smk4565

A 9 month or even a year delay isn't a problem if they can get the cost of their EV's down.  That is the real issue that a Blazer EV is like $60,000, the Equinox EV is launching over $50k.  They need to suck cost and weight out of Ultium.

And Hyundai isn't the threat, BYD and the Chinese are, because they already have cheap EV's in China, they are entering Europe now and they'll be in the USA by 2030.  And for the "people won't buy a Chinese car" argument, they said that about Japanese and Korean cars too, and they will buy a Chinese EV when you can get a 7-seat SUV with a 350 mile range for $40k like the BYD Tang delivers now, and the BYD has a better interior than the Blazer.  

Good news to see more chargers.  People see gas stations on every corner, but they don't see EV charging everywhere, so I think part of getting more people to buy EVs is having more chargers to go to.  I don't think range anxiety is the problem it is lack or charger anxiety that holds people back.

I think Acura gave us a sales dud, the Integra isn’t selling that well either.

At $46,000 - $58,000 why not get a C-class or 3-series or a Tesla Model 3.  All better choices, or get a larger, less expensive Cadillac CT5 and in all 4 examples you have correct wheel drive, not wrong wheel drive like with the Acura.

Maybe they raised the price so sales drop so they can kill this model off and blame "sagging demand for sedans" and introduce another SUV coupe type vehicle.

3 hours ago, surreal1272 said:

I seem to recall a certain Tesla fan raving on about profits and market values recently. Guessing they are looking for some seasoning to go with the crow today. Everyone that wasn’t locked into Musks every word knew this was coming. Tesla’s challenge is how they respond to the competition here and in places like China where BYD is coming up fast and hot. Zero sympathy for Elon or his ilk. 

Tesla's challenge is China and BYD for sure, and also high interest rates and macro economic factors that impact everyone.  

Tesla's other challenge is only have 4 products, 2 of which are in the $75-100,000 range and have a base level 670 hp motors.  The number of people shopping for 670 hp is a rather small part of the market, like less than 1%.  That leaves 1 sedan and 1 crossover.  So clearly they need a cheaper vehicle, a pick up, an affordable 3 row SUV, maybe a van, the roadster, etc, to fill out a model line up so they can have a body style and price point to attract a wide variety of consumers.

The competition from other brands isn't even a problem for them right now, the 210 hp Equniox RS EV FWD is the same price as an AWD Long Range Model Y for example, that's DOA for the Equinox.  The BZ4X/Soltera are not competition with their 200 mile range, the Mach-E isn't selling and is having its production cut, EV6 sales are down 15% this year.  And legacy OEM's are losing money on EV's and scale won't save them, that is why they are all cutting back, they have to stop the losses.

6 hours ago, ccap41 said:

You're rght! 

Now I wonder if the $34,995 Equinox will ever exist, since only the RS is available at launch, and I don't think the 1LT will ever be made for 2024 model year, then for 2025, all of a sudden the 1LT will go from $34,995 to $38,995.

21 hours ago, David said:

Course Tesla will survive as companies buy their Supercharger stations and install them such as BP buying $100,000,000 million of them.

BP Buying $100M Worth of Tesla EV Chargers: What's the Big Deal? - CNET

Right, Tesla will make a lot of money from being the new largest "gas station"

13 hours ago, riviera74 said:

EV sales are only 2% of all NEW auto sales.  They barely exist in the used car market.  Here is what I wonder:  if EVs are the next big thing, why can't I buy a new one for about $20K?  Until that is addressed, then "the EV is the next big thing" is little more than a pipe dream, regardless of government regulations.

EV sales are 8% of the market in the USA, 25% in California.  EV’s are 14% of new cars sales in Europe and 31% in China.  Guess what the #1 volume market was for GM and VW?  China.  But GM and VW are bleeding sales over there.

You can barely get an ICE car for $20k, that won’t buy you a base Corolla, but let’s say $25k gets you a Civic, Trax, Kona, etc.

