So *that's* what happened to all those Mk 1 Xbox power cables ...
Tesla's stock price has risen at least 10 per cent after the electric-car maker's boasted that its fourth quarter revenues exceeded targets by about 20 per cent. The company said that in the three months to the end of 2013, it had sold and delivered 6,900 of its Model S sedans to customers worldwide. It said that its …
Elon is a good talker but the facts show that his products have been involved in a number of fires that should not be expected nor tolerated for these vehicles. Now we have another issue with charging systems that could burn your car and house down. When will consumers wake up? It's great to be a tree hugger but not so much when the trees in your yard are all that's left because your Tesler S just burnt the house to the fround.
The facts don't show "that his products have been involved in a number of fires that should not be expected nor tolerated for these vehicles" at all.
The facts are that three Tesla vehicle fires have been reported, all following a collision. So the [US] National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is investigating whether there's a problem. It may find that there is and it may find that there isn't.
The three Tesla fires were caused by metal debris on the road punching through the bottom of battery case.
But then fuel tanks have been known to explode, too... the one that comes immediately to mind is the early model Ford Pintos...
I'm not sure if there are any in other parts of the country, but several limousine companies in the SF Bay Area are using Tesla Model S in daily limousine service, mostly for airport transfers and wine tours. If they're good for 260 miles, that would be two round trips from Napa to SFO without recharging, although the tail end of the second run could be a problem.
"The facts are that three Tesla vehicle fires have been reported, all following a collision. So the [US] National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is investigating whether there's a problem. It may find that there is and it may find that there isn't."
So I think the takeway fact from this is don't have a collision when you're in a vehicle.
Who saw that one coming?
You are incorrect. One vehicle ran over a piece of debris in the road that punctured the battery pack and started a fire that burnt it to the ground. Running over debris in the road should not cause a car fire. Charging your EV at home should not burn your house to the ground.
Being in denial doesn't change this reality.
Nice troll. Almost every single point you make is false, as you would know if you actually spent even 2 minutes looking in to it. I presume you work for a competitor?
Facts: Three fires in action, two caused by impacts with massive metal lumps. 1 caused by driver crashing in to concrete wall. Drivers were safe in all situations. There is currently an investigation going on to see if anything needs to be done to improve the situation. My reading of the accidents is that there is very little that could be done to make the cars any safer, these were big impacts. Even the people in the incidents have said they don't blame the car.
Facts: No house fires have been caused by the power supply connector- the statement is that it *could* burn the people using it. This has now been fixed anyway with a recall (albeit an over the air one). Just like problems are fixed in other makes of cars when they are discovered. It happens all the time.
So, when you start spouting about stuff you know less than nothing about, and simply have a misguided opinion, please sit back, have a think, look in to it. Then, once you have the evidence in hand, you at least have a valid base from which to start spouting.
I think you are confusing the Fisker Karma with the Tesla. It was the Karma that had a number of fault fires. so far Tesla has had 3 fires, 2 from impacts with debris on the road (with no injuries, unlike this incident) and one fire as the result of a high speed crash impacting multiple objects, (again no serious injury)
Perhaps you should check out #NotATesla on instagram, twitter and facebook...
So far 2 cars have been involved in fires. In each case it was because the car ran over a truck's trailer hook which punctured the 1/4inch armoured plate protecting the battery. (http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/model-s-fire)
Not a good idea to piss off Tony Stark - get your facts right in future.
"It's great to be a tree hugger but not so much when the trees in your yard are all that's left because your Tesler S just burnt the house to the fround."
If you're a true tree hugger, you wouldn't be purchasing any sort of vehicle, Electric or otherwise.
You'd actually live in an urban environment, apartment/condo style. You would also take public (mass transit) or walk / ride your bike to work.
But lets get real.
You buy the car for its style, and its performance.
My brother-in-law bought one to replace his aging car. He ran the numbers in terms of maintenance costs and with his daily round trip commute being over 100 miles (closer to 150 miles) almost all highway, the car with the high speed charger made sense.
I wouldn't recommend anyone over 6' sitting in the back seat.
Is the car perfect? No.
Its expensive, but a blast to drive.
