Some Think Tesla Will Impact ICE Cars Like Amazon Impacted Retail

Tesla

DEC 25 2017 BY EVANNEX 85

Tesla

Tesla and Amazon (Image: Marketwatch)

WILL TESLA DO TO THE INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE WHAT AMAZON DID TO RETAIL?

Tesla is often compared to Apple, and Elon Musk to Steve Jobs. But what if there was another (more accurate) comparison to make — is the Silicon Valley automaker more akin to Amazon and Elon Musk to Jeff Bezos?

Market Realist reports on the “analogies between vehicle electrification and the retail sector. The retail sector has seen disruption led by the likes of Amazon… The success of e-commerce, not to mention the soaring market capitalizations of companies such as Amazon, has forced established retail companies to pursue online sales to complement their existing store business.”

*This article comes to us courtesy of EVANNEX (which also makes aftermarket Tesla accessories). Authored by Matt Pressman.

Tesla

Parallels emerge between Amazon and Tesla (Image: Pando)

Meanwhile, “In the electric vehicle industry, Tesla has been synonymous with electric vehicles. While Tesla’s shipments are only a tiny fraction of legacy automakers, the company’s rising market capitalization could be the envy of established automakers. Leading global automakers are now launching [plans for] a range of electric vehicles.”

Above: It turns out that Amazon’s Jeff Bezos also has an aerospace company, Blue Origin, just as Elon Musk has SpaceX (Youtube: Sam Cornwell)

The parallels between Amazon and Tesla are particularly striking on Wall Street. Marketwatch points to Mott Capital Management founder Michael Kramer who, “thinks the market values Tesla much like it does Amazon… Tesla has been just as maverick, but that hasn’t hurt its ability to raise cash in the past, says Kramer, noting that Elon Musk’s baby has traded pretty consistently around 2.75 times one-year forward sales estimates. Amazon is about two times for that metric.”

Tesla

One year forward, comparing Tesla (blue) and Amazon (orange) PS ratio (Source: Marketwatch)

Kramer explains that, like Amazon, “investors seem to be willing to forgive Tesla,” as it forgoes profits to chase growth. Nevertheless, the automaker’s revenue estimates have risen nearly 20% over the past year, and should that trend continue, its valuation could approach $100 billion as early as next year. Kramer notes, “Sales estimates for 2019 could start pricing in the Tesla semi-truck and possibly faster growth.” If you add in the Silicon Valley company’s solar and energy storage business, things could (indeed) get interesting.

Tesla

Price (blue) and revenue estimates (orange) for two fiscal years ahead (Source: Marketwatch)

And Kramer isn’t the only one comparing the two companies. Baron’s star fund manager, Alex Umansky, recently drew similar parallels as did Morgan Stanley’s Adam Jonas. And, earlier this year, Loup Ventures’ Gene Munster told CNBC, “Most people think of [Tesla] as an electric car company, but their mission statement is to accelerate the globe’s transformation to renewable energy… [yet] people don’t understand what this company’s mission statement is, much like Amazon in its early days when the company was ‘just’ selling books.”

*Editor’s Note: EVANNEX, which also sells aftermarket gear for Teslas, has kindly allowed us to share some of its content with our readers. Our thanks go out to EVANNEX, Check out the site here.

Categories: Tesla

Tags: , ,

Leave a Reply

85 Comments on "Some Think Tesla Will Impact ICE Cars Like Amazon Impacted Retail"

newest oldest most voted

Not gunna happen. The reason Amazon impacted retail is they were willing to take a break even or loss for a specific time frame in order to push other brick and mortar and online services out. In order to do that your margins need to be low or non existent. Which Tesla can’t do.

Irrelevant, Amazon deals with commodity products. Tesla is selling something new and disrupting.

Tesla is basically the Research in Motion if EVs.

if EVs what?

So Amazon wasn’t new and disruptive?

It’s happening now.
Don’t you see BMW and MB react to Tesla’s product line?

The most surprising thing is Wall Street Isn’t pricing in the Gigafactory, Solar or the Semi? There’s a real disconnect on Wall Street and Tesla and serious analysis of the company and the products it makes and sells.

