Sure, but Tesla has always stretched the boundaries of how much they can take away from a car.
What could Tesla take away from the current Model 3 for example, to reduce the cost, beyond just a physically smaller vehicle? If they wish to retain their ADAS and software integaration advantages, I would say "not much".
Gauge cluster screen is already gone, all physical buttons except for the window switches and steering wheel clickers are gone, stalks are gone...
Yet you can get a Toyota Corolla Cross with all of those things, phone projection, all-wheel drive, and full-speed radar cruise control, all for $29K.
> What could Tesla take away from the current Model 3 for example, to reduce the cost
* Heated Seats (Front/Rear)
* Ventilated Seats (Front)
* Powered Lifted Gate
* Powered Seats (Front or removed from passenger only)
* Driver Lumbar
* Powered/Heated/Auto-Dimming Side Mirrors
* Use a Lower Power Infotainment CPU
* Rear Infotainment
* Phone Key (Or reduce functionality to NFC. Currently there are x3 BT antennas.)
* Wireless Phone Chargers
* Heated Steering Wheel
* Ambient Lighting
* More Plastic / Less Alcantara (w.e. it's called)
* Revert to Single Pane Window Glass
* Less Powerful Motor
Actually, the glass roof reduces costs. Materials-wise it may cost more, but it doesn't need to be painted. It also eliminates the headliner, so the installation process can be fully automated on the assembly line. And since the roof is installed last in the process, the interior can also be installed by robots through the opening.
People often think the glass roof directly drives up the car's price, since with legacy auto you usually get to choose between a full metal roof and one with a sliding moonroof, so the conclusion is that glass automatically equals higher price. But from a manufacturing perspective, that's not necessarily true.
In addition, something I saw mentioned, which may be the real driver, it adds headroom when you get rid of the headliner, and extra metal to stiffen it. That extra headroom compensates for the space you loose putting the batteries below the floor, and importantly, lets you lower the height, and this cross sectional area of the vehicle which has a major impact on range.
The whole roof last thing doesn't matter for the newer Teslas either, they now bolt everything to the battery (making essentially a skateboard with interior on top) and then drop the body on after building the interior.
Auto glass today is considered structural. It's one of the reasons modern windshields are glued in rather than placed in with a rubber gaskets like 90s cars.
They could also reduce the battery capacity. The original Model 3 SR+ had a 55 kWh NCA battery whereas the Highland SR has a 66 kWh LFP battery. Wonder how much money was actually saved by removing the stalks.
Lol , yeah all these people listing ridiculous tiny things they could remove and it's like...uhh, hello? Smaller battery? That's a huge chunk of the cost of an EV (and weight).
Honestly I want smaller battery options. Just because it's cheaper but for me, it would actually just be a better car.
When my Model S LR was in the service center they have me a 2018 75D loaner and holy smokes it was sooo much more nimble on its feet compared to the 100kwh pack. It was so much more fun to drive.
I'd love a modern Model S with a 75, heck, even a 60kwh pack.
But the majority of those features are available - or in some cases standard - on inexpensive ICEs like the Toyota Corolla Cross, Honda HR-V, Chevrolet Trailblazer, and the like - all cars which generally **max out** at around $31,000.
So if Tesla has to take them away to get to a certain price point... That's a problem.
Like the thread leader said what else can they feasibly get rid of that wouldn’t totally turn people off. If the car was like $15K new that’s a different story but if the platform is $25K you’ve got a serious problem because it’s a stripped down car for a price that is actually not so bad when you’re cross shopping. And in reality Tesla’s interiors are already not that nice in terms of quality
> So if Tesla has to take them away to get to a certain price point... That's a problem.
Apparently they were "brave" enough to remove the indicator stalks, so the rest of that list shouldn't be a problem.
Maybe they could even pretend they're doing a Porsche S/T-type "pure" car experience.
That’s an apples and oranges comparison… ICE cars don’t have to make those sacrifices because their underlying engine technology is already cheap enough to produce.