If someone builds a $30k sticker price EV in North America, the $7500 tax credit is applied point of sale starting in January, now we have a $22,500 EV that is cheaper than ICE.  If the domestics don’t figure it out, the Chinese already have.

1 hour ago, oldshurst442 said:

If Tesla's EV are selling, so is everybody elses.  And hence Tesla's market share eroding... 

But THAT is not the narrative. 

If EV sales are (or they are going to be) stagnant, THAT includes Teslas.  And THAT would be the narrative for Oct. 2023 and going forward.   Im not cherrypicking.  Im reading what the media is telling me.  

But Mary Barra is telling me that and so is Elon.

 

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/ford-gm-and-even-tesla-are-warning-about-the-ev-market-194905657.html

"We are also moderating the acceleration of EV production in North America to protect our pricing, adjust to slower near-term growth in demand, and implement engineering efficiency and other improvements that will make our vehicles less expensive to produce, and more profitable," CEO Mary Barra said in her Q3 shareholder letter. GM, in pushing back its EV truck expansion earlier this month, noted “evolving EV demand” as the main reason why it was slowing its EV truck volumes.

Even Tesla (TSLA) CEO Elon Musk, perhaps the biggest EV evangelist in the industry, poured cold water on the EV market and general economic landscape. Musk noted on Tesla’s conference call last Wednesday that the company was delaying construction of its upcoming Gigafactory in Mexico due to concerns about global economic conditions stemming from rising interest rates that make financing cars more expensive for consumers, thus crimping demand.

“I’m worried about the high interest rate environment we’re in,” Musk said, adding, “I just can’t emphasize enough how important cost is. … We have to make our products more affordable so people can buy [them].”

 

https://gvwire.com/2023/10/27/gm-and-tesla-ceos-voice-concerns-over-ev-market/

 

GM’s CEO, Mary Barra, who has been a strong advocate for EVs, announced during the company’s Q3 earnings call that GM is stepping back from its goal to produce 100,000 EVs in the second half of this year and another 400,000 by the first half of 2024. The company did not provide a new timeline for achieving these targets.

Tesla’s Elon Musk also warned of potential economic issues that could dampen vehicle demand, even for the leading EV manufacturer. Mercedes-Benz, which has had to offer significant discounts on its EVs to boost sales, described the EV market as “brutal.”

Most EVs are currently selling below their sticker price, and manufacturers are offering incentives of nearly 10% to encourage sales. However, these strategies are not proving effective, as EVs are taking longer to sell than their gasoline counterparts due to concerns over cost, infrastructure, and lifestyle changes.

Ford was the first to adjust its EV strategy, extending its deadline to reach annual EV production of 600,000 by a year and abandoning its 2026 target to build 2 million EVs. Honda also scrapped plans to co-develop affordable EVs with GM, citing the unpredictable EV market.

 

 

NOT this time around.  Investors will NOT help.  

The government?

Tesla is NOT too big to fail like GM or Chrysler was.   

HOWEVER...Tesla WILL stay alive though.  They WILL exist.  Just not producing vehicles.  They will exist  providing  supercharger stations and selling EV motors and EV software programs to OEMs... 

GM market cap $37 Billion.  Tesla market cap $650 billion.

Of course GM and Ford are delaying their EV's because they lose money on them, and people don't want their overpriced EV's.   Hyundai just cut Ioniq 6 prices by $4,100 because people don't want a $50k Hyundai sedan when a Sonata is $30,000.  So they have chosen to soldier on and just lose more money per unit to keeping the factory running.  

Mercedes dealers are complaining about the EQ series since they are too expensive and not aspirational products.   Although Mercedes total sales are down 1.8% this year and their EV's are up 339% to nearly 15% of their total volume.  ICE is dying off, all the more reason Mercedes needs to get their EV house in order and get better pricing, because once those aren't the new car on the showroom, people will lose interest at that price.

