Tesla Predicted To Deliver 3,005 Model 3 Vehicles In 2017

Tesla Model 3


Tesla Model 3

Tesla Model 3

Oppenheimer keeps previous estimates that Tesla will deliver only 3,005 Model 3 sedans by the end of 2017.

Talk is escalating about Tesla Model 3 production. This is as it should be, since the automaker produced just 260 Model 3s through September, after CEO Elon Musk guided over 1,600.

October is now more than half over, and it’s unlikely that any retail customer deliveries (non-employees) will begin before the end of the month as anticipated. Being that the automaker planned on having production much higher at this point, those deliveries may be far off. Even Musk himself is skeptical:

Oppenheimer distributed a note to investors not long after Wall Street Journal reported that the automaker could potentially still be building the cars mostly by hand. The publication suggested that parts for the Model 3 assembly line were not all in place, which was later denied by Tesla. CEO Elon Musk is still hopeful that production will soon increase substantially. Though he recently provided videos of the line in action and admitted to its slow speed, as well as continued complaints about “production hell”, and now supplier issues.

Tesla Model 3

Inside the Tesla Model 3

According to Electrek, Oppenheimer analyst Colin Rusch met with Tesla recently at a meeting for investors. The automaker assured Rusch that all equipment is in place and working and went on to blame a few suppliers for the production issues. Rusch’s note to investors said (via Barron’s as quoted by Electrek):

“Tesla indicated that all the production equipment for Model 3 was installed and working and that all vehicles were moving through the manufacturing line. We understand the delayed ramp is due to a small number of suppliers failing to deliver on time.”

Rusch sees Tesla delivering about 2,800 Model 3s in the fourth quarter of 2017. All in all, Oppenheimer forecasts 100,056 total deliveries for Tesla in 2017 (including Model S and X vehicles). Tesla has not updated guidance, but has plans to be manufacturing 5,000 Model 3s per week sometime in December, in addition to the usual assortment of S and X vehicles.

What’s your estimate? 

For the record: InsideEVs’ Editor-in-Chief pegged between 25,000 and 35,000 Model 3s would be built (not delivered) back last February – at at time when the common consensus was looking upwards of 100,000.

Source: Fortune, Electrek

Categories: Tesla

Tags: ,

Leave a Reply

89 Comments on "Tesla Predicted To Deliver 3,005 Model 3 Vehicles In 2017"

newest oldest most voted

4000-6000 in 2017, 175,000 to 225,000 in 2018.

Remember when Musk said he was shooting for 100,000-200,000 Model 3’s in the 2nd half of 2017? Bet he wishes a lot of us forgot.


I remember immediately discounting it as mathematically impossible, based on his prior statements in the same call. He said it was “impossible” to start production on July 1. He’d also said the goal was 5000/week by yearend.

If you start at zero and ramp to 5000/wk over 25 weeks, the most you can possibly make is 62,500.

My theory is his brain was fixated on the ramp from 5k/wk to 10k in the second half of **2018**. If you start at 5k/week (roughly 120k per half-year), you take the line down a little while for upgrading, and you end the year at 10k/wk, your total production during the half-year would be 100-200k.

But it’s Musk, so who knows what he was really thinking…..

Sounds about right. Originally i i thought maybe 10k no more than 20k in total for 2017.

Recalling Model X did 206 in its first quarter and 2000 in its second.

Somebody didn’t learn the concept of significant digits in school.

😆 😆 😆

Well said, sir.

When it comes to the Model S, none of the digits turn out to be significant.

“As automotive manufacturing consultant Michael Tracy of Agile Group pointed out, the clues of Tesla’s steel problems came from a video posted by Musk himself of the Model 3 assembly line. Referencing Musk’s video, Tracy said a well-functioning auto assembly line would not produce the sparks seen in the video below which are symptomatic of welds spots overheating or poor alignment of components. After the Journal report, Musk tweeted a of the Model 3 production line, which was operating at one-tenth of its potential speed. In the video, sparks fly as two robotic arms assemble parts of the vehicle frame. He followed with another on Wednesday, Oct. 11, showing body panel stamping at full speed. “Resistance welding should make a little smoke, but when you see stuff popping out like that, that’s called expulsion,” automotive manufacturing consultant Michael Tracy of Agile Group in Howell, Mich., said of the first video. “It’s symptomatic of weld spots getting too hot because they’re poorly planned, or in this case, the metal not being pulled all the way together.” Poor welds can increase the damage to a vehicle in an accident, and can lead to rattling and squeaking as the car ages, Tracy said.”… Read more »

…. sooooo, Elon may not be dancing a “jig” anytime soon.


(⌐■_■) Trollnonymous

It’s all a learning curve.
They’ll figure it out. Every manufacturer experiences it.
If not, they can run to the gooooberment and ask for a bailout then file for BK…….lol

Oilprice.com? Would they have an axe to grind?

I don’t have the luxury of watching vids now, but if this is of the employees DIY’ing the position of the panels, that could be a point of inefficiency (on about 260 cars).

Musk was recently on Reddit, Q&A’ing at length about SpaceX launches. “Assume the worst. Now I need to get back to work…” doesn’t inspire me to think Fremont is in a happy place.

Here’s the automotive news original source , (which I originally didn’t link because I thought it was subscription required).


If you take the time to read it, I don’t think it comes off as a hit piece, just automotive journalism, (ref the closing comments in the article)

Good article. Goes into depth on steel vs aluminum. This part is telling…

“This is something a plant typically goes through four to six months in advance of a production launch,” Harbour said. “This raises the question: ‘Is the expertise there?'”

They are implying not enough baseline manufacturing engineering talent. That’s a different skillset/experience than designer engineers.

Tom, Tesla now owns the robotics/automation company called Grohmann that is “a substantial supplier for Daimler, BMW, Volkswagen [Audi], and Bosch.”.

So they have all the talent that they need to build and install top quality welding robots.


Somehow lots of folks have convinced themselves that one Detriot based welding consultant for old US ICE companies, who has never inspected a single weld, somehow knows more than one of the world’s premier robotic welding automation companies.

Tesla could certainly have a welding problem with their robots. If so, the folks from Grohmann will do what they’ve been doing for Daimler, BMW, Volkswagen, and Bosch for decades. They will properly setup and configure the robot welders and confirm with industry standard weld scans and destructive testing to determine if the welds will meet the design specifications.

Grohmann has plenty of experience with building robots to weld steel.

Clarification: never inspected a single Model 3 weld.

I did a quick search on youtube for videos of robotic welding assembly lines. Below are the links I found. As you see, while there are a few instances of those “nearly smokeless” welds, for the most part, I see plenty of instances of lots of sparks flying off ….. Kia, Toyota, BMW… seems they must all have the same issues……perhaps they different kinds of welds?





The BMW welds in specific likely come from robots built by Grohmann, the same company that Tesla now owns.

Grohmann is one of the top robotic welding companies in the world, supplying top European brands with welding robots.

If throwing sparks during welding is good enough for BMW, VW/Audi, and Mercedes, I think Tesla will be just fine.

Who would pay full price for a car that was totally defective, much as the very first ‘x’
s with incredibly bad fit and finish not tolerated on a Nissan Versa (just about the most inexpensive car there is)?

Is this more Getting out the sleeping bag stuff and staying at the end of the assembly line? What is the point of that if they are obviously intentionally making defective products?

Man, the bloom is off the rose for me since I saw how they STILL handle the 12 volt battery issue in the “S”.

” Nissan Versa (just about the most inexpensive car there is)?”

I thought Mirage is cheaper…

Just as a point of comparison – NISSAN just yesterday STOPPED its Japanese assembly since they could not internally guarantee competent Final Inspections.

This situation is Jaw-Droppingly Worse. The slowed production line (to expert eyes) is INTENTIONALLY turning out defective vehicles which CANNOT be fixed by the Service Center afterwards.

Nissan is the example to follow here: when there was even a QUESTION as to quality control, they STOPPED the line. Slowing a line with defective welds (see today’s other story at IEV’s) is orders of magnitude worse – for the unlucky JOE who ends up purchasing the car with his own hard-earned money.

BS, they have a stamping machine up and running. Everything is running smoothly!!!

“at at time when the common consensus was looking upwards of 100,000.”

Who in the heck thought 100k would be delivered in 2017???

(⌐■_■) Trollnonymous

“Who in the heck thought 100k would be delivered in 2017???”

They smokin da good Pakalolo.

Plenty of people. And not more than a few months back ~70k in 2017 was a common belief.

Please point to any comment thread where multiple people said they expected the 100,000-200,000 figure to be realized.

What I remember is just about everyone seeing that as an aspirational figure, with the real figure coming in somewhat lower.

I’ll be surprised if you can find more than one or two comments from Usual Suspects here supporting that 100,000+ figure; and those one or two are going to be from those who, shall we say, have a rather tangential relationship with reality. That might include, for example, the person who formerly posted as “EV nut”, and (I think) continues to post under an ever-changing variety of pseudonyms.

Personally, I guessed a production (not deliveries) of ~25,000 by end of 2017, and I see no reason to lower that guess at this time.

Elon said 100k to 200k in 2nd half 2017. So in other words, 100,000 MINIMUM!

Lots of people. But very few from people who have followed Tesla in the long run.

I expected only a few hundred by the end of the year and they have beaten that!

But go look through electrek and cleantechnica comment sections and youll see some hilariously optimistic predictions.

I thought we were talking about comments to InsideEVs. It wouldn’t surprise me if you can find less well-informed comments about TM3 production on other sites. Not that all comments here are well-informed, but I think the average is better informed when it’s specifically on the subject of EVs… for hopefully obvious reasons!

Agreed, insideEVs commenters, while not at all perfect, are far better informed than on other sites. 🙂

I’ll stick to my prediction, made before July, that there will not be substantial M3 deliveries to non-NDA customers before 2Q 2018.

This means that they will do a slow slog until then building less than 1,000 per month in 2017 and 1500/mo or so in 1Q 2018. IOW, I agree with ~3000 deliveries in 2017.

Once they start delivering to non-NDA customers, I think they will be ~5000/mo (not /week) for the rest of 2018.

What is the market for $40-50k 3-series EV sedans world wide? I’m thinking substantially less than 1/2 million/year. BMW, VW, Audi, Merc, GM, Ford, Honda, Toyota etc are not going to stand still.

The market? I would say 2-3 million. But since other markets are empty I would say that at the moment it’s more like 4-6 million.

Yeah, there is a lot blue ocean out there and Tesla is essentially alone in it’s yacht, with a few dinghies floating around.

“I think they will be ~5000/mo (not /week) for the rest of 2018.”

No offense, I hope you’re way under on your 2018 prediction. As it is, if they can’t ramp quickly starting in 2018, it could have a negative impact how many people will qualify for the full Federal Tax Credit.

On the glass half full side, if Tesla only produces 3K Model 3s in 2017 and only 5K / mo for Q1 of 2018, it’s possible they won’t cross the 200K USA sales mark until April 2018. This would give Tesla another 5 months to get ready for max production.

I’m going to go to 5,000.

First real customer deliveries (not employees/VIPs) end of November.

Why NOT producing (and selling) 50-100,000 Model 3’s in 2017 is a BIG DEAL. Follow the money. At $50K each sale (long range versions), 50,000 Model 3’s generate $2.5 Billion in new revenue. Revenue that they need to staunch their cash incineration.

TSLA has mortgaged the farm in junk bonds to fund the Gigafactory and the new production line. Production delays mean sales delays which means incoming-cash-flow delays. TLSA’s balance sheet is not one of a healthy corporation. And TSLA has about used up their credit. Bond-holders and stockholders alike pay attention to this stuff.

..and so the stock is up 65% + this year while the new GM, has done little, but the old GM went bankrupt, bond and stock holders lost almost everything, where were you in regards to warning people then?

(⌐■_■) Trollnonymous

lol, yeah, why isn’t he/she not warning GM shareholders whn GM is laying off and eliminating shifts and saying…..

