Something's Wrong at Tesla

[bradly1101]

"“It is never a good sign when almost all your senior executives are leaving with the stock price at a high,” Chanos said on “Masters in Business,” a Bloomberg Opinion podcast released last week. “That’s telling you there’s something wrong. And I don’t know what it is, but almost all the senior executives at Tesla see something and are leaving stock option packages on the table.”"

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...ing-it-tougher-for-musk-to-burn-short-sellers

 

[Thebobo]

Overpaid executives out sounds like a good idea?

 

[boomerang]

It's been talked about for months that they were hemorrhaging cash at a phenomenal rate. I for one am not surprised to read this.

 

[dasherHampton]

I still agree with the people who think Apple will eventually buy them and Tesla will become the Apple car.

 

[Thebobo]

I still agree with the people who think Apple will eventually buy them and Tesla will become the Apple car.

ugh

 

[Kaido]

I still agree with the people who think Apple will eventually buy them and Tesla will become the Apple car.

They have a fleet of 55 cars just in California:

https://techcrunch.com/2018/05/14/apples-self-driving-car-fleet-grows-to-55-in-california/

 

[Kaido]

"“It is never a good sign when almost all your senior executives are leaving with the stock price at a high,” Chanos said on “Masters in Business,” a Bloomberg Opinion podcast released last week. “That’s telling you there’s something wrong. And I don’t know what it is, but almost all the senior executives at Tesla see something and are leaving stock option packages on the table.”"

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...ing-it-tougher-for-musk-to-burn-short-sellers

I think it's going to win out in the long haul:

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/05/14/ron-baron-were-going-to-make-20-times-our-money-in-tesla.html

Musk is right about the short sellers imo:

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/02/07/ark-chief-catherine-wood-sees-tesla-stock-going-to-4000.html

Their Supercharger network is getting ridiculous:

https://electrek.co/2018/05/12/tesla-supercharger-2018-growth/

Electric cars are cool. However, most of the them only have an 80-mile range. Newer offerings like the Bolt & upcoming Kona have better ranges, but still have slow charging. Tesla has a nationwide Supercharger network now...30 minutes on a Supercharger vs. 3 hours for a regular EV is just no contest. Plus, nobody else is offering anything remotely close to Autopilot, including the built-in future capabilities. Sure, Cadillac has Supercruise & Nissan has ProPilot, but long-term, they're not going to match what Tesla cars can do in terms of city-street self-driving. It's like no one else is even trying...both with making full self-driving cars & with rolling out a high-speed nation-wide charging network.

Eventually the Model 3 production will ramp up, the back-orders will get filled, and they'll be ready to deliver to new customers in pretty short order. And then the Model Y will come out, which will probably be an even bigger seller than the Model 3. And then the Roadster 2.0 will come out, and I'd imagine they'll find a way to setup their other vehicles (S & X, at least) with the 620-mile battery, which will further distance Tesla from their competitors. Although I am a Tesla fanboy, these are just the facts: No one else has a Gigafactory. No one else has built-in future FSD capabilities. No one else has a Supercharger network.

I think Tesla is going to kill it in the long game.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

I think it's going to win out in the long haul:

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/05/14/ron-baron-were-going-to-make-20-times-our-money-in-tesla.html

Musk is right about the short sellers imo:

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/02/07/ark-chief-catherine-wood-sees-tesla-stock-going-to-4000.html

Their Supercharger network is getting ridiculous:

https://electrek.co/2018/05/12/tesla-supercharger-2018-growth/

Electric cars are cool. However, most of the them only have an 80-mile range. Newer offerings like the Bolt & upcoming Kona have better ranges, but still have slow charging. Tesla has a nationwide Supercharger network now...30 minutes on a Supercharger vs. 3 hours for a regular EV is just no contest. Plus, nobody else is offering anything remotely close to Autopilot, including the built-in future capabilities. Sure, Cadillac has Supercruise & Nissan has ProPilot, but long-term, they're not going to match what Tesla cars can do in terms of city-street self-driving. It's like no one else is even trying...both with making full self-driving cars & with rolling out a high-speed nation-wide charging network.

