Tesla and Uber Unlikely to Survive...
Discussion
Witchfinder said:
Based on various articles and reports I've read, they'll probably just start being used in production cars around 2025.
You mean articles similar to this from back in 2015 
.https://www.cnbc.com/2015/10/30/hemists-make-super...
jamoor said:
Stick to what you know, I don't think they know much about insurance and the regulations surrounding it.
Not only that but insurance companies are usually investment companies the insurance part of it actually makes a loss.
Not only that but insurance companies are usually investment companies the insurance part of it actually makes a loss.
I know enough thanks, I have worked with some of the oldest London/Lloyd's insurance firms and am well aware of how they make money.They would throw the Tesla's off the boat first. (That's a marine jettison reference, you probably won't get it
)Your last few replies have been a bit poor you know.
Dave Hedgehog said:
It’s the same old stuff about not having a basic understanding of company accounts I’m afraid. The vast majority of Ford and GMs debt is the lease business. The chap making the video needs to compare the right types of debt and when he finally does he will realise why no one else has picked up on his amazing numbers.
What he is really highlighting is that Tesla has no lease business of any viable metric and while they know they need to have this for the 3 and the Y to be competitive they haven’t the balance sheet or debt to equity ratio to be able to do it.
The really important metric between Ford/GM v Tesla is that in the case of Ford/GM they have a superior credit rating to their customers. They can borrow much more cheaply than their customers. The problem Tesla has is that almost every single one of their customers has a superior credit rating to Tesla and can borrow more cheaply. That’s a vital part of the business that Tesla need to flip for obvious reasons.
You also need to look at tangible assets and other metrics such as revenue stability etc etc.
The real numbers that this chap should be looking at are the costs of raw materials which for Tesla have dropped like a stone over the last 18 months, massively in their favour but they are still not able to convert those massive gains into profit margins at their volume products. The costs of lithium, cobalt, steel, aluminium and oil have all fallen back heavily and you would have expected this to have started feeding through to margins almost 12 months ago. Production efficiency is still very bad compared to the likes of Ford/GM who can roll out more complex products, more quickly and in more locations and get them to their customers more efficiently.
There is huge efficiency savings to be seized within Tesla and I suspect that G3 with a Chinese work force and the manufacturing efficiencies of their economy should make for very big savings.
DonkeyApple said:
It’s the same old stuff about not having a basic understanding of company accounts I’m afraid.
The vast majority of Ford and GMs debt is the lease business. The chap making the video needs to compare the right types of debt and when he finally does he will realise why no one else has picked up on his amazing numbers.
What he is really highlighting is that Tesla has no lease business of any viable metric and while they know they need to have this for the 3 and the Y to be competitive they haven’t the balance sheet or debt to equity ratio to be able to do it.
The really important metric between Ford/GM v Tesla is that in the case of Ford/GM they have a superior credit rating to their customers. They can borrow much more cheaply than their customers. The problem Tesla has is that almost every single one of their customers has a superior credit rating to Tesla and can borrow more cheaply. That’s a vital part of the business that Tesla need to flip for obvious reasons.
You also need to look at tangible assets and other metrics such as revenue stability etc etc.
The real numbers that this chap should be looking at are the costs of raw materials which for Tesla have dropped like a stone over the last 18 months, massively in their favour but they are still not able to convert those massive gains into profit margins at their volume products. The costs of lithium, cobalt, steel, aluminium and oil have all fallen back heavily and you would have expected this to have started feeding through to margins almost 12 months ago. Production efficiency is still very bad compared to the likes of Ford/GM who can roll out more complex products, more quickly and in more locations and get them to their customers more efficiently.
There is huge efficiency savings to be seized within Tesla and I suspect that G3 with a Chinese work force and the manufacturing efficiencies of their economy should make for very big savings.
I thought GM and to a lesser extent also had big black holes in their pension funds? I've not develed into them to know.The vast majority of Ford and GMs debt is the lease business. The chap making the video needs to compare the right types of debt and when he finally does he will realise why no one else has picked up on his amazing numbers.
