General Motors has had luxury electric automaker Tesla in its crosshairs for a long time now. The General has even been looking to build a fully electric vehicle that could compete with the award-winning Model S sedan, but if recent predictions are true, that will no longer be necessary.
Yra Harris of Praxis Trading has speculated on CNBC this week that Tesla could be sold to General Motors within the next year, Forbes reports. Given Tesla CEO Elon Musk’s seeming commitment to his company that might come as a surprise, but the billionaire entrepreneur has done something similar before when he sold PayPal to eBay in 2002.
Back then, much like Tesla today, PayPal was a smaller upstart in the grand scheme of things. eBay was trying to develop its own method of e-payments and e-transactions, but why do that if there is already a near perfect system developed that you could just buy? Which brings us to GM.
Why would GM spend the money to develop a Model S rival if they could just purchase Tesla altogether. Acquiring Tesla’s platform for the Model S would be much easier than developing their own. Tesla has a reason to do the deal too. They might appreciate the additional financial backing and market know-how that comes along with an experienced automaker like GM.
There is still some obstacles to overcome for a deal such as this to become reality, the largest being Tesla’s price. Currently, Tesla has an 11x price-to-sales ratio, compared to GM’s of 0.37x. With stock price that high, acquiring Tesla might just be a pipe dream for major automakers.
Comments
The issue with paypal was that paypal and ebay became co-dependent on each other. Unfortunately the end result was in ebay’s favor. Because if ebay at one point decided to invest a large amount of money, they could have replaced paypal for ebay with their own. This is where Musk learned his lesson not to be dependent on others for your business. And this is why he insists on having multiple suppliers, build his own infrastructure and offer energy for that infrastructure. Effectively Musk is building an ecosystem centered around his products that work together.
GM on the other hand does not have the money to buy Tesla, and Musk would veto any such sale. The only time Musk will sell is if he thinks it is what is best for Tesla. And GM is the last company Musk would sell to after what they did with the EV1.
So where does this rumor come from?
I love GM, and I drive a Buick, but based on the lukewarm reception of the Chevy Volt, and considering the way the GM EV1 went back in the 90’s, I’d be surprised if Elon Musk sold to GM.
Also, consider how GM brought in once great brands like Holden, Saab, and Opel.
I have said Elon would dump the company on someone at some point. His pockets are not deep enough to keep this one flying as the stock prices are still artificially inflated due to his charismatic use of the web. He has almost turn Tesla into a religion with some folks.
To me this whole idea is a hoax or I pray it to be a hoax.
1 Tesla is way over priced and GM should not pay this price.
2 Other than image what does Tesla have technology wise GM either does not already have or could not do themselves? Nothing GM could so just what Tesla has done with little effort.
3 The only thing I could see if GM taking them in to keep someone else from buying them. But the price is even too high to do that. Who ever buys them will lose money as it would take years to make back what the asking price is.
4 A couple more fires the price tanks and then GM or someone could get a deal. It is a matte of time. I wonder if someone is saying this because they expect the bubble to bust on the stock price and Elon will have to bail or go down with the charge.
Tesla has yet to make money on just selling cars and it will be a while before they ever do. The tax credits are running out and the future models they have are still a ways off. They talk of a Cheaper Tesla but it is still Volt priced.
I am sorry I just do not see GM doing this. I also know Emperor Elon has no clothes.
@Brian – This is not a rumor even, it is just random crazy talk from Santelli. (He has no inside information). He is just making random guesses for 2014 and get paid to do it.
@scott – Musk has no plans to sell the company any time this decade. And Tesla has already been making a profit on selling cars for 3 quarters.
But we agree on one thing GM is not going to buy Tesla and Tesla is not going to sell to GM.
Based on GM’s track record with brands that aren’t their own, this will not go well for Tesla. I would rather Toyota or VW have Tesla.
I think GM will do just fine without tesla if the info is true about the next volt then tesla will have to find a new way to sell their shit boxes!
If GM doesn’t reproduce the same mistakes they committed with others like Saab, i would give it a go!
Weapon
Three months of profits has not even come close to covering the investment made into the company to make a real profit. They have a massive investment to counter before they can make a clear profit.
The capitalization of the company will take years of profits to pay off.
Tesla Motors’ second-quarter numbers are out, and depending on how you figure profit, the electric automaker either made $26.2 million or lost $30.5 million.
First, let’s talk profit. Tesla’s net income for Q2 was $26 million, an increase of 70 percent from Q1. However, that’s not using the Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) math — or non-GAAP. If you apply GAAP, Tesla lost over $30 million. How?
Tesla included its lease accounting into this quarter’s results, something that’s not approved by GAAP. Slate explains that Tesla “rolled out an innovative loan/purchase/buyback scheme that lets people basically lease the cars but with Tesla getting all the money up front via a financing arrangement with Wells Fargo or US Bank.” Essentially, Tesla got all the cash for the expensive Model S sedans it sold and rolled that into this quarter’s income. That’s not allowed under GAAP, hence the discrepancy.
Even Deepak Ahuja, Tesla’s CFO, admitted early on in the earnings call that, “this is a confusing quarter.”
Overall revenue also took a slight hit due to the reduction in zero emission vehicle credits (ZEV) that Tesla sells to other automakers. Tesla reports it’s boosted output from 400 vehicles per week to 500 in an attempt to account for the reduction in ZEV credits. It also deserves noting that the automaker has announced plans to purchase a 31-acre parcel next to its Fremont factory for expansion, so expect that to put a hurt on profits in the future.
This was based on the quarter announced in August and the others were done with similar accounting. While Tesla is not bankrupt and doing OK they are not doing as well as they like you to think.
the real issue is they still have only one very expensive car, an MIA SUV and now a Cheaper car that will be in the Volt price range. Most good business people just do not see this as sustainable long term unless he finds a willing buyer or dance partner to finish what he has started. Elon has deep pockets but even his are not this deep. His Ego is also large and he will do what ever it takes to keep from looking like he has failed. One way is to pass it to another company and let them finish it and make him look good or fail and take the blame.
I really expect a automaker will buy them at some point that needs an electric program but the stock prices will drop before anyone will buy them.
This car is in a limited market and segment where once you sell these cars unless you have a diverse group of vehicles there will be little repeat business in the near future. Yes GM make money with the Vette but the Vette alone will not float Chevy long term.