Eventually the Model 3 production will ramp up, the back-orders will get filled, and they'll be ready to deliver to new customers in pretty short order. And then the Model Y will come out, which will probably be an even bigger seller than the Model 3. And then the Roadster 2.0 will come out, and I'd imagine they'll find a way to setup their other vehicles (S & X, at least) with the 620-mile battery, which will further distance Tesla from their competitors. Although I am a Tesla fanboy, these are just the facts: No one else has a Gigafactory. No one else has built-in future FSD capabilities. No one else has a Supercharger network.

I think Tesla is going to kill it in the long game.

Agreed, I've got a 2010 Camaro right now, and I'm leaning very heavily on getting a Tesla once they become a little more available. Maybe even a used one if the market isn't 90%+ of MSRP still.

 

[bigi]

blumberg, ah?

Yes, Tesla is koing to die.

 

[Midwayman]

Plus, nobody else is offering anything remotely close to Autopilot, including the built-in future capabilities. Sure, Cadillac has Supercruise & Nissan has ProPilot, but long-term, they're not going to match what Tesla cars can do in terms of city-street self-driving. It's like no one else is even trying...both with making full self-driving cars & with rolling out a high-speed nation-wide charging network.

Meh. It's more like nobody is as irresponsible as Telsa, Uber excepted. They're behind the game in development, however they're one of the only people shipping. They're charging for features that don't exist, and quite likely they won't be able to deliver. Tesla is ahead in consumer SDC only because the big players are smart enough to know its not ready yet.

 

[C1]

"Tesla's Autopilot system uses radar, cameras with 360-degree visibility and sensors to detect nearby cars and objects. It's built so cars can automatically change lanes, steer, park and brake to help avoid collisions."

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/tech...-crash/ar-AAxh9VQ?li=BBnbfcL&ocid=mailsignout

How in the world could something like that not detect a fire truck?

Also, loading up roadways with RF emtting self driving cars - just what we all need.

https://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancer-causes/radiation-exposure/radiofrequency-radiation.html

 

[desy]

I disagree
Tesla will eventually be sold and their technology parted out.
They can't make production, they were fine as a niche sports car vendor but need somebody to step up and fix it
There is still no Battery vehicle that makes any sense up north here, A big part of the problem with batteries is you have to build a pile of overhead that may never be used but has to be there driving up cost to make it comparable to ICE. I get utility out of every gallon of gas I buy and don't have to pay for it all up front or if I choose to let the car sit for the winter
Again, a big fan of the drivetrain tho

 

[Bubbleawsome]

"Tesla's Autopilot system uses radar, cameras with 360-degree visibility and sensors to detect nearby cars and objects. It's built so cars can automatically change lanes, steer, park and brake to help avoid collisions."

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/tech...-crash/ar-AAxh9VQ?li=BBnbfcL&ocid=mailsignout

How in the world could something like that not detect a fire truck?

Also, loading up roadways with RF emtting self driving cars - just what we all need.

https://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancer-causes/radiation-exposure/radiofrequency-radiation.html

First link is calling out autopilot but neither group investigating the crash has said it was actually engaged. I wouldn't trust someone doing 60mph in a city while on their phone to tell the truth about that.
Did you even read the second link though? It said there is a very limited possibility some forms of RF can cause cancer, but no definite link has been made. Also, that is with the transmitter literally right at your head, not 6 feet in front of you with metal in between.

 

[XavierMace]

Eventually the Model 3 production will ramp up, the back-orders will get filled, and they'll be ready to deliver to new customers in pretty short order. And then the Model Y will come out, which will probably be an even bigger seller than the Model 3. And then the Roadster 2.0 will come out, and I'd imagine they'll find a way to setup their other vehicles (S & X, at least) with the 620-mile battery, which will further distance Tesla from their competitors. Although I am a Tesla fanboy, these are just the facts: No one else has a Gigafactory. No one else has built-in future FSD capabilities. No one else has a Supercharger network.

That must be some REALLY tasty Kool-Aid.

Also, loading up roadways with RF emtting self driving cars - just what we all need.

