here as far as I'm concerned. Exaggerating range in context of a certification program is moot (unless you're cheating and Tesla is clearly not, according to this article).
> A friend of mine paid the $10k as a "line jumping fee" to get his car 4 months earlier, and I assume that most informed buyers treat the FSD package the same.
Really? You thought this was a compelling example?!!! Have you never bought an "as-is" item from a shop which was on display. You pay cheaper but you can't bring it back for refund if you change your mind. This is common practice in every industry. You wanna be treated differently, you give up some perks.
People who buy FSD package as a way to jump the queue aren't buying FSD, they're buying time and as such doubt they will care about functionality of FSD.
I was referring to people who buy FSD for its current and future capabilities.
When did it become popular to start selling beta products? Did it begin when we all bought into social media?
Apple produced a computer, music player and phone that were a polished step up from what was happening before: build-your-own computer, music with insufficient storage and crap interfaces, and blackberries that only targeted business people.
Underpromise and overimpress me. Enough with this overpromising-because-have-to as if that's the only way to innovate or get investment. It isn't the only way and I wish investors would do a little more due diligence to get behind innovators who know what they are doing, not just throwing money at cool things saying they'll be ready by the end of the year over an 8 year period.