What Tesla needs is a technology breakthrough that will make a battery that last longer and charges fast that cost less. It is the so called fountain of youth in the industry and they all are working on that. But as of now his electric motors are no better than anyone else nor is his batteries. So the long and short is he has a nicely styled car that sells at a price the others need an electric to sell at but figured no one would buy it.
I hope the car makes it as it would help the industry with acceptance but if it fails it could hurt every electric car to come in the near term. Just what we do not need is another Tucker, Delorean or Bricklin. Both of these were claimed to be cars to change the auto landscape but they never did as many others.
Just look at the 3 fires they have had. If and when he hits a real problem it could really be a fatal blow. With a company and product like this there is no second chance.
http://www.autoweek.com/article/20131003/CARNEWS/131009947
Dutch summed it up well and he is not the only one looking at things as they are.
As for the present story on GM I wonder if someone is just trying to manipulate the stock prior to some news that may not play well like a loss for the end year quarter. I am not sure if this is what it is but I have seen stranger things.
GM should pay back it´s depts first before purchasing Tesla.
The 10 billion USD to the US Government, the 3 billion USD to SAAB´s former owner Spyker cars. Then we see if they will have any cash left to brag about.
GM already paid it’s debt back! Paid in full!
YOU Brain Dead Asshole!
A buyout would only benefit tesla there is nothing GM couldn’t do without the purchase, stay clear.
Brian, do not feed the trolls
@62vetteefp:
May I correct your typographical errors?
You wanted actually to write: “Do not feed the troll Brian”, right?
????
I hope u are joking? Ivar is the troll.
Brian is a/the troll.
One of the obstacles to overcome would be the stake of Daimler in Tesla…
They are better off bringing back Pontiac and that’s not happening anytime soon
I find this all amusing. In my opinion GM knows Tesla can not survive on it’s own and will wait for the day Tesla is in dire strait. Then, they might acquire Tesla at a bargain price and what they do with it if this happens will be be interesting.
My brain is working fine and i am not sure i am the Asshole here. GM is the biggest Asshole on this planet. There is even a song about it that you can find if you search the internet.
GM have borrowed the money from the government to be able to pay back in full as you say. That´s why they still are in dept.
P.S. I am the Troll as secret mr 62vettefp say and do not need any food, but keep feeding me with GM fuck-ups. The latest is a 1,5 million cars warranty case in China. GM really need to buy back SAAB again.
Hands down 100% on GM buying back SAAB! However, the $10B that is mistakenly called “debt” was pre-projected to be well over $20B! The government knew the second they handed the check over to GM that they’d end up losing money. To add to that, the 1.2 MILLION American jobs we would have lost will pay back that $10B eventually!
It has come to the time when GM needs to “phase-out” Buick, bring back Pontiac and buy SAAB back! I think it’d be good for GM to have a sort of “foreign” brand (SAAB).
Chevrolet, Saab, Pontiac, GMC and Cadillac
I saw 3 Pontiac’s today! A 2007 GP GXP in Purple Haze, a 2010 G6 GT Sedan in White Diamond and a 2008 Torrent GXP in Sonoma Red. To be quite honest, they are some of the best looking cars (exterior wise) GM has ever produced. My Black 2004 Bonneville GXP is gorgeous too! Pontiac deserves to come back!
Buick is fighting the old grandpa stereotype to this day, something that SAAB can easily replace with some easy work. The 9-3 was/is an amazing car! My aunt and uncle have a 2008 9-3 Aero and a 2011 9-4X Aero! They are both awesome vehicles that still compete with top brands (i.e. BMW, MB, Lexus, Infiniti)! SAAB also deserves to come back; no brand should have to go away like it did. . .
Chevrolet: Economy, Sports and Utility
SAAB: Swedish Sports/Luxury
Pontiac: American Traditional Muscle
GMC: American Luxurious Utility
Cadillac: High-end Luxury
@EvanR, I think most people on this site would agree that there is absolutely no reason to bring back a division/subsidiary that screwed itself over.
You may be right to a point. But at the end of the day, GM screwed itself over. . .
Susan Docherty said that GM tried everything to revive Pontiac to grow it back into its performance roots. But lets think about that for a second. What did they really do? Oh yeah that’s right, they discontinued nearly every good model Pontiac had (aka GP, Bonny, T/A etc) instead of making them better and they re-badged pieces of crap Chevrolet’s to pass them off as a Poncho (G3 and G5)!
As for SAAB: Spyker didn’t have a good financial backing to really be able to grow without going bankrupt (which it did). I think if GM would have kept a chunk of SAAB (let’s say maybe 40%), SAAB/Spyker/GM would have done very well. The vehicles SAAB produced were great, it was the marketing that failed (same with GM’s marketing). My parents had no clue what the hell a Pontiac G6 was until it was discontinued! I can tell you exactly why: GM’s Marketing decided to only have commercials/ads for about the first 2 years it was out and when Pontiac was “phased-out!”
@scott
Investment costs are never covered with profit, that is because most growing businesses spend the money on growth or build up cash on hand. Most investments are covered by stock value, and pretty sure Tesla covered those well for it’s investors.
Pretty sure we have 3rd quarter numbers as well, but ok let us talk Q2. I am well aware of how GAAP and non-GAAP works. I am also aware why there is a discrepency. What your essensially describing is a case of why GAAP rules need to be updated, it is not uncommon for rules to be outdated.
As far as ZEV credits, the purchase and production is actually worked out in Q3 results. The ZEV credits dropped 5x in value and Tesla was still able to show profit and increase their gross margins. And I am aware of how Tesla is going, no body is worried about Tesla’s profits, at this point they are worried about battery supply constraints. That is why Tesla took a big stock hit after Q3 earnings. The most important thing for Tesla right now if growth and they are progressing at a very good pace.
What do you mean by “they still”? They only released their first mass production car a year ago. The SUV is not MIA, it is coming by end of 2014. And the cheaper car will be 35k, yes. What is not sustainable exactly? There is no reason to find a buyer or a partner, they are doing fine and on track overall. Again, the biggest indicator is growth and they are growing at a fairly rapid rate. Their demand is also growing as they enter more markets and build more superchargers.
They also do have partners in both Toyota and Mercedes. Who both license Tesla’s technology and buy Tesla’s drivertrains. Mercedes is releasing the electric B class in 2014 with Tesla’s drivetrain. They are also selling batteries to businesses who use SolarCity come 2014.