We already have roadways filled up with RF emitting cell phones. Nobody seems terribly concerned with that these days.

 

[Kaido]

Meh. It's more like nobody is as irresponsible as Telsa, Uber excepted. They're behind the game in development, however they're one of the only people shipping. They're charging for features that don't exist, and quite likely they won't be able to deliver. Tesla is ahead in consumer SDC only because the big players are smart enough to know its not ready yet.

I don't 100% agree with their approach, but I understand why they do it. Two points in particular I disagree with:

1. At least two people that I know of have died as a direct result of Autopilot (the semi-truck crash in Florida & the highway barrier crash in California). Tesla's response to the California crash was just awful - they 110% blamed the driver, even though Autopilot was engaged at the time. So Autopilot has some problems & Tesla is quick to cover themselves.

2. Which leads into the second point, that they over-hype Autopilot. I understand why they want to do beta-testing and that they need to collect road data and that it's already saving lives. But, they should advertise it as such. "Check out our self-driving car!" "Someone died in it? It was clearly beta and clearly THEIR fault, NOT ours".

On the flip side:

1. Most recent data set I saw says that driving a Tesla with Autopilot enabled reduces your chances of being in an accident 4x. They can't release a perfect system because perfect will never exist. But, a huge reduction in accidents is a worthy goal to strive for.

2. The cars themselves without Autopilot enabled are pretty safe. There was just a Tesla crash where the driver went 60 MPH straight into the back of a stopped fire truck (it's not yet officially known whether Autopilot was enabled or not) & the driver only suffered a broken ankle, which is pretty amazing given the extent of the damage to the vehicle.

Again, I think most of the irresponsibility is in how they advertise Autopilot, both in the naming of it & in how they sell it. However, in the big picture, they are already safer than all other cars on the road, due to both the structural design & safety features, and the computerized self-driving features. So from the perspective of a safety increase through accident likelihood reduction & accident damage reduction, they are doing a pretty good job. Not a perfect job, but with current numbers being four times as safe to drive as other cars, that's pretty compelling.

 

[Kaido]

"Tesla's Autopilot system uses radar, cameras with 360-degree visibility and sensors to detect nearby cars and objects. It's built so cars can automatically change lanes, steer, park and brake to help avoid collisions."

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/tech...-crash/ar-AAxh9VQ?li=BBnbfcL&ocid=mailsignout

How in the world could something like that not detect a fire truck?

I am very interested in confirmation that Autopilot was enabled, and if so, why it crashed. However, in most reported cases, the driver is lying about Autopilot being engaged, so it remains to be seen.

The driver was obviously not alert because (1) she admitted she was on her cell phone (and claims that Autopilot was engaged at the time), (2) she hit a stopped fire truck at 60 MPH, which definitely says that she, as the driver, was not paying attention, and (3) it said the fire truck was stopped at a stop light (are there a lot of 60 MPH roads that have lights on them??).

Per my post above, I have not been happy with Tesla's response to the Autopilot deaths in the past, especially the California one:

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/tesla-...ire-truck-driver-elon-musk-bemoans-attention/

In April, Musk was asked by "CBS This Morning" co-host Gayle King, "what's the purpose of having autopilot if you still have to put your hands on the wheel?" Musk said "the probability of an accident with autopilot is just less," and he insisted the vehicle had functioned exactly as it was designed to in the California crash. "The system worked as described, which is that it's a hands-on system. It is not a self-driving system," Musk said.

It is not a self-driving system named AUTOPILOT? Are you kidding me? And yet if I go directly to the Tesla Autopilot website:

https://www.tesla.com/autopilot

This is the very first thing it says:

Full Self-Driving Hardware on All Cars

All Tesla vehicles produced in our factory, including Model 3, have the hardware needed for full self-driving capability at a safety level substantially greater than that of a human driver.

Technically that's weasel-wording...the cars come with a full suite of self-driving hardware, which is simply currently not activated. If you scroll down to the bottom, you'll find this:

Please note that Self-Driving functionality is dependent upon extensive software validation and regulatory approval, which may vary widely by jurisdiction. It is not possible to know exactly when each element of the functionality described above will be available, as this is highly dependent on local regulatory approval.

