Seeking Alpha

The rave reviews for Tesla Motors' (TSLA +2.9%) Model S aren't quite done pouring in after Motor...

The rave reviews for Tesla Motors' (TSLA +2.9%) Model S aren't quite done pouring in after Motor Trend just returned from a Vegas-to-L.A. test drive that proved both the 265 mpg equivalent rating and zero-to-60 mph acceleration in under six seconds are valid. The company has the highly-anticipated Model X slated for 2014 if production wrinkles are worked out. As for cash burn, Elon Musk says as long as there aren't a "bunch of screw-ups," the automaker should be in good financial shape.
From other sites
Comments (56)
  • GaltMachine
    , contributor
    Comments (1444) | Send Message
     
    What happens when you run out of fuel for that toaster on wheels before you get where you are going?

     

    At least it doesn't burst into flames like its competitors :)
    7 Sep 2012, 02:59 PM Reply Like
  • ThomLandon
    , contributor
    Comments (159) | Send Message
     
    I see this question frequently, and I wonder what you do when you run out of gas before you get where you are going?

     

    You call a tow and they give you gas. AAA has portable charging. So they show up and give you a few miles of charge to get to a charging station (or home).

     

    At least Tesla doesn't burst into flames like its ICE competitors.
    Gas-powered vehicles catch fire 180,000 times a year.
    http://bit.ly/NR00j7
    7 Sep 2012, 03:43 PM Reply Like
  • GaltMachine
    , contributor
    Comments (1444) | Send Message
     
    Thom,

     

    Only a moron would run out of gas but you can easily run out of battery power on a long trip.

     

    How about if you want to go let's say 336 miles in a day? How about 600 miles? What then?

     

    How long will that take you?

     

    I get bored pointing out the obvious but this line of transportation - coal powered vehicles - is no improvement to the current crop and is in fact inferior in all respects. Get a diesel golf and buy a college education for your kid with the savings.

     

    Not to mention the fact that the poorest among us are sponsoring the lifestyles of the rich and famous with that stupid tax credit for a a $100k car.

     

    Oh yeah, I am in fact against all corporate welfare for any company including those evil oil and gas companies.
    7 Sep 2012, 04:59 PM Reply Like
  • bosco115
    , contributor
    Comments (196) | Send Message
     
    Do you have a hard-on for Tesla? You're the same troll I responded to last time:
    http://seekingalpha.co...
    http://seekingalpha.co...

     

    "Coal is burned in central power plants in a Rankine Cycle with 33% thermal efficiency, compared to a gasoline engine Otto Cycle with ~19% efficiency.

     

    Yes, coal powered cars are cleaner than gasoline powered cars. And if your local generation supplier gets electricity from nuclear, it is truly emission-free energy.

     

    Calm your rhetoric."

     

    "You did a nice job ignoring the facts I presented above and instead chose to stick to the talking points.

     

    I typically vote Republican, and I'm also an engineer. I know the science and technology behind these vehicles and the distribution limitations. Any new transportation technology not running a petroleum liquid fuel will require an entirely separate distribution system. Natural gas has good penetration into many homes for heating, as well as many industrial pipelines, but it's not in every home. Compressing or liquefying natural gas is extremely inefficient.

     

    On the contrary, electricity exists in every home. As such, people who wish to use a personal vehicle for small trips under 300 miles (round trip) from home can buy an electric car like the Tesla Model S. Longer trips will require a new network of recharging stations. This is easier than a new network of natural gas refueling stations.

     

    There are pros and cons to each technology. Stop spreading your rhetoric like you know what you're talking about. You don't know shit."
    7 Sep 2012, 05:38 PM Reply Like
  • GaltMachine
    , contributor
    Comments (1444) | Send Message
     
    Thom

     

    "There are pros and cons to each technology. Stop spreading your rhetoric like you know what you're talking about. You don't know shit."

     

    Well I know the substance when I see it and your comment certainly looks like it :)

     

    Apparently calculating a cost benefit is beyond your engineering acumen.

     

    Truthfully I fail to see the value proposition in electric cars. Usually when a product replaces another it is superior in all ways:

     

    Price
    Features
    Performance
    Reliability
    Resale
    Longevity
    Safety
    Etc.

     

    It fails on all of these criteria. Secondly I can't stand crony capitalists like this company who suck off the government teat so yes I have a problem with this company.

     

    Hybrids are already a superior solution and they cost less.

     

    By the way, you started it :)

     

    Have a nice day!
    7 Sep 2012, 05:44 PM Reply Like
  • bosco115
    , contributor
    Comments (196) | Send Message
     
    I'd like to bring up two points to counter this. Tesla's market plan since the beginning has been to sell a series of cars increasing in volume and decreasing in margin. As I originally read it, they wanted to start with a low volume, high margin sports car that would appeal to enthusiasts, early adopters, and those generally unconcerned with price (similar to Porsche). The second was to be a mid-range luxury car at mid-volume, mid-margin distribution (similar to BMW) using revenue and knowledge gained from the first vehicle. The third was to be a high volume, low margin car intended for mass adoption (similar to Toyota) using expertise from the first two models.