Legacy auto might get away with a 1 year delay in sales as long as they use that 1 year to improve the product and get lower manufacturing cost.  If they are just trying to kick the can down the road and worry about it later, they will be too late to catch up.  And it isn't just in the US, in China the EV's are taking over, which is why GM, Ford and VW have lost about half their sales volume over there in the past 5 years, they can't compete on price over there.  BYD is already into Europe, and again VW can't compete on price.  Eventually BYD will come to the US too and they'll bring the price war with them.

31 minutes ago, oldshurst442 said:

 

You dont get it.   

EVs in the US are NOT selling right about now.  Tesla is trying to keep market share.  Tesla is slashing prices.  Tesla's market share will CONTINUE to erode.   Tesla if it continues to slash prices, Tesla's profits go down...   

Tesla wont have enough cash to engineer  2nd gens of their S-3-X-Y   lineup and NOBODY will bankroll them any money. 

Tesla NEEDS 2nd generations...when everybody else has NEWER EVs...   DESPITE people NOT buying EVs at an enourmous rate.   And keep that in mind, EVs are not selling.  Tesla's economies of scale falls even further not ONLY because of competition eroding their market share but ALSO, EVs are NOT selling in high demand.  Tesla or otherwise.   Right now.  At this 3rd quarter as I have read. 

If THIS trend continues, GM has gasoline powered cars to help them ride the transition of havong cash flow.  If Americans REFUSE to buy EVs up UNTIL the 11th hour as they say, GM HAS ICE vehicles to HELP them with the CASH flow...

Tesla's cash flow will be low...  Like I said, NOBODY will allow Tesla to lose BILLIONS like Tesla done the first decade of 12 or 13 year of their existence.   If this trend continues up until 2035,  Tesla WONT make it...  

Tesla deliveries are up 45% this year.  No other car company has 45% growth.  It is a myth that EV’s don’t sell, everyone else’s EV’s aren’t selling.  
 

And if for some reason Tesla got in trouble, they would get a government bailout like GM and Chrysler did.

4 hours ago, David said:

Tesla never got the cost out at first, they made sure to recover as much R&D as they could. Startup costs are always high and has been high as Ford & GM even Hyundai/Kia/Genesis drove from nothing in a few years to what they have today, a far faster ramp up time that does require money compared to the decade plus ramp up Tesla did before as a publicly traded company they started to pay more attention to the cost of production.

Let's also stop your LIES on costs, the costs are NOT 50% higher.

Current ICE RS model off their own online build

Off their Blazer EV info page as it is not in the builder yet.

If we are to go with your HYPERBOL then the Blazer EV RS would be starting at $80K if we go off ICE MSRP or if we were to go off their current posted MSRP for an EV it should be $90K to start.

This does not take into account the huge difference between the ICE and EV in HP, Torque, Interior standard items based on the Chevrolet web pages.

Some companies I would agree with you that they are a horse with blinders on about Tesla, Ford, GM, Hyundai, Kia, Genesis it is very clear they do see Tesla as a threat and unlike Tesla that took decades to ramp up battery production as one example, GM, Hyundai, Kia, Tesla are ramping up production far faster than Ford has done and especially Tesla. They will be able to use economy of scale to drive down costs.

Blazer 2LT gas awd is $39,495 and a Blazer EV 2LT awd is $56,715.  So I guess it is more like a 40% increase.  
 

And of course Tesla had it hard at first they had to start from scratch, buy a factory, etc.  Legacy auto already has factories and workers and tooling and paint booths, distribution network, etc.  

And Ford just announced today they lost $36,000 on every EV sold in Q3 and will be cutting Mach-E production.  Hard to get economies of scale when you cut production.  

4 hours ago, ccap41 said:

I take it you haven't bothered to look at their financial statements. Take away the credits and they were 100% profitable in 2021 still. 

Prior to that, no. They were using those credits to stay afloat and it worked. Which, is basically what I said, "they've been profitable for the last few years."

