I don’t think they’re going to be demo units - they’re supposed to be the exact vehicle you’ve configured, and if you decide you like it, you just keep it. Nobody would want to spec out a vehicle, put down a payment, wait, have it delivered and...find out it’s been through a few other people and a few thousand miles.

I’d guess it’s not all that uncommon when the cars are over $100,000. The people buying those are the ones who have other vehicles they can use if the $100,000+ vehicle has problems.

Don’t I know it. Grabbed my 2014 BMW i3 for 67% off sticker, with options and only 10,300 miles.

- Insurance might cost notably more if individual parts repairs cost more. A door-dent in my BMW X1 was simply suction-cupped out. Can’t do that with aluminum parts that are permanently dented.

That’s not so much a “test drive” as it is a “return window.” And just look up some of the articles recently published about how difficult it has been for some people to actually get their refunds after returning their vehicles.

That’s 15 years to cost-parity assuming a lot of things:

Yeah, it’s so petty of the SEC to do their exact job of ensuring that companies and individuals provide accurate information to investors instead of misleading them.

That’s my feeling too. I love EVs, and I want Tesla to do well, but a cult of personality that automatically dismisses valid criticism like this report isn’t a good thing. 

The “Fred” referenced in KawasakiKR11's tweet is Fred Lambert, writer at the blog “Electrek.” I’ve got a BMW i3 and used to follow that site for EV news, but now it’s pretty clear that they’re just Tesla apologists. At one point, there was an article about the Tesla Model S failing auto-braking tests, and Fred was in…

From some Tumblr post I copied years ago:

Tough but fair, I should know it! 

“Honesty” is a key part of product design, actually. When a product (in this case a car) is called “honest,” that means it doesn’t present itself as more capable than it is. It’s one of Deiter Rams’ ten principles of good design, even!

It might not be a key factor in choosing what car to buy, but it’s a valid reason someone might not want a car getting larger and larger with every new generation.

I can. Doesn’t mean my neighbors or their cars doors can.

People in cramped parking garages.

Very well said, and I couldn’t agree more.

Read the article, began typing response, accidentally hit publish while typing quickly on my iPad, went back to edit and elaborate on my points in a logical argument.

I understand that people want an “accessible” price for it qualify as a halo car, but that leads to questions about how many people need to be able to afford it to make it pass that “price is accessible” test. Let’s say a given car is $80k - a lot of people can afford that, but a lot also can’t. You might call it…

I read the article. I disagree with the dismissal of the AMG One. I don’t need to take everything written as gospel, I’m allowed to question it.

It’s definitely subjective, but I think ~270 units is enough put it beyond the realm of one-offs. It’s not like one of those “we’re only gonna make 10” production run like all of those Keonigsegg variants.