Tesla to lay off 9% of its workforce.

Messages
43,638
Location
'Stralia
Originally Posted By: JeffKeryk
That site has been playing with my head all day... Using the ground to tailpipe example of the gasoline car, it's 168MJ cradle to grave, the extraction and distribution cost of 26, is therefore 15.5% of the total. Applying that to the EV, 15.5% of the total energy used, is 15.5% of 112MJ, or 17.4MJ....netting that off the "getting the energy to the car" leaves 56.6MJ for the generation and distribution of the energy. 56.6MJ of 94.6MJ in total of the energy to create the power (they state it's oil fired) and drive the car...that's 40% efficiency for the generation and distribution system...so taking transmission losses, and with industry experience on how to get the level of efficiency, they have cherry picked CCGT running on oil as their comparator...that's nonsensical, as OCGT are run oil oil for peakers, CCGT on oil is ridiculous (but that's OK, it's a paper argument anyway, based on an EV running on oil). Ducking back to their Gasoline engined vehicle, and only using the energy in the tank , and the claimed 142MJ per 100km. Gasoline contains 34.2MJ per litre on average. So they are claiming 4,15L/100km - it's all in 2020. And that Nuclear for an EV is just as bad for GHG as running a car on petrol (155 versus 169). The linked article makes little sense...and when compared to ZERO GHG from CARB for the Ca power supply, there some serious cognative bias going on in both the authors of the article, CARB, and the starry eyed truth seekers in the "everything is possible because I can imagine it" brigade.
 
Messages
84
Location
Heart of Dixie
every mainstream auto maker in the world is developing EV. the difference is, these companies know how to do it right as a business. when the technology is right and the profit is there, they will go full bore and Tesla will be gone.
 
Messages
17,302
Location
OH
Originally Posted By: riklyn
every mainstream auto maker in the world is developing EV. the difference is, these companies know how to do it right as a business. when the technology is right and the profit is there, they will go full bore and Tesla will be gone.
Mainstream automakers are offering at least a few EVs collectively. Tesla still has a couple of years to get its manufacturing and assembly operations running smoothly before any large push into EVs by the established makers is likely, so I wouldn't count them out just yet. OTOH, if a Toyota or a Honda surprises the market with an <$30K 250 mile range EV, all bets are off.
 
Messages
28,129
Location
Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada
Originally Posted By: billt460
"Given that Tesla has never made an annual profit in the almost 15 years since we have existed, profit is obviously not what motivates us." I would be interested to hear what is long term business model is. Considering the fact he obviously isn't interested in profit?
That's the kind of rubbish that really impresses shareholders. Musk likes to sell a lot of baloney, but if he keeps up statements like this, the shares' value will start to correct itself sooner rather than later, and he and the rest of the board of directors may be finding a new line of work.
Originally Posted By: Shannow
The linked article makes little sense...and when compared to ZERO GHG from CARB for the Ca power supply, there some serious cognative bias going on in both the authors of the article, CARB, and the starry eyed truth seekers in the "everything is possible because I can imagine it" brigade.
I guess when these articles are here to sell us an idea, rather than being peer reviewed science, we see how badly they do when they do get a bit of scientific review.
 
Messages
4,503
Location
Los Gatos, CA
Elon Musk is a pioneer, a visionary. He challenges much accepted thought, he causes disruption. Elon Musk Microsoft had me meet with the Tesla CIO to discuss authoring a custom MRP/MRP II solution to replace SAP... Elon hates SAP. By the way, Tesla is considered a sweatshop here in the valley... As for some of the scientific calculations, I challenge you to think out of the box... When are calculations appropriate and when do they fall short? Hint: Think of a diesel delivery truck that makes numerous stops, operates in traffic and idles much of the time. Would you agree that a hybrid or perhaps pure electric solution makes sense? Also, if it weren't for the dreamers, scientific discovery and subsequent technologies would be .... "Imagination is more important than knowledge. Knowledge is limited. Imagination encircles the world." A. Einstein I appreciate and respect all your thoughts...
 
Messages
43,638
Location
'Stralia
Originally Posted By: JeffKeryk
As for some of the scientific calculations, I challenge you to think out of the box... When are calculations appropriate and when do they fall short? Hint: Think of a diesel delivery truck that makes numerous stops, operates in traffic and idles much of the time. Would you agree that a hybrid or perhaps pure electric solution makes sense?
For things that are meant to operate in the real world, thought up by imagination, then promulgated as fact, calculations are all we've got to turn make believe. When Musk says that he's going to release an 80,000lb semi trailer that can do 500 miles at 65MPH, and can be recharged in 20 minutes, then calculating that it needs 1.2MW of storage on board, and a 3MW energy transfer rate in the extension cord, and there's not enough roof space on the Walmart to deliver that turns the claims and imagination into numbers that can make the claims look possible...or advertising fluff. If my calculations on that are 20% out (possible, Musk tells us nothing about his physics, all about his claims...he refuses to answer investor's questions because the questions are "boring"), the problems don't change by an order of magnitude easier/harder. Somebody says that they can power a pantech with solar panels on the roof and the sides, and calculations demonstrate that they are full of it, or don't have a grasp...even if the panels were 100% efficient (which they can never be), the job can't be done. engineers have always been using engineering to bring imagination into reality. Problem occurs when people imagine that the claims made by this charlatan are true, without understanding what he's actually promising (vaporware).
 