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1318605/000095017022000796/tsla-20211231.htm#item_8_financial_statememts_supplementar

 

And they are going to keep getting credits because Ford and GM are cutting EV production and delaying EV’s and Stellantis nowhere to be found at a time when the CAFE numbers are going up.  

5 minutes ago, David said:

@smk4565 @ccap41 Tesla has been well covered about loosing money even in 2020 and them selling clean air credits since they do not produce ICE auto's is how they have made money as they have not made money on EVs until the last couple of years.

Tesla Loses Money On Every Single Car: Here's Where The Profit Hides (motorbiscuit.com)

Even in 2021 Tesla DID NOT really make money as it was the Automotive Regulatory Credits that saved their ass. 2022 and 2023 are the first years they are actually making money but even then the ARC's are still an important sales point especially to Stellantis and adds a noticeable profit to their bottom line.

Even CNN covered this in 2021.

Tesla's dirty little secret: Its net profit doesn't come from selling cars | CNN Business

Tesla lost hand over fist money from 2003 when it started till end of 2021. 2010 is when it did their IPO and so while Tesla will not say how much money lost each year from 2003 to 2010, we do have their regulatory filings from the IPO moving forward to really show their profit and loss.

Tesla Gross Profit 2010-2023 | TSLA | MacroTrends

The green operating income is due totally from the ARC credit sales to other auto companies especially Dodge/RAM/JEEP

Net Income shows a clear picture of how much money Tesla lost before becoming profitable.

So I am only human and I could have mis-read a quarter report, but I wanted to know just how much money Tesla has lost till they started turning a profit that did not rely on the ARC credits which happened in Q2 of 2022.

From the start of 2010 to the end of Q1 2022 Tesla has lost a total of $28.605 billion dollars.

From Q2 2022 to Q3 2023 Tesla has generated $34.072 billions dollars.

The financial reports show that Tesla has peaked in end of Q4 2022 @ $5.777 billion for the 4th quarter and since then we have Q1 2023 $ 4.511 Billion, Q2 2023 $4.533 Billion, Q3 2023 $4.178 Billion.

I did not take out the on average of half a billion dollars per quarter for ARC sales that Tesla still makes but one can easily see that the profits then barely hit $4 billion per quarter.

Based on this data one could say that Tesla's prime days are over and we will continue to see declines in profits even if sales continue to go up since they are cutting prices to drive sales which always affects profits and is a reason why their stock is tanking in price since they announced their dismal Q3 financials.

This is probably the type of thinking that occurs at GM, Ford, Stellantis and Toyota.  They think Tesla isn’t a threat so don’t worry about them.  They are all in for a rude awakening.  

13 hours ago, oldshurst442 said:

Yes they can.

Especially the legacy OEMs.

They make gas powered cars. Tesla doesnt.

 

They make gas powered cars now, they won’t be in 10 years.  Also the only companies making more profit per car than Tesla are BMW and Mercedes-Benz.  The car manufacturing business has relatively low margins.

Hyundai/Kia for example make about $700 profit per car.  As that ICE business shrinks, not sure how many EV losses that is going to fund.  And they just cut Ioniq 6 by $4,000 to line up closer to the Model 3.

1 hour ago, ccap41 said:

I agree they need to do that but I disagree that they don't know how. They know they need the demand and mass production to get there. You can't get costs down until you're selling hundreds of thousands a year or more. 

Maybe they know how, but are unable.  The Escalade EV is 50% more than the ICE version, the Blazer EV is 50% more than the ICE version.  You can’t raise prices 50% and not expect sales to tank.  They have to get the cost out first to get the volume they need.  Kind of a catch 22.

