Tesla Motors draws criticism in Germany


German companies Daimler (DDAIF) and Robert Bosch think Tesla Motors (TSLA) is jumping the gun in launching a supercharging network in Germany that doesn't work with EV models from other manufacturers.

A standardized system would lower infrastructure costs across the industry, maintain execs with the firms.

From other sites
Comments (97)
  • JD in NJ
    , contributor
    Comments (1634) | Send Message
     
    Smells like whining to me.
    25 Mar 2014, 06:53 AM Reply Like
  • Ford Prefect 1969
    , contributor
    Comments (2267) | Send Message
     
    "Smells like whining to me."

     

    Really pointless whining too.

     

    First someone needs to come up with a car that is capable of accepting a 120~135 KW charge and secondly if they want to use Tesla's property they need to pay up - and also convince Tesla that their vehicles will not interfere with the convenience enjoyed by Tesla customers.

     

    This is backwards thinking to imagine that electric cars need to be somehow generic in nature or that some entity needs to control charging standards for all.

     

    Tesla has it spot on. Make a car that can charge up from just about anything and let the whiners and policy makers come up with anything they want to.

     

    Make cars sufficiently long range that between home charging and Supercharging all other charging infrastructure is a so what and take it or leave it deal.
    25 Mar 2014, 10:08 AM Reply Like
  • seeker34567
    , contributor
    Comments (205) | Send Message
     
    It is capitalism at its best- to have a superior product (chargers) and destroy the competition.

     

    Germany of course would like to preserve their local auto companies and their whining is just a cry for survival.

     

    Tesla should capitalize on its momentum and not compromise with the old corrupt crony capitalism of middlemen auto-dealers and inferior EVs.
    25 Mar 2014, 11:51 AM Reply Like
  • chipdoctor
    , contributor
    Comments (2552) | Send Message
     
    "Smells like whining to me."

     

    Unless you were the one that just got vaporized by the 100KW+ of power going thru a non-standard connector.

     

    Standards exist to make things safer and compatible. Tesla should conform, especially if they receive some benefit (site location, grid tie-in, etc) for this.

     

    There are so many little details that need to be engineered correctly. Everyone should work together for whole EV industry, not just for a random maverick.

     

    You may recall years ago that everyone thought Aluminum wiring was ok to use in electrical service. It was only after some field experience (and a fire or two) that they knew the real issues. I hope this never happens with the "plug" though we will not really know until a few years down the road.
    25 Mar 2014, 01:49 PM Reply Like
  • WulfherSS
    , contributor
    Comments (468) | Send Message
     
    You must have very little industry knowledge to claim that Tesla has not used standards to develop its product and imply tha the product vapourizes people. Also, ever check the energy content of fuel? The bottom line is that the German manufacturers (who make maintenance intensive products) missed the boat like most other OEMs and they have nothing that compares to the Tesla S.
    25 Mar 2014, 03:20 PM Reply Like
  • Ronny Hugo
    , contributor
    Comments (103) | Send Message
     
    Smells like DDAIF has not yet realized they will have to adopt Tesla's technology or incur the cost of developing their own charging network, since Tesla beat them to it. Be first, or be best, and I doubt DDAIF can be best.
    25 Mar 2014, 07:00 AM Reply Like
  • Tales From The Future
    , contributor
    Comments (7366) | Send Message
     
    There already is a standard, or rather two: Chademo and CCS.

     

    Daimler and other companies such as VW and Ford will for example install 400 fast chargers in Germany using the CCS (also known as Combo) standard:

     

    http://bit.ly/1iXXRPb (link in German)

     

    This project is called SLAM. There are many projects underway in Europe installing dual Chademo and CCS chargers, Japan is already full of Chademo chargers.

     

    The world outside China has already decided on two DC-charging standards: Chademo and CCS.

     

    Daimler is a member of the CCS camp, like most Western car companies.

     

    China uses a third standard called GBT. China is using a similar strategy as TSLA to protect their local car and EV industry using a proprietary standard, but at least China is a big country and not a manufacturer.

     

    In the long run, Chademo and CCS (or successors of these two standards) will have the most stations, all car manufacturers worldwide except TSLA support these two standards for EVs.

     

    And it better be, a standard with 15 different plugs , one for each car company would be a nightmare and hinder EV adoption.
    25 Mar 2014, 07:17 AM Reply Like
  • Ronny Hugo
    , contributor
    Comments (103) | Send Message
     
    Are these systems comparable to TSLA's 30 minute over 50% charge? Or do they take hours?
    25 Mar 2014, 08:06 AM Reply Like
  • chickensevil
    , contributor
    Comments (743) | Send Message
     
    Tesla "supports" the other standards in their adapters. They could reasonably make a CCS adapter, and I would expect them to if it ends up taking off enough. You already can get a Chademo adapter if you want it.

     

    As for their superchargers, this is their own proprietary network not necessarily intended for outsiders to be able to access it. While the car companies "support" the other standards, what are they doing to actually help foot the bill to get it off the ground? Seems to me like DDAIF just wants Tesla to foot the bill for other companies to swoop in and use the tech for free. Sorry, but you have to pay to play. Tesla said if others want to use the Tesla technology, then they will have to pay for access and likely install the Tesla hardware.

     

    Having a unique connector never stopped Apple.
    25 Mar 2014, 08:11 AM Reply Like
  • Manfred Bacher
    , contributor
    Comments (7) | Send Message
     
    When a small battery like the 22 kWh-one of the i3 is charged in 20 minutes, how long would it take to charge the 85 kWh of the TESLA? What is the charge power of those chargers in kW? Is it 135 as is with the TESLA superchargers? Even here you need about 40 minutes for a stop. even longer woudn't be practical for TESLA. So while the industry is catching up with small cars, small batteries, TESLA is zooming ahead in big style. Hence the TESLA superchargers.
    25 Mar 2014, 08:38 AM Reply Like
  • JRP3
    , contributor
    Comments (10289) | Send Message
     
    "In the long run, Chademo and CCS (or successors of these two standards) will have the most stations, all car manufacturers worldwide except TSLA support these two standards for EVs."

     

    tftf,
    You really need to stop posting outright lies, since you know that Tesla supports both of these standards, as well as their own superior standard. At this point there is simply no possible excuse for you continuing to spread this misinformation other than an attempt to deceive, since you know better. Just stop it already.
    25 Mar 2014, 08:43 AM Reply Like
  • Tales From The Future
    , contributor
    Comments (7366) | Send Message
     
    "You already can get a Chademo adapter if you want it."

     

    Not yet. It's still "coming soon" according to the TSLA store. And it costs $1k (!):

     

    http://bit.ly/1jXd4lb

     

    To be fair, the CCS adapter will probably be cheaper. But I don't see this as a strategy once TSLA makes a mass-market car. Buyers don't like to spend $1-2k just for adapters.

     

    "Having a unique connector never stopped Apple. "

     

    Apple has a much higher marketshare in phones and yes, it did stop or hinder Apple in the past, look at the adoption rates of USB versus technologies favored by Apple:

     

    USB 2.0 <---> Firewire
    USB 3.0 <---> Thunderbolt

     

    USB dominates the markets today. The same will happen with EV chargers in my opinion over time.

