Tesla automobili
Re: Tesla automobili
https://youtu.be/_jaCOWrCE7w
Najgore je svađati se sa budalom. Prvo te spusti na svoj nivo, a onda te dotuče iskustvom...
Re: Tesla automobili
Firms that burn up $1bn a year are sexy but statistically doomed
https://www.economist.com/news/business ... llectively
Five outliers - Chesapeake Energy, Netflix, Nextera Energy, Tesla and Uber - have collectively lost $100bn in the past decade
YVES SAINT LAURENT, Lady Gaga, David Bowie. Some people do not operate by the same rules as everyone else. Might the same be true of companies? Most bosses complain of being slaves to short-term profit targets. Yet a few flout the orthodoxy in flamboyant fashion. Consider Tesla, a maker of electric cars. This year, so far, it has missed its production targets and lost $1.8bn of free cashflow (the money firms generate after capital investment has been subtracted). No matter. If its founder Elon Musk muses aloud about driverless cars and space travel, its shares rise like a rocket—by 66% since the start of January. Tesla is one of a tiny cohort of firms with a licence to lose billions pursuing a dream. The odds of them achieving it are similar to those of aspiring pop stars and couture designers.
Investing today for profits tomorrow is what capitalism is all about. Amazon lost $4bn in 2012-14 while building an empire that now makes money. Nonetheless, it is rare for big companies to sustain heavy losses just to expand fast. If you examine the members of the Russell 1000 index of large American firms, only 25 of them, or 3.3%, lost over $1bn of free cashflow in 2016 (all figures exclude financial firms and are based on Bloomberg data). In 2007 the share was 1.4% and in 1997, under 1%. Most billion-dollar losers today are energy firms temporarily in the doldrums as they adjust to a recent plunge in oil prices. Their losses are an accident.
But a few firms love life in the fast lane. Netflix, Uber and Tesla are tech companies that say their (largely unproven) business models will transform industries. Two others stand out for the sheer persistence of their losses. Chesapeake Energy, a fracking firm at the heart of America’s shale revolution, has lost at least $1bn of free cashflow a year for an incredible 14 years in a row. Nextera Energy, a utility that runs wind and solar plants, and which investors value highly, has managed 12 years on the trot.
Collectively these five firms have burned $100bn in the past decade, yet they boast a total market value of about $300bn. Combining punchy valuations with massive losses means taking the entrepreneurial art form to a dizzying extreme. Steve Jobs, Apple’s co-founder, was said to have a “reality distortion field” that allowed him to bend the perception of others (although Apple itself was fairly timorous, losing just $874m in its worst year, in 1993). The experience of the five suggests that bending reality today has three elements: a vision, fast growth, and financing.
Take the vision thing first. A charismatic leader with a world-changing plan is de rigueur. For its first 23 years Chesapeake was led by Aubrey McClendon, a cocky Oklahoman who pioneered the process of blasting rocks to extract gas and oil (he died last year in a high-speed car crash). Reed Hastings at Netflix plans to destroy the conventional TV industry by selling films and shows over the internet. Like Mr Musk, Travis Kalanick, Uber’s tarnished former boss, dreams of changing how humans travel. Nextera is led by technocrats but their aim is grandiose—to usher in a new generation of energy technology.
The vision needs to be validated by runaway growth. Often firms emphasise a flattering operating measure, such as oil and gas pumped from the ground, the number of rides hailed and so on. Investors need to believe in a high “terminal value”, a point in the future when high, stable profits will arrive. So it helps to show that, hypothetically, profits would gush if breakneck growth were to stop. Uber says it is profitable in cities where it has operated longest, such as San Francisco. Nextera says that if it stopped investing in new capacity, it would make $6bn of free cashflow a year. Netflix amortises the cost of content over periods of up to five years, so reports an accounting profit even as it bleeds cash.
The third element is financing to pay for huge cumulative losses. Each of the five firms has been a financial innovator, taking advantage of cheap money and growth-hungry investors. Uber has tapped private capital markets, Nextera has structured part of its business as a partnership, Tesla has taken deposits from customers and also trades environmental tax credits. Chesapeake Energy sparked Wall Street’s lust for shale junk bonds, and Netflix has signed commitments to make $14bn of future payments to studios and artists to buy creative content.
