Tesla .. Missing the mark yet again

[IronSnake]

The problem with the negativity and anti-Tesla speak, is they aren't purely about one model of business. They own many many different technologies that they lease out to other companies. The battery facility will power not only Tesla's, but many other products. They are just one pillar in a field of many. Despite what many would like to believe, they have the very real possibility of leading a more electric life for America. I welcome it as someone that sees competition and energy source diversity as important.

My interest in Tesla lies in their use of the battery technology as storage devices for home solar systems. The biggest drawback of any Solar tech is there is no real "storage unit" for which you can maintain a constant power supply. If the sun isn't shining, or the power isn't on, it's useless. I'm hoping Tesla's home battery pack tech ends up being worthwhile.

 

[598]

Old saying that rings very true, The market can stay irrational longer than I can stay solvent.

 

[AustinSN]

On a side note I was excited to hear that they had a solar roofing system that replaced shingles and, according to Tesla, didn't cost much more than a standard roof. With our roof needing to be redone I hopped on the website to get info. $78k to do our roof! **** that. I'll pay $8k and pocket the remaining 70 grand thank you.

I think the roofs there were referring to were higher end slate/concrete roofs. When compared to those, it's not that much more.

Second, the argument can easily be made that the average driver will spend LESS personal time charging a Tesla than filling your gas tank. Think this thru. How often do you drive 200 plus miles in a day? I know it's a pretty rare situation for me. On average I drive 20 miles one way to work, and say occasionally another 15 and back to dinner or shopping after. So on the average daily drive I would never need to stop.

This means I would charge at home, at night, when electric rates are lowest (and way cheaper than gas btw). I would spend basically zero personal time, other than plugging it in, to charge it.

Talked to a guy at a party who had a 90D, his logic was essentially this. We were asking him about the short range and he said it's never been a problem. On some days he will drive up to 100 miles, but he starts every morning out with a full tank.

He said if they take a road trip, they use his wifes RX350.

The problem with the negativity and anti-Tesla speak, is they aren't purely about one model of business.

I was going to mention this. They are known for their cars, but that's not their only basket.

Their stock is definitely over priced but they have an enormous leg up on future tech over a lot of other companies. Mark Fields literally lost his job because investors are concerned he wasn't focused enough on the future.

 

[Blown 89]

I think the roofs there were referring to were higher end slate/concrete roofs. When compared to those, it's not that much more.

No they weren't. Let's be real here, no slate roof costs anywhere near $78k on a house my size. Musk over promised and under delivered.

 

[DHG1078]

No they weren't. Let's be real here, no slate roof costs anywhere near $78k on a house my size. Musk over promised and under delivered.

Its "comparable" to a high end roof when you take in cast savings on electricity over the next 10 years or however long the break even point is. Well, that is what they advertise anyways.

 

[AustinSN]

No they weren't. Let's be real here, no slate roof costs anywhere near $78k on a house my size. Musk over promised and under delivered.

How big is your house?

They could be talking Silicon Valley costs too.

 

[IronSnake]

Its "comparable" to a high end roof when you take in cast savings on electricity over the next 10 years or however long the break even point is. Well, that is what they advertise anyways.

Gotta concur. You can't legitimately take the cost of it into consideration without taking the credit you'll receive back on energy consumption into consideration as well.

The entire cost is supported by theory of a return on your investment. It's not just a roof, it's an energy supply for your home. And given a house like mine at 2k square feet with zero trees would be able to generate so many KW's, I would probably get a check from the power company before I ever saw a bill.

 

[DHG1078]

You can also get a tax credit up to 30% of some of the costs, but thats going to taper off here in the next year or two.

 

[AustinSN]

Looks like a company called Forwards Labs is going to start selling them soon, 33% less cost than Tesla's solar tiles.

Love competition.

 

[DHG1078]

Looks like a company called Forwards Labs is going to start selling them soon, 33% less cost than Tesla's solar tiles.

Love competition.

Hadn't heard of them before. 40 year warranty vs. 30, and 33% cheaper? Hard to say no to that. I wonder if the solar roofing is from the same supplier or not as they say they are more efficient.

 

[IronSnake]

If we stay in this house for good, I am going to look into it. I imagine the wattage has to be immense in comparison to conventional panels.

 

[AustinSN]

Hadn't heard of them before. 40 year warranty vs. 30, and 33% cheaper? Hard to say no to that. I wonder if the solar roofing is from the same supplier or not as they say they are more efficient.

That seems like a really viable option.

If I was certain I was going to keep a house for at least 40 years I would absolutely do it.

 

[Blown 89]

Its "comparable" to a high end roof when you take in cast savings on electricity over the next 10 years or however long the break even point is. Well, that is what they advertise anyways.

Their advertising was way off on that too.

It sounds like some of you haven't actually looked into it outside of the headlines. My house is $1800 sq/ft. The cost of the solar roof is $78,500k. The tax credit is $17,500. According to Tesla's calculations I will save $77,300 in.....30 years. **** that. So in 30 years it still won't have paid for itself and that isn't factoring in what I could get back in investment returns of $70,000k in 30 freaking years.

Oh and that's only 40% coverage. 60% coverage costs $101k. That's absurd. Utterly absurd.

I think everyone going bananas over the Tesla roofs haven't actually read anything other than headlines nor have the actually priced it out compared to what costs to roof an actual house.

How big is your house?

They could be talking Silicon Valley costs too.

It does not cost $78k to roof a house my size in Silicon Valley either.

 

[97desertCobra]

For those of you certain the stock is going to tank, why aren't you shorting it?

It's a rather volatile stock both up and down. Not something some people are willing to short, nor place an uncovered call on. Maybe a straddle. It's been a while since I've been to work (on military orders) but last I was looking at it a few months ago i think I recall it being difficult to find people willing to lend their shares to short in the first place. But my memory may be off on that one.

 

[DHG1078]

It sounds like some of you haven't actually looked into it outside of the headlines.

I haven't looked into it because even just regular solar panels are a 7-10 year break even point for me in socal. Solar panel tech just isn't there yet. In 2-3 years we should have some panels that are closer to 3-5 year break even which is a lot more palatable.

 

[AustinSN]

It does not cost $78k to roof a house my size in Silicon Valley either.

I have no idea what it costs out there, just trying to figure out why they said it.

The pricing will come down, all renewable energy prices have dropped substantially over the last few years. Once more competitors come out and manufacturing catches up, it will probably be the only way to go.

 

[DHG1078]

http://news.mit.edu/2016/new-solar-cell-more-efficient-costs-less-its-counterparts-0829

 

[Never_Enough]

Don't the


I see them in richer areas, especially near busy shopping malls. But they are few and far between. And its only like 5 of them, so good luck finding an open one when they finally produce 100k model 3s. They are also charging people to use the supercharger if you bought a car after jan. 1st, IIRC.

I see a lot of other Tesla models in my area.

 

[RDJ]

I wonder how bad that company will tank when it's time to pay the piper and they're no longer trendy. Tesla is in a race against the clock right now.

Tesla is in a race against the clock because the Gov't subsidies for electric vehicles is set to run out in 2019. that really isn't enough time for him to meet his backlog demand let alone anything new. I think it will tank but not as much as the real tesla haters think it will. I am no fan of the man but I would not classify myself as a hater

On a side note I was excited to hear that they had a solar roofing system that replaced shingles and, according to Tesla, didn't cost much more than a standard roof. With our roof needing to be redone I hopped on the website to get info. $78k to do our roof! **** that. I'll pay $8k and pocket the remaining 70 grand thank you.

his solar roofs are another over hyped and will under perform his estimates. they are not ready for prime time, are too expensive for the average homeowner and have an 11 year ROI. in order to install them you have to have a roof devoid of shade and unless the cost of electricity spikes most places they are not going to be worth putting up. their estimate of their ROI is based on the cost of electricity being 25 cents/kw right now the only place that has anywhere close to that is Hawaii where it is 33 cents/kw the next closest state is 16 cent/kw. so they use that .25 cent cost to boost the attractiveness of their plan without pointing out the factual real cost across the U.S. the AVERAGE cost in the U.S. is 11 cents well below that 25 cent cost.

You can hate on Tesla for the (obviously) overpriced stock, hate the look of the car, hate on it for costing 100k+ for a model s, hell hate on it for being electric etc etc...

But it's obvious from comments that most have not really looked into how it is to actually own one. Specifically on the charging issue.

right now his best charge time is said to be 30 minutes. that is way too long. and remember that as of Jan 1 this year your charging at his stations is no longer free after the first 400kw. 90% of his cars will still run on dino oil because it is still a pretty expensive proposition to install your own charging station. people are going to be spending 40k on a grocery getter.

Second, the argument can easily be made that the average driver will spend LESS personal time charging a Tesla than filling your gas tank. Think this thru. How often do you drive 200 plus miles in a day? I know it's a pretty rare situation for me. On average I drive 20 miles one way to work, and say occasionally another 15 and back to dinner or shopping after. So on the average daily drive I would never need to stop.

This means I would charge at home, at night, when electric rates are lowest (and way cheaper than gas btw). I would spend basically zero personal time, other than plugging it in, to charge it.

Meanwhile in my gas car, I fill up once a week. If I'm hauling ass, and it's a fast pump, it probably takes 5 minutes at minimum to pull off the highway, fill up, then get back on. I'd say that's dammed optimistic. So 260 minutes a year on fillups for the daily drive (probably more like 520) plus fillups on trips.