     

    Somewhere along the line, they decided to throw the Model X into the mix, since I don't believe this to be the Corolla equivalent for Tesla. But from their execution and how I've originally understood their business plan, they seem to be sticking to this very well. Therefore, these vehicles don't have to provide instantaneous savings over ICE vehicles for the company to survive - at least not yet. However, for long-term survival, they must get there within a reasonable amount of time. I think this is possible.

     

    Second, I'm generally against corporate welfare, but this is becoming an exercise in Econ 101 Game Theory. China is subsidizing Kandi and others to build electric cars and sell them to cities in pilot programs. Other countries are doing the same. While I agree that the best course of action is for nobody to subsidize, the fact remains that other countries are doing so. So everyone must subsidize to remain competitive.

     

    Also, I'd like to throw out that I'd be willing to put my life savings behind Elon Musk. Seeing the Dragon launch has affirmed that for me. The man is brilliant.
    7 Sep 2012, 06:37 PM Reply Like
  • ThomLandon
    , contributor
    Comments (159) | Send Message
     
    "only a moron runs out of gas but you can easily run out of battery" Huh? People run out of gas ALL THE TIME. See this BizJournal article showing big increases in running out when gas prices rise. http://bit.ly/RuFM9C

     

    Tesla S with a 300 mile range will provide enough worry free miles 98% of the time. 2% you will have to see where there is a charging station and plan accordingly. This seems like a pretty low bar.

     

    "Coal powered vehicles is no improvement" This has been debunked. Read Nick Butcher's article and see for yourself.
    http://seekingalpha.co...

     

    "this line of transportation . . . in fact inferior in all respects." Huh? Read the reviews of the Model S in every single automotive press. They like the car. It's better than the ICE. Better performance, fewer moving parts, simpler. Easier to refuel (I know you'll object) on a DAY TO DAY basis. i.e. at home.

     

    "The poorest among us are sponsoring the lifestyles of the rich and famous."

     

    Valid objection to the $7500/tax credit and the low interest loans. However, the historical oil and gas subsidies have given them a leg up which, as the lesser of two evils, extending subsidies to electric vehicles seems ok to me.

     

    That the wealthy enjoy these credits, does not by itself, change my perspective. Mortgage interest deductions are also enjoyed by the upper-middle class, for the most part. There are no widespread objections.
    7 Sep 2012, 07:08 PM Reply Like
  • RationalOne
    , contributor
    Comments (25) | Send Message
     
    Be careful when you use the word "moron," Galtmachine.

     

    Only a "moron" would drive 600 miles in one day and not expect to rest at least once or twice. Within a year, there will be superchargers on almost every major interstate that will fully recharge a Model S in about 40 minutes, just enough time to grab a bite to eat, stretch and proceed. And if you regularly drive 600 miles in one sitting, you're among 0.01 percent of the driving public. In that case, buy an ICE car. Tesla won't miss you.

     

    And as far as the tax credit, I agree that all should be eliminated, but with a name like Galt, I'm surprised you're playing the class warfare card ("the poorest among us") when in fact, the poorest among us pay virtually no income taxes at all -- but that's an entirely different subject.
    7 Sep 2012, 09:40 PM Reply Like
  • Nick Butcher
    , contributor
    Comments (806) | Send Message
     
    I'd be pretty willing to put a large fraction of savings behind Elon... if I was doing so at the same terms as him and if he was ALSO putting his life savings behind it.

     

    I think Tesla is a good company and have created a great product. It doesn't *necessarily* follow that it's a great investment. I'm still long, but I've covered the position with put options. This could go either way. Comments like "as long as there aren't a bunch of screw ups" don't do much to improve my confidence. Tesla are behind schedule, and time (/cash) is not a resource they have to spare. Musk must be using a pretty generous definition of 'good financial shape'. If they make it to 30,000/years at 30% GM they will be in good financial shape. Until that point they are on a knife edge.
    8 Sep 2012, 05:48 AM Reply Like
  • Nick Butcher
    , contributor
    Comments (806) | Send Message
     
    "Valid objection to the $7500/tax credit and the low interest loans." - I don't know if it is really! You could equally make an argument that the early adopters (many of whom AREN'T filthy rich) are taking a risk and facing an additional cost in order to get a new (and highly beneficial) technology into the mainstream in order to get costs down to the point that the average buyer can afford it. In ten years, when everyone can afford an EV, it will be thanks to those who bought in when the business case was still uncertain.
    8 Sep 2012, 05:51 AM Reply Like
  • GaltMachine
    , contributor
    Comments (1444) | Send Message
     
    Rational,

     

    "Within a year, there will be superchargers on almost every major interstate that will fully recharge a Model S in about 40 minutes, just enough time to grab a bite to eat, stretch and proceed."