So sustaining a reality distortion field is possible, but the longer it goes on for, the harder it gets. More capital has to be raised and, in order to justify it, the bigger the firm’s projected ultimate size—its terminal value—has to be. Fast growth puts huge strain on managers. At some point the edifice can come tumbling down. The five companies described here have $60bn of borrowings, and one, Chesapeake, is struggling with its debt load.
Poker face
A few firms other than Amazon have defied the odds. Over the past 20 years Las Vegas Sands, a casino firm, Royal Caribbean, a cruise-line company, and Micron Technology, a chip-maker, each lost $1bn or more for two consecutive years and went on to prosper. But the chances of success are slim. Of the current members of the Russell 1000 index, since 1997 only 37 have lost $1bn or more for at least two years in a row. Of these, 21 still lose money.
To justify their valuations, the five firms examined by Schumpeter must grow their sales by an estimated 8-33% each year for a decade. Based on the record of all American companies since 1950, and the five firms’ present revenue levels, the probability of this happening ranges between 0.1% and 25%, using statistical tables from Credit Suisse, a bank.
Firms that burn piles of cash are often lionised in an era when growth is sluggish and few companies reinvest all their profits. But losing a billion dollars or more a year is a wildly risky affair and the odds are that such businesses will fall flat. This should not be a surprise—hardly anyone can pull off building a fashion empire around androgyny, wearing a raw meat dress to an awards ceremony, or singing about life on Mars.
Correction (October 19th, 2017): A previous version of this column said that Apple lost just $874 in its worst financial year. We neglected to add six zeroes. The real figure is $874m. Sorry.
https://www.economist.com/news/business ... llectively
Five outliers - Chesapeake Energy, Netflix, Nextera Energy, Tesla and Uber - have collectively lost $100bn in the past decade
YVES SAINT LAURENT, Lady Gaga, David Bowie. Some people do not operate by the same rules as everyone else. Might the same be true of companies? Most bosses complain of being slaves to short-term profit targets. Yet a few flout the orthodoxy in flamboyant fashion. Consider Tesla, a maker of electric cars. This year, so far, it has missed its production targets and lost $1.8bn of free cashflow (the money firms generate after capital investment has been subtracted). No matter. If its founder Elon Musk muses aloud about driverless cars and space travel, its shares rise like a rocket—by 66% since the start of January. Tesla is one of a tiny cohort of firms with a licence to lose billions pursuing a dream. The odds of them achieving it are similar to those of aspiring pop stars and couture designers.
Investing today for profits tomorrow is what capitalism is all about. Amazon lost $4bn in 2012-14 while building an empire that now makes money. Nonetheless, it is rare for big companies to sustain heavy losses just to expand fast. If you examine the members of the Russell 1000 index of large American firms, only 25 of them, or 3.3%, lost over $1bn of free cashflow in 2016 (all figures exclude financial firms and are based on Bloomberg data). In 2007 the share was 1.4% and in 1997, under 1%. Most billion-dollar losers today are energy firms temporarily in the doldrums as they adjust to a recent plunge in oil prices. Their losses are an accident.
But a few firms love life in the fast lane. Netflix, Uber and Tesla are tech companies that say their (largely unproven) business models will transform industries. Two others stand out for the sheer persistence of their losses. Chesapeake Energy, a fracking firm at the heart of America’s shale revolution, has lost at least $1bn of free cashflow a year for an incredible 14 years in a row. Nextera Energy, a utility that runs wind and solar plants, and which investors value highly, has managed 12 years on the trot.
Collectively these five firms have burned $100bn in the past decade, yet they boast a total market value of about $300bn. Combining punchy valuations with massive losses means taking the entrepreneurial art form to a dizzying extreme. Steve Jobs, Apple’s co-founder, was said to have a “reality distortion field” that allowed him to bend the perception of others (although Apple itself was fairly timorous, losing just $874m in its worst year, in 1993). The experience of the five suggests that bending reality today has three elements: a vision, fast growth, and financing.
Take the vision thing first. A charismatic leader with a world-changing plan is de rigueur. For its first 23 years Chesapeake was led by Aubrey McClendon, a cocky Oklahoman who pioneered the process of blasting rocks to extract gas and oil (he died last year in a high-speed car crash). Reed Hastings at Netflix plans to destroy the conventional TV industry by selling films and shows over the internet. Like Mr Musk, Travis Kalanick, Uber’s tarnished former boss, dreams of changing how humans travel. Nextera is led by technocrats but their aim is grandiose—to usher in a new generation of energy technology.