Also, Best in Class product, how do you on Wall Street ignore that? Spreadsheet blindness?

Or superchargers. Analysts that hate on Tesla just think they’re an “automaker”, and ignore the value and potential future revenue sources from these other business lines.

If the reason for comparing Tesla to Amazon is because it is a successful startup with oversized ambitions, then you can compare Tesla with many other (previously) fast growing startups including Uber, Netflix, and Theranos.

Tesla does have a strong similarity to Amazon in that both benefited from lower taxes. For Amazon due to a sales tax loophole and for Tesla due to EV credits.

Like Uber, Tesla benefits from legal requirements that impede the competition. For Uber it is the cost of a Taxi license that they don’t pay and for Tesla it is requirement to sell zero emission cars in some states.

In the end what will give Tesla the edge over competition is not the battery, but that they design cars for drivers, not for dealers. Dealers want cars that require regular service and that can not be upgraded. Drivers want the opposite. Similar to traditional car makers, Apple designs phones for carriers because carriers sell 88% of their phones.

Thanks for your comment!

This makes no sense. The cost of warranty work is built into the price of the car. It’s basically an insurance policy. If cars require less “fixing” then a higher % of sales can go to profit versus warranty repair.

For legacy auto dealers, a significantly greater portion of their income comes from service rather than sales. Warranties or not, somebody is certainly making a lot of money servicing gasmobiles!

That is one of the reasons why the auto dealership business model is outmoded and will soon be obsolete, with Tesla leading the way on that improvement.

Not warranty, service.
ICE needs oil and coolant changes, spark plugs, exhaust systems, adjustment and replacement for wear and tear on the thousands of moving components compared to the handful that BEV has.
That’s where dealers make their money, and from the dealers POV, improves, as the car ages. It’s not just dealers, many of the little auto shops that currently maintain older cars are equally threatened. At some point, maybe ten years or so, it will be cheaper to run a BEV than an old ICE clunker, at that point all those little auto shops go away like ostlers did 100 years ago.

On a modern car how often are those things replaced? Maybe every 100k miles or so? Most new cars need very little maintenance outside of oil changes that are often included for the first couple of years. So when your taking about the cost difference outside of warranty work your taking about after about 8 years of ownership. Brakes would be one item that wears out within that window that differs from EV’s.

Off the top of my head
Yearly oil changes
Cam belt or similar tech change at 50k miles
Exhausts replaced every 3 or 4 years
Clutch every 30-40k miles
Auto transmission fluid changes
Spark plugs anywhere from 20k miles and up
Water pump around 50k miles
Various belts, pipes and hoses witha lifespan far less than 100k miles.
None of these are warranty issues

“Most new cars need very little maintenance outside of oil changes that are often included for the first couple of years.”

Then how is it possible that auto dealers in general get significantly more income from service and selling parts, than from selling new cars? I don’t believe all that service and maintenance is only for older cars.

Even not-so-old cars need things like tire rotation and balancing and replacement, an occasional new air filter or oil filter, or the like. Correct me if I’m wrong, but none of that is covered under warranty.

Made me look. 🙂

The Oil, Coal and Fracking industries are the MOST HEAVILY SUBSIDES industries in the USA. The EV credits in NO WAY come close to balancing out the Heavy US Government Tax Advantages these company’s receive.

Just like Trump rewarding himself by 300% in the new tax bill, and middle class American’s getting a nickel back.

There has Never Been a level playing field in the energy market.

While their are certainly many similarities, Tesla’s main impact is through their relentless disruption of what had become a fairly static industry based on continuing in perpetuity ICE/fossil fuels.

Tesla has also certainly impacted the shorters negatively too as all whining trolls prove!

Right. They’re not directly comparable. You can look at the luxury segment to see the sort of impact they’ve had, substantial but not overwhelming sales.

Rock hard support at $300 which is not a good sign for the shorts. My own feeling is that most of the activity in the stock atm is from shorts, covering and then others coming in to short as the stock vaults higher.

