Rumour: Model 3 is going to be Tesla's downfall...
- Thread starter B-Dogg
- Start date
- Tags fox model 3 tesla
-
SUPPORT THE SITE AND ENJOY A PREMIUM EXPERIENCE! Welcome to Tesla Owners Online, four years young! For a low subscription fee, you will receive access to an ad-free version of TOO. We now offer yearly memberships! You can subscribe via this direct link:https://teslaownersonline.com/account/upgrades SUBSCRIBE TO OUR YOUTUBE CHANNEL!Did you know we have a YouTube channel that's all about Tesla? Lots of Tesla information, fun, vlogs, product reviews, and a weekly Tesla Owners Online Podcast as well!
Honestly, it very well could be. Make no mistake - this is a very risky proposition. He's trying to not only start a new car company, but scale it up to mass-market levels much quicker than has ever happened in the past. So the premise of the article is sound. There is a lot that could go wrong.
First mistake - scaling. No current automobile company CEO is proven good at scaling. Their companies already had scale before they took over the positions. So Musk might very well be the right person to scale up such a company. He appears to have the vision, and seems to be making the right moves. We'll have to see if he can execute.
Agreed, but they seem to be late to the party. Nissan had an early lead, but didn't follow up the Leaf with something more compelling, and lost that first-mover advantage. GM will be the next major competitor with the Bolt, but it's missing long-distance charging, larger battery options, and style. And I don't see any other companies even coming close to being competitive with the Model 3 for several years after it starts selling.
Completely ignores Tesla's concentration on manufacturability for this model.
Agreed. This is by design, because Tesla is going for scale at all costs. But this is a huge risk, and would be the most likely thing to cause the downfall of Tesla. If they have a major misstep and investors no longer believe that they will eventually recover, that would be the end.
In all, this article is saying "Tesla isn't being run like a traditional car company, therefore it won't succeed". But that would be the one sure way to make sure that Tesla fails. With Musk at the helm and their current plan, they stand a chance to not only succeed, but to disrupt the entire industry.
First mistake - scaling. No current automobile company CEO is proven good at scaling. Their companies already had scale before they took over the positions. So Musk might very well be the right person to scale up such a company. He appears to have the vision, and seems to be making the right moves. We'll have to see if he can execute.
Agreed, but they seem to be late to the party. Nissan had an early lead, but didn't follow up the Leaf with something more compelling, and lost that first-mover advantage. GM will be the next major competitor with the Bolt, but it's missing long-distance charging, larger battery options, and style. And I don't see any other companies even coming close to being competitive with the Model 3 for several years after it starts selling.
Completely ignores Tesla's concentration on manufacturability for this model.
Agreed. This is by design, because Tesla is going for scale at all costs. But this is a huge risk, and would be the most likely thing to cause the downfall of Tesla. If they have a major misstep and investors no longer believe that they will eventually recover, that would be the end.
In all, this article is saying "Tesla isn't being run like a traditional car company, therefore it won't succeed". But that would be the one sure way to make sure that Tesla fails. With Musk at the helm and their current plan, they stand a chance to not only succeed, but to disrupt the entire industry.
Last edited:
Don't take this as a political comment, (because it sounds like one) but with the Koch bros lobbying their other conservative billionaire friends to not support the GOP candidate, and having already admitted to trying to attack Tesla, and having the backing of Fox, any chance this 'news' story was arranged by/for them?
The likes of Toyota, GM and Mercedes are not going to sit idly by while a new car company marches right in the front door and steals half a million cars a year in market share.
They are not going to be able to get a 215mile base model out the gates in 18mths. Look at what they've done with their existing ev lines in response. The Leaf's new range is only 155 miles. And it still looks like a Toaster on wheels.
The established makers seem hell-bent on hybrid technology before they'll even consider full EV's. When the Model 3 starts eating all their lunches, expect them to start rolling out full EV's in about 5 years time. It's the iPhone and Blackberry nexus upon which we sit next year - and we all know how that ended.
