What is Digg?187 Comments
- magic5227, on 12/30/2008, -23/+131One of the few companies really deserving of bailout money.
With the current gas prices, I bet people will start to lose interest in this kind of company until its too late. - adamroach, on 12/30/2008, -8/+80Is there a good time to start a car company with vehicles averaging 80k?
- Pake, on 12/30/2008, -5/+56"Tesla applied for $400 million in federal loans under a year-old program to fund construction of more fuel-efficient cars, only to see the Big Three automakers try to tap that fund as part of their bailout package."
Gotta love the big 3. They barely have even concept electric cars and yet they want to money that should go to the companies who are already producing those cars. - thrashertm, on 12/30/2008, -1/+30The poorest timing was to not be able to mass produce and sell cars when oil was $100+ per barrel
- glucoseboy, on 12/30/2008, -4/+29No, it was to prove that you could build a car company outside of the Big Three that could manufacture an electric car that people would really want to buy. Once you did that, you could improve the technology and the price would come down. Tesla's Roadstar is $100K, their next car, a four seat sedan was targeted at $50K.
- UNL1M1T3D, on 12/30/2008, -1/+24Oh my god, what a coincidence, it says that right in the description!
- AmaDaden, on 12/30/2008, -2/+241) Because we do not have an endless supply of gas. $4 is just the tip of the ice burg. Just wait 10 years.
2) We should stop depending on oil. We have to import most of it and that is causing a HUGE trade deficit. This is a major issue for any American.
3) Tesla has spent the last 5 years working on better electronic tech that WILL benefit you in one way or another. Even if you don't drive an electric car. From the wiki page on Tesla motors...
"Interest in Tesla Motors' battery technology led to the formation of a division called the Tesla Energy Group." - radsdigger, on 12/30/2008, -4/+22Sad. These cars are both stylish and sensible. I can't wait til this technology becomes mainstream, but seems like we'll all have to wait a bit longer.
- robojerk, on 12/30/2008, -7/+25"One of the few companies really deserving of bailout money. "
Umm no... If this company fails it will have almost no affect on the economy and or average joe's wallet. None of these companies that got bailed out even deserve it since they had proven failed business models. They got the bail out because of 2 reasons, all the employees that would lose their job, and the legacy factor of how we once were the best car producer in the world.
I think what you meant to say that this company deserves subsidies since it promotes new electric technology and does not rely on oil. I totally disagree with you because there are plenty of other car makers that make alternative fuel automobiles. Tesla makes automobiles that cost 80k. They're not for average joe consumer. - 4NDr01D, on 12/30/2008, -1/+17the expensive one would have led to innovations of a cheaper one
- mcnees287, on 12/30/2008, -7/+21WTF they dont deserve a bailout.
its noobs like you that are going to ***** this country. - PRlME, on 12/30/2008, -3/+17Top Gears Review of the Tesla:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rr9FcbVAYuE
The Review started good...but it went down hill from there. -=\ - SkippyDoorknob, on 12/30/2008, -5/+17Sensible? They cost a fortune!
- suydam, on 12/30/2008, -3/+15GM is taking endless criticism for the Chevy Volt's price-tag of $40k. I don't see Tesla's $80k roadster (which isn't even a practical car for most people) being anymore worthy (or even *as* worthy) of a bailout. Sorry, but just because they're a new company from California doesn't make them any better than GM.
- jtako, on 12/30/2008, -0/+12The Top Gear review is questionable. A BBC spokesman clarified that Top Gear is an entertainment program, implying that they are not journalists required to meet any standards of journalism. Tesla and Top Gear agree that the car never ran out of juice. It simply was shown being pushed into the garage to show what would happen if it ran out of juice. Also, the 55 miles on a charge was a "calculation" made by Top Gear.
http://blog.wired.com/cars/2008/12/top-gear-fudged ...
http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/12/30/was-top ... - robojerk, on 12/30/2008, -1/+12Once again you are suggesting that they get subsidies. Chances are they already do get some type of subsidy from California and the Feds, I don't know for sure but it wouldn't surprise me. As for getting bailout money, again I would have to disagree with you.
- etx313, on 12/30/2008, -3/+13Definitely not deserving of a bailout. That's ridiculous.
- AmazingSteve, on 12/30/2008, -2/+12I agree with that. Tesla looked to be a great company with fantastic product but it was also waaaaay outta reach of the average person. Make electrics affordable and they will outsell internal combustion 2 to 1 right out of the gate in cities.
- shakeysugarpimp, on 12/30/2008, -4/+14We need factories like these ones, they will help us prevail in hard times.
- Topher06, on 12/30/2008, -2/+12If they were green, and smart, then they would just buy out and retorfit a GM plant in Detroit rather then building a whole new facility.
But its a poor time for someone to start up a new car company, they would be better off selling the technology to one of the existing (off-shores) car companies. - CAIndependent, on 12/30/2008, -2/+11With the first iteration of Tesla cars going for 109K and the second going for 60K, the company's making a great deal of progress. The Roadster is super high end and the sedan is a luxury car. When it comes time for the third iteration, based on the pattern it could go for around 33K. That's competitive considering you'll be paying 1 cent per mile for fuel.
Further, the business model seems to be working. If it's true that selling only 1000 of the roadsters is the breakeven point, they have plenty of momentum to hit that mark. At which point, the reliability of their cars will set the stage for the profitability of thier company. - knowitman, on 12/30/2008, -0/+9And yet people are complaining about the Volt which is a much more practical car because it can cost upwards of $40K?
- inactive, on 12/31/2008, -0/+9And once they got the money, anyone else notice a surge of "Its bad to buy foreign" "American cars are great! Trust this old man!" commercials?
Nice to see them putting that money to good use...*****. - pygmy, on 12/30/2008, -0/+8And they totally thrashed the car round the track. Any car driven that way will chew through fuel/charge.
- jtako, on 12/30/2008, -1/+9They have orders for over 1000 Roadsters (a year of their anticipated production) with deposits ranging between $5,000 and $50,000. What demand are you not seeing?
- kahrn, on 12/30/2008, -3/+11Perhaps you didn't realise. Top Gear is opinion. Clarkson voiced his opinion -- and did not say it was crap. Infact, he said it was insanely fast.
The top gear review was flawed and has recieved a lot of crtisicm as they made it look like the car run out of power -- it did not. It had flaws in most of the figures (like the effeciancy -- electric power is FAR more effecient) and coming out with silly put downs like "If you were travelling to scotland", "If you were charging at home on your personal wind turbine". Seriously, WTF?
For one to just say "it turned out to be a piece of crap" indicates no real insight into the facts. YES, it is expensive. That's the way things whistle -- It'll come down in price when more units are bought and the company expands and the technology matures. That's why a lot of Top Gear fans are disgusted with such a terrible review. Don't just take the word of opinion for fact, sheeple! - Birdoftruth, on 12/30/2008, -4/+12............................................________
....................................,.-‘”...................``~.,
.............................,.-”...................................“-.,
.........................,/...............................................”:,
.....................,?......................................................,
.................../...........................................................,}
................./......................................................,:`^`..}
.............../...................................................,:”........./
..............?.....__.........................................:`.........../
............./__.(.....“~-,_..............................,:`........../
.........../(_....”~,_........“~,_....................,:`........_/
..........{.._$;_......”=,_.......“-,_.......,.-~-,},.~”;/....}
...........((.....*~_.......”=-._......“;,,./`..../”............../
...,,,___.`~,......“~.,....................`.....}............../
............(....`=-,,.......`........................(......;_,,-”
............/.`~,......`-...................................../
.............`~.*-,.....................................|,./.....,__
,,_..........}.>-._...................................|..............`=~-,
.....`=~-,__......`,.................................
...................`=~-,,.,...............................
................................`:,,...........................`..............__
.....................................`=-,...................,%`>--==``
........................................_..........._,-%.......`
..................................., - borez, on 12/30/2008, -2/+9The incredibly high cost of a Tesla car won't supply a demand.
- Giga, on 12/30/2008, -0/+7"Getting 9 dirty beaters off the road would make a far bigger impact than 1 rich guy driving an EV."
As a short term solution, I agree with that. However, getting all oil burning cars off the road and replacing with electric is the goal, and you have to start somewhere. - mrferg, on 12/30/2008, -0/+611 seconds is okay?!?! My car does it in 5.5, and I'd still trade it in for the new Tesla.
- HappyScrappy, on 12/30/2008, -0/+6Who here didn't think that the layoffs (executed astoundingly poorly) were at attempt to dress up the books for an IPO.
I don't feel at all bad that Musk was unable to sell this company with no track record to an unsuspecting public.
Musk and Silicon Valley in general need to get over this idea that the definition of success is going IPO and selling out to get rich. It's not what founders of Fairchild thought. It's not what Hewlett & Packard thought. And Steve Jobs didn't become a billionaire by flipping his company at the first opportunity (either of them actually).
Make a company. A really viable company and a business that can be grown to reach the broad public (not $100,000 two seaters). Then watch it grow and grow rich with it. - UNL1M1T3D, on 12/30/2008, -2/+8Yeah I wouldn't necessarily call them sensible when they only get 55-200 miles on a single charge that takes 8 hours to charge (Top Gear review). It's a start though.
- anillop, on 12/30/2008, -0/+6Do you have any idea what that would cost and how many problems they would be inheriting from the company that sold that plant. That would be a terrible idea, because when it comes to an auto plant it is always best to build from scratch (preferably in a non-union area).
- inactive, on 12/30/2008, -8/+14Tesla's business plan was to sell to the stupid rich who have nothing better to do than try to live 'green'. A good business plan as long as there are stupid rich.
- HonoredMule, on 12/30/2008, -0/+6Replace Creative with Diamond Rio, and my previous comment will appear far less stupid. :/
- OrangeTide, on 12/30/2008, -0/+6Yes. We should bail out luxury sports car manufacturers. So that financial executives have something to spend their bailout bonuses on.
- DirtyBinLV, on 12/30/2008, -1/+7If they had competent management that didn't dick around for months adjusting the height of the window sill (really), they would have been able to.
- robojerk, on 12/30/2008, -2/+8It's okay, people have been doing this for the past 8 years or so. Just refinance your home with an adjustable rate loan with an awesome teaser rate, then you too can afford a $60k, or $100K automobile. There is absolutely no consequences!!!
/sarcasm - mrfanboy, on 12/30/2008, -3/+9The company makes one expensive sports car, fails, then wants a bailout? Wow...
- UNL1M1T3D, on 12/30/2008, -0/+5I know a lot of automotive factories in Detroit that they can use...
- GianDoe, on 12/30/2008, -1/+6I saw the same episode you did UNL1M1T3D, and I was wondering why anyone would buy a Lotus Elise that they had to drive like a grocery getter. It's like being a kid again with a BigWheel, you get an hour worth of power and then have to let it charge for a day to drive it again.
Also... don't still we create power by burning coal like cavemen? Has anyone researched the amount of pollutants that are put into the air given one charge relative to the original gas tank with range as a factor? (for example it only can go 100 miles on the freeway, and you can go 400 on a tank, that's 4 charges, which is this much energy usage, which creates this much pollution, etc...) Anyone? - Racer20, on 12/31/2008, -0/+5That's the problem with the American Public. The people who take every opportunity to claim the D3 CEO's don't have a clue are the same ones who come up with half-baked, fantasy-land ideas like that.
GM's lowest capacity plant is Bowling Green Assembly, where the Corvette and Cadillac XLR are built. Annual volume is somewhere around 50K units. It'll be a LONG TIME before Tesla needs anywhere near that capacity . . . why on earth would they buy into such overcapacity, then have to teardown or retrofit the majority of it anyway? - MrHappyMan, on 12/30/2008, -0/+5http://digg.com/television/Top_Gear_lied_about_the ...
He's right. I don't know why you're being Dugg down. The 'review' was misleading. - OrangeTide, on 12/30/2008, -2/+7Instead of a Tesla, you could buy 10 ford focuses and give 9 away to low income families who cannot afford a efficient clean burning compact car. Getting 9 dirty beaters off the road would make a far bigger impact than 1 rich guy driving an EV.
- enantiodromia, on 12/30/2008, -0/+5you realize that Silicon Valley is one of the most elite spots for a technology company in the world, right?
you can spew all your anti-california claims you want, but the truth is this is where Google, Apple, Yahoo, Cisco, Facebook, eBay, and almost every other major tech company is located, and they seem to be have done ok.
i don't see any major tech companies rushing to move their HQs out of state. - oboshoe, on 12/30/2008, -0/+53 to 6 months ago, it looked like incredibly good timing.
Things can sure change fast. - OrangeTide, on 12/30/2008, -1/+6Sensible, seems cheaper to use the money to buy a second home in bike riding distance to work.
- 2Bnor2B, on 12/30/2008, -2/+7The big 3 just have better lobbyists.
- theblacknight, on 12/31/2008, -2/+7I think you mean that this is one of few companies actually deserving money from the $25 billion Congress has earmarked for improving decreasing fuel consumption for cars. It's not asking for money from the $700 billion TARP bailout. It's asking for money to build a plant (and maybe develop, I can't recall) to build an all-electric sedan. Unless the Detroit 3, this money would actually make things greener instead of just allow them to continue operating for 90 days.
People forget that new, fancy technology starts at the top with expensive luxury items and then trickles down into consumer models. We're familiar with making car analogies out of everything, but let's try a computer one. Do you think it really costs Seagate more to produce a 750GB hard drive than a 500GB hard drive? No, but they do to pay for development costs. New features come to the expensive drives and then later make it into the cheaper drives. - Andrewbot, on 12/30/2008, -0/+5Issue with hydrogen is that it is hard to store properly, and can be very unstable and dangerous in the event of an accident.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 191 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is