46 minutes ago, oldshurst442 said:

https://insideevs.com/news/692967/gm-ditches-goal-building-400000-evs-north-america-through-mid-2024/

 

The gossip in town is that Elon "lost" 28 billion dollars.   If he continues to make Tesla price cut because Tesla continues to lose markert share amd Elon will continue to "lose" billions.  But that doesnt matter.     It seems that all is not well in EV land.    Despite government laws forcing the bans of gas power, if now until then, Americans arent going to buy EVs,  it does not matter of Mary Barra saying that 30 000-40 000 dollars EVs are not profitable, GM will bleed too much money to stay afloat.  But with that broad stroke of reality, Tesla ALSO loses money on THAT price range EVs but at least GM SELLS gas powered cars to have cash flow.  Tesla does not have gas power on their roster.   Tesla bleeds money is what Im saying. THIS time around, I dont think ANYBODY will subsidize Tesla losing billions like they done for a decade 2 or 3 years prior... 

Tesla isn't losing money, they have made $7.1 billion dollars of net income so far this year, so they should end the year with about a $9 billion profit if Q4 looks like Q3, and it could be a $10 billion profit if they have a good quarter.  They don't need subsidized, they are easily making money, and they have a growing product line to expand revenue.  And energy generation and distribution is a small % of their business, but it is high margin and they are about to double or triple that part of the business with all these other OEM's putting Tesla charging plugs on their cars.

Elon lost money since the stock price dropped, but I don't think Elon cares about losing money, he wasted $40 billion on X for no reason, he could have bought GM for $39 billion at today's price if he wanted to flush money away.  This is why Tesla is dangerous. They are profitable at about $5k per car now, Elon might not care if they cut prices another $5k per car and make $0 on the car, if he can make the money on charging and selling FSD software that has huge margins.  Basically give away a free iPhone to make money on subscriptions and apps.  The other companies can't do that, or afford to get into a price war with him.

4 hours ago, David said:

Nice, you continue to show blind faith to Narcissistic Musk. Tesla lost 100,000's of thousands of dollars per EV in the early days due to all the R&D and especially the warranty claims they had. This is nothing new as your $76K figure is way off as you cannot push everything onto each EV when there are costs not associated with the building of EVs, but due to many other costs in building any business.

I am sure your basing it on this story from a company that has made it very clear that EVs are the devil.

Ford Loses Nearly $60,000 for Every Electric Vehicle Sold - TheStreet

Ford lost $1.33 Billion on EV's in Q3.  But it isn't just the bleeding money, it is that F150 Lightning demand is basically gone, and the Mach-E has very little demand.  The dealer near me has 19 of them, all with customer cash offers from Ford, why the dealer isn't throwing in $5k off on top of that I don't know.  

And I don't have any faith or loyalty to Musk, but it is pretty clear that Tesla is highly profitable and with quickly rising sales volume, while no one else can seem to figure out EV's.  And you have GM delaying the Equinox EV to next year some time, the Silverado and Sierra were pushed back a year, Mercedes dealers complaining about how the EV's are as aspirational or desirable as the gas cars and they are too expensive, Hyundai/Kia dealers have EV's piled up on the lots.  

The same thing is true at all these OEM's, they make EV's that don't look like the rest of the brand, or aren't eye catching enough, then they cost 25-50% more than the similarly sized ICE car on the same lot, and they are heavy, with less range and performance than a Tesla.  

Cadillac Escalade starts at $82,000, the Escalade EV is $130,000.  These Escalade EV's will sit around on dealer lots also, unless they only make about 2,000 of them a year.  All these OEM's need to suck cost out of these EV's but seem clueless on how to do it.

42 minutes ago, oldshurst442 said:

Probably because FoMoCo hasnt learned just yet where they can lose weight where it aint necessary.  It is the first try after all.    The Mach-E is OVER engineered and the Mach-E launch videos actually EXPLAIN that the Mach-E is overengineered because Ford doesnt want to phoque things up ESPECIALLY when they have named it a Mustang Mach-E...   

 

But yeah...its nice to spin things negatively... 

