Slashdot Mirror


Elon Musk Emails Employees About 'Extensive and Damaging Sabotage' By Employee (cnbc.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from CNBC: Tesla CEO Elon Musk sent an email to all employees on Monday morning about a factory fire, and seemed to reference possible sabotage. Now, CNBC has learned that Musk also sent an e-mail to all employees at Tesla late on Sunday night alleging that he has discovered a saboteur in the company's ranks. Musk said this person had conducted "quite extensive and damaging sabotage" to the company's operations, including by changing code to an internal product and exporting data to outsiders. In the email, Musk said "the investigation will continue in depth this week" to "figure out if [the saboteur] was acting alone or with others at Tesla and if he was working with any outside organizations [that want Tesla to disappear]." You can read the full email via CNBC's report.

490 comments

  1. A common refrain from Musk by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 2, Interesting

    "Not our fault!" There must be some bad news coming out later this week, and he wants to get ahead of it with some sort of excuse to blame...

    --
    Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    1. Re: A common refrain from Musk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nailed it! Damage control for more bullshit that was never going to work in the first place. He's lucky he hasn't been prosecuted for fraud at this point.

    2. Re:A common refrain from Musk by gl4ss · · Score: 0, Troll

      it's just damage control explanation to why they weren't even making enough of them before the fire..

      somehow VAG isn't having these problems? also their megafactories have been more advanced than teslas for like 18 years.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    3. Re:A common refrain from Musk by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Also, if there is any substance to this, the last thing he should do is communicate it in this fashion.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    4. Re: A common refrain from Musk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Elon is fine. He has his convictions but in the end, we have always come to an agreement.
      --
      Robert Bigelow
      Founder and President
      Bigelow Aerospace

    5. Re:A common refrain from Musk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Also, if there is any substance to this, the last thing he should do is communicate it in this fashion.

      If you read the email, he's actually caught the guy and had a confession. Getting this guy, likely with the police arresting him (given the accusation) likely blew the cover of the investigation. There is no benefit from secrecy any more.

      At this point he firstly deters any other conspirators by letting them know he knows. They are less likely to do damage during this crucial time. Secondly he warns other loyal Tesla employees to look out, and that's a real reason to give accurate information so that they are more likely to spot the problem.

      Open communication is probably the right thing at this stage.

    6. Re:A common refrain from Musk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      but... wait... his emails! TESLAGHAZI!!!

      I mean trolls gotta work, eh?

    7. Re:A common refrain from Musk by johanw · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      > If you read the email, he's actually caught the guy and had a confession

      If you pay someone enough, some people will confess anything. I've seen a case where someone was paid $25,000 to admit he was a murderer, knowing that they had to release him anyway after a few weeks due to lack of evidence (and unlike the US such a stunt won't get you any real trouble here) but giving the real murderer more time to escape.

    8. Re:A common refrain from Musk by Rei · · Score: 4, Insightful

      it's just damage control explanation to why they weren't even making enough of them before the fire..

      FYI, production scaleup has been going really well these past several months, hitting 2k/wk sustained early in the quarter, 3,5k sustained in the middle of the quarter, and well en route to 5k/wk by the end of the quarter.

      somehow VAG isn't having these problems? also their megafactories have been more advanced than teslas for like 18 years.

      I must have missed where VAG built a factory capable of producing 5k EVs per week in 15 months from the start of tooling, on a brand new line with a newly hired workforce. Literally, the first 467 Kuka robots arrived, were placed, and workers were hired, in April-June 2017.

      Teslas "problems" are that they set absurdly aggressive schedules for themselves.

      --
      I was watching this thing on TV about some guy named Hitler. Someone should stop him!
    9. Re:A common refrain from Musk by pots · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Arson? Arson is a common refrain from Musk? The company has had some problems, to be sure, but this is not a standard excuse.

    10. Re:A common refrain from Musk by Falconnan · · Score: 2

      OR... The statement they have a confession is true, and they're not simply assuming there were no others involved. There are a lot of short sellers looking to see Tesla take a hit, so there is a potential profit motive. And while it may seem unlikely, were I Musk and I suspected someone looking to cause damage, I wouldn't be looking at the auto companies in the US. Honestly, I'd be looking at brokerage firms.

    11. Re: A common refrain from Musk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly what I thought. He is giving himself an out for missing the Wall Street numbers.

    12. Re:A common refrain from Musk by DrXym · · Score: 2, Insightful
      It should still have been up to 20000 by this point. Tesla's problem was they decided to build a brand new car in a brand new plant in a stupidly ambitious timeframe. It was very clear beforehand that they would hit issues and that some issues like QC would be swept under the carpet to keep the volumes up.

      I guess it's good for them that they are overcoming these problems but I don't know why anyone would want to be an early adopter until there were resolved.

    13. Re: A common refrain from Musk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or you want to find another way to profit from a forced failure of a company that isn't toeing the corporate line now that destruction of facilities is gone.

    14. Re:A common refrain from Musk by Balthisar · · Score: 4, Interesting

      BEV cars go together pretty much like PHEV and HEV cars do. The drivetrain comes in as components. You put them together. Assembling a Tesla's not all that different from assembling a VW, and companies like VAG routinely go from Kuka/Comau/Kawasaki/Fanuc arriving on the floor to full mass production at design rate in a matter of months, because, unlike Tesla, they're experts are what they're doing. Even workforce training isn't as important as you think, because they're experts at that, too.

      This isn't meant to be a Tesla slam, because if Tesla keeps at it, they'll eventually become experts, too.

      --
      --Jim (me)
    15. Re:A common refrain from Musk by thegarbz · · Score: 4, Insightful

      but I don't know why anyone would want to be an early adopter until there were resolved

      Maybe it's because they are dealing with a company that stands behind their products, repairs and upgrades them, and resolves issues if they are discovered, and are not dealing with a car manufacturer.

    16. Re:A common refrain from Musk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Damn Russians.

    17. Re:A common refrain from Musk by DrXym · · Score: 1, Flamebait
      I don't want a brand new car that needs to be repaired because it wasn't adequately QCd in the first place. If QC turned a blind eye to faults customers can discover what faults are still there that they can't see - issues with wiring, software, structural joins and so on?

      And all car manufacturers offer a vehicle warranty. I'm sure Tesla's repair service is nice and all but what would be even nicer is not having to use it. And that assumes they can even rectify faults or will do so unless a danger exists that requires a recall.

      And no, I don't think any of this has to do with why people preordered. I think the main reason was hype, the media band wagon and a failure to think things through.

    18. Re: A common refrain from Musk by reanjr · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Which is why I just bought some TSLA. The problems they have are all problems of inexperience, which will slowly disappear. Musk keeps his promises, as long as those promises don't have a date attached. The basic business model (essentially being the Apple of automobiles) is very promising.

    19. Re:A common refrain from Musk by ledow · · Score: 4, Interesting

      And also opens himself up to libel action, comments on a legal case (if there even is one!) outside the scope of his legal department, insinuates that his competitors have access to his supposedly secure network (trade secrets, et al presumably).

      Honestly, there's a reason that people shut their mouths in certain situations and let the lawyers / HR people talk rather than themselves. Every employee who works near this guy will know who he is. Certainly if anything in this email is factually wrong, he would have basis to sue. Hell, if there's anything in this email that CAN'T BE PROVEN, he would have basis to sue (i.e. the supposed "confession").

      This could prejudice a trial too... now a judge might need to find a jury who hasn't heard of Elon Musk and hasn't heard such a statement.

      There's also - and this is critical - no need for it. You can send out a message about finding a potential saboteur, stating your suspicions that they aren't alone, reminding people of the need for security and confidentiality, and providing the line to allow whistleblowing, without mentioning half the details Musk has.

      Like Trump, Musk "reacts" rather than acts. He just codifies his internal emotion towards something and sends that out to the world as a quotable company statement, rather than thinks or checks or moderates.

      Anyone with a brain is just thinking "Well, you must have really poor source control, then".

    20. Re:A common refrain from Musk by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      Bloomberg is showing about 1700 per week right now; they need to triple that - and sustain it - within 10 days to reach 5K by the end of the quarter. My bet is they don't reach that metric, at least not sustained. Meaning, yet again, missing a production goal.

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    21. Re:A common refrain from Musk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shut it dick-nozzle.

    22. Re: A common refrain from Musk by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 0

      You do realize that TSLA loses money on every vehicle it sells - BEFORE you account for R&D and capital expenses (which pushes it further into the red), don't you?

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    23. Re: A common refrain from Musk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Being the Apple of automobiles is about the worst thing I can possibly imagine and is certainly not the reason I drive a Tesla.

    24. Re:A common refrain from Musk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is more than 4 months old, so not really "now".

    25. Re:A common refrain from Musk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well fire and tesla's seem to go together, so maybe it is just a car on the line igniting as expected, which is sort of like arson.

    26. Re: A common refrain from Musk by drsquare · · Score: 1

      That's not a 'basic business model', that's a distance, aspirational dream, like winning the lottery. Apple is one of the most valuable businesses on the planet, Tesla is a tiny player in its own industry and has no route to being as big as Apple.

    27. Re:A common refrain from Musk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you don't even have a basic understanding of the automotive industry, eh?

    28. Re:A common refrain from Musk by drsquare · · Score: 1

      Updated June 19th?

    29. Re:A common refrain from Musk by houghi · · Score: 1

      Well, he fires rockets into the sky, so I think that proves he did it himself, right?

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    30. Re:A common refrain from Musk by thegarbz · · Score: 2

      I don't want a brand new car that needs to be repaired

      Don't be an early adopter then.

      There are plenty of people who are perfectly happy buying things that are fixed on the go.

      And all car manufacturers offer a vehicle warranty.

      hahahahahahhahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahhahahaahahahaha
      Yeah my own state had to pass laws to hold car companies accountable when delivering lemons. I'll also leave it as an exercise to you to figure out how many people died due to Ford not recalling and repairing faulty ignition switches.

      and a failure to think things through.

      Yes people seem to often not think things through, especially when it comes to comparing car manufacturers or understanding the motivations of others.

    31. Re:A common refrain from Musk by DrXym · · Score: 1

      Don't be an early adopter then. There are plenty of people who are perfectly happy buying things that are fixed on the go.

      Fools and their money are soon parted.

      hahahahahahhahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahhahahaahahahaha

      You're easily amused. There are not many vehicle manufacturers with as bad a reputation for QC as Tesla.

      Yes people seem to often not think things through, especially when it comes to comparing car manufacturers or understanding the motivations of others.

      Actually I did think things through. The situation for the model 3 was completely predictable.

    32. Re:A common refrain from Musk by Dread_ed · · Score: 2

      "I don't want a brand new car that needs to be repaired because it wasn't adequately QCd in the first place."

      Then you won't want to ever buy a car from companies such as Honda or Toyota (or any car company for that matter), provided it is the first model year of a new engine, new body, or both. Every car company has issues with the first year model of a new model or engine, guaranteed.

      Pretending like they don't so you can shoot darts at Tesla is disingenuous.

      As for why people pre-ordered, we both know why they did it. They are interested in disrupting the oil-centric automotive model for any number of sub-reasons under that heading.

      Your opinions are so prejudiced, emotional, one-sided, and lacking foresight that it looks as if you have a separate, unspoken agenda that is informing and shaping them.

      --
      When the only tool you have is a claw hammer every problem starts to look like the back of someone's skull.
    33. Re:A common refrain from Musk by avandesande · · Score: 1

      Maybe Elon is just a category 47b

      --
      love is just extroverted narcissism
    34. Re:A common refrain from Musk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      companies like VAG routinely go from Kuka/Comau/Kawasaki/Fanuc arriving on the floor to full mass production at design rate in a matter of months, because, unlike Tesla, they're experts are what they're doing.

      Car manufacturers routinely have problems rolling out new models. It just doesn't make the news like Tesla. Just recently, VW was eating thru worker overtime budgets due to problems rolling out their new platforms. And may I also point out the Prius Prime plugin was delayed by months while Toyota struggled to address manufacturing issues. It too had a new platform.

    35. Re:A common refrain from Musk by Rei · · Score: 1

      , and companies like VAG routinely go from Kuka/Comau/Kawasaki/Fanuc arriving on the floor to full mass production at design rate in a matter of months

      Examples?

      --
      I was watching this thing on TV about some guy named Hitler. Someone should stop him!
    36. Re: A common refrain from Musk by Rei · · Score: 1

      "You do realize...." (inserts something that's in flat contradiction with all of Tesla's quarterly statements)

      --
      I was watching this thing on TV about some guy named Hitler. Someone should stop him!
    37. Re:A common refrain from Musk by Rei · · Score: 1

      The problem with the Bloomberg tracker is that it averages in line downtimes for upgrades, so you get "several thousand a week" averaged in with "0 a week".

      --
      I was watching this thing on TV about some guy named Hitler. Someone should stop him!
    38. Re:A common refrain from Musk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ahhh yes, the obligatory Tesla shilling by Rei, upvoted to +5 on schedule.

      Nothing is wrong at Tesla! Production is off the charts! Media is biased! Praise be to Elon!

    39. Re:A common refrain from Musk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fools and their money are soon parted.

      Here is a thought. If everyone is as "smart" as you are, then no one would be an early adopter. As a result, there wouldn't be any good product for "smart" people like you later on. There wouldn't be an airplane or any car we are using nowadays. So be sarcastic all you want, but don't bitch about it if that kind of event occurs (which should never be). Got it?

    40. Re: A common refrain from Musk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd actually suspect this is true. We've heard of "factory problems" before haven't we?

    41. Re:A common refrain from Musk by thegarbz · · Score: 5, Informative

      Yes how foolish that those early adopters bought things that work just fine.

      There are not many vehicle manufacturers with as bad a reputation for QC as Tesla.

      Now let's talk about reputation shall we?

      Telsa has a QC reputation mostly built up based on incredibly stupid nit-picking with only one real major flaw to date: The doors on the Model X. Most of their quality control issues were along the lines of "OMG the gap in this pannel is 1mm wider than that other panel, oh woes me!" In the mean time customers are like "LOL this door has panel gaps? I didn't hear you over the sound of how fast this thing accellerates and how sweet the ride is!" Hell most early reviews about fit and finish which grilled the few minor nitpicks reluctantly then proceeded to say how absolutely awesome of a car was produced. Oh but the stitching on the leather wasn't perfect, so horrible, much upsetness!

      But all in all QC isn't the issue here. We're talking about company responses. So what kind of a reputation does Tesla have there?
      - They caught the world by surprise when they offered free feature upgrades over the air.
      - They borderline no questions asked repair shit most companies need to get dragged to court over (my own experience with GM was having the ignition switch fail 3 days before the warranty expired on my Astra and them then waiting 3 days to get back to me so they could try and tell me it was out of warranty and charge me $400 for the repair, and towing as well. Fortunately I lived in a country where the regulator had teeth and they forced GM to not only tow and fix the car but also re-imburse me for the rental costs for delaying me as long as they did).
      - Tesla invested in a mobile repair fleet sending people out to customer's houses for this kind of stuff.
      - A consumer reports came out with a sub par rating for the Model 3 brakes. Tesla stepped up and fixed it.
      - Telsa recalling cars with actual faults quickly and voluntarily. In the meantime what did an NHTSA rep say in a public hearing about Chyrisler? "In every one of the 23 recalls, we have identified ways in which Fiat Chrysler failed to do its job."

      Yeah you're right. Fools and their money are easily parted. One day maybe the fools will wake up and actually buy from Tesla instead of risking their lives.

    42. Re: A common refrain from Musk by enderwiggin7 · · Score: 1

      I own a Honda CRV and a Kia Forte. Both brand new, both had recall repairs inside 5 years. It happens to everyone.

    43. Re: A common refrain from Musk by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 1

      I don't know much about how Tesla does these things. So I'm kind of curious.

      Okay, your Honda CRV/Kia Forte had recall repairs inside 5 years. So, I assume, you took the appropriate car to the appropriate dealer and either waited around or got a loaner or something like that while they fixed the problem.

      Without dealers for this sort of thing, how does it work with Tesla?

    44. Re: A common refrain from Musk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe it's because demand outstrips production by 18,000 fold?

      You fucking imbecile.

    45. Re: A common refrain from Musk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So to be an early adopter one must be stupid and gullible? Lol

    46. Re:A common refrain from Musk by q4Fry · · Score: 1

      Not exactly, but he did investigate sabotage when a SpaceX rocket blew up.

      “We literally thought someone had shot the rocket,” Musk said in an interview last summer at SpaceX’s headquarters in Hawthorne, Calif. “We found things that looked like bullet holes, and we calculated that someone with a high-powered rifle, if they had shot the rocket in the right location, the exact same thing would have happened.”

    47. Re:A common refrain from Musk by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      yes, but that is an average rate, not instantaneous rates. They are higher than 1700.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    48. Re: A common refrain from Musk by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      Tesla is part of a keiretsu, and as such can easily be as huge as Apple. You just need to expand your vision a tad.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    49. Re:A common refrain from Musk by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      If you think about it, while what you said makes sense in the perfectly legal world, this is the real world and Tesla has had some negative external pressures that just got a gut punch. Libel? I'll bet Elon's smart enough to only repeat those pieces that are in the police report.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    50. Re:A common refrain from Musk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So one shill for a hundred blind hatred trolls, sounds fair.

    51. Re:A common refrain from Musk by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 2

      - They caught the world by surprise when they offered free feature upgrades over the air.

      Why are OTA updates a good thing? It just indicates that what I purchased isn't really mine, and can be taken away by a malicious or malformed update.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    52. Re: A common refrain from Musk by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      Here you go. Gross profit is COMPLETELY eliminated by just Selling General and Admin costs. That's not including interest expenses, R&D, etc. Gross profit in Q1 2018 was $456MM, and Selling General Admin costs were $686MM. That's a quarter of a billion loss BEFORE we even include R&D, interest on debt, capex, etc. Oh, and that's from Tesla's financials.

      Facts are facts - cheerleaders need to realize that...

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    53. Re:A common refrain from Musk by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      So, if you have ONE week with 5K units, you can claim you can do 5K units sustained? In actuality, you need to average in downtime. You need to look at the weekly and monthly averages to get a feel for the typical build rate. You cannot extrapolate a single 8 hour shift and say "that's what we can do". NO sane production engineer would ever do that... The facts are that Tesla is delivering about 1700 units a week right now. They need to do a solid 700 per day for the next 10 days to even come close to showing they can do 5000 per week.

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    54. Re:A common refrain from Musk by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      Peak doesn't matter; output and sales and revenue relies upon average. You cannot take a single peak value and assume it will be the continuous output. What can they do for a full month? That would be much more instructive about the actual throughput of the line. When I've set up production lines, I'm always looking at the typical throughput averaged over 3 to 5 days, or even 2-4 weeks (depending upon the volume of product being built). You cannot go by a peak value ever - it's not an accurate representation of the long-term output of the line.

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    55. Re: A common refrain from Musk by kenh · · Score: 1

      Maybe it's because demand outstrips production by 18,000 fold?

      On what planet does increased demand cause privation to slow down?

      You fucking imbecile.

      Right back at you.

      --
      Ken
    56. Re: A common refrain from Musk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You do realize that TSLA loses money on every vehicle it sells - BEFORE you account for R&D and capital expenses (which pushes it further into the red), don't you?

      Completely false, their gross margin on cars has moved between 10% and 25%. Better than any ICE car maker that ships more than 100K cars a year. Its the GM and BMW's of the world that lose money on each EV.

    57. Re:A common refrain from Musk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And also opens himself up to libel action, comments on a legal case (if there even is one!) outside the scope of his legal department, insinuates that his competitors have access to his supposedly secure network (trade secrets, et al presumably).

      Honestly, there's a reason that people shut their mouths in certain situations and let the lawyers / HR people talk rather than themselves. Every employee who works near this guy will know who he is. Certainly if anything in this email is factually wrong, he would have basis to sue. Hell, if there's anything in this email that CAN'T BE PROVEN, he would have basis to sue (i.e. the supposed "confession").

      This could prejudice a trial too... now a judge might need to find a jury who hasn't heard of Elon Musk and hasn't heard such a statement.

      There's also - and this is critical - no need for it. You can send out a message about finding a potential saboteur, stating your suspicions that they aren't alone, reminding people of the need for security and confidentiality, and providing the line to allow whistleblowing, without mentioning half the details Musk has.

      Like Trump, Musk "reacts" rather than acts. He just codifies his internal emotion towards something and sends that out to the world as a quotable company statement, rather than thinks or checks or moderates.

      Anyone with a brain is just thinking "Well, you must have really poor source control, then".

      Wow, you have no understanding of US law or what constitutes libel. NOTHING in this email is grounds of a libel claim or a lawsuit of any kind except the actual sabotage. They have a confession. No individual person or company was called out. Printing something like Big ISP are only out to exploit as much money for the lowest quality service possible is not libel. I have no idea what these "details" you think are so egregious actually are but 90% of that email is just standard CEO BS. There was VERY little detail about the actual incident. Most details centered around normal business operation. Maybe you're forgetting that he didn't send this to everyone in the world, just employees. Google has done things that could actually be libel and still, nothing has come from it.

    58. Re: A common refrain from Musk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He means, which seems quite obvious, that the demand is so much higher, a perfect 2nd assembly line could not keep up anyway.

      There are a lot of people here that a masters of business, engineering, international trade, and can even predict the future.

      Which begs the question, why are they here? Because their just the run of the mill dipshit pc support idiot.

    59. Re: A common refrain from Musk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What do you do for a living? Iâ(TM)m guessing from your expert articulation of where Tesla should be, you are a COO or somewhere in the executive level that has access to decision making information.

      You certainly canâ(TM)t be a network admin or help desk guy. Right? Right?

    60. Re:A common refrain from Musk by DrXym · · Score: 1

      That's a nice bundle of anecdotes and defensiveness.

    61. Re:A common refrain from Musk by DrXym · · Score: 1

      Yes because every product ever is vaguely specified and requires people to plunk down cash sight unseen to join a queue to receive theirs many years later. Thanks for clarifying that.

    62. Re:A common refrain from Musk by DrXym · · Score: 1

      Then you won't want to ever buy a car from companies such as Honda or Toyota (or any car company for that matter), provided it is the first model year of a new engine, new body, or both. Every car company has issues with the first year model of a new model or engine, guaranteed.

      The adage "never buy version 1.0 of anything" applies to all cars. Never said anything different.

      And when you throw shoddy QC on top thanks to Tesla's desperation to fulfill orders, and software which didn't even deliver with a working radio FFS, then you're just compounding the problems. They'll get there eventually. No reason to be the guinea pig until they do.

