Tesla

Tyler Durden said:
iacrenter said:
morekaos said:
99% can't afford
Click to expand...

I thought about posting 99% but even the "poor" 10 percenters in the US love to over leverage themselves for luxury items. 8)
Click to expand...

Anyone who can afford Irvine, could afford the model S. 
Click to expand...

Well I hope they drop the $10,000 or $20,000 battery upgrade in or the neighborhood soccer dad is going to smoke them off the line in the Camry...
 
Tyler Durden said:
iacrenter said:
morekaos said:
99% can't afford
Click to expand...

I thought about posting 99% but even the "poor" 10 percenters in the US love to over leverage themselves for luxury items. 8)
Click to expand...

Anyone who can afford Irvine, could afford the model S. 
Click to expand...

The poor guy who works at your local McDonalds is helping to subsidize an Irvinite's eco toy. Just make rich folks pay for the real cost of these non essential goods.
 
Tyler Durden said:
Technology transfer is the whole reason its subsidized.

Do your really think those companies would be so altruistic to eat the losses in R&D, tooling, manufacturing and sales and make their shareholders pay to bring EVs to the marketplace at price people would pay?
Click to expand...

The only reason the Tesla S exists is because the government distorts the free market with subsidies. The Tesla S shouldn't have been built, because who the f*ck is going to buy a $150K electric car...not many people. The market would dictate use of existing cheaper/alternative technology (more fuel efficient/lighter vehicles etc...) that would still address environmental concerns.

It is bad public policy for the government to invest in expensive technology with only marginal benefits to the environment and society. It is especially an egregious use of tax dollars to benefit a select few who do NOT need subsidized electric cars that go from 0-60 in less than 5 seconds.

If the government persists on supporting EV vehicles, how about a cap on subsidies for vehicles that cost more than $50K? or phasing out rebates for those with higher income? Or better yet, support more cost effective existing technology.
 
irvinehomeowner said:
Isn't the Tesla S only $72k? Or are you saying before subsidies it's $150k?
Click to expand...

the model S costs 70K+

he is saying if the government didnt subsidize, Tesla would have to sell it for about 150K to make money off of it. Right now it can sell it for 70K and the company overall still makes money on it because of subsidies it gets from the government and sales of those credits.
 
I was ready to go rush out there to buy it but this logic did not make it past the "boss".  :p

Tyler Durden said:
iacrenter said:
morekaos said:
99% can't afford
Click to expand...

I thought about posting 99% but even the "poor" 10 percenters in the US love to over leverage themselves for luxury items. 8)
Click to expand...

Anyone who can afford Irvine, could afford the model S.
Click to expand...
 
Tyler Durden said:
iacrenter said:
Tyler Durden said:
Technology transfer is the whole reason its subsidized.

Do your really think those companies would be so altruistic to eat the losses in R&D, tooling, manufacturing and sales and make their shareholders pay to bring EVs to the marketplace at price people would pay?
Click to expand...

The only reason the Tesla S exists is because the government distorts the free market with subsidies. The Tesla S shouldn't have been built, because who the f*ck is going to buy a $150K electric car...not many people. The market would dictate use of existing cheaper/alternative technology (more fuel efficient/lighter vehicles etc...) that would still address environmental concerns.

It is bad public policy for the government to invest in expensive technology with only marginal benefits to the environment and society. It is especially an egregious use of tax dollars to benefit a select few who do NOT need subsidized electric cars that go from 0-60 in less than 5 seconds.

If the government persists on supporting EV vehicles, how about a cap on subsidies for vehicles that cost more than $50K? or phasing out rebates for those with higher income? Or better yet, support more cost effective existing technology.
Click to expand...

Its the government's role to step in when ROI is flat or negative in an area they want to promote additional investment.  Prior to government subsidy, the market had already dictated that there was no large desire for electric vehicles.  Remember the EV1 and Original Honda Insight?  People were not beating down the doors to scoop those up like they were SUVs and Trucks.  So GM and Honda did what any company would do, quit funding the money pits and started putting more emphasis on higher margin vehicles like Chevy Tahoes and Honda Pilots.

If there is no incentive for them to do so, why would any traditional manufacturer produce an electric vehicle?  The internal combustion models already sell at hefty profits, the technology is proven for the last 200 years which lowers R&D costs because they have a large basis to start from.  Tooling costs can also be split across multiple product lines and provide opportunities to create multiple models from existing plants, which further decreases their costs.  Similarly, its not tough for them to market conventional cars, since everyone 5 and older knows what they are.

The free market has always been distorted by government subsidies.  Why do you think the price of commodities are where they are?  The government pays farmers NOT to produce crops in some years to keep prices stable.  If they did not do so, no one would be interested in farming, because the money is made in food packaging and distribution, not the growing! 

In your opinion, is Obamacare not a form of subsidy?  The free market is not interested in providing insurance at low premiums to all individuals regardless of insurability.  So the government intervened and is creating a program that effectively forces all taxpayers to subsidize health insurance.  Is that not also in the interest of the public good?
Click to expand...

I never said ALL government subsidies are bad. Just ones that seem to pour money down the drain for marginal returns or ones that seem to benefit those that don't need it.

Expansion of government health care while creating significant market distortions has the potential to help millions of Americans currently without health coverage. From a public policy standpoint, that seems to be a better use of taxpayer money than building luxury EV cars for the 1%ers to drive.

There are no perfect subsidies but given limited resources/tax dollars (though the Fed spends like there is no tomorrow), it is better to be selective with these programs.
 
ps9 said:
Can you hack some falcon wings onto the Rav4?
Click to expand...
Not Falcon... but still:

6086170023_large.jpg


31812870016_large.jpg


parts1099670838promo.jpg

http://www.verticaldoors.com/
 
The governments record in this industry is not encouraging

http://money.cnn.com/2013/04/24/autos/fisker-government-loan/index.html

Lawmakers probe government loan to Fisker as carmaker struggles

With electric-car maker Fisker struggling to stay in business, lawmakers grilled founder Henrik Fisker on Wednesday over the government's $192 million loan to the ailing company.

Fisker laid off most of its employees earlier this month and missed its first loan payment to the Department of Energy on Monday. The Treasury Department has already seized $21 million in an effort to recover some taxpayer funds, but most of the $192 million remains at risk.
 
morekaos said:
The governments record in this industry is not encouraging

http://money.cnn.com/2013/04/24/autos/fisker-government-loan/index.html

Lawmakers probe government loan to Fisker as carmaker struggles

With electric-car maker Fisker struggling to stay in business, lawmakers grilled founder Henrik Fisker on Wednesday over the government's $192 million loan to the ailing company.

Fisker laid off most of its employees earlier this month and missed its first loan payment to the Department of Energy on Monday. The Treasury Department has already seized $21 million in an effort to recover some taxpayer funds, but most of the $192 million remains at risk.
Click to expand...

several years ago, a friend of mine once tried talking me into interviewing for the controller position at Fisker, i knew it would fail, just a matter of time
 
morekaos said:
The governments record in this industry is not encouraging

http://money.cnn.com/2013/04/24/autos/fisker-government-loan/index.html

Lawmakers probe government loan to Fisker as carmaker struggles

With electric-car maker Fisker struggling to stay in business, lawmakers grilled founder Henrik Fisker on Wednesday over the government's $192 million loan to the ailing company.

Fisker laid off most of its employees earlier this month and missed its first loan payment to the Department of Energy on Monday. The Treasury Department has already seized $21 million in an effort to recover some taxpayer funds, but most of the $192 million remains at risk.
Click to expand...

What's a few hundred million dollars to the federal government? Chump change. They don't care since it is not their money and they'll just keep raising your taxes.
 
qwerty said:
morekaos said:
The governments record in this industry is not encouraging

http://money.cnn.com/2013/04/24/autos/fisker-government-loan/index.html

Lawmakers probe government loan to Fisker as carmaker struggles

With electric-car maker Fisker struggling to stay in business, lawmakers grilled founder Henrik Fisker on Wednesday over the government's $192 million loan to the ailing company.

Fisker laid off most of its employees earlier this month and missed its first loan payment to the Department of Energy on Monday. The Treasury Department has already seized $21 million in an effort to recover some taxpayer funds, but most of the $192 million remains at risk.
Click to expand...

several years ago, a friend of mine once tried talking me into interviewing for the controller position at Fisker, i knew it would fail, just a matter of time
Click to expand...

Eventually, I think Tesla will meet the same fate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top