CarSpyShots
Quick Member Login:
Forgot password?
Forum Statistics:
Forum Members:
Total Threads:
Total Posts:


There are users
currently browsing forums.
  Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 01-19-2019, 01:13 AM
paranoidgarliclover paranoidgarliclover is offline
CSS Oldtimer
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 1,596
paranoidgarliclover is on a distinguished road
Default Too early to start the Tesla deathwatch?

https://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/20.../#more-1656942
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 01-19-2019, 01:08 PM
Crash Crash is offline
CSS Oldtimer
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 2,297
Crash is on a distinguished road
Default

Another click bait article.

Ford cut its workforce 12% last year and GM by 15% (with plant closures). Are they done for?

Youíve got a company who is starting to make a profit - and taking moves to continue this, and they get dumped on.

The amount of negativity towards this company astonishes me. Itís a genuine American success story, created jobs where GM abandoned a category, completely breathed life to a stale category, now has the best selling premium car in America...

Yes,Iím a Tesla fanboy, for the above reasons.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 01-19-2019, 03:25 PM
swizzle's Avatar
swizzle swizzle is offline
Raconteur
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Bakersfield
Posts: 25,838
swizzle is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crash View Post
...The amount of negativity towards this company astonishes me..
It shouldn't. Elon Musk is genuinely hatable and he is 99% of the problem with Tesla. They need to kick him to the curb. Tesla comes across as arrogant, boastful, snooty all because of him, but many Tesla owners are equally devoid of manners, but I think that's because of some misguided Elon Musk narcissistic envy.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 01-20-2019, 12:54 AM
paranoidgarliclover paranoidgarliclover is offline
CSS Oldtimer
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 1,596
paranoidgarliclover is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crash View Post
Another click bait article.

Ford cut its workforce 12% last year and GM by 15% (with plant closures). Are they done for?
Well, they flirted perilously close to death ~10 yrs ago, didn't they?

I've never driven or even sat in a Tesla. I think my "hate" (b/c that's probably too strong a word) for the company stems from its inability to prove that they can actually produce a high-quality car as a daily driver. The auto industry is ripe for disruption, yes, but I don't think designing a car like you would a cell phone is a good idea. Tesla has a strong fanbase and the owner demographics are the envy of every manufacturer, but it regularly scores at the bottom of quality/reliability studies. Even the cars they provide to journalists have major glitches. And it's not clear if they will ever produce the base Tesla 3, and the article implies that they may not be able to sustain a profit if they do.

It is, IMHO, simply too early to call the company a true success. How often do we talk about the Duesenberg. Or even about makes that lasted for a few decades, like Pontiac and Olds?

A stable and profitable company can afford a lull once in awhile. A lull for company that only just started to profitable and whose CEO foresees multiple problems ahead could lethal.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 01-20-2019, 03:25 AM
swizzle's Avatar
swizzle swizzle is offline
Raconteur
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Bakersfield
Posts: 25,838
swizzle is on a distinguished road
Default

Never bother Tesla fanboys with facts. It triggers them.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 01-21-2019, 04:39 PM
Crash Crash is offline
CSS Oldtimer
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 2,297
Crash is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by paranoidgarliclover View Post
Well, they flirted perilously close to death ~10 yrs ago, didn't they?

I've never driven or even sat in a Tesla. I think my "hate" (b/c that's probably too strong a word) for the company stems from its inability to prove that they can actually produce a high-quality car as a daily driver. The auto industry is ripe for disruption, yes, but I don't think designing a car like you would a cell phone is a good idea. Tesla has a strong fanbase and the owner demographics are the envy of every manufacturer, but it regularly scores at the bottom of quality/reliability studies. Even the cars they provide to journalists have major glitches. And it's not clear if they will ever produce the base Tesla 3, and the article implies that they may not be able to sustain a profit if they do.

It is, IMHO, simply too early to call the company a true success. How often do we talk about the Duesenberg. Or even about makes that lasted for a few decades, like Pontiac and Olds?

A stable and profitable company can afford a lull once in awhile. A lull for company that only just started to profitable and whose CEO foresees multiple problems ahead could lethal.
Flirted yes...but haven't died.

The $35K Model 3 will happen - however, the execution of how they launched this car was wrong. They should have positioned as $45K - produced those, then shocked the industry w/ a $35K option. By the time the $35K option does happen, it'll be almost seen as a negative as it'll have taken 3+ years.

Their initial cars did suffer from quality issues - however those have largely been addressed. The bigger thing is that they get so much focus that if there is an issue, it's overblown. Every major report I've seen (Consumer Report being the largest) sites this...yes, early cars had issues (panel alignment / gap) being the biggest ones - but those have been largely addressed. I say largely as there are ALWAYS going to be QC issues in ALL cars. I just saw a video that ripped apart a Mercedes for poor fit / finish / panel gaps / interior plastic seams / etc.

I own a 2014 Model S - and there are no issues.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 01-22-2019, 07:51 AM
paranoidgarliclover paranoidgarliclover is offline
CSS Oldtimer
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 1,596
paranoidgarliclover is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crash View Post
Flirted yes...but haven't died.

The $35K Model 3 will happen - however, the execution of how they launched this car was wrong. They should have positioned as $45K - produced those, then shocked the industry w/ a $35K option. By the time the $35K option does happen, it'll be almost seen as a negative as it'll have taken 3+ years.

Their initial cars did suffer from quality issues - however those have largely been addressed. The bigger thing is that they get so much focus that if there is an issue, it's overblown. Every major report I've seen (Consumer Report being the largest) sites this...yes, early cars had issues (panel alignment / gap) being the biggest ones - but those have been largely addressed. I say largely as there are ALWAYS going to be QC issues in ALL cars. I just saw a video that ripped apart a Mercedes for poor fit / finish / panel gaps / interior plastic seams / etc.