Which still isn't very clear, i.e. that the expensive AUTOPILOT feature that they market their cars on doesn't actually, really, fully work? And it looks like the barrier detection issue still hasn't been fixed:

 

[Kaido]

That must be some REALLY tasty Kool-Aid.

As mentioned, I AM a Tesla fanboy

I know plenty of people who want to make the jump to electric, but when it boils down to buying a car with no self-driving capabilities that takes 3 hours to charge, vs. a car with self-driving (currently highway-only, but better than nothing) & a 30-minute quick-charge at a Supercharger, it's no contest. I test-drove the Bolt (238-mile range) & while it's a great machine, (1) there's no AWD, and (2) it doesn't even have TACC (radar cruise). That's not to say those cars are useless, because they fit many people's needs just fine, but why would you miss out on a car that's already 4x safer than every other car out there & will be probably the only car brand out there that gets more features over time? Granted, a Model 3 base is $35k and a Bolt is something like $42k nicely equipped, and the Model 3 goes up to $60k fully-equipped (300+ mile range, AWD, etc.), so there are some price differences, but it's not like the Bolt is going to get better over time with self-driving or even TACC.

I do think that Tesla has a solid head start. No one else has a nationwide chain of Superchargers. No one else sells a car with self-driving that matches what Tesla does right now, today, and what they promise they can deliver in the future in your existing car (as a paid upgrade now or in the future for FSD). They also have the best safety of any car available as well. So some things are fanboyish, sure, but the facts are the facts for the situation right now, today.

 

[Accord99]

1. Most recent data set I saw says that driving a Tesla with Autopilot enabled reduces your chances of being in an accident 4x. They can't release a perfect system because perfect will never exist. But, a huge reduction in accidents is a worthy goal to strive for.

It has a fatality rate 4X better than average. But that's misleading because the average includes older cars and cars driven by younger people who typically can't afford expensive cars. Those fatality rates don't look as good when compared to equivalent luxury cars, a few of which haven't had a reported fatality in the US.

 

[Midwayman]

I don't 100% agree with their approach, but I understand why they do it. Two points in particular I disagree with:

1. At least two people that I know of have died as a direct result of Autopilot (the semi-truck crash in Florida & the highway barrier crash in California). Tesla's response to the California crash was just awful - they 110% blamed the driver, even though Autopilot was engaged at the time. So Autopilot has some problems & Tesla is quick to cover themselves.

2. Which leads into the second point, that they over-hype Autopilot. I understand why they want to do beta-testing and that they need to collect road data and that it's already saving lives. But, they should advertise it as such. "Check out our self-driving car!" "Someone died in it? It was clearly beta and clearly THEIR fault, NOT ours".

Yah, their response has been really disappointing. I'm worried that their cavalier attitude will poison people against self driving cars and push back regulatory acceptance by years. If they marketed it as yet another advanced driver assist function like automatic brakes I would have much less issue with it. Try our "Advanced lane holding cruise control" would be much more accurate.

Again, I think most of the irresponsibility is in how they advertise Autopilot, both in the naming of it & in how they sell it. However, in the big picture, they are already safer than all other cars on the road, due to both the structural design & safety features, and the computerized self-driving features. So from the perspective of a safety increase through accident likelihood reduction & accident damage reduction, they are doing a pretty good job. Not a perfect job, but with current numbers being four times as safe to drive as other cars, that's pretty compelling.

I wonder where those numbers are coming from? Last I heard the NHTSA was pulling back from numbers that Tesla was trying to use to support the safety of the system. I know they are safe cars from a normal car perspective. I just haven't seen anything supporting tesla's claims hanging our on /r/selfdrivingcars

I am very interested in confirmation that Autopilot was enabled, and if so, why it crashed. However, in most reported cases, the driver is lying about Autopilot being engaged, so it remains to be seen.