For your everyday car, its great, but I wouldn't recommend it for long drives because of the recharging issues.
EPS is negative, forward P/E >100, Price/Book >30, PEG >10 so, to be kind, it's overpriced regardless of what they sold last quarter. Both Apple and Ford are more stable investments with better financials and both currently pay dividends.
For the Tesla touters who would like to point out that Tesla is up 625% over the last 5 years, kindly note that Apple isn't far behind at 550% and Ford tops both at 635%.
You are quite right in that Ford has appreciated considerably in the last half decade, thanks for pointing that out.
I do note, however, that Tesla has only been publicly traded since 2011, and Ford's performance hasn't compared quite so favourably over the same period. Then again, Tesla doesn't behave like typical automotive stock, but more like a Silicon Valley company.
You are correct Ford hasn't matched Tesla and that is solely because of the first nine months of last year. If you look between Tesla's IPO on 29 June 2010 up until a year ago you will see that both companies registered about a 40% gain in stock price. Where Tesla takes off is only in the first nine months of last year but it has dropped since then and while both Tesla and Ford have dropped in that period, Ford has dropped 5% and Tesla's boost today brings it up to a 10% loss. Note that with Ford you also get 3% dividend which nicely tempers the loss in stock value. Oh I could make the comparison with any other major automaker since in the last three months Honda has been fairly flat and pays a 5% dividend, Toyota is down about 8.5% and pays 2.5%, General Motors is up 13% with no dividend. But as you say, Tesla behaves like a tech company.
Unfortunately, Tesla isn't a tech company, it's an automotive company and as such they build one, they sell one. It isn't a tech company where they can leverage one platform to drive sales somewhere else unless they decide to use that huge touchscreen to display ads or some other revenue generation scheme it's just a car that needs service and warranty work. My reasoning for comparing it to Apple was to show that even tech companies have far better financials than Tesla. I could have easily picked Google, Yahoo, Oracle, Microsoft or a bunch of others and the results would be the same. Sure there might be tech startups that would love to have Tesla's numbers but I don't consider Tesla a startup.
Most articles do a disservice to the average investor, like many of my relatives, who don't know all the gobbledegook like P/E ratios, book value, EBITDA or even mrq and ttm. They look at this and think "OMG, their price jumps even when they have problems so they must be a great investment and I don't want to miss it!" so when they ask me I'm forced to try to put out that fire and show them that the value isn't there. Is it worth $40? Sure. $50? Probably. $60? Possibly. $160? Sorry, not even close. As a product I think the Tesla S is great and certainly a better investment than an equal dollar amount of TSLA shares and I think that will be true for about another year or two when the company grows enough to justify the valuation.
Eddy, once again, many thanks for contributing your perspective on Tesla, which is indeed novel compared to most of the stuff one reads on the press. I personally found it an interesting, informative read for that reason.
I would just like to point out that (from memory, I hope you will excuse me), that in addition to selling actual cars, Tesla also have a considerable intellectual property portfolio (in the form of various patents for new electric automotive technology, some of which are actually useful in the mobile computing industry also). They also sell electric car components to other manufacturers (notably Mercedes-Benz, who own part of Tesla), and lastly, because of theirs being a pure electric car they have a surplus of "carbon credits" (California's Zero Emission Vehicle Credits is the official name), which they sell to other companies.
This in no way invalidates your observations, just mentioning that Tesla making a profit is not just limited to sales of their cars.
I'm not sure what Eddy's point is.
It's not Tesla who set the market price for their shares, it's the market. They may be overvalued, I don't care if they are, but that's out of Tesla's hands. And of course, they are for sure not the only company that is overvalued.
The important thing to me is that Tesla are improving the electric car and the electric car market. And that is a good thing.
"EPS is negative, forward P/E >100, Price/Book >30, PEG >10 so, to be kind, it's overpriced regardless of what they sold last quarter. Both Apple and Ford are more stable investments with better financials and both currently pay dividends.
For the Tesla touters who would like to point out that Tesla is up 625% over the last 5 years, kindly note that Apple isn't far behind at 550% and Ford tops both at 635%."