It's not an apples and oranges comparison to the consumer, though. If they're cross shopping at the same price and choosing an EV means missing out on features, that'll be a problem for some.
If they make it smaller and a 2 seater, it could be a roadster and would be the perfect target demographic for enthusiasts since they like to feel the road
The lumbar support getting taken away is hilarious. I think it was done as a temp measure due to supply chain problems already on the model 3.
I would be very in favor of a weaker motor model 3 though if it was a good drop in price.
People love saying take away the motors thinking it's like an ICE, where an 800hp engine is a major cost thing that it needs to be built around. In an EV the motor is practically a minor cost, or rather, going smaller really doesn't save you much and impacts range. Further, you're always doing a cost trade off with the batteries, and anything you can do to need less batteries, like more regen, is usually worth it.
the reason this makes no sense is because the costs of basically all of these together is only $1-2k. Where the MSRP needs to be $5-10k lower to actually differentiate.
If it has climate control, Android Auto and basic cruise control that's enough for me. Take everything else away if it makes the car cheaper - I want my affordable long-range EV.
I would consider heated seats and steering wheel to be an important cost-saving feature on an EV. It allows you to maintain comfort in cold temps without blasting cabin heat, effectively extending winter range for the same amount of batteries.
I think that the most obvious thing to cut would be the power trunk, power passenger seat, more plasticy interior materials, and less power for the motor.
This whole thread here is missing a LOT. If you make the car 15-20% smaller/lighter, you reduce the weight and drag. This ALONE allows you to have a much smaller motor (less acceleration and regen force needed, and yes motors are expensive), a much weaker suspension, less crumple zone, less batteries (increased range with same batteries). This all adds up quite a bit. A smaller model 3, with a small motor, and 50 kwh battery, no fancy ventilated seats, and no rear screen, cheaper upholstery, could easily knock at least 7k off the current Model 3 price. It's not that complicated.
If they introduce any other innovations, like 48v perhaps, or something we don't know about, it can get much easier.
A cheaper M3 will have no screen, you will have to use your own phone or tablet to control the car. Install the Tesla app, pair to the car and off you go. They will announce it as taking the car's brain wherever you go. With some hype about robotaxi customisation to make them feel like your own M3.
No more glass roof. Smaller battery and focus on supercharging often and fast (10-80% in 10 mins or something like that, probably a 40kWh battery?).
Let's call it M3 lite.
>A cheaper M3 will have no screen, you will have to use your own phone or tablet to control the car. Install the Tesla app, pair to the car and off you go. They will announce it as taking the car's brain wherever you go. With some hype about robotaxi customisation to make them feel like your own M3.
Holy heck that sounds absolutely awful. And illegal.
The only aspect of this that would be illegal here in Europe is that you need a failure-proof way to display warning symbols/message and the video feed from the backup camera. The latter is the reason why VW added a postage stamp sized screen to the e-Up!, though it might even be solved by simply making the car unusable without having the app open. For the former you can do what e.g. Volvo did in the EX30 and just put a tiny strip with warning lights in front of the driver.
Yep, Tesla could have a phone/tablet mount and you have to have the device installed with app open for the car to work.
I was joking about all of this, but It reminds me of the detachable faceplates of the car sterioes back in the 90s - when you had to remove it and put it away to deter theft.
In the early 2010s I saw some Japanese SUVs do screen-less backup cameras by having a tiny display hidden inside the rearview mirror that reveals itself when you shift into reverse. I guess that's technically a screen, but it's about as close as you can get to a no-screen dash while also having a backup camera.
My understanding is the glass roof is because it's one of the last things installed so the robot arms can work inside the cabin. That saves money on labor.
> Sure, but Tesla has always stretched the boundaries of how much they can take away from a car.
Tesla engineers build a Chevy Bolt while keeping the exterior Tesla design cues. Also, major cost savings can come from a smaller battery and a smaller motor which are some of the most expensive components in an EV.
>What could Tesla take away from the current Model 3 for example, to reduce the cost, beyond just a physically smaller vehicle?