 

All that over engineering to get a vehicle that is heavier, slower, more expensive and has less range than their closest rival.  And that gets outsold 10-1 by their key rival in just the USA.   Globally it is like 20 to 1.  

Ford knows how to do pickups and commercial vehicles, and I give them credit on the Bronco and Bronco Sport, they built desirable products there and the Maverick is a big win because small trucks and trucks under $30,000 don't exist anymore and with high interest rates and inflation it was the right product at the right time.  But outside of that, they don't have a lot going for them.

5 hours ago, oldshurst442 said:

 

 

There is nothing to explain as he is lying through his teeth when he says that... 

He knows that the Mach-E is built on a pure bespoke EV platform.  

 

This also a lie...

However... Tesla's production efficiency is non-existent.  Elon lies a lot.  

Therefore...

Tesla's price cuts and Tesla is bleeding money meaning that the measley  $1 250 rebate of the Model 3 and the $2000 rebate of the Model Y are monies that interfere with the Model 3s and Model Ys profits meaning small rebates of vehicles that have sold as much as they have and produced as much as they have and the production lines of Tesla are not up to legacy automobile manufacturer's srandards. 

Meaning if FoMoCo is losing $60 000 on each Mach-E sold, then Tesla ALSO is losing money on each Model 3 and Model Y sold. ESPECIALLY on rebate. 

Meaning Tesla cannot sustain rebates...  

The thing is...Elon started a price war Tesla cant afford.  His mouth is writing checks his ass cant cash...

But its nice to find faults with GM or Ford or anybody else but hypocritically defend Tesla.

Sounds like a Toyota argument come to think of it.

@surreal1272

Hope your hip surgery went well, buddy, even thought I would have NEVER have thought to paint you as a brand nut jobber! 

 But...it is Toyota you defend, so it makes sense. 

Apple, Toyota and Tesla...

Ford breaks out their EV financials, Ford themselves say their EV's will lose $4.5 billion dollars this year.   (or $1.125 billion per quarter)

Ford has sold 46,671 EV's through Q3 at a loss of $3.375 Billion, which is actually $72,314 dollars lost per car sold.  

Tesla meanwhile making billions in profits on EVs:

7 hours ago, ccap41 said:

Explain this. This is literally the first time I've read this. 

The Mach-E is built on the GE1 platform which is a heavily reworked Ford C2 platform, which is what underpins the Escape and final generation Ford Focus, Corsair, Bronco Sport, Maverick, Edge, etc.  Probably also why it is a few hundred pounds heavier than the Model Y they were trying to copy.

12 minutes ago, surreal1272 said:

So just make up any excuse to cover up the fact that he said production was originally supposed to start in 2021 when he announced it in 2019 (having been in "concept" concept before then).

 

And that 4 years is a lie in this day and age and you know that. Kia's EV9 is going from concept to production in less than 3. The Mach-E was announced 2019 and was on sale the next year so just stop with the endless excuses when even Elon has confessed to the endless delays delaying the Cybertruck. Again, you ignore facts to make up excuses and feelings.

 

And touting that dumb bulletproof video is just sheer ignorance and fanboy BS. That is a lawsuit waiting to happen. Notice they didn't shoot at that once unbreakable glass (that Elon broke in front of the world). Keep drinking that Kool-Aid though.

Kia EV9 concept debuted in November 2021.  Not yet at dealers.  And the Mach-E is bad product built on an ICE platform, they rushed it because Tesla was so fast on the rise.  Model Y outsells the Mach-E like 20-1 worldwide so I wouldn't call the Mach-E a success story, especially since Ford loses $60,000 on each one they sell.

Also Kia EV6 US sales through Q3 are 14,798, down from 15.7% from last year.  Tesla Model Y US sales are 284,000.   If Kia is so good, why are they getting outscored 284-14?  

