Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple, Tesla Fighting Over Top Employees
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Attacking the dealership model has little to do with the automotive manufacturers. The dealership laws are intended to protect the jobs and businesses of the dealers. They do not benefit the consumer or the car manufacturers. The laws come from the fact that the dealer was often one of the more profitable local companies so that owner focused on supporting local politicians to keep the dealership law protections.
Musk isn't disrupting anything more than he is just breaking the law. Now it is law that probably shouldn't exist, but it is pretty clear what the law says. The automotive manufacturer is not allowed, in most states, to sell directly to the consumer. The other car manufacturers would also love for these laws to be revoked so they would no longer have to give the dealers a cut of this action. But the automotive manufacturers aren't local guys, they are often overseas or, at best, in another State. So the politicians protect the local dealers.
Sweet! I absolutely love Tesla. Been raving about them before anyone knew who Musk was. Apples cool too. 
Right. And laws are going to sharply limit how the CPU is programmed to drive the car. It will be programmed to obey speed limits and drive cautiously. Some folks will find that boring and will want to "drive". But others will be content to get in the car and turn on the TV for the trip. My guess is the vast majority of people will find watching TV, sleeping or eating during their trip much more fun than driving.
So once you don't get that little thrill stepping on the accelerator during your trip and your CPU will rarely use the extra power with its cautious driving model, why pay for the 350 HP car?
That said, I'm guessing that true auto drive is still a decade away. Getting it to work most of the time at slow speeds, in ideal weather, seems a long way away from near 100% success in all conditions (both weather and a car that is old and hasn't been serviced all that well (people forget about that part, the car has to last at least a decade in some way shape or form and that means the auto drive parts as well)).
They gave hints well before that stating "3 years", hence my phrasing above. Model S was released in 2012, so 2015 would be 3 years. I personally never dreamed they would meet that timetable, based on their history.
And yes, that is the point I was making about vaporware. Here's more:
"Vapor" is applied subjectively. I would say it should be used only after repeated failures to produce a promised product. Tesla has been delayed, but I would call that delay. And the addition of a 2nd motor to the S was a surprise, it's pretty clear they are working hard to deliver their products.
But, with what I've seen (although I should look more) from everyone else, Tesla is pretty far from losing its advantage. The others are a joke so far.
I really want to see this car.
Well said, there are no real benefits to be had except for dealership owners. Maybe local sales tax coffers benefit too? I'm sure given that even Amazon now has to turn over sales tax to many states regardless of where the product ships from.
A joke? I'm sure Tesla won't be laughing if Chevrolet comes through with a 200+ mile range EV for under $40k in 2017, or if Nissan delivers the same with the next generation Leaf. Tesla will be facing direct competition on range, will likely be undercut on price, and will lose the first-mover advantage they had with with previous two models. Most importantly, they cannot afford to not succeed, while their competitors can. Tesla was supposed to be showing the industry how a nimble, high-tech car company can beat the hidebound auto companies at their own game. Not necessarily, so it seems.
I mean, I guess anyone's free to redefine words to mean whatever they want, but that makes it awfully hard to communicate. That's not what vaporware means, and people are going to have a hard time understanding you if you use a term to mean something other than what everyone else thinks it means.
Unless of course the argument is that it is not currently in development, or will be repeatedly delayed and ultimately cancelled, but that doesn't appear to be the case.
What good is the money if you hate the position?
Oh, that's cute. You love in a world were you only have a job that you love, rather than having to do a job so you can pay bills and provide for your family. Some people don't like their jobs and just have to get by and suck it up.
All valid concerns, but this is far from certain. Tesla is in a far better position, IMO, scaling down the technology from the Model S than Chevy is in scaling up from the Volt. Nissan fares better given direct experience with an EV, but their pack has been absolutely plagued with environmental issues. Rumors are they plan to change chemistries to help reduce the trouble, but that remains to be seen.
That's just the specs. Like with Apple, there are experience benefits as well. Tesla's showrooms and service centers are gigantic leaps above Chevy and Nissan. Tesla provides loaners for service, or will pick up/drop off the vehicle. Superchargers are a strategic advantage.
There are risks, but I'm not sure the situation is as dire as laid out.
Gorgeous Car
"Tesla is planning a so-called Gigafactory, an enormous battery plant to supply the company's upcoming high-volume Model 3.
California wants that factory bad, offering to waive its environmental regulations to win it.
That's bad news—for Tesla, for California, for you and me, and for the future of electric cars."
It's preferential treatment like this (if allowed) that is tragic. Our state cares more about celebrities like Musk and Jobs than they care about insuring water is allowed to flow into the Central Valley where so much of the nation's food is grown.
Protecting the "Delta Smelt" a tiny fish means more than feeding the humans that occupy the US. Costing thousands of jobs and hurting farmers including big agricultural operations, politicians are keeping the special interest groups happy.
Values?
Ethics?
Just two concepts that are ignored.
But hey! That gorgeous Tesla and the upcoming Solar Farms will comfort the unemployed humans at the bottom of the food chain, just below the well fed Delta Smelt.
www.jalopnik.com/tag/tesla-model-s
"Tesla is planning a so-called Gigafactory, an enormous battery plant to supply the company's upcoming high-volume Model 3.
California wants that factory bad, offering to waive its environmental regulations to win it.
That's bad news—for Tesla, for California, for you and me, and for the future of electric cars."
It's preferential treatment like this (if allowed) that is tragic. Our state cares more about celebrities like Musk and Jobs than they care about insuring water is allowed to flow into the Central Valley where so much of the nation's food is grown.
Protecting the "Delta Smelt" a tiny fish means more than feeding the humans that occupy the US. Costing thousands of jobs and hurting farmers including big agricultural operations, politicians are keeping the special interest groups happy.
Values?
Ethics?
Just two concepts that are ignored.
But hey! That gorgeous Tesla and the upcoming Solar Farms will comfort the unemployed humans at the bottom of the food chain, just below the well fed Delta Smelt.
www.jalopnik.com/tag/tesla-model-s
The question I'd have in my head if I was in a tug-of-war between these two companies is: "Hmmmm do I wanna work with state-of-the-art computers, or stat-of-the-art cars and computers. I'd personally go for the latter. And I'm willing to bet that you'd get a free Tesla just like Apple corporate employees often get free computers and whatnot .
.Are you responding to the right person? I made an almost identical point to yours, responding to someone else about misusing that word.
Well, if we consider Tesla in trouble for not putting out 2017 cars today, then I guess we should consider Chev in the same light. And my opinion is that Chev does not WANT to succeed in this area.
Tesla may have talked about nimbleness, but their efforts to be a "production" car company contradicts that.
Are you responding to the right person? I made an almost identical point to yours, responding to someone else about misusing that word.
Right, misunderstanding, I think. I said "Are we redefining that term to mean literally anything that hasn't been released yet?" and you replied "And yes, that is the point I was making about vaporware.", which I read in the opposite way you intended. Sorry about that.
Not only was it already chosen, as of last month they already had structures building vertically on-site.
Clearly nothing since I drove my Tesla to work today. Have their other products been delayed? Sure, but such is the uncertainty of life and business.
I'm not some insanely rabid Tesla fan (even though I have one) but you're just embarrassing yourself at this point.
Many car companies provide loaners, as well as pickup and drop-off service, so this hardly unique. What's more, if I paid $100k for a car and the company did not provide these services, it would a major "you have to be kidding!" moment.
Both Chevrolet and Nissan have been working with EV technology for some time, so I would not count them out. They will be competing directly with Tesla.
----------
So Tesla over-promised or just didn't get the difficulty of what they were attempting? I'm not sure I see that as any kind of excuse for not delivering.
I'm not saying they are in trouble, only that they aren't producing magic. Elon Musk or no Elon Musk, the laws of physics still apply.
The luxury brands do, but we're talking about Chevy and Nissan and they don't. And it's hard to convey the difference in how service is handled. It's like a whole other world. Very positive. I could go into details, but the closest analogy is probably the difference between the Genius Bar and PC manufacturer support.
I wasn't counting the others out and said as much. I'm watching the Bolt as a potential second vehicle if the Model III isn't attractive or very late. I mainly commented to counter you "counting out" Tesla!
Good stuff. It's going to be a competitive landscape, and competition is good.
I actually see Telsa more like Virgin Atlantic. They are coming into a highly established industry with a new way of thinking, looking, selling and acting with the goal of challenging an establishment and winning market share. In the end, however different Tesla may seem or look, they are still making cars. They have already made EVs seem more reasonable and attainable, and are making the case for the better value and service / technology innovations while not being "budget;" which is where I would have put JetBlue in the analogy. Apple has seldom actually been first to market with an idea, they just market better and have a stronger branding machine than most, if not all, of their competitors or comparators. I haven't fleshed my thoughts out too much more on this, but my gut tells me that the Apple retail model may be a guide for Tesla's stores, but because their business model is something else entirely. After all, this is a very different type of product and industry (and price point even at the lowest levels). Apple's innovations are more in the branding of their product and their corporate culture, than in the actual product itself. Tesla's innovation is more about challenging paradigms that have long existed and breaking in not as a low cost alternative or a green alternative, but as a forward-looking and innovative company with a product capable of beating the traditional leaders at their own game; it is Virgin going from NY to London! Most companies, large and small, claim they are forward looking / innovative / smart / pick a positive sounding business buzz word. IBM, Google, GE, Siemens, Ford, Chevy, HP even Walmart talk about their innovation and thinking in developing their products or services. Investors love it and consumers buy it. There needs to be more to a company than a brand identity; it lives in their products. Surely, any company would love to have the passion of the Apple brand evangelists behind them. However, we're talking about a totally different buying cycle and price point. As price and longevity goes up, so to does the burden on the product. If the iPad2 is a little off, that's fine, there will be an iPad3 coming out soon. If a $65k car is a little dodgy the company will go the way of the dodo in no time.
I asked 50 people in my society. My father is a car enthu but, not an Internet geek. I asked him too. I asked most of my "non-auto geek" friends. Guess what? Not 1 person knew tesla.
Out of the auto geek friends only a handful knew.
Remember the world doesn't begin and end with your locality.
The luxury brands do, but we're talking about Chevy and Nissan and they don't. And it's hard to convey the difference in how service is handled. It's like a whole other world. Very positive. I could go into details, but the closest analogy is probably the difference between the Genius Bar and PC manufacturer support.
I wasn't counting the others out and said as much. I'm watching the Bolt as a potential second vehicle if the Model III isn't attractive or very late. I mainly commented to counter you "counting out" Tesla!
Well again, if I was spending $100k for a car, I'd expect to be treated like royalty by the dealerships. Maybe Tesla can extend this treatment to customers paying less than half that much for a car, and that would be a good thing. We shall see.
Not counting out Tesla, just calculating their probability of success. Historically the auto industry has not been kind to startups, even well-capitalized ones that seemed to have all the ingredients for success. In fact it hasn't been very kind to venerable manufacturers who didn't necessarily make any major mistakes, but are gone just the same.
Very true, but it works both ways. Maybe some localities are particularly informed, maybe some localities are particularly ignorant.
Pretty spot on with the dealership stuff, however I wouldn't be so sure that the large manufacturers would be jumping at the opportunity to abolish it. Because of their size I think the dealership model works for them. Would they really want to have to deal with a major overhaul to their sales and service infrastructure? It's easier for a smaller company like Tesla because they're building it from the ground up. Not that I don't think the laws are dated and pointless, but I'm just not sure if the restrictions were removed that the bigger names would start doing direct sales.