    63. Re:A common refrain from Musk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In my personal experience doing this for a living, let's say the Alero, the P90 Malibu, the original Expedition and later versions, the Fusion, the Edge and Flex, the Avalanche, the Aztec (I build body shops, not design the products!), several versions of F150, and the list goes on and on and on. The secret sauce is coordination on a massive scale and a century of institutional knowledge.

    64. Re: A common refrain from Musk by Local+ID10T · · Score: 2

      I don't know much about how Tesla does these things. So I'm kind of curious.

      Okay, your Honda CRV/Kia Forte had recall repairs inside 5 years. So, I assume, you took the appropriate car to the appropriate dealer and either waited around or got a loaner or something like that while they fixed the problem.

      Without dealers for this sort of thing, how does it work with Tesla?

      Tesla does have sales locations you can bring your car to for service -they are just not 3rd party dealerships.

      By not having 3rd party dealerships, Tesla has a direct relationship with each owner. They know what car you have, and what version of what model it is.

      -Software fixes are provided over-the-air.

      -Physical defects are likely to be fixed by Tesla sending a tech out to you. Minor fixes can be done on-site. For larger fixes they can bring you a loaner car, drive your car to the shop, fix it, and return it to you.

      --
      "You want to know how to help your kids? Leave them the fuck alone." -George Carlin
    65. Re:A common refrain from Musk by soc_cost_priv_gains · · Score: 1

      So you never update your PC because you want it to be yours?

    66. Re:A common refrain from Musk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds like you have some skin in the game no? How much have you lost so far?

    67. Re:A common refrain from Musk by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      A PC is not a car. Namely, a PC's updates are frequently for security and/or interoperability.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    68. Re: A common refrain from Musk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ask apple

    69. Re:A common refrain from Musk by darth.hunterix · · Score: 1

      In case of a PC I have a huge stash of Linux install CDs/DVDs to use in case of broken/malicious updates, so my machine will be up and running in a matter of hours (and most of it spent on restoring from backups). Can I have the same thing for a car (regardless of brand)?

      And the first time I've heard about MS adding spyware to Win7 I literally pulled the Ethernet cord from my only non-Linux machine and it hasn't been online ever since. Precisely for the reason that it's supposed to be MY machine, not Microsoft's.

      --
      What is best in life? Hot water, good dentishtry and shoft lavatory paper.
    70. Re:A common refrain from Musk by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      No one cares about ownership. That battle was lost years ago.

      As to why they are good? You're talking about an industry built on expensive upgrades and service fees locked into something you own. I hate lack of ownership more than the next guy but I would much rather drive a car from a manufacturer who has a demonstrated record of free aftermarket feature support and upgrades than, for example, Renault who insisted they wanted to charge me $150 for the privilege of my car's navigation system actually understanding that the highway is not the way it used to be.

      Bonus points if you have Android Auto which hasn't been upgraded and is full of security holes, or if you've ever had to book your car in for a service at some dealer location massively out of your way during work hours just so they can plug a USB stick into the dash for the latest software fuckup that caused a recall.

      OTA updates are a massive improvement even with the ownership and security issues that it comes with, especially in the eyes of the inconvenienced consumer.

      Sincerely,
      Someone who glues their mobile phone to the windscreen for navigation because their car doesn't get updated maps.

    71. Re:A common refrain from Musk by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      That's a nice bundle of anecdotes and defensiveness.

      LOL, most of these don't even need a Google. They have been discussed here on this very site. Do you even Slashdot bro?

    72. Re:A common refrain from Musk by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      A distinction with no difference in 2018. I take it you've never had to take your car in for a recall just so someone can plug a USB stick into the dash?

    73. Re: A common refrain from Musk by Rei · · Score: 1

      SG&A != gross margins
      SG&A scaling is not linear with vehicle output, and more to the point a significant amount has to be spent in advance of scaleup.

      --
      I was watching this thing on TV about some guy named Hitler. Someone should stop him!
    74. Re:A common refrain from Musk by Rei · · Score: 1

      As car as I can tell, you're not talking about building a line for a new platform (like, say, the N platform, GMX 130, CD3), you're talking about a line for a new body on an existing platform. Did you ever set up a line for a brand new platform?

      --
      I was watching this thing on TV about some guy named Hitler. Someone should stop him!
    75. Re:A common refrain from Musk by Rei · · Score: 1

      No, you can't. Not during a scaleup period. Scaleup fundamentally requires downtimes; it's a natural part of the process.

      During sustained operations? Yes, you absolutely care about averaging them in. But that's not the figure that people care about during a scaleup. The figure that they care about is, "if we stopped scaling up today, stopped taking down the lines for upgrades, how many could we produce per week?". And that's not the figure that the Bloomberg tracker gives.

      --
      I was watching this thing on TV about some guy named Hitler. Someone should stop him!
    76. Re:A common refrain from Musk by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      Are these downtimes for scaling or reworking? We've heard of several of the last stoppages being because of new robotics, etc. Are they trying to scale, or are they trying to iron the kinks out? Having done more than my share of factory work, once you get a line up and going and working smoothly at the planned rate, you leave it going - and you replicate that line to increase volume. Production needs to happen, you don't risk it by tearing down and redoing...

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    77. Re: A common refrain from Musk by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1
      Gross margins != profit.

      SG&A somewhat scales with vehicle output, it's not completely linear, but if you look at the last, say. 20 quarters - you'll see it does increase with gross revenue.

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    78. Re:A common refrain from Musk by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I don't want a brand new car that needs to be repaired because it wasn't adequately QCd in the first place. If QC turned a blind eye to faults customers can discover what faults are still there that they can't see - issues with wiring, software, structural joins and so on?

      I currently drive an Audi that was $300 because the transmission failed and it was sold as a parts car. The transmission I put in it came out of a car whose transmission was replaced in its second year (or was it third? I have the service documents, but they are not close at hand) because it failed catastrophically. If they sourced lame transmissions from ZF, what other junk did they source? (As it turns out, a bunch of garbage from Bosch.)

      Any vehicle can suck eggs when you get it. If you don't want that to happen, get a Honda. They are typically good in every way, even if they are not great in any way. Everyone else has numerous failures to go with their successes.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    79. Re:A common refrain from Musk by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Why are OTA updates a good thing? It just indicates that what I purchased isn't really mine, and can be taken away by a malicious or malformed update.

      They're good and bad. They can be a crutch, enabling manufacturers to do a bad job in the first place on the basis that they can fix it later. But they are also a means to fix problems, and no complex product is problem-free.

      Your car isn't really yours anyway. The government reserves the right to take it away from you on various specious bases.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    80. Re:A common refrain from Musk by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      A distinction with no difference for cars made in 2018. And also why I'm only looking at used cars. I'm dreading the day I have to buy a car with flashable firmware.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    81. Re:A common refrain from Musk by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      It's the lack of wanting to deal with Android Auto, USB-updates, etc. that keep me locked into used (and aging) cars. I have a phone (and tablet, and other computing devices) I want a car to drive. Even when renting a car with a nav system, I don't think I've ever used it. I'm amazed, not that Renault wanted to charge for updates, but in car navigation is a positive for anyone. I just want 5V in USB format and audio input to the stereo.

      I guess, what I'm saying, is that I'm already paying for feature upgrades in an open market where I have lots of choices. Why a car company thinks their computing will fit my needs at all compared to what I bought last month is confusing.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    82. Re:A common refrain from Musk by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      Your car isn't really yours anyway. The government reserves the right to take it away from you on various specious bases.

      Maybe where you are. While my government requires me to pay annually, that's only if I want to drive the car. If I put it in a garage.on a private track, it's mine.

      I suppose they can take my car if I use it in a crime.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    83. Re:A common refrain from Musk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If there's anything we've learned (or should have learned) about really rich guys (whether they've earned their riches or inherited them), it's that they don't feel the need to vet themselves very carefully. We should also have learned that they probably don't have to, since they have staffs around to clean up after them.

    84. Re:A common refrain from Musk by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Don't be an early adopter then. There are plenty of people who are perfectly happy buying things that are fixed on the go.

      Fools and their money are soon parted.

      In your world, there is zero innovation, becaus no one willl buy anything new.

      You are welcome to wait untill something has had 50 years of proven service. But your idea that anyone buying anything new is a fool is merely uou looking in the mirror.

      In order to have any sort of progress, there needs to be three groups.

      Early adopters, so that there is any progress at all.

      Middle adopters so that the progress can be sustained

      Late adopters as a repostory of history, and so that there can be resale value. Everyone works together. The mistake you make is that you assume somehow that everything that is good has somehow always existed, and now the newcomers are going to upset your world. When in fact, a world where everyone was like you, we'd all be living in mud huts and using rocks as hammers And none of that newfangled flint stuff either.

      hahahahahahhahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahhahahaahahahaha

      You're easily amused. There are not many vehicle manufacturers with as bad a reputation for QC as Tesla.

      Surely you jest. Ford with the flaming Ignition switches and the Pinto gas tanks, Chevrolet with the Corvair transaxle locking, Toyota with the out of control acceleration problem, The Ford Pinto "Park to reverse" slip killer, the Almost every Asian car seat belt jam, The Ford Explorer flaming Cruise control, the Audi throttle control problem when a bad design caused the throttle to fail open.

      And for most of these problems, the automakers denied denied, denied. Especially interesting was after a woman killed her kid when the Audi she owned failed full throttle open and she crushed her to death, Audi claimed she had accidentally stepped on the throttle. The prosecution and jury took into consideration that there wer brake marks up to th epoint of the child's death, and didn't buy the Audi claim of simultaneous part failure plus the woman stomping on the accelerator.

      Yes people seem to often not think things through, especially when it comes to comparing car manufacturers or understanding the motivations of others.

      Actually I did think things through. The situation for the model 3 was completely predictable.

      Actually, you have a really faulty memory. Youo scream like a banshee because you hate progress, while conveniently forgetting all of the deaths and injuries and safety recalls caused by your beloved car manufacturers, who apparently can do no wrong.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    85. Re:A common refrain from Musk by ebvwfbw · · Score: 1

      Maybe it had something to do with his not-flamethrower?

    86. Re:A common refrain from Musk by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      It's the lack of wanting to deal with Android Auto, USB-updates, etc. that keep me locked into used (and aging) cars.

      So you're a lost customer anyway.

      As for why people want it, safety is a good one. Car based navigation systems are the safest option for travel. Likewise I ripped out the radio with USB input in my previous car and replaced it with bluetooth, having a cable in the cabin near the gearstick is a huge problem.

    87. Re:A common refrain from Musk by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      A distinction with no difference for cars made in 2018.

      And 2017, 2016, 2015, 2014, 2013, 2012, 2011, and 2010. Interestingly if you have a diesel car you're running out of years prior to this where you're still allowed to drive it in European cities.

      You can keep hanging on to old cars as long as you want, eventually you won't be allowed to drive them anymore.

    88. Re:A common refrain from Musk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Especially interesting was after a woman killed her kid when the Audi she owned failed full throttle open and she crushed her to death, Audi claimed she had accidentally stepped on the throttle.

      This is well-known case in which Audi was 100% correct, the idiot American, driving in typical murican fashion with one leg on the pedal and one on the gas did indeed step on the throttle, and the US media circus made it into the car problem.

      Ditto for the as of yet unsubstantiated "Toyota acceleration problem".

      You Americans are idiots, and you're used to someone mopping up after you.

    89. Re: A common refrain from Musk by kenh · · Score: 1

      I, of course, meant 'production' not 'privation' - autocorrect!

      --
      Ken
    90. Re: A common refrain from Musk by kenh · · Score: 1

      He means, which seems quite obvious, that the demand is so much higher, a perfect 2nd assembly line could not keep up anyway.

      So Elon musk/Tesla gets a pass on quality control failures and missed production promises because 'demand is up 1800 fold'?

      No, every missed promise, every faulty vehicle, cheapens his company's brand - he doesn't get a pass, he's held to same standards as any other businessman.

      --
      Ken
    91. Re: A common refrain from Musk by reanjr · · Score: 1

      That's fine. Not all iPhone owners are Apple fan boys, but it's the fan boys that make AAPL valuable.

      Tesla is attempting to move into a high margin premium market. By controlling the battery supply and making advancements to stay a couple years ahead of their competitors in cost, as well as focus on direct sales, they've positioned themselves to reap much larger proft margins than any of their competitors.

      That's the Apple model.

  2. The descent into madness begins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    When will he start collecting his urine in jars and not letting people into his office anymore?

    So much for retiring on Mars.

    1. Re: The descent into madness begins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I like him and Tesla but I read the email and this time it's a little cray-cray...

    2. Re: The descent into madness begins by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 0

      Telsa was at war with FordGM: therefore Telsa had always been at war with FordGM.

    3. Re:The descent into madness begins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh hun, in his head he's already on mars. It's just a global conspiracy to convince you he’s not.

    4. Re: The descent into madness begins by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      Tucker was at war with FordGM....

  3. Management by conspiracy theory by AlanObject · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Since he apparently has something of a confession by someone I have to assume that something real happened.

    But speculating that a big automotive competitor is possibly involved sounds nutty even if true. He should have quit when he was ahead and left that out.

    Even if Tesla hits all their numbers and all their sales are directly subtracted from any one of the established competitors the net result is really tiny. I haven't done the calculation but less than %1 tiny I am sure.

    So the motive just ain't there. The ROI is just not there to justify the risks involved.

    1. Re:Management by conspiracy theory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Sure it is. Just not short term. Companies do actually think 5 and 10 years into the future. Tesla is extremely disruptive. Get rid of them, and electric cars can be stalled for another 10 years. That is more than worth sabotage. As it is, most companies are having to move into electric cars, and all of them are being dragged kicking and screaming.

    2. Re:Management by conspiracy theory by darkain · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Ford Market Cap: 46.93B
      Tesla Market Cap: 62.96B

      Does THAT look like motivation to you?

    3. Re:Management by conspiracy theory by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      You would think it would be news and something that he would be required to inform stock holders of, before sending it to all employees and letting the stock holders find out about it in the papers after doing that.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    4. Re:Management by conspiracy theory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Since he apparently has something of a confession by someone I have to assume that something real happened.

      But speculating that a big automotive competitor is possibly involved sounds nutty even if true. He should have quit when he was ahead and left that out.

      Even if Tesla hits all their numbers and all their sales are directly subtracted from any one of the established competitors the net result is really tiny. I haven't done the calculation but less than %1 tiny I am sure.

      So the motive just ain't there. The ROI is just not there to justify the risks involved.

      If Tesla hits its production quotas in 2019, they should sell about 500,000-750,000 cars. The entire US car market is about 17 million cars. So that's about 3-5% of the US car market. But 30% of buyers have said that they are looking at an EV for their next car. And right now it costs the traditional automakers about $47,000 to make an EV but it only costs Tesla about $28,000 (assuming they are making 10,000 model 3's a week). If the model 3 sales queue just keeps filling up during 2019 the ICE auto makers are in a very tough situation.

      That's going to be a hard ramp up for the auto makers. They face at least 5 years before they can make EVs at the same scale for the same price point as Tesla. That gives Tesla 5 years to grow their production and establish their dominance in the EV space. That would be disastrous for pretty much all the companies that sell cars in the US (GM, Ford, Toyota, Daimler, BMW, etc). While some of the companies are in a better position than others if this happens, none of them are in a good place at that point. Their stock prices will take a beating which will raise their price of capital. Most of their factories will have to be overhauled. New competencies will have to be learned. In short, many of them won't make it. Now that's a lot of ifs, but really all it depends on Tesla being able to make cars (not that hard) and people being willing to buy them on-line (which probably has already been proved). What would you do in that situation? Oh, and don't forget the car dealerships, the Oil companies and the auto unions. Elon/Tesla has a long list of enemies. Doesn't mean he isn't also paranoid or that there is a real conspiracy here.

    5. Re: Management by conspiracy theory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

      I know from the past a case where one small company was building an electric car . A big car company bought a company that sponsored them and their funding was cut and the project was killed.

    6. Re:Management by conspiracy theory by kamapuaa · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Tesla makes a big thing about 5,000 model 3s/week, and it sounds like in the near term they're hoping to ramp up to 7000-8000/week. There's also the S and X selling 2,000/week.

      That's a big chuck of the car market. Googling, the Toyota Corolla is tops at 18,000/week. It's a bigger deal because (I imagine) Tesla 3 success will disproportionately effect higher-margin luxury brands like Audi, BMW, etc.

      Not saying Musk doesn't sound crazy. Just that dismissing Tesla as an upstart bit player is flat-out wrong.

      --
      Slashdot: providing anti-social weirdos a soapbox, since 1997.
    7. Re:Management by conspiracy theory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or a different angle -- Uber would be seeing Tesla's self-driving tech as direct competition to their own.

    8. Re:Management by conspiracy theory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      This kinda of stuff happens all of the time. I've heard of data dumps right before leaving, people stealing entire ldap databases (probably for spam sales/recruiting) and well if you can name it then I've seen it. If it isn't espionage then it might be someone who has found a way to massage a few bucks.

      The thing is... most of these people get caught and sometimes punished. The guy who skipped town (into china) after downloading a monster repo at work never got punished. We sent papers to their lawyers, but that was mostly just going through the motions. What almost never happens is they announce it to everyone.

      I suspect most of what they actually wanted was the data that was sent off sight. They probably would have gone unnoticed if they didn't start screwing with systems people pay attention to.

      If they are announcing something then it's just to spook any others and get them to flee quickly.

    9. Re: Management by conspiracy theory by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You're just dabbling in the same High-finance bullshit as the shorters.

      Ford marketplace- big
      Tesla marketplace- tiny

      Ford goes out of business- hundreds of thousands unemployed.
      Tesla goes out of business- Panasonic puts their equipment in shipping containers and hauls it to China.

    10. Re:Management by conspiracy theory by h33t+l4x0r · · Score: 5, Interesting

      But speculating that a big automotive competitor is possibly involved sounds nutty even if true.

      No way. When the most shorted company in the world finds saboteurs it's nutty not to speculate.

    11. Re:Management by conspiracy theory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IF Tesla hits its production quotas in 2019, they should sell about 500,000-750,000 cars.

      "IF"?
      Hey Rei (why you posting anonymous btw?), it seems like you don't sound too confident about a 100,000 car company ramping up to 500,000-750,000 in less than two years

    12. Re: Management by conspiracy theory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Check yourself. When there's a will, there's a way. Look at Ford with the Model T. The problem is Tesla are building cars in a completely new way, and those machines have to be tuned and revised before they hum. In the long run, they will be simpler to build.

    13. Re:Management by conspiracy theory by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      But speculating that a big automotive competitor is possibly involved sounds nutty even if true. He should have quit when he was ahead and left that out.

      Not sure why sabotage is any more unlikely than the corporate espionage that is alleged to have already happened in the self-driving car space.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    14. Re:Management by conspiracy theory by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      I did a quick Google, I can't find a citation for the Bolt costing 47k/ea to make.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    15. Re:Management by conspiracy theory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Someone blew up his satellite launch. He needs to be paranoid.

    16. Re:Management by conspiracy theory by Tablizer · · Score: 0, Troll

      Damn good thing we don't have a President like that.

    17. Re:Management by conspiracy theory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Ford doesn't care about Tesla's market cap any more than Petsmart cared about Pets.com's market cap in 1998.

    18. Re:Management by conspiracy theory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So the motive just ain't there.

      What happened to all the original electric cars? That experiment was a success. Who would not want electric cars? Who stands to lose big if oil becomes irrelivant? Only one group doesn't want electric cars, and it is not a competing automaker. The motive is there.

    19. Re:Management by conspiracy theory by taustin · · Score: 1

      At this point, he's one Presidential run away from being Ross Perot.

    20. Re:Management by conspiracy theory by whh3 · · Score: 1

      But speculating that a big automotive competitor is possibly involved sounds nutty even if true. He should have quit when he was ahead and left that out.

      Not sure why sabotage is any more unlikely than the corporate espionage that is alleged to have already happened in the self-driving car space.

      Do you have a link to those allegations?

      --
      remove nospam. to email!
    21. Re: Management by conspiracy theory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      As I understand it, they are bringing another production line up, for a total of three. With 2,500 per line. They didnâ(TM)t get all of the speed they were expecting to get immediately so they pulled back on some of the automation and added a third shift. Once the production line stabilizers some more, then more of the additional factories will be ordered and built. With one planned in China.

    22. Re: Management by conspiracy theory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you mean âoethinkâ, which apparently you need to do more of.

    23. Re:Management by conspiracy theory by dehachel12 · · Score: 1

      it seems like you don't sound too confident about a 100,000 car company ramping up to 500,000-750,000 in less than two years

      from 0 to 100000 is a lot harder. I think they did about 100000 last year, and currently they already are at a 250000/year(3000 M3 per week+100000 X+S) rate.

    24. Re:Management by conspiracy theory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll punch you in the dick, you short selling little bitch.

    25. Re:Management by conspiracy theory by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      Tesla makes a big thing about 5,000 model 3s/week, and it sounds like in the near term they're hoping to ramp up to 7000-8000/week. There's also the S and X selling 2,000/week.

      That's a big chuck of the car market.

      10,000 cars a week is 520,000 cars a year. The US market is 17 million cars a year. I leave it to you to do the math.
       
       

      Just that dismissing Tesla as an upstart bit player is flat-out wrong.

      With a hair under 3% of the total market, Tesla is very, very much an upstart bit player.

    26. Re: Management by conspiracy theory by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Ford marketplace- big
      Tesla marketplace- tiny

      Ford goes out of business- hundreds of thousands unemployed.
      Tesla goes out of business- Panasonic puts their equipment in shipping containers and hauls it to China.

      The EV market is just as large as ICE car market. The writing is on the wall and ICE is on the way out. It could be worth billions or even trillions to delay Tesla months or years by any number of parties. When you rock a multitrillion dollar boat, you better believe that there is plenty of incentive for sabotage.

      However, the shortsighted shortsellers seem to be especially spurned by Tesla, so I would suspect one of them trying to make a big payday for themselves.

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    27. Re: Management by conspiracy theory by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Tesla can't meet demand at the moment, where as Ford is cutting models due to lack of it.

      It's hard to say how big Tesla's market share will end up being once they can get production up to speed and fulfil all the pre-orders. Other manufacturers are beating them to market on affordable 200+ mile range EVs now, e.g. Hyundai's new 64kWh Kona. But it seems certain that Tesla will become a major player in the market now.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    28. Re:Management by conspiracy theory by Rei · · Score: 0

      How many times do I have to point out that I don't post anonymously? If I have something to say, you'll hear it from me. Instead, every post on the internet these days that supports Tesla seems to get attributed to me. News flash: I'm not the only person on the planet who supports them.

