CNN Skeptical of Elon Musk's 'Big Promises' (cnn.com)

An anonymous reader writes: Tesla's electric semi-truck will be launched three weeks later than planned, CNN reports. It's been bumped to November 16th because Tesla says it's "diverting resources" to address problems with its Model 3 sedan production -- they've produced just 17.3% of the cars they'd planned -- and to make more batteries to send to areas hit by hurricanes. CNN notes Tesla's Model X "didn't start shipping until two years after it was supposed to roll out," and production of its Model S sedan "was also much slower than originally promised." Michelle Krebs, an analyst with Autotrader.com, complains Tesla "may well have far too much on its plate. It should focus and deliver on some key promises."

But Elon Musk "has a history of some pretty pie-in-the-sky promises," complained CNN business anchor Maggie Lake, citing Musk's claim that he had verbal approval for an underground hyperloop connecting New York City to Washington D.C. ("This is news to City Hall," said New York's press secretary at the time, and no actual approval has ever been produced.) Lake also noted Musk's promise to fix South Australia's blackout problems by building the world's largest lithium-ion battery within 100 days back in March. Last Friday Tesla signed a contract to begin the work, so the 100-day countdown has begun.
CNN's report ran under the headline "Elon Musk: Big Dreamer or Monorail Salesman?" -- referencing a satirical 1993 episode of The Simpson's. "Here's a spoiler alert," the segment concludes. "If you haven't seen that episode...the monorail plan doesn't work out too well. Let's put it that way."

Comments

Guess they are not big into the whole news thing

[Anonymous Coward]

Other wise they might have known - https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/sep/30/elon-musks-big-battery-for-south-australia-already-half-complete

Re:Why would anyone take CNN seriously?

[bogaboga]

To be relevant to this maybe you could compare Musks claims with CNNs news and provide some proof they are less trustworthy in general?

If people followed and but their cash on CNN and its claims prior to the election, they'd have lost big time.

Anyway, I digress....but these are some of the outrageous things they've said in the recent past. Remember, they claim to be, "The most trusted name in News."

1: They on June 6th reported that Comey was going to contradict President Trumpâ(TM)s claim that he wasnâ(TM)t under FBI investigation in his Senate testimony, a report which obviously was going to make Trump look like a liar. They had to retract these claims.

2: CNN.com Headline: From early May, âoeRape and domestic violence could be pre-existing conditions.â CNN argued that the American Health Care Act (AHCA) could make sexual assault a pre-existing condition, preventing women who survive rape from getting health care.

3: Claim reported as something worth listening to, while referring to WikiLeaks: "Remember, itâ(TM)s illegal to possess these stolen documents. Itâ(TM)s different for the media. So everything you learn about this, youâ(TM)re learning from us,â Cuomo said on television.

Need more? I have 11 crazy ones for you...

Re:Guess they are not big into the whole news thin

[Rei]

Beat me to it. Looks like it's going to be done well ahead of schedule. But hey, facts havenever stopped anyone before when trying to find reasons to bash Musk.

Facts like the fact that Musk never said he had approval from New York City - that he actually said, "verbal govt approval". Which he did - the government he was speaking of was the federal government (DOT, asked about it: "We have had promising conversations to date, are committed to transformative infrastructure projects, and believe our greatest solutions have often come from the ingenuity and drive of the private sector,""). But hey, let's leave that part out and pretend that Musk was just making things up.

Facts like, for example, that Model 3's production schedule had been moved forward to July (was originally supposed to start at the end of this year), with Musk stating at the time that the reason for the July deadline was because he knew some suppliers would inevitably fail to meet their deadline and he had to have a way to hold their feet to the fire with real penalties for failing to deliver. Of course, they actually did make the July deadline.

The Wall Street Journal will gripe about the fact that there are missing features in the (over-the-air-upgraded) software stack and that there's some manual labour / part changes in manufacture because automated assembly line isn't yet complete. Really, WSJ? Gee we all thought that the line was fully ready to produce tens of thousands of vehicles per month, but the schedule was only to produce a couple hundred for giggles. And of course, every Tesla short will whine about how there are customers acting as "beta", ignoring the fact that none of the above comes as any surprise to anyone with a deposit, particularly the earliest ones, and that they're thrilled to have the chance to get their vehicles early. I know one who, after having the car for just two weeks, already put down a deposit on a second one.

But hey, I guess someone has to try to recoup some of their losses in their ill-advised short position in TSLA.

Re:Guess they are not big into the whole news thin

[Rei]

15 may 2016:

Tesla promised to start deliveries by the end of 2017, and to move 500,000 units a year (including Model S and Model X sales) by 2020.

Musk, apparently feeling his company isn't under quite enough pressure, upped the ante during Wednesday's call, saying he'll deliver 100,000 cars by the end of 2017 and hit the half-million threshold in 2018.

I'll repeat: Tesla accelerated their own schedule. Their original schedule was "something, at some point, in 2017". They changed it to an extremely aggressive S curve starting in July. As for the latter part:

"I think it’s worth explaining sort of how manufacturing a complex object with several thousand unique components actually works. And what date’s relevant and – in order to achieve volume production of a new car with several thousand unique items, you actually have to set a target date internally and with suppliers that is quite aggressive.”

According to Musk, that target date in July 1 of 2017. That doesn’t mean that the Model 3 will enter production on July 1st, because as Musk explains:

“Now, will we actually be able to achieve volume production on July 1 next year? Of course, not. The reason is that even if 99% of the internally produced items and supplier items are available on July 1, we still cannot produce the car because you cannot produce a car that is missing 1% of its component.”

Musk says that actual production will be “some number of months later,” due to supply chain issues and internal production problems. This, according to Musk, is how the entire automotive industry works. In some ways then,start of production for the Model 3 is not entirely controlled by Tesla.

Musk concluded this part of the discussion with this statement:

“So in order for us to be confident of achieving volume production of Model 3 by late 2017, we actually have to set a date of mid-2017 and really hold people’s feet to the fire internally and externally to achieve an actual volume production date of late 2017.”

He then provided a production target, which is way beyond what we’d expected to hear:

“So as a rough guess, I would say we would aim to produce 100,000 to 200,000 Model 3s in the second half of next year. That’s my expectation right now.

Re:Guess they are not big into the whole news thin

[Rei]

Right. So let me get this straight: we're supposed to be mad at Muskwhile they're moving the equipment in and installing it well within 100 days from the signing of the contract, it doesn't count, because we're supposed to judge Tesla not by the terms given (100 days from the signing of the contract), but instead a term that was never offered (100 days from the issuance of this tweet). Correct? And that there's something abnormal and unfair about a multi-million dollar power contract not being negotiated overnight?