Messages
6,748
Location
Lake Havasu City, Arizona
You have to remember how Elon Musk got wealthy in the first place. He first created Zip 2 with his brother and made approximately $50 Million. He then founded PayPal with this money, and sold it for an even greater profit. With all of that money, he founded Tesla, SpaceX, and Solarcity, which are "worth" more than $1B each. However, his financial gravy train seems to have stopped there. Is it because he has risen beyond the level of his own ability? Or because he got lucky in the first place with something that has nothing to do with what he is involved in now? I'm not trying to take away any deserved credit from the man. But coming into vast sums of wealth relatively easily and early on, doesn't automatically guarantee future success in business. Perhaps he bit off more than he can chew with Tesla. Running 15 years without a profit, coupled with consuming truckloads of government cash during the interim, would make that a very conceivable possibility. Musk is betting a fortune that electric vehicles are going to be the future. So far that is not the case. This in spite of all of his lofty claims. Perhaps he would have been better off pulling a Mark Cuban. Sell at the top, buy an NBA team, and basically retire except for jet setting around the country, giving "expert advice" on everything from politics, to the environment. You can't lose money if you're giving away B.S. for free.
 
Messages
17,302
Location
OH
Originally Posted By: JeffKeryk
Tesla stock is at $358. I would not worry over Elon's fortune... Been a pretty sound investment since day 1. Just sayin'...
The same could be said of Enron as well as many other enterprises over the years. Sound investments until the bottom dropped out. Just sayin'
 
Messages
6,326
Location
New Braunfels
I Seriously have never seen one on the road. I probably would not notice it if I did since I have no idea what they look like. Usually layoffs are due to a lack of positive cash flow, so when I read about a nearly 10%rift, I think of financial troubled waters for the company they worked for.
 
Last edited:
Messages
4,503
Location
Los Gatos, CA
Tesla is #1 or #2 (behind Lam Research) workforce in Fremont. They are in the old GM / NUMMI plant. My 4-4-2 was built there in 1965; I have the Order Copy Build Sheet. My 1993 Toyota 4WD PU was built there. And the support jobs (restaurants, etc) make for a huge tax base for the area. Fremont fought for Tesla to take over the facility after GM and Toyota left.
 
Messages
17,302
Location
OH
Originally Posted By: Bryanccfshr
I Seriously have never seen one on the road. I probably would not notice it if I did since I have no idea what they look like. Usually layoffs are due to a lack of positive cash flow, so when I read about a nearly 10%rift, I think of financial troubled waters for the company they worked for.
I see Tesla Model S cars fairly often. These are attractive cars apparently cribbed from the current four door Maserati models. I've seen two Model X cars and it looks for all the world like a blown up Gen 2 Prius. I've even seen a couple of Model 3 cars, which are badly proportioned hunchbacked pug nosed things. Clearly Tesla will not win based upon their design expertise, but then neither the Leaf nor the Bolt are things of great beauty.
 
Messages
7,904
Location
Michigan
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
Here's the deal: As I noted above any current Tesla model would suit my wife and I as daily drivers all of the time with very low operating costs. The thing is that all of these cars are so overpriced as to make no practical sense as daily drivers. I'm a fiscal guy and my wife is a fiscal gal, so we look at things on a ruthless cost basis. No Tesla model comes even close to being economically advantageous even as compared to a thirsty new Suburban. The fact that no Tesla is a practical touring car only adds to the disadvantages column. These are actually practical and useable cars in typical daily driver service and if I were looking at another ten years of my commute and could buy a Model 3 for $35K or so, I'd be seriously interested. At current Tesla prices, no thanks.
Have you considered the Chevy Bolt on a ruthless cost basis? Tesla's marketing seems to be to prove that electric cars can do whatever gasoline cars can do, but will cost 3x as much. GM doesn't make any such wild claims for the Bolt, just that it's a good, practical daily commuter car.
 
Messages
17,302
Location
OH
Yes, I have considered the Bolt. Not too seriously, since as I noted in the post you quote I'm not looking at another ten years at fifty miles a day. Were I doing so, then the Bolt would make a pretty compelling case for itself. The Volt even more so, since along with the EV aspect you also get a real engine should you want to go anywhere beyond work and back. Within the next three years or so, our combined household driving will decline from around 35K a year to maybe 15K just by our having eliminated our commutes through retirement.
 
Messages
6,748
Location
Lake Havasu City, Arizona
Google Chevy Bolt, and this is what comes up. A tiny compact, all electric car with a maximum range of 238 miles. With a recharge time of 9.3 hours out of a 220 volt outlet. (How many garages in this country have 220 volt outlets?) And you get all of this for a minimum of $40K to $45K out the door. Somehow I doubt there will be a waiting list to buy these things. https://www.google.com/search?source=hp&...1.0.jrhT6sUnBR0 2019 Chevrolet Bolt EV Compact car MSRP: From $36,620 Range: 238 mi battery-only Battery charge time: 9.3h at 220V MPGe: 128 city / 110 highway Battery: 60 kWh 350 V lithium-ion LT $36,620 Premier $40,905
 
Top