      And there's a logic hole in the GP's post, in that there's a world outside of America. Tesla is a global company; only a fraction of the vehicles they make are sold in the US. That doesn't detract from their general argument, mind you.

      --
      I was watching this thing on TV about some guy named Hitler. Someone should stop him!
    29. Re:Management by conspiracy theory by Rei · · Score: 1

      3500 M3 steady state. Went down at the end of last month for upgrades to bring them up to 5k by the end of the month, and are in the process of ramping back up. Was surprised to find out BTW that their pack production numbers from giga are *without* the Grohmann line - they're just now spooling it up. That's going to make a massive difference for them.

      And yes, S+X is 100k per year. By design - they only can get enough 18650s from Panasonic for ~100k per year, and neither Tesla nor Panasonic want to sink more capital into building more of their old cell format, for obvious reasons.

      --
      I was watching this thing on TV about some guy named Hitler. Someone should stop him!
    30. Re:Management by conspiracy theory by Rei · · Score: 1

      It's in their interest to spook others who may be thinking of pulling the same stunt. And to make an example of this person by seeking a conviction.

      --
      I was watching this thing on TV about some guy named Hitler. Someone should stop him!
    31. Re:Management by conspiracy theory by Rei · · Score: 1

      ...will have the hardware needed for full self-driving capability...

      Model S and Model X vehicles with this new hardware are...

      Before activating the features enabled by the new hardware...

      Teslas with new hardware will temporarily lack certain features currently available on Teslas with first-generation Autopilot hardware

      --
      I was watching this thing on TV about some guy named Hitler. Someone should stop him!
    32. Re: Management by conspiracy theory by Rei · · Score: 1

      No kidding. It was on the front page of Slashdot like once a week for many months on end.

      --
      I was watching this thing on TV about some guy named Hitler. Someone should stop him!
    33. Re:Management by conspiracy theory by dehachel12 · · Score: 1

      into building more of their old cell format, for obvious reason

      I am guessing they'll have to switch S and X to the new format some day(guessing this will be in 2020 or so); will they have any other use for the old 18650?

    34. Re:Management by conspiracy theory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      uhhh where have you been the last two years? google it. you can literally google "corporate espionage self driving cars" and you'll get it. why the fuck does everyone always ask for links when literally most questions asking for links can literally be answered by typing the thing they're asking about into google???
      and it was google (waymo) vs uber.

      ugh. like literally it would have been faster for you to highlight what he typed and chosen the option to search it on google, and that would have saved you time instead of typing out a response that just makes you look lazy and poorly informed.

    35. Re: Management by conspiracy theory by Cederic · · Score: 1

      The problem is Tesla are building cars in a completely new way, and those machines have to be tuned and revised before they hum. In the long run, they will be simpler to build.

      Is that why they can't get remotely close to the manufacturing output of their competitors?

    36. Re: Management by conspiracy theory by DrXym · · Score: 1

      The time to squash your competitors and grind them to dust is as soon as possible, not after they start eating your lunch. I'm not convinced there is an overarching conspiracy per se against Tesla or for sabotage, but I can certainly see market forces and automakers as having a strong desire for Tesla to tank and thinking of means to achieve it.

    37. Re:Management by conspiracy theory by Cederic · · Score: 1

      So they have the hardware needed to identify and avoid trucks crossing the carriageway, to identify and avoid concrete barriers at junctions, to identify and avoid pedestrians pushing bikes?

      Just that automated cars haven't been doing too well on those fronts.

    38. Re: Management by conspiracy theory by Daralantan · · Score: 2

      The EV market is just as large as ICE car market. The writing is on the wall and ICE is on the way out.

      Right now? Not at all. This may be applicable a few more years in the future, but I still see way way way more ICE vehicles and tons of people that react to electric like: "I DON'T WANT A GOLF CART. THAT'S A GLORIFIED GOLF CART." Etc.

      Should make good progress in a few more years though.

    39. Re: Management by conspiracy theory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He thinks from first principles and tries to cover all the bases. Sometimes it makes one look insane. This mode of thinking may even be a risk factor for certain apparent mental disorders - but there's nothing inherently wrong with it provided that he continues to calibrate his perceived probability of various events and his cognitive function keeps up.

    40. Re:Management by conspiracy theory by Rei · · Score: 1

      18650 is a common format. There might be a market for, for example, laptop batteries and other medium-sized consumer electronics. Still, that's a pretty large volume of 18650s.

      I imagine Tesla won't invest the capital in switching until they feel they can't actually sell 100k/year S+X. The Model Y platform (aka, a stretched 3 platform with updates) should make a nice platform for both an updated S and X. The larger battery vs. the 3 should allow for some very impressive ranges and power outputs. In the meantime, they're already migrating individual tech elements from the 3 to the S and X. For example, it was recently announced that S and X are getting the 3's new climate control system.

      Oh wow... just this second it hit me... a major update they could do is swapping out the rear motors on the S and X for the new PM motors. They'd get an instant ~10% improvement at range. The S 100D should be 370-ish miles of range with the new PM motor. And it'd improve sustained track performance. They'd obviously stick with induction on the front motor.

      --
      I was watching this thing on TV about some guy named Hitler. Someone should stop him!
    41. Re: Management by conspiracy theory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most people are retarded. What they wish for and what they realistically can get are also not necessarily related.

    42. Re:Management by conspiracy theory by Reverend+Green · · Score: 1

      UBS estimates the total cost to sell a Chevy Bolt is $44,200. That includes direct and indirect costs as well as dealer margin.

      See graph on page 17 here: https://www.cargroup.org/wp-co...

      This paper (by Argonne National Lab) goes into some detail on indirect costs for vehicle manufacturers: http://www.ipd.anl.gov/anlpubs...

    43. Re: Management by conspiracy theory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Squashing isn't really necessary. The big auto manufacturers have a tremendous head start on Tesla - if they would take advantage of it.

      They already have factories that works, for one. They have plenty of experience in all the non-electric fields of carSquashing isn't really necessary. The big auto manufacturers have a tremendous head start on Tesla - if they would take advantage of it.
        manufacturing (bodies, suspension, steering geometries, design, styling, ...) They even have brand loyalty.

      If they wanted to squash Tesla, they could do so simply by making a model of electric car themselves. They already have production lines for ord
      They already have factories that works, for one. They have plenty of experience in all the non-electric fields of car manufacturing (bodies, suspension, steering geometries, design, styling, ...) They even have brand loyalty.

      inary cars, and can move workers & robots around based on what sells. It wouldn't matter to Ford if a car is gas or electric, as long as it is a Ford. They have plenty of experience spinning up a new production line, they do that for every new model anyway.

      If they all did this, Tesla wouldn't be special anymore. Greenies could go electric with any brand. But Tesla would be the only one to not also have fuel cars & old money to fall back on.If they wanted to squash Tesla, they could do so simply by making a model of electric car themselves. They already have production lines for ordinary cars, and can move workers & robots around based on what sells. It wouldn't matter to Ford if a car is gas or electric, as long as it is a Ford. They have plenty of experience spinning up a new production line, they do that for every new model anyway.

      The only way Tesla can exist & compete at all, is because the rest are all determined not to have an electric model in their lineup.

    44. Re:Management by conspiracy theory by 110010001000 · · Score: 2

      It doesn't. Besides, the biggest EV maker is Nissan and they sell their leaf for $30k. These Tesla guys are delusional.

    45. Re: Management by conspiracy theory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your shit's al retarded and you talk like a fag.

      You're not wanted around here Rei. Just run along back to Muskrat Daddy and suck his cock more.

    46. Re:Management by conspiracy theory by Miser · · Score: 1

      100% agree.

      I'm not one to buy into conspiracy theories either, but it would not shock me if another car maker/big oil/another big player in that market had a vested interest in letting Tesla fail/steal their technology. I'm not saying this is the case - but it sure passes the "plausible" test.

      Furthermore, (and yes I realize this is probably a stretch) it would also not surprise me that "big oil" has buried certain technologies that could wean us off (not necessarily replace) oil and such and because of their massive greed for money, they keep it hidden. Then, when oil, really, really is "gone" to too expensive to extract, voila! They will have "invented" this new cutting edge technology that they've been sitting on all along.

    47. Re:Management by conspiracy theory by froggyjojodaddy · · Score: 1

      Disclaimer: I find it hard to focus my attention when it comes to certain economics and short-selling definitely is one of those things.

      My layman's understanding is that short sellers are betting the stock will tank. So they are very motivated to see the share price drop. Is it too much of a stretch to assume some would do whatever it takes to make the share price drop so they can get rich??

    48. Re:Management by conspiracy theory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That paper also says its costs $41K for Tesla to sell a base model 3 and break even.

      So the original AC said:
      Tesla cost: $28K
      Bolt cost: $47K

      Cited paper ACTUALLY says:
      Tesla cost: $41K
      Bolt cost: $44K

      That cuts the difference down by 85% to just $3K. Looks like the original AC was exaggerating a teeny, tiny bit.

    49. Re:Management by conspiracy theory by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 1

      No this is pretty much how this gets handled all the time. I've seen mails like this before from other CEOs over the years. Usually they don't believe the person in question is acting alone, so they make statements about vague confessions and try to get his partners to make incriminating moves to protect themselves, thinking they might have been named. Sometimes that is how they identify the buyer for the stolen data.

    50. Re: Management by conspiracy theory by DrXym · · Score: 1
      Again, I'm not convinced there is a conspiracy per se but there are certainly ways screw around with Tesla that don't involve competing with them - spreading negative and false news, messing with their supply chain, stock market manipulation, interfering with their sales model.

      There are signs that manufacturers are starting to compete by offering their own EVs. Jaguar's new i-Pace is potentially a model S killer and things like the Leaf, Ioniq, Bolt et all might eat Tesla's lunch at the other end. Some manufacturers are even stating that their entire line up will be all hybrid or pure EVs in a couple of years.

    51. Re:Management by conspiracy theory by whizzter · · Score: 2

      Actually the 17 million figure includes commercial vechicles, the number for passenger vechicles seems to be around 6-6.5 million and a competitor approaching 5-10% from being basically at 0% a few years back should scare any company in any market.
      See https://countryeconomy.com/bus...

    52. Re:Management by conspiracy theory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      https://www.techrepublic.com/article/autonomous-driving-levels-0-to-5-understanding-the-differences/

      Read.

    53. Re: Management by conspiracy theory by reanjr · · Score: 1

      Telling stockholders before the public... isn't that insider trading?

    54. Re: Management by conspiracy theory by reanjr · · Score: 1

      You think it's insignificant that 1 in 32 cars sold would be luxury EVs?

    55. Re: Management by conspiracy theory by reanjr · · Score: 1

      It's more than that. Short sellers - unlike traditional stockholders - can lose more money than they invested. And worse in this case, is that short squeezes are slow moving monstrities. It's easy for even institutional investors to end up throwing good money after bad in order to preserve their short positions.

      This wouldn't just be greedy people who don't want to miss out on profit. This would also be greedy people who are going to be ruined.

    56. Re: Management by conspiracy theory by reanjr · · Score: 1

      Espionage is not sabotage, though. It's a big leap to go from someone stealing secrets, then getting hired at a competitor, and using those secrets; to a corporation hiring a corporate saboteur to undermine a competitor. The company has plausible deniability in the first case, but not the second.

      If it's sabotage, it's much more likely to be an employee who spent their life savings shorting TSLA at 10x leverage.

    57. Re: Management by conspiracy theory by jimbolauski · · Score: 3, Informative

      The EV market will one day be as large as the ICE car market. By 2020 there will be 1 million electric cars out of the 230 million cars on the road in the US, an estimated 17.3 light vehicle sales will occur in 2020 about 5 to 10% will be EVs. It's going to take a generation or two before EV's make up 50% of the market, 35% is predicted market share for 2040.

      --
      Knowledge = Power
      P= W/t
      t=Money
      Money = Work/Knowledge so the less you know the more you make
    58. Re:Management by conspiracy theory by The+Cynical+Critic · · Score: 1

      This was the thing that struck me the most about the email for me as well. Hyping how they're closing in on the 5k/week production milestone is completely understandable when he knows it's immediately going to get leaked to the press in it's entirety, but blaming the fossil fuel industry and makers of gas guzzlers does make him look like a loon even if he's right. It wouldn't even be that out of character for either considering what happened to the EV-1.

      The thing about volume manufacturing of something as big and complicated as a car is that it's an incredibly costly and difficult process, but once you've gotten something into proper volume production it's way easier to further expand from there. We got to see this here in Europe when communist block countries who had previously not manufactured cars in volume had serious trouble getting volume manufacturing going, but once communism fell it was pretty easy for western European companies to come in and pick up from there and scale up production even further with more complicated cars.

      In other words, once they've been able to (reliably) crank out well in excess of 5k Model 3s per week it's going to be way easier to scale that up even further and/or start cranking out other cars in similar numbers. Sure, under the original GM-Toyota ownership the NUMMI plant's best year had an average weekly output of about 8.2k vehicles per week, but it produced a much wider array of vehicles on way less streamlined production lines so I can't imagine Tesla not being able to surpass that rate by a wide margin even this year.

      If 8k vehicles a week is profitable, I'm pretty sure a similar number in high margin electric cars is more than enough to be profitable, particularly if you're not going trough the massive investments in getting a plant to actually reach that kind of production figures.

      --
      "Why should I want to make anything up? Life's bad enough as it is without wanting to invent any more of it."
    59. Re: Management by conspiracy theory by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 2

      Check the financials. Tesla loses money on every car it sells. Look at gross profit and subtract sales, administration, and general. You're already at a loss. BEFORE R&D, capex, interest, etc. Tesla isn't eating anyone's lunch, it is eating its own tail. Ford, GM, VW, Toyota - they make profit on every vehicle, enough that they also pay dividends. There is no worry there...

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    60. Re: Management by conspiracy theory by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      Do you realize that the best selling EV in the world is the BAIC EV180? And the second best is the Nissan Leaf? Tesla's model S is a distant 3rd place...

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    61. Re:Management by conspiracy theory by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      Tesla has yet to sustain anything more than ~2K per week; occasional press-push bursts above that, but currently they are doing around 1700 per week (per Bloomberg). Five thousand per week, sustained, is probably at least 1 quarter - if not 2 - away.

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    62. Re: Management by conspiracy theory by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      You think it's realistic that Tesla will capture 100% of that luxury EV market?

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    63. Re:Management by conspiracy theory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As far as conspiracy theories go, this makes zero fucking sense.

      But let's play it out for a second.

      The only way this theory makes sense is if you first accept one axiom: that Tesla is the only company capable of building electric cars profitably.

      If that's the case, then it makes sense for an existing IC-vehicle manufacturer to try to take them down to -- as you put it -- "stall" BEV rollout for a decade. That's a decade more life for the IC manufacturer, right?

      Now here's the problem:

      Tesla can't make BEVs profitably. In fact, they really, really suck at it. (They were only profitable briefly, once, when they managed to sell a bunch of credits.) It's not Tesla's fault per se. Sure, they're worse at building cars than the other manufacturers, but the lack of profitability and the small marketshare isn't really their fault per se -- it's the market itself.

      BEV tech just isn't to the point where it's a drop-in replacement for gas. Yes, it will be some day. Yes, probably soon. But right now? June 2018 now? It's not. Some of that's infrastructure, some of that's battery tech, some of that's cost... but for all those reasons, right now BEVs aren't a drop-in replacement.

      And that is why the existing manufacturers are "dragging their feet" on building BEVs. Not because they are scared of building a car with a different powertrain, but because they prefer making money to losing it.

      Which brings us to the second reason why the conspiracy theory is bullshit: in order to win, Tesla has to learn how to make an entire car, PLUS all the electric powertrain bits, and do so consistently and profitably (which they can't yet, see above.) Ford/Mercedes/whatever just has to do the second one, since they've got a century (literally) of experience with the rest.

      But yeah, they're all scared of "disruption", right?

      Disclaimer: I have no short or long positions in any of the companies or technologies mentioned, because gambling on individual stocks is fucking stupid.

    64. Re: Management by conspiracy theory by drsquare · · Score: 2

      That's not really relevant, if anything it's an advantage for Tesla. Ford has to keep delivering profits or its share price will tank, they don't have the luxury of spending that money. They're locked into their business model, that makes them vulnerable.

    65. Re: Management by conspiracy theory by stooo · · Score: 1

      Nope.
      More like 80%, depending on what others do on electric this year.

      --
      aaaaaaa
    66. Re:Management by conspiracy theory by drsquare · · Score: 1

      You're confusing 'number of cars' with 'market share'. Tesla sells in the middle to upper range, which are more expensive and have larger margins than average. That 3% of the market could mean 10+% of the market in terms of dollars, and even more in terms of gross margins.

    67. Re:Management by conspiracy theory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      10,000 cars a week is 520,000 cars a year. The US market is 17 million cars a year. I leave it to you to do the math.

      Would you only be satisfied if they sold 100% of the cars?
      If you now start your own car making company, how long would do you reckon it would take you to get to half a million cars per year?

    68. Re: Management by conspiracy theory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hate to break it to you, but you need some basic lessons in economics, accountancy and finance.

      Last year, the bulk of the costs for building the Model 3 production line and Gigafactory were in Operating Expenses. This is not a mystery, and was always going to be more expensive than the amount of sales revenue last year.

      Looking at (revenue - expense) does not tell the whole story of how a company is doing. Tesla is expanding, the revenue is not expected to exceed expenses at this time. This is not a new theory.

      I don't know why the "you must sell more in food than you spend while building a restaurant" theorists are so outspoken when it comes to Tesla, but it's rather annoying to keep seeing the same ignorant drivel. This is first semester basic economics.

    69. Re: Management by conspiracy theory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That was accurate months ago. They have increased since then.

    70. Re: Management by conspiracy theory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're just dabbling in the same High-finance bullshit as the shorters.

      Ford marketplace- big
      Tesla marketplace- tiny

      Ford goes out of business- hundreds of thousands unemployed.
      Tesla goes out of business- Panasonic puts their equipment in shipping containers and hauls it to China.

      Tesla goes out of business - OPEC terrorist sponsors shoot AK47s in the air to celebrate.

    71. Re: Management by conspiracy theory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Surely you're not saying that Tesla's problems are caused by other manufacturers rather than Musk himself.

    72. Re:Management by conspiracy theory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Companies do actually think 5 and 10 years into the future.

      I'm happy if they think 5-10 months in advance, instead of just focusing on the next quarterly report.

    73. Re: Management by conspiracy theory by Mab_Mass · · Score: 1

      "I DON'T WANT A GOLF CART. THAT'S A GLORIFIED GOLF CART."

      And the best way to convert people with that attitude is to expose them to EVs. I was at the Midwest Renewable Energy Association's annual energy fair this weekend, and (as you would expect), there were many EVs around.

      Say what you like about Tesla - those are nice looking cars. Once people in ICE vehicles start getting routinely passed by them, they are going to stop worrying about driving a golf cart and start worrying about driving their old tractors....

    74. Re: Management by conspiracy theory by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      The company has plausible deniability in the first case, but not the second.

      Why do you say that? In either case, the company would have to lie and say that they hired the person to come work for them, but didn't ask them to do something bad to the person's previous employer. I'm really not seeing the difference from the company's perspective. Either a company is willing to grossly violate the law or it isn't.

      If it's sabotage, it's much more likely to be an employee who spent their life savings shorting TSLA at 10x leverage.

      Most companies have strict rules against buying or selling puts and calls while an employee, and IIRC, the SEC's insider trading division frowns upon it, too. I would say that's the least likely explanation. The most likely explanation is almost always an employee who knows he/she is about to get fired, who decides to scorch the earth on the way out, and thus creates new credentials to allow him or her access after leaving the company to afford himself or herself at least some plausible deniability. In other words, the most likely truth is almost precisely what they believe actually happened.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    75. Re: Management by conspiracy theory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not even close. EV represents 2% globally, mostly in Asia. In the US, it is less than than 1% for pure EV, not counting plug-in hybrids. About 50% of the US sales are in one state, California.

      Tesla is a gnat in the automotive world. The company is approaching 200K produced cars after they have been in business for 15 years. Let me put this in perspective. Subaru is a minor car manufacturer and they sell 500K cars in the US annually.

    76. Re:Management by conspiracy theory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Does THAT look like motivation to you?

      That looks like motivation for Musk to spin banal production problems into a conspiracy theory. The guy has billions in personal net worth on the line. Not to mention all the prestige and status he stands to lose.

      This is the guy who just recently laid off 10% of the workforce and pretend that was totally normal for a company going through its biggest production ramp-up ever.

      Anyone taking his words at face value now is entranced by his cult of personality.

    77. Re: Management by conspiracy theory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... Ford is cutting models due to lack of it.

      That's not accurate. They're cutting in-demand automobile lines to replace them with more profitable SUV and light truck lines. They sell more Fusions in a year than Tesla has sold total vehicles ever. They sell nearly as many Focii. They just don't make as much profit as they do on larger vehicles (though they do make a profit on them).

    78. Re:Management by conspiracy theory by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      Lets see. Global Leaf sales are headed right now for 100K/year
      Though in April, global sales plummeted, while in may they came back a bit
      OTOH, Model 3 is working towards 250K / year. And unlike the leaf, they have pre-sold enough that if they delivered .5M / year, they would still be busy.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    79. Re: Management by conspiracy theory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's not really relevant, if anything it's an advantage for Tesla. Ford has to keep delivering profits or its share price will tank, they don't have the luxury of spending that money. They're locked into their business model, that makes them vulnerable.

      See also AMZN for every market they enter.

    80. Re: Management by conspiracy theory by sexconker · · Score: 1

      What do you think the phrase "the writing is on the wall" means?

    81. Re:Management by conspiracy theory by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      Tesla is obviously scaring ALL major car makers. Problem is, they do not know what to do. Tesla is so far ahead of them that they are panicking and trying to get the govs to intervene. For example, German gov has stopped subsidies to Tesla owners. Likewise, in America, red states have done their utmost to stop showrooms, services centers, customer subsidies, etc. California is looking to stop customer subsidy for tesla only.
      Then you have MASSIVE subsidies to the car companies DIRECTLY. Right now, it is the German gov that is funding all of their new battery plants. Likewise, Japan is funding Chademo and H2 production installs.

      China was willing to change their taxation to get Tesla to bring production there.

