Thoughts on TESLA

Status
Not open for further replies.
I heard this somewhere... not sure...


But they said that Tesla was going to use the exact same batter pack in all Model 3s 'to keep the cost down' and limit them with software....



To me that is like putting a V8 in a car and then cutting out cylinders according to what you paid for the car... the V8 is expensive and should not be put in unless paid for...


Also, what happens when someone gets stuck when they bought the low battery option and everybody knows there is still juice left in the car to move.... is Tesla going to let someone be stuck who knows where:confused: And what if it is in the desert or the 20 below and the driver dies?


Could be wrong on this as I only heard it once....
 
Texas Proud said:
I heard this somewhere... not sure...


But they said that Tesla was going to use the exact same batter pack in all Model 3s 'to keep the cost down' and limit them with software....



To me that is like putting a V8 in a car and then cutting out cylinders according to what you paid for the car... the V8 is expensive and should not be put in unless paid for...


Also, what happens when someone gets stuck when they bought the low battery option and everybody knows there is still juice left in the car to move.... is Tesla going to let someone be stuck who knows where:confused: And what if it is in the desert or the 20 below and the driver dies?


Could be wrong on this as I only heard it once....
Click to expand...

That's what the did originally. And well, what's old appears to be new again. According to this story, that's what they are doing once again with S and X. Model 3 not mentioned, but don't see why it would be any different.

Tesla launches new cheaper Model S and Model X with software-limited battery pack
 
It is pretty typical these days. For example: programs like Quicken have everything, but only activate to the level you buy.

If you ever have to deal with car circuit boards, you'll see extra features populated (and sometimes not populated) but not activated. The special feature (a light, or display, or switch) is deactivated typically in some encoded way.

It does seem a bit unusual to do this with expensive batteries, however.
 
JoeWras said:
It is pretty typical these days. For example: programs like Quicken have everything, but only activate to the level you buy.

If you ever have to deal with car circuit boards, you'll see extra features populated (and sometimes not populated) but not activated. The special feature (a light, or display, or switch) is deactivated typically in some encoded way.

It does seem a bit unusual to do this with expensive batteries, however.
Click to expand...




I can understand software and even some circuit boards.... but the battery is the most expensive part of the car.... why put in a batter that is 30% or more larger than what was bought that is probably thousands of dollars....
 
Texas Proud said:
I can understand software and even some circuit boards.... but the battery is the most expensive part of the car.... why put in a batter that is 30% or more larger than what was bought that is probably thousands of dollars....
Click to expand...
Totally agree. It is strange.

This would be a good place for Elon to invest in his engineering to limit COGs so he can make those more affordable Model 3s.

I learned in my w*rk that making a "dummy" of iterations of something on a device seems easy on the surface, but has all kinds of complexities underneath. I'm being intentionally vague because it applies to most engineering and design problems, from houses to computers to automobiles.

In the case of autos, for instance, they may have to go through crash certification for a change like this (pure guess, but an example). Another example would be costs associated with a different iteration on the assembly line. Costs and testing add up, and I would just guess that they didn't have the time or cash to do that yet.
 
oneill225 said:
How about Enron? They kept their CFO and other execs right up until they went to jail.
Click to expand...

Not really.

Skilling (CEO) quit months before the report of big losses, He was replaced by Ken Lay who was Chairman (temp as CEO). Fastow (CFO) was fired.

Skilling got 24 years in prison (I think 24)

Fastow plea bargained and got 10 (?)

Lay got convicted but died of a heart attack before heading off to the Big House.

Brief history here:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/the-rise-and-fall-of-enron-a-brief-history-1.591559

A few execs committed suicide instead of getting convicted.

It was a mess...

No comparison to Tesla's business or management.
 
aja8888 said:
Not really.



Skilling (CEO) quit months before the report of big losses, He was replaced by Ken Lay who was Chairman (temp as CEO). Fastow (CFO) was fired.



Skilling got 24 years in prison (I think 24)



Fastow plea bargained and got 10 (?)



Lay got convicted but died of a heart attack before heading off to the Big House.



Brief history here:



https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/the-rise-and-fall-of-enron-a-brief-history-1.591559



A few execs committed suicide instead of getting convicted.



It was a mess...



No comparison to Tesla's business or management.
Click to expand...
You and I both get and appreciate how different the situation is between Enron and Tesla. [emoji3]
 
aja8888 said:
Not really.
Skilling (CEO) quit months before the report of big losses, He was replaced by Ken Lay who was Chairman (temp as CEO). Fastow (CFO) was fired.
Skilling got 24 years in prison (I think 24)
Fastow plea bargained and got 10 (?)
Lay got convicted but died of a heart attack before heading off to the Big House.
No comparison to Tesla's business or management.
Click to expand...

