oldshurst442

My point being: Tesla's car manufacturing may fail them to the point of where consumers might not want to buy Tesla vehicles. Especially if Tesla does not give a proper 2nd generation to their current crop of cars. The Roadster 2.0 is a halo car. If it didnt exist, Tesla could have used the Model S as its halo car so by having a Rodster 2.0 in the line-up wont change much. However, if a 2nd gen Model S does NOT show up anytime soon, anything from Cadillac or Porsche or Audi and anybody else that could meet and especially beat the Model S' performance specs in speed and in battery and range performance, Tesla is SCREWED!!! And I could feel it in my gut, that GM WILL meet and beat Telsa's tech. VW too. And if the marketing hooh-la-la of Lucid is genuine, not good for Tesla and the Model S IF the Model S stays as a gen 1 offering. And THEN when THAT happens, then the bread and butter models WILL be affected. ESPECIALLY if the Model 3 and Model Y dont get gen 2s, but even if they stay with that gen 1 look...because as we see with the Ford Mach E, a new, shinier model will ALWAYS sell better than an older, passé vehicle. And when THAT happens, because Im afraid it will, revenue streams from selling cars will dwindle, carbon credit sales will be non-existent and then the car making business for Tesla is done for. But like I said earlier, Tesla's powertrain and battery tech is still second to none. Even if VW and GM could and will meet and beat it, its still on top and Tesla could just relegate itself to sell its platforms to OEMs. And this would be a great money making endeavor for Tesla. Powered by Tesla could be a very powerful marketing tool for many body shell "coach builders". Something a reminisce about it from the pioneering days...

Profit is such a delicate definition...especially when it comes to corporate capitalism. But that is neither here nor there. The conversation SHOULD steer itself AWAY from all other OEMs and it should really JUST BE about Tesla. Tesla's revenue streams are a delicate issue. There is revenue. From all kinds of sources. But as far as the revenue streams that are DIRECTLY related to its car selling business, and how efficient it could build them, well, this is where the problem lies for Tesla. It does sell enough cars for a viable revenue stream. Heck, that revenue stream helps Tesla put money back into the company with Tesla's construction of battery fabrication factories AND car fabrication factories and it also helps investors tom continue to invest in Tesla's stocks. THAT is a good thing as money that Tesla needs to use is there for various projects that need to be made in the future. But... Tesla's manufacturing is inefficient and costs money to the company. THAT leads to Tesla having quality issues too, which also cuts into the bottom line. Market erosion is also happening from at least 2 OEM giants (VW and Ford of all places) and from China's car companies and there hasnt been a full onslaught of competition yet from any of the OEMs. GM hasnt entered the fight yet. But its coming here and in China... Side track from GM and contrast: GM's manufacturing inefficiencies was only because there were too many brands...NOT because of a lack of an understanding of how to manufacture cars. Unlike Tesla. GM's quality problems because of shytty bean counting...NOT because of shytty manufacturing. Tesla over engineers in some places needlessly and under engineers in others. Not because of bean ccounting, but because of a lack of experience. All GM had to do is NOT cheap out on the processes... GM's market erosion WAS because of cheap bean counted products...BUT GM still had and still has a very very healthy market share. People bought and continue to buy GM products. Tesla is being questioned even by those investors who truly believe in them right now. Its funny, even when GM was dragged through all that mud during the 70s, 80s, 90s, 00s. 10s and now 20s, especially during the bankruptcy, GM was NEVER questioned about their existence. Many people wanted their solvency, but even those people, they just knew GM was really not in danger of selling any cars... Can we say the same with Tesla now? Selling carbon credits is not a way to keep a business afloat. Tesla has to figure out a more efficient way to manufacture a vehicle. The Cybertruck is said to be engineered in a way for Tesla to make money. But the Cybertruck wont be selling in any high volumes to KEEP Tesla afloat. If the Cybertruck indeed ever goes on sale to begin with. Their bread and butter model...the Model 3 and Model Y , even with the new manufacturing plant in China...is still a manufacturing mess... Again...something that GM in 2009 NEVER had to face...

In all honesty...GM's "bankruptcy" was not a conventional one. It was a solvency that was restructured. Because there actually was revenue streams that were coming in. Pretty SUBSTANTIAL revenue streams at that. Its just that a lot of waste and fat had to be trimmed and why a restructure was presented as a solution instead of liquidating the company and dissolving it. Tesla on the other hand, is not like GM where there is a healthy revenue stream from actual selling of cars. Tesla does spend billions in factories and their proprietary EV charging network which negates their revenue streams as the revenue coming in just goes directly back into the company. HOWEVER...much data including Sandy Munroe concludes that Tesla's manufacturing of automobiles is very very inefficient. GM did not have that problem. Sales were also there for GM. (Tesla's market share going forward after 2023-2024 is under scrutiny too) GM's problems were that they had an enormous amount of expenses. Not even debt. Their debt load WAS manageable. Banks did not want to loan them money BECAUSE there was an over all (and global) bank meltdown (thanks to greedy American bank mortgage loans etc)... It was their expenses that really did them in.

Id say with the Roadster 1.0 Tesla was considered a legit car company even with just that car and it was just a conversion job. Elon wanted a legit Tesla EV with a REAL EV platform and that is how the Model S came about, but Tesla as a company starts with the Roadster as the REAL Tesla technology and raison d'etre is the battery tech and electric motor. To this day, Tesla is considered a tech company with their battery tech, motor and software front and center ahead of their car production...

Tesla is not going to go bankrupt. At least not in the 2020s. In the 2030s...who knows? Too many "investors" have poored too many billions into this to just let it fail. However, if Tesla CARS dont overtake the competition in sales market share, then who knows what will happen next. Consumers NEED to BUY your vehicles to STAY IN business... THAT is just how...business works. However, if Tesla cars wont exist, Tesla powertrains and batteries IS a thing and Tesla could provide THAT to OEMs that dont want to invest the billions developing their own tech. Volkswagen Group or GM might not be those that would buy Tesla powertrains and batteries as they have their own technologies...but... Toyota might. They have fallen behind. Honda might. Honda will be buying GM tech, but having another option like Tesla might benefit Honda... Mercedes might also. Mercedes EV tech is pathetic as of now... Keep in mind that VW does outsell Tesla is certain markets NOW. Keep in mind that the Ford Mach E also has eroded Tesla market share. GM EVs that actually compares to Tesla, like the GMC Hummer EV, well, the Hummer EV has a very very healthy amount of down deposits for one. Tesla like craze about the Hummer with people...

Did it ever gain momentum in the first place? (on vintage vehicles being electrified) I dont think it ever was THAT huge of a thing. As with "sacrilegious" engine swaps like a Toyota twin turboed inline 6 being dropped in a '69 Camaro or an LS swap in a Mark IV Supra or in an air-cooled Porsche 911 not bothering me, I dont care if a battery electric powertrain gets to be swapped into a classic car. But...I do hurt just a tad inside when the V8 goes away for an electric motor... I do find THIS trend: "On the heels of the news piece where something like 20% of BE vehicle owner are switching back to IC" to be quite interesting though. Not good for the 2035 ICE ban I must admit. Even though I DO think its coming because its more to do with worldwide government regs rather than market place acceptance, there might be a push back by consumers for regs like these...

What did one lung say to the other? we be-lung together! What do you call a lung thief? breathtaking! Thank-you. Thank-you very much!

I needed some cleaning products for my automobiles. Both cars hadnt been cleaned on the inside for quite some time now... I have 3 consecutive days off starting today so I thought Id do some car cleaning. I thought I had some left over but nope, so before heading to work yesterday, I bought some cleaning products. And this is what I saw in the Canadian Tire parking lot. My dad's 1979 Impala seemed to have had the same colour... Say what you will about 1970s cars from GM. Diss, bitch and complain and say that GM's troubles began in the 1970s. I, for one though, LOVE many many GM products from this era. This Poncho right here...long, low and sleek. Beautiful convertible. Miles better looking and interesting than the shyte cars that you could see in the background...

Hey @David K-Pop is a cancer. A vicious one at that! https://ca.news.yahoo.com/kim-jong-un-calls-k-121112259.html Dont look at me...David. Im only regurgitating what the expert of Korea is saying.

Earth is flat?

I cried. Started feeling weak right after she said that she still had cancer in her lungs, spine and liver. And then when she started singing, her beautiful voice, the tears just flowed... I admire her courage.

Oldshurst442 to CCAP: "I bet you do not hear THAT too often..." Everybody on CheersandGears: "Wut? Did he actually say that??? " "What nerve???!!!"

Somebody does not know and understand Benz's history... I suggest that somebody learn it. At the very least, that person could just use Wiki... A couple of merges and acquisitions and introduction of new brands in the early history of Benz motor cars between the three gentlemen that bear confusingly the name of the company today. Herr Benz, Herr Daimler and Herr Maybach all had their own proper automobile companies to which they merged together, collaborated together before and after mergers and created a new brand together with a new name (Mercedes) and further merged and formed and acquired each other's companies to form new companies... And then furthered their merger traditions in the late 1990s with an American company using the name Daimler-Chrysler in the NEW company that if we actually do the math, we would see that at THAT point in time, Daimler-Chrysler had MORE brands then General Motors did... Let us not forget to mention acquisitions of American and European lorry manufacturers... I dont blame him tho, the history of this company and its names are most definitely confusing... But, seeing that he is a fan of the company, Id think he would know better... Mercedes, over time, has taken over as the MAIN brand name... But in this company's history, all three gentlemen had their names of Daimler, Maybach and Benz adorn a vehicle under its convoluted branding system including models under the Mercedes name in the company... All three gentlemen engineered their own stuff on their own brands bearing their names, but also engineered stuff under their mergered and acquisitioned convoluted company. And all three gentlemen worked and engineered stuff on the brand named Mercedes. Same but different when we compare the histories of Dunbar Buick, Louis Chevrolet, Ransom E Olds and GM founder that was ousted but clawed his way back into buying himself into the company and acquiring and buying out Louis and Ransom and creating new brands like Pontiac and Cadillac... Not quite accurate and profound this history lesson, but good enough to put things into perspective to show that GM and Daimler-Benz or whatever they are calling themselves today are indeed apples to apples. The German company just decided to consolidate all models and brands into one name over time. GM decided to create an empire with several brands, then shut down some of these over time but continue on with a multiple brand strategy.

Number 7 was left stranded. Its OK. Im happy anyway. Time to root for Number 25.

E class is bundled with the CLS... In effect, putting the C Class in 3rd place... With the exception of the GLE, what I posted are in effect the models that sell the most in the US... Their bread and butter lease queens... 7600 C Class 7000 GLBs 15 000 GLCs THAT right there, is a LOT (30 000 units) of $38 000 - $43 000 vehicles. And I know those are just starting price points. Id say the avg lease prices of these probably leave the store at 45 000 - 46 000 dollars. Still... If you take a looksie at Buick... https://www.buick.com/ These fall under a Buick level of competition and YOU yourself dont consider Buick as luxury... This little exercise just brings home the points: 1. Mercedes is not entirely luxury...ESPECIALLY to what their bread and butter vehicles selll at IN the USA... 2. Further proof that Mercedes-Benz is akin to General Motors rather than Cadillac. And if we factor in the HOME market of Europe...those A Classes, CLAs and C Class cars are just Chevrolets for Europe...

If the Bruins lose tomorrow... Maybe they should change their pick me up song of Im Shipping Up to Boston... To this: Fits them perfectly... choreography, lyrics and all!!!

Im in hockey/baseball mode...so this would be my version of two Rangers pic(s)

Actually...they ARE a volume brand in the USA. https://www.mbusa.com/en/all-vehicles#vbg-suvs What Im about to post...STRAIGHT from the USA M-B website..are all lease queen specials...meant to get the lessee to spend the least amount of $$$s per month so M-B could roll-out as many of these as possible for volume and market share. The figures YOU love to educate us with when you try to tell us about how LUXURY Mercedes is and how M-B dominates luxury sales and when you talk about M-B in general....

I was out and about today. Had a doctor's appointment in the morning. When I finished with that, I drove. And drove. And stopped at a Dairy Queen. Had a strawberry sundae (with peanuts). Looked at cars driving by. Looked at people walking by. Montreal had a very happy vibe about it today. Not the actual cars, but same colour and wheel combo. Driven by a mid-twenties hottie. Literally 2 minutes later Driven by a very good lookin' middle-aged woman. 5 minutes later. Driven by a young punk. He too in his early to mid-20s. Young punk only because he was a good lookin' guy and he has a nicer car than me when I was in my early to mid 20s I had to get by with a used 1989 red Firebird with a 2.8 liter V6 that I crashed and a new 1994 Grand Am GT also with a V6. The updated 3.1 liter version. With 4 phoquing doors and that aqua blue/teal colour. Both engines not even cracking the 200 HP mark while this punk has 450 of them at his disposal! Phoquer! 1984ish El Camino. This same colour combo. Not the same wheels. It had god awful after markets. I didnt quite glimpse the front end as this is almost the exact same angle I saw it as I was turning right and he was going straight. I didnt see who the driver was. The car was pretty beat up. Had rust wholes in the rear quarter panels. It sounded horrible... Parked on a street looking pretty

I prefer this kind of scenery. Besides, she seems to be smarter and more down to earth. Although I do understand that bimbos exist with all the various car niches...

That is impressive. Seems like too much work for me to get in and out of though. Id rather just do a hood/roof slide and jump right in... faster, cleaner and more efficient. Plus...muscle car!!!

I ranted a tad about this, but Im glad you brought it back to light. This leaves the door right open for Porsche and/or Audi to (Taycan/E Tron GT) to deliver on a 500 range, 1000 HP-ish super EV sedan that does 0-60 in under 2 seconds. Porsche, from what I have learned from their history, is that Porsche does NOT like taking a backseat to ANYBODY... They fell very short with their Taycan as compared to the Model S, but you just KNOW that Porsche is NOT resting on its laurels. They WILL end up out-performing Tesla in the next gen Taycan... GM and its Hummer EV, If you look at the supposed specs, and GM usually sandbags their numbers, the Hummer EV does 0-60 in 3 seconds, has 1000 HP and has a range of 350 miles. Freedom mode engaged. The Hummer EV has also a 9000 lbs weight and is as big as a house... Imagine what that drivetrain will do in a waaaay less big and heavy package. Lets say a Cadillac V EV or Chevy EV muscle car... To say that the regular Plaid is good enough is simply foolish. I know he would prefer to NOT want to admit that his engineers cant deliver... If his engineers CAN deliver this 1000 HP, 0-60 in the 1 sec range and 500 EV mile range, then Telsa SHOULD produce it. In limited numbers if anything. Tesla could solidify dominance. By not producing it, Tesla opens the door WIDE open for another to take EV superiority... When Tesla was the only game in town, Tesla's EV tech seemed impressive and downright dominant. Especially when all others were producing compliance EVs. And rightfully so. But other OEMs are figuring the tech out...and quite fast I might add...

Self inflicted...

I like Tesla. I got nothing BUT praise for Tesla cars. The sedans. A little less the Model 3, but I like Tesla. But I would NEVER buy a Tesla product. My partner has got the Model S. He loves it. He wants to change it for a newer Model S. But Im getting away from what I wanna say. And its got to do with what Balthy just said about the Plaid+ being dead. And the reason of why that Musk said is but one reason of several as to why I would NEVER buy from this guy... No need as Plaid speed is just so good? THAT is what he wants to say? Like go phoque yourself buddy! Your cars WERE good. Your cars WERE faster than everybody else. Technology catches up and OEMs have it figured out. Dodge didnt say we are not going to give you the Demon because the Hellcat is so good. Before Chevy and Ford could answer the Hellcat with their pony car offerings, Dodge went further berserk and gave us the Demon... The newer Porsche Taycan could barely beat the Model S. The Plaid speed probably could bitch slap the Taycan. The problem is, you just KNOW that Porsche is NOT standing still on this. But that is Porsche. Porsche made the boo boo in under-estimating Tesla. But I has a feeling when the next update of Taycan will happen, Porsche will leave Tesla in the dust... Why? In the automotive business, there is no room for cockiness. Musk will find this out soon enough. Porsche might be cocky in areas, but they improve and improve their sportscars upon the next gen. They dont rest on their laurels... Musk, by being this cocky, will get his clocked cleaned. The century old plus automakers have done these battles thousands of times before. THIS is why Dodge has Hellcatted the world and didnt waste time to Demonize it further... THAT is how Detroit does it. Ford has proven that Tesla tech can be replicated and be bettered. GM will prove that soon enough too. End of rant...

But you have it WRONG about fighting... In the NHL....fighting is ALSO NOT allowed. NEVER was allowed... I dont like fighting as much as YOU do... The disconnect is, I UNDERSTAND the place fighting has in hockey... You might not think it has a place. But it does and THAT is why it even happens, quite often, in the European leagues... What I want out of the game...well...read my signature... I posted THAT as soon as the New York Rangers made that statement public... Its the bodychecks you dont want. But it is a physical game. EVEN in the Euro leagues. It looks like you are stuck between a rock and a hard place. No skin off my back if you cease to watch ANY hockey... But please do not tell me that Euro hockey is better. Its slightly different. But to me... Euro hockey is the same thing, only diff is, Euro hockey is hypocritical.