# US Federal Vehicles will all be Electric. Tesla - get movin.



## Garlan Garner (May 24, 2016)

Here is a fantastic opportunity for Tesla if they can ramp up their production. Come on Texas and Berlin.

President Biden will make entire 645k federal vehicle fleet US-made electric - Electrek


----------



## FRC (Aug 4, 2018)

Garlan Garner said:


> Here is a fantastic opportunity for Tesla if they can ramp up their production. Come on Texas and Berlin.
> 
> President Biden will make entire 645k federal vehicle fleet US-made electric - Electrek


Certainly hope this becomes a reality. I've never been certain; when a politician makes a promise, is it more likely or less likely to happen?


----------



## iChris93 (Feb 3, 2017)

FRC said:


> when a politician makes a promise, is it more likely or less likely to happen?


Let's not stray too far in politics and leave this rhetorical 😎


----------



## JWardell (May 9, 2016)

It absolutely has the potential to create more jobs and stimulate the economy, even so much to verbally support american-made EVs, solar, windmills, etc. A few police departments have recently discovered the benefits of switching to Teslas, you can imagine the same would be true for federal agents etc, even if it were only for those vehicles due for replacement. He probably doesn't actually have the power to force them to do it, but its gets more and more people thinking about it and accepting it as mainstream. 
All the more reason that it's important to ship the Cybertruck ASAP. Tesla and Rivian will lose a ton of sales if the Ford F150 EV beats them.


----------



## JasonF (Oct 26, 2018)

There are two main issues I can see with Tesla supplying U.S. government vehicles: Without a major regulation change (not just an executive order) the government will only buy vehicles from existing _military_ contractors - that's why they usually buy AM General, Ford, or GM vehicles - those companies have already been certified. And usually government sales (and rentals too, ironically!) depend on _excess_ production, which Tesla isn't quite capable of inside the U.S. yet.


----------



## Garlan Garner (May 24, 2016)

JasonF said:


> There are two main issues I can see with Tesla supplying U.S. government vehicles: Without a major regulation change (not just an executive order) the government will only buy vehicles from existing _military_ contractors - that's why they usually buy AM General, Ford, or GM vehicles - those companies have already been certified. And usually government sales (and rentals too, ironically!) depend on _excess_ production, which Tesla isn't quite capable of inside the U.S. yet.


I agree, however - if you want FSD regulations through....what better place to start local approvals than to get it Federally Approved first,


----------



## JasonF (Oct 26, 2018)

Garlan Garner said:


> I agree, however - if you want FSD regulations through....what better place to start local approvals than to get it Federally Approved first,


That would be awesome, but I don't trust the government to do something that makes sense.


----------



## GDN (Oct 30, 2017)

Does Tesla want in this business? They've got their hands full trying to build factories and cars that people are in line for. 

It will take the gov't 20 or more years to replace 645K vehicles, just a little over 32K per year. Many are specialized like postal trucks, most all are entry level trims of whatever platform they are - Pickup, passenger car, etc. This isn't Elon's business and this business isn't something I think would even be worth looking at for where they are as a company and their sheer growth of millions of vehicles they are already trying to build and have people waiting for.

There are also already others working on the postal style vehicle like Workhorse and Rivian. I think Elon has bigger fish to fry and has no concern for the government and their vehicle needs.


----------



## FRC (Aug 4, 2018)

I suppose that most of us here would love for our government to own and operate only vehicles that are low emission and low maintenance. But, as @GDN alludes to above, Elon has bigger fish to fry; and our government should have, too.


----------



## Garlan Garner (May 24, 2016)

GDN said:


> Does Tesla want in this business? They've got their hands full trying to build factories and cars that people are in line for.
> 
> It will take the gov't 20 or more years to replace 645K vehicles, just a little over 32K per year. Many are specialized like postal trucks, most all are entry level trims of whatever platform they are - Pickup, passenger car, etc. This isn't Elon's business and this business isn't something I think would even be worth looking at for where they are as a company and their sheer growth of millions of vehicles they are already trying to build and have people waiting for.
> 
> There are also already others working on the postal style vehicle like Workhorse and Rivian. I think Elon has bigger fish to fry and has no concern for the government and their vehicle needs.


I don't believe that the effort to supply the govt would be one that caused distress in Tesla.

Tesla is by far the largest auto manufacturer in the US. If any auto manufacturer had the ability to supply this need it would be Tesla.

Is Tesla.... the largest auto manufacturer in the US is overtaxed with 4 models?

The govt isn't asking for high volume.

Anyway....I just feel like if Tesla WANTED to be the govt supplier....then they could.


----------



## iChris93 (Feb 3, 2017)

Garlan Garner said:


> Tesla is by far the largest auto manufacturer in the US.


What? By what measure?


----------



## Garlan Garner (May 24, 2016)

iChris93 said:


> What? By what measure?


Value of the Company

Sales of Vehicles in their respective classes.

All EV's globally.


----------



## GDN (Oct 30, 2017)

Garlan Garner said:


> Value of the Company
> 
> Sales of Vehicles in their respective classes.
> 
> All EV's globally.


But Company Value has nothing to do with delivering these vehicles. That value is almost 100% paper based at this time and Tesla doesn't have a vehicle that will fit the requirements when the bids go out because of options and price. Tesla doesn't have a product that would fit the bill and they won't for some amount of time. I didn't read the directive, but I doubt it doubled the prices they could pay for the base F150's that cost $25K today, the sub-compacts, compacts, and even full size Fusion, nothing from Tesla comes close for more than twice the price.

I own TSLA and WKHS and I'll thank Biden for this news and pumping my WKHS stock by 37% today, however Tesla moved very little today. You check back to this thread in 5 years and we'll review to see that the gov't has blown billions, has no Tesla's and probably still has very little of anything else full EV either.


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

GDN said:


> I didn't read the directive, but I doubt it doubled the prices they could pay for the base F150's that cost $25K today, the sub-compacts, compacts, and even full size Fusion, nothing from Tesla comes close for more than twice the price.


If the government is going to require that the vehicles purchased be electric, then they're going to have to adjust price expectations. The cheapest American-made EV today (Nissan Leaf, built in Tennessee) starts at $32k. A Tesla Model 3 starts at $38k. It'll be in the running, whether or not Tesla specifically decides to target that market.


----------



## JasonF (Oct 26, 2018)

garsh said:


> If the government is going to require that the vehicles purchased be electric, then they're going to have to adjust price expectations. The cheapest American-made EV today (Nissan Leaf, built in Tennessee) starts at $32k. A Tesla Model 3 starts at $38k. It'll be in the running, whether or not Tesla specifically decides to target that market.


As I mentioned above though, government tends to go straight for existing relationships even above price. Right now that puts the Chevy Bolt ahead of the running for passenger cars. Even though it's not the cheapest, it has that existing government supplier relationship, plus control over the charging infrastructure for it.


----------