“GM also confirmed Friday that it’s investing $294 million in the factory to build a new Cadillac SUV.”

Their strategy? Sell more biga$$ ICE SUV’s.

The article doesn’t say big or ICE.

And everyone sells SUVs. Ferrari is working on one now.

Tesla sells SUVs.

You missed the ICE part out of “biga$$ ICE SUV’s.”

Tesla doesn’t sell any “biga$$ ICE SUV’s.”

That’s the beauty of EV’s. You can actually have an SUV with a relatively small penalty.

For example, the non-performance 75D version of the Model S and X only have a 10% difference in MPGe. (these are the versions you would get if you value economy). If you normally need 10 solar panels to power your car, this means you have to install an 11th panel. Done.

The difference over 5 years is just $250 dollars in electricity:

Model S:
in fuel costs over 5 years
compared to the
average new vehicle

Model X:
in fuel costs over 5 years
compared to the
average new vehicle

The Model 3 vs Model Y numbers will probably be even better.

And this isn’t just Tesla. Even a relatively short range PHEV like an outlander PHEV or Volvo T8 PHEV can eliminate 8K miles worth of gas being burnt, and greatly cut that ICE EV gas hogging.

what price are you assuming for the electricity$

Those numbers come directly from the EPA window stickers as reported on fueleconomy.gov. I did not calculate them personally.

I save $ 6.000 in gas every year driving my Model S.

Charging has so far not cost me anything at all.

No service so far at 80.000 miles.

Both GM and Tesla stocks are doing great this year. I believe GM was up about 40% for the year.

They’re both clearly moving in a direction stockholders are happy with.

But like most consumers… I don’t care about that! 🙂 I just like that they’re both producing awesome EVs.

Close, up 30% which outperforms the market by 15%. But they have been like drunken sailor in the gutter who finally stumbles to his feet, so as not miss movement.

There is really nothing to compare GM stock-wise to Tesla over the past few years.

I also recommended their stock at $34 good dividend and potential for growth, but I think if they hit $50 and stay there it would be a surprise. But not bad for value, at least it was.
I personally will not own them.

HVACman said:

“TLSA’s balance sheet is not one of a healthy corporation.”

Well, there are a lot of Tesla stock short-sellers posting all over the internet who have been saying that for years. Fortunately, it doesn’t seem to represent reality. Not then, and not now.

Just out of curiosity, HVACman, are you now shorting Tesla stock? Your comments about Tesla lately Tesla read like you are.

Actually, Tesla’s bonds came in with lower rates than expected. That signals high demand for Tesla bonds.

On top of that, this round of bonds was actually the first where Tesla didn’t have to offer equity options, which are considered more valuable to those who are willing to take the risk. Not having to offer equity also signals that demand for Tesla debt has actually gotten stronger.

Finally, the buyers drove up the total number of bonds that were originally offered for sale. Again, this shows demand literally outpacing what Tesla offered.

There is no signs that “TSLA has about used up their credit.”

Yup pent up demand is there , but continuos demand for a sedan , any sedan evs or not is weak,
The real strength in 3 sales will require the Y.

Hopefully the Y will be closer to being a true crossover. Not a humpback sedan like the X is.

(⌐■_■) Trollnonymous

266K sales by mid 2019 if they’re lucky.
After that the pent up demand is gone and they’ll probably sell in the 1600 per month till the Y is out.
Jus hope the Y won’t look like a pregnant TM3.

As long as the Model Y machine, can make the machine ( little baby Model Ys), then I won’t mind the “Prego” look of the expecting Tesla Model Y.

Yes, Elon spoke about that in the last earnings call. The Model Y is expected to exceed the sales volume of the Model 3 by a large margin.

To quote myself from the old article in which Jay said 25-35k.

“I’d be very happy if they could hit 1000 per week before years end.”

That was my hope then, and still my hope.

I said 20k about 6 months ago realizing that Musk’s prediction was beyond ludicrous. Still even with the problems they are having I think they can make that.
Stock continues to fly sort of putting a lie to Wernher von Braun’s famous pronouncement.


“Oppenheimer keeps previous estimates that Tesla will deliver only 3,005 Model 3 sedans by the end of 2017.”

Actually there will be only 3004.59 Model 3 sedans delivered. As one of them is being delivered, it will be T-boned and break nearly (but not quite) in half. /s

But seriously, I’ll stick to my guess (and it’s only a guess, not a “prediction”) of ~25,000 Model 3’s produced by end of year, with somewhat less delivered.

Who wants to wager that Model 3 production will outnumber Bolt production? Anyone want to put money where their mouth is still? 🙂

You’re already losing one bet by shorting Tesla stock, and I would guess you’ve got pretty substantial losses from the frequency and tone of your posts.

Are you sure you want to lose even more? 😎

Don’t own any TSLA. Sold my only holdings a couple of months ago for double the buying price.

$100 bet for anyone that thinks Model 3 sales in the US will be greater than Bolt sales. I know I’ll get no takers, but maybe some Tesla diehard will make the bet. 🙂
And then probably never pay up.

*in 2017

Yeah, that was pretty clear. So what constitutes a sale. In someones driveway?
At this point I think you would have to give odds. Maybe GM sells 20k Bolts in 2017, Tesla is far behind with many analysts saying they won’t make 5k this year. So maybe at 5 to 1 it would be worth a chance, as Tesla would have to produce 10k on average in November & December, though the Bolt may even fall short of 20k sold.

A more interesting question might be on what day in 2018 will Model 3 sales surpass Bolt sales.

Personally, I’d consider the Model 3 to be actually “for sale” when Tesla stops requiring NDAs from their “customers.”

It’s pretty clear that the reason for the NDA is to keep the beta test under wraps, especially with the information that’s come to light about the “No negative commentary allowed” conditions.

You can redefine “for sale” what ever way you want, but the State of California, the EPA, NHTSA, Tesla, the buyers, the banks, the IRS, the SEC, insurance companies, etc all disagree with your mental gymnastics.

Sales began in July 2017. Those buyers will get federal tax incentives because that’s when sales began.

States sales taxes will be collected, because they were sales.


Substituting your reality won’t change the real world. Good luck with that.

You are, of course, quite correct: any company is free to sell unfinished products still in the testing phase as long as these products meet the minimum NHTSA safety standards.

I don’t see why anybody would want to taunt others about one car selling more units after being in production for 15 months, compared to some other car that has been in production for only 6 months.

But if anybody chooses to celebrate 15 months of production beating only 6 months of production because of a month or two of production delays effectively making it just 4 or 5 months of production, they should enjoy it while they can.


I wonder how the bets are going for those who said that GM would sell 50K or 60K Bolts in 2017? Or those who said Tesla wouldn’t build any Model 3’s until 2019?

“I wonder how the bets are going for those who said that GM would sell 50K or 60K Bolts in 2017?”

Who, you mean Bro? XD Not many others would have taken that off the cuff remark from GM as gospel – a representitive was simply being asked a hypothetical question by a reporter lol.

“Or those who said Tesla wouldn’t build any Model 3’s until 2019?”

Man, I woulda taken them up on that bet!

And I thought I was pessimistic about the numbers for 2017… but a delay till 2019 was as unlikely as Tesla hitting 200,000 this year. Missed opportunity to make a little money… 🙂

We can compare similar time frames. I’m a flexible guy!

First 3/6/9/10.2/11.99 months of production of the Bolt versus the Model 3.

First 30 days: Bolt – 579 / Model 3 – 30…whoops, that’s a Bolt landslide
First 3 months: Bolt – 3,940 / Model 3- 220…ouch, that ain’t any better for the ‘3’

Waiting to take bets here!

And GM never said they were going to produce 50-60k Bolts this year. When answering a question, GM exec Kevin Kelly said IF THERE WAS DEMAND of 50-60k Bolts, GM would have no issue producing that many in 2017.