      Yeah, everybody can see the writing on the wall now. And companies and gov are getting VERY nervous., I suspect that in 2 more years, that Japanese, S. Korean, German, Italian, and American car makers will be screaming for massive gov bailouts. And the GOP will give them again.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    82. Re:Management by conspiracy theory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually the 17 million figure includes commercial vechicles, the number for passenger vechicles seems to be around 6-6.5 million and a competitor approaching 5-10% from being basically at 0% a few years back should scare any company in any market.

      Plenty of margin in commercial vehicles, and those platform(s) can be used to leverage economies of scale to make passenger vehicles cheaper.

      And do F-150 counts as "commercial" or "passenger". In Ontario, Canada, all the pick-ups trucks I see have commercial plates: what are the margins on F-150s?

    83. Re: Management by conspiracy theory by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      tons of people that react to electric like: "I DON'T WANT A GOLF CART. THAT'S A GLORIFIED GOLF CART." Etc.

      I have not seen anyone react to a Tesla with anything other than a major jaw drop as it disappears down the road, not even in "insane" mode.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    84. Re:Management by conspiracy theory by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      30% of buyers have said that they are looking at an EV for their next car

      Looking at != buying. That doesn't even mean buying if both are available and comparably priced... which they are not.

      it only costs Tesla about $28,000 (assuming they are making 10,000 model 3's a week).

      And it only costs me $0.30 to make an EV, assuming I can copy one at Kinkos. What's the point with non-reality based things again?

      They face at least 5 years before they can make EVs at the same scale for the same price point as Tesla.

      The main reason it's cheaper for Tesla than other companies is the lower amount of Cobalt in their batteries. Since Tesla has committed to open up all their patents, other companies can just start making those batteries.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    85. Re: Management by conspiracy theory by Corbets · · Score: 1

      Wasn’t that the plot of the first Daniel Craig bond film?

    86. Re:Management by conspiracy theory by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      My guess is that they'll go to the new solid lithium batteries first for higher capacity and much better safety.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    87. Re: Management by conspiracy theory by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      By 2020 it sounds like BMW and VW/Audi will have EVs in production. For higher end vehicles you can add Porsche to the current mix. I don't recall Mercedes stance, but it wouldn't surprise me to see them release an EV at the same time or within a year. 2023 was the original time-line IIRC for EU EV production. There are pressures outside of Tesla and the US that are driving EV development. If you've ever stepped outside in a typical city, e.g., Paris, on a non-breezy weekday, your lungs would quickly tell you why.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    88. Re:Management by conspiracy theory by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1

      I suspect that in 2 more years, that Japanese, S. Korean, German, Italian, and American car makers will be screaming for massive gov bailouts. And the GOP will give them again.

      I suspect that it'll be the other Party that will be anxious to hand out auto maker bailouts in the USA. We don't build cars in Republican strongholds, last I checked....

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    89. Re: Management by conspiracy theory by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1
      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    90. Re: Management by conspiracy theory by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      Tesla's losing money on every car they sell, and are going further into debt (meaning - losing MORE money per car) every month. Is this the new accounting, like the dot-bomb era where the mantra as "it's OK to lose money on every unit, you'll make it up in volume!"? When you're burning a few billion dollars a year, and only have a few billion left in the bank and credit lines - the end comes up really quick UNLESS you want to sell (dilute) more stock... Tends to piss off stockholders though...

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    91. Re: Management by conspiracy theory by whh3 · · Score: 1

      Oh, just that? I thought there was something more nefarious that he was referring to. I thought the original poster was being more subtle. Sorry for offending the slashdot trolls.

      --
      remove nospam. to email!
    92. Re: Management by conspiracy theory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      By 2020 it sounds like BMW and VW/Audi will have EVs in production. For higher end vehicles you can add Porsche to the current mix. I don't recall Mercedes stance, but it wouldn't surprise me to see them release an EV at the same time or within a year. 2023 was the original time-line IIRC for EU EV production. There are pressures outside of Tesla and the US that are driving EV development. If you've ever stepped outside in a typical city, e.g., Paris, on a non-breezy weekday, your lungs would quickly tell you why.

      And Tesla has been making EVs for 8 years now, what's your point? How many batteries has BMW and VW made? That's the real issue here as that's a much newer technology with a much smaller margin required to make an EV profitably. Why is the fact that 50% of the cost of the EV are the batteries suddenly such a surprise to the TSLA Bears? A few years ago that's all they could talk about, now that Tesla is doing it, its easy for anybody to do it...

    93. Re: Management by conspiracy theory by sfcat · · Score: 1

      Accurate as of today...

      Only counts US shipments which have been basically suspended until July 1 due to how the EV tax credits work. Nobody knows what their production numbers are right now and we won't have a good proxy again until mid July.

      --
      "Those that start by burning books, will end by burning men."
    94. Re: Management by conspiracy theory by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      Yes, batteries are the issue. It's always been the issue, all the way back to the dawn of cars (first taxis in NYC were electric in 1897) It seems like several EVs have solved that issue (GM, Nissan, Tesla, BMW) so at least 4 manufacturers appear to have resolved battery issues well enough to sell plugin battery vehicles.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    95. Re: Management by conspiracy theory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Better cover your short buddy.

    96. Re: Management by conspiracy theory by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      But we were promised that they'd deliver 5K cars/week by Q2 of 2018! If they now hold off to Q3, well I guess that's just another busted Tesla promise...

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    97. Re:Management by conspiracy theory by CaffeinatedBacon · · Score: 1

      Enjoy your fifth place Tesla fanboi.

    98. Re: Management by conspiracy theory by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      The best way to win them over is not to call them retarded.

    99. Re:Management by conspiracy theory by dehachel12 · · Score: 1

      wouldn't they use the same 2170 formfactor, so they neednt redesign the pack?

    100. Re: Management by conspiracy theory by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      If they now hold off to Q3, well I guess that's just another busted Tesla promise...

      Musk consistently fails to set expectations of deadlines correctly, but also consistently meets expectations in other ways. So far, enough investors find that compelling that they continue to have funding. As long as the market continues rewarding him for eventually keeping his promises, he'll be able to continue burning money.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    101. Re:Management by conspiracy theory by Stickybombs · · Score: 1

      Except for those plants in Missouri, and Kansas, and Kentucky, and Tennessee, and Alabama, and Texas, and Georgia, and Ohio, etc.

    102. Re: Management by conspiracy theory by ebvwfbw · · Score: 1

      Ford market is big? You realize they're just about out of the car business, right?

      https://www.nbcnews.com/busine...

      Ford market - small. Very small.

  4. Not unlikely. by Qbertino · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I remember the flat-out lies newspaper testreports told about the range of Tesla cars and that were uncovered by the logs the car had recorded about how it actually had been driven. To me there is no doubt that behind the scenes specialised agencies and perhaps even darker machinations are at work to throw monkey wrenches into Teslas attempt to build an market feasilbe electric car.

    Systematic sabotage at Tesla? Really way more likely than most people would think, IMHO.

    --
    We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
    1. Re:Not unlikely. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Why would they? Every other automotive company is already working on electric cars, and cars such as the Nissan Leaf (with its 172km/107 mile rage and $28,550 price) are already very close to being feasible for the mass market. Derailing Tesla's hype train would in no way stop the development of electric cars.

      Tesla is much less important than you appear to believe it is. It's a minor player in the automotive world that gets vastly more media attention than it warrants. Mass market electric cars are more likely to be delivered by the existing, much larger, automotive players.

      Given that electric car development will continue whether Tesla exists or not, your conspiracy theories are boarding on insanity. Also, I assume the review you're referring to was Clarkson's. Tesla sued Clarkson and lost, then they appealed the verdict, and lost again, but no doubt you think the judge was part of the whole conspiracy...

    2. Re:Not unlikely. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean the report where the logs confirmed everything the reporter said?

    3. Re:Not unlikely. by Tuidjy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Sabotage at Tesla? Given that Elon Musk is mentioning a confession, I buy it completely.

      Sabotage coordinated by a competitor or a company that feels threatened? Possible, but very hard to prove if engineered by a half-competent person.

      Publicly announcing it without hard proof? Probably counter-productive.

      Sending an e-mail to the employees before the internal investigation is completed, and the stock holder notified? Puzzling to say the least.

      --
      No good deed goes unpunished...
    4. Re: Not unlikely. by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      You are attributing way more than you are entitled to Tesla.

      I mean, wtf? You really think the only reason EVs have tajeen off is because of Musk's little venture???

      Give human enterprise a little more credit. Stop being one of Elon's ninnies.

    5. Re:Not unlikely. by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 5, Informative

      Tesla didn’t lose because the judge found that Clarkson had performed a fair test of their car. They lost because Clarkson argued that his show shouldn’t be considered a serious car review, but light entertainment meant to amuse rather than inform. And in that case you don’t have to be truthful.

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    6. Re:Not unlikely. by javaman235 · · Score: 1

      It's not that puzzling. He has a confession, possibility of an organized group, doesn't have time to roll em up with honeypots and whatnot. The best move is to tell all employees to keep eyes open, and let would be actors know all eyes are on them. It's right to alert the public too, the difference between dismissing sh*t talking about burning Teslas and noting it is knowing that someone is actually burning Teslas.

      --
      -The art of programming is the pursuit of absolute simplicity.
    7. Re: Not unlikely. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Everyone (including Tesla) was waiting on lithium ion batteries to reach a point where economies of scale made production viable. Chevrolet was showing concepts for the Volt in 2007, and Nissan was clearly working on the Leaf which launched in 2010 and has out sold all of Tesla's production combined.

    8. Re:Not unlikely. by whoever57 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      At least in the USA, every other manufacturer of EVs has not realized what is Tesla's massive advantage and what it takes for practical long distance EVs.

      The Supercharger network.

      There is no other charging solution in the USA that is close to the Supercharger network. You can buy a Chevy Bolt today, but driving across country in it: that's going to be slow and difficult.

      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    9. Re: Not unlikely. by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 2

      Most people drive their car to and from work. A small fraction of automotive traffic would require the Supercharger network.

    10. Re: Not unlikely. by whoever57 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Most people drive their car to and from work. A small fraction of automotive traffic would require the Supercharger network.

      That's true. But most people people want to be able to do those long drives occasionally. $35k is a lot of money for a car that is only a commuter car. A Leaf would be cheaper and just as effective.

      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    11. Re: Not unlikely. by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 2

      The market for EVs may already have been there, but Tesla certainly has been instrumental in making the rest of the industry take notice. The model S was the first EV that even petrolheads actually got exited about: a practical vehicle with good range, performance and looks, rather than something only a tree hugger would want to drive.

      I also doubt that politicians would have declared the EV to be sufficiently mature to set a timeline for phasing out IC vehicles, if it wasn’t for Tesla. That may still be a bit premature, but that’s on the other auto makers who still aren’t exactly ambitious about modern EVs.

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    12. Re:Not unlikely. by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      I don't understand why there isn't more excitement for plug-in hybrids.

      I can buy a Civic or a Volt, and get 70%* or so of my annual miles electric, and have an even faster more complete supercharger network.

      This is the best of both worlds, zero gas fill ups day to day, fast fuling when traveling.

      Sure, the 50 mile range won't cover everybody's failing driving, but even if it only covers half, it's a huge improvement, and available today.

      *70% assumption is 95+% of daily driving + quarterly road trips of 500-1000 miles.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    13. Re:Not unlikely. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And in that case you don’t have to be truthful.

      The 1st Amendment disagrees. There are no cases where you must be truthful except one: under legal oath. I'll be the first to tell anyone, liars suck shit. But the 1st protects them from answering for their lies, at least while they're on this plane of existence. It does not, however, protect them from karma.

    14. Re:Not unlikely. by whoever57 · · Score: 1

      I don't understand why there isn't more excitement for plug-in hybrids.

      Because a plug-in hybrid has all the disadvantages of a small-range EV combined with all the disadvantages of an ICE, with the exception of range.

      A plug-in isn't going to be efficient as a pure EV (less regeneration because the battery is smaller), it's going to need maintenance of the ICE, and it's not as much fun to drive (small electric motor and small ICE).

      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    15. Re:Not unlikely. by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      Why would they? Every other automotive company is already working on electric cars, and cars such as the Nissan Leaf (with its 172km/107 mile rage and $28,550 price) are already very close to being feasible for the mass market. Derailing Tesla's hype train would in no way stop the development of electric cars.

      Because every little part works? If their mentality is "either buy a car from us or don't buy at all", it's not inconsistent with trying to delay Tesla's progress as much as possible regardless of circumstances. Also, Leaf is currently a bad choice due to excessive battery degradation (I guess you get what you pay for!), so for a rational consumer, it's probably not nearly as attractive. Hell, from a TCO point of view, a Model S can be cheaper than a Leaf after a sufficiently long distance driven (if you're, say, a professional driver), if the difference between gasoline price and electricity price is large enough since the Model S will pay for itself completely ($6/gal vs. $0.1/kWh in case of my country).

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    16. Re:Not unlikely. by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      Depends on the battery capacity. If it's large enough, the generator on board will be engaged only very infrequently and its possible failure likely won't impact your ability to reach the repair service. Something like the BMW i3 could be ideal in denser places like Europe.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    17. Re: Not unlikely. by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      $35k is a lot of money for a car that is only a commuter car.

      Perhaps not if you're saving $0.15 every mile like with gas and electricity prices in many parts of Europe.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    18. Re: Not unlikely. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Problem with the leaf was the early generation didnâ(TM)t have water cooling for the batteries. The expected lifetime was quite poor. The newest battery tech if any other manufacturer is 5-10 years behind Tesla. Words directly from Monroe, not myself.

    19. Re: Not unlikely. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Meanwhile Volt isn't sold in Europe anymore. Competition to Tesla is still mostly meh, save for the Jaguar iPace.

    20. Re: Not unlikely. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Production cost probably and difficult to market. I had an Ampera (a Volt V1 in disguise) which was great for the reasons you mention + being zippy and comfortable to drive and cheap to operate. I wanted to buy the V2, but they are not sold in Europe because they could not make a profit on it and the volumes were too low due to lousy marketing, sabotage by car salesmen and a target public that wasn't ready or too dumb to comprehend.

    21. Re:Not unlikely. by Areyoukiddingme · · Score: 5, Informative

      The 1st Amendment disagrees. There are no cases where you must be truthful except one: under legal oath. I'll be the first to tell anyone, liars suck shit. But the 1st protects them from answering for their lies, at least while they're on this plane of existence. It does not, however, protect them from karma.

      British court, British judge. US First Amendment not in play. Requirements for truth notably more stringent.

    22. Re: Not unlikely. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If thatâ(TM)s true, then itâ(TM)s surprising that Teslas are head and shoulders better than their electric car competition.

    23. Re: Not unlikely. by johnsie · · Score: 2

      Nope, Tesla brought electric cars into the news. A few other companies followed suit. Tesla are leaders in the industry and are responsible for the recent drive to get ecars in the mainstream. Just because they produce less cars doesn't mean they aren't influential.

    24. Re:Not unlikely. by johnsie · · Score: 0

      This is the exact reason why Fox News gets away with spouting such nonsense.

    25. Re:Not unlikely. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think I'm half-way on this: Tesla are an important but not a critical part of the electric car industry. With petrol cars it was also often the case that innovations made by smaller companies for racing or luxury cars were later adopted more widely. Tesla is probably pushing the technology forward more quickly than the bigger, older companies would without Tesla being there.

    26. Re:Not unlikely. by AvitarX · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I'm not sure I buy your argument.

      Regular hybrids aren't maintenance traps like you imply, and a plug in hybrid would be lower maintenance (much more time using the electric vs the gas compared to a regular hybrid).

      Additionally in practice the plug in hybrids seem to be about the same efficiency as regular hybrids, so I'm not convinced battery size is a huge deal.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    27. Re:Not unlikely. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I remember the flat-out lies newspaper testreports told about the range of Tesla cars and that were uncovered by the logs the car had recorded about how it actually had been driven.

      Funny thing is that the newspaper test reports were likely representative of customer experiences _exactly_ because they were lying. It's like newspaper tests about laptop battery runtimes: they are all hogwash since it's of so little relevance what battery runtime I have in the first month of possessing a laptop. It's not an experience relevant for significant parts of the total time the battery will get used.

      So it would be totally unexpected for me if a factory-new car fell short of its battery promises. The question rather is how much time will pass before it falls short. This varies a _whole_ lot with replacement batteries on a laptop (or a smartphone or whatever). The more expensive ones tend to start with a bit less of capacity and retain it for quite long. The cheap ones have impressive values that start seriously degrading rather fast.

      I consider it possible that both parties cheated: the newspapers by parking place driving shenanigans, and Tesla by messing with the battery software (which was equipped with logging features that would appear in violation of privacy laws in stock products) so that it allowed for levels of charging and discharge that were incompatible with long-range durability of battery packs.

      But that's a general issue with newspaper tests of provided items (which is sort-of a given once you pass significant pricing levels): there often is the danger that the item has been tuned for better test results and does no longer reflect a stock and/or sustainable experience.

    28. Re: Not unlikely. by jabuzz · · Score: 1

      But a Nissan Leaf is also electric, just does not have the range of a Tesla. It however has enough for commuting and is a cheaper. So if you are buying an electric vehicle for commuting to work and nothing else a Tesla does not make economic sense.

    29. Re: Not unlikely. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Potentially much more in some places, which might not be obvious to some. E.g Norway is pretty much perfect EV country, since it's mostly up and down, all the time, and gas is really expensive.

      I'm not sure exactly how the math works out, since I'm not Norwegian, but I have no doubt the savings are substantial. I think the same holds true for many other places which translates as a whole lot of gas not being burned trying to get up hill, only to be turned into more heat when you have to brake on the other side instead.

    30. Re:Not unlikely. by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      That's because it takes longer to charge a vehicle then it does to fill up a gas or diesel car. You need to build new electrical infrastructure for it, especially new infrastructure since the current grid runs at 100% capacity nearly all the time. The Liberals in Ontario wanted to do that, at the tune of $140B or so. That's a lot of hospitals, MRI/CAT scanners in a province that desperately needs all three. Needless to say, their idea didn't win them the election or even enough seats to be an official political party.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    31. Re:Not unlikely. by Cytotoxic · · Score: 1

      The 1st Amendment disagrees. There are no cases where you must be truthful except one: under legal oath. I'll be the first to tell anyone, liars suck shit. But the 1st protects them from answering for their lies, at least while they're on this plane of existence. It does not, however, protect them from karma.

      That's just not true. You can't just lie about someone (or some company) and be protected by the first amendment. Libel and Slander are actually things in the US, even with the first amendment protecting freedom of speech.

      What you can do is share your opinion - any opinion - even if it is a stupid opinion, or even if it is a bad faith opinion. That's fully protected.

      So you can say "Tesla makes crappy cars" and you are fine. But you can't say "Tesla cars are made from the bones of aborted fetuses". At least not seriously. But you could say that as a joke. And then it is protected speech again.

      Perhaps you were thinking about criminality? You cannot generally be prosecuted for lying - unless it is under oath or to a government official. Perjury is a pretty serious crime, although relatively rarely prosecuted. And lying to government officials can be a big deal - the FBI is famous for using their interviews to get their mark for the procedural crime of obstructing their investigation by lying, even if it is an immaterial lie.

    32. Re:Not unlikely. by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 1, Funny

      I don't like Fox news, but they usually do not lie. They equivocate, they dissemble, but they don't (usually) lie.

    33. Re:Not unlikely. by hey! · · Score: 1

      My experience in business is that business people love change in theory but hate it in practice. They like to view themselves as innovators and market disrupters but what they really want is for their job to be easy and predictable.

      Case in point: the SUV. In the 90s car makers responded to tightening emissions standards on cars by selling consumers trucks which had to meet lower standards. This is the kind innovation that US automakers love: all style and no substance. These "new" vehicles were shockingly primitive under the skin, built on ancient body-on-frame pickup truck platforms that didn't meet modern passenger car safety standards either. They were dangerous in a crash, prone to flipping over, and their crude suspensions, tuned to eliminate they "truck" like ride, also eliminated any kind of road feel. I once crossed the Sierras in a snowstorm driving a Ford Explorer and it was terrifying. I had years of experience driving in the snow, but the total lack of road feel was unnerving.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    34. Re: Not unlikely. by BostonPilot · · Score: 3, Informative

      Most people drive their car to and from work. A small fraction of automotive traffic would require the Supercharger network.

      That's true. But most people people want to be able to do those long drives occasionally. $35k is a lot of money for a car that is only a commuter car. A Leaf would be cheaper and just as effective.

      I've had a BEV and now a Volt for my daughters. I'm buying a M3 for myself. There are things I don't like about the car (over-reliance on the center screen, door handles, etc.). But, the two things that helped me decide: the long range battery and the Supercharger network.

      The thing is, even with the Supercharger network, a BEV is barely practical when you want to do anything other than your daily commute. Without the Supercharger network, you're definitely going to want to rent an ICE... Sure, some people do road trips in a Bolt, but I think it's more a thing to try than an experience you would want to repeat often. There simply isn't a robust enough DC recharging network available yet.

      The competition (GM, Nissan, Porsche) keep wanting to put chargers at dealerships, but I've read too many people's negative experiences with that (charging station is blocked, only available when the dealership is open, too far from the highway)... Tesla seems to be the only company that understands what's required to be able to use the car for inter-city travel and they've stepped up to the plate and built a descent charging network.

      I think the other manufacturers are happy to have poor charging options because it's another way to keep people buying ICE cars for a little while longer. When they start building out networks equivalent to the Supercharger network, or partner with Tesla on the existing Supercharger network, you'll know that they've finally decided to stop dragging their feet and are seriously trying to market BEVs.

      Most people drive their car to and from work. A small fraction of automotive traffic would require the Supercharger network.

      There is no doubt in my mind that an electric vehicle with ~200 miles of range is sufficient for a large percentage of commuting which is probably the majority of miles driven by most people. And it's certainly true that renting an ICE is a reasonable alternative a few times a year. But the only way the BEV was practical for me was because I also still had my ICE car. To actually be able to have the BEV as your only vehicle you either need a very long range battery, or a robust charging network. Eventually the public charging network will improve but right now it's not set up to allow inter-city travel.

      Example: right now I live outside Boston. I have a friend with a place in Newport RI... it's almost exactly 100 miles. That's a little too far for comfort with a car that has 200 miles of range. In the winter here in New England we lose about 50% of the range, so the car could barely get there on one charge.

      Assume I have a Nissan with DC Fast Charging. Along the route there are 4 public DC Fast Charging sites showing on PlugShare. One is close to home, so that might be useful on the way back, but on the way down isn't useful. There's one at a Nissan dealership about a third of the way there. It's open 24/7 so that might work, except there's only 1 CHAdeMo charger, so if someone else is using it I might have to wait a while or try to find an alternative. There's a CCS charger at a Whole Foods 2/3 of the way there... but... Nissan wants a CHAdeMo, not a CCS (are there adapters?). And, again, only a single station so if someone is using it I'm screwed. Finally there's a BMW dealership just a little further down the road, but again CCS, and I'm not sure what the BMW dealership is going to say about me trying to charge a Nissan there. And again.. only 1 charger so if someone else is using it, and I can find an adapter, and the BMW guys are nice and will let me charge... I might still have to wait quite a while.

    35. Re: Not unlikely. by reanjr · · Score: 1

      Telemetry is pretty standard on all vehicles nowadays. Tesla just has more sensors. There's no privacy violation in tracking the battery usage of a vehicle. There may be a violation if you download their telemetry without their permission, but this is obviously a car Tesla supplied. There is no reason to believe Tesla did anything to tweak these vehicles from stock.

      You're FUDding all over. Stop.

    36. Re:Not unlikely. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's because it takes longer to charge a vehicle then it does to fill up a gas or diesel car. You need to build new electrical infrastructure for it, especially new infrastructure since the current grid runs at 100% capacity nearly all the time. The Liberals in Ontario wanted to do that, at the tune of $140B or so. That's a lot of hospitals, MRI/CAT scanners in a province that desperately needs all three. Needless to say, their idea didn't win them the election or even enough seats to be an official political party.

      This is why having the government provide everything is a dumb idea. There is no reason at all to have CAT scanners competing with electric infrastructure. They are not related at all.

      Electric companies should be providing electric infrastructure, not the government. People paying for electricity should be footing the bill, not people who are just working being taxed to pay for it.

      The same goes for CAT scanners. There's plenty of demand for high end medical equipment. Customers will happily pay for it - even without a single payer system.

      In the US we have a problem with CAT scanners too. In most places you can't just open a new hospital or medical facility. And if you have a medical office and you'd like to add a CAT scanner you can't just do that. Because in most places the State decides whether it is "medically necessary", or whatever phraseology they use in that jurisdiction. Meaning that if there are other hospitals in the area and they don't want the competition, the state will stop you.

      All of the meddling - whether overt and total as in the case of the government owning the utilities or medical system, or more complicated as in the case of regulation of medical providers - or even really obscure, like the barriers that prevent an electric utility from setting up high efficiency transmission lines from Vancouver to Chicago to sell cheap hydro power from the pacific coast of Canada to the US Midwest, all of it makes the world a little bit worse, however well intended.

      The notion that the government should take $140 billion from the citizens to build a high-tech power grid is just stupid - so it is a good thing that they were defeated at the polls. Members of the national government are in no position to even understand the issues surrounding next-generation power distribution, let alone be the final arbiters of exactly which technologies are used, which routes are used, etc. Allowing them to make those choices ends up with things like the "hydrogen economy" infrastructure that California spent so much money building toward, or the huge, empty cities in China, built by a national government in anticipation of needs they didn't understand. It isn't that they aren't good people, or even smart people. The problem is that all of the incentives are wrong, and the wrong people are making the choices.

    37. Re: Not unlikely. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Potus gets away with vomiting lie after lie on Twitter.
      I am not sure if morals are less important than they used to be, but it sure feels like it.

    38. Re:Not unlikely. by Cytotoxic · · Score: 2

      Hell, from a TCO point of view, a Model S can be cheaper than a Leaf after a sufficiently long distance driven (if you're, say, a professional driver), if the difference between gasoline price and electricity price is large enough since the Model S will pay for itself completely ($6/gal vs. $0.1/kWh in case of my country).

      I don't really see how a Model S could be cheaper than a Leaf, or how a Model S could possibly pay for itself completely.

      Even at $6 per gallon for gas, that means a sedan that gets 30 mpg costs $20k in gas per 100k miles. So even if electricity was free, you'd still need to drive a half a million miles just to pay for the Tesla, not including any electric infrastructure you need, like a charging station or electric box upgrades, and not accounting for interest on your $100k up front, as opposed to over a few years. And the Model S battery isn't going to last a half-million miles.

      Numbers on the true life of a Model S battery and the true cost of replacement seem to be all over the place. But a replacement looks to be at least $20k - as much as 100k miles worth of gas at $6 per gallon, and a lifetime of no more than 150k miles.. maybe 200k miles. And that low estimate of $20k could be more like $45k if you believe other sources... and at that price you could never catch the gas sedan. It costs less to buy the gas than the replacement battery, even at $6 per gallon.

    39. Re:Not unlikely. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's just not true. The BBC pulled out their video footage, everything they showed happened. The overheating battery packs and the cars going in to limp mode are WELL documented even in the newest of Teslas cars. I mean, hell, one of the things Top Gear mocked them about was the abysmal range on a race track paired with extremely long recharge times. Tesla argued this wasn't true, and their range was fine. What Tesla doesn't understand is that all cars have abysmal mileage on a race track. Top Gear did an economy super car race to see which super car got the best mileage on a track. A lambo managed something like 0.8 MPG. I think the best was 1.7 MPG or so. Top Gear didn't lie, they simply framed it in a way Tesla didn't like. Granted those of us familiar with motor sport know this and always find it kind of funny.

    40. Re:Not unlikely. by Cytotoxic · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I think in British courts even the truth is not always a defense.

    41. Re:Not unlikely. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      "The 1st Amendment disagrees. There are no cases where you must be truthful except one: under legal oath."

      Okay, now explain laws against libel and slander. Go ahead, I'll wait.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    42. Re:Not unlikely. by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      They lie constantly. They say things that are true, then conclude things that aren't true from those things, and say them too.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    43. Re:Not unlikely. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      The suv isn't because no carmakers want to do new things. It's because people care more about style than substance and they sell what people are buying.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    44. Re:Not unlikely. by drsquare · · Score: 1

      Do you really want to be lugging around an ICE year round just for the few times you actually need it? Do ICE cars not have problems if they're used that infrequently?

    45. Re: Not unlikely. by whoever57 · · Score: 2

      I think that the M3 won't be so affected by temperature as the Leaf. Teslas have active battery temperature management, while the Leaf only has passive management.

      Regarding the M3: I have one and it's a blast. Unfortunately, it makes me realize how sluggish my Leaf is.

      One thing that surprises me in your post: I don't think I have ever seen a public CCS charger that did not also have Chademo. I am sure Chevy and other dealerships install CCS only chargers, but outside of that, any new level 3 charger supports both.

      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    46. Re: Not unlikely. by whoever57 · · Score: 1

      If everyone bought cars purely on what made economic sense, BMW, Mercedes and other luxury brands would not exist.

      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    47. Re:Not unlikely. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Libel and slander are false by definition?

    48. Re:Not unlikely. by ledow · · Score: 1

      "As of April 2017, Tesla plans to expand from approximately 9,000 destination charging stations to 15,000 during 2017, in advance of the Model 3 rollout which they expect to put significant additional demand for use of the facilities.[4]"

      "As of May 2018, there were 1,229 stations globally, with 9,623 chargers."

      So... yet another Musk promise which is at least one order-of-magnitude out.

      Plus, "owners of vehicles purchased after January 15, 2017, were given an annual limit of 400 kWh (about 1,000 miles or 1,600 km) of free charging "credit" before they have to pay for charging."

      So it's just a charging station, like any other. Like my local council, supermarket and car park have, not to mention normal refuelling stations. What's special about that?

      The land those places are built on, and any local generation kit (if applicable, because it sure as hell ain't powering all the chargers for the amount of time they're used and their current draw), is worth more than anything Tesla has put on that land, or could make from that service.

      Yet-another Musk loss-leader. It's easy to throw away billions. It's a lot harder to convince people to give it to you.

    49. Re:Not unlikely. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you watch the relevant video? They didn't say "the car is out of charge", they said, "this is what it looks like when you run out of charge...". They argued this was a dramatization. Obnoxious, but not libelous.

    50. Re: Not unlikely. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      or you could get a used civic/corolla that does 35MPG and save yourself a bunch of money

    51. Re:Not unlikely. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "They lost because Clarkson argued that his show shouldnâ(TM)t be considered a serious car review, but light entertainment meant to amuse rather than inform. And in that case you donâ(TM)t have to be truthful."

      This is a lie. The Judges (they lost the appeal as well) found no error of fact in the Top Gear review.

      They also found that the dramatisation of the battery running flat could not be taken as libel by a reasonable viewer.

    52. Re:Not unlikely. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't understand why there isn't more excitement for plug-in hybrids.

      I have a Volt, my wife drives it mostly. It's great for what she needs, but I wouldn't call it "exciting" in any sense. Any sort of charger network is pointless to me. We plug it in every night. Sometimes at the public library since they have free charging. A few malls have chargers but they aren't free. The thing gets 40mpg anyway, it's just not worth worrying about.

      We aren't eco-nazis or anything... it was just the best value option at the time we were looking for a car. The definition of "Best Value" is different for everybody of course. For us, it's a Camry/Altima equivalent sedan with nice enough interior and lowest cost of operation. Having 4 seats instead of 5 was a negative but not a deal-breaker. In 5 years there have been a few dealer warranty issues repaired at no cost, 1 lost key replaced, and a new set of tires at 60k miles. (*the dealer may or may not be giving it oil changes, free of charge, but the service manager at the dealer told me not to do it unless it asks you to on the dash)

      With my wife's driving patterns, and some occasional trips longer than the battery lasts, it consumes on average 40 gallons per year. In contrast my work truck consumes that much in a slow week and sometimes far more. There's not much point in that apples to oranges comparison though.

      I guess if there's anything "exciting" about the Volt it's that the total maintenance cost over 5 years has been less than any other car I've ever owned.

    53. Re:Not unlikely. by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      For me the excitement is about not dealing with gas stations basically ever.

      I hate (perhaps irrationally so) pumping gas.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    54. Re:Not unlikely. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't like Fox news, but they usually do not lie. They equivocate, they dissemble, but they don't (usually) lie.

      Do you mean "alternative fact"?

    55. Re:Not unlikely. by apoc.famine · · Score: 1

      I can't imagine anyone with an IQ over 90 could honestly think that Fox News doesn't lie. Are you intellectually disabled, or just a shill? I ask because if you do 5 seconds of searching you can find abundant evidence of Fox News lying, even if you don't watch it to see for yourself.

      --
      Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
    56. Re:Not unlikely. by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      Yes, I do. the ICE has far more value to me than the extra battery and the curb weight of a Volt and a Bolt is about the same so it's not like it's extra, just different use.

      The different options of the affordable cars are about as follows for my driving pattern:

      50 mile battery PHEV, 70% of my driving (estimate), convenient road trips (Volt, Civic PHEV)
      or
      200 mile battery 80% of my driving (estimate on big normal driving days overflow, but pulled from my ass), no road trips without rental (Bolt)
        or
      300 mile battery 100% of my driving, inconvenient but doable road trips (Tesla model 3).

      The first option is the most appealing to me, and as a single car household the second is pretty much a non-starter, even if super chargers existed everywhere gas did (I doubt that to be the case in central VA or NY), the extra fill-up time (30 minutes for 200 miles (fill to 80% from 40 mile buffer) sounds like a huge pain. If the range was 600+, and I could plug in overnight at a hotel everywhere, my opinion would change. I've cleared more than 600 miles in a day, but it's beginning to get uncomfortable as I age.

      I drove 1400 miles in a 3 day span on pretty much a whim (well, it snuck up on me, I loosely had planned on doing it for a few months) to see the eclipse, I like that freedom, it's part of why I want a car to begin with (also, I like my 12 minute commute not being 30 by bus).

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    57. Re: Not unlikely. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think BMW Newport has a station in the back too, but I can't recall ever NOT seeing an i3 sitting there.

    58. Re: Not unlikely. by misnohmer · · Score: 1

      Car logs bite both ways. Tesla sold 85KWH batteries, only to be uncovered to be 81KWH (77 usable). I guess 81 rounds to 85? They sold 691hp Model S P85D, only to eventually be forced by European courts to admit the car will never produce more than 463hp because of battery and other drivetrain limitations, but their marketing spun an excuse that they didn't lie because "motors are capable". The cars would require a 50% power boost to meet what Tesla sold people (they didn't admit the truth until after that model was discontinued). If Tesla stretches the truth that far, why are they surprised when competition does too?

    59. Re:Not unlikely. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      At least in the USA, every other manufacturer of EVs has not realized what is Tesla's massive advantage and what it takes for practical long distance EVs.
      The Supercharger network.

      Actually, all of them are completely hip to this. The problem is that none of them want to build one. It's one thing for Tesla to prioritize certain routes, but the entrenched US automakers can't get away with that without offending their customers. All of them are hoping that someone else will do it for them, preferably with our money.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    60. Re:Not unlikely. by whoever57 · · Score: 1

      Your post merely shows your ignorance.

      You don't understand the difference between "station" and "charger" when these terms are used by Tesla. So, no, there is not an order of magnitude miss.

      Secondly, you don't understand the difference between a destination charger and a Supercharger.

      Thirdly, you don't understand the technical differences between the capability of most CCS chargers and Superchargers.

      You don't don't apparently understand the concept of driving along highways, since, in your mind, this includes taking diversions, through city traffic, in order to find a charger in your local city car park, instead of at a facility next to the highway.

      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    61. Re:Not unlikely. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They lie constantly. They say things that are true, then conclude things that aren't true from those things, and say them too.

      Drawn conclusions aren't true or false. They're logical or illogical. Perhaps wrong or right. But they are the result of a process, not facts in and of themselves.

    62. Re: Not unlikely. by SpiceWare · · Score: 1

      With the Tesla... There's a Supercharger site not far from the BMW dealership... It's just a couple thousand feet off the highway, and there are 8 stations. I can't tell with PlugShare how many of the chargers are occupied

      You can view that within the car - Tesla unlocks real-time Supercharger occupancy data on vehicle map. Not sure how accurate it is, just got back from our first road trip in a Tesla and on the way back to Houston the Nacogdoches Supercharger showed 5 of 8 stalls in use, but only one spot was occupied - and it was ICED at that.

    63. Re: Not unlikely. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ugh, it's bad enough we have to charge our cell phones - no one wants to think about where to stop to charge their car. Unless it is like gas stations are today, I don't see BEV catching on. Plus, the amount of standards for high-speed charging (at least 3, right?), meh, they're not even compatible unless you drop to a slow charging speed. Most road trips, I'm stopping half of the time for the females to use the restroom, not because I have to for gas - but since we're stopping anyway I gas up.

      The Volt Hybrid makes the most sense to me - at least for now. 50+ miles on battery, with 300+ miles on gas. No range anxiety - if an ICE will drive that route then there are gas stations, so can a Hybrid. For my commute, I'd really only have to plug in twice a week, but I'd probably just do it nightly to keep it topped off.

      Can't wait for the current Volt gen (2015) to come off lease and consider picking one up. I suspect they'll retain a bit more value than the Gen 1 (2011-2014) models did. But who knows, there is always something newer and better coming out, like the Tesla 4...

      Of course, I ride my eBike most of the time and am nearly as fast as taking a car (dedicated no-stop bike trail 4 of my 5.5 mile commute), just not when it's really foul rain or 105F+.

    64. Re:Not unlikely. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Quite simply, any alleged victims of libel or slander must prove not only that the offending statements were false, but that these statements harm their reputation. Generally, cases of defamation must be overwhelmingly obvious that reputation has suffered for a court to side with the alleged victim, or even to make it past preliminary assessments into trial. Defamation cases are losers. Again, the First Amendment generally protects liars, except when under oath. Ever heard of Fox News? They got sued for their bullshit lies. They didn't even try to defend that they lie. They still won in court.

    65. Re:Not unlikely. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, generally, the AC is correct. Unless it can be proved the statements are false, and that reputation has suffered as a direct result, any victims of defamation will lose if they bring lawsuit. The First Amendment protects liars, except when under oath.. Remember the case against Fox News, where the defendent admitted they were full of shit? They still won in court because of the power of the 1st Amendment. It is very difficult to prove a case of defamation. I would guess 99.9% of defamation lawsuits fail.

    66. Re:Not unlikely. by SpiceWare · · Score: 1

      the current grid runs at 100% capacity nearly all the time

      If that were true then the Electricity Demand Curve would be the Electricity Demand Horizontal Line. The reality is there's a glut of capacity at night, which conveniently coincides with the time most people would be recharging their EVs.

    67. Re:Not unlikely. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only thing Fox News hasn't lied about, to my knowledge, is that they lie. They did this in court. They won, protected by the First Amendment.

    68. Re:Not unlikely. by soc_cost_priv_gains · · Score: 1

      Car makers love the SUV because they can sell a pickup for the price of a luxury car.

    69. Re:Not unlikely. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Car makers love the SUV because they can sell a pickup for the price of a luxury car.

      They can sell it because people buy it. Pickups are costing more and more to produce as people demand more content and better handling.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    70. Re:Not unlikely. by ledow · · Score: 1

      1) I do. It's quite clear in my quotes.

      They were going to "ramp up" to 15000 STATIONS by 2017, they'd barely achieved 9000 CHARGERS, worldwide, by mid-2018.

      If anything, their own quotes and numbers make no sense and try to confuse the issue ("from 9000" when they only have 1200 even now). They were supposed to have at least 15,000. They have 1200. That's an order of magnitude out.

      2) There are MUCH FEWER Superchargers than destination chargers. Literally, you can list them on their website. So the problem is even worse.

      3) A supercharger is a higher-current draw. That's it. That's all the difference is. And you can find maps for my country that list every charger from super-high-draw down to a 13A wall-plug. Superchargers are far from a majority, and far from being alone in high-current draw.

      4) "Like my local council, supermarket and car park have, not to mention *****normal refuelling stations*****"

      You have serious parsing problems, or a serious bias.

    71. Re: Not unlikely. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Please stop calling the Model 3 the M3. There is already an M3, and it is made by BMW. You can call the Model 3 the "3" without being outright wrong. In fact, it would make substantially more sense.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    72. Re:Not unlikely. by whoever57 · · Score: 1

      The quote about ramping up to 15000 chargers refers to destination chargers, while the number you quote for May 2018 is Superchargers. There is a big difference.

      A supercharger is a higher-current draw. That's it.

      That higher current makes a huge difference on road trips. You can't wave it off as unimportant.

      4) "Like my local council, supermarket and car park have,

      Perhaps it is different in your country, but in the USA, most chargers in car parks are level 2 chargers, which are completely useless for road trips. Also, who wants to drive miles from the highway to find a charger?

      You are the one with the bias.

      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    73. Re: Not unlikely. by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      Leaf also has insanely fast battery degradation, which makes the "cheaper" argument debatable if a Tesla lasts several times longer.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    74. Re:Not unlikely. by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      and a lifetime of no more than 150k miles.. maybe 200k miles.

      ...seriously?

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    75. Re: Not unlikely. by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      We have a dense network of railways (9500 km of rails covering 78000 km^2) and bus lines. I live at a bus stop. I don't need any car at all. It's very liberating, actually.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    76. Re:Not unlikely. by Cytotoxic · · Score: 1

      That's a pretty interesting link.

      There are a few examples of cars making it over 300k miles and even to 400k miles on the original battery with only minimal degradation. And there are others expressing astonishment at these numbers. I've seen plenty of discussions where 150k miles is supposed to land you with significant battery degradation.

      I suppose there's a bit of speculation involved in the lower numbers and a bit of careful handling of the equipment in the higher numbers.

      Still, it doesn't alter the conclusion, it just makes the numbers closer, with a break-even point of a half-million miles at an expensive price point for gas and zero cost electricity.

  5. Betting opportunity by Okian+Warrior · · Score: 5, Interesting

    About 25% of the stock is shorted (varies day-to-day, but it's a single-digit fraction of the total).

    When you short a stock on margin and the price goes up, you have to add money to your margin account to cover the potential loss.

    Tesla stock is up almost 100 points over the last month, roughly 35% ($370 up from $275).

    Tesla short sellers are taking a bath right now, to the tune of $2 billion in the last month.

    A fair number of those short sellers would be interested in throwing a pile of cash (say $100,000) at a disgruntled employee to damage the production line.

    Anyone care to bet against that prediction?

    (The next step will probably be to get the FBI involved.)

    1. Re:Betting opportunity by gl4ss · · Score: 5, Insightful

      the shorters made the mistake of assuming that stock price would be tied to real world performance the company the stock is for.

      I don't think they would be in position to do that, if they wanted they could pick any other company as well.

      I have to wonder though, on what basis are people buying Tesla stock right now? it's highly valued for what it represents already and the company is likely to need more cash infusion to survive. I am aware of however that the stock can go up even in such a case, because people "like" it or like the guy running the company.

      like, look as this news _should_ run the stock down and what is actually going to happen is that it's going to go up, because bizarro(and the people buying it are just buying it as if it were making apple like profits any day now).

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    2. Re:Betting opportunity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wonder what foreign short positions are like. If a short position holder outside the US wanted to to try sabotage, the parties involved would have a harder time catching the ringleaders.

    3. Re:Betting opportunity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have to wonder though, on what basis are people buying Tesla stock right now? it's highly valued for what it represents already and the company is likely to need more cash infusion to survive. I am aware of however that the stock can go up even in such a case, because people "like" it or like the guy running the company.

      Well right now I have to believe its mostly shorts closing out positions while their risk managers curse them out. The rest are probably the eternally hopeful or those late to the party but don't realize it.

    4. Re:Betting opportunity by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      it's highly valued for what it represents already and the company is likely to need more cash infusion to survive.

      Folks such as the GP like to quote that “25% are short sellers” in a vacuum - as if that, in itself, is evidence of nefarious activity. But the thing is... Tesla’s financial position puts it *exactly* in the category of stocks where the gamble known as short selling makes sense (if it ever does).

      If Elon fanboys want to convince the rest of us that hanky panky is going on, they need to point out several other companies in similar financial straits where there *isn’t* a high degree of short selling going on.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    5. Re:Betting opportunity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    6. Re:Betting opportunity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      According to Elon, it’s just Jews controlling the media.

      He never said. You are obviously dumb for even suggesting that.

    7. Re:Betting opportunity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No he just heavily implied it. Racist White South Africans are gonna be racist.

    8. Re:Betting opportunity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or you're an anti-Semite who believes Jews control the media and are project instead of reading his actual point, those who are in power in many industries also own media outlets and have substantial influence over them.

      Do I think this is why Tesla is being dragged through the mud as much as possible? Not really. Tesla is big news in large part because of its relative valuation and the various large projects its CEO is involved in. No doubt, the sadistic element of many people is tickled more than the generous and conscientious side, so it's little wonder that headlines and articles are written as clickbait (like really everywhere, including your own link). No doubt the whole "Auto-Pilot" thing isn't helping things, but we don't see people freaking about cruise control because most people understand its limitations because it's been around long enough.

      Maybe you should next link to "The Real Truth about Anonymous Coward".

    9. Re:Betting opportunity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tesla short sellers are taking a bath [reuters.com] right now, to the tune of $2 billion in the last month.

      Except for the fact that borrowing is still relatively cheap right now by historical standards and the markets are absolutely flooded with cheap credit. All eyes are on the Fed for when the rate hikes begin, but until they do the music is still playing and the punters are still circling the chairs. When the rates turn it's going to be messy like we've rarely seen, but as Warren Buffet often says the real winners will be those sitting on cash when the blood is running in the streets and the sale of the decade is on for buyers of distressed assets.

    10. Re:Betting opportunity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    11. Re:Betting opportunity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sure this won't be like that time that he didn't *really* accuse ULA of having a guy with an m-82 on the roof to take shots at "his" rockets...

    12. Re:Betting opportunity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thing is

      even if he didn't the argument was still that the media is unfairly attacking tesla or spacex which he equates to attacking him personally... ...when he made himself into the frontman and insists on having a very public image as a visionary... ...all of this was in the middle of a rant about how nanotechnology isn't real because he once heard someone use a buzzword in a meeting and can't differentiate between people who have skills and people who sell things. And he picked someone out of a crowd to attempt to make himself feel powerful, and they immediately smashed him and he spent literal days totally-not-crying about it by tagging that person repeatedly in examples of him also losing the same argument elsewhere against people slightly less unprepared to be diplomatic.

      So forgive me if i say... it has no bearing on whether he's racist or not (he's adamant he's not, but he's wrong about other things he's adamant about) but he's still obviously incorrect and if he wasn't so self assured he might be able to hear why he's incorrect... but since he can't he now looks like a bit of an idiot to everyone who was there and didn't already have a previous opinion.

    13. Re:Betting opportunity by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      I have to wonder though, on what basis are people buying Tesla stock right now?

      Insanity? Being dedicated Faithful of the Cult of Elon? There's certainly no rational reason, and even the more usual forms of irrationality in the market don't explain it. Tesla stock is vastly overpriced, with no clear path to profitability on the levels that would justify the price (which would be profits in the tens of billions of dollars range). And that's setting aside the massive amounts of debt they're loaded with.

    14. Re:Betting opportunity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's certainly no rational reason

      The stock market and the real market has never been rational, the cult of capitalism in america is beyond the pale. Anyone with any experience with human beings knows that the human mind did not evolve to make rational decisions in a highly technocratic capitalist society.

    15. Re:Betting opportunity by BadDreamer · · Score: 3, Informative

      People who buy Tesla stock now buy it on the expectation that others will continue to find it valuable.

      All this nonsense about "highly valued" and "represents" are red herrings. Stock value is not in any way dependent on the state of the company they are labeled with (with the exception of if it goes out of business). All they are dependent on his what people will pay for them.

      All this armchair analysis about how the company is doing, and market cap, and profits, and other such nonsense is entirely irrelevant. All that matters is what people are prepared to pay.

      Nothing else. Literally nothing else, what so ever.

      So no, the stock will not go down. People love the idea of the underdog too much.

    16. Re:Betting opportunity by Cederic · · Score: 1

      Stocks very closely follow a valuation based on their fundamentals. Those are different across different industries, but the people that really make money on the markets track the fundamentals.

      Warren Buffett is rich because he invests prudently based on fundamentals, not emotionally based on 'Tesla are so cool'.

      Right now Tesla are viciously overvalued. They've managed to avoid a market correction and may continue to be an outlier. But they are an outlier, and you'd be a fucking idiot to pretend otherwise.

    17. Re:Betting opportunity by BadDreamer · · Score: 0

      And outliers are becoming the norm, and you'd be a fucking idiot to pretend otherwise.

    18. Re:Betting opportunity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's some hardcore fake news there, boys. Or if you prefer an older term we can call it "yellow journalism".

    19. Re:Betting opportunity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One of Henry Ford's bowel movements has more human merit than your entire life.

    20. Re:Betting opportunity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People who buy Tesla stock now buy it on the expectation that others will continue to find it valuable.

      Exactly. They believe the electric car will be a big thing, even if it takes longer time than Musks original schedule.

      They are not a failure just because their growth isn't super fast. They still grow, so shorting is stupid.

    21. Re:Betting opportunity by Cederic · · Score: 1

      No, I'd be a fucking idiot to invest my money without a better understanding of why they're an outlier, and how long they're likely to remain that way.

      Which is why I haven't invested my money in Tesla (or Tesla shorts).

    22. Re:Betting opportunity by BadDreamer · · Score: 1

      Which means you do not understand. Which was my point from the start.

      The only reason stocks follow markers is because investors follow markers. As investing is becoming democratized, that will go away, and outliers will not only be more common, but will drive the market instead of the markers.

    23. Re:Betting opportunity by Cederic · · Score: 1

      At which point it's raw gambling, and Warren Buffett will get even richer by focussing on companies that have the revenue, cost position, market knowledge, product range and leadership to actually support the value of the company.

      I do understand, I also choose not to gamble.

    24. Re:Betting opportunity by BadDreamer · · Score: 1

      It will be as much raw gambling as it is now. Warren Buffett makes his money on stock buyers following the markers, not on any kind of law of nature or inherent value in the stocks. Ironically, people follow the markers mainly because people like him do.

      You're consistently missing the point. Companies do not affect the stock value of the company by doing all those things. What they affect is the will of the stock buyers to pay. Nothing else. There is NO inherent value in a stock based on the company state. None what so ever. And people are waking up to that.

      And, well, you do not understand if you call it "gamble", so you do not understand. But from your crude language at the start of this, I already knew that.

    25. Re:Betting opportunity by Drethon · · Score: 1

      People who buy Tesla stock now buy it on the expectation that others will continue to find it valuable.

      Exactly. They believe the electric car will be a big thing, even if it takes longer time than Musks original schedule.

      They are not a failure just because their growth isn't super fast. They still grow, so shorting is stupid.

      Yeah, but the stock market is for finding the highest profit company in the next quarter. Potential value ranging from the quarter after to ten years from now (or longer) is not worth anything in the stock market. Any public company knows this and is structured to sacrifice all long term earnings for the next quarter. /s

    26. Re: Betting opportunity by reanjr · · Score: 1

      Possible but unlikely. Much more likely to be an employee who shorted the stock and is trying to save themselves or enrich themselves.

    27. Re: Betting opportunity by reanjr · · Score: 2

      And people like me buying stock on the assumption that the short squeeze will send the price higher, and lending it out to short sellers at profit to keep the squeeze going.

    28. Re: Betting opportunity by reanjr · · Score: 1

      Bullshit. You seem to think technical trading is irrational.

      The truth is this is not a market (not just TSLA, the wider market) to be focusing on fundamentals. Technicals are in charge, and their impact is growing with the ever increasing supply of retail and automated investment.

      To be more clear, while the fundamentals of Tesla may not support the current price (which is just speculation as Tesla has no direct comparisons; the closest is probably AAPL), the fundamentals are all turning positive. If fundamentals are improving and the pr

    29. Re: Betting opportunity by reanjr · · Score: 1

      (continued from parent; stupid interface) ...price is rising, then the 25% shorted stock is RATIONALLY going to lead to a short squeeze which drives the price higher.

    30. Re: Betting opportunity by reanjr · · Score: 1

      It's weird how so many people think $1000 for an iPhone is the market finding the right price, while a $340... no wait $350... hold on, $360 share in a company is irrational or manipulative.

    31. Re: Betting opportunity by reanjr · · Score: 1

      But which fundamentals? Is Tesla like Ford or is Tesla like Apple? That's the essential argument.

    32. Re: Betting opportunity by reanjr · · Score: 1

      You mean how AIG stock closely tracked their fundamental risks?

    33. Re: Betting opportunity by reanjr · · Score: 1

      If they pay dividends, there is inherent value in the stock tied to the state of the company, but your point is still true in general.

    34. Re: Betting opportunity by reanjr · · Score: 1

      Which is what makes Tesla an outlier. The institutional short sellers are thinking ahead a year at most. Tesla's thinking ten or twenty years down the line. That's both what makes Tesla potentially valuable fundamentally, it's what drives their investors to think long term, and it's why there's such a disconnect between long/short investors.

    35. Re:Betting opportunity by Cytotoxic · · Score: 1

      Yeah, by any rational measure, shorting Tesla should be a safe bet. There is understandably a lot of excitement around getting a half million preorders for the Model 3. That's cool!

      But all of the top selling models sell more than that every year - not over a several year period, as Tesla plans. Ford sells over a million of their F series light pickup trucks every year. Makers like Ford, Toyota and VW would probably consider cancelling a small car that didn't move 50k units per year. Tesla didn't move 30k cars last year, in total.

      Shorting a company that is priced above these giant multinationals even though even their aspirational numbers are not a significant percentage of the big carmakers certainly seems to make sense.

      Which is why investing in stocks is so hard. What people do very often fails to make sense.

    36. Re:Betting opportunity by drsquare · · Score: 1

      Maybe Tesla don't exist to make Warren Buffett rich.

    37. Re:Betting opportunity by Cederic · · Score: 1

      There is NO inherent value in a stock based on the company state. None what so ever.

      You are so very pathetically wrong.

      A company's value is a function of its anticipated revenue streams, its anticipated profit or loss, its anticipated dividends, its existing assets and liabilities, its ability to exploit the markets it targets and also the amount you can con above and beyond that amount from deluded fuckwits that think none of that matters.

      You fit the last category.

    38. Re:Betting opportunity by BadDreamer · · Score: 1

      So riddle me this then; why is the stock value not tied to any of that, but worth exactly what someone is willing to pay for it?

      I do not think none of that matters. I know none of that matters. And you can not show me how it does.

    39. Re:Betting opportunity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      anticipated revenue streams, its anticipated profit or loss, its anticipated dividends,...,its ability to exploit the markets it targets

      You must have a better crystal ball than I do, if you can judge that without gambling.

    40. Re: Betting opportunity by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      You seem to think technical trading is irrational.

      You are correct, I do. Especially in this case when it's more akin to speculation than technical trading - because the fundamentals don't support the valuation. The end result of that is a bubble and the invariable subsequent crash.
       

      To be more clear, while the fundamentals of Tesla may not support the current price (which is just speculation as Tesla has no direct comparisons; the closest is probably AAPL), the fundamentals are all turning positive.

      The issue isn't whether the fundamentals are turning positive or not (they aren't really, because of Tesla's massive debt load and capital burn rate)... It's whether the fundamentals support the valuation. They don't. Not even close.

    41. Re:Betting opportunity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The big short sellers play the long game, a month, pfft.

    42. Re:Betting opportunity by Cederic · · Score: 1

      What can I say, I used to write portfolio management software that provided predictive tools to savvy investors.

    43. Re:Betting opportunity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, I'd be a fucking idiot to invest my money without a better understanding of why they're an outlier, and how long they're likely to remain that way.

      Which is why I haven't invested my money in Tesla (or Tesla shorts).

      So you're saying you're a fucking idiot then? None of that is hard to figure out for Tesla. Easy, easy money considering absolutely nothing short of an apocalypse is going to stop electric/self-driving cars. Tesla is the leader in electric cars by a margin so large the other players are jokes and auto-pilot, though poorly named, has withstood tons of scrutiny unscathed.

    44. Re:Betting opportunity by DarthVain · · Score: 1

      This is my thought over any kind of industrial sabotage.

      The sabotage doesn't even have to be all that successful, nor hurt the long term viability. It just has to be public, and during a critical phase (i.e. ramping up production). The idea is that it gets into the media, and spooks some investors to sell.

      When we're talking BILLIONS shorted that little bump could may you break even, or at least prevent you from losing your shirt.

      Then again, it could just be a screw you from an employee slighted. Considering by the sounds of it he got caught and confessed, unless he's getting paid to get caught and protect his backers... Not sure what the penalty would be, but the paycheck would have to be pretty good to go to jail for it.

      That said, the one thing that sort of made an eyebrow rise is that he apparently changed codes using "fake" accounts... Not sure what sort of crappy security they have built into their system, but that seems awfully unlikely unless he is some sort of system admin with access, but it doesn't really say.

    45. Re:Betting opportunity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm betting on one of the big traditional car companies being behind it. The Volkswagen emissions scandal shined a very bright light on what sociopathic scumbags these people are.

    46. Re:Betting opportunity by BadDreamer · · Score: 1

      Which means you were feeding the cycle of investors following the markers.

      Again, there is no law of nature behind this. No inherent good in following the markers. The only reason people are following the markers is because they expect that others will be following the markers. And that is why your software was working. Because it predicted the markers that other people were trying to predict and follow.

      That does not mean following the markers has objective value. All it means is that other investors will reason the same way.

      That is ALL it means.

      You've drank the Kool-Aid, and consider these subjective markers to be denoting some kind of objective value on the stock. They do not. They denote what other investors are likely to look for, that is all they are. Predictors of how others will behave.

    47. Re:Betting opportunity by BadDreamer · · Score: 1

      The stock market is no such thing.

      The stock market is a place where people try to figure out how other people want to invest.

      That's IT. There is no connection between company performance and what someone is willing to pay for a stock. The only connection is what people expect other people to be prepared to pay for the stock in the future.

      If there is profit or loss doesn't in itself matter. Yes, a lot of people will use that as indicators for buying or selling, but that is up to them; it is no law of nature.

    48. Re:Betting opportunity by Cederic · · Score: 1

      That does not mean following the markers has objective value.

      If Apple stopped trading tomorrow their revenue streams would be 0, their profit would be 0, their future dividends would rapidly tend towards 0.

      The company would not be worth 0. Its assets have objective value.

      You've drank the Kool-Aid, and consider these subjective markers to be denoting some kind of objective value on the stock.

      I don't drink Kool-Aid. Shit, I don't even know where I can buy it in this country. They're not subjective. There is an objective value to a company's stock.

      Sorry to burst your delusions.

    49. Re:Betting opportunity by BadDreamer · · Score: 1

      You can't provide this objective value, or measure it, or even explain it. All you can do is claim it exists.

      What really exists is that which is there whether we believe in it or not. And objective value to a company's stock does not exist if we do not believe in it.

      You have burst nothing. All you keep doing is putting forth your delusions as fact, but you can not support them.

    50. Re:Betting opportunity by Cederic · · Score: 1

      All you keep doing is putting forth your delusions as fact, but you can not support them.

      That's very ironic.

      So if there are two companies, both sell widgets, both have $100m/year revenue, both make $10m/year profit, both pay $1m/year in dividends, both have 2000 staff, both have released no new products in the last two years, but one company has $500m in the bank and the other company has net liabilities of $500m, you're telling me they're worth the same?

      They're not. Now grow the fuck up and learn some basic fucking financial analysis.

    51. Re:Betting opportunity by BadDreamer · · Score: 1

      No, I am not telling you the companies are worth the same. They're not.

      They are both worth whatever someone wants to pay for them. No more, no less. And that is not in any way, shape or form dependent on their assets, but only on what someone wants to pay.

      I know basic financial analysis. That is unrelated to my point. You can't see past basic analysis, and think that such analysis indicates something objective. It doesn't. The only reason following analysis works is because others follow analysis.

      It's highly ironic that you tell me to grow up, when you're the one stuck in your imagination.

      And you still haven't provided an objective connection between stock price and company assets. Spoiler; you can't, because there is none.

    52. Re:Betting opportunity by Cederic · · Score: 1

      that is not in any way, shape or form dependent on their assets, but only on what someone wants to pay

      You appear to be assuming every other person on the market is as stupid as you. They're not.

      you still haven't provided an objective connection between stock price and company assets

      I didn't say it was just assets. It's a complex function of multiple things, including investor sentiment. You're the fuckwit claiming that it's all entirely only down to investor sentiment.

      Fuck it. Go blow your money on the stock market. My pension fund will thank you.

    53. Re:Betting opportunity by BadDreamer · · Score: 1

      So, what besides investor sentiment is it down to, Mr. Foulmouth?

      I assume all the swearing is because I'm right.

  6. Full Email From Elon by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 5, Informative

    From: Elon Musk
    To: Everybody
    Subject: Some concerning news
    June 17, 2018 11:57 p.m.

    I was dismayed to learn this weekend about a Tesla employee who had conducted quite extensive and damaging sabotage to our operations. This included making direct code changes to the Tesla Manufacturing Operating System under false usernames and exporting large amounts of highly sensitive Tesla data to unknown third parties.

    The full extent of his actions are not yet clear, but what he has admitted to so far is pretty bad. His stated motivation is that he wanted a promotion that he did not receive. In light of these actions, not promoting him was definitely the right move.

    However, there may be considerably more to this situation than meets the eye, so the investigation will continue in depth this week. We need to figure out if he was acting alone or with others at Tesla and if he was working with any outside organizations.

    As you know, there are a long list of organizations that want Tesla to die. These include Wall Street short-sellers, who have already lost billions of dollars and stand to lose a lot more. Then there are the oil & gas companies, the wealthiest industry in the world — they don't love the idea of Tesla advancing the progress of solar power & electric cars. Don't want to blow your mind, but rumor has it that those companies are sometimes not super nice. Then there are the multitude of big gas/diesel car company competitors. If they're willing to cheat so much about emissions, maybe they're willing to cheat in other ways?

    Most of the time, when there is theft of goods, leaking of confidential information, dereliction of duty or outright sabotage, the reason really is something simple like wanting to get back at someone within the company or at the company as a whole. Occasionally, it is much more serious.

    Please be extremely vigilant, particularly over the next few weeks as we ramp up the production rate to 5k/week. This is when outside forces have the strongest motivation to stop us.

    If you know of, see or suspect anything suspicious, please send a note to [email address removed for privacy] with as much info as possible. This can be done in your name, which will be kept confidential, or completely anonymously.

    Looking forward to having a great week with you as we charge up the super exciting ramp to 5000 Model 3 cars per week!

    Will follow this up with emails every few days describing the progress and challenges of the Model 3 ramp.

    Thanks for working so hard to make Tesla successful,
    Elon

    (copied from https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/18/elon-musk-email-employee-conducted-extensive-and-damaging-sabotage.html)

    1. Re:Full Email From Elon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yeah, because having a direct confession is 'no substance'
      Did you even read the past that you are responding to?

      If you ask me, troll quality has fallen since breitbart started recruiting from 4chan instead of using russians

    2. Re:Full Email From Elon by PerlPunk · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's right to call out attention to sabotage. It's wrong to cast abstract aspersions against possible competitors. Keep to the facts, Elon, don't promote conspiracy theories.

    3. Re:Full Email From Elon by Computershack · · Score: 0

      Christ there's some tin foil hat level conspiracy nonsense going on in Elon's head.

      --
      I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't looking good either. - Scott Adams
    4. Re:Full Email From Elon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Conspiracy theories are great for raising the paranoia level.

    5. Re:Full Email From Elon by DrXym · · Score: 1

      If this is sabotage and not hyperbole as described, Tesla should really be calling in the FBI.

    6. Re: Full Email From Elon by dhjdhj · · Score: 1

      And how do you know he hasnâ(TM)t?

    7. Re:Full Email From Elon by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 2

      It'd be easier to doubt his story if employee sabotage and industrial espionage weren't becoming more common in other places.

    8. Re:Full Email From Elon by crypticedge · · Score: 2

      Well, except the part where he says they caught the guy and he admitted to it. I mean, that's commonly referred to as "substance"

    9. Re: Full Email From Elon by DrXym · · Score: 1

      I don't obviously given what is known. It seems odd to not mention it if in fact they have.

    10. Re:Full Email From Elon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why? It's not like this would be the first case of corporate espionage and sabotage.
      You have to keep these things in mind.

    11. Re:Full Email From Elon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He's playing 4D chess

    12. Re:Full Email From Elon by apoc.famine · · Score: 1

      Normally I'd agree, but he is correct about the motivations of people collectively standing to lose billions of dollars for the various reasons he describes. Historically, businesses haven't just stood around idly as another business or industry put them out of business. They tend to use everything at their disposal to prevent that, including bribery, sabotage, espionage, lawsuits, anti-competitive bills, illegal actions, etc.

      When investors have shorted your company for a billion dollars, I imagine it's really hard not to see a giant conspiracy in everything that goes wrong. Not many companies have an enemy list the size and scope of Tesla.

      --
      Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
    13. Re:Full Email From Elon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Yeah, because having a direct confession is 'no substance'"

      The only substance we have is a claim from someone with a history of talking big with little follow through.

    14. Re:Full Email From Elon by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      obviously it is not considered substance by those that oppose Musk (or Trump or Hillary or....).

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    15. Re:Full Email From Elon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, it is not as though Google caught China stealing tech, or Trans Rapid caught CHina stealing tech or Boeing was caught stealing tech from L-Mart, or VW, and most car makers cheating the gov, or Wells Fargo caught cheating customers, or .....

    16. Re:Full email from Elon by sexconker · · Score: 1

      I was dismayed to learn this weekend about a Tesla employee who had conducted quite extensive and damaging sabotage to our operations. This included making direct code changes to the Tesla Manufacturing Operating System under false usernames and exporting large amounts of highly sensitive Tesla data to unknown third parties.

      What is a "false username"?
      Is it a username that doesn't exist? If so, how did your system allow such a thing?
      Is it a username for someone else? If so, were the other users complicit? How did the saboteur know their login details? How did you identify the saboteur among the "false usernames"?

      How do you know that data was exported? You claim to know that "large amounts" of "highly sensitive" data was exported to "unknown third parties". If your system categorizes data such that some can be categorized as "highly sensitive", and you have logging in place that can discern how much was exported, why were no alarms set off when "large amounts" of "highly sensitive" was accessed? Further, how do you know what was done with it? You claim it was exported to "unknown third parties", but how did you make that determination? Were you able to track the data after it was exported? If so, how? Was the data exported over your own network? If so, see my previous questions about categorization of data, logging of volume and access, and a lack of klaxons.

      The full extent of his actions are not yet clear, but what he has admitted to so far is pretty bad. His stated motivation is that he wanted a butt fucking that he did not receive. In light of these actions, not butt fucking him was definitely the right move.

      I think you need to give him that butt fucking so he tells you the full extent of his actions.

    17. Re:Full Email From Elon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's right to call out attention to sabotage. It's wrong to cast abstract aspersions against possible competitors. Keep to the facts, Elon, don't promote conspiracy theories.