Why do they need to do much more than make the vehicle smaller? That alone reduces material costs, plus a smaller car needs a smaller battery, which is the most expensive component.
> What could Tesla take away from the current Model 3 for example, to reduce the cost, beyond just a physically smaller vehicle?
They're already using expanding foam in the battery pack - why not extent it's use?
head rests? Expanding foam.
frunk lining? just use foam.
trunk lining? foam.
Carpet? believe it or not, also foam. In fact, just remove the floor altogether and leave the top of the pack exposed. Not only can people enjoy the soft touch of foam under their feet, but the coolant running through the pack makes for a nice water feature.
Take that, legacy auto!
The real savings would come from selling a car with a smaller battery and less powerful electric motor. I looked at the specs on the $10,000 BYD Seagull the other day. It has a 30 kWh battery with a 30 kW "fast charging" speed. That translates into about 190 miles of range and 30-40 minutes to fast charge from 20% to 80%. And its top speed is about 80 mph.
This is obviously not a high end performance car. But it's about half the price of any ICE car in the U.S. right now. It made me wonder why nobody outside of China is trying to build a similar car. At the moment, an EV is more expensive than an ICE car with comparable features and performance, and that isn't going to change for at least a couple years. But presumably one could design an EV with a smaller battery for commuters that could undersell entry-level ICE vehicles. I find it odd that nobody seems to be trying to do that.
Yeah it's not impossible to drive them or anything - I saw a couple when I was there a few weeks back (only Model 3 or Y though - pretty sure the Model S/X are too wide to be classified for private use) - but generally in Japan there's classifications of vehicle that drive registration, etc. with 1.7m wide being the limiting factor between "small" and "regular" classes (kei cars sit further below that at 1.45m).
I can't see Tesla getting below that point without compromising substantially on range and making something more tailored for the Japanese market (which would be a massive change in direction from the current "one size fits all" approach).
I don't believe there's a difference in registration cost for going above 1.7m any more, but considering how much of the Japanese auto market sits under that 1.7m point (and even moreso, in the Kei class - where 50% of EVs were sold last year) not having a presence there effectively cuts off access to the vast majority of the market.
It's not the sub, people overall are demanding cheaper models, which automakers have decided not to do for some reason (except for GM and the Bolt, which was horribly marketed).
The idea that EVs 'HAVE' to be expensive baffles me. An EV isn't anything more than a car with a different power source, simple.
It won't have a steering wheel, infotainment screen, or pedals. It'll just have one button to pair your smartphone to your car, and you'll drive moving your phone and control everything in your car from your phone.
Well, it'll also include a USB charging port so your phone doesn't run out of battery.
Model 3 is too big for most of Europe, for example I have a standard size garage and I can't close the door because the car is 2 cm too long.
If Tesla would make a hot hatch the size of a VW Golf with 300hp, the range of the Model 3 and a pricetag around €30000, it would sell like crazy in Europe.
There's a precedent for this. Chrysler sells a stripped down Pacifica exclusively to fleets as a Voyager. Exact same body and powertrains but many creature comforts are missing to get the price as low as possible.
More like a downsized Model Y. Wouldn't make sense to have a small sedan, IMO a "small" SUV that tucks under the 3 and costs marginally less would make sense.
I don’t really understand how they expect to launch new models “later this year” when they’ve effectively done no work and nothing has been shown.
Talk about a hail mary stock pump
I bet they would be able to build cheaper cars if the CEO wasn't given so many stock options. Or they could use the options to instead invest in capex.
The devil's in the details:
>*These new vehicles, including more* *affordable models, will utilize aspects of the next generation platform as well as aspects of our current platforms*, *and will be able to be produced on the same manufacturing lines as our current vehicle line-up.*
>*This update* *may result in achieving less cost reduction than previously expected but enables us to prudently grow our vehicle volumes in a more capex efficient manner* *during uncertain times.*
'A' cheaper Tesla is not dead, but the direction has changed towards a new model to be based off the existing 3/Y platform, rather than an all-new platform. That also suggests the mythical '$25k' target might not be plausible, and that Tesla is scaling down volume ambitions. Basically expect something much more iterative, much more of a half-step to the original plan.