     

    So your argument against my rational observation on long family vacation driving is to cite a non-existent technology of the present and perhaps the future?

     

    Show me your link for this "supercharger" technology, its implementation plan, locations, cost, etc.

     

    45% of our electricity comes from burning coal and the rest from nuclear and other fossil fuels. A truly pitiful amount comes from "clean energy" *(gag) of which hydro-power is not included because whacko environmentalists think water power is bad for the environment.

     

    Auto reviewers, as in Product Placement pay for performance experts, like it. Wow. That's hilarious.
    8 Sep 2012, 01:07 PM Reply Like
  • JRP3
    , contributor
    Comments (8654) | Send Message
     
    Coal was less than 35% this year, and dropping. Regardless of what "whacko's" may think hydropower is indeed clean. As for fast charging, Nissan already has 60kw Chademo fast chargers, Tesla is planning 100kwh superchargers. Musk will be releasing the details of the supercharger network this month. However it's rather irrelevant since a once a year family vacation has no bearing on the actual success of an EV, most families have more than one vehicle, and there is this other thing called renting a car, which people already do when necessary.
    9 Sep 2012, 10:09 AM Reply Like
  • GaltMachine
    , contributor
    Comments (1444) | Send Message
     
    "Morpheus: I imagine that right now, you're feeling a bit like Alice. Hm? Tumbling down the rabbit hole?
    Neo: You could say that.
    Morpheus: I see it in your eyes. You have the look of a man who accepts what he sees because he is expecting to wake up. Ironically, that's not far from the truth. Do you believe in fate, Neo?
    Neo: No.
    Morpheus: Why not?
    Neo: Because I don't like the idea that I'm not in control of my life.
    Morpheus: I know exactly what you mean. Let me tell you why you're here. You're here because you know something. What you know you can't explain, but you feel it. You've felt it your entire life, that there's something wrong with the world. You don't know what it is, but it's there, like a splinter in your mind, driving you mad. It is this feeling that has brought you to me. Do you know what I'm talking about?
    Neo: The Matrix.
    Morpheus: Do you want to know what it is?
    Neo: Yes.
    Morpheus: The Matrix is everywhere. It is all around us. Even now, in this very room. You can see it when you look out your window, or when you turn on your television. You can feel it when you go to work, when you go to church, when you pay your taxes. It is the world that has been pulled over your eyes to blind you from the truth.
    Neo: What truth?
    Morpheus: That you are a slave, Neo. Like everyone else, you were born into bondage, born into a prison that you cannot smell or taste or touch. A prison for your mind. Unfortunately, no one can be told what the Matrix is. You have to see it for yourself. [Opens Pill box and empties the contents into his hands and outstretches his hands] This is your last chance. After this, there is no turning back. You take the blue pill [opens his right hand revealing a translucent blue pill], the story ends, you wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red pill [opens his left hand revealing a similarly translucent red pill], you stay in Wonderland, and I show you how deep the rabbit hole goes. [Neo reaches for the red pill] Remember: all I'm offering is the truth. Nothing more."
    9 Sep 2012, 03:31 PM Reply Like
  • Stephen Pace
    , contributor
    Comments (545) | Send Message
     
    @Nick Butcher: Exactly. Plus the government isn't exactly giving us the cash. Let's say I pay $30k in taxes--the government will happily take that from me, or in this case, they say "Mr. Taxpayer, if you'll be an early adopter and help us get some EVs on the road which is in the national interest to help wean us off foreign oil, we'll let you keep $7500 of the $30k to do that." You don't get the money if you aren't already paying it in. In a world where many have no problem with Mitt Romney paying only 13% tax because his income is investment based, then I have no problem keeping $7500 of money I'm already paying the government to help meet a goal where both our interests are aligned.
    9 Sep 2012, 09:57 PM Reply Like
  • Shannon Shelmire
    , contributor
    Comments (16) | Send Message
     
    Investment? Why does it need to be an investment. Altruistic purchase aside, support the genius of USA, support the technology, support the design, feel good. Too much analysis spoils the fun.
    10 Sep 2012, 02:13 AM Reply Like
  • Surf Dog
    , contributor
    Comments (826) | Send Message
     
    Elon Musk has the tendancy to understate and over deliver.