     

    Chademo and CCS will dominate since they are open standards approved by international bodies and (it's worth repeating) supported by all car companies except for TSLA.
    25 Mar 2014, 08:44 AM Reply Like
  • chickensevil
    , contributor
    Comments (743) | Send Message
     
    Ronny and Manfred: The rate of charge of a single cell is maxed at what that single cell can handle. The max capacity of the cell (how much power it holds at a full charge) is designated as 1C. Lithium batteries are pretty much capped at a 2C rate of charge, however you normally wont hit that high of a rate. What this means, the larger the battery, the faster you can recharge.

     

    a 22kW battery will be capped at 44kWh recharge rate. Hence the Leaf is already maxed out by Chademo and is also why most of the Chademo chargers I have seen are capped at 50kWh rate, since aside from Tesla there are no larger batteries that can handle a higher rate.

     

    As such, the Tesla 60kW battery will be capped at 120kWh, and the 85kW will be capped at 170kWh. Tesla has already stated that their technology cap is currently looking to be 150kWh for their superchargers.

     

    So, to answer your questions, assuming you can recharge at a rate of 2C on the battery (regardless of size), you will get your half charge/full charge at the same time. However, the amount of range given for that time will vary depending on the size of the battery.

     

    Assuming that 30 minutes = 50% recharge. A 22kW battery would only be back to around 40 miles, while a 60kW battery would be at 100 miles, and the 85kW battery would be at 150 miles. There is a lot of research into breaking through this 2C rate cap, but for now that is the ceiling in order to avoid damaging the batteries significantly.
    25 Mar 2014, 08:50 AM Reply Like
  • chickensevil
    , contributor
    Comments (743) | Send Message
     
    Hmmm, must be why all those radios and speakers, and sound systems, and car docks, and insert random other device all had iPod and iPhone docks in them INSTEAD of USB. Sometimes if you were lucky you would find one that would also have a USB connector on the side... if you were lucky.

     

    And you will notice that even for USB most companies couldn't decide for a long time on which connector to use, there were 4 of them that were in use at one point.

     

    Thunderbolt was an intel technology. Firewire was very popular in its day and most things came with support for both technologies (USB and Firewire). The issue came with the design portion. Firewire was more expensive to implement on the peripheral so for most thing it made economical sense to go with USB.

     

    But neither of these would indicate that Apple's devices were some how "limited" or "held back" when they have used these. My PC has USB and Firewire connectors on it, even still today (bought the case like 1 year ago), Most laptops I have seen also will generally carry one firewire port. And Apple would certainly design around whatever hardware they are expecting you to use, so I don't really see how this has "hindered" Apple.
    25 Mar 2014, 09:10 AM Reply Like
  • Tales From The Future
    , contributor
    Comments (7366) | Send Message
     
    JRP3 wrote: "You really need to stop posting outright lies, since you know that Tesla supports both of these standards"

     

    JRP3, you keep posting wrong stuff and accusing me of lies? TSLA cars will only work on Chademo/CCS stations with adapters:

     

    - The TSLA Chademo adapter is still listed as "coming soon" and costs $1k. Did you miss my link above? Here it is again: http://bit.ly/1jXd4lb

     

    - There is no CCS adapter yet (or even announced) from TSLA.

     

    Otherwise please show me how TSLA cars can use a Chademo or CCS station (DC charging) without an adapter today.

     

    True "support" in my view is being able to charge a car without any expensive adapter. I doubt people buying a future Gen III car from TSLA want to spend an additional $1-2k on adapters for Chademo or CCS.

     

    PS: For people lost in the many abbreviations, here's a picture of all three DC charging standards and protocols, namely:

     

    Chademo, CCS, GBT: http://bit.ly/1eJDFiw

     

    (GBT is just used in China)
    25 Mar 2014, 09:10 AM Reply Like
  • Kalud
    , contributor
    Comments (64) | Send Message
     
    Chademo and CCS are simply too slow. Mostly useless for Tesla, still Tesla offers an adapter for Chademo.

     

    Chademo goes to 50kW

     

    CSS goes up to 90kW

     

    Tesla Supercharging is 120kW and they are starting installing 135kW right now in Hamilton, NJ.
    25 Mar 2014, 09:22 AM Reply Like
  • JRP3
    , contributor
    Comments (10289) | Send Message
     
    Tftf,
    That's like saying Tesla doesn't "support" various 110 and 240V plugs because they require an adapter, in other words, total nonsense. Tesla supports the J1772 standard, and the CSS is an extension of that standard, which Tesla also supports. So, again, Tesla vehicles will be able to use CSS, Chademo, Mennekes, 110, 240V, J1772, and their own, superior, superchargers. Yes the Chademo adapter is expensive. So?
    25 Mar 2014, 09:27 AM Reply Like
  • chickensevil
    , contributor
    Comments (743) | Send Message
     
    TFTF: I would assume that just like how they include the J1772 adapter as standard with the car, that they would include whichever other adapter becomes the standard if it becomes in high enough demand. As of right now, Chademo actually has a decent number of locations here in the US, and how many Combo ONLY stations are there? Like... 1? 2? If there is demand for the Combo adapter, I don't doubt they would make one.

     

    For the most part, the DC chargers won't be necessary anyway given the deployment of the Superchargers. What is more needed is smart deployment of destination charging (L2). Any DC adapters that become available to Tesla owners will simply be icing on the charging cake.
    25 Mar 2014, 09:28 AM Reply Like
  • Tales From The Future
    , contributor
    Comments (7366) | Send Message
     
    Chickensevil, you are certainly correct that there are few CCS stations today, because CCS-equipped cars are only begining to show up for sale (the BMW i3 is one of the first, the VW e-Golf will follow soon) in Europe and the US.

     

    But they are coming. There are plans for hundreds of stations in countries like the Netherlands and Germany.

     

    In about 3-5 years, I expect all major countries with EV sales to have a full coverage of Chademo and CCS stations.

     

    Japan is already there with Chademo, there's an incredible density of stations:

     

    http://bit.ly/1fXBCUj

     

    Part of it is public money. TSLA will not get such public money for its SC stations because Superchargers don't work with other cars from other brands. Both CHademo and CCS on the other hand get public money.
    25 Mar 2014, 09:45 AM Reply Like
  • chickensevil
    , contributor
    Comments (743) | Send Message
     
    TFTF: Ok, so then as it was stated by Musk in May of 2013:

     

    http://aol.it/15jMZ4O

     

    The batteries need to be built with Supercharging in mind, he said, and Tesla needed to "solve the problem of long-distance travel and we can't wait for others to agree with our strategy. If we wait for some sort of consensus, it's going to take too long. We just need to get going and other manufacturers can either copy us or join us."

     

    So if Tesla had sat around waiting for this to be rolled out, and agreed upon, and then debated, and then argued some more, and then laws created, and argued... we would be almost 2 years behind where we are today with the superchargers, maybe more, since they would STILL be trying to figure out what kind of connection the car itself should have (which was likely sorted out back in 2010, along with the original supercharger technology). All this so that they could play "kindly" with the other companies who have shown to be slow to the game, and slow to even doing EV adoption.

     

    Tesla doesn't need Public money (isn't that one of the biggest complaints about Tesla being some kind of government pet? I guess this goes to show that they aren't right?). The 2k that is part of the sale price of the car has been shown to be more than enough for them to build out the network and sustain it for the time being (and when the roll out solar it will make it even more fiscally sustainable).

