Sulu

If you have invested good money into what you believe is innovative technology, you want to protect it (by obtaining a legal patent) to try to prevent those who would steal the intellectual knowledge, produce it and sell it at much lower price, undercutting your costs. Once you have the patent, you can license the technology -- at a cost -- to allow others to use.

The American legal system will even help you here by allowing you to own patents without putting them to use by producing from them -- just sell the rights to use the technology. Just look at Paice; they hold patents on technology that is used by Ford and Toyota in their hybrid systems, yet they have never used them, preferring to sit on them and then sue when an automaker tried to use them.

I am not convinced that Tesla is that innovative. Tesla has merely put to use existing technology that other automakers have not because other automakers are looking further ahead. Tesla is using laptop battery cells whereas other automakers are investing in researching new battery chemistries. And Tesla's Autopilot uses off-the-shelf sensors. What Tesla is good at is pushing this technology to market quickly -- perhaps before the technology (witness the Autopilot autonomous driving system) is ready for primetime.


The key for Tesla is to make money. They are being kept alive by blind faith. Since going public in 2010, Tesla has only turned a profit twice, in different, non-consecutive quarters (only being profitable for 3 months at a time, not 6 months). And Tesla made money by selling green credits in California's cap-and-trade carbon market, not by building and selling cars at a profit.

LeX2K

What are other auto makers currently using in their electric cars and why is their battery tech better? Tesla is partnered with Panasonic they make the best cells out there. BTW the Model 3 will see a 30%+ increase in power density by moving to the 2170 cell, Samsung is going with a very similar design.

So what companies are ahead of Panasonic, Samsung, LG etc. and what auto makers are using these fantastic battery cells?

peteharvey

But what about the competition?
The competition is much more experienced in engineering the chassis/body structure, and much more experienced in manufacturing.
The competition also has genuinely massive reserves of $$$.

Back in the 1990's, we had the Palm Pilot PDA with a pen-stylus resistive touch screen.
Bill Gates followed with a Microsoft Windows Mobile operating system OS with a color LCD screen.
By 2007, Apple pioneered the finger-driven capacitive touch screen in the iPhone 2G.
However in the years after, the then Microsoft CEO named Steve Ballmer made a "fatal" mistake, and he did NOT quickly develop a Microsoft finger-driven capacitive touchscreen device to compete.
Hence today, Microsoft is dead as far as Ms Windows Phone is concerned, with sales of less than 1% market share.

However, with EV vehicles, many major manufacturers have announced rapid EV development.
Only a few months ago, Akio Toyoda announced that he would spearhead the TMC EV team.
Hence, Tesla doesn't have a bright future.

I do agree with Bob Lutz & Marshall that in-housing the dealerships & supercharger stations is inefficient and costly.
However Tesla's greatest downfall will be the fact that the Lion battery and electric motor already has widespread industrial use throughout the world, and the competition has far more experience in developing the body and in manufacturing, plus their massive cash reserves.

It would have been great if Tesla had some kind of "monopoly" on the battery and electric motor - to keep the competition away; then their dreams will indeed come true...
.

1JZsoarer

Yes, but GM, Ford had electric vehicles at the end of the 90's and yet here we are, Tesla still way ahead of the competition. Sure they have more money and all of that, but when that money is not invested in R&D then it doesn't have the same impact in the car industry. Here we see every other car maker still profiting from their power in processes and their scale saving but Tesla is getting there also (well not really on the scale of the sales but they are still able to increase their margin now that they are selling more cars than ever).

peteharvey

Those GM & Ford EV's in the late 1990's were all NiMH powered with mediocre electrical energy density, hence both mediocre performance and poor range.
The current Tesla electric vehicle revolution is based on lithium ion chemistry with very high energy density with excellent performance and decent range.

mmarshall

Electric vehicles did not start in the 1990s with GM's Impact. There were a number of them back in the early days of motoring, in the first couple of decades of the 20th century. What killed them off, back then, was the huge growth of the crude-oil and gas industry and the greater range/better flexibility of the gasoline-powered car. Pollution and air quality was not a concern in those days, except for a few notoriously dirty areas like Pittsburgh and its steel industry. L.A. had not yet grown large enough to be seriously polluted by car-exhausts....that would come later.

Sulu

The first-generation GM EV1 came with lead-acid batteries, worse than the nickel metal hydride (NiMH) batteries that came with the second-generation EV1 -- heavier and with shorter range. Battery chemistries certainly have come a long way in the 20 years since the EV1 was first introduced, and automakers like Toyota, GM and the German luxury brands are all investing money in batteries better than the current lithium-ion batteries.

mmarshall

NASA was using advanced batteries and/or fuel-cell systems as far back as the 1960s....though computers were far less capable than they are today. Auto makers would not (or simply found it too expensive) at the time to follow suit. Besides, with cheap gas, there was little or no incentive, at the time, to develop alternate-fuel vehicles. Significant fuel-crunches did not come until 1973-74.

bitkahuna

iTrader: (20)

now that's funny. while i don't think anyone can say whether tesla will make it long term, to say they aren't innovative is absurd. i see more and more tesla cars on the road - they are the ONLY company to have ever made a stylish practical and more mainstream desirable electric car even if it's still expensive and far from perfect.

doesn't matter what they're using, they're getting it done, and gaining real world insight into customers experience and next steps.

maybe so.

part of the 'profit' problem i believe is re-investing money back into building the gigafactory, which has got to be insanely expensive. that and likely litigation against them trying to sell direct, which i am saddened for them, as i believe the sooner that car makers can sell direct, the better!

same here without question.

well that's a different matter... if they gave away the cars they'd be popular but the business model would be doomed. as someone i used to work with said "you can easily sell gold coins for copper prices."

but one day keeps getting FURTHER away as reserves continue to grow with new techniques and exploration.

sure, you and everyone else. if an electric car had 500mi. range and recharged in 5 minutes, they'd outsell fossill fuel cars immediately.

that's a big 'once' but the chevy bolt looks like a big step forward. but still, recharging is too slow.

i get the feeling he's more interested these days in spacex than tesla though.

he makes lots of 'announcements'. need to see actual results.

but yes, tesla has pushed the car industry forward, whether tesla makes it down the road or not. as far as money, i could see them issuing new stock if they need to to raise funds, sure it's dillutive but with their current market cap the market will likely deal with it if it's explained properly.

dseag2

Well, considering we have had recessions on an average of every 7 years since the Great Depression due to the standard business cycles of our economy, and the last one started in 2008, you may want to start planning. ;-)

dseag2

I agree that Tesla is a viable company, but your view of how successful they are is skewed living in Southern California. I visit there frequently, and it seems like Teslas are a dime-a-dozen. However, they aren't that ubiquitous in other areas of the country. I barely see any in Dallas, where I live, or in Seattle, where I visit every month. And Seattle residents are as "green" as it gets. They are just more Prius-types.

evident

in my opinion that's a moot point. You'll see hooligans on the street with all sorts of other cars, from priuses, to riced out civics, to hellcats and other high horsepower machines that aren't courteous to anyone either. This is just another vehicle that has a great 0-60 time. not sure why everyone's panties are in a bunch when discussing a tesla vs any other vehicle that gets a good 0-60 time??

JDR76

I'm surprised you don't see more in Seattle. I see several here every day. There are 3 or 4 just in my work parking lot.

mmarshall

Fizzboy is correct.....it is not a moot point by any means. Excessive power on the street, combined with immature and aggressive drivers, is a classic recipe for trouble...whether it is an all-electric Tesla or a classic American muscle car like the Hellcats. Not that long ago, a young kid totaled a GTO and killed himself drag-racing, not even a half mile from my house. And, as i've said in other posts, I've seen even more killed or hurt in V8 Mustangs.

Aron9000

^ I agree with "great power comes great responsibility" mantra, don't drive like a ****/race on the street. However, I wouldn't just single out fast cars for a source of ire for jackass drivers. A lot of younger/immature guys with more money than sense are driving huge lifted "bro trucks" as I call them. Once again driving very aggressively, tailgating in something that has bad brakes and compromised handling from the lift kit. Can't tell you how many times I've seen idiots in 4wd trucks blow by me in the snow only to see them in the ditch a few miles down the road.