The facts are Tesla is mopping the floor with these OEM's and I don't see how any OEM outside of BMW and Mercedes makes an easy transition to EV's because the EV's are too high priced and too low volume compared to their ICE counterparts.   And even then, I don't think it will be all that easy for Mercedes or BMW, but they are lucky that Tesla isn't coming for them, Tesla is coming for the mass market.

10 hours ago, ccap41 said:

Just in time to be 3 or 4 years late! 

Not only are they not the first electric truck, they're not the 2nd or 3rd either. 

They better come out with a banger of a product if you're going to announce first, be 3 or 4 years late and now they're the 4th in the category. Technically, 5th, if you count the GMC Hummer. 

4 years concept to production is pretty common in the industry.  Also Cybertruck is an all new product with a new manufacturing process, so they had toe work all that out.  Plus it is bulletproof as confirmed today by Elon that they emptied an entire Tommy Gun magazine into the side of one.  And the tri-motor has over 1,000 hp making Ram TRX and the F150 Raptor R look like weak sauce.

8 hours ago, David said:

V12 will never get full approval as it has no redundancy systems. Musk seems to think he can do it all with Camera's and no backups and the Gov will never let him have it his way. 

Musks way is to gamble your life as long as you play him money, that is what V12 of FSD really is. A computer game to Musk. He has no respect for life or humans, only his only dick and money.

Musk himself uses V12.  I don't think he would use a product that would kill him.  Also Tesla crash test ratings are best in industry if it does crash.

And if Tesla's way isn't right, then whose is?  Mercedes is the leader in the clubhouse with a mapped roads level 3 system that works to a max of 40 mph.  That's probably another year to get it to all the states (and European countries outside of Germany) and then another year to get it up to 60-80 mph, another year to expand use cases.  And everyone else tends to run 5-10 years behind the S-class in technology. 

19 minutes ago, surreal1272 said:

Good grief. Not those numbers. I’m talking about these mythical figures you have saying that AI based self driving will somehow be better despite the litany of evidence to the contrary (and, again, the fact that Elon can even get his current self driving systems right, nevermind this version 12 nonsense. 
 

And November 30th you say? Now is that full production date (it’s not btw) or the slow roll out date that everyone else not named SMK already knew?

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/elon-musk-says-dug-own-102158965.html

 

And I quote…

”Musk said that he wanted to "temper expectations" for the electric truck's launch, which Tesla announced would be on November 30.”

Yes it will be slow at first, Tesla said 125,000 a year next year, but I feel like that will be the run rate at the end of 2024, and the 250,000 a year might not be until 2025.  But keep in mind the Silverado EV production at Orion is being delayed to late 2025, so looks like just low volume of Silverado work trucks until then and GM sold 13 Silverado EV's last quarter.  Cybertruck could easily be the best selling electric pick up in 2024 even with them slowly ramping, F150 Lightning sales fell off the cliff and they cut back production on those.

59 minutes ago, surreal1272 said:

And are you using Musk data to pull out these imaginary numbers about crashes and scenarios?

 

Your trust is this is baffling given the buggy nature of the venture so far but hey, gotta keep on cheering for your new lord and master right?

Is that the time horizon they are using for the Cybertruck?

No, 6 million accidents and 40,000 deaths a year is about the average for the USA.  

November 30th for Cybertruck!

22 hours ago, oldshurst442 said:

I think nobody even gets to level 3...

Autonomous driving is a pipe dream.

 

Wait until any system of anybody goes haywire, and this whole experiment gets shut down for good. 

LOL

Waymo has all kinds of problems and California keeps on limiting their testing boundaries...

LOL

Its criminal that ANY goverment allows Tesla or anybody else with this shyte.  But judgement day for autonomous driving is just around the corner...   Just a question of time when a real disaster will occur involving Tesla, GM, Mercedes or anybody else...  

If we had only self driving cars on the road, and no human drivers, and self driving cars led to 30,000 traffic fatalities per year, that would be an improvement over humans.  There are on average 6 million car accidents per year in the USA.  Zero chance in hell that self driving cars crash 6 million times per year.