Another Euro point of view

The thing is that low interest rate for many years has made the stock exchange highly speculative (markets awash with cash, see speculation with bitcoin for ex.). I would give more credit to a high stock price when interest rate are higher, which could happen going forward.

Certainly a factor. Cheap money and low returns.

Almost everyone agree that EV are inevitable. In that space, no other company leads like Tesla. Until we see drastic push for EV from other companies (ie, seriously expanding infrastructure to surpass Tesla), Tesla is THE 800 lb gorilla of EV. I don’t see this changing any time soon.

Amazon comparison is good, but better is search engine comparison. There were dozen search engine web sites back in 1990’s, but Google dominated, because they provided the future. None of the legacy well-funded search engines could compete, including Microsoft, Yahoo, etc.

Search engines are not at all like EVs. EVs are just cars and Henry Ford figured out the business model for cars a century ago. Search engines were entirely new. Google succeeded because they figured out how to make search a business. When Google entered the market they didn’t have the best search engine, that was Alta Vista from DEC. The difference was that DEC had no idea that search was a business in itself, they built Alta Vista to demonstrate the speed of their computers. At the time DEC was the number 2 computer manufacturer in the world and they were fighting the losing battle to keep computers from becoming a commodity, which by the time they launched the Alta Vista they had already become. Nobody at DEC realize that building computers was a 20th century business and that Search was a 21th century business so they didn’t invest in Alta Vista and they let Google take over the market. EVs aren’t like that at all, they are better cars but they are still just cars. EVs don’t do anything that a Model T couldn’t do, they just do it better. The business model for selling EVs doesn’t change,… Read more »

You talk about Alta Vista, but remember, there were dozen other search engines, most of them startups trying to make money. Some like Yahoo was already well funded and even Microsoft was in the game. Yet, Google came to dominate. Why? It’s because Google provided the service that people wanted the best way utilizing the new technology.

The fact that Tesla is providing the best EV / service among all is exactly the same reason why Google dominated over all others, including established businesses (like Yahoo) and 800 lb gorillas in related business (like Microsoft). It doesn’t matter if the sales model is “free” searches or financing cars through the banks. The reason for Google, Amazon, etc. success is that they provided the best service among their peers in upcoming technology, which is exactly what Tesla is doing.

You’re inching closer to stumbling on the truth in your second attempt, but it seems pretty clear neither of you have ever read the story of Google or know what you’re talking about, yet you’re both happy to make up a theory on the spot about why you think Google took over the market, and present it as if it were fact. To claim that Google took over because they knew how to make it a business is absolutely refutable. Google in fact made no profits from search until long after they had become dominant in the market. The consensus in the software industry is that it was the ranking algorithm that gave Google the edge – their famous Page Rank, named so after Larry Page, not for the fact that is was used to rank web pages. Alta Vista would find all web pages containing the word “SparkEV” very, very quickly, but the result you were interested it could be buried somewhere on page 3000 of the search results. Page had the idea that you could look at not just what the page contained, but what other pages linked to the page, and what they contained, and how popular… Read more »

Actually, your comment is exactly what I’m saying. Google wasn’t making any profits in the beginning while other companies were funded. But Google provided superior service compared to the competition, and eventually came to dominate the market and then to profitability.

Tesla isn’t making any profits, makes / service that people want (400K reservations for car that won’t be available for 2 years), and will dominate over other guys as soon as they can produce enough of them.

“Amazon comparison is good, but better is search engine comparison. There were dozen search engine web sites back in 1990’s, but Google dominated…”

Tesla is a manufacturer; Google is a service provider.

It’s hard to find two types of businesses less alike than those two!

Except Google is also a manufacturer, and Tesla is also a service provider.

They are very different companies, but it isn’t as simple as you’re pretending – neither is purely one or the other. And they may very well have similarities in strategy that are interesting to ponder despite many important differences.

I think the comparison to Amazon is interesting. My own suspicion is that there is a lot of rampant speculation involved, but the claim is the exact opposite: that investors are willing to take a long-term view, invest on fundamental considerations, and forego profits for decades. The data could support either hypothesis, as far as I can tell.