You have math failure. Bolt production began in October, not December when deliveries began. You seem to want to reward GM for holding up deliveries for a couple of months after starting up production, and penalize Tesla for delivering as soon as they came off the line. Bolt deliveries in first month of production: 0 Tesla deliveries in first month of production: 30 Bolt deliveries in second month of production: 0 Tesla deliveries in second month of production: ~75 If you want to celebrate about a few hundred more in the third month, enjoy your victory while it lasts. You can define down victory to as small and narrow of a measure as you want, and remain willfully blind to what will happen over the long term for as long as you want. It will be short lived WHEN (not if) Tesla Model 3 production achieves ramp up in the thousands per week. I’ll make sure to remind you of your benchmarks when that happens. Because if you think GM sales in their first 4 quarters will be more than Model 3 sales, no rational person believes that. I’ll bookmark this thread to revisit this in July 2018. Then we… Read more »

“I don’t see why anybody would want to taunt others about one car selling more units after being in production for 15 months, compared to some other car that has been in production for only 6 months.”

Because the CEO of one of those automakers claimed that he expected to produce 100k-200k of that car in 2017, and people who called that out as unhinged fantasy were loudly denigrated as TSLA shorters and shills for Big Oil.

Well, since nobody on THIS SITE has actually ever done anything like that over the 100k-200K number, you will have to go elsewhere to whine about that.

See Pushy’s post above.

Making affordable cars is not harder. It’s massively harder and what makes the industry the remarkable thing it is and is why I became a car guys. I hope they succeed

Is it usual to source all the parts from one supplier? In order to make 5,000 vehicles per week, would they need at least a week’s worth of parts ready to go, and probably much more than that? I would find it interesting that this new model launch has not had the required 5,000 to 20,000 parts in stock and ready for production. Even at 1,000 per week it would need 1,000 to 4,000 parts in stock. You can easily do the math for any sized production run. And as a supplier, who has budgets based on potentially 5,000 units per week (think LCD screen, could be ordered of magnitudes higher for other parts), when will they start to look at legal recourse for beach of contract? Someone comments about sparks in the spot welding, that sounds like a more realistic situation, which again it is surprising all the robots were not calibrated and tested prior to the July launch event. Finally, Tesla has a lot of battery based projects going on at the moment, could they actually be battery constrained due to these very large scale projects? I’m pretty surprised there have not been many more Model 3 deliveries… Read more »

“Is it usual to source all the parts from one supplier?”

We had an argument a discussion of this very subject over on the InsideEVs Forum:


Relevant discussion starts in post #13

* * * * *

According to “JeremyK”, who says that he works in the industry, it’s usual for a major auto maker to get all “tier 1” parts from a single source. That is, each part has only a single supplier, not that they all come from the same place!

He says parts from tier 2+ suppliers might be multi-sourced.

I can’t speak from personal knowledge, but it looks like JeremyK knows what he’s talking about.

(⌐■_■) Trollnonymous

“it’s usual for a major auto maker to get all “tier 1” parts from a single source.”

In many cases, there’s financial incentive. You may be getting a price cut from the vendor for sole sourcing. That would really be the only reason to go sole source.

The contract has to be written correctly if your vendor fails to deliver or delivers defective parts. Then you fall back to vendor candidates 2 and 3.


Car part prices are heavily influenced by volume, because along with the price of labor and materials, you are paying for fixed costs like tooling and setup that can be the same whether you make 10,000 or 100,000.

It might cost a company a million dollars to build 10K units, but only 5 million dollars to make 100K units because the cost to build each next batch keeps going down with each batch built.

Sole sourcing gives companies the best deal because of this.

I believe the 3005 prediction.

And I stand by my earlier guess that the production “S” curve is delayed by about two months. They probably have to hastily retool a few things, and that’s why the long delay.

*If* I keep my Model 3 reservation, there’s no way the order will be fulfilled in the December-February window Tesla is telling me now, which I doubted anyway. It will probably be more like February-April or May.

Every other car welding video I could find on Youtube also shows similar sparks to the Model 3 video. I don’t know what these guys are smoking.

Here’s an example from a Nissan assembly line

Smoke not spark. Kind of hard to weld without spark.