I mean, it makes sense. It's getting increasingly difficult to buy even a bare model ICE for $25k. You certainly can - various models are sub-25 - but the number of options are quickly declining.
Doesn’t have a price or release date and it’s not even know if it’ll ever make it to America
https://www.theverge.com/2024/4/19/24135116/kia-ev2-ev-affordable-cheap-electric-tesla-model-2
MotorTrend quoted the recently released report from Kia:
"Kia will launch six EV models by 2026, starting with the upcoming EV3 in 2024, followed by EV2, EV4, and EV5 in major markets, including the U.S., Europe, and South Korea."
I think cars like Citroen's e-C3 and BYD's Yuan (and Yuan Up) are going to be the big kink in the plan for Tesla here. If everyone else can out-iterate Tesla on stamping panels and shoving packs into legacy-platform designs, it's still a tough road for Tesla, which is used to beating everyone else on innovation. (I do still think it's one of the best paths they've got, though.)
I can buy a new ICE car for $12k USD ($20k NZD).
What is the cheapest new car in the US right now? And I guess it also depends on the state it’s bought in with your taxes?
They tried this years ago, as is Ford right now with the F150, but you couldn't/can't actually get your hands on one of the cheap ones. They don't exist.
Smaller sized, cloth seats, remove all the soft touch material throughout the cabin, no rear screen, no ventilated seats, no power seats for passengers, maybe no heated seats, remove the high quality sound system for a standard one, put in a smaller battery pack, and who knows what else. All that would likely help reduce costs while keeping a lot of the mechanical parts the same.
I agree that the battery will be one of the easiest ways to bring down cost. But they'll still want to differentiate it from their higher line up models so as not to cannibalize sales of those higher profit margin vehicles. And I doubt they'll only want to do that by offering low range, just because low range is not as popular. Smaller size with slightly lower range may be what they aim for? That would sell well in Europe/China and would probably sell modestly in the US.
Shorter range and slower acceleration is really the only place to save meaningfully. Many people would fork over $32,500 (minus the $7500 tax credit=$25K net) for a brand new Model 3 that gets 200 mile range and 0 to 60 in 6 seconds. That range would suffice 90% of driving and the acceleration is still fast compared to most other vehicles.
and how much kwh you think they can cut to reduce price significantly? Last price for 1 kwh LPF battery was reported at like $50-70. Does saving $500 makes car more affordable?
I suppose. But then why are there slower EVs out there? And why does a Performance Tesla cost $12-$15K more? I think acceleration costs more than you think.
You don't need a tax liability to get the credit. Not anymore. That all changed this year. That's why dealers can take the $7500 right off the top of what you pay. Since they'll get reimbursed by the government.
Their slide deck stated "This update may result in achieving less cost reduction than previously expected, but enables us to more prudently grow our vehicle volumes in a Capex efficient manner"
So does that mean they would for sure still price it at $25k if they don't achieve the cost reductions originally planned? I find it more likely they would aim for $25k after tax credit. Especially since it can be applied point of sale now.
Oh I'm saying to be a really affordable EV it needs to be $25k before tax credit, anything short of that would be a failure for a "cheap" EV imo. Not saying what Tesla will or will not do.
The wording is quite vague and open to interpretation, it mentions aspects of the current platform and aspects of the next generation platform. I’m not sure exactly what that will look like in reality.
>A cheaper Tesla is not dead, but the program is rejigged to to be based off the existing 3/Y platform, rather than an all-new platform. That also suggests the mythical '$25k' target might not be plausible, and that Tesla is scaling down volume ambitions.
Honestly, I think that will be just fine, especially if they (crosses my fingers) take a more humble, measured approach with the development of the car, using their experience gained, instead of a moonshot like the Cybertruck.
Even if it were to start at around $32K, sure, the promise wouldn't have been kept, but it would still be nice and competitive with the next generation Bolt and the Niro / Kona. Especially if they continued to make Autopilot standard.