The vision needs to be validated by runaway growth. Often firms emphasise a flattering operating measure, such as oil and gas pumped from the ground, the number of rides hailed and so on. Investors need to believe in a high “terminal value”, a point in the future when high, stable profits will arrive. So it helps to show that, hypothetically, profits would gush if breakneck growth were to stop. Uber says it is profitable in cities where it has operated longest, such as San Francisco. Nextera says that if it stopped investing in new capacity, it would make $6bn of free cashflow a year. Netflix amortises the cost of content over periods of up to five years, so reports an accounting profit even as it bleeds cash.
The third element is financing to pay for huge cumulative losses. Each of the five firms has been a financial innovator, taking advantage of cheap money and growth-hungry investors. Uber has tapped private capital markets, Nextera has structured part of its business as a partnership, Tesla has taken deposits from customers and also trades environmental tax credits. Chesapeake Energy sparked Wall Street’s lust for shale junk bonds, and Netflix has signed commitments to make $14bn of future payments to studios and artists to buy creative content.
So sustaining a reality distortion field is possible, but the longer it goes on for, the harder it gets. More capital has to be raised and, in order to justify it, the bigger the firm’s projected ultimate size—its terminal value—has to be. Fast growth puts huge strain on managers. At some point the edifice can come tumbling down. The five companies described here have $60bn of borrowings, and one, Chesapeake, is struggling with its debt load.
Poker face
A few firms other than Amazon have defied the odds. Over the past 20 years Las Vegas Sands, a casino firm, Royal Caribbean, a cruise-line company, and Micron Technology, a chip-maker, each lost $1bn or more for two consecutive years and went on to prosper. But the chances of success are slim. Of the current members of the Russell 1000 index, since 1997 only 37 have lost $1bn or more for at least two years in a row. Of these, 21 still lose money.
To justify their valuations, the five firms examined by Schumpeter must grow their sales by an estimated 8-33% each year for a decade. Based on the record of all American companies since 1950, and the five firms’ present revenue levels, the probability of this happening ranges between 0.1% and 25%, using statistical tables from Credit Suisse, a bank.
Firms that burn piles of cash are often lionised in an era when growth is sluggish and few companies reinvest all their profits. But losing a billion dollars or more a year is a wildly risky affair and the odds are that such businesses will fall flat. This should not be a surprise—hardly anyone can pull off building a fashion empire around androgyny, wearing a raw meat dress to an awards ceremony, or singing about life on Mars.
Correction (October 19th, 2017): A previous version of this column said that Apple lost just $874 in its worst financial year. We neglected to add six zeroes. The real figure is $874m. Sorry.
Najgore je svađati se sa budalom. Prvo te spusti na svoj nivo, a onda te dotuče iskustvom...
-
gazza
- Banned
- Postovi: 2781
- Pridružio se: 01 Okt 2012, 12:38
- Garaža: Suzuki S-Cross 4x4 1.6TD Sergio Celano
- Lokacija: Vracar/Limnos
Re: Tesla automobili
provedoh vikend u amsterdamu. tesla taksiji su svuda, prvo ih uocite na aerodromu. u centru grada svuda punjaci za elektricne automobile, ne samo tesle nego opele, renoe, nisane. bas ih ima dosta. u povratku nas uberom vozio majstor koji vozi nisan leaf, prezadovoljan, 39.000e platio, autonomija 210km, vreme full punjenja 20 minuta. vrlo zanimljivo...
Re: Tesla automobili
Full punjenje 20 minuta?
Najgore je svađati se sa budalom. Prvo te spusti na svoj nivo, a onda te dotuče iskustvom...
Re: Tesla automobili
mislio sam da je nemoguće, 24 kWh baterija...
ali ...
Nissan Leaf Electric Dictionary DIRECT CURRENT FAST CHARGERS
EV Term
Also known as fast chargers, Direct Current Fast Chargers (DCFC) deliver a full charge in less than thirty minutes. They’re the fastest EV chargers around, and they’ll charge your LEAF® in about the time it takes to enjoy a great cup of coffee
ali ...
Nissan Leaf Electric Dictionary DIRECT CURRENT FAST CHARGERS
EV Term
Also known as fast chargers, Direct Current Fast Chargers (DCFC) deliver a full charge in less than thirty minutes. They’re the fastest EV chargers around, and they’ll charge your LEAF® in about the time it takes to enjoy a great cup of coffee
Boringly average, but also perfect for school run mums
Re: Tesla automobili
Najviše sam video prijusića taksija.gazza je napisao: ↑24 Okt 2017, 18:21provedoh vikend u amsterdamu. tesla taksiji su svuda, prvo ih uocite na aerodromu. u centru grada svuda punjaci za elektricne automobile, ne samo tesle nego opele, renoe, nisane. bas ih ima dosta. u povratku nas uberom vozio majstor koji vozi nisan leaf, prezadovoljan, 39.000e platio, autonomija 210km, vreme full punjenja 20 minuta. vrlo zanimljivo...
Re: Tesla automobili
Tesla's seat strategy goes against the grain...for now
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-tesla ... SKBN1CV0DS
SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Elon Musk was fed up.
The seats on Tesla Inc’s (TSLA.O) new Model X SUV were a mess. An outside contractor was having trouble executing the complicated design, spurring frustration and finger-pointing between Tesla and its supplier.
How would Tesla ever pull off mass production of the upcoming Model 3, the car intended to catapult the niche automaker into the big leagues, if it could not deliver on something as fundamental as a seat?
Musk made a decision: Tesla would build the seats itself.
Tesla’s demanding chief executive vowed years ago to shake up the automotive industry with his line of electric vehicles and a futuristic manufacturing facility in Fremont, Calif. But industry experts say Musk’s insistence on performing much of the work in-house is among the reasons Tesla is nowhere close to its stated goal of building 500,000 vehicles annually by next year, most of them Model 3s.
The automaker this month revealed it built just 260 of the vehicles between July and September, badly missing its target of 1,500 Model 3s in the third quarter. In a statement, Tesla blamed manufacturing “bottlenecks.” It declined to elaborate, but assured investors “there are no fundamental issues with the Model 3 production or supply chain.”
Tesla has demonstrated a commitment to vertical integration not seen in the auto industry for decades.
The company has so far sunk $2 billion into a sprawling Nevada factory to manufacture its vehicles’ batteries. In-house programmers design the bulk of the complex software that runs the Model 3, which Musk has described as a “computer on wheels”. Tesla controls its own retail chain, selling its cars directly to customers and bypassing dealers.
But it is Tesla’s 2015 decision to build its own seats that has some industry veterans scratching their heads. Seat making is a low-margin, labor-intensive enterprise that big automakers generally farm out to specialists. Tesla is operating its own seat assembly line inside its factory, and it is hiring engineers and technicians to figure out a way to fully automate the process.
“Is that really the core competency of an auto company? It is not,” said analyst Maryann Keller, who has been tracking the car industry since the early 1970s. “Why would you want to do that?”
Tesla declined requests from Reuters to discuss its seat assembly efforts. The company is expected to reveal more about its production issues on Nov. 1, when it announces third-quarter results. There is no indication that the “bottlenecks” mentioned previously by the company are associated with seat production.
Analyst Keller and others suspect Tesla eventually will be forced to farm out seat assembly to suppliers as the company transitions from a niche producer of pricey, hand-built luxury cars to a mass manufacturer. Seat makers including Germany’s ZF Friedrichshafen AG [ZFF.UL], France’s Faurecia SA (EPED.PA) and Detroit-based Lear Corp (LEA.N) already are trying to win that business.
A lot is riding on Tesla’s ability to scale up operations quickly. Starting at $35,000, the Model 3 is Tesla’s attempt to bring its electric technology to a wider audience. More than a half-million customers have already put down deposits.
Tesla has never turned an annual profit and it is burning through cash. Yet investors are betting big on its future. It is now the second most valuable U.S. automaker, behind only General Motors Co (GM.N). Tesla shares on Wednesday closed at $325.84, down 3.4 percent.
FROM STOP-GAP TO STRATEGY
Musk has defended Tesla’s hands-on approach as the way to ensure reliability, as well as an opportunity to rethink industry norms.
The interior of the Tesla Model 3 sedan is seen in this undated handout image as the car company handed over its first 30 Model 3 vehicles to employee buyers at the company's Fremont facility in California, U.S., July 28, 2017. Tesla/Handout via REUTERS
It is also a reflection of the entrepreneur’s obsession with detail.
“One of the hardest things to design is a good seat,” Musk said at the September 2015 launch of the Model X in Fremont.
Problems first surfaced with the flagship Model S sedan in 2012. Musk complained that the seats made by its contract manufacturer, Australia-based Futuris Group, were not comfortable nor of the quality expected for a car whose price tag started at around $57,400, according to a former Tesla executive who described Musk’s thinking to Reuters.
Troubles accelerated with the Model X, leading Tesla to wrest assembly from Futuris just after the vehicle’s release in late 2015. If seats could be entirely redesigned from the ground up, Musk reasoned, maybe their assembly could be automated in preparation for the high volumes anticipated for the Model 3.
“He saw the opportunity to do it differently and better,” the former Tesla executive said. “The short term was a stop gap, but the long-term idea was to rethink the design of how a seat works to include how a seat is built.”
Slideshow (9 Images)
Futuris did not respond to requests for comment. It continues to supply seat parts to Tesla. Detroit-based seating supplier Adient PLC (ADNT.N) acquired Futuris for $360 million last month.
Meanwhile, Tesla’s seat woes continue. In all, the automaker has issued four seating-related recalls since 2013. The latest came this month with the recall of 11,000 Model Xs manufactured between Oct. 28, 2016 and Aug. 16, 2017.
SUPPLIERS CIRCLING
Making car seats is a complex business. Choosing materials, dying and cutting, shaping foam and metal frames, and adding heaters, recliners and other gadgets can involve nearly a dozen suppliers for top models. Final assembly requires lots of labor.
That’s why most automakers opted decades ago to outsource seats for their lower-cost models to specialty seatmakers whose market is expected to reach $79 billion by 2022, according to market researcher Lucintel.
Although Musk’s philosophy has always been “build it right and then figure out how to get the cost down” later, according to the ex-Tesla executive, observers say Tesla can ill afford more production headaches.
Philippe Houchois, an auto analyst with the investment bank Jefferies, wrote in a September note to clients that “scalability” was now the main challenge at Tesla, whose manufacturing prowess is still unproven when it comes to building large numbers of vehicles.
“We don’t think Tesla’s vertically integrated business model can be scaled up as profitably and quickly as consensus thinks,” Houchois wrote.
Despite Tesla’s previous battles with Futuris, seat suppliers smell opportunity. ZF Friedrichshafen and Faurecia have opened Silicon Valley labs, in part to woo Tesla.
Lear, which cuts and sews material for Tesla, is likewise pressing to get the automaker’s seat manufacturing business, according to Matthew Simoncini, the company’s chief executive.
“In general Tesla has a philosophy: ‘We’ll do it ourselves. We’ll change the mold,'” Simoncini said. “(Outsourcing)is a much more efficient use of capital. That would allow them to focus on what they do best.”
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-tesla ... SKBN1CV0DS
SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Elon Musk was fed up.
The seats on Tesla Inc’s (TSLA.O) new Model X SUV were a mess. An outside contractor was having trouble executing the complicated design, spurring frustration and finger-pointing between Tesla and its supplier.
How would Tesla ever pull off mass production of the upcoming Model 3, the car intended to catapult the niche automaker into the big leagues, if it could not deliver on something as fundamental as a seat?
Musk made a decision: Tesla would build the seats itself.
Tesla’s demanding chief executive vowed years ago to shake up the automotive industry with his line of electric vehicles and a futuristic manufacturing facility in Fremont, Calif. But industry experts say Musk’s insistence on performing much of the work in-house is among the reasons Tesla is nowhere close to its stated goal of building 500,000 vehicles annually by next year, most of them Model 3s.
The automaker this month revealed it built just 260 of the vehicles between July and September, badly missing its target of 1,500 Model 3s in the third quarter. In a statement, Tesla blamed manufacturing “bottlenecks.” It declined to elaborate, but assured investors “there are no fundamental issues with the Model 3 production or supply chain.”
Tesla has demonstrated a commitment to vertical integration not seen in the auto industry for decades.
The company has so far sunk $2 billion into a sprawling Nevada factory to manufacture its vehicles’ batteries. In-house programmers design the bulk of the complex software that runs the Model 3, which Musk has described as a “computer on wheels”. Tesla controls its own retail chain, selling its cars directly to customers and bypassing dealers.
But it is Tesla’s 2015 decision to build its own seats that has some industry veterans scratching their heads. Seat making is a low-margin, labor-intensive enterprise that big automakers generally farm out to specialists. Tesla is operating its own seat assembly line inside its factory, and it is hiring engineers and technicians to figure out a way to fully automate the process.
“Is that really the core competency of an auto company? It is not,” said analyst Maryann Keller, who has been tracking the car industry since the early 1970s. “Why would you want to do that?”
Tesla declined requests from Reuters to discuss its seat assembly efforts. The company is expected to reveal more about its production issues on Nov. 1, when it announces third-quarter results. There is no indication that the “bottlenecks” mentioned previously by the company are associated with seat production.
Analyst Keller and others suspect Tesla eventually will be forced to farm out seat assembly to suppliers as the company transitions from a niche producer of pricey, hand-built luxury cars to a mass manufacturer. Seat makers including Germany’s ZF Friedrichshafen AG [ZFF.UL], France’s Faurecia SA (EPED.PA) and Detroit-based Lear Corp (LEA.N) already are trying to win that business.
A lot is riding on Tesla’s ability to scale up operations quickly. Starting at $35,000, the Model 3 is Tesla’s attempt to bring its electric technology to a wider audience. More than a half-million customers have already put down deposits.
Tesla has never turned an annual profit and it is burning through cash. Yet investors are betting big on its future. It is now the second most valuable U.S. automaker, behind only General Motors Co (GM.N). Tesla shares on Wednesday closed at $325.84, down 3.4 percent.
FROM STOP-GAP TO STRATEGY
Musk has defended Tesla’s hands-on approach as the way to ensure reliability, as well as an opportunity to rethink industry norms.
The interior of the Tesla Model 3 sedan is seen in this undated handout image as the car company handed over its first 30 Model 3 vehicles to employee buyers at the company's Fremont facility in California, U.S., July 28, 2017. Tesla/Handout via REUTERS
It is also a reflection of the entrepreneur’s obsession with detail.
“One of the hardest things to design is a good seat,” Musk said at the September 2015 launch of the Model X in Fremont.
Problems first surfaced with the flagship Model S sedan in 2012. Musk complained that the seats made by its contract manufacturer, Australia-based Futuris Group, were not comfortable nor of the quality expected for a car whose price tag started at around $57,400, according to a former Tesla executive who described Musk’s thinking to Reuters.
Troubles accelerated with the Model X, leading Tesla to wrest assembly from Futuris just after the vehicle’s release in late 2015. If seats could be entirely redesigned from the ground up, Musk reasoned, maybe their assembly could be automated in preparation for the high volumes anticipated for the Model 3.
“He saw the opportunity to do it differently and better,” the former Tesla executive said. “The short term was a stop gap, but the long-term idea was to rethink the design of how a seat works to include how a seat is built.”
Slideshow (9 Images)
Futuris did not respond to requests for comment. It continues to supply seat parts to Tesla. Detroit-based seating supplier Adient PLC (ADNT.N) acquired Futuris for $360 million last month.
Meanwhile, Tesla’s seat woes continue. In all, the automaker has issued four seating-related recalls since 2013. The latest came this month with the recall of 11,000 Model Xs manufactured between Oct. 28, 2016 and Aug. 16, 2017.
SUPPLIERS CIRCLING
Making car seats is a complex business. Choosing materials, dying and cutting, shaping foam and metal frames, and adding heaters, recliners and other gadgets can involve nearly a dozen suppliers for top models. Final assembly requires lots of labor.
That’s why most automakers opted decades ago to outsource seats for their lower-cost models to specialty seatmakers whose market is expected to reach $79 billion by 2022, according to market researcher Lucintel.
Although Musk’s philosophy has always been “build it right and then figure out how to get the cost down” later, according to the ex-Tesla executive, observers say Tesla can ill afford more production headaches.
Philippe Houchois, an auto analyst with the investment bank Jefferies, wrote in a September note to clients that “scalability” was now the main challenge at Tesla, whose manufacturing prowess is still unproven when it comes to building large numbers of vehicles.
“We don’t think Tesla’s vertically integrated business model can be scaled up as profitably and quickly as consensus thinks,” Houchois wrote.
Despite Tesla’s previous battles with Futuris, seat suppliers smell opportunity. ZF Friedrichshafen and Faurecia have opened Silicon Valley labs, in part to woo Tesla.
Lear, which cuts and sews material for Tesla, is likewise pressing to get the automaker’s seat manufacturing business, according to Matthew Simoncini, the company’s chief executive.
“In general Tesla has a philosophy: ‘We’ll do it ourselves. We’ll change the mold,'” Simoncini said. “(Outsourcing)is a much more efficient use of capital. That would allow them to focus on what they do best.”
Najgore je svađati se sa budalom. Prvo te spusti na svoj nivo, a onda te dotuče iskustvom...
Re: Tesla automobili
https://youtu.be/_DT0vDMWsq4
Najgore je svađati se sa budalom. Prvo te spusti na svoj nivo, a onda te dotuče iskustvom...
Re: Tesla automobili
Lol
it built just 260 of the vehicles between July and September
it built just 260 of the vehicles between July and September
Boringly average, but also perfect for school run mums
Re: Tesla automobili
Tuzno izgleda enterijer.
Hit detalj su ventilacioni otvori pozadi.
Ovaj lik je ladno uspeo da nam objasni da je izmestanje instrument table na pogresno mesto zapravo dobra stvar jer instrumenti vise ne blokiraju pogled ka putu. Sa druge strane, on je sa svojim superman perifernim vidom u stanju da prati brzinu na srednjem ekranu bez skidanja pogleda sa puta... Sta reci posle toga?
Hit detalj su ventilacioni otvori pozadi.
Ovaj lik je ladno uspeo da nam objasni da je izmestanje instrument table na pogresno mesto zapravo dobra stvar jer instrumenti vise ne blokiraju pogled ka putu. Sa druge strane, on je sa svojim superman perifernim vidom u stanju da prati brzinu na srednjem ekranu bez skidanja pogleda sa puta... Sta reci posle toga?
Re: Tesla automobili
Tako mu sve jedno gde je brzinomer, kad je na auto pilotu.
Re: Tesla automobili
Koliko vremena je na autopilotu, 0.1%?
Re: Tesla automobili
Tek sad vidim da sam pogrijesio kad sam rekao da C4 novi ima enterijer u rangu Tesle. Ima enterijer 3 puta bolji od Tesle, ovo je prejadno i pretuzno.
Re: Tesla automobili
Elon Musk Was Wrong About Self-Driving Teslashttps://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-10 ... -lost-year
Znaci i Tesla vlasnici imaju granicu tolerancije. Podneta tuzba zbog zahebancije sa autopilotom, obecanim i naplacenim mogucnostima kojih jos nema na vidiku...
Ono sto nisam znao je da, danasnje Tesle imaju losiji autopilot od onih od pre nekih godinu i nesto dana dok se nisu posvadjali sa Mobileye i prestali da koriste njhovu tehnologiju. Sadasnja Tesla tehnologija jos nije dostgla nivo gde je Mobileye bio.
Mobileye je inace skoro kupljen od Intela koji ima partnerstvo sa BMW-om (MObileye je bio deo partnerstva i pre preuzimanja).
Znaci i Tesla vlasnici imaju granicu tolerancije. Podneta tuzba zbog zahebancije sa autopilotom, obecanim i naplacenim mogucnostima kojih jos nema na vidiku...
Ono sto nisam znao je da, danasnje Tesle imaju losiji autopilot od onih od pre nekih godinu i nesto dana dok se nisu posvadjali sa Mobileye i prestali da koriste njhovu tehnologiju. Sadasnja Tesla tehnologija jos nije dostgla nivo gde je Mobileye bio.
Mobileye je inace skoro kupljen od Intela koji ima partnerstvo sa BMW-om (MObileye je bio deo partnerstva i pre preuzimanja).
-
Saša
- Postovi: 13038
- Pridružio se: 13 Jan 2012, 08:07
- Garaža: Renault Kadjar Equilibre 1.3 TCe 140 i Fiat Punto Classic 1.2 8V LPG Dynamic A/C
- Lokacija: Novi Sad
Re: Tesla automobili
Ne znam da li je ovo već bilo, ali - jako dobar i detaljan prikaz Tesla Modela 3. Doduše, bio je to jedan od pred-produkcijskih modela i u "premium" verziji, no svejedno meni to jako dobro deluje. Iako ne puca od nekog luksuza i "svemirskih džidža-bidža", vidi se da su posvetili puno pažnje svakom detalju. Biće to vrlo funkcionalan i dobar auto. 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_DT0vDMWsq4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_DT0vDMWsq4