What he is really highlighting is that Tesla has no lease business of any viable metric and while they know they need to have this for the 3 and the Y to be competitive they haven’t the balance sheet or debt to equity ratio to be able to do it.
The really important metric between Ford/GM v Tesla is that in the case of Ford/GM they have a superior credit rating to their customers. They can borrow much more cheaply than their customers. The problem Tesla has is that almost every single one of their customers has a superior credit rating to Tesla and can borrow more cheaply. That’s a vital part of the business that Tesla need to flip for obvious reasons.
You also need to look at tangible assets and other metrics such as revenue stability etc etc.
The real numbers that this chap should be looking at are the costs of raw materials which for Tesla have dropped like a stone over the last 18 months, massively in their favour but they are still not able to convert those massive gains into profit margins at their volume products. The costs of lithium, cobalt, steel, aluminium and oil have all fallen back heavily and you would have expected this to have started feeding through to margins almost 12 months ago. Production efficiency is still very bad compared to the likes of Ford/GM who can roll out more complex products, more quickly and in more locations and get them to their customers more efficiently.
There is huge efficiency savings to be seized within Tesla and I suspect that G3 with a Chinese work force and the manufacturing efficiencies of their economy should make for very big savings.
As an aside. from a cash perspective, I wonder if Tesla are clearing more than $1k net profit on each M3 they sell as each switch from a $1k reservation (also known as an interest free loan) to a sale could be virtually cash neutral - ie they've banked most of the cash from each M3 sale years ago.
Dave Hedgehog said:
T-195 said:
Dave Hedgehog said:
I was surprised just how car like the M3 is
You must be easily surprised.
Too Car like, not Sports Car like.
The M3.
I've only driven the Model S and I'd describe that as competent rather than fun. The brutal acceleration is novel for the first day you drive it, after that it was just an easy appliance to get from a to b in.
What's fun about driving the Model 3 compared to those BMW and Audi's you mention? Haven't heard much about the driving experience other than they're quick and have 90's Audi style lifeless steering. Am I missing something?
Friends cars, short term loan cars, demo events etc.
I got to drove 6 or 7 different performance BMW’s at one event, had an M4 for a day, RS4 at a millbrook event, Audi lent me an RS6 for a week, an R8 for 4 days (put 1000 miles on it)
What makes a car fun, that’s a hard one, some cars just make me smile that extra undefinable something, the RS6 has it as does the C63, but also my MKV R32 did
Just about every YouTube review of the model 3 be it reviewers or owners has them smiling, I don’t have the skill to describe it properly
This seemed pretty good
https://youtu.be/xpFe8k1vjcg
I got to drove 6 or 7 different performance BMW’s at one event, had an M4 for a day, RS4 at a millbrook event, Audi lent me an RS6 for a week, an R8 for 4 days (put 1000 miles on it)
What makes a car fun, that’s a hard one, some cars just make me smile that extra undefinable something, the RS6 has it as does the C63, but also my MKV R32 did
Just about every YouTube review of the model 3 be it reviewers or owners has them smiling, I don’t have the skill to describe it properly
This seemed pretty good
https://youtu.be/xpFe8k1vjcg
Edited by Dave Hedgehog on Saturday 31st August 14:00
DonkeyApple said:
It’s the same old stuff about not having a basic understanding of company accounts I’m afraid.
The vast majority of Ford and GMs debt is the lease business. The chap making the video needs to compare the right types of debt and when he finally does he will realise why no one else has picked up on his amazing numbers.
What he is really highlighting is that Tesla has no lease business of any viable metric and while they know they need to have this for the 3 and the Y to be competitive they haven’t the balance sheet or debt to equity ratio to be able to do it.
The really important metric between Ford/GM v Tesla is that in the case of Ford/GM they have a superior credit rating to their customers. They can borrow much more cheaply than their customers. The problem Tesla has is that almost every single one of their customers has a superior credit rating to Tesla and can borrow more cheaply. That’s a vital part of the business that Tesla need to flip for obvious reasons.
You also need to look at tangible assets and other metrics such as revenue stability etc etc.