“Except Google is also a manufacturer…”

Looking at the “List of Google products” page on Wikipedia, I had to scroll down thru an awful lot of apps, internet-based services, and software products, before I got to anything that you can actually hold in your hand.

But even there, I think you have confused the Google logo being slapped on a tangible thing with Google actually being a manufacturer. Other companies making things for Google to sell does not make Google a “manufacturer”.

“It’s hard to find two types of businesses less alike than those two!”

If business success depend on type of business, we’d have million different MBA programs. Fact is, business success from top view is fairly generic and can be predicted with similar criteria.

Of course, there’s some luck involved. For example, if another company has better search engine (ie, it can literally read your mind), Google is dead. Fortunately for Tesla, that will not happen any time soon.

“…business success from top view is fairly generic and can be predicted with similar criteria.”

That may not be 100% wrong, but it’s certainly close. The founders of Tesla, Martin Eberhard and Marc Tarpenning, thought they could run an automobile manufacturer as if it was a Silicon Valley company. Learning how wrong they were was a rather painful learning process and a steep learning curve.

It’s the same error everyone makes who suggests that Apple should make electric cars, or that it should buy out Tesla. And a service provider like Google is even less like a heavy industry manufacturer such as Tesla, than is a light industry like Apple.

Once I owned and drove a Tesla, I knew they were going to win. The idea of going back to a gas car is about as compelling as handing in your iPhone for a landline or at least some old style Nokia phone. And cars with the next generation powertrain are just part of their positioning for the future with solar power, battery storage, ai, logistics, car-share network, supercharger network, removing car dealers like amazon selling direct etc. For me the vision is obvious at this point.

100% agreed.
The Crudeness of the ICE solution is only apparent after you’ve driven an EV. I too, will Never go back.

Peter Lynch rules of investing:
If you like the product, Buy the Stock.

CRUDEness and ICE LOL nice work

It’s not an apt comparison. Brick and mortar retailers were unwilling to compete with themselves so they left the door open to Amazon. That’s not true with auto makers. GM and Nissan have been selling electric cars as long as Tesla has, the others have all dabbled in EVs enough to learn enough to start building them in quantity by the time EV technology reaches the point where the range and costs are competitive with ICE cars. Don’t forget that GM beat Tesla to production with an affordable 200 mile EV by over a year (maybe 18 months, lets see if Tesla can get the Model 3 into full production in the next quarter). Where was Sears or Macy’s response to Amazon when Amazon was at Tesla’s stage? The answer is that they didn’t have a response then and they still don’t. That’s not true with cars, every single manufacturer will have a full state of EVs in the next 3 or 4 years.

I agree this is not a good comparison but you have to keep in mind these car companies are not really responding to Tesla as much as responding to governments requests. If CARB, Japan and China didn’t push these requirements maybe Tesla would still be on their own right now. All these manufacturers should send a thank you note to these institutions pushing them from behind to inovate rather than lobbying to ease mpg regulations.

Really? Where are all those legacy carmakers going to get batteries for their new EV lines? Do they have their own gigafactories in the pipeline? (no.) And what are they going to do about their dealerships, many if not most of whom have no interest in selling low-maintenance EVs? What are they going to do with their ICE engineering staff and supply chains once they no longer need ICE components? It’s not going to be an easy transition.

BMW Already outsold Tesla this year.
No one really cares about pure EV, all they want is to be able to boast abt “electrified” to their friends and not run out of gas ([sic] charge) on the freeway / autobahn. If you think they like being herded into the supercharger cow dung pasture farms to wait 30mins, you must be joking. Toyota and all the rest are waiting at the top of the canyon rim, waiting to fire the warning shots to swarm down and encircle the Tesla campwagons. FYI, solid state batteries will leapfrog existing battery tech, and make super chargers into dinosaur mass e-wastage (not very enviro friendly).

“Electrified” hybrids will outsell EVs? (Which is why the Volt outsold the Bolt last year, right? Oops, it didn’t.) As to solid state batteries, we have yet to see any solid state chemistry even in a prototype EV, much less ready to mass market. Anyway, even if there were a viable solid state battery tech for EVs, they’d still need superchargers for distance travel.

Long-term, BEVs will eventually beat out hybrids, because the former eliminates all that ICE crap from the drivetrain. Legislation to deep-six petrol engines of all types is breaking out world wide.

Yep. For one GM is going to stop production of the Volt in 2022. That’s a ways off, but it looks like GM can read the handwriting on the wall.

I can’t find any point in your rant here, and I also think you misunderstand what solid state battery tech brings to the table if you think it somehow obsoletes superchargers.

bjrosen said:

“GM and Nissan have been selling electric cars as long as Tesla has…”

What electric car was Nissan selling in 2008, when Tesla started selling the Roadster?

Nissan didn’t start selling EVs until the end of 2010, the same month that GM started selling the Volt.

Lots of people today already, or yet, still don’t know much of Tesla’s history, or that the Roadsters Full Payment of $100,000 up front, 2 years before delivering the 1st, actually motivated

Woops! Motivated GM to go forward with the Volt design! (Sure wish comment editing was part of this wensites tools!)

Yes, this wensite is, oops there is a red line under that word. What does that mean?

Yes, and it was Tesla putting the Roadster into production which lead, directly or indirectly, to Nissan making the Leaf.

That is something that every person who calls himself a supporter or fan of EVs ought to know!

I don’t think it is a good comparison. Because Tesla cannot offer enough models to even begin to capture that much of the auto-buying business. The only thing that really sets them apart from other car companies is the fact they are electric. But other automakers will be offering plenty of EVs to choose from. Their retail sales model could also be copied, if needed.

Interesting enough, some of my coworkers are leaning towards the eGolf! Likely since they know the Golf, and haven’t got a solid comparison to other EV’s, or the Focus EV hasn’t truly stepped up yet! Also, here in Canada, most see the Model 3 as a still too expensive option, at $60,000+ CDN$

“…Tesla cannot offer enough models to even begin to capture that much of the auto-buying business.”

Not this year or next, no. But if Tesla continues growing at the rate it has since 2012, then in less than a decade it will be making more cars a year than Ford. I’m not saying that will happen; Tesla may have to slow its growth within a few years. But it’s certainly not impossible.

since price to earnings comparison doesn’t work with Tesla since they have no earnings. So let’s invent a new one: price to fwd sales. That works!!

/sarcasm off/

Good article. Valid comparison IMO.

Musk should make SpaceX part of a new conglomerate called Tesla industries.

Tesla and SpaceX are the only companies doing anything of interest or benefit to society.

“Tesla and SpaceX are the only companies doing anything of interest or benefit to society.” what an incredibly ridiculous statement. carbon capture and disease research just to name two that are more important. carbon capture is going to be more pivotal than electrification. we’re are already neck-deep in catastrophic weather events directly related to climate change that will only get worse. electrification will help fight / stop the pathogen but carbon capture will be our only hope for healing the damage done. while it could have potentially been forests + time or the like but unless you’ve been living under a tesla-branded rock you know why there is no remaining solution there.

CCS is a ruse. Don’t fall for it.

That is, Carbon Capture and Storage, not the charging standard…

NAILED IT

“…carbon capture is going to be more pivotal than electrification.”

What are you talking about, “clean coal”? That’s an even more obvious hoax than the “hydrogen economy”!

Carbon sequestration is very possible. The existence of Oil and Coal is proof of that.

That said, economically it would seem to make no sense. Renewables are much cheaper.

Another Euro point of view

It also can be seen under this angle, the bet Tesla seems currently making is to apply the “Silicon valley way of doing business” to capital intensive industry such as car making. By “Silicon valley way of doing business” I mean to expand business as fast as possible with disregards for profits in order to grab market shares so fast that competitors can’t react. Profits to take care of themselves much later on when land grabbing process is completed . On the contrary short’s opinion seems to be that such “business model” which can successfully be applied with services or electronics can’t be applied to an industry such as car making or home battery making (high capital needs, low margins, much slower products turn over (people owning/leasing cars for many years). Both can the right, only time will tell.

