ice-capades Posted October 12 Share Posted October 12 Tesla Dominates Connecticut's EV Market, Despite Limitations New Haven Register (No Link Available) New Haven Register_2024-10-12_Tesla Dominates Connecticut's EV Market, Despite Limitations.pdf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twintornados Posted October 12 Share Posted October 12 The "Tesla Vehicle Charging Only" is a misnomer.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick73 Posted October 12 Share Posted October 12 I was under impression Tesla stock dropped this week mostly after the Robotaxi reveal that left many analyst disappointed. https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/teslas-sporty-two-seater-robotaxi-design-puzzles-experts-2024-10-12/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twintornados Posted October 12 Share Posted October 12 The drop was associated with missing a sales projection. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick73 Posted October 13 Share Posted October 13 Various sources reported stock decline was associated with Cybercab reveal lacking details supporting how it will become a profitable business. Tesla sales data came out much earlier, and wasn’t that bad anyway; not that I invest in Tesla directly or follow their stock closely. I think investors also wanted to see more on Model 2 progress and a believable timeline which wasn’t mentioned AFAIK. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe771476 Posted October 14 Share Posted October 14 Here in liberal/socialist CT, Eversource electric customers are paying a public benefits fee supposedly for public EV chargers that I nor most everybody else will never be using! Some households are paying $200/mo.! Other reasons mentioned by fuming customers are this fee is to help Eversource recoup lost revenue from 20 big store closures, deadbeat immigrants and Eversource workers Saturday overtime nonsense! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ice-capades Posted October 14 Author Share Posted October 14 2 hours ago, Joe771476 said: Here in liberal/socialist CT, Eversource electric customers are paying a public benefits fee supposedly for public EV chargers that I nor most everybody else will never be using! Some households are paying $200/mo.! Other reasons mentioned by fuming customers are this fee is to help Eversource recoup lost revenue from 20 big store closures, deadbeat immigrants and Eversource workers Saturday overtime nonsense! It's not just Eversource customers as United Illuminating customers are in the same situation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick73 Posted October 15 Share Posted October 15 Whatever we are doing so far with BEVs is not making much difference, or it’s difficult to quantify improvement, so no wonder we are seeing pushback at various levels. And to be clear, I’m not saying BEVs do not reduce Green House Gases, it’s just that when Houston yesterday (October 14th) hit 99 F, breaking record of 92F by full 7 degrees, one starts to ask why bother? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sherminator98 Posted October 16 Share Posted October 16 On 10/15/2024 at 2:06 PM, Rick73 said: Whatever we are doing so far with BEVs is not making much difference, or it’s difficult to quantify improvement, so no wonder we are seeing pushback at various levels. And to be clear, I’m not saying BEVs do not reduce Green House Gases, it’s just that when Houston yesterday (October 14th) hit 99 F, breaking record of 92F by full 7 degrees, one starts to ask why bother? Pick your poison-the climate is changing, you can argue how much of it is man made, but the other thing to keep in mind is we might have done something already in the past that turning it around may or may not be possible. But at the same time it doesn't give you the cop out not to try. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twintornados Posted October 20 Share Posted October 20 On 10/15/2024 at 2:06 PM, Rick73 said: Whatever we are doing so far with BEVs is not making much difference, or it’s difficult to quantify improvement, so no wonder we are seeing pushback at various levels. And to be clear, I’m not saying BEVs do not reduce Green House Gases, it’s just that when Houston yesterday (October 14th) hit 99 F, breaking record of 92F by full 7 degrees, one starts to ask why bother? it took a long time to get to the point where we are effecting climate change, the solution will take equally as long to move the needle back...gotta start somewhere. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick73 Posted October 23 Share Posted October 23 On 10/20/2024 at 9:48 AM, twintornados said: it took a long time to get to the point where we are effecting climate change, the solution will take equally as long to move the needle back...gotta start somewhere. Yes, we all know every journey starts with a single step, that’s a given, but starting in the wrong direction doesn’t help. The mindset that doing anything is always better than doing nothing at all is fundamentally flawed. More than that, since humanity has limitations, investing limited resources in solutions that do not deliver the greatest benefit is absurdly shortsighted. I like EVs more than most, but at same time know that they are not solving the “big picture” problem, and that over the last 20 years humans could have done better. Incrementally, BEVs may reduce GHGs a little, but at what costs? Could we do better with same level of investment (all inclusive, not just money) by pursuing other solutions? Most likely. I believe “trying” things that are wrong or even less than the best just to feel good that we are doing something is wrong and will cost us in the long run. Add “global” component to greenhouse gases (mostly CO2 in transportation) and there is little doubt that pushback is inevitable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sherminator98 Posted October 23 Share Posted October 23 2 hours ago, Rick73 said: I believe “trying” things that are wrong or even less than the best just to feel good that we are doing something is wrong and will cost us in the long run. Add “global” component to greenhouse gases (mostly CO2 in transportation) and there is little doubt that pushback is inevitable. Well boils down to this-given how humans are doing things now we will eventually go through a bottleneck of some sort, which will be really bad...which no one really wants to hear. So damned if you do, damned if you dont...i'm figuring I'll be dead before that happens so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick73 Posted October 24 Share Posted October 24 Tesla Won't Make A $25,000 Car That Isn't A Robotaxi https://insideevs.com/news/738534/tesla-25000-car-robotaxi-musk/ "Basically, having a regular $25K model is pointless. It would be silly. It would be completely at odds with what we believe," Elon Musk said on Tesla's third-quarter earnings call. He was responding to a question about when investors can expect a $25,000 non-robotaxi electric car. Above from Musk during Wednesday’s earnings call. It appears he doesn’t believe people need to drive in the future; or that any of us enjoy driving. I would guess he doesn’t like driving and assumes everyone else will feel the same if given the opportunity to experience autonomous cars; in this case Cybercab or Robotaxi. He may be right, but if so, it will be a sad day when we don’t have the option to drive. I suppose his decision at least leaves door open for other manufacturers to build affordable normal BEVs with less direct competition. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sherminator98 Posted October 24 Share Posted October 24 7 hours ago, Rick73 said: Above from Musk during Wednesday’s earnings call. It appears he doesn’t believe people need to drive in the future; or that any of us enjoy driving. I would guess he doesn’t like driving and assumes everyone else will feel the same if given the opportunity to experience autonomous cars; in this case Cybercab or Robotaxi. He may be right, but if so, it will be a sad day when we don’t have the option to drive. I suppose his decision at least leaves door open for other manufacturers to build affordable normal BEVs with less direct competition. That is entirely too easy to answer-the profits from the other models would go away because people would default to the cheapest model they can buy or is useable for them. Given the current market conditions, that is exactly what is going to happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick73 Posted October 24 Share Posted October 24 48 minutes ago, silvrsvt said: That is entirely too easy to answer-the profits from the other models would go away because people would default to the cheapest model they can buy or is useable for them. Given the current market conditions, that is exactly what is going to happen. Maybe, but buyers want what buyers want, and if a company like Tesla doesn’t compete with itself, some other manufacturer will step in and provide the product. Other companies will build an affordable car anyway if that’s a product many buyers want because it’s the way free markets work. Tesla is just buying a little time with delay on Model 2. They already went through same scenario when they introduced Model 3 and Model Y and essentially killed demand for their own Model S and X. Had they not built Models 3/Y I think those buyers would have gone to GM, Hyundai/Kia, etc. That would have been even worse for Tesla because volume of S/X would have decline anyway; maybe just not quite as much. This issue reminds me a little of Ford cancelling Ranger pickup in US thinking buyers would just upgrade to an F-150. Not only did they bring Ranger back due to loss sales to competition, but also introduced an even smaller and lower-cost pickup, the Maverick. I may be wrong, but think companies often lose sales to competitors because they fear competing with themselves. I realize fear of cannibalization is a little different for Tesla because of their very high market share, but I’m pretty sure other BEV manufacturers will provide an affordable BEV if that’s what many buyers actually want. BYD already has very affordable Seagull in North America (Mexico IIRC) which I think would sell well in US if not for government restrictions. For what it’s worth, Tesla stated during call they will have cheaper model in first half of 2025 but I expect that will be a Model 3 (and or Y) with smaller battery that qualifies for tax credit. I don’t expect much more than reintroduction of short-range models. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted October 24 Share Posted October 24 2 hours ago, Rick73 said: This issue reminds me a little of Ford cancelling Ranger pickup in US thinking buyers would just upgrade to an F-150. Not only did they bring Ranger back due to loss sales to competition, but also introduced an even smaller and lower-cost pickup, the Maverick. They cut Ranger because it wasn’t making money and they were shutting down plants to stay out of bankruptcy. They weren’t expecting buyers to shift to f150s. And they did t bring it back because of a loss of sales, They brought it back to make Bronco viable, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted October 24 Share Posted October 24 1 hour ago, akirby said: They cut Ranger because it wasn’t making money and they were shutting down plants to stay out of bankruptcy. They weren’t expecting buyers to shift to f150s. And they did t bring it back because of a loss of sales, They brought it back to make Bronco viable, dont get me started on the Ranger...its STARTING price now in the mid 30s and they are only avail in a crewcab ( NO Supercabs ) with a shortbed...Ford has quite literally turned to ignoring commercial customers needs with BOTH the Ranger and the F150 by deleting certain builds....some head scratching decisions have been made by corporate....weird if you ask me...not that my whinging will change anything but I do know first hand buyers with specific needs are going elsewhere... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick73 Posted October 28 Share Posted October 28 Back to Tesla’s EV dominance, it’s probably just offering more for less, making their vehicles choices hard for competitors to beat. As an example the cheapest Tesla, the RWD Model 3 as far as I know, now has 363 miles of EPA range, and perhaps even more important, charges at a reported rate of +195 miles of highway driving in 15 minutes. Above Tesla estimate based on driving at steady 65 MPH and charging on a 250 kW Supercharger. This makes the RWD Model 3 not only practical for shorter local trips but long ones as well. When car is new, one could drive 3 hours steady, charge for 15 minutes, and repeat indefinitely. Because of its longer range, battery would not need to go above 80% state of charge which is when charging starts to slow considerably. Most other “somewhat affordable” BEVs lack the combination of highway range and charging speed to make long distance travel as practical. For those who prefer an SUV, a similar argument can be made for base Model Y. Cheaper BEVs like Chevy Bolt and Nissan Leaf not only lacked similar highway range, but charge much slower, making long trips likely much less pleasant and or practical IMO. It’s understandable why Tesla has been dominant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chrisgb Posted October 28 Share Posted October 28 On 10/24/2024 at 12:14 PM, Deanh said: dont get me started on the Ranger...its STARTING price now in the mid 30s and they are only avail in a crewcab ( NO Supercabs ) with a shortbed...Ford has quite literally turned to ignoring commercial customers needs with BOTH the Ranger and the F150 by deleting certain builds....some head scratching decisions have been made by corporate....weird if you ask me...not that my whinging will change anything but I do know first hand buyers with specific needs are going elsewhere... Nissan Frontier and Toyota Tacoma are the only two building extended cabs and crew cabs w/available 6ft box for the NA market. The Tacoma's extended cab is fixed: no rear doors.😳 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted October 28 Share Posted October 28 6 minutes ago, Chrisgb said: Nissan Frontier and Toyota Tacoma are the only two building extended cabs and crew cabs w/available 6ft box for the NA market. The Tacoma's extended cab is fixed: no rear doors.😳 I decided to keep my F150 for hauling stuff and I’ll just rent a parking space at a storage unit when I’m not using it. I would have definitely bought a new Supercab Ranger if it was available. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted October 29 Share Posted October 29 On 10/28/2024 at 8:34 AM, Chrisgb said: Nissan Frontier and Toyota Tacoma are the only two building extended cabs and crew cabs w/available 6ft box for the NA market. The Tacoma's extended cab is fixed: no rear doors.😳 I know....I lost a rather large order to Nissan specifically for that reason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.