     

    I'm not worried. Get ready for the next run up.
    17 Sep 2012, 04:22 PM Reply Like
  • Vico Confino
    , contributor
    Comments (221) | Send Message
     
    Vico Confino will turn 80 on March 11, 2013.
    In 1978 I purchased a Toyota Carolla for $3,200 out the door. Since then I have owned a total of 19 Toyotas, trading up to the Camry when it first came out. Early last year I began researching electric autos like the Tesla. I ordered one for me and one for the wife (#2600 & #2601)
    From what I had learned about Elon Musk and his vision of producing the finest EV, I followed his every move very closely. The naysayers were pounding away at how he would fail just like other visionaries.
    I disagreed and bought Tesla stock. My vision was that by the time
    my two sedans were ready for delivery my profits from the stock would cover at least the cost of one of the autos. Looks to me like
    today's naysayers are the grandchildren of the naysayers who predicted that the auto would never replace the horse. If I am wrong gentlemen can I rent one of your horses.
    Stay well, stay in shape, the car of the future is here.
    Vico Confino
    7 Sep 2012, 03:16 PM Reply Like
  • Gobbesmack
    , contributor
    Comments (14) | Send Message
     
    " test drive that proved both the 265 mpg equivalent rating ..."

     

    What utter nonsense.
    7 Sep 2012, 04:41 PM Reply Like
  • stetsoninc
    , contributor
    Comments (9) | Send Message
     
    With that attitude you must still be riding a horse instead of a car.

     

    The Telsa is the gas-less carriage much like the Model T was the horseless carriage in 1908, and I am sure that Henry Ford had to listen to the same comments about his mode of transportation.
    7 Sep 2012, 06:42 PM Reply Like
  • pat1000
    , contributor
    Comments (515) | Send Message
     
    Don't own any Tesla stock BUT I will if it hits 35 and a lot more at a new high-----

     

    Forget all the chatter ----The price of Tesla stock is going to tell us if their EVs are going to make it in a big way-----
    8 Sep 2012, 02:43 AM Reply Like
  • Nick Butcher
    , contributor
    Comments (806) | Send Message
     
    Stock price is a lagging indicator. Tesla getting to 50 vehicles/day will tell us whether their EVs are going to make it in a big way.
    8 Sep 2012, 05:52 AM Reply Like
  • GaltMachine
    , contributor
    Comments (1444) | Send Message
     
    Wow. I got quite the pile on happening here. Thanks for all the positive thoughts.

     

    I thought I would cut and paste a previous comment on this subject since it seems appropriate here.

     

    To everyone above, I will state it plainly, these cars are inferior, more expensive, less safe, less reliable, and without government corporate welfare - $500 million dollar crony capitalist loan - wouldn't exist. This company wouldn't exist without the teat of government.

     

    Why subsidize the lifestyles of the rich and famous at the expense of the poor in this country?

     

    This is what you get when you build an industrial policy on the back of the lie of man-made global warming. Wasted resources, wasted money, wasted effort, and a lower standard of living for everyone in the world - burning food (corn) for fuel is just the ultimate manifestation of this stupid delusion which coincidentally has been exposed as the scientific fraud that it is. Perhaps you haven't heard yet.

     

    What you all fail to realize is that the car is part of an overall lifecycle from beginning to end and when these things end they pollute the environment to a far greater extent than any so-called benefit they provide while under operation - all those toxic batteries and the rare earths that need to be mined to get these toasters on wheels going doesn't do much to "save the world".

     

    The problem with Liberal ideas is they fall apart under the harsh light of logical examination.

     

    Now if this were a natural gas powered car then I would be interested.

     

    In case it isn't obvious, I am a rabid, nut-job, whacko, right-wing Randian who also happens to be an opinionated, knowitall a-hole :)

     

    Have a nice day!
    8 Sep 2012, 01:00 PM Reply Like
  • Nick Butcher
    , contributor
    Comments (806) | Send Message
     
    If you're going to brand yourself a 'knowitall' you should work on building a corpus of knowledge that's not drawn from... well... rabid nut-job whacko right-wing extremist blogs. It's laughable.

     

    Although it's possible that you're just paying homage to Rand by ensuring your arguments are as internally inconsistent as hers, in which case: Nice job!
    8 Sep 2012, 05:15 PM Reply Like
  • JRP3
    , contributor
    Comments (8654) | Send Message
     
    More like a knownothing a-hole. Not a single correct fact, other than food for fuel.
    9 Sep 2012, 10:18 AM Reply Like
  • Stephen Pace
    , contributor
    Comments (545) | Send Message
     
    @GaltMachine:

     

    "these cars are inferior" -> even if 99% of all reviews weren't astoundingly positive, I've driven it, and all I can say dream on.

     

    "more expensive" -> true-ish, but new technology is always more expensive and early adopters pay the freight for the masses. The Model S stacks up well against comparable vehicles like the BMW M5.

     

    "less safe" -> Is it that you don't believe the preannounced NHTSA results or are you questioning them? Fair to question until you see them in print, but then it is no use arguing until they are officially published. I have no doubt that the Model S will be the safest car on the road. Even more if the government decides to incorporate changes to the offset crash test (the one Tesla tested at even higher speeds than required and that many other luxury manufacturers are going to struggle with until they come out with new designs).