The real numbers that this chap should be looking at are the costs of raw materials which for Tesla have dropped like a stone over the last 18 months, massively in their favour but they are still not able to convert those massive gains into profit margins at their volume products. The costs of lithium, cobalt, steel, aluminium and oil have all fallen back heavily and you would have expected this to have started feeding through to margins almost 12 months ago. Production efficiency is still very bad compared to the likes of Ford/GM who can roll out more complex products, more quickly and in more locations and get them to their customers more efficiently.
There is huge efficiency savings to be seized within Tesla and I suspect that G3 with a Chinese work force and the manufacturing efficiencies of their economy should make for very big savings.
More than just having a better credit rating than customers (for that read dealerships as well as the fleet / retail buyers), big Auto Co's often have banking licences. E.g. Ford has licences in the UK and Germany (https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-ford/ford-wins-approval-for-german-banking-licence-idUKKCN1HD0TI)The vast majority of Ford and GMs debt is the lease business. The chap making the video needs to compare the right types of debt and when he finally does he will realise why no one else has picked up on his amazing numbers.
What he is really highlighting is that Tesla has no lease business of any viable metric and while they know they need to have this for the 3 and the Y to be competitive they haven’t the balance sheet or debt to equity ratio to be able to do it.
The really important metric between Ford/GM v Tesla is that in the case of Ford/GM they have a superior credit rating to their customers. They can borrow much more cheaply than their customers. The problem Tesla has is that almost every single one of their customers has a superior credit rating to Tesla and can borrow more cheaply. That’s a vital part of the business that Tesla need to flip for obvious reasons.
You also need to look at tangible assets and other metrics such as revenue stability etc etc.
The real numbers that this chap should be looking at are the costs of raw materials which for Tesla have dropped like a stone over the last 18 months, massively in their favour but they are still not able to convert those massive gains into profit margins at their volume products. The costs of lithium, cobalt, steel, aluminium and oil have all fallen back heavily and you would have expected this to have started feeding through to margins almost 12 months ago. Production efficiency is still very bad compared to the likes of Ford/GM who can roll out more complex products, more quickly and in more locations and get them to their customers more efficiently.
There is huge efficiency savings to be seized within Tesla and I suspect that G3 with a Chinese work force and the manufacturing efficiencies of their economy should make for very big savings.
And whilst a banking licence isn't an actual licence to print money, it is pretty close to that these days with the activities of central banks.
DonkeyApple said:
It’s the same old stuff about not having a basic understanding of company accounts I’m afraid.
The vast majority of Ford and GMs debt is the lease business. The chap making the video needs to compare the right types of debt and when he finally does he will realise why no one else has picked up on his amazing numbers.
What he is really highlighting is that Tesla has no lease business of any viable metric and while they know they need to have this for the 3 and the Y to be competitive they haven’t the balance sheet or debt to equity ratio to be able to do it.
The really important metric between Ford/GM v Tesla is that in the case of Ford/GM they have a superior credit rating to their customers. They can borrow much more cheaply than their customers. The problem Tesla has is that almost every single one of their customers has a superior credit rating to Tesla and can borrow more cheaply. That’s a vital part of the business that Tesla need to flip for obvious reasons.
You also need to look at tangible assets and other metrics such as revenue stability etc etc.
The real numbers that this chap should be looking at are the costs of raw materials which for Tesla have dropped like a stone over the last 18 months, massively in their favour but they are still not able to convert those massive gains into profit margins at their volume products. The costs of lithium, cobalt, steel, aluminium and oil have all fallen back heavily and you would have expected this to have started feeding through to margins almost 12 months ago. Production efficiency is still very bad compared to the likes of Ford/GM who can roll out more complex products, more quickly and in more locations and get them to their customers more efficiently.
There is huge efficiency savings to be seized within Tesla and I suspect that G3 with a Chinese work force and the manufacturing efficiencies of their economy should make for very big savings.
Thanks DonkeyApple I actually understood that The vast majority of Ford and GMs debt is the lease business. The chap making the video needs to compare the right types of debt and when he finally does he will realise why no one else has picked up on his amazing numbers.