      It's an internal memo that was leaked where he mentioned not a specific company but entire industries. It's not a secret the groups he mentioned don't like Tesla. It's a not a secret corporate espionage and sabotage happen. We have no idea what evidence he has point to that. It could be none but sensitive data being exported to unknown third parties is a pretty good indicator that even if the guy was just a disgruntled loner, he's selling that info. Also encouraging your other employees to be vigilant is just smart. I didn't read anything in there that isn't a fact. Not liking facts doesn't invalidate them.

  7. Get the robots to execute him!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Get the robots to execute him and his cohorts!!!
    should be fun to watch

  8. Re:When all else fails... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It wouldn't be the first time the owner of a failing business hired someone to burn it down.

  9. tucker round 2? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not the first time the big 3 did some harm.

    1. Re:tucker round 2? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would they be scared of a care company that can't make cars?

    2. Re:tucker round 2? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOL are you just flat out fucking stupid, especially when large car companies have history in fucking over smaller makers?

      Tesla are making 200K cars are year rght now and ramping up. They have a huge jump on everyone in maaking EV's. If you cant see how this threatens the Big Three, you are even more stupid that a Tesla fanboi.

    3. Re:tucker round 2? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because Tesla is the only American company building cars that people actually *want* to buy.

  10. High level employee or bolt turner? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anytime you have thousands of employees sabotage from a disgruntled employee is not too unlikely. Fortunately, the ones most likely to do it tend to be fairly low level, and the damage they can inflict is limited.

    If a high level production or engineering manager is out to get you, look out. If they are smart and subtle, the damage could be mind boggling.

  11. Not unlikely;Tucker by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Tucker 48

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tucker_48

  12. Sabotage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Was it this saboteur guy that set fire to Michael Morris' Tesla?

  13. FYI Wasn't a big fire by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Last night, there was smoldering in an air filter in the welding area of the body line. The smoldering was extinguished in a matter of seconds. There were no injuries or significant equipment damage, and production is back online," the representative said.

    http://www.businessinsider.com/tesla-employee-engaged-in-sabotage-against-the-company-report-2018-6

  14. Re:When all else fails... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "When an egomaniac is confronted with his own failures, and can’t accept they could be his own fault, what does he do?"

    He signs up dozens of nut-based alts? He reinvents himself on YouTube?

    "He operates on the assumption that he didn’t cause the failure, and instead blames others"

    Oh yes, it was all FatCashewsLoveMe's fault.

  15. Atlas Shrugged by bonedonut · · Score: 1

    For the modern age

    1. Re:Atlas Shrugged by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Great, a shitty inconsistent ideology that results in pure socialism for a fortune cookie explanation. You may be literate, but you're also gullible. Rand is really no different than Hubbard. Please put down that garbage literature and think for yourself, you fucking lemming.

  16. Elon is a huckster by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    He's very intelligently scammed taxpayers and investors out of billions. But that's not a compliment.

  17. Code review? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How were any software changes made without code review approvals? What about QA?

    1. Re:Code review? by ledow · · Score: 1

      Quite.

      git blame.

      And, sorry, but if your data got out, do you not have some kind of data control and audit?

      These things are supposed to be life-critical systems. If you can't immediately point the finger at the author of every line of code, but send public emails about it, I'm calling bullshit.

      Gosh, if only you also ran, say, a space company with thousands of tons of liquid fuel strapped to a rocket, which would give you the necessary protocols and procedures to ensure that code is managed properly and secrets don't slip out.

    2. Re:Code review? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      git blame just shows you whatever metadata was in the commit.
      I can put anyones name in there I want, unless they enforce pgp signatures, and enforce that the commit is also the same as the user uploading the change (which is not default). git blame really means nothing when dealing with nefarious users.
      Still, this indicates they need to up their security practices.

  18. Heâ(TM)s losing it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Acting more and more erratic

    The fame finally caught up with him

  19. Next Week's Headlines by mentil · · Score: 1

    Saboteur was shorting TSLA, now shorting a Supercharger.
    Saboteur at fault for fire, now on fire due to electrical fault.
    Saboteur meant to retire to Sun City, went way of SolarCity.
    Saboteur trying to halt Model 3 production gets overrun by Model 3.

    Just sayin', lots of people hate him about now.

    --
    Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
  20. This Email reads like marketing fluff. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What is this? All of this 5000k/week stuff is written in a style that does not appear to be addressed actually at factory workers (who'd certainly have factory-internal lingo for the factory-internal goals) but made for a press release. Without wanting to look like a shortseller, it doesn't feel really kosher to me.

    1. Re:This Email reads like marketing fluff. by Rei · · Score: 5, Informative

      This is a perfectly normal looking company email from Musk. One can argue that he writes them knowing that they'll leak, but there's nothing about the style in this one that's different from any of the numerous others over the years. They're generally a mix of "here's the problems/issues we currently need to address ASAP" and a pep talk.

      --
      I was watching this thing on TV about some guy named Hitler. Someone should stop him!
    2. Re:This Email reads like marketing fluff. by The+Cynical+Critic · · Score: 2

      Musk isn't stupid and knows well that any company-wide email like this is going to leak so you can't exactly blame him for using the opportunity to hype the idea that Tesla is finally going to reach the goal of making 5k Model 3's per week. Particularly not when he's in the middle of fighting short sellers who would like to see Tesla floundering as hard as possible rather than reaching production milestones.

      Still, the talk about short sellers I can understand as Tesla's not the only company short sellers have tried to mess with recently, but the unsubstantiated talk about fossil fuel companies and competitors still mostly making petrol and diesel cars being behind this does make him look like a bit of a loon in my eyes. If anyone wants to spy on Tesla, it's their Chinese rivals in the electric car market, not Ford or General Motors. Sure, General Motors has a history of being assholes, but mostly to the environment and their own factory workers.

      --
      "Why should I want to make anything up? Life's bad enough as it is without wanting to invent any more of it."
    3. Re:This Email reads like marketing fluff. by terrycarlino · · Score: 1

      Yeah because it's not as if the major auto companies ever conspired with tire and petroleum companies to destroy competitors.

  21. Where is the police report? by hsthompson69 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Sounds like a crime was committed.

    Sounds like maybe someone should be prosecuted.

    Was a police report filed? Has someone been jailed?

    I'm calling shenanigans until we git a pic of someone in cuffs.

    1. Re:Where is the police report? by Solandri · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Any other company, the first thing people would suspect is that it's unsafe working conditions which are causing the unusual number of fires, and the company/management is at fault for not devoting enough funds nor attention to worker safety. But since it's Tesla, it must be arson by a disgruntled employee, or sabotage by a competitor.

      The thing most people don't realize is that Tesla is not the reason the industry is pushing towards electric cars. The California Air Resources Board is. CARB has a zero emissions vehicle mandate - every year a certain percentage of vehicles each manufacturer sells has to be a ZEV. The formula is a bit complicated, but for 2018 it's a little over 2%. For 2025 it's supposed to be 8%. If an automaker fails to hit the target percentage, they have to buy ZEV credits from someone who surpassed the target (e.g. Tesla). If they fail to do that, they are banned from selling cars in California and about a dozen other states which automatically adopt CARB's guidelines . These states comprise about a third of the U.S. by population, and no auto manufacturer wants to be cut off from a third of the U.S. market. So they are all rolling out EVs to comply with the ZEV mandate.

      Tesla has nothing to do with it. Because of the ZEV mandate, all the other automakers would be working hard to make EVs even if Tesla didn't exist. If anything, Tesla allows manufacturers to delay rolling out their own EV, since they can just buy ZEV credits from Tesla instead (many low-volume high-end exotic car makers are choosing to do this). So it would actually be against the other automakers' self interest to sabotage Tesla since that would raise the market price of ZEV credits, and they'd have to pay more (mostly to Tesla) if they should fail to hit their CARB-mandated ZEV percentage. The only time sabotage would make sense is if they're selling enough of their own EVs that they don't need to buy Tesla ZEV credits (and feel they won't need to in the future), in which case there's no need to sabotage Tesla since they'd already be beating Tesla in the market. Musk didn't start Tesla because he thought EVs were the future and wanted to get in on it early (he may believe that, but that's not the reason he started Tesla). He started it because he realized that CARB's ZEV mandate would give an automaker who made only EVs an economic advantage in the market (other automakers would have to pay him for every EV he sold).

      So there's no incentive for the rest of the auto industry to sabotage Tesla, or EVs in general. That's a self-victimization delusion created by EV advocates who can't comprehend why regular people don't want to buy EVs. Because they can't understand the motivations of regular people, they come up with a conspiracy theory about how the industry is responsible for holding EVs back. Believe me, the industry wants to sell EVs so they can comply with CARB's ZEV mandate, since California is in absolutely no danger of switching from a blue state to a red state. This is also the reason I'm not shorting Tesla stock. 8% ZEVs by 2025 is an extremely aggressive target. I'm not sure the other automakers can hit it. If they can't, and Tesla can survive that long, its current stock valuation may in fact be justified.

    2. Re:Where is the police report? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      So there's no incentive for the rest of the auto industry to sabotage Tesla, or EVs in general.

      Your post was very imaginative up until here. Of course there are good reasons for them to do those things. Tesla threatens the established order in more than one way. The way that most frustrates the auto industry is how investors consistently tolerate Tesla's losses. Ford can post a profit and their stock can dip, because investors want to know what Ford will be doing tomorrow. Also, if the general public joins the automakers in pushing back against EVs, they can delay the point at which they have to start selling them, and they can continue to sell their profitable existing product lines.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  22. Standard Musk line - sabotage by ayesnymous · · Score: 1

    Remember when one of SpaceX's rockets exploded, and they thought one of their nearby competitors sabotaged it?

    1. Re:Standard Musk line - sabotage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're saying a ULA sniper took out the Tesla paint shop too?

    2. Re:Standard Musk line - sabotage by burtosis · · Score: 1

      Remember when one of SpaceX's rockets exploded, and they thought one of their nearby competitors sabotaged it?

      Don't be ridiculous, it was actually a meteorite impacting the fuel tank.

    3. Re:Standard Musk line - sabotage by vtcodger · · Score: 1

      Hey, if the dude can hit a Helium tank from, as I recall, 2km away without ranging in, shooting up a paint shop should be something he(or she) could do blindfolded.

      ehrrr .... what paint shop? I thought the guy messed with the production code. And apparently his "fixes" worked on the first try.

      --
      You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
    4. Re:Standard Musk line - sabotage by Cytotoxic · · Score: 1

      Remember when one of SpaceX's rockets exploded, and they thought one of their nearby competitors sabotaged it?

      No, I don't remember that at all.

      I do remember that the engineers investigating the incident included sabotage in their fault tree. And I remember a couple of execs being asked specifically about that and saying that yes, it was being considered.

      But no, I don't remember them actually thinking that a competitor sabotaged their rocket.

      I do remember a lot of speculation on the internet about it. Lots of people reading things into random blips on video feeds. Lots of people opining that a well-placed rifle shot could trigger such an explosion. But "random guys on the net" is not the same thing as "SpaceX thought".

    5. Re:Standard Musk line - sabotage by ayesnymous · · Score: 1

      But at first, they did think that a competitor sabotaged it: https://www.washingtonpost.com...

    6. Re:Standard Musk line - sabotage by ayesnymous · · Score: 1

      They did think a competitor sabotaged it and wanted to inspect their roof: https://www.washingtonpost.com...

    7. Re:Standard Musk line - sabotage by ledow · · Score: 1

      And that was all hyperbole too.

      They "couldn't replicate it" without shooting a rifle, then they were informed by the FAA that there was nothing hinting at sabotage and the roofs were searched by the air-force.

      Suddenly, after that, they could replicate it without having to use a gun.

      And it turned out to be their own incompetence.

    8. Re:Standard Musk line - sabotage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Remember when one of SpaceX's rockets exploded, and they thought one of their nearby competitors sabotaged it?

      Pepperidge farm remembers.

  23. Gonna be the best by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No really guyz it will be awesome. If i had more money i could finish it. Ok, I don't known why it's not working right now but it will be great, you'll see, I just need more money..... I almost had it and then someone else broke it, not my fault. I need money to fix their mistakes. .... Quick give me more money before you suckers, I mean "investors", figure out that this company will never make a profit and that the cash is for packing faclon 9s with hookers blow and sending them to Mars.

    1. Re:Gonna be the best by vtcodger · · Score: 1

      You're sayin that the Model 3 is 90% complete?

      --
      You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
  24. Don't forget the trends by Laxator2 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Ford has a big market share now, but what of the trend for the future? Let's add some more to the list:

    - Electric car market share increasing, prices decreasing, range and charging time improving, Ford works in a saturated market.

    - Pressure to reduce the use of fossil fuels. Ford cannot just discard their current production lines and go all electric due to many factors, not least of which being internal politics.

    - Electric cars and large batteries work well with wind and solar electricity generation and renewable energy has a steep increasing trend.

    I can add more, but anyone can get the idea that while Ford dominates now all trends chip away at that domination and Tesla is perfectly positioned to benefit from those trends.

    Remember the stages: "First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you ..." Tesla has passed now the first two stages, so the fight is shaping up.

    1. Re:Don't forget the trends by mjwx · · Score: 0

      Remember the stages: "First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you ..." Tesla has passed now the first two stages, so the fight is shaping up.

      Yes, but Tesla's stages are:

      1. First you make a big scene in the press.
      2. Then fans fellate you.
      3. Then your leader turns nutty.
      4. And you still haven't made any money.
      5. So Mercedes buys you for pennies on the pound.

      Musk is currently at stage 3.

      No-one actually laughed at Tesla and given they aren't even looking like their going to be profitable in the near future, other manufacturers are just biding their time until they can buy them up cheap (this strategy is how Volkswagen AG has come to own so many brands). Tesla has a cult of personality and a large list of fans, most of whom cant afford a Tesla.

      We are going to see a lot of "disruptive" companies die in the next few years (if that long) because they had no plans for profitability, in fact had no plans beyond "be called disruptive in the press". Remember that the likes of Google, Amazon, et al. didn't simply have a new, strange idea that no-one had bought to market before, they had a plan to make that into a sucessful business from the word go and achieved milestones instead of just being "disruptive".

      We're going to need a name for this next bust, DisruptaBust... UberFail, BusTelsa?

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    2. Re:Don't forget the trends by ledow · · Score: 1

      Ford produce a new car every year. Several in fact. Different models, makes and revisions. They can easily change to electric (they already have hybrids) any time they need to. They don't, because the vast, vast majority of the market is non-electric still. When the time comes to change, Ford can turn on a dime, while Tesla will suddenly actually need to COMPETE.

      And, in the noise, vast amounts of other manufacturers who produce THOUSANDS of times more cars are also just waiting.

      When consumers start buying this stuff, Tesla is dead in the water with a minority market share.

    3. Re:Don't forget the trends by Drethon · · Score: 1

      Especially with Ford dropping all of their cars, except the Mustang and the GT(?) and going full truck/crossover/van (any others?) inventory. I know I'm not their demographic but while I previously considered a hybrid fusion, Ford is no longer a brand I have any interest in.

    4. Re:Don't forget the trends by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Remember that the likes of Google, Amazon, et al. didn't simply have a new, strange idea that no-one had bought to market before, they had a plan to make that into a sucessful business from the word go and achieved milestones instead of just being "disruptive".

      You conveniently ignore the fact that Amazon's business plan (sell absolutely anything online and ship it insanely fast) was indeed strange on various aspects. Many questioned its feasibility... and now that it is finally profitable every armchair analyst comments on how obviously good their base model was.

      Face it. Tesla maybe (and it is a medium to small maybe) is the next Amazon. Stop talking nonsense.

    5. Re:Don't forget the trends by drsquare · · Score: 1

      Ford are pulling out of the car market. Pretty soon they'll just make pickup trucks. That makes them dangerously exposed, but they're too big to 'turn on a dime'. Where would they suddenly get ten million batteries a year?

    6. Re:Don't forget the trends by ledow · · Score: 1

      https://techcrunch.com/2018/04...

      Yes... but actually they're putting their efforts into crossovers (hybrids) and SUVs instead.

      And that's only Ford in North America

      Plus "pulling out" means they'll only sell 6 million such cars this year. Aw. Diddums. About 60 times more than anything Tesla have ever produced in total. In one year.

    7. Re:Don't forget the trends by terrycarlino · · Score: 1

      This is reflective of Ford's major market not being in the coastal corridors. In most of the country electric is a non-started for a lot of reasons.

      Everywhere not in a city people travel way beyond the 220-300 miles a day a Tesla can give you. Heck I've been places you're going 50 miles just to get to a decent store, and that's only the closest store, you might have to go farther to hit a specialty shop.

      Ford has accepted that they're major customer base is interested in trucks. They've kept the Mustang because there's still a market for that particular vehicle. In the truck arena they outpace other auto companies by far. They're playing to their strengths.

    8. Re:Don't forget the trends by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      I haven't had interest in Ford since they did away with adjustable headrests back in the 90s (they only recently came back). Deathtraps if you weren't the proper size for their cars. That coupled with terrible service and a lack-luster line of vehicles in the last 20 years made me look elsewhere. There's a reason Trump sees so many BMW/Mercedes/Audis driving around, GM/Chrysler/Ford don't make any desirable/decent cars especially for the money asked.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    9. Re:Don't forget the trends by Drethon · · Score: 1

      I haven't had interest in Ford since they did away with adjustable headrests back in the 90s (they only recently came back). Deathtraps if you weren't the proper size for their cars. That coupled with terrible service and a lack-luster line of vehicles in the last 20 years made me look elsewhere. There's a reason Trump sees so many BMW/Mercedes/Audis driving around, GM/Chrysler/Ford don't make any desirable/decent cars especially for the money asked.

      I had a 2005 Ford Taurus, it came with adjustable headrest I think. Sold in in 2016, still ran like brand new if you ignore all the rust. My only real issue was it was a used fleet car and that version came without anti-lock brakes (I didn't think that was possible post y2k...). Was a bit tight for a full size car, at least compared to my 2008 Impala. However in what every says about Fords, I wonder how much was I just got lucky.

    10. Re:Don't forget the trends by Drethon · · Score: 1

      Yeah, and best of luck to them, I'm just not a customer to their brand choices. Doesn't make the choice bad, just not for me.

  25. At the police station? Re:Where is the police repo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You do realize where we are in the timeline for this event....
    I expect your curiosity will be satisfied soon... or maybe you'll be moving the goalposts before then?

  26. Moonraker by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

    Oh no, I can see it now. The falcon heavy about to launch. 007 is looking for a way out without getting too singed.

  27. Maintainance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't understand why there isn't more excitement for plug-in hybrids.

    Because you need to maintain both ICE and electric car in one piece.

  28. Maybe it's the same person. by Truekaiser · · Score: 1

    Whom he claims shot his rocket to make it explode. /s

    1. Re:Maybe it's the same person. by dyfet · · Score: 1

      Yep, and the shooter was at the grassy knoll too...

    2. Re:Maybe it's the same person. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did the guy who admitted to the sabotage admit to sabotaging the rocket as well?
      If not I don't see why you would think he also sabotaged the rocket.

  29. New instructions for Boring flamethrowers by GuB-42 · · Score: 1

    - Do not use inside Tesla factories.

  30. must want to milk the government tit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    again to 'rebuild'

  31. Change Control? by Major+Blud · · Score: 1

    changing code to an internal product

    This makes me wonder about their change control procedures. How was somebody able to push bogus code to production for as long as they did without getting caught? He was either very sneaky or they have lax controls.

    --
    If you post as Anonymous Coward, don't expect a reply.
    1. Re: Change Control? by reanjr · · Score: 1

      Tesla's approach has been to move fast and break things. Controls slow you down. While it would be irresponsible to not have controls around the on-board autopilot software, it's less clear-cut when it comes to developing your manufacturing. There are trade offs either way.

    2. Re:Change Control? by Cytotoxic · · Score: 1

      Or maybe this means he works in QA. Somebody has the keys to the kingdom.

      Actually, they said he used other people's logins. So that's pretty interesting.

      Maybe he's a network admin? Who else could gain access to accounts like that? Maybe the QA guys left their passwords on sticky notes?

      Ok, maybe you are right. Maybe they need to examine their controls.. maybe "as actually implemented" instead of "as written on paper". You shouldn't be able to gain access to multiple people's logins.

  32. Tesla is a mess by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have never heard so many excuses coming from a manufacturing company as I have from Musk and Tesla. At this point only the delusional would think Tesla will ever get its act together. The affordable Model 3 has become to over priced and difficult to produce model 3 and its obvious the assembly part of Tesla was poorly conceived and will never reach goals for any reasonable length of time.

    1. Re: Tesla is a mess by reanjr · · Score: 1

      How hard is it to just hire competent people though? Tesla's problems are notable, perhaps critical, but not difficult to overcome.

  33. Re:No what's insane is pussy grabber pres by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your country is losing billions in investments. Enjoy being an African shithole within 5 years!

  34. Reality check by sjbe · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I must have missed where VAG built a factory capable of producing 5k EVs per week in 15 months from the start of tooling, on a brand new line with a newly hired workforce. Literally, the first 467 Kuka robots arrived, were placed, and workers were hired, in April-June 2017.

    Hate to break it to you but the big auto makers build assembly lines with FAR larger production rates in shorter time periods than that routinely. It's normal for companies like Toyota to go from start of DESIGN to production in 20-30 months. Not start of tooling, start of design. They do tooling in far less than 15 months. And the process of assembling an EV isn't wildly different from a car with an internal combustion engine. A chassis is still a chassis. A suspension is still a suspension. I've seen them tool up an entire factory in under 10 months. (I work in the industry)

    What makes Tesla struggle is that they don't have the institutional knowledge of a company like VW or Toyota and they are still building their production system procedures. They're having to learn it as they go and develop their production system from scratch which is genuinely hard to do. What Tesla has done is very impressive but let's not pretend they have mastered assembly better than companies that have been doing it for decades. Tesla is bringing a lot of awesome innovation to the party on the design and product engineering but to date they are still behind the curve when it comes to manufacturing prowess. If they survive I think they'll be fine in the long run but they have a bumpy road ahead of them for a little while. People tend to think manufacturing assembly is easy and it's actually one of the hardest things to do well you can imagine. I think Musk gets it and his job is just to keep the cash flowing until Tesla can get their production system scaled up and stable.

    1. Re:Reality check by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd love to see their QC stats as well. New line, new workers, new robots, new procedures, new process. I'm pretty sure they're not hitting Six Sigma.

    2. Re: Reality check by reanjr · · Score: 2

      What makes Tesla struggle is they thought they could design a much more automated assembly line. They made plans based on being able to perform much more of the work without humans. The idea was to apply software agility to the assembly line, iterating rapidly and developing something better than everyone else. But like many agile projects, the end is hard to see and harder to get to by simply tweaking and tweaking. At least in a short time frame.