I own a 2014 Model S - and there are no issues.
The thing is that what you've written above doesn't quite address the thrust of what Musk wrote.... which was that the company doesn't know if can be profitable w/ a $35000 car. So the question isn't so much when the cheaper 3 will come but what will happen if it sells in large quantities. Colin Chapman, I think, always warned about chasing volume w/ a cheaper car.... There's a reason why all makes try to move their cars upward; it's b/c the profit margins are higher.

As for the bugs being in the initial cars.... The S just fell off of CR's recommended list for a drop in reliability, so I don't think it was just an initial thing.

As for Tesla getting more attention than other cars.... Yes, that's probably partially true. But that's what Mercedes said back in the mid 1990s, when it's reliability ratings fell off a cliff. It said that its buyers were more picky than buyers of cheaper cars. And, as someone who had both Mercedes and cheaper car at the same time, I can assure that MBs reliability (and even perceived quality) stunk to high hell during the mid 1990s into the early 2000s. I'd actually argue that buyers of cheaper cars are more picky b/c they're spending more of their discretionary income on the car and have more at stake.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 01-22-2019, 02:05 PM
Crash Crash is offline
CSS Oldtimer
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 2,297
Crash is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by paranoidgarliclover View Post
The thing is that what you've written above doesn't quite address the thrust of what Musk wrote.... which was that the company doesn't know if can be profitable w/ a $35000 car. So the question isn't so much when the cheaper 3 will come but what will happen if it sells in large quantities. Colin Chapman, I think, always warned about chasing volume w/ a cheaper car.... There's a reason why all makes try to move their cars upward; it's b/c the profit margins are higher.

As for the bugs being in the initial cars.... The S just fell off of CR's recommended list for a drop in reliability, so I don't think it was just an initial thing.

As for Tesla getting more attention than other cars.... Yes, that's probably partially true. But that's what Mercedes said back in the mid 1990s, when it's reliability ratings fell off a cliff. It said that its buyers were more picky than buyers of cheaper cars. And, as someone who had both Mercedes and cheaper car at the same time, I can assure that MBs reliability (and even perceived quality) stunk to high hell during the mid 1990s into the early 2000s. I'd actually argue that buyers of cheaper cars are more picky b/c they're spending more of their discretionary income on the car and have more at stake.
Here is a quote from the letter sent to employees:
Tesla will need to make these cuts while increasing the Model 3 production rate and making many manufacturing engineering improvements in the coming months. Higher volume and manufacturing design improvements are crucial for Tesla to achieve the economies of scale required to manufacture the standard range (220 mile), standard interior Model 3 at $35k and still be a viable company. There isn't any other way

They never say Tesla won't be able to do it, they only say if they don't make the cuts, they won't be able to make the $35K version to be sustainable from a profitability perspective.

This said - we don't know what the $35K version will offer for features / etc. If you go order a Tesla now, any other paint colour beyond black costs extra. So, unless you're ordering a bare bones version, that is black, you won't be getting a $35K brand new Tesla. This strategy is pretty common in the auto industry; but Tesla has gotten so much buzz from it - I think it's going to bite them in the rear...hence, I don't think they should have lead w the $35K version in their unveiling. I REALLY think it's going to bite them in the rear when they announce / show Model Y (likely March) and they still haven't produced the $35K version...Had they had said $45K Model 3, they would have done much better from a PR perspective, been able to announce Model Y in March - and used that as an opportunity to say 'oh, by the way, starting in 3 months, a $35K version of Model 3 will be available. That would have delivered a MUCH better outcome for them

Can you send the link for the CR report showing that Model S fell off? I just picked up this years CR and it didn't show that...I'm a Canuck, so maybe it's different?? Doubtful - but I am curious.

Specific to Mercedes - I wasn't talking about reliability; I was talking about QC for the car (panel gaps / etc). A buddy of mine bought a BMW (brand new) and I was stunned by the poor production quality of that (gaps, poor fit and finish on the inside / etc)...point being that all cars have these issues - just some companies are are assumed to be fantastic - when they're really just average or good. A good example, most consumers think Kia is garbage - however their QC is arguably some of the best in the industry; ANY company should be looking at them as a gold standard for panel gaps (especially the newer Optima); conversely, Toyota QC is just average IMO.

Ultimately we all have our biases. I am obviously biased towards Tesla - and (as might have been picked up at times) can not stand Nissan. The good thing is that we can discuss these opinions in a forum like this :)
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 01-22-2019, 06:55 PM
paranoidgarliclover paranoidgarliclover is offline
CSS Oldtimer
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 1,596
paranoidgarliclover is on a distinguished road
Default

Yes, being able to discuss differing opinions is good. :)

I can't find a link to the article (it was a link from another article I was reading that wasn't even about Tesla), but you can find the Tesla Model S page on CR here:

https://www.consumerreports.org/cars...2019/overview/

Digital and physical mag access are separate, so I'm not sure how much you might be able to see.

At any rate, the predicted reliability is 2/5, and it doesn't have the checkmark or the "Recommended" next to the overall rating anymore.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 01-22-2019, 10:28 PM
boston boston is offline
CSS Oldtimer
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 4,311
boston is on a distinguished road
Default

They design of the cars lacks many elements of engineering economy. They build panels and other parts in a far too complex manner. As a result costs are higher.

There are plenty of opportunities to reduce expenses. This layoff its typical and normal in any fast growing company which naturally develop areas of expertise that suddenly are no longer needed.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:16 AM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Black Falcon Media Group Oy