Yah people lie all the time. I mean in every accident I've ever been involved in the other driver has lied about their involvement. At least Tesla has sensor logs and can prove it. Though I have to wonder about 'not engaged' means 'It disengaged a couple seconds before the incident but the driver hadn't taken control yet." That's a huge problem with SDC and why Goggle is pushing straight to level 4 cars. The transition is going to be tricky as people get less and less attentive to the road.

It is not a self-driving system named AUTOPILOT? Are you kidding me? And yet if I go directly to the Tesla Autopilot website:

https://www.tesla.com/autopilot

This is the very first thing it says:

Technically that's weasel-wording...the cars come with a full suite of self-driving hardware, which is simply currently not activated. If you scroll down to the bottom, you'll find this:

Which still isn't very clear, i.e. that the expensive AUTOPILOT feature that they market their cars on doesn't actually, really, fully work? And it looks like the barrier detection issue still hasn't been fixed:

Yah, this really irks me. Don't sell a feature that isn't done. We don't even know if the sensor package they are using will ever be usable as autopilot. I would have been way happier with a wiring harness laid down to likely mounting points with the possibility of upgrades later on. Not paying for a package that will likely be outdated by the time the software is ready. Compute and sensors are only getting cheaper.

 

[FIVR]

Tesla is the future. Read this wikipedia page and if you can tell me after you've read it that you think this guy will fail then I don't know what to tell you. You're an idiot.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elon_Musk

 

[tweakmonkey]

Tesla vs Cadillac "Super Cruise":
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RxeK0F-D3gg

It's interesting how careful GM is about all this. The way the Super cruise system monitors your eyes and notifies you to put your hands on the wheel, and how it's only even allowed to activate on certain roads.

Tesla simply gives people too much control at this stage. GM's lawyers noped out of that. I'm guessing this will change - you can't have people crashing into stationary structures at 60 MPH. People turn this stuff on then pay 0% attention. What could possibly go wrong??

 

[XavierMace]

but the facts are the facts for the situation right now, today.

Except, no, they really aren't. I like Tesla's in general, if I had the cash, I'd probably get a Model S. But you're drastically over-hyping their upsides and dismissing their downsides.

Superchargers really only matter if you take road trips. Personally only one of the Tesla owners I know does and it's for business. The rest just drive theirs around town, and charge it at night. As a general marketing point, sure it's drastically faster charging than you get with competitors but 30 minutes is still a long time compared to the 2 minute it takes to pump gas. IF you're taking road trips with your EV (and that's a big IF), the value of that goes up. But the price gap (regardless how you try to spin it) between Tesla's and most the other EV's is VERY sizable.

Admittedly Tesla has nobody to blame but themselves, but every time somebody calls a Tesla self driving, god kills a kitten. Is it impressive? Yes. But the software isn't there yet to call it truly self driving even if the hardware is. There's a reason the car tells you to keep your hands on the wheel every time you use it.

"4x safer" is complete and total marketing BS. From Elon's own mouth, that's based on the NHTSA's stated one fatality every 86M miles vs Tesla's one in 320M. He's taking his one recent model and comparing it to the national average which includes a mountain of old cars. When it's regurgitated by his fan club, I'm willing to dismiss it as ignorance. Out of his mouth, it's flat out deliberately deceptive marketing. I haven't seen 2018 data but in 2017 IIHS published a report of the safest vehicles on the road, 11 of which had ZERO fatalities in a 4 year period. Spoiler alert, Tesla wasn't one of those 11. The size of the Model S and Model X are certainly a large factor in it's safety as well. There's also a variety of other numbers Tesla "massages" (or ignore) when doing their song and dance. Tesla doesn't report US auto sales. One might ask why not if things are as rosy as they make them out to be. But based on registration, Tesla's US sales last year looks to be about 55k. Which puts them behind Porsche, which means they're not selling like hot cakes.

You could counter that last point by saying it's not an interest issue, it's a production issue. But then you've just reached the major concern most finance people have. Tesla STILL isn't reaching the production numbers they said they would. For a company that's bleeding money at a shocking rate, that's a big problem.

 

[tweakmonkey]

Tesla STILL isn't reaching the production numbers they said they would. For a company that's bleeding money at a shocking rate, that's a big problem.