Presumably you mean capacitive discharge welding. There are other welding methods that are sparkless.


It is sort of like a doctor diagnosing a patient without examining them. They can be wrong, or they can be right, but the accuracy is certainly questionable.

Tesla certainly could be having welding problems. That is the type of thing that ramp-up exists for. Or it can be an incorrect guess from a Detroit-based consultant who gets their primary income from ICE car companies, who is trying to get their name out there by bashing their customer’s competitors. (FYI – the guy is based in Detroit, and ICE car companies are who pays his bills).

The only way to know would to actually inspect the welds. Both with a weld scanner and by destructive testing to see what the yield strength of the weld is. Neither of which has been done by this weld consultant.

It is like diagnosing a patient without doing any testing at all, when the standard procedure is to use a standard bank of tests.

Either way, fixing ramp-up problems is what ramp-up is for.

3005 units would represent about a two and a half month delay. That is where Tesla should have been by around mid-October, and they are saying Tesla won’t get their until around two and a half months later. Tesla has already announced that they have seen roughly a month long delay, and half a month later we are just recently hearing about an uptick in deliveries (via electrek), so somewhere around a 1-2 month delay seems reasonable. So it comes down to whether Tesla can catch up and get back some time already lost, or whether they lose an additional roughly month before the end of the year. Now let me pick up these goal posts and move them back a month or two. If Tesla is delivering thousands of cars a week in early Q1 2018, this will be much ado about nothing. A month or two delay will have no real impact on Tesla’s business or on the EV revolution. And considering that Wall Street set the goal posts at 2019 and got it wrong by a full year, I’ve got no problems moving the goal posts by around a month or two. Only trolls will care. _________________________________________… Read more »

Yes, couldn’t agree more.

The more discussion of the content and the less repetitive trolling the better.

Thanks Jay!

I think bottle necks will be dealt with in about a week or so from now and an additional three weeks to get the quality of the cars up to an acceptable standard for real mass production. I think real problem is quality and model 3s that are being returned back and forth to tesla to sort it out. In the beginning of December this will be handled and we will have 16000 model 3s manufactured in December. Before December only 2000 model 3s will have been delivered. That’s what I think

Loving my Model X. Will never own an old gas car. Give Musk a break on bringing out a new car for the masses and all new tech. I think he did not think it would be this popular. The whole world wants EV’s overnight and he is the Apple car guy. People want a better choice whether it helps the planet or not. Congrats, Mr Musk. Take your time as people do not rush a Ferrari of EV for the masses!

Going to keep this tucked at the bottom of the thread (I speak to you from the future, lol) – but to give notice to community who might notice something different in this particular comment section.

We are going to try something a little different with this thread for the first time ever…as a test, because it has been ofted requested in the past.

This thread will be live moderated to keep the discussion specific to the topic, and to enforce the use ‘big boy’ pants when commenting/interacting with others.

So if you notice comments disappearing, or being edited to remove ‘things that would likely get you punched in the face’ in real life like you never have before here at IEV – well, you will know why (there won’t be further discussions or explanations). If that notion isn’t particularly appealing to you…you might want to skip this one. Normal ToS rule apply to subsequent threads

/we’ll see how it goes

Oops! I would like to read from a prepared statement. First I need to write one.

“I would like to say that at no time did I have discussions with those that I spoke to that involved anything, whatsoever, by any measure you care to mention, that rang of, or bore any facsimile, to a whiff or hint or perhaps even an inkling of…”
Sir, your time is up.


Thank you very much for your efforts to keep it civil in here!

But wouldn’t it be far less labor-intensive for InsideEVs staff to just institute the oft-discussed comment thread function of being able to vote comments up and down?

(⌐■_■) Trollnonymous

“just institute the oft-discussed comment thread function of being able to vote comments up and down”

Then we’d have to click the comment to see what ticked someone off……lol

Or be able to report comments as offensive via a button ?


I think it is going smashingly well. Please feel free to aggressively moderate (delete or edit) my posts if I cross the line. I welcome the moderation for everyone, including me.

I clicked on some ad links to help fund.