Slashdot Mirror
Tesla Burns Through Record Cash To Bring the Model 3 To Market (bloomberg.com)
Dana Hull, reporting for Bloomberg: Tesla's Elon Musk keeps getting the green light to do what it takes to bring electric cars to the masses, regardless of how much it's going to cost. The company burned through $1.16 billion in cash in the second quarter by spending on capacity for its cheapest model yet and boosting battery output. Investors fixated instead on what Musk said is coming next: Hundreds of thousands of Model 3 sedan deliveries, installations of solar roofs and an all-new semi truck to add to the lineup. "This is the best I've ever felt about Tesla's future," Musk said on a conference call. The stock surged as much as 7.4 percent to $349.94 as of 9:45 a.m. Thursday in New York, the biggest intraday gain in four months. The chief executive officer has built a fanatical following of Tesla shareholders who continue to throw their support behind his clean-energy vision. It helps that consumers keep opening their wallets: The Model 3, which starts at $35,000, has racked up almost half a million reservations and is drawing more deposits by the day. The record negative free cash flow Tesla reported for the three months ended in June was almost double the $622 million it went through in the first quarter. With a little more than $3 billion in cash on hand, Musk told analysts the company is thinking about raising money through a debt offering.
it's buying hardware and services to set up the production facility... big difference burning cash would be spending it on things that don't do anything for the company, such as distributing dividends and cash executive bonuses...
it actually looks like a car
Has been out for awhile and nobody is buying it. What's better about the Model 3?
I can't speak for everyone, but the two reasons I am buying a Tesla Model 3 is the better performance and the over the air updates. Most car models have all their features on day one and any new updates are only for future year models. This is not the case with Tesla. I'll give my money to Tesla for almost no other reason than to support a company which does this.
-- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
said government money was paid off with interest aeons ago
Biggest difference is the supercharger network for the Model 3. The Bolt's options when it comes to road-trips are more limited and where they exist they are inferior since they don't have the same charge rate as the supercharger.
The Tesla isn't built by a company that swallowed a bunch of taxpayer money in a big government shell game to survive...
Oh wait...
Every company takes advantage of government programs to exist. Public roads, public education, intellectual property protection, military protection of sea lanes, etc. Tesla probably owes its existence more to our universities for producing its engineers than it does to tax incentives.
-- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
that's a budget issue. how about stopping the idiotic, unwinable war in afghanistan, and spend that money on electric car incentives (severa hundred billions a year)
Lol, okay, let's go down the list. Bolt vs. Model 3. Just the base models (Model 3 is much more upgradeable)
MSRP: $37500 vs $35000
0-60: 6,5s vs. 5,6s
Top speed: 90mph vs. 130mph
Handling: Read for yourself (start at "What's blanching...")
EPA range: 238mi vs. 220mi
Max charge speed: 90mph vs. 260mph
Fast charge network: Poor (single stall, poorly monitored, big holes) vs. excellent (4-8+ stalls, widespread distribution on almost all major interstates)
Dealership experience: Famously hard sell and uneducated about EVs, vs. almost humorously soft-sell, behaving instead like museum curators who just want to talk about their exhibit
Automatic crash avoidance: Optional extra vs. standard
Climate control: Single vs. dual zone
Track record for safety: less-than-stellar vs. outright-insulted-if-they-score-less-than-perfect-in-any-test. And this.
Standard warranty: 3yrs / 36k mi vs. 4yrs / 50k mi (both have the same battery warranty, 8 yrs / 100k mi)
Company dedication: Makes EVs as a side project to their main business vs. fully invested in EVs.
Efficiency: heavier & higher drag vs. lighter and lower drag
Styling: Come on, is there any contest? Even remotely? Bolt vs. Model 3. The interior difference is even worse, with the Bolt being your typical econobox interior (yet at a nearly $40k price point).
Depreciation of past models: Terrible vs. Low
I could keep going. I mean, there's just no contest. Unless you're seriously in a rush, or you think Musk is the devil, I can't imagine why anyone would pick the Bolt over the Model 3.
So, apart from that, how was the play, Mrs. Lincoln?
DO NOT BUY A LEAF. The Chevy Volt, Chevy Bolt, Zero S, and Tesla Model S/X/3 all have high-quality battery management systems with thermal management. The Leaf's lack of a TMS causes their battery to degrade rapidly, losing as much as 40% of its capacity in 2-3 years; whereas the Tesla, Volt, and Zero have shown little to no loss of capacity over half a decade and hundreds of thousands of miles.
Get a used Volt. They're ass-cheap. Just don't buy a Leaf, holy shit dude.
Support my political activism on Patreon.
As an Independent (yet a fiscal conservative who is repelled more by most Democratic tax plans than Republican ones), I'd question your assertion that "most Republicans" believe in the theory that rich people and corporations will start to "create jobs" only when they accumulate enough cash.
That's another way of talking about the "trickle down economics" which were out of the 1980's Reagan era, and were really just based on an untested economic theory at the time. Reagan's cabinet members succeeded in selling him on and supporting, so they could try it. It didn't work, primarily because they underestimated how many successful companies have little or no interest in more growth. (Even giants like Apple exhibit this tendency today. No matter how much money they make? They still cling to a business model that says it's perfectly acceptable to build computers that only cater to a relative niche in the marketplace. Apple doesn't even try to build Enterprise gear for server rooms anymore, leaving that whole sector to other companies. It doesn't even attempt to make its own mail server -- opting instead to build its Mail and Calendar clients around Microsoft's Exchange solution. Sometimes, adding too many new employees and expanding into too many areas just dilutes the formula that makes you successful. So profits aren't sensible to dump back into business expansion.)
I have no problem with Tesla's business model right now. I think Elon Musk is a very intelligent guy and a pretty decent leader, who really believes in the technologies he's trying to develop and market. That said though? He's definitely operating a company that greatly benefits from government loans, perks, subsidies and initiatives. In a more libertarian society, I'd like to see much less of that happening. But today, it is what it is. We voted for a bigger government than I personally like, and it's one that likes to take a lot of our tax dollars and spend them, directed at specific things it thinks are "best for all of us". So many subsidies have gone to fossil fuel based companies, it makes it really difficult to single out Tesla as the "bad guy" for receiving some now.
Which company has more cache?
caché.
So this height-challenged Czechoslovakian resistance fighter is trying to escape the Gestapo, who are chasing him. He sees a small farm house, runs to the door, and knocks rapidly. The farmer opens the door and the resistance fighter immediately asks him:
"Excuse me, but could you cache a small czech?"
I'll be here all week.
>> Tesla Model 3 is the better performance and the over the air updates.
Yeah, OTA Updates, so cool. or is it ? Now that's an OTA update : https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
While Chrysler/Jeep does a poor job of engineering its in-car computer systems (as shown by the film!) that has nothing to do with Tesla. Proper engineering makes ota updates safe from hackers (witness MacOS, Linux, and part of the time, Windows). Just be careful whose stuff you buy.
The Leaf's lack of a TMS causes their battery to degrade rapidly, losing as much as 40% of its capacity in 2-3 years
This depends on where you live. My 2012 LEAF has 50K miles on it and has lost only about 4% of its battery capacity. (I'd go check it right now with my OBDII interface and LeafSpy Pro, but my wife has it.)
Get a used Volt. They're ass-cheap. Just don't buy a Leaf
Used LEAFs are much cheaper. You can get one about like mine (note: I'm not selling mine; I like it) for around $6K. Assuming you don't need more than 60 or so miles of daily range, and don't live in an area with a very hot climate (which causes rapid battery degradation), for $6K you can get an EV that will be a great commuter and around-town vehicle for several years, and will cost less than a nickel per mile to operate, including electricity and maintenance.
Unless you live in Arizona,or the like, they're great little cars, and very, very cheap right now.
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
Yeah, he and some MontanaSkeptic guy are well known for arguing that Tesla is dead, but Tesla keeps going and selling more. Gut feeling says both are idiot trolls being paid by kock Bros.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.