Tesla hasn't proved that you can make a reasonable amount of profit compared to your investment when selling to that market. Hell, they haven't showed you can make any profit on that investment, they're still deep in the red. It would take them something like 10+ more years at their current income to even break even. Is it really such a surprise that companies that need to make money aren't dying to get into that market?
Then, suddenly, the day arrives when battery tech has advanced to the point where it's obvious even to casual observers that battery tech is the future. Hell, it's the present by then. We're almost there. Battery tech is still following an exponential decline in price/performance.
Problem is, now the rest of the industry is 10 years behind. They were hoping to just buy this tech from their suppliers, but so is everyone else. All profit gone in a bidding war. Making your own requires double-digit billions of investments (OK, plausible) and 10 years lead time. Let's be super charitable and say 5 due to the existence proof and leaky personnel. Now they've got to catch up while their newly equal-sized competitor eats their lunch.
Classic innovator's dilemma, and it's as obvious today as it was in 2013. Probably more.
Costs 50% more than any. Also inferior range due to 1000 small design & drivetrain details. Can't produce 100,000 of them per year, due to battery sourcing constraints. No global charging network that will make cross-country trips painless.
Technically charges at 350kW, but good luck finding more than a 50kW CHAdeMO along your route. Especially during congested hours. Porche claims intention to install 800 of the fastest charging points globally by 2020, but after years of dragging feet, onus is on them to prove it.
This is what most casual observers fail to get. It's not about the specs of the cars themselves, it's about thousands of small details in production & distribution infrastructure, charging technology and UX that go deeper than just paying a subcontractor to slap it on top.
Many manufacturers can, with a proper effort, make something that seems convincing at a casual glance. But creating a properly competitive product is hard and will take years. Along with a cultural change that I think almost none will mange.
I was surprised because I searched for users with the name "Scott Adams" and it was promoting users with 0 followers and not showing his verified account at all. This was through Tweetbot iOS.
Well, per the article, it is NOT allowed, at least in Germany. I have been kind of amazed how hands off the advertising and road safety regulators have been with Tesla so far, tho.
But you don't understand. Car analysts since the early 90s have been saying that electric cars would become profitable and become a serious chunk of the market by 2020 because they all knew that musk was going to come along and show us how great electric cars are and save the world.
This is actually pretty much the dumbest argument if you take just a moment to think about it.
Imagine some drug that costs $100 million to develop and that the most it can earn in the market is $70 million at a price of $1000. Okay, but then the government thinks it's really important to provide, so it's going to subsidize the development to the tune of $40 million. The drug company could then spend $60 million for development and earn $70 million. Over the typical drug development and sales lifetime, that's actually a quite mediocre return, but let's not worry about that.
But wait, the government paid 40% of the development cost. Why the fuck should that company be able to charge $1000, they should only be able to charge 60% of that, they should charge $600. Well, then they are fucked because they are right back at the same equation for whether it is profitable to work on that drug.
In general, with a moment's thought, any intelligent person will realize that expecting discounts on products based on how much the development was subsidized by the government completely obviates the entire point of subsidies.
That's bullshit. Companies have "whole letter"s for pretty much everything they do. Gilead had a "whole letter" when they said they'd provide 1.5 million doses for free. Was that also loaded with crap and the "$0" price excessive?
Are you saying redis_mlc's comment is total nonsense, or the article is total nonsense, or both? Because redis_mlc's comment seems to agree with the article.
Both labs are corona labs. China's leading corona researchers work there full-time. The US paid those labs to upgrade their security because they were afraid of what they saw when visiting.
Those are all facts. Where is the fear-mongering?
Just because you don't know anything doesn't mean I don't.