What he is really highlighting is that Tesla has no lease business of any viable metric and while they know they need to have this for the 3 and the Y to be competitive they haven’t the balance sheet or debt to equity ratio to be able to do it.
The really important metric between Ford/GM v Tesla is that in the case of Ford/GM they have a superior credit rating to their customers. They can borrow much more cheaply than their customers. The problem Tesla has is that almost every single one of their customers has a superior credit rating to Tesla and can borrow more cheaply. That’s a vital part of the business that Tesla need to flip for obvious reasons.
You also need to look at tangible assets and other metrics such as revenue stability etc etc.
The real numbers that this chap should be looking at are the costs of raw materials which for Tesla have dropped like a stone over the last 18 months, massively in their favour but they are still not able to convert those massive gains into profit margins at their volume products. The costs of lithium, cobalt, steel, aluminium and oil have all fallen back heavily and you would have expected this to have started feeding through to margins almost 12 months ago. Production efficiency is still very bad compared to the likes of Ford/GM who can roll out more complex products, more quickly and in more locations and get them to their customers more efficiently.
There is huge efficiency savings to be seized within Tesla and I suspect that G3 with a Chinese work force and the manufacturing efficiencies of their economy should make for very big savings.
Dave Hedgehog said:
Friends cars, short term loan cars, demo events etc.
I got to drove 6 or 7 different performance BMW’s at one event, had an M4 for a day, RS4 at a millbrook event, Audi lent me an RS6 for a week, an R8 for 4 days (put 1000 miles on it)
Excellent I got to drove 6 or 7 different performance BMW’s at one event, had an M4 for a day, RS4 at a millbrook event, Audi lent me an RS6 for a week, an R8 for 4 days (put 1000 miles on it)
I'm still waiting for Model 3's to trickle through for short term rental so I can drive one for a day or two and see if they really are as good as the Tesla fans say or if they're just competent like the Model S. I hired a Kona Electric at the end of last year as I had a deposit on one because of all the hype. Deposit cancelled after I drove on for a week.
Trouble with car opinions is they're all subject to personal preferences. I loved my Integrale when I had it over 15 years ago, most of my friends and family thought it was a crap relic of the 80's and hated being in it. As a driver I found it sublime on the right road on a good day.
Smiljan said:
Excellent
I'm still waiting for Model 3's to trickle through for short term rental so I can drive one for a day or two and see if they really are as good as the Tesla fans say or if they're just competent like the Model S. I hired a Kona Electric at the end of last year as I had a deposit on one because of all the hype. Deposit cancelled after I drove on for a week.
Trouble with car opinions is they're all subject to personal preferences. I loved my Integrale when I had it over 15 years ago, most of my friends and family thought it was a crap relic of the 80's and hated being in it. As a driver I found it sublime on the right road on a good day.
The model 3s have a 7 day return policy, you could do that?I'm still waiting for Model 3's to trickle through for short term rental so I can drive one for a day or two and see if they really are as good as the Tesla fans say or if they're just competent like the Model S. I hired a Kona Electric at the end of last year as I had a deposit on one because of all the hype. Deposit cancelled after I drove on for a week.
Trouble with car opinions is they're all subject to personal preferences. I loved my Integrale when I had it over 15 years ago, most of my friends and family thought it was a crap relic of the 80's and hated being in it. As a driver I found it sublime on the right road on a good day.
Smiljan said:
Excellent
I'm still waiting for Model 3's to trickle through for short term rental so I can drive one for a day or two and see if they really are as good as the Tesla fans say or if they're just competent like the Model S. I hired a Kona Electric at the end of last year as I had a deposit on one because of all the hype. Deposit cancelled after I drove on for a week.
Trouble with car opinions is they're all subject to personal preferences. I loved my Integrale when I had it over 15 years ago, most of my friends and family thought it was a crap relic of the 80's and hated being in it. As a driver I found it sublime on the right road on a good day.
I am no Tesla fanboi, I know all the problems with electric jebus (musk), the parts issues, the buying process which is just a total sI'm still waiting for Model 3's to trickle through for short term rental so I can drive one for a day or two and see if they really are as good as the Tesla fans say or if they're just competent like the Model S. I hired a Kona Electric at the end of last year as I had a deposit on one because of all the hype. Deposit cancelled after I drove on for a week.
Trouble with car opinions is they're all subject to personal preferences. I loved my Integrale when I had it over 15 years ago, most of my friends and family thought it was a crap relic of the 80's and hated being in it. As a driver I found it sublime on the right road on a good day.
t show of a disaster. I don’t like the wood trim, I think the infotainment is very old fashioned.But taking all that into account I still put a deposit down, I liked it that much. For me ICE cars feel like antiques now.
Edited by Dave Hedgehog on Saturday 31st August 14:21
DonkeyApple said:
It’s the same old stuff about not having a basic understanding of company accounts I’m afraid.
The vast majority of Ford and GMs debt is the lease business. The chap making the video needs to compare the right types of debt and when he finally does he will realise why no one else has picked up on his amazing numbers.
What he is really highlighting is that Tesla has no lease business of any viable metric and while they know they need to have this for the 3 and the Y to be competitive they haven’t the balance sheet or debt to equity ratio to be able to do it.
The really important metric between Ford/GM v Tesla is that in the case of Ford/GM they have a superior credit rating to their customers. They can borrow much more cheaply than their customers. The problem Tesla has is that almost every single one of their customers has a superior credit rating to Tesla and can borrow more cheaply. That’s a vital part of the business that Tesla need to flip for obvious reasons.
You also need to look at tangible assets and other metrics such as revenue stability etc etc.
The real numbers that this chap should be looking at are the costs of raw materials which for Tesla have dropped like a stone over the last 18 months, massively in their favour but they are still not able to convert those massive gains into profit margins at their volume products. The costs of lithium, cobalt, steel, aluminium and oil have all fallen back heavily and you would have expected this to have started feeding through to margins almost 12 months ago. Production efficiency is still very bad compared to the likes of Ford/GM who can roll out more complex products, more quickly and in more locations and get them to their customers more efficiently.
There is huge efficiency savings to be seized within Tesla and I suspect that G3 with a Chinese work force and the manufacturing efficiencies of their economy should make for very big savings.
At this point I'm tempted to say selling cars isn't their overall aim.The vast majority of Ford and GMs debt is the lease business. The chap making the video needs to compare the right types of debt and when he finally does he will realise why no one else has picked up on his amazing numbers.
What he is really highlighting is that Tesla has no lease business of any viable metric and while they know they need to have this for the 3 and the Y to be competitive they haven’t the balance sheet or debt to equity ratio to be able to do it.
The really important metric between Ford/GM v Tesla is that in the case of Ford/GM they have a superior credit rating to their customers. They can borrow much more cheaply than their customers. The problem Tesla has is that almost every single one of their customers has a superior credit rating to Tesla and can borrow more cheaply. That’s a vital part of the business that Tesla need to flip for obvious reasons.
You also need to look at tangible assets and other metrics such as revenue stability etc etc.
The real numbers that this chap should be looking at are the costs of raw materials which for Tesla have dropped like a stone over the last 18 months, massively in their favour but they are still not able to convert those massive gains into profit margins at their volume products. The costs of lithium, cobalt, steel, aluminium and oil have all fallen back heavily and you would have expected this to have started feeding through to margins almost 12 months ago. Production efficiency is still very bad compared to the likes of Ford/GM who can roll out more complex products, more quickly and in more locations and get them to their customers more efficiently.
There is huge efficiency savings to be seized within Tesla and I suspect that G3 with a Chinese work force and the manufacturing efficiencies of their economy should make for very big savings.
No business can survive in the long term selling products that last an extremely long time as their customers wouldn't come back. These days a recurring source of revenue is important for businesses.
