The full self-driving tech and corresponding regulations / legal approvals are not there yet at scale and not likely to be in place for at least a decade (or more).
It's likely the real reason is because Telsa will lose the $25k EV market to Chinese EVs:
'Seth Goldstein, a Morningstar Research Services analyst, said he believes these less-expensive vehicles will be built on current Tesla platforms and priced in the mid-$30,000s.
"It was my understanding that the original plan was to make the more-affordable vehicle on a new platform," he told Reuters. "I think Tesla realized they were late to making an affordable vehicle versus their Chinese-EV peers … So, they changed their strategy rather than make a large investment to produce a new vehicle."'
"lose the market" is I think, a rather "Intel everywhere" take on what market share means. He would not "own" it the way he owns Tesla's current segments, true. But in the long term he won't own Tesla's market share, because in the long term the other car manufacturers who do make onshore and won't be behind sanctions will compete.
This is like "Ford won't make a VW beetle competitor because .." battles of the 60s. Did it mean Ford lost the small car market? No. it shared it.
If our model is there is porche so we don't need any other sports cars, we're pretty close to a planned economy model no? Why are we making saloon cars if a truck can do it all? Why do we have SUV if a tractor and trailer can carry more people &c &c.
I do not expect to see headlines saying "Ford, GM, BMW and Renault have closed their factories because they can't compete, and why bother trying"
This, or cannot AND doesn't want to. The man works in advertising, if this was about magic slimming butter the FDA would have stripped his licence and drummed him out of the butter factory. It just amazes me that shareholders can be sucked into a shell game of future expectations because 'leader is genius' and not wake up to find he did a rug-pull AND IT HAS NO CONSEQUENCES.
If I were to put myself in Elon's head, my objective would be to leverage the wealth from Tesla (he holds 13% of outstanding shares), propped up by investor enthusiasm, to accomplish my goals for as long as possible before the market realizes the goals are aspirational. Tesla is on autopilot (hah), leaving Elon to do Elon Things.
That is not to say Tesla isn't going to continue to do well in vehicles and energy storage, just that there is no point in the org striving harder to scale faster when Elon can do the equivalent of "rest and vest." Why work hard when you can distort reality and achieve the same wealth game outcome?
I am trying to imagine Andrew Carnegie saying "I have found a way to make steel for 2c per tonne, without coal, and it will be as strong as unobtanium" and the entire western shareholder class of the time sending them his money and then he says "ha ha sorry I can't so fuck you" and .. goes on being US steel and nobody gives a fuck.
You're not wrong. Based on all available evidence, it unfortunately looks like you can get away with a whole bunch of lying without consequences in the current simulation.
It's a fortunate thing, then, that the share of electricity generated by fossil fuels continues its steady decline - down to 59% across the US at this point.
The full self-driving tech and corresponding regulations / legal approvals are not there yet at scale and not likely to be in place for at least a decade (or more).
It's likely the real reason is because Telsa will lose the $25k EV market to Chinese EVs:
https://www.cnn.com/2024/04/03/cars/china-tesla-byd-competit...
Edit: the article also confirms this:
'Seth Goldstein, a Morningstar Research Services analyst, said he believes these less-expensive vehicles will be built on current Tesla platforms and priced in the mid-$30,000s.
"It was my understanding that the original plan was to make the more-affordable vehicle on a new platform," he told Reuters. "I think Tesla realized they were late to making an affordable vehicle versus their Chinese-EV peers … So, they changed their strategy rather than make a large investment to produce a new vehicle."'
"lose the market" is I think, a rather "Intel everywhere" take on what market share means. He would not "own" it the way he owns Tesla's current segments, true. But in the long term he won't own Tesla's market share, because in the long term the other car manufacturers who do make onshore and won't be behind sanctions will compete.
This is like "Ford won't make a VW beetle competitor because .." battles of the 60s. Did it mean Ford lost the small car market? No. it shared it.
If our model is there is porche so we don't need any other sports cars, we're pretty close to a planned economy model no? Why are we making saloon cars if a truck can do it all? Why do we have SUV if a tractor and trailer can carry more people &c &c.
I do not expect to see headlines saying "Ford, GM, BMW and Renault have closed their factories because they can't compete, and why bother trying"
Translation: Musk admits Tesla can't build a $25K car.
This, or cannot AND doesn't want to. The man works in advertising, if this was about magic slimming butter the FDA would have stripped his licence and drummed him out of the butter factory. It just amazes me that shareholders can be sucked into a shell game of future expectations because 'leader is genius' and not wake up to find he did a rug-pull AND IT HAS NO CONSEQUENCES.
If I were to put myself in Elon's head, my objective would be to leverage the wealth from Tesla (he holds 13% of outstanding shares), propped up by investor enthusiasm, to accomplish my goals for as long as possible before the market realizes the goals are aspirational. Tesla is on autopilot (hah), leaving Elon to do Elon Things.
That is not to say Tesla isn't going to continue to do well in vehicles and energy storage, just that there is no point in the org striving harder to scale faster when Elon can do the equivalent of "rest and vest." Why work hard when you can distort reality and achieve the same wealth game outcome?
I am trying to imagine Andrew Carnegie saying "I have found a way to make steel for 2c per tonne, without coal, and it will be as strong as unobtanium" and the entire western shareholder class of the time sending them his money and then he says "ha ha sorry I can't so fuck you" and .. goes on being US steel and nobody gives a fuck.
We call that lying.
You're not wrong. Based on all available evidence, it unfortunately looks like you can get away with a whole bunch of lying without consequences in the current simulation.
So we did call him a Robber Baron. Maybe Musk (Bezos..) is just re-enacting the gilded age?
china blames west. west blames china.
And battery-cars powered by coal-oil generated electricity is stupid.
It's a fortunate thing, then, that the share of electricity generated by fossil fuels continues its steady decline - down to 59% across the US at this point.