     

    The point in "waiting" would be so someone else (the public or some "charging" company) could pick up the tab... Tesla doesn't need or care to let someone else do this... so Daimler and Bosch are just pointlessly whining...
    25 Mar 2014, 10:13 AM Reply Like
  • 123man
    , contributor
    Comments (1600) | Send Message
     
    Public money - well, now we can wait for the onslaught of the "not my money" folks who complain that Tesla dared to even borrow public money - which then got paid back - there is no negative for Tesla with the deployment of these other chargers - since they have the technology team to take advantage of whatever is offered by way of chargers, it only strengthens Tesla's mobility, if a Tesla owner needs to use one and has the patience -
    25 Mar 2014, 10:22 AM Reply Like
  • David at Imperial Beach
    , contributor
    Comments (4382) | Send Message
     
    Standards are useless when they are substandard. Tesla superchargers are the fastest available technology. My response to Daimler and Bosch is that it is too soon to establish standards. Nevertheless, Teslas will be able to support whatever standard becomes dominant in any area.
    25 Mar 2014, 10:53 AM Reply Like
  • David at Imperial Beach
    , contributor
    Comments (4382) | Send Message
     
    No, it's not worth repeating. Chademo and CCS are worthless if they don't advance the state of the art. They don't. It's easy enough to "support" a standard when you aren't the one building the stations. And since there are competing standards in different areas, and none of the standards come up to the capabilities of the state of the art superchargers, it remains to be seen what will become dominant.
    25 Mar 2014, 11:02 AM Reply Like
  • David at Imperial Beach
    , contributor
    Comments (4382) | Send Message
     
    'True "support" in my view is being able to charge a car without any expensive adapter.' So in other words you won't be happy unless Teslas have a row of ports along the side of the car that allow you to plug in whatever cord you want to. Ignore the fact that the car itself will likely have to be more costly by about $5K since the costs have to go somewhere.
    25 Mar 2014, 11:11 AM Reply Like
  • DanoX
    , contributor
    Comments (3461) | Send Message
     
    It didn't hinder Apple at all, and I'm sure based past performance with Intel OS X and PPC OS X, Firewire is probably still being maintained/upgraded in the back laboratory at Apple.
    25 Mar 2014, 12:18 PM Reply Like
  • RussellL
    , contributor
    Comments (977) | Send Message
     
    "In about 3-5 years, I expect all major countries with EV sales to have a full coverage of Chademo and CCS stations."

     

    Do you really expect us to believe Tesla should have waited 3-5 more years before building the Model S?

     

    "TSLA will not get such public money for its SC stations because Superchargers don't work with other cars from other brands. Both CHademo and CCS on the other hand get public money."

     

    It's obvious Tesla doesn't need public money for their Super Charger stations.
    25 Mar 2014, 12:50 PM Reply Like
  • Tales From The Future
    , contributor
    Comments (7366) | Send Message
     
    "It's obvious Tesla doesn't need public money for their Super Charger stations."

     

    I never wrote that.But since millions will be put into Chademo (see Japan) and CCS (see Europe) it will make less and less sense for TSLA to compete and set up its own stations long-term (5-10 years).

     

    Open standards supported by multiples car brands are powerful. Chademo went from zero stations to over 3000 in just four years, the same could happen with CCS starting this year.
    25 Mar 2014, 01:05 PM Reply Like
  • Rik1381
    , contributor
    Comments (1402) | Send Message
     
    Model S shipped to Japan will reportedly include CHAdeMO charging ability.
    25 Mar 2014, 01:40 PM Reply Like
  • Tales From The Future
    , contributor
    Comments (7366) | Send Message
     
    " Model S shipped to Japan will reportedly include CHAdeMO charging ability."

     

    So will TSLA eat up the $1k (Chademo adapter price) in this case?

     

    If so, Japan would be the only country where TSLA cars could directly access Chademo or CCS out of the box without expensive adapters.

     

    I read the news differently a few months ago:

     

    http://bit.ly/1iZAjth

     

    i.e. Japanese customers would have to buy the same $1k adapter like everyone else, but maybe that changed now (?)
    25 Mar 2014, 02:24 PM Reply Like
  • surferbroadband
    , contributor
    Comments (4835) | Send Message
     
    They take hours.
    25 Mar 2014, 11:46 PM Reply Like
  • molli
    , contributor
    Comments (5403) | Send Message
     
    @tftf - Model S has the standard type 2 connector. The supercharger fits in that connector. Type 2 is designed for AC and DC charging up to about 50 kW and any European EV with a type 2 connector could plug into the supercharger because it fits and - if allowed - DC charge up to 50 kW. The connector itself is not an issue at all.
    The only issue Daimler, Bosch and RWE have is that charging is free ( =prepaid ). Bad for Daimler because their car fuel cost looks bad now and bad for RWE because once EVs become more popular they can not raise prices at will in the future.
    It is just about the money...
    27 Mar 2014, 03:23 AM Reply Like
  • Lvmoda
    , contributor
    Comments (46) | Send Message
     
    Means they're worried about their future market share. TSLA can always convert to a new standard when it makes economic sense and on their own terms, but right now daimler and bosch are locked out and in the weaker position in their own market.

     

    PS> One year in and my P85 has been flawless and enjoyable as the first day I took delivery. The US dealer whining about service and "consumer protection" are weak and ridiculous arguments. TSLA = disruption...interesting to watch others lose their brand equity and credibility.
    25 Mar 2014, 07:01 AM Reply Like
  • DeeAgeaux
    , contributor
    Comments (82) | Send Message
     
    Tesla faces criticism from two German companies in Germany.

     

    Tesla is open to sharing the network.

     

    Daimler and Bosch could have built their own network decades ago.

     

    If Tesla did not build it then a fast charging network would not be built for many decades more.
    25 Mar 2014, 07:17 AM Reply Like
  • kmi
    , contributor
    Comments (4558) | Send Message
     
    My understanding is that only Tesla vehicles are allowed access to the US supercharger network, how would this be different.
    25 Mar 2014, 07:32 AM Reply Like
  • Dan Fichana
    , contributor
    Comments (1918) | Send Message
     
    Yes- just like Microsoft and nintendo were saying Sony was jumping the gun with the blu-ray player

     

    (Beta not an apt comparison due to Beta's limitations in the VHS beta war; remember movies were over 1 hr long and Beta in the early years only had 1 hr of play).

     

    It is entirely possible that Tesla's become a defacto standard and the others may have to pay royalities to use.

     

    That is what I think the critisism is about.
    25 Mar 2014, 07:54 AM Reply Like
  • Michael Bryant
    , contributor
    Comments (6729) | Send Message
     
    I don't care what corporate CEOs want or think. What do the people want?
    25 Mar 2014, 08:02 AM Reply Like
  • chickensevil
    , contributor
    Comments (743) | Send Message
     
    Musk said he's not against working with other automakers to make their EVs compatible. The batteries need to be built with Supercharging in mind, he said, and Tesla needed to "solve the problem of long-distance travel and we can't wait for others to agree with our strategy. If we wait for some sort of consensus, it's going to take too long. We just need to get going and other manufacturers can either copy us or join us."

     

    http://aol.it/15jMZ4O

     

    DDAIF, I think you already have you answer... You should have gotten on board with Tesla's chargers way back in 2011/2012, instead of coming out with your own "standard" and then trying to bully others into following.
    25 Mar 2014, 08:19 AM Reply Like
  • Tales From The Future
    , contributor
    Comments (7366) | Send Message
     
    " instead of coming out with your own "standard"".

     

    CCS is not a standard by Daimler, it's industrywide and one of two global standards for fast EV charging. Here's the list of companies backing one of the two standards:

     

    CHAdeMO: Nissan, Mitsubishi, Mazda, Hyundai/Kia, PSA, Tata, BYD, Volvo, Suzuki...

     

    CCS/SAE Combo (Combined Charging System) : Audi / Porsche / Volkswagen... (VW Group), BMW, Chrysler/Fiat, Daimler, Ford, General Motors, Hyundai, Jaguar/Land Rover/Tata, PSA, Toyota, Volvo....

     

    The only EV company not featured on this list is obviously Tesla.
    25 Mar 2014, 09:02 AM Reply Like
  • JRP3
    , contributor
    Comments (10289) | Send Message
     
    Still wrong since CSS is an extension of J1772, which Tesla supports, and Chademo, which Tesla supports, along with their own, better, superchargers.
    25 Mar 2014, 09:28 AM Reply Like
  • chickensevil
    , contributor
    Comments (743) | Send Message
     
    "Industry wide" would indicate that everyone has signed on to it... from your list... that doesn't seem to be the case.

     

    It doesn't matter which becomes the "defacto" standard, because Tesla will just make an adapter for it. And likely start including it a "standard" in their cars if it has that high enough of use.

     

    For the record, the people associated with Chademo got together in 2011, the SAE Combo wasn't proposed until 2012, which at that point Tesla had already started rolling out their Superchargers. So yeah, the others are late to the party, with their big, clunky connectors...

     

    First off, if Tesla were to switch out the end of the cable on their superchargers, it would just confuse other people more, since you would pull up and plug in and then wonder why it doesn't work...

     

    Second, it would add an extra layer of complication on their own customers (who would actually be using it) since they would have to attach an adapter to make it connect into the car. Why should Tesla back track all of their stations which are only for their customers, just so they can join some "group"? I just don't see the point.
    25 Mar 2014, 09:40 AM Reply Like
  • Tales From The Future
    , contributor
    Comments (7366) | Send Message
     
    I'm not saying TSLA should change the plug on their stations. They can use what they want on their Superchargers.

     

    My comments about CCS, Chademo and the list of backers was in response to comments arguing that other car companies should switch to Tesla's Supercharger stations/system.

     

    That will never happen in my opinion. First, because two industy-wide standars exist (Chademo and CCS) and second it doesn't make sense for large car companies to adopt a system by a rival - that would be repeating the mistake made by IBM when it licensed MSFT DOS and later Windows for PCs. Car companies will not give away their EV keys to TSLA.

     

    PS: Let's remember Daimler is a TSLA investor and even they are critizing TSLA's move. Long-term, it would be horrible if each EV car company had its own plugs and stations.
    25 Mar 2014, 10:06 AM Reply Like
  • chickensevil
    , contributor
    Comments (743) | Send Message
     
    Well then there isn't a problem and Daimler/Bosch are pointlessly complaining. Tesla isn't suggesting anyone ELSE roll out their supercharger stations... They are perfectly capable of doing that themselves.

     

    And they are staying neutral to the rest of the charging battles going on, since all of them are currently slower than anything Tesla offers. So until someone comes up with something real (not some "hypothetical" we "could" go to infinity billion kW rate of charge) that is faster than what Tesla offers I see no reason for Tesla to change their business at all.

     

    Tesla customers seem more than happy to stick to buying/obtaining/making adapters to work with other chargers or situations. Most of them view this as a temporary hold over until Tesla gets all their Superchargers rolled out. (One guy I met had created a pretty well thought out connector to daisy chain two 50A RV connectors into one single HPWC so he could get the full 80A charge rate at an RV park should he deviate off the current Supercharger route.)

     

    So the car companies can all argue and fight over Bluray vs HDDVD while Tesla will just end up making whatever connections they need to.
    25 Mar 2014, 11:02 AM Reply Like
  • David at Imperial Beach
    , contributor
    Comments (4382) | Send Message
     
    And who's idea was it to have two "standards"?
    25 Mar 2014, 11:18 AM Reply Like
  • David at Imperial Beach
    , contributor
    Comments (4382) | Send Message
     
    Well, long term it would be "horrible" to use your own word, if CHAdeMO is dominant in Japan, CCS in Europe, and GBT in China, and none of them charge at 135kW or above. A global EV manufacturer would have to "support" all those standards and whatever became dominant in the US, and unless those standards were upgraded, they still wouldn't be technically adequate. There's also the little problem of where they are deployed. Tesla supercharging stations are conveniently located for long distance travel. A standard that is deployed only in shopping malls and other downtown areas would not provide the required convenience for continental travel.

     

    It actually does make sense for other manufacturers to license Tesla's technology and not have to build out their own network of superchargers if no competing standard offers anywhere near the capability and convenience.
    25 Mar 2014, 11:31 AM Reply Like
  • Tales From The Future
    , contributor
    Comments (7366) | Send Message
     
    "whatever became dominant in the US, "

     

    US manufacturers opted for CCS as well (D3, along with European car companies selling cars in the US).
    25 Mar 2014, 11:48 AM Reply Like
  • JD in NJ
    , contributor
    Comments (1634) | Send Message
     
    David,

     

    That's the great thing about standards. There are so many from which to choose.
    25 Mar 2014, 12:04 PM Reply Like
  • RussellL
    , contributor
    Comments (977) | Send Message
     
    "The only EV company not featured on this list is obviously Tesla."

     

    And the only company that is successful in producing and selling a long range, high performance BEV.
    25 Mar 2014, 01:04 PM Reply Like
  • Tales From The Future
    , contributor
    Comments (7366) | Send Message
     
    "That's the great thing about standards. There are so many from which to choose. "

     

    No, there are exactly two in fast-charging outside of China: Chademo and CCS.
    25 Mar 2014, 02:30 PM Reply Like
  • Rik1381
    , contributor
    Comments (1402) | Send Message
     
    CCS in the US and in Europe have different pin arrangements. They are not the same.
    25 Mar 2014, 02:33 PM Reply Like
  • Tales From The Future
    , contributor
    Comments (7366) | Send Message
     
    "CCS in the US and in Europe have different pin arrangements."

     

    I'm aware of that, I even posted a picture:http://bit.ly/1eJDFiw

     

    The advantage is having only one plug for slow and fast charging.

     

    And how many times do you drive over Greenland ;)? There are only minor changes only between CCS for Europe and the US, station makers and car makers will have economies of scale worlwide. Same for Chademo.
    25 Mar 2014, 03:40 PM Reply Like
  • chickensevil
    , contributor
    Comments (743) | Send Message
     
    "That's the great thing about standards. There are so many from which to choose."

     

    And both of them are inferior. Moving on.

     

    "CCS in the US and in Europe have different pin arrangements. They are not the same."

     

    Unfortunately Rik this isn't a case for Tesla (or against) since you cannot move Tesla from one continent to another due to the way the electric grid is setup differently in other locations. You even have a different port on your car from the US to the EU. I assume you could convince and pay Tesla to let you change out those parts, but I doubt it would be cheap and most likely would run into the same issues that we did with the Roadsters.

     

    "The advantage is having only one plug for slow and fast charging."

     

    Yeah, Tesla's plug does the same as well, it is also much smaller, and less clunky.

     

    ---------

     

    Bottom line Tesla is the only one doing a decent business model (single payment up front - free for life), placing them in decent locations (as opposed to Blink, et. al. who think that sticking chargers at grocery stores and pharmacies are the way to go... or how about other auto manufacturers... Nissan... who think they should place chargers at their dealerships), and is rolling them out with pretty great efficiency... You all can spend your days arguing over "standards" and how things "should be implemented" while I go drive from coast to coast across the US with ease. Thanks!
    26 Mar 2014, 08:06 AM Reply Like
  • AlphaPA
    , contributor
    Comment (1) | Send Message
     
    Don't move too fast.... Didn't Benz have a 118 year or so headstart as a car company? Now follow the leader.
    25 Mar 2014, 08:36 AM Reply Like
  • From an European point of view
    , contributor
    Comments (42) | Send Message
     
    Year to date Tesla sold 96 cars in Germany , while the big local brands ( BMW+Mercedes+VW) sold 1000 , although at a chepar a price .
    For Europe Tesla S is too big . I visited their showroom in Brussels , and one of the first question from the Tesla rep was " what is the length of your current car ?" .
    25 Mar 2014, 08:38 AM Reply Like
  • Dan Fichana
    , contributor
    Comments (1918) | Send Message
     
    Let us wait until Q1 results before jumping to conclusions.

     

    There is no backdoor way of trying to divine sales.

     

    Historically numbers like that are disasterously wrong.

     

    We learned that with VIN analysis, we learned that with registrations in the US, we learned that with parts suppliers, there is no indication that those 100 cars is remotely correct.

     

    On top of that consider Tesla's funky distribution- they build up some, next month deliver than starve the country the following month. Odd, but works.
    25 Mar 2014, 09:27 AM Reply Like
  • David at Imperial Beach
    , contributor
    Comments (4382) | Send Message
     
    A Bentley or a Rolls Royce salesman might well ask the same question. Europe doesn't seem to have a problem accommodating big expensive cars when they want to.
    25 Mar 2014, 11:36 AM Reply Like
  • Manfred Bacher
    , contributor
    Comments (7) | Send Message
     
    the whining of Bosch and Daimler reminds me of our monopoly games as children: The losers always argued that the winners were not being fair. I feel ashamed for my fellow Germans. Stop complaining and be humble! Humbly accept that "just do it" is better than waiting for others, politicians namely, to make decisions. Humbly accept that Musk is better! What kind of an argument is this anyhow, telling an entrepreuneur how he should go about his bold, curageous business decisions while not making good and fast decisions themselves? What keeps Daimler, who has a share in TESLA and obtains drive trains for their smart and b-Class from adopting TESLA's technology? What stops Bosch from establishing their own, supercharger network that is open to all manufacturers and that is so much better, than TESLA's system? After all Musk didn't spend a dime of subvention money. Why shouldn't he make sure that his customers get the very best? Why shouldn't he use his competitive edge to the fullest while it lasts?
    25 Mar 2014, 08:38 AM Reply Like
  • arondaniel
    , contributor
    Comments (1664) | Send Message
     
    "What keeps Daimler, who has a share in TESLA and obtains drive trains for their smart and b-Class from adopting TESLA's technology? What stops Bosch from establishing their own, supercharger network that is open to all manufacturers and that is so much better, than TESLA's system?"

     

    Maybe 100+ years worth of gasoline engine refinements and investments?
    25 Mar 2014, 09:06 AM Reply Like
  • Gerald Summers
    , contributor
    Comments (3) | Send Message
     
    Elon Musk is too good for those Germans
    25 Mar 2014, 08:39 AM Reply Like
  • Tales From The Future
    , contributor
    Comments (7366) | Send Message
     
    If you know Tesla's history, TSLA wouldn't even exist today hadn't Daimler (yes that Daimler mentioned in the article) saved them back in 2009 with a cash infusion:

     

    Elon Musk: 'The credit for saving Tesla should go to Daimler'

     

    http://aol.it/RHnYfR

     

    Oh the irony of your comment.
    25 Mar 2014, 08:58 AM Reply Like
  • David at Imperial Beach
    , contributor
    Comments (4382) | Send Message
     
    The irony is that you and solucky seem to be the first ones to forget that fortuitous cash infusion.
    25 Mar 2014, 11:39 AM Reply Like
  • proberge
    , contributor
    Comments (21) | Send Message
     
    Tesla went proprietary to solve a problem : how to make recharging extremely fast. In order to do that they had to make the supercharger, the controllers and the batteries inside the car communicate with each other.

     

    Even if Tesla allowed other manufacturer to use the supercharges, most likely they would not charge as fast.
    25 Mar 2014, 08:48 AM Reply Like
  • Johann Galt
    , contributor
    Comments (246) | Send Message
     
    I would think Daimler and Bosch easily have the political pull to force Tesla to include other manufacturers whether Tesla likes it or not.
    25 Mar 2014, 09:04 AM Reply Like
  • chickensevil
    , contributor
    Comments (743) | Send Message
     
    Tesla, specifically Elon, has said that they have no issue bringing on other Manufacturers. The new Mercedes EV that has Tesla tech is not able to use superchargers. Why? because Daimler chose not to include it in the car... Don't blame Tesla for this.
    25 Mar 2014, 10:17 AM Reply Like
  • Technology Equity Strategies
    , contributor
    Comments (3035) | Send Message
     
    This is one of the areas where public policy and competitive advantage for an individual company will conflict.

     

    Tesla has every right to try to build a proprietary standard, whether its to accelerate the adoption of cars or to create a lasting advantage for its own enrichment. But there should be no taxpayer incentives or government subsidy of any kind for a company that does not conform to completely open standards.

     

    In the U.S., for example, the tax credit should not apply to any car that seeks to create barriers to an open charging network. You want the American taxpayer to help build your car company? Then cut out the self dealing crap. Taxpayers should not have to fund this directly or indirectly.

     

    You want a proprietary advantage? Fine. But get your hand out of the public till.

     

    This is an area where the Tesla sanctimony and hypocrisy is most stark. This company exists only by grace of the American taxpayer. If it does not embrace completely open standards, its a travesty, and the government needs to stop the support.
    25 Mar 2014, 09:12 AM Reply Like
  • JRP3
    , contributor
    Comments (10289) | Send Message
     
    Nonsense. Tesla received no government funding to develop their superior supercharges. Just because no other battery can handle the power is not Tesla's problem.
    25 Mar 2014, 09:30 AM Reply Like
  • Technology Equity Strategies
    , contributor
    Comments (3035) | Send Message
     
    JRP3

     

    Of all the silly arguments. It doesn't matter whether Tesla got funding for its Superchargers. Society benefits from open standards. Tesla got public money and still does through the tax credit that buyers get when they buy a Tesla.

     

    Either conform to the public interest, or stop getting that benefit. You fully understand the corporatist gimmick that your company is running.

     

    All this B.S while sucking on the public tit. This game will work only so long, then it will be time to find out if this company can stand on its own two feet without the taxpayer.
    25 Mar 2014, 10:24 AM Reply Like
  • 123man
    , contributor
    Comments (1600) | Send Message
     
    TESLA PAID BACK THE DOE LOAN - what part of that is misunderstandable -
    the truth is that the charging systems being back with PUBLIC money should have to include Tesla, not the other way around - Tesla's "hand is out of the public till" - please explain your statement about "sanctimony and hypocrisy" and if the shoe fits, wear it -
    25 Mar 2014, 10:31 AM Reply Like
  • chickensevil
    , contributor
    Comments (743) | Send Message
     
    Tesla has already said they would accept other people using their network if they agree to Tesla's conditions, which is that they want people to use their business model (single payment upfront, free for life usage).