The whole point is, the argument can easily be made that you would spend less time on the Tesla. And if you're able to pay 100k for a car, you probably have two. This logic may not work for the new 35k model, but honestly, who do you know that has only one car but it costs 100k (or 35). So you take the wife's gas fusion on the long trips..big deal.

Hell, with my calculations (admittedly dammed basic) it sure looks like to me I could literally save enough money on gas vs electric to rent a gas car for multiple weekends a year if I need a long trip...and still come out ahead.

way to basic and more simplistic than it is going to turn out to be

Those calculations would work for our DDs here as well. I can usually rent an F-150 for about $50 a day (often less) and most of our driving is less than 50 miles per day. I've considered picking up one of these several times:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/2000-Ford-R...ash=item4404d1f777:g:lqkAAOSwLEtYi4f4&vxp=mtr

I bet insurance and taxes would be stupid cheap on it.

you would be money ahead doing this than buying a tesla. if you keep up with oil changes etc your car/truck will run you 300k miles ... Teslas will need at least two battery changes and maybe three in that time.

Nobody mentioned the crappy build quality. Yes, crappy build quality. They are notorious for it.

The leg humpers will deny it, but the cars suffer from some of the worst quality control in the industry.

Their battery technology is off the chain, but as for building a car, they leave a lot to be desired.

actually their battery tech is not off the chain. His powerwall was touted as "being able to power your house in case of a power outtage and only cost 3k" while one powerwall is indeed going to cost about 3k you will need multiple of them to power your house over even a moderate power outtage. after you buy all the other stuff needed to tie it to the grid and into your house you are well over the 3k cost as well. they have a way to go. and that battery plant they are talking about? not their tech. they are building panasonic batteries in that plant to use in their equipment.

For those of you certain the stock is going to tank, why aren't you shorting it?

because it is too unpredictable and expensive to short

My interest in Tesla lies in their use of the battery technology as storage devices for home solar systems. The biggest drawback of any Solar tech is there is no real "storage unit" for which you can maintain a constant power supply. If the sun isn't shining, or the power isn't on, it's useless. I'm hoping Tesla's home battery pack tech ends up being worthwhile.

it might in several years. right now it is only slightly more cost effective than other methods that are no where near cost effective unless you are out in the boonies and can't grid tie your system. Storage units DO exist they are just not cost effective. As I stated above their powerwall system is not as advertised and the tesla leg humpers ignore that fact.

No they weren't. Let's be real here, no slate roof costs anywhere near $78k on a house my size. Musk over promised and under delivered.

he always over promises and under delivers. my system cost 37K to install, half of his roof cost and I put out almost double what his 78K dollar roof costs. Thankfully I got rebates and the tax credits or it would not have been worth me putting it in. his roof systems are going to be the same way but the rebates and tax credits won't be there so it will not have the install base that he claims. that is why he bought solar city to give him a head start, but solar citys rep is crap and anyone that does their homework wouldn't touch one of their systems.

Its "comparable" to a high end roof when you take in cast savings on electricity over the next 10 years or however long the break even point is. Well, that is what they advertise anyways.

and that advertisement is overstated and false.

Gotta concur. You can't legitimately take the cost of it into consideration without taking the credit you'll receive back on energy consumption into consideration as well.

The entire cost is supported by theory of a return on your investment. It's not just a roof, it's an energy supply for your home. And given a house like mine at 2k square feet with zero trees would be able to generate so many KW's, I would probably get a check from the power company before I ever saw a bill.

now with the system being talking about here. I have a 2300sq ft house and a 10kw system and I still have a small electric bill most months because I overbuilt there are a few months where they pay me or we break even I really don't think their systems as currently envisioned will be able to do that. you have to have setbacks due to fire codes and they can take several hundred square feet off the available roof space in some cities. My ROI on my system was about 4.5 years the ROI on a system where electricty is less than 10cents/kw is going to be longer and you have to take into consideration that not all places are going to be getting rebates or tax credits so that will increace the ROI. Right now they are talking an ROI of 11 years on a Tesla roof, which is crazy talk for 99% of the country

Looks like a company called Forwards Labs is going to start selling them soon, 33% less cost than Tesla's solar tiles.
Love competition.

I am watching these guys as well it will be interesting to see where they go hopefully not in the toilet

I haven't looked into it because even just regular solar panels are a 7-10 year break even point for me in socal. Solar panel tech just isn't there yet. In 2-3 years we should have some panels that are closer to 3-5 year break even which is a lot more palatable.

you have it right. esp. in SoCal. with the tiered system they have most people put up panels to keep them out of tier 3 since that is where the cost really is. without rebates and tax credits solar does not make sense for most folks

http://news.mit.edu/2016/new-solar-cell-more-efficient-costs-less-its-counterparts-0829

it will also be interesting to see where these go ... I wish them well but my money says it will be 3-5 years rather than 1-2 years talked about in the article. it would be nice to see it less tho

 

[2000gt4.6]

Tesla is in a race against the clock because the Gov't subsidies for electric vehicles is set to run out in 2019. that really isn't enough time for him to meet his backlog demand let alone anything new. I think it will tank but not as much as the real tesla haters think it will. I am no fan of the man but I would not classify myself as a hater

his solar roofs are another over hyped and will under perform his estimates. they are not ready for prime time, are too expensive for the average homeowner and have an 11 year ROI. in order to install them you have to have a roof devoid of shade and unless the cost of electricity spikes most places they are not going to be worth putting up. their estimate of their ROI is based on the cost of electricity being 25 cents/kw right now the only place that has anywhere close to that is Hawaii where it is 33 cents/kw the next closest state is 16 cent/kw. so they use that .25 cent cost to boost the attractiveness of their plan without pointing out the factual real cost across the U.S. the AVERAGE cost in the U.S. is 11 cents well below that 25 cent cost.

right now his best charge time is said to be 30 minutes. that is way too long. and remember that as of Jan 1 this year your charging at his stations is no longer free after the first 400kw. 90% of his cars will still run on dino oil because it is still a pretty expensive proposition to install your own charging station. people are going to be spending 40k on a grocery getter.

way to basic and more simplistic than it is going to turn out to be

you would be money ahead doing this than buying a tesla. if you keep up with oil changes etc your car/truck will run you 300k miles ... Teslas will need at least two battery changes and maybe three in that time.

actually their battery tech is not off the chain. His powerwall was touted as "being able to power your house in case of a power outtage and only cost 3k" while one powerwall is indeed going to cost about 3k you will need multiple of them to power your house over even a moderate power outtage. after you buy all the other stuff needed to tie it to the grid and into your house you are well over the 3k cost as well. they have a way to go. and that battery plant they are talking about? not their tech. they are building panasonic batteries in that plant to use in their equipment.

because it is too unpredictable and expensive to short

it might in several years. right now it is only slightly more cost effective than other methods that are no where near cost effective unless you are out in the boonies and can't grid tie your system. Storage units DO exist they are just not cost effective. As I stated above their powerwall system is not as advertised and the tesla leg humpers ignore that fact.

he always over promises and under delivers. my system cost 37K to install, half of his roof cost and I put out almost double what his 78K dollar roof costs. Thankfully I got rebates and the tax credits or it would not have been worth me putting it in. his roof systems are going to be the same way but the rebates and tax credits won't be there so it will not have the install base that he claims. that is why he bought solar city to give him a head start, but solar citys rep is crap and anyone that does their homework wouldn't touch one of their systems.

and that advertisement is overstated and false.

now with the system being talking about here. I have a 2300sq ft house and a 10kw system and I still have a small electric bill most months because I overbuilt there are a few months where they pay me or we break even I really don't think their systems as currently envisioned will be able to do that. you have to have setbacks due to fire codes and they can take several hundred square feet off the available roof space in some cities. My ROI on my system was about 4.5 years the ROI on a system where electricty is less than 10cents/kw is going to be longer and you have to take into consideration that not all places are going to be getting rebates or tax credits so that will increace the ROI. Right now they are talking an ROI of 11 years on a Tesla roof, which is crazy talk for 99% of the country

I am watching these guys as well it will be interesting to see where they go hopefully not in the toilet

you have it right. esp. in SoCal. with the tiered system they have most people put up panels to keep them out of tier 3 since that is where the cost really is. without rebates and tax credits solar does not make sense for most folks

it will also be interesting to see where these go ... I wish them well but my money says it will be 3-5 years rather than 1-2 years talked about in the article. it would be nice to see it less tho

I'd be interested to know how it's "too simplistic".

I don't own a Tesla/electric car or plan to soon. But if I did, that's exactly what would happen.

Simply put it is very rare for me to drive over 200 miles per day. This seems true of most people that I know as well. And when I do drive over 200 miles per day, it is just barely over that (approx 4 hour drive there and back to STL/KC). Even that drive would only take one 20-30 minute charge to get there and back. So what, plug in and go get a soda/walk around a bit.

And if I did own an electric car, if for some reason I was going to drive a long distance, I would take the wife's fusion or our truck.

It really is that simple. I can honestly say I cannot remember ever (really, ever in like 18 years ) driving more than about 4-5 hours in one day on a non business trip (rental car there). We just don't drive long distances...we fly. And that being the case....I would spend less time charging at remote stations than I do now pumping gas year to year.

This whole range thing seems to me to be a complete non issue that people haven't really thought thru. Obviously if you were a traveling salesman it isn't for you. But the average driver really is making multiple 5+ hour trips per year in their only automobile? I really question that.