You are right. Everything else (touchscreen, self driving (even use of word Autopilot, etc)) is just tech grandiose hyperbole to put lipstick on the obese non-price competitive profitless Pig.

Right – Tesla’s are terrible cars and no one with half a brain would ever buy them. They are clearly just falling for the hype.

“non-price competitive” – huh? Right – because there are several large EVs to compare with.

If you really need to support your short position, or your fossil position, or whatever, you should come up with more intelligent arguments. They are out there – we have heard them too – and they don’t change reality. But you can do better

Where do you live?
Consumer Reports reported Tesla Broke the Scale.
Best in Class.

Consumer Reports doesn’t get translated into Russian?

Last week I had the chance to ride in two top end luxury sedans in the same day, a brand new Model S and a brand new 7 series. There is really NO COMPARISON. The BMW is so superior in fit, finish, features, ride, luxury perception, etc. The only things the Tesla have going for it are the unique “cachet”, the “green” element and the speed (as if you could ever use that on the street).

Remember when all the Hollywood celebrities were driving Prii? That’s what Tesla has going for it.

There really is no comparison between comments from genuine EV fans, and ones like this one from serial Tesla bashers.

So sad that they have nothing better to do with their lives than pretend to be EV fans while writing trollish EV hater posts.

Ride?

If you got a chance to touch the accelerator, you’d see why ICE vehicles are doomed.

Driving an EV is just so much better.

Yes, First, I said RIDE IN not DRIVE. I will gladly and wholeheartedly agree that DRIVING an EV is superior to an ICE. But, when you RIDE IN a Model S, it’s really nothing special. When you RIDE IN a 7 Series, you’re thinking, yeah I could get used to this. There really is no comparison to the features and luxury. Second, I am an EV driver and have been so since I got my first Volt in 2012. Even though I was the first to want it, I lobbied my employer to install charging stations, which now support over 25 employee EVs and are free of charge. Finally, I support Tesla enthusiastically, but I have no need for a car as large as even a Model 3. Frankly I prefer reliable and simple dials and switches to a ‘do it all’ touch screen interface. Those are my opinions and preferences. I drive well over 25k miles a year in one of busiest traffic areas of the country, which translates to a lot of hours on the road. Frankly I wonder why people who can post on these sites all day and night long care about cars, since they obviously… Read more »

“But, when you RIDE IN a Model S, it’s really nothing special.”

The time I got to ride in a Model S, and got to experience that famous “Tesla grin” for myself, was one of the my memorable experiences within the past several years.

I think it’s safe to believe a serial Tesla basher like you has never had the pleasure of riding in a Model S, let alone driven one!

“luxury perception”? LOL. Yeah, keep thinking that. Meanwhile, everyone else will think of Tesla when it comes to mid to high end car. With the announcement of Tesla roadster, the brand image is taking on that of Lamborghini an Ferrari, far beyond that of BMW. Yes, Tesla 3 isn’t as quick, but it is from the same brand.

Only TESLA broke Consumer Reports Rating system.
So, sorry troll.

With all due respect, BMW ICE is JUNK compared to BMW’s own i3. You need to Drive an EV.

We are all making so much sense . Let’s have a Few more stiff drinks and see what happens , Why stop now . It’s Christmas!

A lot going on in the article but I’ll focus solely on the actual title…

First and foremost, uber is far more of a disruptor to the auto industry than anyone else…Fleet owned fully autonomous rides at an affordable price is where we’re inevitably going…Yet Tesla is leading the pack at producing vehicles with this technology…GM created supercruise but before it was ever offered GM acquired Cruise Automation for $1B which was obviously to accelerate autonomous driving…You wonder if they would have acquired them if they thought their autonomous program was far enough along…

“Fleet owned fully autonomous rides at an affordable price”

Except Uber is doing literally none of those things.

As an EV enthusiast and a strong Tesla fan, I certainly hope that Tesla can repeat the success of Amazon.com.

But let us keep in mind that making automobiles for the first-world new car market is an extremely competitive business, and one which requires much, much greater capital investment for growth than does an internet-based retail sales business like Amazon.com. For Tesla to grow as fast as Amazon.com would require massive capital investments. Tesla is already borrowing money at a profligate rate.

