14 ms·

I believe this article completely ignores the product side of the story. Elon doesn't pitch, he builds. His products are significantly better than market alter

I believe this article completely ignores the product side of the story. Elon doesn't pitch, he builds. His products are significantly better than market alternatives, with a steady momentum of improvement over time. In the unofficial biography there's the story of how Tesla pulled an unlikely funding from Daimler. The Daimler executives visiting Tesla were unimpressed, skeptical and bored to death by the PowerPoints. Then the Tesla team took them for a ride in the electrified Smart they had built in a hurry. All the executives stepped out of it with a smile. The check arrived later. It was about the product, not the "save the earth" narrative.

Cancan82 5y ago
This is a huge point - promoters works up until a point - but eventually you have to deliver on the promise or people walk. Somehow, Elon delivers on damn near all his major promises (with delays and whatnot, but stil)
- germinalphrase 5y ago
  You could drive a bus through that “whatnot”.
- justapassenger 5y ago
  Elon is great at setting ambitious goals and later changing them to be less ambitious. He gets hype from initial goals, and rarely he’s being hold accountable for what’s actually delivered. And quite a few products he delivered are really cool, not gonna deny it. But they are nowhere close to what they were hyped to be.
  - taneq 5y ago
    This is because his initial promises are so completely unbelievable that even getting in the same ballpark is an amazing accomplishment. Barring a couple of obvious outliers (looking at you, FSD) he's typically within an order of magnitude of his completely insane predictions. Line that performance up against anyone else and the difference is stark.
    - cinntaile 5y ago
      Who do you want to compare with? I don't know that many famous people that make completely unbelievable predictions that don't pan out, do you have any examples?
    - justapassenger 5y ago
      What insane predictions? SpaceX landing rockets? It’s really cool, but no one reasonable said you cannot land rockets. People questioned if it’s worth it. And this question still remains - they massively overestimated size of the market (they were planning to have launches weekly or more often). Instead they have rare commercial launches and they use it for internal project, that has also lots of questions about profitability. But it successfully kicks can down the road. Electric car wasn’t questioned if it’s possible (expect for some freaks). And first mass market EV wasn’t even from them. Leaf (with its many flaws) until not long ago was best selling EV combined. It was questioned if you can make in a way that profit, range and scale can meet. And Tesla still struggles at all of them. Boring tunnels? Look at the tunnel in Las Vegas and tell me with a straight face that this is a future of transportation.
      - therealx 5y ago
        To be fair, that’s one of the worst tunnels in any city. I’d rather drive into NYC.
      - nickik 5y ago
        > It’s really cool, but no one reasonable said you cannot land rockets. People questioned if it’s worth it. Not true. > And this question still remains - they massively overestimated size of the market (they were planning to have launches weekly or more often). No it doesn't. Even launching less often it would have been worth it. And of course they did it the first time only a few years ago, the impact of dropping prices in launch are only really now starting to impact the industry. They are launching every 1-2 weeks. If SpaceX didn't do Starlink there would be 4-5 other companies wanting create such constellations. Many other large constellations are in planning. > But it successfully kicks can down the road. It made something possible that wasn't possible before and that was the whole point. > Boring tunnels? Look at the tunnel in Las Vegas and tell me with a straight face that this is a future of transportation. Its amazing how people look at the first prototype of something and make judgment. The first roadster was a not really a great car. The Falcon 1 wasn't really that great a rocket. If you said about the Falcon 1 'this is the future of rocketry'? No, Starship is where the whole development has lead to. Boring company public infrastructure company that is 5 years old and born out of a basically a hobby project. And they already done quite a bit in that time and are winning competitive bids for other projects. Most companies that want to build transportation infrastructure spend decades in project planning. Based on first principle you try to figure out the right solution. Then start building prototype and product and improve them significantly with each generation. What matters is speed of innovation and having the right conceptual idea.
- cma 5y ago
  How about his promise to solve the Flint water crisis for any home above FDA levels? Promise to manufacture ventilators? Promise to return to the Thailand cave and demonstrate his submarine will work? Solar roof tiles delivered by slowly growing them to near the size of traditional panels, and not in anyway cheaper than a normal roof. Promise to build a rollercoaster with a loop made with cars on rails and frozen yogurt stands if employees don't unionize? Vegas Loop delivery vs what was sold initially? Promise to deliver proof of his claims against Unsworth?
nnamtr 5y ago
Is his stuff really that good? I can't shake the feeling that he has a strong tendency to exaggerate. https://www.theverge.com/2021/5/7/22424592/tesla-elon-musk-autopilot-dmv-fsd-exaggeration https://www.theverge.com/2021/5/7/22424592/tesla-elon-musk-a... https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnbbrandon/2021/04/13/elon-musks-the-boring-company-is-starting-to-look-like-a-dumb-idea/?sh=2e65b2d17562 https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnbbrandon/2021/04/13/elon-mu...
- albntomat0 5y ago
  Both can be true. SpaceX had the first reusable first stage, and Tesla provided large improvements in electric vehicles. Maybe those wouldn't have been possible for someone lacking the confidence/exaggeration of Elon Musk at the helm of the companies.
  - cma 5y ago
    The space shuttle boosters were reusable. It had a reusable first and second stage other than the tank.
    - whoisthemachine 5y ago
      According to this article [0], the cost per flight was ~$1.2B. Yes, it was re-usable, but was still very costly. [0] "The average cost per launch was about $1.2 billion (in 2010 dollars) during the shuttle's operational years from 1982 to 2010." https://www.space.com/11358-nasa-space-shuttle-program-cost-30-years.html https://www.space.com/11358-nasa-space-shuttle-program-cost-...
      - cma 5y ago
        Yes but they were working with first of its kind technology from ~50years ago and could launch 7 astronauts. That it was expensive doesn't make SpaceX first.
        TeMPOraL 5y ago
gajjanag 5y ago
You should define "better" carefully. Even today, there is no Tesla vehicle that comes close to, e.g., a Toyota Camry/Prius on the cost per mile front once you account for depreciation and maintenance.
- reasonabl_human 5y ago
  Just curious, do you have numbers to support this? If you purchased a model 3 with both state and federal rebates a year or two ago, in a number of states the short range RWD model was the sticker price of a nice civic. And Biden has frequently floated massive tax breaks for EV purchases to come…. The maintenance is extremely infrequent and cost of travel per mile is cheap for electric, like an order of magnitude cheaper than a typical consumer car, not sure about a Prius. Depreciation is definitely in teslas favor- the cars hold their value incredibly well compared to most every other vehicle…
  - mellavora 5y ago
    I notice you mention -state rebates -federal rebates -massive tax breaks which makes it sound like government subsidies are the equalizer, not the engineering at Tesla.
    - reasonabl_human 5y ago
      Not at all. The engineering at Tesla makes a civic / Prius look like a child’s toy.. I brought up the tax rebates because ‘cost of ownership’ was the metric discussed, and taxes are certainly involved with that for any EV since the gov incentivized ownership. The max rebate was ~7k if you lived in California and were on the first wave of federal credits I think? And the difference between a model 3 and a civic / Prius is way more than 7k, although that is subjective. Cost of ownership is objective.
      - deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
  - 5y ago

Cancan82 5y ago

This is a huge point - promoters works up until a point - but eventually you have to deliver on the promise or people walk. Somehow, Elon delivers on damn near all his major promises (with delays and whatnot, but stil)

germinalphrase 5y ago
You could drive a bus through that “whatnot”.
justapassenger 5y ago
Elon is great at setting ambitious goals and later changing them to be less ambitious. He gets hype from initial goals, and rarely he’s being hold accountable for what’s actually delivered. And quite a few products he delivered are really cool, not gonna deny it. But they are nowhere close to what they were hyped to be.
- taneq 5y ago
  This is because his initial promises are so completely unbelievable that even getting in the same ballpark is an amazing accomplishment. Barring a couple of obvious outliers (looking at you, FSD) he's typically within an order of magnitude of his completely insane predictions. Line that performance up against anyone else and the difference is stark.
  - cinntaile 5y ago
    Who do you want to compare with? I don't know that many famous people that make completely unbelievable predictions that don't pan out, do you have any examples?
  - justapassenger 5y ago
    What insane predictions? SpaceX landing rockets? It’s really cool, but no one reasonable said you cannot land rockets. People questioned if it’s worth it. And this question still remains - they massively overestimated size of the market (they were planning to have launches weekly or more often). Instead they have rare commercial launches and they use it for internal project, that has also lots of questions about profitability. But it successfully kicks can down the road. Electric car wasn’t questioned if it’s possible (expect for some freaks). And first mass market EV wasn’t even from them. Leaf (with its many flaws) until not long ago was best selling EV combined. It was questioned if you can make in a way that profit, range and scale can meet. And Tesla still struggles at all of them. Boring tunnels? Look at the tunnel in Las Vegas and tell me with a straight face that this is a future of transportation.
    - therealx 5y ago
      To be fair, that’s one of the worst tunnels in any city. I’d rather drive into NYC.
    - nickik 5y ago
      > It’s really cool, but no one reasonable said you cannot land rockets. People questioned if it’s worth it. Not true. > And this question still remains - they massively overestimated size of the market (they were planning to have launches weekly or more often). No it doesn't. Even launching less often it would have been worth it. And of course they did it the first time only a few years ago, the impact of dropping prices in launch are only really now starting to impact the industry. They are launching every 1-2 weeks. If SpaceX didn't do Starlink there would be 4-5 other companies wanting create such constellations. Many other large constellations are in planning. > But it successfully kicks can down the road. It made something possible that wasn't possible before and that was the whole point. > Boring tunnels? Look at the tunnel in Las Vegas and tell me with a straight face that this is a future of transportation. Its amazing how people look at the first prototype of something and make judgment. The first roadster was a not really a great car. The Falcon 1 wasn't really that great a rocket. If you said about the Falcon 1 'this is the future of rocketry'? No, Starship is where the whole development has lead to. Boring company public infrastructure company that is 5 years old and born out of a basically a hobby project. And they already done quite a bit in that time and are winning competitive bids for other projects. Most companies that want to build transportation infrastructure spend decades in project planning. Based on first principle you try to figure out the right solution. Then start building prototype and product and improve them significantly with each generation. What matters is speed of innovation and having the right conceptual idea.
cma 5y ago
How about his promise to solve the Flint water crisis for any home above FDA levels? Promise to manufacture ventilators? Promise to return to the Thailand cave and demonstrate his submarine will work? Solar roof tiles delivered by slowly growing them to near the size of traditional panels, and not in anyway cheaper than a normal roof. Promise to build a rollercoaster with a loop made with cars on rails and frozen yogurt stands if employees don't unionize? Vegas Loop delivery vs what was sold initially? Promise to deliver proof of his claims against Unsworth?

nnamtr 5y ago

Is his stuff really that good? I can't shake the feeling that he has a strong tendency to exaggerate. https://www.theverge.com/2021/5/7/22424592/tesla-elon-musk-autopilot-dmv-fsd-exaggeration https://www.theverge.com/2021/5/7/22424592/tesla-elon-musk-a... https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnbbrandon/2021/04/13/elon-musks-the-boring-company-is-starting-to-look-like-a-dumb-idea/?sh=2e65b2d17562 https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnbbrandon/2021/04/13/elon-mu...

albntomat0 5y ago
Both can be true. SpaceX had the first reusable first stage, and Tesla provided large improvements in electric vehicles. Maybe those wouldn't have been possible for someone lacking the confidence/exaggeration of Elon Musk at the helm of the companies.
- cma 5y ago
  The space shuttle boosters were reusable. It had a reusable first and second stage other than the tank.
  - whoisthemachine 5y ago
    According to this article [0], the cost per flight was ~$1.2B. Yes, it was re-usable, but was still very costly. [0] "The average cost per launch was about $1.2 billion (in 2010 dollars) during the shuttle's operational years from 1982 to 2010." https://www.space.com/11358-nasa-space-shuttle-program-cost-30-years.html https://www.space.com/11358-nasa-space-shuttle-program-cost-...
    - cma 5y ago
      Yes but they were working with first of its kind technology from ~50years ago and could launch 7 astronauts. That it was expensive doesn't make SpaceX first.
      - TeMPOraL 5y ago

gajjanag 5y ago

You should define "better" carefully. Even today, there is no Tesla vehicle that comes close to, e.g., a Toyota Camry/Prius on the cost per mile front once you account for depreciation and maintenance.

reasonabl_human 5y ago
Just curious, do you have numbers to support this? If you purchased a model 3 with both state and federal rebates a year or two ago, in a number of states the short range RWD model was the sticker price of a nice civic. And Biden has frequently floated massive tax breaks for EV purchases to come…. The maintenance is extremely infrequent and cost of travel per mile is cheap for electric, like an order of magnitude cheaper than a typical consumer car, not sure about a Prius. Depreciation is definitely in teslas favor- the cars hold their value incredibly well compared to most every other vehicle…
- mellavora 5y ago
  I notice you mention -state rebates -federal rebates -massive tax breaks which makes it sound like government subsidies are the equalizer, not the engineering at Tesla.
  - reasonabl_human 5y ago
    Not at all. The engineering at Tesla makes a civic / Prius look like a child’s toy.. I brought up the tax rebates because ‘cost of ownership’ was the metric discussed, and taxes are certainly involved with that for any EV since the gov incentivized ownership. The max rebate was ~7k if you lived in California and were on the first wave of federal credits I think? And the difference between a model 3 and a civic / Prius is way more than 7k, although that is subjective. Cost of ownership is objective.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
- 5y ago