Aren't they pretty close at this point? I mean 2000 vs 2500 last quarter per week, now it's 500 per day, and they're "expecting 5000" per week in June was it? They're certainly working hard on increasing the output now and I can't imagine it won't be improving from here. Not sure if the quality is decent but still.

It's not like they promised 2000 and made 30.

 

[XavierMace]

Aren't they pretty close at this point? I mean 2000 vs 2500 last quarter per week, now it's 500 per day, and they're "expecting 5000" per week in June was it? They're certainly working hard on increasing the output now and I can't imagine it won't be improving from here. Not sure if the quality is decent but still.

It's not like they promised 2000 and made 30.

No, they really aren't close. In Feb 2017, they stated 5k per week was their goal by Q4 2017 and 10k per week in 2018. Right now it's "quite likely" they're going to manage 500/day this whole week (if you want to take Elon's word for it). We're coming up at the half way mark for 2018 and they're not even to their Q4 2017 goals. If they manage the 500/day they're finally half way to their Q4 2017 goal. That's not exactly a stellar performance and given how long they've been stuck at that point, it makes their stated expectation of 5000/week in June seem unlikely. Just as importantly complaints about QC and build quality are growing. That is a VERY bad combination, especially when you're already off talking about your next big thing.

Tesla fans seem to live in this bubble where they don't realize the implication and depth of the statements being made. The Model 3 is supposed to be the savior of Tesla that's going to take over the auto industry and bring doom to the old fashioned car companies. Let's for a minute subscribe to the fantasy that there's infinite demand for this car, it's just a matter of production. Look at the Top 20 cars sold in the USA last year.

Number 20 was the Hyundai Elantra at 198,210 sold. If you do the math, that adds up to needing a production rate of 3,811/week. Even if Tesla managed to sustain the 500/day they're now hoping for, that still falls short. If they want to take the crown of the best selling passenger car from the Camry, they need 7,443/week. If they want to take the #1 automobile spot from Ford (that's the goal, right?), they need 17,245/week.

Those numbers are just US sales and based on registrations, half of Tesla's sales were overseas. Which means Tesla needs to up their current manufacturing numbers by 5x to be able to keep up with the Camry and that's again making the unlikely assumption that there's infinite demand for the car.

Obviously the major manufacturers are no strangers to money problems. The difference is, they have production capacity to try to make a come back. Back in March, Business Insider wrote:

While Tesla has been reliably losing money since 2010, GM has made $70 billion since its own postbankruptcy IPO in 2010.

Tesla is digging themselves a VERY deep hole and their ability to get out is not looking great. Elon is a master of redirection. He's constantly trying to get your attention with shiny new things so you don't notice the problems with the "old" stuff.

 

[zinfamous]

I am very interested in confirmation that Autopilot was enabled, and if so, why it crashed. However, in most reported cases, the driver is lying about Autopilot being engaged, so it remains to be seen.

The driver was obviously not alert because (1) she admitted she was on her cell phone (and claims that Autopilot was engaged at the time), (2) she hit a stopped fire truck at 60 MPH, which definitely says that she, as the driver, was not paying attention, and (3) it said the fire truck was stopped at a stop light (are there a lot of 60 MPH roads that have lights on them??).

I imagine that there are tons. A lot of interstates that are primarily local or "business routes" routinely go from rural to "small town" over and over. IME, these are usually 55mph zones, but some are 60mph, but the speed often changes because the routes frequently go into commercial and residential areas and yeah, there are often traffic lights because you have local roads trying to cross these ~4 lane divided highways. But in those cases, you will almost always have speed limit warnings well in advance, bringing you down to 45mph or less, as well as warnings about an upcoming signal.

I can kinda see where an autopilot might fail on such a road, (it's not like it knows the posted speed, does it, especially if it drops quickly?), if coming around a long, blind corner and there is a signal at the other of the turn, autopilot probably wouldn't have time to see it. This of course means that the human driver had been ignoring all of the signage up to that point and essentially let this happen, so I can't imagine not faulting the driver--I just think there are situations where this current generation of automated driving could plow a car into the back of a stopped firetruck at 60mph, if left on its own.