Our resident expert, Nix, says that Tesla’s assets are growing faster than its debts. I certainly hope that’s true! But even if it is, I question that Tesla can grow much faster than it already is. I simply don’t think it’s realistic to suggest a heavy industry manufacturer in a highly competitive business can grow anywhere near as fast as Amazon.com.

But I would be very happy — nay, positively ecstatic! — to be proven wrong.

???

Our objective here is the maximum electric vehicle sales and that is already happening in China. Soon USA and EU will be sucked into the EV bandwagon.

I hope not! There are still new retail stores being opened, and buying Whole Foods had meant that Amazon is now part of the brick & mortar retail business. That’s like if Tesla were to decide they need a line of ICE vehicles for some reason.

Amazon has had a large effect on the retail industry, but I think a lot of people want Tesla’s effect on the automotive industry to be even larger! Like if Amazon had caused Walmart, Home Depot, Best Buy, etc. to close all their physical stores by now and gone online only.

A EU mandate to car manufacturers to make a further 30% reduction in car emissions in the next decade will surely seal the fate of ICE vehicles over here in Europe.

Lol. The EU is domainated by car-producing nations that all have a very strong car lobby, Germany first and foremost. That’s why regulation has been watered down so much at every turn, and even dieselgate did not lead to adequate restructuring of the type-approval process. Yes, it is improving. But no, Europe is not in the driver’s seat here. China is by far the nation with the biggest impact, and the reason is simply that its immediate local-pollution problems in the big cities are so acute that no car lobby can be strong enough to cancel it out. People demand tougher action in China than in the west – and are getting it. Democracy is a good thing, on balance, but it doesn’t work very well when the electorate let politicians get away with favoring industry over people. Nothing scares a politician like the prospect of not being reelected, and the car lobby tells them jobs will disappear if regulation gets tougher – and they will blame the politicians. As long as politicians have more reason to fear this scenario than people not reelecting them because they didn’t enact tough environmental policies, the problem will persist. We will continue to… Read more »

That’s a reasonable, and from my pov an accurate assessment.

Whay happen to technocratic governmemt where reason, knowledge and science was imputs in decesion making like 1930 federal government

For sure government(s) and laws will far exceed the impact on ice than Tesla.
China, Norway, etc. for a start.
From a manufacturing stand point , Tesla doesn’t have the capacity other manufactures already have. There will also come a point their design will become stagnant.
98% of the US buying public still doesn’t even want an EV.
I see Tesla getting their share once they figure out how to build cars, but they will never own the bottom end of the market , which by comparison is where Amazon started.
If Tesla cranked out 400,000 model 3 in 2018 they couldn’t support them service wise with what they have in place now, requiring even more investment , incurring more losses.
While all their competition is profitable and have huge infrastructure manufacturing and service facilities in place. There is more to this than having 1/2 million people think your product is cool.
There’s also a reason why everybody else got rid of vertical intergration in manufacturing. VI is good way to spend huge amount of dollars and get stuck holding the bag as technology changes.

Yet another Tesla bashing post filled with FUD and untruths. It’s painfully obvious the Tesla Model 3 has Tesla haters running scared!

Hey, Bunny! Tesla is right behind you — BOO!
:LOL: :LOL: :LOL:

GO TESLA GO DESTROY DIRTY GAS GUZZLERS AND DIESELS LOL CONNECT THE DOTS ON CLEAN AIR WAKE UP FOLKS

Why doesnt GM make an alliance with Tesla where GM design and sell the product through its dealers and Tesla manufractures the products through GM factories

Do you really think GM wants more EVs to compete with its gasmobile sales?

Do you really think Tesla wants its cars designed by the same people who designed the Volt or the Bolt EV, or sold at gasmobile dealerships that hate EVs and would take a slice of Tesla’s gross profit margin?

The EV market, and potential EV buyers, will benefit by Tesla competing with GM, not by Tesla joining itself at the hip with a ponderous, slow-moving dinosaur like GM.