You are right. I should have said up until the scam was discovered, not jail.

Still, Fastow was the CFO for close to 4 years. '98 to the end of '01.

Let's get back to Tesla, though. Do you think it is "red flag" that Tesla's CFO position is changing hands? If so, why?
 
bobandsherry said:
Tesla turns another profit, ramps up production – as competitors flood market with electric vehicles. Potential for 'pile-up of epic proportions'
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/01/31/aut...lly-creating-pile-up-of-epic-proportions.html
Click to expand...

So many EVs, so little time.

I am glad to see the media starting to recognize the flood of EVs that will be coming online in another year or two. I don't see it as a "pile-up", I see it as a bumpy transition from ICE vehicles. Some companies will succeed and others will fail. That is why the legacy auto makers are chasing Tesla right now.

In the short-term (12-18 months), Tesla is the horse to bet on. Long term? We will know more in a year.
 
I am not betting on any horse in this race. I just watch. :)
 
JoeWras said:
Totally agree. It is strange.

This would be a good place for Elon to invest in his engineering to limit COGs so he can make those more affordable Model 3s.

I learned in my w*rk that making a "dummy" of iterations of something on a device seems easy on the surface, but has all kinds of complexities underneath. I'm being intentionally vague because it applies to most engineering and design problems, from houses to computers to automobiles.

In the case of autos, for instance, they may have to go through crash certification for a change like this (pure guess, but an example). Another example would be costs associated with a different iteration on the assembly line. Costs and testing add up, and I would just guess that they didn't have the time or cash to do that yet.
Click to expand...




If it were me I would just use the same (what I will call) battery case... that can be standard... but the actual amount of batteries put into that case can be for the specific output... and if there is some engineering problem with having empty space then just fill that with slugs...


There is no reason to put in expensive options and then defeat them just because someone does not want to pay up...
 
oneill225 said:
You are right. I should have said up until the scam was discovered, not jail.

Still, Fastow was the CFO for close to 4 years. '98 to the end of '01.

Let's get back to Tesla, though. Do you think it is "red flag" that Tesla's CFO position is changing hands? If so, why?
Click to expand...


Not just for Tesla... if any company hires a new CFO, or any top executive, and that executive leaves in a short amount of time without some major reason for them to do so it is a red flag...


There could be 2 main reason IMO..


The exec hired was bad and the company has learned that and is disposing of their bad decision....


The exce hired was good and after taking a look around the company has decided that there is something going on that they do not want to be a part of...


Another would be some other company gave them a much better offer and they decided to take it since they do not have much time in their current company... I do not think this is what happened with Tesla...


Any other possibilities you can think of?
 
Texas Proud said:
If it were me I would just use the same (what I will call) battery case... that can be standard... but the actual amount of batteries put into that case can be for the specific output... and if there is some engineering problem with having empty space then just fill that with slugs...


There is no reason to put in expensive options and then defeat them just because someone does not want to pay up...
Click to expand...

Well perhaps they'll offer an "upgrade" option down the road, giving someone a chance to see that the smaller pack may not fit their needs. Then all Tesla needs to do is collect the $$$ and make a change in the vehicle configuration through the software. So could end up being a cash cow later.
 
bobandsherry said:
Well perhaps they'll offer an "upgrade" option down the road, giving someone a chance to see that the smaller pack may not fit their needs. Then all Tesla needs to do is collect the $$$ and make a change in the vehicle configuration through the software. So could end up being a cash cow later.
Click to expand...
This would make for an interesting study to see how it affects customer satisfaction. Would folks be happy that for a thousand dollars they can get extended range and extended battery life? Or would they be resentful that the Tesla is charging them extra to use the entire battery that is already installed in the car they have already paid for. And let's not forget that they are already lugging that extra battery around every day, using their precious charge to accelerate that dead, useless mass from every red light, etc. I'd guess the resentment factor would be greater than the "gee--what a great favor Elon is doing me" factor, except among the most rabid Teslaphiles.
 
Texas Proud said:
If it were me I would just use the same (what I will call) battery case... that can be standard... but the actual amount of batteries put into that case can be for the specific output... and if there is some engineering problem with having empty space then just fill that with slugs...
Click to expand...
I know, I know, it seems like that's all there should be to it. But...

Let me give you an example. I worked on a project 20 years ago where we had to delete an iteration of the device we were working on. Our boss asked us the software effort, and me and my co-worker gave him an estimate of a day or two. In our minds, it was "for (i=1 to 2)" instead of "for (i=1 to 3)".

So, we did that, got it through initial test, and sent the software on its way, ready to ship. A week later, at the last moment, they voided the software drop due to a problem found in some system test. Turns out that some rarely used totally orthogonal piece of software had assumed that all of these devices would have a minimum of 3 iterations. There was no good reason for that software to make that assumption, but it did!

The box crashed when running this very obscure feature.

Thankfully, that was in the day when software was actually tested. ;) So, we didn't screw the customer except for a few day delay.

I'm guessing there may be something similar with Tesla. There may be a lot of assumptions in iterations, power curves, etc. I find that software that was really put under the gun to get stuff out quick has many "hard assumptions" that will "be configurable later." Again, I know nothing about Tesla engineering, just a pure guess.

These things are fixable, of course, but a few million lines of code need to go through test for such a critical piece of hardware before it can be certified. That takes time, people and money.
 
samclem said:
This would make for an interesting study to see how it affects customer satisfaction. Would folks be happy that for a thousand dollars they can get extended range and extended battery life? Or would they be resentful that the Tesla is charging them extra to use the entire battery that is already installed in the car they have already paid for. And let's not forget that they are already lugging that extra battery around every day, using their precious charge to accelerate that dead, useless mass from every red light, etc. I'd guess the resentment factor would be greater than the "gee--what a great favor Elon is doing me" factor, except among the most rabid Teslaphiles.
Click to expand...
If the upgrade costs more later, I can see both groups feeling good. Those who already bought since they got a "deal", and those who want to upgrade as they can upgrade their range at a lower overall costs than having to do a swap out and replace of the battery pack, saves on labor costs too.

As for hauling around the extra weight, the weight may be needed just to keep the car weight balanced
 
bobandsherry said:
Well perhaps they'll offer an "upgrade" option down the road, giving someone a chance to see that the smaller pack may not fit their needs. Then all Tesla needs to do is collect the $$$ and make a change in the vehicle configuration through the software. So could end up being a cash cow later.
Click to expand...

There is also another benefit to shipping the larger battery with software limited output, though I think it would be small.

A larger battery with a lower draw-down will last longer (lifetime). So fewer warranty issues. Again, I think this is small relative to the cost of the extra battery, but it isn't zero. So coupled with the potential upgrade income, maybe Tesla has done the math and decided it is worth it.

And Tesla batteries appear to be have a long life, so the above carries even less weight. But it still might be enough to swing their decision.

I've seen more egregious examples of this at my MegaCorp, two extreme examples come to mind. The engineers were just appalled at what they were asked to do, it went against every fiber of their being! :) But marketing insisted it was needed at the time, and in at least one case they were right, in the other, they probably were not wrong, harder to tell.


edit/add: In other news, TSLA is actually recovering a bit today @ ~ $312. Still a long way from the pre-drop close of $347 on 1/17.

-ERD50
 
Last edited:
Texas Proud said:
Not just for Tesla... if any company hires a new CFO, or any top executive, and that executive leaves in a short amount of time without some major reason for them to do so it is a red flag...

There could be 2 main reason IMO..
The exec hired was bad and the company has learned that and is disposing of their bad decision....
The exce hired was good and after taking a look around the company has decided that there is something going on that they do not want to be a part of...
Another would be some other company gave them a much better offer and they decided to take it since they do not have much time in their current company... I do not think this is what happened with Tesla...
Any other possibilities you can think of?
Click to expand...

Of course. Health, family, and any other unforeseen life event. It is also possible that he never intended to stay long term. This is no longer the era of working for a company for 35 years and retiring.

The simple fact that turnover has occurred without supporting evidence of real problems, tells us little or nothing about the health of a business. It is just red meat for the Tesla bears to throw on the wall to see if it sticks.
 
oneill225 said:
Of course. Health, family, and any other unforeseen life event. It is also possible that he never intended to stay long term. This is no longer the era of working for a company for 35 years and retiring.

The simple fact that turnover has occurred without supporting evidence of real problems, tells us little or nothing about the health of a business. It is just red meat for the Tesla bears to throw on the wall to see if it sticks.
Click to expand...

We pretty much know the "health" of Tesla as it is detailed in their income statement, balance sheet and 10K. People who make it to the C suite don't leave quickly unless there are big problems, either personal or within the Company.
 
aja8888 said:
We pretty much know the "health" of Tesla as it is detailed in their income statement, balance sheet and 10K. People who make it to the C suite don't leave quickly unless there are big problems, either personal or within the Company.
Click to expand...
Especially when person left before and came back. One can read several things into it, some good, mostly negative.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

M
Tender offers for auction preferred shares?
Replies
2
Views
272
marko
M
Ncc1701
Calamos Structured Protection ETFs
Replies
12
Views
767
DJRR
D
H
MYGA
Replies
17
Views
865
Luvtoride
Luvtoride
M
Should I Sell?
2 3
Replies
69
Views
4K
l8_apex
L
S
Bond offerings site?
Replies
4
Views
340
savory
S

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom