All assuming that Tesla doesn’t go bankrupt and out of business in the meantime - and given their massive and growing losses, that isn’t an assumption to be discounted lightly.
shortyoh
shortyoh
Yeah - and the person pushing for the move is doing the ROI calculation for his division, not the company as a whole. Having navigated through these waters myself, it is a hard bargain to push to get someone to agree to let their department’s numbers look worse so the company overall is better off - because their…
Glad to see someone else gets it.
Cars are subject to significantly different tariffs than other products. And they do cost considerably more to ship - $500-600 additional in shipping is pretty normal.
One of the major reasons many things are made in China and not the US is that corps typically have one person in charge of manufacturing and someone…
They’re doing it in this ONE case because the perceived market in the US is tiny - you evidently have no idea how astronomical the cost is to add a vehicle to an existing line or open up a new line....
Think of it this way - Say they expect to sell 15,000 per year. To open up a line in the US, you have to purchase…
parts are not the same thing as full cars.
Cars cost several hundred to ship overseas. Tarrifs on finished vehicles are much higher than on parts, and can add well into the thousands to every single vehicle. Labor costs in the US are simply not that high. The average vehicle takes under 30 hours of labor for stamping,…
What incentive do they have to continue producing cars here where labor rates are higher?
Simple - the tariffs and shipping costs outweight the labor savings. The ONLY time it makes sense to ship completed vehicles from China are when the sales volumes are so low that opening a line or using part of a flex line to meet…
Yep - safety defects have a max fine (not counting liability, which is what GM is paying out) that is much lower than emissions fines - thanks to GM pulling a stunt similar to VW years ago that caused the government to raise its fines for emissions violations.
3rd:
So to have the best chance at living, you have to kill your soul?
I wasn’t implying that Tesla was emulating Apple’s plan. Just correcting the false implication that anyone in the auto industry follows “planned obsolescence” the way people generally (and falsely) think - designing a product that doesn’t last to force you to buy new. THAT is far closer to Apple’s model.
10x? More like 33x.
Assuming average mileage per year (about 12k), CR’s detailed reliability ratings show average major repair rates among all vehicles at 5 years old barely cracking 1% for engines and transmissions separately.
Even at 10 years old, the average new car has only a 3% engine and 2% transmission failure…
Right - but planned obsolescence in the auto industry wasn’t about designing cars to have short lives. It was about making you desire a new car because of improvements. Apple’s approach is much more towards “here’s the newest and greatest, all you fans want to go out and buy one, and we’re simply no longer going to…
It is interesting to me how many people jump on this survey for its flaws yet who also defend Consumer Reports’ surveys when they have the same flaws - and try to report much lower problem rates (ie, this survey shows near 2/3 - even if that’s +/- 20%, the failure rates are still huge. Meanwhile +/- 2% can mean the…
For a normal luxury car, yes.
But these are tech toys in many ways. The average buyer of a Tesla is far more into the tech side of things, even if they don’t fully understand it, than your average luxury buyer who buys a car with a pinwheel badge because it has a pinwheel badge.
It’s like getting solar panels - you’ve…
So? I had a similar situation through a previous employer who offered a 401(k) match when I interned with them. They booted me from the program, so I did a transfer of funds in-kind to another 401(k). Even if you didn’t do the transfer in-kind, you could sell, transfer the cash, and then buy back into the same…
I would say “tossing them” is a bit of an exaggeration - they’re worth quite a bit even when “used” - there’s still a lot of capacity for storing power from solar panels, for example, even though the storage density might not be up to snuff for EV use. And absent reuse, they recycle pretty nicely.
Less for more? What on earth are you talking about now?
5th:
What floors me about consumers complaining about dual-clutch behavior is how few of them actually test drove the vehicles first.
Seriously. I know a few people who bought the things without a single test drive, when the behavior would have been obvious and they could have decided if they could live with it or not...
YES - generation rates have fallen in Ohio. Capacity has been increasing faster than demand. And with regards to EVs, moving to base load plants makes power CHEAPER because they are much more efficient. These are facts.
Can you not see how the utilities play this?
BTW, if you actually read through the press release…