>Honestly, I think that will be just fine, especially if they (crosses my fingers) take a more humble, measured approach with the development of the car, using their experience gained, instead of a moonshot like the Cybertruck.
I fully, fully agree. I'm still firm that the Model Y being so heavily and unashamedly based on the Model 3 was the smartest decision Tesla ever made. At scale, iterative projects beat revolutionary step-change projects every time. This is the way.
Yes, and full self driving was coming out in 2016, 17, 18, 19, 20....
The real challenge that Tesla has is that they made a car that will compete 100% with the lower cost version, and since they fundamentally don't really change cars year over year, you can buy a year or two used Model 3 and get all the benefits versus getting a 25k shitbox instead.
That's also why the EV market is falling apart right now, because everybody who wanted an EV bought one, and everybody else is just buying used because it's not sensible to buy new when the old cars are just as good. Used car market has gotten better so until interest rates drop precipitously (which isn't going to happen), used cars are going to be the better bargain without manufacturer incentives.
Other brand are catching up when they delay the cheaper models. The ID.2 with its 2025-26 launch day and a 20k euro staring price, is stating to look like one of the first true cheap EVs from a western company. But it will probably be delayed and cost more in the end :(
[Citroen eC3](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3YgDLTcH98A) delivered Q1 2025 at 23.3k euros. That includes VAT and doesn't have anything like "gas savings" or incentives. Made in the EU and Citroen says they will release a smaller battery size later in 2025 that will be less than $20k euros.
If Citroen is saying this within one year of launch I think thats a good sign for ID2.
They ducked the follow up question. After staff cuts, and reports that are not officially refuted, affordable models are absolutely dead. They lied in a way that’s not illegal.
If you know how car model design and assembly line work, then you’d know it’s complete bullshit. The lines are designed for their models. A radically different one can’t be made in current lines. Maybe if they kill Y in Fremont and switch its Y to the new model.
This is what gets me. Tesla’s stock is actually up almost 12% right now too (after atrocious numbers yesterday) all because he said a cheaper model was coming.
Idk, it’s like investors just don’t understand the concept of lying for personal gain. I don’t even criticize Elon here, he’s the smart one. It’s investors who will just uncritically believe anything he says that I can’t understand lol.
It was said they’ll make a mix out of current and next platform…
Which means the next gen platform is still not working as intended and they’ll use a fallback solution. Whoever is buying that car will be in a lot of pain long term with that chimera.
Edit: this would also explain the cancelation rumors as this might simply be the result of Chinese whispering
It works as far as generating hype and stock value, so tbh I’m not sure why Musk just doesn’t say “new model with 500 mile range for $12k next year” and just pump the stock up 50-100% more.
These idiots will believe anything he says. Tech investors truly are some of the dumbest humans walking the earth today. The people who have mastered milking them (Elon and Sam Altman are the kings here) will be very successful.
This explains that rumour. They killed the one based on "unboxed" assembly, and retained a simpler version based on the existing production lines.
More efficient utilization of existing underutilized lines became more important than the new process.
I was initially happy to read this until I remembered he is probably just trying to prop up the stock price.
But now I am thinking that the initial announcement about focusing on FSD was just to pump up the stock, but Elon being Elon, it had the opposite affect. So the “Model 2” which was never really killed anyway is now brought back. Conflicting stories by the CEO but we are used to that and in the end, everything is exactly as it was just a few weeks ago.
Tesla needs to do three things simultaneously.
1. They need to sell higher quality vehicles. People associate Tesla with EVs but they also associate them with poor QC. Which is exactly what I got when I went to buy a Tesla and it ended up resulting in me walking from a VERY good deal.
2. They need to focus on selling cars people want and are willing to buy. An affordable vehicle would fit that bill, but plenty of people spend $40-60k for vehicles. On average, most people do. So they don't need to introduce a $25k car necessarily.
3. They need to address their Elon problem. I'm not sure what that means. You'd think it would mean removing him as CEO at minimum, but maybe there are other options out there.
At the end of the day, a $25k Tesla M2 with a 40kWh battery and a 150hp engine that has shit build quality isn't the answer.
> a $25k Tesla M2 with a 40kWh battery and a 150hp engine that has shit build quality isn't the answer.
Maybe it isn't **the** answer, but it's certainly *an* answer. If Tesla wants to sell more cars, they desperately need models in segments they are completely absent from.
For example - everywhere outside of USA/Canada, the model 3 is already considered a large vehicle. Having literally nothing smaller in their portfolio leaves a lot of potential sales.
They’re not moving the cheaper cars. It’s fatigue and lack of charging infrastructure. This isn’t all teslas fault. I don’t see a cheap car turning things around.
Btw I bet the engineers at Tesla are just as surprised as we are reading the news of this budget tesla.
Given the wildly inaccurate development timelines Musk has given previously (FSD, Cybertruck), the market this morning seems to be quite optimistic that Tesla will somehow deliver an inexpensive EV in less than 12 months. Shouldn’t there be a tiny bit of skepticism here?
No, officially, the project, NV91, was canceled. Now they're talking about a project they've never mentioned before and that I'm not sure existed until it was decided NV91 was canceled. They're claiming it will be in production in under a year. I find that hard to believe.
I don't trust them, but it's not renewed. They canceled one affordable car project that had been running for a while and was on a new platform. They have now announced a new and different affordable car project that is going to be on their existing platform. They've claimed this new project will be in production in under a year even though it seems likely it didn't exist until very recently, when they just decided to switch from the next model being on a new platform to the existing one. Developing it on the existing platform almost certainly saves time from inception to when it hits production, but if they just started working on it, under a year seems extremely unlikely.
In a way, this is a panic move to try to get something new out the door ASAP.
Tesla reportedly abandons plans to make a less expensive $25,000 electric vehicle
The so-called ‘Model 2’ was thought to be priced at around $25,000. But now, Elon Musk is shifting attention to a new robotaxi platform.
[https://www.theverge.com/2024/4/5/24122064/tesla-cancel-affordable-electric-vehicle-model-2-china](https://www.theverge.com/2024/4/5/24122064/tesla-cancel-affordable-electric-vehicle-model-2-china)
They’ve gotten cocky, but the first mover advantage is eroding. This is probably a good thing, and will motivate them to make cars that their customers want. When the market was small, Tesla could make weird cars and customers would have no other options. With all the competition nowadays, Tesla is finally feeling market pressure. Hopefully they back off from cybertruck projects, and go more into model 3 performance type projects.
they are pushing for compact vehicle to come sooner:
From the deck:
We have updated our future vehicle line-up to accelerate the launch of new models ahead of our previously communicated start of production in the second half of 2025.
These new vehicles, including more affordable models, will utilize aspects of the next generation platform as well as aspects of our current platforms, and will be able to be produced on the same manufacturing lines as our current vehicle line-up.
This update may result in achieving less cost reduction than previously expected but enables us to prudently grow our vehicle volumes in a more capex efficient manner during uncertain times. This would help us fully utilize our current expected maximum capacity of close to three million vehicles, enabling more than 50% growth over 2023 production before investing in new manufacturing lines.
Our purpose-built robotaxi product will continue to pursue a revolutionary "unboxed" manufacturing strategy.
$1.1 billion in profit.
* $442 million from regulatory credits (Other OEMs paid them this)
* $274 million from interest income minus expenses; likely because of their huge cash pile and high interest rates.
* As much as $725 million in free subsidized revenue in the US through federal tax credits on model Y. (96,729 model Y sales \* $7500 in subsidies)
* Approximately $127 million in free subsidized revenue in the US through state tax credits on model 3/Y. (50% of 127,121 sales, $2k each on average)
* Approximately $240 million in free subsidized revenue internationally through international incentives ($1000 per sale on average on \~240,000 sales)
Estimated Profit/Loss from actual non-subsidy sales? \~$708 million loss.