BTW is Ford on it's 2nd or 3rd US government bailout because they can't manage to make enough cars that USians want to own at prices they want to pay.
@ James Hughes 1
My point is that a lot of news articles about Tesla tend to talk a lot about the product and how well the stock price is doing but fail to address any sort of financials other than the stock price. This creates a disconnect between reality and perception and leads to a contrived valuation as people pile on in an attempt to get rich. So while I think the company is doing great things with the product and actually wish I could afford to buy one of the cars, I don't think the stock is a wise investment at this time because, IMO, the current stock price has been artificially inflated by people wanting to get in on the action at, what turns out to be, any price. And yes, there are many other examples of stocks with #hyperinflated stock prices.
@John Smith 19:
You're thinking of Chrysler and/or GM who were bailed out to prevent them from going bankrupt. Ford is the one who passed on the bailout deal and it's also the only one of the three who didn't wind up filing for bankruptcy. Yes, Ford got loans from the government but then so did Tesla. I was going to use Cummins but figured folks would say it wasn't a fair comparison because they weren't direct competitors, perhaps I should have used Honda, Toyota or Volkswagen instead. You'd think folks would wonder when Facebook has better financials. Meh, can't please everyone.
...I think robotic cars would probably be more beneficial than electric cars. I really wish the politicians would iron out the legal issues already.
Of course, a robotic electric car would be even better, but my impression remains that electric cars are still too expensive and the technology still too immature.
Depending on what you have to support them, a fleet of robotic electric cars could be rather interesting. Just need some good powe rsource for all that juice, preferably not burning fossil fuel. I'm very curious to see what'll happened with the the Quebec gouv's plan for electrification of transports.
If it broke, I'd be able to have competent people to fix it, unlike my Camaro, where the various wrench monkeys were too retarded to replace the ABS sensor that the computer was complaining about, and I couldn't replace it myself. It's pretty sad when you've got to have your lawyer send them a letter to get them to do their job.
"it is pretty sad that you have a lawyer"
Its actually sadder that he admits to having a Camaro.
Sorry, but when I was in High School, way back when... that's the car rich kid's parents bought them when they turned 16.
Mine's the jacket with the Mercedes SUV key fob in the pocket.
Location, location, location. Besides the equator each state has rules to help with things like tax credits, easy financing, grants and beneficial net metering policies to go along with China's "cheap as chips" PV cells. All together it could be a fairly substantial savings for however long the programs last.
Let's not forget heating since evacuated tube collectors can easily pay for themselves in a fairly short time depending on the local heating sources. I have a relative in New Hampshire who installed a system some six years ago and while not completely free from oil for heat and hot water the system has paid for itself twice now.
...the cost is too high and charging is a pain. Very few public charging points in the UK although the fast battery swap option they showed last year is very cool and also gives a great option to get the batteries upgraded as new technology evolves and they tweak the firmware to use it, but also battery life would affect the resale value of the car. If you can change the battery that fast there's no problem.
I really do like the model S. The other mpv one with the gull-wing doors would be a problem though - I wouldn't be able to open then in the garage as the roof is too low! but the S is gorgeous.
I'd have one too, but I am waiting until the purely automotive technology in the car gets to the level that I expect at this price point. Things like adaptive cruise control, collision detection, pedestrian/animal detection, adaptive suspension (I think it may actually have this one already), and all the other little details such as automatically drying the brake pads in rainy weather, crosswind steering compensation, etc., etc.
It's small things, but they all add up to make long-distance driving way more relaxed than it would otherwise be.
It is bewildering what passes for a "personalized plate" in the UK, and I say that as one who was born there.
Here in NY you can have 8 letters and numbers of your choice if a) no-one else has them, 2) they don't spell anything offensive and $) you are willing to pay a premium for them.
A relative (by marriage) labeled his new sports car "second childhood" which was witty, but he had to pull so many letters and sub in numbers creatively that the result was more like Furbish than English.
A Camarro's "DETHTUNG" was classic though (wiki Deathtoungue) and had me seething with jealousy for days.
When will the British people rise up and demand the same freedom to plaster their vehicle with witty de-voweled into incomprehensible gibberish sentiment?
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019