I don’t think any automaker is going to buy them, mostly since their stock will probably go up to over 200 in 2014 but also because Musk won’t sell. The market is not that limited because the market is growing every year. At one point smartphones were a limited market but look at it now. Keep in mind that selling 30k Tesla Model S is like selling 200k Toyota camry. The profit margins are much higher and the overall cost of the car is higher which means more revenue and profit. The Model S and X will provide enough revenue and growth for Tesla up to the Model E in 2016/2017. From then on they will most likely do another offering which will help them mass produce Model E and Model Y (35k sedan and suv).
Tesla does not need any breakthroughs, a breakthrough will help but incremental improvements are more than enough. Also, fyi, Tesla has the best batteries out of all the EVs. They have the best energy density. The motors are also actually the best out of all the current EVs. Will the other guys catch up? Of course. But that is why Tesla is building a competitive advantage in their superchargers, branding and etc.
And so far Tesla is not hurting the EV industry, actually the opposite. They are making it exciting for once. And we are not dealing with another Tucker, Delorean or Bricklin. I mean you are aware that Tesla already sold more cars than (Tucker + Delorean + Bricklin) * 5 right? A story of a car catching on fire is nothing new, a car catches on fire every 3 minutes in the USA. Once the NHTSA gives the ok and the novelty of a new hot product catches on fire wears off, it will become an issue of the past.
As for the present story, as I mentioned above. Some random analyst on cnbc just made a random prediction. And now all the papers are reprinting it as fact. Jalponik is having a field day with it and making random predictions for fun.
Oh Ivar, how silly you are… Any Idea how much $$$ other governments pour (subsidize) into their industries (automotive) ect… Japan mega subsidizes its auto industry… Ivar you do need to check your head. And it is not unpresidented for our government to provide funds to keep industries afloat… Their is your fuel for the fire… And yes you are complete moron and asshole…
Troll no someone that speaks the truth yes!
You’ve been about as close to the truth as Pluto is to the Sun.
May I remind you how “right” you were about Chevrolet in Europe?
Oh Ivar, how silly you are… Any Idea how much $$$ other governments pour (subsidize) into their industries (automotive) ect… Japan mega subsidizes its auto industry… Ivar you do need to check your head. And it is not unpresidented for our government to provide funds to keep industries afloat… Their is your fuel for the fire… And yes you are complete moron and asshole………
What I would like to know is why did everybody give GM crap for the money they got from the government but nobody says a thing about Chrysler?
I’m never buying a GM car or truck cuz they took the government money! But Chrysler did and no one has that approach towards them?
@Brian – Same reason why people give Tesla crap for taking the 465 million ATVM loan(even after they paid it back in full with interest 9 years early) but nobody says a thing about Ford and their 5.9 billion ATVM loan (that they are still paying back).
Let me ask you what division would be more profitable if GM bought it back?
Pontiac or hummer?
One division Avg sell price was 20k
The other was more then double that!
The only division that got screwed was hummer it was profitable it was top of the line in it’s segment! The people who bought them loved them!
So get off the Pontiac band wagon! Stop being a fucking dinosaur!
GM has two brands that already have replaced Hummer (i.e. Chevy and GMC). GM doesn’t have a brand like Pontiac anymore at all! Buick will never ever be comparable to Pontiac, and I can guarantee that! Chevrolet does have the Camaro, Corvette and SS. But they have always been a part of Chevrolet (with the exception of the SS), which I think would go away if Pontiac came back (the SS).
We live in a time where efficiency is key! Most people don’t want a 5,000lb SUV\Truck that gets 13 mpg on the highway! You keep looking at the past, but Pontiac would be much more profitable nowadays. The LT1 gets 29 mpg! You can have power and efficiency but utility and efficiency is like water and oil!
You also keep insisting that Hummer WAS more profitable BACK THEN. Of course, Pontiac didn’t sell because its products were quite lame. That doesn’t necessarily mean you can’t turn it around and sell world-class products (U.S. and Canada in this case) like Cadillac.
Here’s a simple to read recap if you didn’t understand:
-GM has Chevrolet and GMC to directly replace Hummer.
-GM does not have a brand that can replace Pontiac
-Nobody wants a 5,000lb Truck that gets 13 mpg these days
-Pontiac’s products were often bad, but that doesn’t mean it couldn’t change
Brian asks why nobody here is talking about Chrysler.
Because this forum is about GM, not Chrysler.
If all things in life were that simple!
how cheap was gas when the EV1 came out again? I don’t agree they should have been destroyed but the past is the past. Not sure about how Holden and Opel were doing but Saab was already going bankrupt and hadn’t made a profit in years before GM bought them.
Weapon
Sorry you can call it six ways to Sunday but the truth is the stock will not be sustainable over $200 and this is not my opinion but most in the industry.
Too many have taken the Elon Kool Aide already and many will lose in the end.
The Supercharge stations are eating up all the money from the Emission Credits and they are only good if you live in the right part of California or DC. If you live anywhere else you are stuck with a much longer wait.
Again what does this car offer that any other electric does not in the way of advanced technology? It will be a decade or more before you could drive one coast to cast in less than a week or more.
Their batteries are no better than anyone else as they use the same technology at any lap top. As for incremental improvements this segment need more than that as it is still not a segment many are wanting to join yet. To make it with the public on a larger scale these cars have to be to a point that the owner does not have to change their lifestyle to live with the car.
I am sorry but you have not presented anything new here or sustainable to convince me that Elon is the second coming of Henry Ford. At this point we will just have to agree to disagree and let time prove who is correct.
The most difficult issue is as long as gas is cheap and batteries are limited this segment will see slow grow to no growth in much of the country outside California. The cold is another area most of these cars fall down in. Even my local Tesla nut leaves his at home when it is cold as the range drops by a lot when the heater is on and the batteries are just not efficient. This is an issue all electrics have right now.
No shit you dumb ass I want to know why GM gets he’ll for the money they got from the government but Chrysler doesn’t!
People say I’ll never drive a GM car again but I don’t hear the same When people talk about Chrysler!
Troll per Urban Dictionary: Do not feed the Trolls!
Internet Troll
An internet troll is a person who uses anonymity to cause frustration, anger, impatience or to generally be disruptive for no seemingly good reason EXCEPT to be that nuisance.
Most are souless bastards, touched by daddy/priest, and in the stead of coping with that trauma in a healthy way, take out their aggression, anger, impotence, frustration on others.
-have problems forming real-life relationships; have a hard time attracting members of the opposite/same sex,generally introverts. Though some are ‘trolls-in-hiding’, most are skill-less loners.
General troll behavior:disruptive forum posts; the posts are generally off-topic, or unnecessarily combative. Each contemporary popular website has its own sub-genre of troll
-can be male or female, mostly males, including the popular ‘gender bender’44 yo man that acts like 14 yo girl
His answer is about GM. You can spin all you want. The question is why is it always GM that gets pick on? Chrysler took money and so did Ford big time.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/joannmuller/2012/08/29/automakers-report-card-who-still-owes-taxpayers-money-the-answer-might-surprise-you/
http://jalopnik.com/5704575/ford-bmw-toyota-took-secret-government-money?skyline=true&s=i
What GM should think more about than Tesla’s EV tech, is Tesla’s beautiful exterior and interior. While GM has done a lot with caddy, they need to develope better looking Chevys and Buicks- inside and out.
cmaroman101 tells us he is “Not sure about how Holden and Opel were doing but Saab was already going bankrupt and hadn’t made a profit in years before GM bought them.”
Opel was not only Germany’s largest carmaker, but the largest one all over Europe, when GM took control of Opel in 1929. After the war, Opel had in West Germany a market share of more than 20% until the 1970ies. Today, Opel has a market share of 7% in Germany, and of 6.7% Europe-wide (Jan-Nov 2013).
Today’s Holden is the result of the merger of the local Australien GM subsidiary with Holden, in the 1920ies.
I feel like it’s the governments fault since aren’t they the one to say to kill Pontiac??
Pontiac getting “phased-out” was both the governments fault and GM’s fault! The government because thy didn’t allow GM to keep Pontiac to make it better. GM’s fault because they didn’t try hard enough to make Pontiac the best it could be.
yabadabadoo:
Finallay i have found the GM community, and you must have problems of your own if you get upset over little truth. I say that all countries shall play after the same rules. No government shall subsidize it´s industy without having to pay heavy toll fees for import of goods to another country. How shall local companies be able to compete if a foreign government like USA help lets say GM to sell car´s in other countries. It can be related to car´s, food, military equipment etc.
I see your point in the cheap japanese/Chinese cars everywere. Obama can raise the import tax and the problem bay be solved or ?
My head is fine and need no checking.How about yours ?
Who is the moron and the asshole ? You, me, or the financial system.
Step forward with your name and do not be an internet Troll.
I am only a Troll from the SAAB community.
Any restructuring of GM, with it without UST, would have killed Pontiac. The volume was too low. Chevy is begining to fill the high value performance niche. What frustrates me is GM needs better small and mid high volume front wheel drive models. Cruze and malibu are largely rental cars where I live in Florida. Ford, Kia, Hyundai, Nissan and Mazda are crushing chevy and buick.
I am surprised no one want to bring back Oldsmobile.
Chevrolet has performance (i.e Corvette, Camaro, SS), but it fails to create the “American BMW” image that Lutz was striving for with Pontiac.
What really frustrates me is that GM got rid of its brand that had the most profitability in their futures!
Oldsmobile always used the best and most recent technology in their vehicles! My mom has two Final 500’s (An Aurora and Bravada), which are beautiful vehicles that are way better than any Buick before 2010!
Saturn was a couple years away from becoming a Saab comparant (which is a good thing)! Saturn was a sporty, European brand that attracted many young, new buyers to GM (unlike Buickl).
Pontiac was getting close to being very successfull! They could have brought back the classics:
Grand Am Sedan, Coupe, Convertible (G6/9-3 on Alpha)
Grand Prix Sedan (97-08 GP on Sigma ll)
Trans Am Coupe (97-08 GP on Sigma ll)
Bonneville Sedan/Wagon (00-05 Bonny on Zeta)
GTO Coupe/Convertible (00-05 Bonny on Zeta)
As well as keeping newer models:
Torrent (06-09 Torrent on Theta Premium)
Vibe (Wagon/CUV on Theta)
@ivar-
You are not a troll. You are an angry Republican. You’re watching too much fox. Bush began the bailout by just cutting checks without restructuring via bankruptcy. McCain would have made a very similar effort to Obama with GM. It is doubtful he would have saved Chrysler, as it was seen as too screwed up to save. Obama deserves a lot of credit for saving Chrysler. It was his call and worked about better than anyone could have hoped.
There is nothing wrong with Fox News! It’s the only news station that doesn’t brainwash you. .
@scott
No, it is your opinion. Who is this “industry”? Like all things opinions vary. You can have your opinion and I can have mine. But don’t go pretending to speak for the industry.
Personally, I disagree that it is koolaid, but you do realize that even if it is, the outcome is the same? Things have value because people believe they have value, if everyone believes something has a set value, it becomes that value.
The superchargers are not eating up money from emission credits. The cost of the superchargers are built into the car. They are in Tesla’s advertising budget actually. And supercharger build out has accelerated, a new supercharger is appearing every 2-3 days. There are 49 superchargers in USA and 14 in Europe.
The car has the most energy dense batteries, the BMS is superior to any prior EV, it is the first mass production EV that has been developed from the ground up.
You can make a coast to coast trip right now in less than a week.
And their batteries are not the same as a laptop. The Roadster used the same batteries as a laptop(LCO chemistry) and 18650 cells. The Tesla Model S uses 18650 cells(form factor), but uses NCA chemistry in the battery cells. But the cells are only part of the battery equation. The cells make up 60% of the weight, the remaining 40% is the BMS.
The cars are already at a point where people don’t need to change their lifestyles. You just get in the car and drive. Every morning you wake up with 100% range and never have to worry about running out of gas, oil changes or anything of that like unless you go on a road trip that 0.1% of the time. If anything, I would argue a gasoline car forces you to change your lifestyle as you have to always be on the look out for how much gas you have, drive out of your way to a gas station. Then there are the annoying oil changes and other engine related maintenance. Tesla got to a point technologically where it would work fine for most people, the last barrier to crack is cost. That is what the Model E will do.
The EV industry has been growing exponentially every year since the first mass produced EVs in 2011. Things take time. And by the way, Heating only uses up 13%, air resistance around 4% during cold winter. While gasoline cars use the heat from the engine which costs them much less, the engine is highly inefficient, so you suffer a much bigger hit from air resistance. So at end of the day, a gasoline car loses the same 15-25% range during winter. There was actually a video of a person in Norway who drove his Tesla Model S in -6 degrees temperature and traveled 233 miles and still had 25 miles left. That is 258 miles range compared to 265 EPA rated. So please, stop making up bull. Obviously conditions have an impact on range, but the same conditions apply to gasoline cars. The only advantage gasoline cars have is in road trips since there are more gas stations, but Tesla is quickly filling in that gap with superchargers.
Dan: I am a SAAB Trolls from Sweden.
Dan the Dems would have done it for the Unions and all the money they give them and the Repubs would have done it for the companies that contribute.
I am a conservative and had no issue with the bail out so not all Republicans are against it. In fact most were for it other than the political rhetoric some were doing. In fact Bush started it and let Obama take what he started before he left office. I thought the hand over was more than fair since Obama was going to have to live with what ever happened. Bush could have set the whole thing up and made Obama live with what he set up.
Weapon
It is not just my opinion but many in the media are now finally speaking out and being honest that the stock price is not sustainable. Please read the link I posted to Dutch Mandel one of the leading most respected auto editors today. His story is similar to others who are now speaking out.
Here is what the WSJ posted not long ago.
The same for Wall Street as many are speaking of the risk involved here. For example, Ford’s (F_) short interest is about 2% of the float, General Motors (GM_) has 7.7% and Toyota Motors (TM_) is less than 1%. In comparison, Tesla’s short interest is more than 25%, and that doesn’t include synthetic shorting by large hedge funds.
As investors, the most pertinent question to ask yourself before you place an order is, “What edge do I have over my counterparty?” In other words, what makes you smarter than the person who is selling (or buying) shares to you?
If you’re a Ford, Toyota, or GM investor, the shares you own likely came from another investor selling their shares. However, if you’re a Tesla investor, especially a recent one, there’s an exceptionally strong chance you bought your shares from a large hedge fund borrowing shares to sell to you.
Are you confident you have done more homework and understand the landscape better than the brightest minds on Wall Street? Have you performed your due diligence to know historically what the odds of success are for buying a stock with an annualized P/E of more than 350? You know the hedge funds short-selling shares have. Do you have a quantifiable edge over your counterparty, or in the voice of Clint Eastwood, “Are you feeling lucky?”
As for values we are at a time where people have some of the most messed up values ever. Just look at how people throw away money on lotteries in false hope to win. I am not against Gaming per say but I do hate lotteries where the odds are so poor people would be better off putting the money in the bank and collect more from low interest than what they would ever see in a life time of playing. At least with a table game you can control the odds. Tesla is like a lottery ticket at best.
Your Superchargers are just a spit in the wind. Sure the will work with limited stations with limited number of cars but what do you do when you have 20 people wanting a charging station and only 5 plug in units with in 400 miles that may just not be on the way. Let say you and I leave Detroit tomorrow for Daytona. Lets just see how soon you get there after I am there. I hope you like a day in KY and a Day in GA as you will need them. That to me is lifestyle changing if I have to travel.
Also I would not discount what the larger automakers have planned. They all are coming out with new EV product and they have dealers in every town and every state with in min’s of most owners. Also I would not discount the next EV GM has as I do not think they have shown all their cards. Based on the claims of range price and generator it may just be the game changer we have been waiting for. It will be interesting to see if it exceeds the expected Volt 2.0 that many expect.
Either way we will just have to agree to disagree. I just do not see Elon making it long term. The EV is and will remain a small segment of the market for a time to come.
Also Elon needs to be careful what he states as one day he will not be given the free pass he has been holding. He already said he regrets the Tube statement and now he stated he will sell 100,000 X models when it is hard to sell that many cheaper gas models now. He is his own Hyperbole and needs to temper some of his tweets. Yes he has done well marketing but if you talk too much if can get you in the end. As of now he is on a narrow ledge and has to use car or that ledge can drop away fast.
Same on the car issues as if he ever gets a big issues and one will happen he had better be prepared. Any new technology can and will have issues. In his case it could cost him his stock values overnight. While the other Automakers live on the Gas models they can take a risk with out much danger to the entire company. All his chips are on red 5 and it is all or nothing.
I will not feel any joy if he fails but I just do not see a long term outcome here.
@scott
The media has always been all over the place, I think best check their record of how right or wrong they were about investing in Tesla to begin with. Many of these media outlets cost people a lot of money telling people not to invest in Tesla during the IPO and early in the year. WSJ in general has always been anti-Tesla so I don’t see anything changed. I will also point out that last time Tesla had an increase in short interest, it resulted in a short squeeze
And most people’s counter party are computers, 80% of trading is automated by computers with no person behind them. Most of the investment in Tesla comes from potential from growth, for growth companies, nobody looks at P/E. That is because the company is spending money to grow, not wasting money reporting profit.
The WSJ statement about supercharger is an example of their sheer ignorance. When you buy a Tesla Model S, 2k goes towards superchargers. The deployment of superchargers are based in areas where people buy Tesla cars, more Tesla cars = more superchargers. Also, superchargers come in sets of 2 ( so 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14 and etc), so 5 is not going to happen. And his statement about there not being superchargers yet in Kentucky or Georgia is ridiculous, they will be there in 2014. But I am going to bet you that when that reporter goes to the detroit auto show, he is not going to take his car, he is going to get on a plane and fly.
And yes, competitors are going to come out with their own. But none of them are going to be there when the Gen III comes. The soonest competitors are going to have something is 2018. Giving Tesla 1-2 years head start on the Gen 3. The Model S and X will most likely remain unchallenged. Volt 2.0 is just going to be a new engine and cheaper price tag of 30k. It is not going to compete with the Gen 3.
The EV market again is growing every year. Take the prius, 10 years ago it was nothing. In 2012 it sold over 500k cars world wide. If you compare sales of EVs to the sale of the prius year by year. The sales of EVs are quicker. A decade from now, most cars sold will be EVs or Hybrids.
And no, Musk said he regrets mentioning the Hyperloop because he did not have enough time to put it all the data together. The statement also put a lot of requests asking to see it so he hurried to put it together but he wanted to show something more. He does not regret the Hyperloop if that is what your thinking, and independent studies have looked at the hyperloop and found it feasable. Musk still plans to build a prototype as well.
Also, who said 100,000 Model X? Tesla plans to sell 100,000 Model S + X in 2015. No one said 100k Model X cars.
There of course will be issues, look at it this way. Ford and GM have been making cars for what? 100 years? and they still have big issues on their cars. Nothing in life is ever perfect. Tesla has went through a recall of 1400 cars already, went through fires(thermal runaways to be more accurate) and it is still doing just fine. These are normal in cars and the biggest issue is dealing with the PR. Eventually someone is going to die in a Tesla, it will happen but again this is normal part of cars and normal part of life. These issues don’t have much long term impact on sales of cars either.
Musk also could care less how much his stock is worth, he is in it for the long haul. And as I mentioned Tesla has other products from drivetrains they supply to others, to solar city battery supplying for solar storage. And they also have that 700 million they saved for a rainy day. Come end of 2014 they will have their Model X as well. And 2016/2017 their Model E.
EvanR made my day with his joke about Faux News on December 29 at 8:34 PM, applicable also to the Corporate News Network:
“There is nothing wrong with Fox News! It’s the only news station that doesn’t brainwash you. .
That made a good laugh at the early morning. And it shows that the best brainwash is when the brainwashed loves it.
“it was all right, everything was all right, the struggle was finished. He had won the victory over himself. He loved Big Brother.”
(last line of “Nineteen Eighty-Four” by George Orwell)
NO! NO! NO! Say this isn’t so! Tesla builds the most beautiful car made in America. GM will, not if, will destroy the Tesla brand if such a travesty in GM acquiring Tesla occurs. Tesla is a world class leader and there’s NOTHING that GM, Ford and Chrysler produce that even remotely comes close to the style and engineering of the Tesla S. I guarantee that if GM was to acquire Tesla they would destroy the Tesla brand. Remember what GM did to SAAB? Think about that!
With all due respect, Bob Lutz was never going to make pontiac into BMW. Isn’t that what caddy is trying to do? GM still has 4 brands in US. Globally, a few more. Everyone else covers the market in the US with two primary brands. Pontiac noses were not and are not the solution. GM needs to make cars and trucks that are, at a minimum, top in a segment. No more crappy cars.
What Lutz meant was on a performance aspect rather the luxury scheme. He wanted a solid performance vehicle with technology to back it up! You’re right, Bob Lutz was trying to make “no more crappy cars” with the Solstice and G8. But it was too late. Now all we can do is hope GM comes to its senses and that they “phase-out” Buick and bring back Pontiac! Now with Chevrolet’s starting to go into mid $40’s, it doesn’t make sense to have another brand in the same price range!
I also think GM (once up and well for good) should buy back SAAB and put a new spin on it. SAAB was just getting started with the new 9-4X, 9-5 etc.
If SAAB came back with updated models, engines and marketing, they would be an instant success!
9-3 Sport Sedan, Coupe, Convertible and Wagon on Alpha
9-5 Luxury Sedan and Wagon on Super Epsilon
9-4X Luxury CUV on Theta Premium
9-3X SportWagon on Extended Alpha
9-X Air Luxury Convertible on Super Epsilon
1.6t with 210HP
1.8t with 245HP
2.0t with 280HP
2.5tdi with 165HP
2.8t with 320HP
3.0t with 350HP
3.6t with 395HP
That’s the thing. Cadillac is better positioned to be that ‘American BMW’ Lutz had in mind. Just look back 10 years and see how far Cadillac has grown. Even today, the non-V and non-Vsport models are nothing to be ashamed of.
Pontiac may have a price advantage, but sport luxury is not a value proposition. Cadillac, as it is today, IS the closest thing to an American BMW.
@EvenR – I hope your joking right? Fox News is pretty much brainwashing central. It has the worst rating as far as factual accuracy and is the most biased. And that is saying a lot since today all news networks have gone completely downhill.(Factual accuracy of today’s news networks is about 1 out of 3 things they say is accurate, Fox News is 1 out of 4).
It has gotten so bad, that when they polled people about how much they knew about news and how accurate they know about something. Even comedy central daily show viewers beat all the news networks( With exception of NPR which beat the daily show which isn’t saying much since they still scored below 50% ). Yes, a freaking comedy show provides more accurate news then our news networks : (
No, I am not joking at all! Mike Huckabee, Greta Van Susteran, Sean Hannity, Bret Baier, Neil Cavuto and Bill O’Reiily are all I watch! I know I can trust all of them. Fox News is the only news channel that doesn’t get paid to lie (unlike CNN, MSNBC, CNBC and all the other libtardic stations).
You have to be, do you even know the history of Fox news and why it was made? Since the other news networks were beginning to lean to the left, Fox News was made as a station to exploit and milk the right. Most of the people in Fox News are not even conservatives. They are professional actors paid to lie for money. It is all about the money. Just out of curiosity, do you know where Fox News HQ is located?
Look, seriously. There are some REAL conservative news networks out there. Not as big as Fox News. Fox News is made of a bunch of frauds.
To put it bluntly, Fox News and MSNBC are so bad, that when they polled people about current events. They found that people who don’t watch the news at all had more accurate knowledge of the news than those that watch Fox News and MSNBC.
I agree, Fox news sucks! Anyone who believes Fox News is credible are gullible .
This us what happens when a troll shows up.
The article was about some media comment on GM buying tesla. Now we are into politics.
Please do not feed the trolls. Keep this forum about GM.
I will agree there is a right lean to Fox but they were the only one giving the opposing side. CNN, MSNBC and the NYT along with many blogs were just spewing the view from the left.
The truth is the far right and far left have damaged this country. The far left are not even real Democrats anymore and the far right can get a little too defensive at times. Just look at Joe Manchin of WV as he represents a Roosevelt like Democrat and he is left looking like a Republican.
The fact is CNN has hired the actors and are reporting more on Hollywood than anything else. MSNBC have nothing but far left people and do not even attempt to provide an opposing view.
With Fox none of their people are actors. They are all real news people. While some like Megan Kelly appear to be models she is a highly rated lawyer and even Clerked for years for the Supreme Court. O Reilly has been a news man for 50 years and many of their commentators like George Will and Charles Krauthammer are some of the most respected people out there by both sides.
The only Celebrity I know of they hired is Gretchen Carlson as she was Miss America about 35 years ago and has been doing news ever since.
While Fox is not perfect they give more of both sides and the real new than anyone else out there. Just because you do not agree does not kill their credibility.
As for what affiliation people are in the news we should never know. Just look at Walter Cronkite. He was one of the best news people we had. He was a flaming far left guy but he never let it get in the way of reporting.
All I can say is just look at the ratings and see where most people go for the best news they can get. It may not be perfect but it is the most complete out there. The last ratings I saw Fox was in the multi millions of viewers and CNBC, CNN, HNL and MSNBC combined did not even reach half of what Fox has watching.
The problem is so many people today are so self absorbed they could care less what is going on and hence this is why we have the power struggle we have today. You can blame the news all you like but the lack of interest goes right to the people and the fact many are not even taught how the government works or how it should work. As long as they can get on the government dole they will just vote for who ever promises them the most free things.
I Like people like Joe Manchin D and Mike Huckabee R but the same of it is these are the people we need but they are never going to be the ones in charge anymore. This is why so many people are independents any more as no one really represents them better.
Enough Political BS.
Weapon-
Like I said we must agree to disagree as I do not buy the spin.
I hope Tesla the best but expect a less than stellar future in the hands of Musk. That could change with another owner but I see a partnership more in line here unless the stock tanks first.
We all heard the same talk about the Fisker too and just look when it went bad it went bad fast. Elon may get lucky and hold it together longer but I just do not agree with you that it is sustainable. Even with the S and X models and even the E model to sell 100,000 in this price range in a limited market car is going to be difficult no matter who is calling the shots. If he falls short of his predictions it can unravel fast.
If I owned Stock that I had bought a few years ago I would sell now and if I did not own stock I would not buy now. These fund people can manipulate things to a high degree and you have to be careful. There will be some winners and a lot of losers.
@scott
And why do you expect a less than stellar future for Tesla under Musk exactly?
And I don’t know who gave the same talk for Fisker but personally I was saying Fisker would fail from day 1. Why? Because the concept of a designer making a car company out of 3rd party parts and putting it together was ridiculous. On top of silly gimmicks like loading a solar panel on it. On top of that, Fisker’s goal was literally to make a car for the rich and that was it. What ultimately killed Fisker was them rushing to market and the downfall of A123 batteries which pretty much put them in a position where old cars were failing and they could not make any new cars for over 6 months.
I assure you selling 100k Model S and Model X will be no problem, Model E will probably sell like 500k. Again, the same was said about the prius and 10 years later it is selling 500k a year. The plugin EV market is growing at a pace much faster than the hybrid market. Falling short on this prediction is extremely unlikely, the reason Musk is often right in his predictions is because he predicts the obvious.
And why in the world would you sell stock now if you had any? TSLA is up 1.59 points as I am typing this. Even if you thought long term bad things are going to happen to Tesla, selling should be timed. Selling now makes no logical sense. Selling now is actually a pretty horrible idea just from the sheer fact that fund managers are scooping up Tesla to have on their portfolio for end of the quarter (It makes them look good to have top performing stocks at end of the quarter). And lets be honest, if you had TSLA, you would have sold at 50$
As for buying now would depend on how you think Q4 earnings will be.
Fox is republican, but they are not conservative. A majority of republicans are not even conservative, the only conservative base the republicans have are the libertarians which are ignored in the republican party or mimicked. Otherwise most of the conservative base is social conservatives, not fiscal conservatives. But yes, most of the news networks lean left.
And I’d rather not talk about the extremist of both sides. Though I will note, the issue with the far right is not being defensive but being “purist”. Don’t get me wrong, there are “purists” in the far left too, but they are mostly ignored on the left where as on the right they recently have taken the republicans hostage. (By purists I am talking about people who hate even steps taken towards the direction they want, they only settle for ABSOLUTES. They would rather have everything completely changed exactly or no change at all. And everything is black or white with no shades in between)
Though I think you missed what I meant by Fox News being actors. I am not talking about hiring celebrities or models. I am talking about people who for money will say and do things regardless of their own beliefs. To them, if you pay them money, they will put on any facade.
In all the time I have watched Fox News, I rarely see them give both sides. Most of the time they set up a situation where you have 3/4 people on one side, and 1 person on other side. Other networks actually tend to make it more even.
But it is not about it being even or not. Or whether I agree or not. I am talking about factual accuracy here. And out of all the networks, Fox News has the worst factual accuracy. (2nd being MSNBC). As I mentioned, Fox News and MSNBC were so bad, that people who watch those networks actually knew less than people who didn’t even watch the news at all.
And don’t get me wrong, all news networks are doing horribly in factual accuracy and educating their viewers. As I mentioned above, it got so bad that even comedy central’s daily show viewers are more informed than almost all the news networks. The only one that scored better in educating people was NPR, and even NPR could not get people to answer even 50% of the questions correctly.
The reason why Fox News and MSNBC are rated the worst in factual accuracy is because these networks abuse something called confrontational bias. And their news programs are all setup to play into it. And unfortunately other news networks are also moving more and more in that direction.
And yes, there are a lot of people watching Fox News, but that is not exactly a good thing. Especially due to the poor quality in news. At issue is, conservatives need a better news outlet. While liberals have many channels to chose from (even if they are all bad), they can at least chose the lesser of all the junk, this forces them to compete and some end up better then others(still crap but better crap). By watching Fox News, you get the other side, but Fox News has almost a monopoly, this pretty much gives them the ability to make up and say w\e they want. This is the reason for their horrible accuracy in factual information. When you have no competition the quality goes to nothing, this happens to all companies.
I am not blaming the news for the government, I say this to everyone. The government is a representation of the people. If the government is corrupt, it is because the of the people, because the people make up government. I do agree that schools do a terrible job of teaching people how government works, they mostly just cover the branches of government and that is about it. They don’t even teach people much about them. Though I will disagree on teaching people on how government should work. That opens up a can of worms where a person can implicate their ideals of government on to others. People have to think for themselves and decide how government should work.
I will also disagree on the fact that people vote for whoever promises most free things, those people are too lazy to vote in reality, people vote mostly for the lesser of the two evils. Lets be honest, when was the last time a candidate was actually likable make it to the final election? It was never about that, it was about not letting the other guy win. To be honest, I wish more people would realize how useless the president’s election is and focus more on their local districts. Local districts is where people’s votes matter the most and that is where they pass policies that impact people the most. If your not in a swing state, your vote for president is pretty much useless. The swing states elect the president.
And while I don’t exactly agree with Mike Huckabee, though I don’t disapprove of him (Which is not a bad thing, because to be honest, I disagree with 90% of what Ron Paul says, but I would vote for him). Don’t know who Joe Manchin is.(at least by name, not very good at remembering names. Remember Huckabee because he ran for president). And yes, I am independent.
Sorry but you are way off base on more than a few things here. #1 being a Republican does not mean you have to be far right. Yes there are far right members but not of them are that far out. Most of them are really more to the center right and too many like you assume they are far right.
As for new the real issue is some are driving agendas and the other part is to entertain as much as inform.
As it is the only real voice for the center to the right is Fox and most of what they present is legit. At least they are not going around calling to defecate down someone’s throat.
You also have media like NYT trying to sell that the Benghazi issue was because of a Video? They also want to claim there was no Al Qaeda link. While it is not the 2001 Al Qaeda it has links to the past. Al Qaeda today is like Cancer and it has mutated into many forms. You can call them what ever you like but it was a preplanned attack and Hillary and the President blew it. I would be more forgiving If they would just admit the mistakes vs. they feed a line of bull. I know the different between shit and shineola.
So you don’t believe the Unions donate and vote to who will give them the most. The whole state and Fed union people vote in the people who will give them the most in money and benefits. They also opt them out of health care plans they do not want to be in anymore than the people who have to be. I could easily list more. This was not a welfare comment though there is a part of that too.
Manchin is the Senator that was governor and replaced Byrd.
I watch and trust Fox but I also watch the other channels as you need to be informed. I am sorry the rest are so far out there that it is laughable. I know better because I do keep up but so many people can not even tell you who the VP is.
The real issue we have today is the most qualified people we have will never run for office. It is underpaid for all the trouble. Also once you get to a certain level you do what you are told.
As for your ranking of who is most accurate at news it just depends on who is doing the surveys as they are not on the up and up either.
The real issues here are there is little moral compass anymore and little personal responsibility. In this day and age where they want to make guns illegal and drugs legal it is a real agenda driven joke.
Like religion or not if people would just follow the Ten Commandments it would save them a lot of issue and trouble in their lives. People self inflict their own issues and want others to pay for their issues. You don’t lie, Cheat or Steal we could see a lot of improvement here. But society is degrading at a rapid rate. So many want to sell you on the end of the world via So Called Global Warming when the human race may just do each other in centuries sooner.
As for Tesla You know were I stand and only time will prove who is right.
As for now I am waiting to see just what GM is to deliver on the new EV as I have seen insiders who can be trusted call it a moon shot. I really suspect there is going to be some major advancements here. I really think what they told us so far is only the tip of the ice berg.
@ Scott. GM’s next electric vehicle will be a moonshot. That’s interesting since their first three Electric vehicles we’re also Moon shots in fact they are still on the moon. No other company has ever built a car for use off world electric or gas.
Moon shots are expensive and that is what the problem is with the Volt. The Volt still remains the best technological marvel of EV’s. Not like a Tesla if it runs out of electricity it can continue on like a regular car and still get 38 MPG. Nobody else has anything that good, yet.
Japan has a tradition of not trading fairly. The link below is a long read, but interesting.
http://www.uwsa.com/issues/trade/japanyes.html
So why do we allow them to get away with it?
Well GM and Boeing have a out of this world car.
Goodyear also was the first and only tire on the moon. The early landings had a tool cart that had pneumatic tires. They would sent them up with low pressure and once on the moon they were fully inflated.
I agree the Volt is the most practical of all EV cars as it is one that should appeal to the widest market. Price is the only real issue.
Now if they can get this car to the claimed $30K and still have a 200 Mile range then add to it a 40 plus MPG engine generator they will have nearly the range to get to the moon. LOL!
Here is what we know they have made the claims of $30K and 200 mile EV and still keeping a generator. We also know that GM was working on the 2nd and 3rd Gen Voltec drivelines when the first Volt appeared.
I speculate that they have jumped ahead to the 3rd gen and I suspect it will be on a lighter platform based on the coming Cruze.
Now did they install a larger battery? Better Motors? Hard to say at this point but they have had to make some major change or discovery to get the range up that high with a small battery pack.
Other than a larger battery the Tesla really offers nothing really that different or advanced that anyone else has. They use a small and a much larger battery that is larger than most other EV car as they have a bigger car to put it in.
If they hype this up I hope they really deliver on this to the point it will impress everyone and not just the GM fans.
I also hope they learn to better market it than the Volt. I know they spent a lot of money but they really did not get a lot of traction for what was spent. The Volt is one car like the Prius that need to be everywhere on the web. The kind of people who like these cars are on their I Phones a lot and the web. With the price down and range up there is no more excuses for anyone not to at least give it a look.
Also there were hints the engine could be offered in more than gasoline. A small Diesel and CNG could be a real bonus.
I would not be surprised if we see something on the ATS in a electric at some point come out of no where. It would not be hard to counter a S model as they could take the electric driveline add a larger battery and meet or beat the Tesla. The ATS weight is just right and removing the engine and adding more battery would more than easily make a nice car.
Moon Shots do not have to be expensive if cost reduction and improved range are part of the package. A cheap EV car that is larger than a golf cart has been difficult to build as going to the moon. Get a respectable sized car for the $30K and that is true progress.
Should nt we get a moon shot from the volt every time a new volt comes out
Depends on the technology and how fast it develops.
Keep in mind how long this one has been in development. It was already being worked on when the first Gen was still in development.
Things will progress as the advancements come.
This could be very beneficial to both GM and Tesla, GM could gain the new EV technology is desperately needs and Tesla could gain the dealership network that it desperately needs. Although Cadillac has been completely overhauled these past few years and are much better amazing vehicles, some people are still to stubborn to step foot in a Cadillac showroom. With GMs acquisition of Tesla they could make Cadillac/Tesla showrooms where they could attract these stubborn buyers who are interested in Tesla and could easily be talked into taking an ELR or another Cadillac model for a test drive.