Fingers crossed Tesla can prove the ICE naysayers wrong and deliver Model 3 on-time.
They are not going to be able to get a 215mile base model out the gates in 18mths. Look at what they've done with their existing ev lines in response. The Leaf's new range is only 155 miles. And it still looks like a Toaster on wheels.
The established makers seem hell-bent on hybrid technology before they'll even consider full EV's. When the Model 3 starts eating all their lunches, expect them to start rolling out full EV's in about 5 years time. It's the iPhone and Blackberry nexus upon which we sit next year - and we all know how that ended.
Fingers crossed Tesla can prove the ICE naysayers wrong and deliver Model 3 on-time.
I really feel that Elon Musk is WAY too smart to let what happened with the Model X happen again with the Model 3. I have said from the start that I believe Tesla has always been much farther ahead with the Model 3 than they were letting on. I think priority number one with Elon and JB has been to under promise and over deliver on everything Model 3. I still believe that the Model 3 will deliver on time or ahead of schedule with more tech and performance than they have let on to anyone. I have no evidence of this other than the moving up of the timeline but I still feel strongly that everyone will be amazed at how this progresses moving forward.
Dan
Dan
Yeah, Dan. I think you're right. They have constantly said they designed the Model 3 to be easy to manufacture. I think the production problems with the Model X will have primed Tesla well for the production of Model 3. There seems to be a complacent smirk from the auto-establishment every time Tesla assert their production goals - much like Steve Blamer when the iPhone was ramping up for production back in 2007. They've sold a billion of those since! It can be done.
Last edited:
Yeah I'm pretty sure things will go smoothly. They packed too much into the Model X and the timeframe got pushed back a fair amount. They're focusing a lot on the manufacturing and tooling side so things get off to a good start, seems like a smart move. There will be some wicked showstopper tech in the next reveal (HUD?) but its not going to be something crazy like falconwing doors.
Tesla knows very well what's riding on Model 3. Namely the whole company.
Model X is still very fresh in their minds and they won't repeat that "mistake" willingly. Everything I hear going on inside of Tesla is that it's all hands on deck and they mean business with suppliers. If they can't get with the game they'll be cut out. The sheer amount of excitement over Model 3 is galvanizing the supplier chain to step up to the plate.
Model 3 will be on time and the finished product will blow people away.
Model X is still very fresh in their minds and they won't repeat that "mistake" willingly. Everything I hear going on inside of Tesla is that it's all hands on deck and they mean business with suppliers. If they can't get with the game they'll be cut out. The sheer amount of excitement over Model 3 is galvanizing the supplier chain to step up to the plate.
Model 3 will be on time and the finished product will blow people away.
On production and efficiency, I've not heard much mention of this from the quarterly call, but a caller pointed out the bottleneck part of production is the hand assembly done by people. Elon responded by saying that all people have been taken out of the Model 3 production plans. There will not be a single human hand on the assembly line. There will be a ton of people in the factory, but they will be managing the machinery.
I think this point alone could be a huge advantage (presuming all the tooling is 100%) over the other auto manufacturers reliant on laborers for the final assembly. The fitment should be 100% the same for every car and will not be dependent on if the assembly worker is tired or crabby or new and not yet up to speed.
I think this point alone could be a huge advantage (presuming all the tooling is 100%) over the other auto manufacturers reliant on laborers for the final assembly. The fitment should be 100% the same for every car and will not be dependent on if the assembly worker is tired or crabby or new and not yet up to speed.
They certainly have plans to minimize the human factor in building the Model 3 with their new manufacturing "breakthrough" but I doubt that version .5 at Fremont will be fully non-human. Version 1.0 when they build another factory should give them the ability to reach that after they work out the bugs in the current factory.
This new method could very well be the solution to the accelerated ramp they expect to achieve later next year. I don't think this new is anything new to Tesla, it's only that they've started to talk about it publicly. I think this was part of the plan all along during the Model 3 development in that the not only was the car designed to be easy to build but the factory tooling was designed expressly to be pretty much 100% automated.
This new method could very well be the solution to the accelerated ramp they expect to achieve later next year. I don't think this new is anything new to Tesla, it's only that they've started to talk about it publicly. I think this was part of the plan all along during the Model 3 development in that the not only was the car designed to be easy to build but the factory tooling was designed expressly to be pretty much 100% automated.
I have had the pleasure of working with some very bright research types. but as focused as they were on the specifics of their topics, they were often not good business people or even good people persons (leaders). I listened to the Q2 finance call and Elons boyish charms were taking the day, and then he said " If any supplier falls short, they will be cut, if any internal group falls short, that group will be reorganized." Now, that simple statement was a take-command, I know whats happening and I'm responsible for finding weak links and deploying repairs. His boyish charms and engineer brilliance just jumped into a well seasoned business/finance fellow - and a powerful leader.
There will be naysayers and folks who will try to hogtie them. I hope they learned from the Tucker sabotage .
This guy - (and JB and a thousand more employees) are flying a multi-billion dollar company with no net - and have reinforced MY confidence in them and their vision.
There will be naysayers and folks who will try to hogtie them. I hope they learned from the Tucker sabotage .
This guy - (and JB and a thousand more employees) are flying a multi-billion dollar company with no net - and have reinforced MY confidence in them and their vision.
The auto industry decades ago took the advice of those who think "sticking to the knitting" is the sole secret of business survival. They collectively cut back on hiring electrical engineers and decided to keep marketing, styling, and internal combustion drive train expertise as their core competencies. Stake out the high ground. Everything else, some other clowns could fight over. This is how the big guys decided to make cars.
Unfortunately, the review of evolution reveals that if you over-specialize, you become more vulnerable whenever the environment itself changes.
And it don't take a Weatherman to know... that the times, they are a changin', as Robert Allen Zimmerman of Duluth once noted.
The information age means you can upgrade software overnight with a download, not with a terrestrial voyage to your dealership to wait in a line for the next service representative to write you up.
Folks, when the "alien dreadnaughts" appear, the party is over. Those capable of reaching your planet at a point when you cannot reach theirs will inevitably on notice as to which side is SOL.
There were many brave and talented native American warriors in the 19th century. They eagerly learned to shoot rifles and ride horses, things that their grandparents had never seen, but they lacked in factories and machine tools to make the rifles and ammo. Unlike horses, throwing a couple of the right Winchesters into a room with a mixed tape won't make more of them for you.
Custer paid for hubris at Little Big Horn, but the Lakota lost the arms race. To paraphrase the wit of Mason Williams: functional advanced technology is a cheap trick.
Beware of Borg bearing musical gifts. Somebody loses their seat when the music stops, and it's not the Collective.
It's eleven fifty-nine. Do you know where their home planet is?
Unfortunately, the review of evolution reveals that if you over-specialize, you become more vulnerable whenever the environment itself changes.
And it don't take a Weatherman to know... that the times, they are a changin', as Robert Allen Zimmerman of Duluth once noted.
The information age means you can upgrade software overnight with a download, not with a terrestrial voyage to your dealership to wait in a line for the next service representative to write you up.
Folks, when the "alien dreadnaughts" appear, the party is over. Those capable of reaching your planet at a point when you cannot reach theirs will inevitably on notice as to which side is SOL.
There were many brave and talented native American warriors in the 19th century. They eagerly learned to shoot rifles and ride horses, things that their grandparents had never seen, but they lacked in factories and machine tools to make the rifles and ammo. Unlike horses, throwing a couple of the right Winchesters into a room with a mixed tape won't make more of them for you.
Custer paid for hubris at Little Big Horn, but the Lakota lost the arms race. To paraphrase the wit of Mason Williams: functional advanced technology is a cheap trick.
Beware of Borg bearing musical gifts. Somebody loses their seat when the music stops, and it's not the Collective.
It's eleven fifty-nine. Do you know where their home planet is?
After much thought, I have ultimately decided to answer the rhetorical question from an American perspective, since John Plantagenet of England is one of my potentially over 33 million 26th-great-grandfathers, and he likely bears partial responsibility for jerks behaving badly in government. (It's not that King John got off without ever paying. They did make him sign the Magna Carta against his will, and he eventually died of dysentery.)
To wit, how do people make a living these days writing crap?
The brain is designed to write stories. That helps it to navigate through the world. But while statistics don't lie, and liars can figure, stories suffer the same fate.
Those who don't learn from history get the nasty refresher course, so let's do a Reader's Digest version here, in hopes to light a candle in the windy darkness.
In English common law, air and things that came by air traditionally belonged to everyone, (otherwise, monarchs could tax the use of air, with dire consequences for those in need of breathing and short on cash. So when TV and radio came along, and with both air and fluctuations in the electromagnetic field being generally not well comprehended, the law became that the federal government could regulate broadcasts as part of interstate commerce. (Sure, as an ex-paperboy, I realized that papers more literally arrived by air when I threw them on the porch, but people are much more interested in what they feel is right than in science.)
When cable TV arrived, it seemingly traveled by wires, and people were allowed to own wire individually rather than collectively. Ronald Regan, the acting president of millionaires and billionaires, decided to stop enforcing the FCC fairness doctrine. Previously, news was required to be presented in the public interest for stations to get their FCC licenses removed.
Reporting the news truly had been unprofitable. I was just good in a democratic republic for the people to know what was really happening so they could help steer the ship of state. The sponsorship for broadcasting truth (which is often dismal) did not draw great cash flows to station owners. If you believe that everything in the entire cosmos must turn a financial profit or else be sacked, then the truth telling is doomed.
While there is indeed an appetite for misinformation ("Don't tell me the truth, tell be stuff that feeds my predilections!") "journalists" make money these days telling tall tales as infotainment and otherwise, especially if they hang out with those who are shorting TSLA.
I inform you, in the public interests of fairness and transparency, that I have placed "journalists" in quotes in the preceding paragraph because I have a niece who is a journalist in the more honorable sense of the word. I also acknowledge that have personally also made money telling "lies" as a novelist. I just don't pretend that my lies are entirely true. Truth is stranger than fiction.
To wit, how do people make a living these days writing crap?
The brain is designed to write stories. That helps it to navigate through the world. But while statistics don't lie, and liars can figure, stories suffer the same fate.
Those who don't learn from history get the nasty refresher course, so let's do a Reader's Digest version here, in hopes to light a candle in the windy darkness.
In English common law, air and things that came by air traditionally belonged to everyone, (otherwise, monarchs could tax the use of air, with dire consequences for those in need of breathing and short on cash. So when TV and radio came along, and with both air and fluctuations in the electromagnetic field being generally not well comprehended, the law became that the federal government could regulate broadcasts as part of interstate commerce. (Sure, as an ex-paperboy, I realized that papers more literally arrived by air when I threw them on the porch, but people are much more interested in what they feel is right than in science.)
When cable TV arrived, it seemingly traveled by wires, and people were allowed to own wire individually rather than collectively. Ronald Regan, the acting president of millionaires and billionaires, decided to stop enforcing the FCC fairness doctrine. Previously, news was required to be presented in the public interest for stations to get their FCC licenses removed.
Reporting the news truly had been unprofitable. I was just good in a democratic republic for the people to know what was really happening so they could help steer the ship of state. The sponsorship for broadcasting truth (which is often dismal) did not draw great cash flows to station owners. If you believe that everything in the entire cosmos must turn a financial profit or else be sacked, then the truth telling is doomed.
While there is indeed an appetite for misinformation ("Don't tell me the truth, tell be stuff that feeds my predilections!") "journalists" make money these days telling tall tales as infotainment and otherwise, especially if they hang out with those who are shorting TSLA.
I inform you, in the public interests of fairness and transparency, that I have placed "journalists" in quotes in the preceding paragraph because I have a niece who is a journalist in the more honorable sense of the word. I also acknowledge that have personally also made money telling "lies" as a novelist. I just don't pretend that my lies are entirely true. Truth is stranger than fiction.