     

    "less reliable" -> Ask me in 10 years. Few parts to break, and if Roadster is any indication, we'll do fine with Model S as well.

     

    "government corporate welfare" - We'll agree to disagree about the role of government. You were probably annoyed with the government building the highways (built with defense in mind, they had a profound commercial result as well), Hoover Dam, and the Internet. The government has a interest in not ceding this business to the Germans or Chinese, and they made a call to LOAN money to a company they thought was in a position to prevent that. The LOAN comes with a lot of strings, and all indications are that Tesla is going to be able to pay this back.

     

    You may like the Model E better--it will be cheaper and I hear it will be made of Rearden Metal.
    9 Sep 2012, 10:23 PM Reply Like
  • Nick Butcher
    , contributor
    Comments (806) | Send Message
     
    "You may like the Model E better--it will be cheaper and I hear it will be made of Rearden Metal."

     

    Unlikely. I suspect GaltMachine only buys cars from companies that conform to a pure capitalist ethos and have always existed free of government intervention.

     

    That's why he has to walk everywhere.
    10 Sep 2012, 02:06 AM Reply Like
  • detto
    , contributor
    Comments (76) | Send Message
     
    ^^^LIKE^^^^
    10 Sep 2012, 07:04 AM Reply Like
  • idkmybffjill
    , contributor
    Comments (1718) | Send Message
     
    "That's why he has to walk everywhere."

     

    HAHAHA that's awesome. I just laughed out loud at work Nick lol.
    10 Sep 2012, 02:08 PM Reply Like
  • idkmybffjill
    , contributor
    Comments (1718) | Send Message
     
    "This is what you get when you build an industrial policy on the back of the lie of man-made global warming."

     

    I guess NASA is lying then, and the GOP knows better lol.
    10 Sep 2012, 02:09 PM Reply Like
  • idkmybffjill
    , contributor
    Comments (1718) | Send Message
     
    "government corporate welfare" - We'll agree to disagree about the role of government. You were probably annoyed with the government building the highways (built with defense in mind, they had a profound commercial result as well), Hoover Dam, and the Internet"

     

    Stephen, people who insult any government involvement seem to have no answer for the points you just brought up. Throw in GPS onto that list as well.
    10 Sep 2012, 02:12 PM Reply Like
  • Surf Dog
    , contributor
    Comments (826) | Send Message
     
    Can someone explain to me, why bother to debate this troll?????
    18 Sep 2012, 01:55 AM Reply Like
  • Mel Githens
    , contributor
    Comment (1) | Send Message
     
    Unlike a ICE, an electric will not quit sudenly when the battery
    gets low. It will still operate at a much slower speed to
    get you to a charging station.

     

    I have a Chevy S10 that I converted to electric 4 years ago
    and it has 20000 miles on it.

     

    I will be replacing it with a Tesla Model S probably at the end
    of this year.
    9 Sep 2012, 04:21 AM Reply Like
  • GaltMachine
    , contributor
    Comments (1444) | Send Message
     
    http://1.usa.gov/OjYczf

     

    Coal, natural gas, and nuclear are the electricity grid power sources. Coal is by far the number 1 source of fuel for electricity so therefore all EV vehicles are powered largely by coal or other fossil fuels by definition.

     

    No way around that, although I have to admit the President's War On Coal is working.

     

    Nat Gas is growing like crazy which is a good thing, but unlike Nancy Pelosi, I actually do know that Natgas is a fossil fuel :)

     

    By the way, Nikola Tesla would have found the whole idea of a DC powered car abhorrent.
    9 Sep 2012, 03:40 PM Reply Like
  • JRP3
    , contributor
    Comments (8654) | Send Message
     
    Hardly, since the motors in the vehicles are AC and there is no such thing as an AC battery.
    10 Sep 2012, 09:30 AM Reply Like
  • ThomLandon
    , contributor
    Comments (159) | Send Message
     
    @galtmachine

     

    Even assuming that you are right, you are wrong. Even if you charge your EV from coal, you still have a smaller carbon footprint that by using gasoline.

     

    WTF is your point?
    10 Sep 2012, 10:07 AM Reply Like
  • GaltMachine
    , contributor
    Comments (1444) | Send Message
     
    "In 1887, Tesla constructed a brushless alternating current induction motor based on a rotating magnetic field principle, which he demonstrated to the American Institute of Electrical Engineers (now IEEE) in 1888 and patented that same year.[62] Until the development of induction motors, AC's advantages for long distance high voltage transmission were counterbalanced by the inability to operate motors on AC. Tesla claimed that he conceived his induction motor in 1882 although the claim had no independent verification.[63] The paternity of the invention remains controversial, since rotating magnetic fields and a prototype induction motor were demonstrated in Europe in 1885 by Galileo Ferraris.[64][65][66][67] Ferraris published his findings in 1888.[68] Also in 1897 Tesla developed the principles of his Tesla coil."
    http://bit.ly/QztZdC

     

    A battery powered car (DC) would have been an abomination for the man who fought the "energy war" for AC energy delivery vs. Thomas Edison. A giant battery on wheels would not have been his conception of the automobile.