     

    I don't think there is anything special about the plug itself (at least not the american one)... I think most of the stuff that goes on, is "under the hood" so to speak, on the car itself.

     

    If you want "open charging" to be one of the conditions of the Tax credits, you are welcome to go lobby against it. Tesla didn't ask the government to make the EV tax credit, nor did they have anything to do with the conditions. So by all means, go lobby to have it modified, and see where that gets you. Otherwise it sounds like you are just nitpicking and trying to bring up a red herring to distract the issue.
    25 Mar 2014, 11:09 AM Reply Like
  • Ford Prefect 1969
    , contributor
    Comments (2267) | Send Message
     
    @Tales From The Future

     

    We know your shorts are under water you don't have to come here to cry about it any longer, it is getting really old, I promise.

     

    @Tippydog.

     

    Tesla is the only US Automaker that did not and does not suck on the public tit to survive to use your disgusting language.

     

    The only one. Two of them actually went bust, the other one is for ever crying that the $5.9bn bailout was only a loan. Sure a loan without which they would have gone bust according to Stephen Chu - the guy that gave it to them.
    25 Mar 2014, 11:16 AM Reply Like
  • David at Imperial Beach
    , contributor
    Comments (4382) | Send Message
     
    Society benefits from open standards only when those open standards allow the state of the art to progress. Where would PCs and mobile devices be if we were still hobbled by the USB 1.0 speed standard? Any manufacturer with a high speed device would be completely out of luck and would have to implement its own nonstandard connector.
    25 Mar 2014, 11:43 AM Reply Like
  • Majek_eight
    , contributor
    Comments (91) | Send Message
     
    Tippydog,
    Tesla does not "get public money through the tax credit that buyers get when they buy a Tesla".
    The person who purchases the Tesla gets the credit, not Tesla. Furthermore, this credit applies to other EVs and Hybrids, so based on your flawed argument, Toyota, Nissan and now BMW and Volkswagen are getting public money as well.
    Up to now, Tesla has been able to sell credits to other car manufacturers, who do not meet Government minimum "green" sales. This will end soon for Tesla and may have already. Other car manufacturers could have produced more "green" vehicles to avoid buying them from Tesla, but it was more profitable for them to produce their ICEs and just buy their "green" stamp. Don't criticize Tesla for the other's lack of effort in developing an EV or hybrid.
    This completely ignores the fact that all 3 major U.S car makers were bailed out by the U.S taxpayer- talk about sucking on the public tit, as you so eloquently phrased it.
    GM, Chrysler and Ford would not be around (maybe Ford) today if they did not suck from the public tit. Given that they have not paid the U.S Gov't/taxpayer back, you can argue that they are still sucking on the public tit.
    Talk about being hypocritical. Seems you may be the hippiest critter of us all.

     

    Tesla was not bailed out. They got their loan from the Dept. of Energy- just like Fisker did. I don't hear you complaining about Fisker.

     

    Quit your whining about Tesla not making their charging "open standard". It is open, others can choose to use the same superior charging connection Tesla has implemented.
    If they choose not to, Tesla may have adapt to accommodate their vehicles to use another system- if they want to.
    Until it is decided on what is the best charging method, Tesla will move forward with theirs- charge on Tesla.
    25 Mar 2014, 12:46 PM Reply Like
  • Technology Equity Strategies
    , contributor
    Comments (3035) | Send Message
     
    Ford. Loan from the government. EV tax credit to buyers. Absurd subsidies in Norway. HOV access lanes in California. Sales tax exemptions in many states.

     

    Sucking on the public tit indeed. Take these things away in the past, there would be no Tesla. Take the credits away now, this stock returns to its rightful place in the investment cellar.

     

    Now it runs around complaining like a little B (Baby) that the laws aren't good enough in some states, that the incentives aren't good enough in Germany.

     

    This company will find out that all that public support for private gain will come with some strings. It always does. Taxpayer milk will only last so long.
    25 Mar 2014, 12:52 PM Reply Like
  • RussellL
    , contributor
    Comments (977) | Send Message
     
    "This is an area where the Tesla sanctimony and hypocrisy is most stark. This company exists only by grace of the American taxpayer. If it does not embrace completely open standards, its a travesty, and the government needs to stop the support."

     

    Nissan received a $1.448b and Ford $5.907b government loans. Both are in the process of paying it back.

     

    Chrysler $12.5b TARP loan and the US only recovered $11.2b. $1.3b loss.
    http://www.treasury gov/press-center/press...

     

    GM $49.5b, $39b recovered. $10.5b loss.
    http://www.treasury gov/press-center/press...
    25 Mar 2014, 01:10 PM Reply Like
  • JD in NJ
    , contributor
    Comments (1634) | Send Message
     
    There is something fitting about demanding that a manufacturer lower its standards, switch to an inferior technology, and seriously degrade the customer experience, because it's had some government support.
    25 Mar 2014, 01:15 PM Reply Like
  • Tales From The Future
    , contributor
    Comments (7366) | Send Message
     
    "We know your shorts are under water "

     

    Wrong, I'm at break-even currently. But keep making things up.

     

    I'm patient.

     

    We have seen yesterday what happens with all these momo names (not just TSLA; there's a whole bunch of them) when the cheap money music stops or other jitters occur.
    25 Mar 2014, 02:31 PM Reply Like
  • chickensevil
    , contributor
    Comments (743) | Send Message
     
    "Ford. Loan from the government. EV tax credit to buyers. Absurd subsidies in Norway. HOV access lanes in California. Sales tax exemptions in many states."

     

    Tesla did not ask for those things, nor did they build their business model around it. Has it helped? Yes. I won't deny that. But the only thing that was damn near required to keep them afloat (unless they got the cash from somewhere else, which they might have) was the DOE loan. They did not build anything around the tax credits or sales tax exemptions. Let's face it, 7,500 back on a 96k car (what I paid for mine) amounts to about as much as the 4% sales tax and other fees that I am having to pay. The only people that credit might be helping, are those who get the absolute base model of the car. I am going to be paying about that much back in interest over the life of the loan.

     

    You want to talk about "unfair advantage", Look at the crazy tax breaks we gave to SUVs in 2002 where you could get a 30k write off on a vehicle:
    http://usat.ly/1gpyu8z

     

    But you know... now that it is Tesla, it is all somehow finally "unfair" and Tesla shouldn't get anything special, right? I say fine! Take it all away. I am still willing to stake my money that they will succeed anyway.
    26 Mar 2014, 08:25 AM Reply Like
  • Ford Prefect 1969
    , contributor
    Comments (2267) | Send Message
     
    @chickens

     

    As I have understood it, Tesla is distinct from Ford in that it had to demonstrate proof of solvency on the basis of its Roadster business in order to qualify for its ARPA-e loan.

     

    Ford on the other hand did not and apparently it was known to Stephen Chu that Ford would not have been solvent without it. Most likely they got it by threatening to lay off the work force instead.

     

    There were two events that saved from going under during the depths of 2008/9

     

    Musk's private funds. Daimler investment obtained by demonstrating a working electric Smart car.

     

    Right now if the $7500 was canned, the principle effect would be to cripple the economics of pretty much all of the compliance cars and probably wipe out sales of the Nissan Leaf and BMW i3, Chevy Volt and so on.