    3. Re:Reality check by Rei · · Score: 1

      Examples? It took GM 15 months from start of fitting out the line to the first Bolt deliveries. On an existing line with an existing trained workforce.

      --
      I was watching this thing on TV about some guy named Hitler. Someone should stop him!
    4. Re:Reality check by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      An entirely new platform is not typically designed and rolled out in 20months. The basic platforms that automakers retool and build on often last for a decade and take years to design and test before wide spread roll out.

    5. Re:Reality check by cheesybagel · · Score: 1

      Are those cars manufactured with aluminum alloys in the bodywork, and is how large is their battery pack? You do know that Tesla had to build their own battery factory because the market doesn't have enough capacity right?

    6. Re:Reality check by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wrong, Tesla doesn't make batteries. Tesla assembles other factories' batteries.

  35. Full email from Elon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    From: Elon Musk
    To: Everybody
    Subject: Some concerning news
    June 17, 2018 11:57 p.m.

    I was dismayed to learn this weekend about a Tesla employee who had conducted quite extensive and damaging sabotage to our operations. This included making direct code changes to the Tesla Manufacturing Operating System under false usernames and exporting large amounts of highly sensitive Tesla data to unknown third parties.

    The full extent of his actions are not yet clear, but what he has admitted to so far is pretty bad. His stated motivation is that he wanted a butt fucking that he did not receive. In light of these actions, not butt fucking him was definitely the right move.

    However, there may be considerably more to this situation than meets the eye, so the investigation will continue in depth this week. We need to figure out if he was acting alone or with others at Tesla and if he was working with any outside organizations.

    As you know, there are a long list of organizations that want Tesla to die. These include Wall Street short-sellers, who have already lost billions of dollars and stand to lose a lot more. Then there are the oil & gas companies, the wealthiest industry in the world — they don't love the idea of Tesla advancing the progress of solar power & electric cars. Don't want to blow your mind, but rumor has it that those companies are sometimes not super nice. Then there are the multitude of big gas/diesel car company competitors. If they're willing to cheat so much about emissions, maybe they're willing to cheat in other ways?

    Most of the time, when there is theft of goods, leaking of confidential information, dereliction of duty or outright sabotage, the reason really is something simple like wanting to get back at someone within the company or at the company as a whole. Occasionally, it is much more serious.

    Please be extremely vigilant, particularly over the next few weeks as we ramp up the butt fuck rate to 5k/week. This is when outside forces have the strongest motivation to stop us.

    If you know of, see or suspect anything suspicious, please send a note to [email address removed for privacy] with as much info as possible. This can be done in your name, which will be kept confidential, or completely anonymously.

    Looking forward to having a great week with you as we charge up the super exciting ramp to 5000 Model 3 cars per week!

    Will follow this up with emails every few days describing the progress and challenges of the Model 3 ramp.

    Thanks for working so hard to make Tesla successful,
    Elon

    (copied from https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/18/elon-musk-email-employee-conducted-extensive-and-damaging-sabotage.html)

  36. False equivalency by sjbe · · Score: 2

    Tesla can't meet demand at the moment, where as Ford is cutting models due to lack of it.

    Wow is that a false equivalency if I've ever heard one. Tesla sells a few tens of thousands of cars each year. Ford sells millions. These are not equivalent situations. It's easy to exceed production capacity when you barely have any capacity and you only sell to a niche segment. Ford makes and sells nearly as many F150s every month (50-80K) as all of Tesla's models combined per year. That's with just one vehicle model.

    It's hard to say how big Tesla's market share will end up being once they can get production up to speed and fulfil all the pre-orders.

    In the short run it isn't hard at all. Their market share will be slightly bigger than it currently is which is to say tiny. In the long run (talking 10+ years) it's hard to predict because it's not even clear yet if Tesla will survive. If they do their future looks bright but they aren't going to overtake GM anytime soon if that is what you are implying. But I could see them being a steadily growing and influential automaker over the next decade if they can survive the next 2 years.

    But it seems certain that Tesla will become a major player in the market now.

    "Certain"? No. The odds are good they will become a significant automaker by marketshare IF they can survive the next 24 months and come to profitability. That is anything but certain right now. There is reason for optimism but to pretend they are out of danger is to ignore reality. Tesla needs to become profitable soon or their financing is going to dry up. If that happens they are screwed.

    1. Re:False equivalency by drsquare · · Score: 1

      That's with just one vehicle model.

      The way things are going, that may eventually be the only thing they sell. And that's the thing, the trajectories. Tesla is on the way up, Ford is in retreat and in 'managed decline' mode.

    2. Re:False equivalency by yodleboy · · Score: 1

      They aren't in retreat. They are reducing product lines in North America because they sell more of 2 models than all their others. I'd like to think we'll be getting some amazing F150s and Mustangs from that saved money, but they will probably just use most of it to expand in other markets.

  37. No bonus points for doing it from scratch by sjbe · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'd love to see their QC stats as well. New line, new workers, new robots, new procedures, new process. I'm pretty sure they're not hitting Six Sigma

    You can get general stats for free with just a short search on the internet. You can pay for detailed ones. It's not hard to get that information. NOBODY is hitting six sigma quality in auto assembly. Even the best suppliers don't reach that level of quality except in rare cases. Too many products with too many stacking tolerances for that to be possible. But the big auto makers are all really quite good, even the worse ones. Companies like Toyota and Honda have a well deserved legendary reputation for their quality systems. I've been in their plants myself and can confirm this first hand. They are REALLY good at quality.

    But your mistake is thinking that they do it all from scratch. That's the thing is that once you have a part of a production system that works you don't redesign it all from scratch. The big automakers have proven technology and production systems which they just have to reconfigure and reorganize. They make incremental improvements which accumulate over time. Tesla just hasn't had the benefit of years and decades of iteration. In time they'll get there (hopefully) but you can't accelerate the process beyond a certain point. Tesla doesn't get any bonus points for trying to do it all from scratch. That just means they have a lot of places where things can (and will) go wrong.

    Disclosure: I'm an industrial engineer (and an accountant) and my day job is running a company that makes auto parts. I literally build assembly lines for a living so I'm actually talking about something I know pretty well here.

    1. Re:No bonus points for doing it from scratch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Disclosure: I'm an industrial engineer (and an accountant) and my day job is running a company that makes auto parts. I literally build assembly lines for a living so I'm actually talking about something I know pretty well here.

      Knowledgeable about the subject? I'll bet you even RTFA. You obviously don't belong in this thread!

    2. Re:No bonus points for doing it from scratch by Headw1nd · · Score: 1

      Get him!!!

    3. Re:No bonus points for doing it from scratch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even the best suppliers don't reach that level of quality except in rare cases.

      Not true. I worked for a "who-cares" Detroit outfit that made 100% of a series of parts that go into Toyota's transmission. A tiny shop responsible for global throughput. We produced, checked, tooled, checked, prepared for shipment, checked, and then Toyota would check on their end. When a part didn't work, the entire transmission wouldn't work. If we didn't hit six sigma, the entire shipment would be kicked back at our expense.

      This is from a relatively tiny shop in Detroit with operators making $9-15 an hour. It's common there. People elsewhere just don't have the expertise and demand too much.

    4. Re:No bonus points for doing it from scratch by sfcat · · Score: 1

      Disclosure: I'm an industrial engineer (and an accountant) and my day job is running a company that makes auto parts. I literally build assembly lines for a living so I'm actually talking about something I know pretty well here.

      Knowledgeable about the subject? I'll bet you even RTFA. You obviously don't belong in this thread!

      You do realize that this disclosure means he loses money if TSLA succeeds. Its equivalent to saying 75% of my net worth is invested in TSLA shorts. Its manufacturing, not rocket science (that's SpaceX). I'm sure they will figure it out, what the GP hasn't figured out is that ICE car companies can't make EV batteries and haven't even bought the land to make a battery factory yet. And it turns out that EVs use so many batteries, that the only way to make a car at an attractive price point is to own your own battery factories and invest heavily in battery R&D. Which the auto markers will do too slowly to adapt once the market starts turning on them.

      --
      "Those that start by burning books, will end by burning men."
    5. Re:No bonus points for doing it from scratch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Disclosure: I'm an industrial engineer (and an accountant) and my day job is running a company that makes auto parts. I literally build assembly lines for a living so I'm actually talking about something I know pretty well here.

      First of all, your posts here are awesome and you didn't need to say that. Second of all, you should not have, as it is an Appeal to Authority, a fallacious argument. How do I know? I studied philosophy. Fuck, now I'm doing it.

    6. Re:No bonus points for doing it from scratch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are misunderstanding the Appeal to Authority fallacy. That fallacy generally refers to authorities that our commenting outside of their domain.

    7. Re:No bonus points for doing it from scratch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I follow most of your discussion, but why don't they get points for doing it from scratch? Points from whom? The big auto makers are scared to use all their knowledge, expertise, and experience to tackle this segment, so Tesla is taking up the mantle without any of those advantages. They are making a different kind of car from a consumer standpoint, something never offered before, even if the assembly process is similar. Early adopters certainly keep that in mind when they choose Tesla over the "competition" made by the established automakers.

    8. Re:No bonus points for doing it from scratch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your interpretation is too narrow. Anytime anyone says "I should know, because I am such and such," the fallacy is committed and the argument invalid.

  38. Union Goons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Standard Operating Procedures for Unions that are shut out.

    1. Re:Union Goons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Toyota's and Honda's factories in the U.S. are not union shops and those two companies do not appear to have many difficulties with churning out large volumes of automobiles.

    2. Re:Union Goons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They are not trying to disrupt the status quo.

  39. Instiutional knowledge by sjbe · · Score: 4, Interesting

    What makes Tesla struggle is they thought they could design a much more automated assembly line.

    That's an institutional knowledge problem. They just don't have the collective experience to know what won't work yet or where the boundaries of the technology lie. You can do a lot with automation but there are limits which a more seasoned company would understand. Experience can be a double edged sword because it can keep you from trying something new but it also can keep you from making mistakes.

    The idea was to apply software agility to the assembly line, iterating rapidly and developing something better than everyone else.

    That's not a new concept. You think nobody at Ford or Toyota or GM has ever had that thought? The difference is that they've already tried and figured out where it works and where it doesn't. Tesla is just reinventing the wheel here and learning lessons the hard way. To be honest they got a bit cocky and it bit them in the ass.

    But like many agile projects, the end is hard to see and harder to get to by simply tweaking and tweaking. At least in a short time frame.

    The software mentality can get you into trouble when you are making hardware. The economic and technical constrains are different as is the pace of iteration. It's relatively inexpensive to iterate in software and you can do it quickly. This is a MUCH harder trick to pull off when you are making physical goods.

  40. Mushing Drugs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i think Mush may be exploring the world of strange .

  41. Paying peanuts by Chrisq · · Score: 2

    Well, as the saying goes if you pay peanuts you will get monkeys..

  42. never go full cray-cray by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the crazy is strong with this one.

  43. In the words of Keynes by Headw1nd · · Score: 1
    "Markets can remain irrational longer than you can stay solvent"

    Not only that, with that much shorting, the short sellers themselves can drive up the price as they try and cover their contracts.

  44. exploitable! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I fully expect trolls to post properly doctored versions of this letter to every TSLA story from here on out. Make slashdot great again!

  45. You KNOW the Stonecutters are behind this! by Thud457 · · Score: 2

    Who controls the British crown?
    Who keeps the metric system down?
    We do, we do!

    Who keeps Atlantis off the maps?
    Who keeps the Martians under wraps?
    We do, we do!

    Who holds back the electric car?
    Who makes Steve Guttenberg a star?
    We do, we do!
    Who robs cavefish of their sight? Who rigs every Oscar night? We do! We do!

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  46. Tesla Manufacturing Operating System by ruddk · · Score: 1

    I want to hear more about the "Tesla Manufacturing Operating System".

  47. Summary failed, English too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That summary was one of the worst and most confusing ones I have read on Slashdot. Please...

  48. it takes one... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It takes one to know one, you ASMGFCBFLSMNL---OAGD.

  49. credit due by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I'd like to see you scam the taxpayers so well. It's not as easy as you would think.

    1. Re: credit due by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The "not a compliment" was intended to denote that it was morally lacking not intellectually lacking.

      Not that anybody even cares about morality these days.

    2. Re: credit due by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most people care. You should not lie. That is lacking morale.

    3. Re: credit due by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He didn't of course. But i can understand why the cock (prick) brothers might want to spread such lies.

  50. sabotage or incompetence? by mschaffer · · Score: 1

    When your so delusional you believe your own BS, how could you tell the difference between sabotage and incompetence?
    How soon we forget the suspicious "shadowy figure" on a rooftop, or, sabotage by the competition causing SpaceX explosion in Oct, 2016.
    Who's being blamed next? The ghost of Jimmy Hoffa because they installed the third assembly line over his unmarked grave?

  51. this scriptwriter is a hack. by Thud457 · · Score: 1

    Nah. Elon's gotta hold it together until he takes over as dictator of Mars City One. Then the story gets real interesting.

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  52. Deus ex machina by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deus_ex_machina

  53. dont' always stand by their product by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There are plenty of instances where Tesla owners had to sue Tesla to make good on their promises.
    Don't whitewash their reputation. They are very much like any other car company that way.

    1. Re:dont' always stand by their product by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Such as? ... ... ...
      Didn't think so.

  54. Ahhh, is that what you learned at Breitbart? by Brannon · · Score: 1

    That's adorable. It's completely wrong, it's contradicted by mountains of data. It's directly contradicted by official public disclosures to shareholders by Tesla themselves--and lying to shareholders is a crime. Not a "oops" kind of crime, but a "you're going to jail" kind of crime.

    But it's adorable that you want to believe it so badly. Like a kid believing in Santa Claus.

    Is the world changing too quickly for your little mind to adapt?

    1. Re:Ahhh, is that what you learned at Breitbart? by GoTeam · · Score: 1

      Please leave Santa Claus out of this discussion. What did he ever do to you?

    2. Re:Ahhh, is that what you learned at Breitbart? by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      Here are the facts. Gross profit of $456MM. Selling General Admin costs are $686MM. That puts you negative right there. R&D is another $367MM. Interest is another $150MM. That's how Tesla keeps losing $700MM per quarter. And again - looking at the financial statement, it's losing money before R&D and interest costs.

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
  55. Re: how does he know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Catching someone and getting a confession is a pretty good indicator.

  56. Re:At the police station? Re:Where is the police r by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

    You do realize where we are in the timeline for this event....

    Yes, we're past the point where cops should be involved. We're almost certainly past the point where somebody should be under arrest. We know that because company management is openly discussing the issue.

    It's either that or Musk is disregarding the advice he should be getting from the company lawyers.

  57. no honor among thieves by micahraleigh · · Score: 0

    No, see! We're taking massive subsidies and free money from the tax payers!

    We're NOT supposed to be ripping ourselves off !!

    That is COMPLETELY different.

    This is just not organized enough of a heist.

    We are too ahead of our time.

  58. I can only speak for myself, but I bought because: by Brannon · · Score: 1

    1. Tesla is at the forefront of a few different industries that are undergoing radical change (automotive & semi EV, automotive & semi self-driving, utility & home batteries, utility & home solar) collectively representing trillions of dollars.

    2. The majority of people who are betting against Tesla are doing so for irrational reasons, specifically: (a) they don't like Elon Musk, and (b) they don't like change.

    I don't normally bet on individual stocks. I knew Apple was going to be wildly successful when Jobs came back and launched the iMac, iPod, iPhone--but I still didn't bet on them. But in this case it's just too damn easy. Taking money directly from TSLA shorts is the easiest money I've ever made.

  59. It happens.. by h8sg8s · · Score: 1

    I worked for a company making high-end electronic instruments in the 1980s. There was a RIF due to the market for those going titsup and an entire batch of systems had to be trashed due to someone putting incorrect info into one of the part sequencing systems that fed the pick/place and part auto-insertion systems. At the time the company estimated the cost to be a few million $$. Industrial sabotage seems to go hand-in-hand with layoffs and other "HR actions".

    --
    Organization? You must be joking..
  60. Post-World War II U.S. Auto Industry Mavericks by k6mfw · · Score: 1

    I see references to Tucker so here's an interesting lecture:
    https://www.c-span.org/video/?...

    University of Central Florida professor Yanek Mieczkowski taught a class about some of the people who challenged the status quo of the U.S. auto industry from the post-World War II era to the present day. He discussed the successes and failures of people such as Harley Earl, Preston Tucker, John DeLorean and Elon Musk.

    Mieczkowski said Musk is not in good company considering these previous auto mavericks all failed. However, Musk has billions to spend where the others do not. Let's see how this plays out (and the drama is unfolding daily!)

    --
    mfwright@batnet.com
  61. What about Labor? by Koreantoast · · Score: 1

    Personally, I take the simplest possibility: this was a disgruntled employee who decided to lash out at Tesla. However, if we're going to indulge in conspiracy theories, there are other factions with axes to grind that Elon didn't mention. One is labor, particularly the United Auto Workers (UAW), and the contentious fight about unionization of the NUMMI plant. Increase "safety" issues at an overworked plant to try and drive a narrative of why Tesla autoworkers should unionize to stand their ground against Elon Musk. He has of course mentioned short traders, auto manufacturers, etc.

    1. Re:What about Labor? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Musk constantly lies about the state of Tesla and SpaceX. So do not just blindly believe what he is saying.

      He just lied about the factory's production numbers (which NOBODY could confirm ... not even 1/2 of what he claimed). He could be using an accidental fire as an excuse to justify why the factory is not producing at the rate claimed.

  62. Bullshit. by thesupraman · · Score: 1

    Bullshit.

    Try lying in a publicdisclosure of finances, or a contract, or you taxes.. none of which are under oath.
    Claiming the 1st protects lying is just stupid, to stay the least.

  63. typical denier by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But you are the one constantly telling us that a week average or two weeks average is not enough, but if you do it you only need 3-4 days? Typical denier, pick and choose the evidence you want and make up your bullshit from there.

  64. You're just completely wrong by Brannon · · Score: 1

    > You do realize that TSLA loses money on every vehicle it sells - BEFORE you account for R&D and capital expenses (which pushes it further into the red), don't you?

    This statement is directly contradicted by your own link:

    Total Revenue: $3.4 B
    Cost of revenue: $2.95 B

    These are the numbers that scale linearly in the number of cars they sell. If the cost of revenue is higher than the total revenue, then you could claim that "they lose money on every car sold"--because your clear and intentional implication is that they are selling cars at a loss.

    They clearly make 15% in Gross profit on every car they sell; if they hold those margins and sell more cars, then they'll amortize the fixed costs "Selling General Admin, etc." and then they'll be profitable as a business.

    1. Re:You're just completely wrong by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      How much did it take to get that revenue? Look at the sales and admin line as well - that's kind of required. They end up negative. And of course there's the interest on the debt to finance the operations/purchases for the sales. That should be in there too. Completely eliminate R&D and capex and they still lose money. Seriously, you're only looking at the cost to get the raw parts off the production line - not the costs related to getting the parts to the factory, sales arranged, vehicles shipped, etc. All the other stuff that HAS TO HAPPEN to have a sale.

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
  65. Unless there is an arrest, I call BS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have to call this claim total bull from Musk (as usual) .... until a person is charged with the sabotage.

    Musk has the tendency of LYING about everything, not just capabilities / performance of the products his companies build. So since he just claimed a production number that NOBODY has confirmed, I'm not going to believe his words until somebody is actually arrested and charged for the crime (because sabotage is a costly crime).

  66. That's not what "Cost of Revenue" means by Brannon · · Score: 1

    It includes all costs which are directly proportional to the number of cars Tesla is manufacturing--that's the whole point. There are other costs that are fixed, un-related, or maybe scale sub-linearly with car production--but all of those will be amortized by higher volumes (and/or higher margins).

    Early in Ford Model T production you would have had very similar ratios. You just have to sell a *lot* of cars before you pay back the initial investment and cover fixed & sub-linear costs. Tesla has like $15B worth of back-orders without yet paying a cent on advertising--so there's good reason to believe they can sell every car they build.

    It turned out Ford did pretty well, but I'm sure there was some idiot at the time betting on buggy whips instead because they had a better looking balance sheet.

    But please, by all means, short TSLA. Short them by a lot. I've made thousands of dollars over the last couple months extracted from geniuses like you who don't understand the difference between a mature business and a rapidly growing business.

    1. Re:That's not what "Cost of Revenue" means by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are other costs that are fixed, un-related, or maybe scale sub-linearly with car production--but all of those will be amortized by higher volumes (and/or higher margins).

      That's a funny legend, but averaged on cars and dollars of revenue, these costs increase consistently with the increased production and sales. Year over year, product over product.

      Buying Tesla is like buying a Pebble watch - in two or three years you'll be left with "community updates".

      As for the stock, good luck getting a penny on the dollar if you keep it long term.

  67. Battery tech by sjbe · · Score: 1

    You do realize that this disclosure means he loses money if TSLA succeeds. Its equivalent to saying 75% of my net worth is invested in TSLA shorts.

    I have neither a long nor short position on the company. I have posted numerous times here on slashdot that I think TSLA is good company but a terrible stock. It's ludicrously overvalued but it isn't a good short candidate either because the pricing isn't even vaguely rational so it's difficult to predict when it might come back down to earth. I wouldn't touch that stock with a barge pole, long or short.

    Its manufacturing, not rocket science (that's SpaceX).

    Amusing that you think manufacturing isn't the difficult part of rocket science. Your condescension towards manufacturing pretty clearly shows you know nothing about the subject. Manufacturing a device like an automobile at scale is actually one of the most challenging activities known to mankind.

    I'm sure they will figure it out, what the GP hasn't figured out is that ICE car companies can't make EV batteries and haven't even bought the land to make a battery factory yet.

    Apparently you are unaware that Tesla is partnered with Panasonic which is the company actually doing the heavy lifting on Tesla's vaunted gigafactory. You know, Panasonic aka the largest battery manufacturer in the world. Please note that Tesla is not on the list of largest battery makers. Panasonic provided most of the funding and operational expertise on the project. If you think companies like GM cannot find a similar partner you are mistaken. (GM gets their batteries from LG in case you wondered)

    that the only way to make a car at an attractive price point is to own your own battery factories and invest heavily in battery R&D.

    Or to just buy a company already doing that. There are LOTS of companies making batteries and investing it battery R&D. It's not clear that Tesla has any insurmountable advantage here though I agree that their strategy is a sensible one.