Tesla are making cars with claimed 500,000 - 1,000,000 mile lifespans. BMW, Ford etc seem to make cars with a much shorter lifespan. Their recurring sources of revenue are from the servicing and selling parts for their vehicles and in 15 or so years selling the customer another car once its depreciated back to scrap value.
So what's teslas game here? Is it to get cars into the field and then figure out how to make money off the cars in the field later?
jamoor said:
At this point I'm tempted to say selling cars isn't their overall aim.
No business can survive in the long term selling products that last an extremely long time as their customers wouldn't come back. These days a recurring source of revenue is important for businesses.
Tesla are making cars with claimed 500,000 - 1,000,000 mile lifespans. BMW, Ford etc seem to make cars with a much shorter lifespan. Their recurring sources of revenue are from the servicing and selling parts for their vehicles and in 15 or so years selling the customer another car once its depreciated back to scrap value.
So what's teslas game here? Is it to get cars into the field and then figure out how to make money off the cars in the field later?
I don’t normally take much notice of companies mission statement, I know apples is “milk the sheep and get ALL the money” I was intrigued to find recently that Tesla’s is “to accelerate the world’s transition to sustainable energy”No business can survive in the long term selling products that last an extremely long time as their customers wouldn't come back. These days a recurring source of revenue is important for businesses.
Tesla are making cars with claimed 500,000 - 1,000,000 mile lifespans. BMW, Ford etc seem to make cars with a much shorter lifespan. Their recurring sources of revenue are from the servicing and selling parts for their vehicles and in 15 or so years selling the customer another car once its depreciated back to scrap value.
So what's teslas game here? Is it to get cars into the field and then figure out how to make money off the cars in the field later?
jamoor said:
Tesla are making cars with claimed 500,000 - 1,000,000 mile lifespans. BMW, Ford etc seem to make cars with a much shorter lifespan. Their recurring sources of revenue are from the servicing and selling parts for their vehicles and in 15 or so years selling the customer another car once its depreciated back to scrap value.
Tesla's claims are to be taken with a pinch of salt. The lifetime of a vehicle is not determined solely by its powertrain, which even in ICE cars is likely to last beyond the usable lifetime of the structure and interior these days.And given the minuscule market 'saturation' of Tesla,running out of customers in the next decade shouldn't actually be the slightest concern, unless their products turn out to have only niche appeal.
Smiljan said:
Excellent
I'm still waiting for Model 3's to trickle through for short term rental so I can drive one for a day or two and see if they really are as good as the Tesla fans say or if they're just competent like the Model S. I hired a Kona Electric at the end of last year as I had a deposit on one because of all the hype. Deposit cancelled after I drove on for a week.
Trouble with car opinions is they're all subject to personal preferences. I loved my Integrale when I had it over 15 years ago, most of my friends and family thought it was a crap relic of the 80's and hated being in it. As a driver I found it sublime on the right road on a good day.
A fair few S owners on the FB group also now have 3’s, and I think all have described the drive as much more fun and engaging than the S.I'm still waiting for Model 3's to trickle through for short term rental so I can drive one for a day or two and see if they really are as good as the Tesla fans say or if they're just competent like the Model S. I hired a Kona Electric at the end of last year as I had a deposit on one because of all the hype. Deposit cancelled after I drove on for a week.
Trouble with car opinions is they're all subject to personal preferences. I loved my Integrale when I had it over 15 years ago, most of my friends and family thought it was a crap relic of the 80's and hated being in it. As a driver I found it sublime on the right road on a good day.
Dave Hedgehog said:
I am no Tesla fanboi, I know all the problems with electric jebus (musk), the parts issues, the buying process which is just a total st show of a disaster. I don’t like the wood trim, I think the infotainment is very old fashioned.
But taking all that into account I still put a deposit down, I liked it that much. For me ICE cars feel like antiques now.
Which one did you go for Dave?t show of a disaster. I don’t like the wood trim, I think the infotainment is very old fashioned.But taking all that into account I still put a deposit down, I liked it that much. For me ICE cars feel like antiques now.
Edited by Dave Hedgehog on Saturday 31st August 14:21
Gassing Station | EV and Alternative Fuels | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff