Nine times the normal charge? That’s textbook price gauging. Isn’t Uber already in the cross hairs of all kinds of regulators? That’s just asking to get investigated by Attorney Generals all over the country.

Yeah, funny math. The ramp up was far slower than that. Delivery figures are as follows 2012 - 2658, 2013 - 22,450, 2014 - 31,655, 2015 - 50,557. Tesla made the announcement you referred to in July of 2015 just after the 3rd anniversary of the Model S being on the market. So if you assume an average of half the cars…

You’ve got some funny math going on there. The Model S has been on the market about 3.5 years. So they started with zero, had a slow productions ramp up and only recently passed 100k vehicles. There’s no evidence AT ALL that these vehicles are being driven sparingly. They start out EVERY day with 200+ miles of range…

Seriously? What human error causes all the cars that you see on the side of the road on fire? That’s something that happens hundreds of times every single day in this country.

1 out of 100,000 is a VERY low percentage, .001%. It’s FAR lower than the 193,500 car fires out of 230 mil registered vehicles, .084%.

There are nearly 200,000 vehicle fires each year in the US. That’s why we have a term defining such an occurrence, over 500 times every day.

You’d be wrong. There are nearly 200k car fires per year in the US every year.

Where are you getting this statistic that people only drive Teslas 7,500 miles per year? I don’t think that’s true at all.

According to the National Fire Protection Association there were 193,500 vehicle fires in the US in 2014. There are over 100,000 Tesla Model Ss worldwide. Including this fire in Norway, there have only been a handful of fires in over 3 years. That’s an average of a little over 1 fire per year.

I’m no Tesla fanboy, but the fact that you can count on your fingers the number of Tesla fires is pretty good proof that’s it’s not a big deal at all. Gas powered vehicles catch on fire so regularly that there’s a term for it, carbecue.

Tyler,

From my original comment in this thread. “Tesla’s stock price is insane. There’s no way they’re worth their market cap.”

The Bolt will start at $37,500 and is a subcompact vehicle. That’s $2,500 greater than the larger base Model 3. Also the Model 3 is aimed at competing against the BMW 3 series, not a Honda Fit. BMW, Audi and Mercedes all seem to be able to sell both entry level 3 Series, etc and much larger 5 Series, etc and even…

Lol. GM is going to do a version 2.0 of the Bolt in only 2 years? That’s a total fabrication.

You’re making an assumption based on no facts. Does the BMW 3 Series have a crap interior? How about the C Class Mercedes? Those are the cars that the Model 3 will compete against. And just like those vehicles, the Model 3 will be offered in various levels, everything from what is essentially a stripper base model to…

Tesla’s stock price is insane. There’s no way they’re worth their market cap. But, that doesn’t mean their future isn’t bright. If they can bring their upcoming Model 3 to market on time and the promised price of $35k before any incentives, they’ll have a HUGE hit on their hands. EVs have the kind of driving dynamics…

“a practicality too low for most consumers.”

That’s not really what I was saying. The fact that it can’t take off with the same fuel or weapons as its land based version doesn’t mean that it doesn’t have more range or load carrying ability than the much smaller Mig-29. Got any data comparing the Su-33 vs the Mig-29k for range or payload?

I’m betting that the SU-33 has a much greater range and payload than the Mig-29. The land based version of that aircraft had an extremely short range to begin with.

Bet it turns out that she’s pregnant.