     

    I think a company named after Tesla would have actually produced something revolutionary rather than working on improving a technology that already existed a 100 years ago but that's just me.

     

    I truly admire the engineering prowess of the vehicle, the elegance of design, and the visionary leadership of Elon Musk in making this happen but in the end it is still just a Rube Goldberg device solving a problem that doesn't need solving.

     

    I don't blame the company for building this product since the market price signals have been so distorted by government intervention (tax credits, EPA policy, destroying the coal industry) and fraudulent global warming science.

     

    With the financials they have and the obvious limits in the state of battery technology is this company ever going to turn a profit before it runs out of money?

     

    At the current rate of burn, this company will need to raise a lot of money to keep going.

     

    Good luck with your investment!
    10 Sep 2012, 10:48 AM Reply Like
  • GaltMachine
    , contributor
    Comments (1444) | Send Message
     
    To all posters, I do apologize for stirring up your worlds and agitating you. I won't do it again.

     

    If the government wasn't involved in this company and it was privately funded, I wouldn't give a fig about what the car does or doesn't do and I would evaluate it purely from an investment point of view.

     

    For me, along with the VOLT, it acts as a metaphor for all that is wrong with the economic direction of this country.

     

    I wish you well and good luck with the investment.
    10 Sep 2012, 10:58 AM Reply Like
  • Nick Butcher
    , contributor
    Comments (806) | Send Message
     
    Go and read a bit more broadly. I know you think you've made some cutting observations and shaken our collective world view, but all you've actually done is make a fool of yourself.
    10 Sep 2012, 11:05 AM Reply Like
  • GaltMachine
    , contributor
    Comments (1444) | Send Message
     
    Nick,

     

    You are entitled to a wrong opinion :)

     

    Given your life's work I am not surprised by your perspective. I have no such limitations.

     

    http://bit.ly/U4G4Gv
    http://bit.ly/QzyZim

     

    "Including a wireless source of alternating current, electricity, from space, “dark energy” aka “radiant energy”, enough to power a car, a large ship, a train, it was limitless. This, and other things he did and spoke of, have given others the incentive to experiment and discover/invent things that no one would have thought of otherwise."

     

    "The flying machine of the future -- my flying machine -- will be heavier than air, but it will not be an airplane. It will have no wings. It will be substantial, solid, stable. You cannot have a stable airplane. The gyroscope can never be successfully applied to the airplane, for it would give a stability that would result in the machine being torn to pieces by the wind, just as the unprotected airplane on the ground is torn to pieces by a high wind. My flying machine will have neither wings nor propellers. You might see it on the ground and you would never guess that it was a flying machine. Yet it will be able to move at will through the air in any direction with perfect safety, at higher speeds than have yet been reached, regardless of weather and oblivious of 'holes in the air' or downward currents. It will ascend in such currents if desired. It can remain absolutely stationary in the air even in a wind for great length of time. Its lifting power will not depend upon any such delicate devices as the bird has to employ, but upon positive mechanical action."
    Tesla

     

    Good luck!
    10 Sep 2012, 11:10 AM Reply Like
  • Nick Butcher
    , contributor
    Comments (806) | Send Message
     
    Well I won't deny that it's easier to speculate when largely uncontrained by knowledge.

     

    Incidentally, if you're going to try to invoke Tesla to prove your points, you probably shouldn't quote instances where history has proven him grossly, abundantly wrong. If you look around you you'll see a world that has been revolutionized by stable airplanes with wings. Teslas speculative machine, however, remains sadly absent.

     

    Should I prepare for another copy-paste from the matrix script by way of riposte?
    10 Sep 2012, 02:18 PM Reply Like
  • GaltMachine
    , contributor
    Comments (1444) | Send Message
     
    Nick,

     

    How do you know Tesla was "grossly, abundantly wrong"?

     

    His ideas may still be ahead of our time.

     

    http://bit.ly/PjfLhh
    Crisis averted: Dark matter was there all along

     

    17:20 23 May 2012 by Lisa Grossman
    "Dark matter is the mysterious, invisible stuff that makes up 83 per cent of the matter in the universe. It is responsible for keeping galaxies from flying apart despite their high spinning speeds, and has aided our understanding of how structures in the universe formed."

     

    By the way, although you may not have enjoyed our conversation I have.

     

    Thank you.
    10 Sep 2012, 02:36 PM Reply Like
  • Nick Butcher
    , contributor
    Comments (806) | Send Message
     
    "You cannot have a stable airplane" - I'd say he was pretty abundantly wrong on that one. Overall, however, a genius. He did a lot of his own thinking, incidentally.
    10 Sep 2012, 02:49 PM Reply Like
  • GaltMachine
    , contributor
    Comments (1444) | Send Message
     
    Nick,

     

    In fairness to Tesla, I think he was describing an airplane that would hover like his flying machine idea.

     

    I guess the closest thing we have to that are helicopters and harrier jets and they are pretty expensive for the average person to own :)

     

    He was a once in a century genius, too bad he was such an eccentric. If he had been more like Edison, he might have accomplished a lot more.

     

    Who know if "dark energy" is possible or not but I suspect something like it will be in humanity's future at some point in the hopefully not too distant future.

     

    Funny when I first heard the name Tesla in connection with Elon Musk many years ago, I actually thought he was going to work on some version of this energy idea and I was disappointed that it turned out to be a car company powered by batteries. That doesn't seem revolutionary to me.

     

    The energy idea, now that would change the world.
    10 Sep 2012, 02:54 PM Reply Like
  • Nick Butcher
    , contributor
    Comments (806) | Send Message
     
    http://bit.ly/MA1MyI
    10 Sep 2012, 02:57 PM Reply Like
  • GaltMachine
    , contributor
    Comments (1444) | Send Message
     
    Nick,

     

    Now that is a fantastic link! Thanks for sharing.

     

    That's exactly what I am talking about.

     

    If you are a Tesla geek then I think you will love the movie, "The Prestige".

     

    http://imdb.to/P8ibh4
    10 Sep 2012, 03:09 PM Reply Like
  • Nick Butcher
    , contributor
    Comments (806) | Send Message
     
    I've seen it - and yes, cool movie. At least we agree on two things :-)
    10 Sep 2012, 03:14 PM Reply Like
  • GaltMachine
    , contributor
    Comments (1444) | Send Message
     
    Nick,

     

    I am sure we agree on more than two things. I happen to like Kiwis (hope that's not offensive). I am a Canuck living in the US.

     

    At some point this company is going to have to show a path to profit especially with that burn-rate as your wonderful article today pointed out, so as an investor I am not exactly sure what you guys see in this company. Especially when you know from experience most of these breakeven calculations are far from certain. I suspect that even that breakeven point you have calculated is aggressive. Cars are a volume product and I wonder if there really are enough buyers out there to make this viable long-term beyond the early adopters, the rich, and techno-geeks.

     

    Now if Tesla could somehow figure out how to manufacture an EV car that can compete with a Cruze or Focus in terms of price that would be quite an accomplishment and actually make these vehicles a no-brainer. Given the limits of current technology, I don't think that's possible. There needs to be a paradigm shift away from LI, I just don't happen to be smart enough to know what it is - Dark energy!

     

    I think the value in the company is as a takeover candidate which might explain why the valuation is still sizable for a firm losing so much money.

     

    Good luck!
    10 Sep 2012, 03:28 PM Reply Like
  • JRP3
    , contributor
    Comments (8654) | Send Message
     
    GM, you seem to forget the fact that though Tesla was a genius he also ended up as a bit of a lunatic. Not everything he conceived was brilliant or correct. You criticize Tesla the company for building an amazing EV using batteries and instead praise Tesla the man for imagining but not building things that may not be possible using powers that may not exist or may not be accessible.
    And you really should stop with the complaining about Tesla's government guaranteed loan, unless they fail to pay it back, and unless you complain in proportionate volume to all the other government loans, and subsidies, to all other industries and individuals.
    11 Sep 2012, 08:51 AM Reply Like
  • GaltMachine
    , contributor
    Comments (1444) | Send Message
     
    JRP3,

     

    "unless you complain in proportionate volume to all the other government loans, and subsidies, to all other industries and individuals."

     

    I do in fact object to this. I think giving money to politically connected people like Elon Musk is a form of crony capitalism which I object to in all forms because I believe it is a distortion of the market signal and results in capital flowing into unproductive purposes.

     

    I know all of you are excited by this car and the technology but I just don't see the revolutionary aspect of it in its current form and surely not worthy of the Tesla appellation. From the article:

     

    "We traveled 233.7 miles during a recent trip in a Tesla Model S from Los Angeles to San Diego and back before stopping to recharge when the onboard range meter said we would be 1.7 miles short of reaching the office.
    “The take home message isn’t whether or not the Model S meets the EPA’s range rating of 265 miles. We’ve proven that it does and does not. The takeaway is that the Tesla Model S is not a real electric car, it’s a real car that just happens to be electric.”

     

    Read more: http://bit.ly/Nmjj2j

     

    The EV1 from GM in the late 90's could do up to 160 miles and cost a lot less to buy at that time.

     

    http://bit.ly/ODxBbY

     

    So the gain in mileage for all this impressive technology is minimal in my opinion. There are plenty of occasions in a year where I will drive 300 miles in a single day for business travel (I live in FL) and for me stopping to recharge for 8 hours would not be an option assuming you could find a place to plug in. The performance would be even worse if you run air conditioning which is an absolute must in FL most of the time.

     

    Contrast that with a 5 minute fill up and on this point alone it just doesn't work for me. You may feel differently but I guarantee you the average person would feel exactly as I do.

     

    The market is limited for this product because other than as a second vehicle and one that costs a $100k and is unlikely to get cheaper to boot, it fails the test as a primary vehicle for everyday use. It needs to get really cheap to compete and I am not sure how likely that is to happen.

     

    Anyone looking at these vehicles seriously will also look at hybrids and from my perspective the hybrid wins the cost/benefit analysis.

     

    Good luck with your investing.
    11 Sep 2012, 10:11 AM Reply Like
  • idkmybffjill
    , contributor
    Comments (1718) | Send Message
     
    "I do in fact object to this. I think giving money to politically connected people like Elon Musk is a form of crony capitalism which I object to in all forms because I believe it is a distortion of the market signal and results in capital flowing into unproductive purposes."

     

    GM, if you are worried about that, you should start with calling out the Koch brothers. The amount of money they spend to try and achieve their political goals could certainly be flowing into more productive purposes.
    11 Sep 2012, 10:37 AM Reply Like
  • JRP3
    , contributor
    Comments (8654) | Send Message
     
    GM, you have to compare vehicles in a similar price class, period. Any other comparison is ridiculous, and would never be done with different ICE's. So once you compare a Model S with a comparably priced ICE model the S instantly comes out on top. Obviously if the S range doesn't work for you, don't buy it. However many people realize the S range is actually more than enough and most people have more than one vehicle in the household. Your fundamental mistake is assuming that a product which you don't think could work for you can't work for millions of others.
    As for your claims about the EV1, it never got 160 miles of range in normal use, more like 100-120 miles. From your link:
    "while the NiMH cars could travel between 100 and 140 miles between charges."
    It was also a small 2 seat car, where the S is a large luxury 5 + 2 passenger car, and frankly if you hyper mile the S at low speed I'll bet you could hit 450 miles of range or more. So your claims are a bit silly, to say the least.
    Yes I'm excited by the technology, not only by where it is now but by where it's most likely heading. But we won't get there if we don't start where we are now. Model S leads to the Gen3 sedan, which then leads who knows where, but it will be better than where we are now, which is still pretty damn awesome from all the reviews I've seen.
    12 Sep 2012, 09:31 AM Reply Like
  • GaltMachine
    , contributor
    Comments (1444) | Send Message
     
    JRP3,

     

    "it never got 160 miles of range in normal use, more like 100-120 miles"

     

    Please don't accuse me of making up facts. You have to read the whole article:

     

    "The NiMH batteries, rated at 77 amp-hours (26.4 kWh) at 343 volts, gave the cars a range of 160 miles (257 km) per charge, more than twice what the original Gen I cars could muster.

     

    It took the NiMH-equipped cars as much as eight hours for the cars to charge to full capacity (though an 80% charge could be achieved in between one and three hours). "

     

    Don't fall in love with an investment as it has a tendency to cloud your judgment.
    12 Sep 2012, 09:59 AM Reply Like
  • JRP3
    , contributor
    Comments (8654) | Send Message
     
    And don't take as fact a single statement in Wiki about what the potential range of the EV1 may have been. The fact remains that the EV1 was half the vehicle that the Model S is in range, carrying capacity, and luxury. Your judgement is clouded by some inherent dislike of the EV concept. Obviously many people like the concept and are quite happy with the advantages it provides, which makes it a potentially good investment. Case in point, I don't own any Apple products, nor do I understand the Apple fan boy mindset, yet I can see that others do and that there is a huge market for the products.
    13 Sep 2012, 09:33 AM Reply Like
  • DanoX
    , contributor
    Comments (2847) | Send Message
     
    New tech (electric cars, high speed rail, thorium) is always a economic opportunity what is the problem with the naysayers I don't understand.
    10 Sep 2012, 03:30 PM Reply Like
  • Surf Dog
    , contributor
    Comments (826) | Send Message
     
    Speaking of future technology, I ran across this today.

     

    If it turns out to be legitimate, I can imagine that this concept could influence many new ideas.

     

    The inventor comming from a very unlikely station makes it most interesting.

     

    http://bit.ly/QyfmoZ
    18 Sep 2012, 02:24 AM Reply Like
  • Nick Butcher
    , contributor
    Comments (806) | Send Message
     
    It's not a new idea, and it doesn't get around any constraints of speed or energy. But still, would be extremely awesome if it worked. I'd fork out for a flying skateboard.

     

    http://1.usa.gov/QkI0fN
    18 Sep 2012, 03:16 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