     

    Tesla Model S is not a compliance car, it is a car and it is the least % subsidised of the lot. End of the $7500 would cripple follow-on competition, not Telsa.
    26 Mar 2014, 03:40 PM Reply Like
  • French battery specialist
    , contributor
    Comments (69) | Send Message
     
    Plugs are standardized in Europe. Bollore, with the Autolib in Paris was forced to make its chargers open to others electric cars (with some light fees) in Paris.
    I believe, Tesla superchargers will have to offer same service and be compatible with european standards if they want to have some in the streets or on parkings!

     

    Like your 220V plug was standardised ...
    The lack of compatibility of TESLA cars with existing european DC chargers norm is a serious problem for consumers because they cannot use others ...

     

    That type of policy is anti-competition.

     

    Remeber that we have EV's in Europe for more than 20 years, and that it is not new techno don't dream ... It is only a niche market with already plenty of offers wordwilde ...
    25 Mar 2014, 09:33 AM Reply Like
  • chickensevil
    , contributor
    Comments (743) | Send Message
     
    Again, Tesla has already said they are open to people joining into their supercharging venture assuming they follow the same business model. That is their "condition" for access. Because all of these penny pinching business models over complicate the use of the network, make them far more expensive to maintain, and sometimes can keep paying customers from even being able to use the service.
    25 Mar 2014, 11:12 AM Reply Like
  • French battery specialist
    , contributor
    Comments (69) | Send Message
     
    Just to say DC charger have a protocol that can change the charge power depending on the car ability (its battery) and there is a communication protocol in between the vehicle and the charger to set what will be the charge power (4 differents) and to provide electrical safety to the vehicle during charge (in case the charge wire is shorted for instance)
    25 Mar 2014, 09:45 AM Reply Like
  • 123man
    , contributor
    Comments (1600) | Send Message
     
    If it is so easy then the other manufacturers should copy Tesla and offer to pay for using their technology - what you are in essence saying is that Tesla should downgrade their cars to meet lower standards already set by the other guys - complete BS - Europeans will inevitably be attracted to Tesla because (not in spite of) of Tesla's unique features i.e., longer range at higher speeds in luxurious comfort, with superior technology - you are suggesting that Tesla go back to being horse drawn - not going to happen -
    25 Mar 2014, 10:39 AM Reply Like
  • manbitesdog
    , contributor
    Comments (24) | Send Message
     
    I guess this means the B200 electric will NOT be filling up at the Tesla super-chargers... Too bad, it was going to be a decent alternative to not spending $100K... :oP
    25 Mar 2014, 10:00 AM Reply Like
  • chickensevil
    , contributor
    Comments (743) | Send Message
     
    That was Daimler's choice when they decided to buy the technology from Tesla. It really is too bad.
    25 Mar 2014, 11:14 AM Reply Like
  • Simon S
    , contributor
    Comments (45) | Send Message
     
    It took over 3 years of committee meetings and negotiations to agree on the J1772 standards and at the end, you have 3 different standards in the US, Japan and Europe. Not only that, but the resulting standard, was the combination of the worst features of the various technologies offered. The paddle chargers that GM had on the EV-1 were much safer, more reliable and better technology all around, yet was not adopted. I heard you could charge with paddle chargers under water still not cause a short because it is based on induction charging. A lot more can be accomplished in a 3 year period (Tesla is a good example). In situations like this where you have too many players dragging their feet, there comes a time when you just need to make a decision and move with it. Can you imagine the oil companies taking 3 years to decide the diameter of the nozzle to use in gas stations ??
    25 Mar 2014, 10:58 AM Reply Like
  • chickensevil
    , contributor
    Comments (743) | Send Message
     
    I wonder if they did have to fight over that (the whole nozzle sizing thing)... would be interesting...

     

    Tesla changed their own plug from the roadster to the S and you can see how much 5 years of development without outside interference helped them out! It is a smaller connector that provides all the same safety features as any of the other connectors out there (locking, water/humidity safety, etc), and even a couple nice "flavor" features, like pushing the button to open up the charge port.
    25 Mar 2014, 11:20 AM Reply Like
  • mikep3796
    , contributor
    Comments (13) | Send Message
     
    This misses the whole point. Tesla has never made a profit. They just issued convertible bonds. The stock is crashing due to this. The hedge fund managers will drive it ddown to extract the maximum profit from the bonds. (Expect a short squeeze at some point though.)

     

    Just where does the electricity come from? Natty? Coal? Brent lt. swt. crude?

     

    Hmm?
    25 Mar 2014, 11:51 AM Reply Like
  • Ford Prefect 1969
    , contributor
    Comments (2267) | Send Message
     
    @User 12975401

     

    Just weird.

     

    How do you imagine they pay for a global roll out, R&D and still add money to the bank account each quarter?

     

    Stock is in the $220s - anyone see the stock crashing because of anything? Looks like it just picked up the moving average following the last short squeeze.

     

    Electricity - the whole Tesla fleet effectively uses a fractional % of the grid offset contributed by Solar City installations.
    25 Mar 2014, 12:56 PM Reply Like
  • Doc's Trading
    , contributor
    Comments (1847) | Send Message
     
    technical..update::TSLA 222.49... My advise of purchase of TSLA (or to sell OOM put spreads for a two to three day trade (yesterday) at the 110-115 area still holds here. The gap filling decline predicted on the day the stock hit its high of 265 has occurred and the gap at 118 filled. Now we are watching the daily volume for clues to future patterns. Resistance levels are at 227;230;and 236. However I don't believe any of these numbers will be reached on this rally and advise selling the third day's advance (tomorrow) and even selling out of the money (nearby expiration) 2 1/2 call spreads in any 3-5 point further advance tomorrow.... for a retest of the lows. The calls should expire worthless on this weeks options. Today's volume thus far is neither bullish nor bearish, but relatively neutral. more later......
    25 Mar 2014, 01:38 PM Reply Like
  • chickensevil
    , contributor
    Comments (743) | Send Message
     
    I believe you mean "210-215" and "218"

     

    otherwise, yes, barring any news from the company, this is likely a pretty fair guess of where the stock will be headed in the short term.
    26 Mar 2014, 08:30 AM Reply Like
  • surferbroadband
    , contributor
    Comments (4835) | Send Message
     
    Maybe this will be the last comment.

     

    "a supercharging network in Germany that doesn't work with EV models from other manufacturers."

     

    Well that is the point of doing something proprietary. You have the best standard and everyone follows your lead and buys your product. In the long run you are building a monopoly.

     

    What is that word again?

     

    Monopoly.

     

    Ever played that game? Real fun. And if you own the Boardwalk with a hotel...$$$.

     

    Daimler (OTCPK:DDAIF) and Robert Bosch are gonna be bankrupt real soon, thanks to bad boy Elon who own the Boardwalk with a hotel.
    25 Mar 2014, 11:57 PM Reply Like
  • chickensevil
    , contributor
    Comments (743) | Send Message
     
    Nah, Daimler has a stake in Tesla, so they won't be completely out of luck. I am also not a proponent of monopolies because it eventually hurts the consumer.

     

    However, that being said, Elon tried playing nicey nice with the big boys. His goal originally was to just motivate the big players to build their own GOOD EVs, which hasn't happened and doesn't look to be happening. In 2013 it was clear to Elon that it wasn't going to happen, which is why he said there would likely be a 4th gen vehicle (a car that is a real mass market car targeting the 20k range - my guess, he only said 4th gen) because instead of a gentle motivation of "hey this is cool stuff, and look what we can do" they are going to require serious competitive pressure to actually make them have a real response.

     

    Right now, you have either A: compliance cars or B: competitors to the Leaf. Noone is seriously building anything to try to compete with a Tesla. The best next iteration of EVs from other other players is to hit somewhere in the 120 mile range... that isn't competition, that is an annoyance. Marc said after he left Tesla and went to the other companies that they are far worse than being just 5 years behind...
    26 Mar 2014, 08:37 AM Reply Like
  • Ford Prefect 1969
    , contributor
    Comments (2267) | Send Message
     
    I think it is pretty clear what big auto and big oil have in mind as a response to Tesla and it's not competing to make a better and cheaper EV than Tesla.

     

    It's the return of the Hydrogen fuel cell hoax.

     

    This now becomes the Tesla battle for dominance of the future auto industry.

     

    Exciting stuff.
    26 Mar 2014, 03:45 PM Reply Like
  • HansNoordsij
    , contributor
    Comments (3) | Send Message
     
    If they started this 7 years ago and there would be suitable cars in real world available now there would have been a possibility for Hydrogen fuel cells.

     

    For EV's an extended infrastructure is already available or being built and the biggest advantage is that the car can be plugged in at home.

     

    Hydrogen has to start from scratch and I doubt if anybody is willing to give up the advantages I mentioned above. But we will see.
    13 Apr 2014, 08:28 AM Reply Like
  • Ford Prefect 1969
    , contributor
    Comments (2267) | Send Message
     
    @HansNoordsij

     

    All roads from hydrogen lead to fracked natural gas and increases in greenhouse gas emissions.

     

    The EV highway leads directly to solar and renewables and reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.

     

    Both are being touted to educated green conscious consumers. One of them is a profound fraud that cannot survive a Google search.

     

    One is designed to protect the oil industry from renewables, the other is designed to chart a course away from fossil fuel dependency.

     

    I am not sure that the hydrogen FCV thing could survive a week of manufactures being required to state prominently the source of Hydrogen and method of production instead of pretending that Hydrogen is "green" or "totally emissions free".
    14 Apr 2014, 05:38 AM Reply Like
  • Doc's Trading
    , contributor
    Comments (1847) | Send Message
     
    Update TSLA ....Update TSLA..... After advising to sell the stock on the high day when it hit 265 and advising that the odds are 99% that she will drop to the price never traded, 118, filling that gap before any further move up in the stock (despite a positive general market).... Then Monday I advised buying at the 110-115 level for a two to three day rally or 227 . I advised the sale because I expected a retest of the lows........

     

    NOW......I advise that the stock may break its low, especially if the market is weak for the forth day in a row tomorrow, but do not sell short here, instead there are two better options: Bulls::1. buy half what you want to own on a scale down 10% every 3 points lower till you own half of what your looking to buy total or the stock stops declining. You can buy another 20% if the stock starts to outperform the general market (IE: Dow down 50 points and TSLA looking to close 2-3 higher). Option 2: Await a day where the stock's action causes a reversal to the upside (closes within 1/3 of its high price on the range the stock had on that day....especially if the market doesn't have that same pattern) . Place a stop order to sell 1 point under that days low...
    Sell half your position on any three day rally from that reversal close... this will give you a net long price under your stop order.(adjust your stop order to reflect the smaller amount of stock you now own.
    Shorts (bears): Await a rally regardless of how long it may take to rally to a price near 227-232. If you are already short, place a stop above the last rally top (227).
    26 Mar 2014, 07:08 PM Reply Like
  • HansNoordsij
    , contributor
    Comments (3) | Send Message
     
    Imagine that there was some (whisfull thinking) rule that said that the tracks for the ICE high speed train also must/could be used by "normal" trains. There would not have been an ICE network at all. It is pretty much the same.
    What are we talking about? There must be, at this moment, 1.000+ charging places in Germany. When I read about the plans there will be a roll out of another 1.000 in the coming period.

     

    At this moment there are 4 ! Superchargers operational. Some more are under construction and there will be eventually round 40 Superchargers in Germany. That means only one of 50 charging stations will be a Supercharger. They all are situated at places that are only convenient for long distance driving.

     

    They are all build by, paid for and kept in operation by the Tesla community.
    So the really very few (40 next to 2.000+) Superchargers can never be a problem. Anyhow, there is also some freedom to choose.

     

    The problem is off course the car itself. It is at this moment the only car that serves long distance traveling. None of the "industries" has given of can give an alternative to the Model S.
    With my Model S I can travel from The Netherlands to Salzburg on my regular speed (120 -130) and only have to make three "35 to 45" minutes stops. If I would use our other EV, Nissan Leaf, comparable with the other EV's that are build now, and supposing there would be enough charging stations along the way, I would have to stop every 100 km for a reload that wil take 30 to 40 minutes. (At least when I want to drive 120).
    That proves that those cars were never meant to serve long distance driving. They are perfect for local service and we use the Nissan every day!

     

    Instead of arguing that the Tesla Supercharger would also be open to the other cars (despite the fact that these cars are completely different and the locations are unpractical for them) the industry should try to make a car that is at least as good as the Model S. That can only be an EV with a long range and an appeal that would attract potential buyers. Learn from Tesla, keep in touch with them and try to work things out together to make the same kind of car that can have use from Superchargers (maybe the 40 from Tesla or also some more build by themselves).

     

    At first, get to work on it!
    13 Apr 2014, 08:29 AM Reply Like
  • HansNoordsij
    , contributor
    Comments (3) | Send Message
     
    What are we talking about? There are at the moment certainly more then 1.000 charging points in Germany and that will be over 2.000 soon (considering the out roll planning). Tesla has at this moment 4! SC's operational, some more are under construction but in the end there will be around 40 SC's in Germany, all of them on strategic sites especially chosen for long distance high speed (Autobahn) driving. More is not necessary, they are only meant for long-distance traveling.
    So 1 of 50 charting points is a Tesla SC, built by and paid for by the Tesla community.
    So the problem does not really exist.
    Yes there is a problem. That problem is the car itself. When I travel from home (The Netherlands to, let's say, Salzburg I can drive at about 120 km/hour, having a 35 to 45 minute break for three times and that's all. The power I use is prepaid for when I bought the car. I can compare this with our other EV, the Nissan Leaf. Suppose there were enough charging point (forget for now the issue of Chademo versus the others). If I want to keep the speed at 120 km/hour I would have to stop at least eight times for 45 minutes.
    The same goes for all the other cars with a range between 100 and 150 km (but at 120 km/hour it will me not much more then 100 km. These cars are simply not designed for long distance traveling, which is not a problem because they are extremely useful in local operations.

     

    As long as the "industries" are not able to make cars that can be compared with the Model S we will have this discussions about non-issues. There would not have been the high speed ICE train if there was a rule that other trains should be able to use the same track too.
    13 Apr 2014, 08:47 AM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)
ETF Hub
ETF Screener: Search and filter by asset class, strategy, theme, performance, yield, and much more
ETF Performance: View ETF performance across key asset classes and investing themes
ETF Investing Guide: Learn how to build and manage a well-diversified, low cost ETF portfolio
ETF Selector: An explanation of how to select and use ETFs