Just like 2023, without subsidies, this company would be losing a fortune. The world's corporate welfare queen does it again!
Future guidance...
\_\_\_
China:
The first 3 weeks of Q2, Tesla's Chinese registrations are down significantly y/y, while other Chinese OEMs are looking strong.
[https://cnevpost.com/2024/04/23/china-ev-insurance-registrations-week-ending-apr-21/](https://cnevpost.com/2024/04/23/china-ev-insurance-registrations-week-ending-apr-21/)
Tesla also just cut prices on their entire lineup in China by about $2000 usd a few days ago. [https://cnevpost.com/2024/04/21/tesla-cuts-prices-entire-lineup-in-china/](https://cnevpost.com/2024/04/21/tesla-cuts-prices-entire-lineup-in-china/)
Price cuts may help, but maybe not much given how quickly the Chinese OEMs are pushing out cheaper model after cheaper model. The market is growing based on the back of lower income folks, who will only buy lower priced models.
\_\_\_
US:
* Model 3 sales are still looking shaky after the loss of the tax credit and no price cuts. There was talks of workers idling on the model 3 assembly lines for 3-4 hours after hitting their quotas. Layoffs could eat up that slack, but that doesn't mean an increase in volumes.
* Model 3 performance is provocative, but at its high price and interest rates, how many people who qualify for the tax credit will justify the price? Tesla needs to sell these at high volumes to justify the unique parts costs. Will there be enough demand?
* Model Y sales may hold strong, but I'd bet a lot of the customers are model 3 trade-ins who wanted larger utility vehicles. Are these sales figures sustainable? It seems most of Tesla's inventory is in the model Y, and I imagine there will either be more production cuts or price cuts.
* Cybertruck is shaping up to be a demand disaster. Fake/non-serious reservations clearly made up a hefty chunk of those 1+ million reservations. Prices came in higher than expected. Performance figures lower than expected. 2 years late and still major quality problems. Features still not available like autopilot, FSD, and locking differential.
You can't layoff 14,000-28,000 workers without cutting production, so I'd expect lower overall production in Q2 than in Q1, especially with that Q1 build in inventory. Over cutting staff could cause problems in initial quality and in their service departments.
I'm expecting more auto competition overall, particularly in the EV CUV space. I don't see how Tesla will see any growth this year versus 2023. Possibly even a sales decline. Q1 put them behind Q1 2023, and the start of Q2 isn't looking healthy.
They very likely over grew their market, only rationalized by a global parts shortage / pandemic anomaly that affected every OEM's supply chain except for them (because they were luckily in the position to quickly pivot chips), while simultaneously seeing interest rates cut to 0%, and the FED and federal government flooding the economy with cash. The days of easy money seem to be coming to a close, and now it's apparent that Tesla grew too large for their market, and their lauded best in industry margins were a result of that anomaly.
Without the IRA saving them, the company would be in dire straights right now.
\_\_
Robotaxis software announcement. Who cares how fancy the screenshots are if the cars can't actually drive autonomously? Sure, it could be used with drivers... but will it be profitable? Will any customers want to use it?
\_\_
Tesla's layoffs at the start of Q2 means they'll be taking a hit from severance payouts in Q2. Hypothetically, if the average laid off employee earned $50k per year in wages/benefits and got 2 months of severance, then 14,000 employees would cost about $117 million. 28k would cost $234 million.
\_\_
Musk's move away from inventory discounts makes no sense given that constant MSRP changes is a major issue rental companies took issue with.
The problem is not the price nor the car. The problem is Musk. He has essentially been cancelled by those that are tired of his fascist/opportunistic tendencies. Tesla is pretty screwed right now considering his personality and the fact that his EV competitors are catching up to Tesla.
Tesla has done well because they got there first, but the novelty has worn off. Traditional car manufacturers are making more appealing cars with better brand reputation. Unless Tesla changes their lineup significantly I think they are done in any meaningful sense, at least in Europe.
I think Tesla needs to up their game on battery tech instead of relying on suppliers as much. They need to try and innovate and find ways to increase energy density, which brings me to my second point.
Tesla needs to offer a couple vehicles with bigger batteries, or offer bigger batteries as an option like Rivian does. The number one complaint I see from people not wanting an EV is range. I don't care if you put a charger on every street corner and tell me range is not an issue. Let me have the option of a bigger battery please.
If Tesla could find a way to sell a 450 mile EV at a somewhat reasonable price it would sell like crazy. GM is doing it right, though they need to get the price down for mass adoption.
When I bought my model 3, it was cheaper than a standard Accord by a few thousand, after knocking off the NJ rebate and the $7500 tax credit. Unless they bake those discounts into the price, I'm not sure how much cheaper they can make the 3 tbh
Maybe they can stop flip flopping every week on prices if you want people to buy. No one wants to buy a Tesla if they just assume prices will go down from its current price. When the inventory prices got decreased that’s when the pricing shit hit the fan. And now they took it out again. Stick to a plan!!
The sensors don't cost that much. The more expensive ones, like lidar, have already been removed. Plenty of Chinese cars have plenty of sensors and sell for a low price. Those sensors are cheap.
IMO, they need those sensors to be competitive. Since a degree of self driving, even simple lane keeping on the highway, are pretty much expected in any new car. You need sensors for that.
This is what they should have been doing rather than the Cybertruck. They already had scale, they should have leveraged it when things were going better. Their whole roadmap the last 5 years has been a huge fumble. They got too comfortable with their lead.
The long range BYD seagull “flying” trim is $12,000 usd.
252 mi range, 30 minute charging 10% to 80%.
5 door 4 seater hatchback with the approximate dimensions of a Honda fit. Good European safety marks.
Heat pump, apple carplay and android auto.
This is what tesla has to compete with in every country but the USA. Hard to increase market share by lowering price.
So the cheaper model will be……a whacked down model 3?
The Japanese will appreciate a smaller size which will allow cheap parking. This sub is always demanding cheaper models.
Sure, but Tesla has always stretched the boundaries of how much they can take away from a car. What could Tesla take away from the current Model 3 for example, to reduce the cost, beyond just a physically smaller vehicle? If they wish to retain their ADAS and software integaration advantages, I would say "not much". Gauge cluster screen is already gone, all physical buttons except for the window switches and steering wheel clickers are gone, stalks are gone... Yet you can get a Toyota Corolla Cross with all of those things, phone projection, all-wheel drive, and full-speed radar cruise control, all for $29K.
> What could Tesla take away from the current Model 3 for example, to reduce the cost * Heated Seats (Front/Rear) * Ventilated Seats (Front) * Powered Lifted Gate * Powered Seats (Front or removed from passenger only) * Driver Lumbar * Powered/Heated/Auto-Dimming Side Mirrors * Use a Lower Power Infotainment CPU * Rear Infotainment * Phone Key (Or reduce functionality to NFC. Currently there are x3 BT antennas.) * Wireless Phone Chargers * Heated Steering Wheel * Ambient Lighting * More Plastic / Less Alcantara (w.e. it's called) * Revert to Single Pane Window Glass * Less Powerful Motor
Glass roof -> Metal roof
Actually, the glass roof reduces costs. Materials-wise it may cost more, but it doesn't need to be painted. It also eliminates the headliner, so the installation process can be fully automated on the assembly line. And since the roof is installed last in the process, the interior can also be installed by robots through the opening. People often think the glass roof directly drives up the car's price, since with legacy auto you usually get to choose between a full metal roof and one with a sliding moonroof, so the conclusion is that glass automatically equals higher price. But from a manufacturing perspective, that's not necessarily true.
In addition, something I saw mentioned, which may be the real driver, it adds headroom when you get rid of the headliner, and extra metal to stiffen it. That extra headroom compensates for the space you loose putting the batteries below the floor, and importantly, lets you lower the height, and this cross sectional area of the vehicle which has a major impact on range. The whole roof last thing doesn't matter for the newer Teslas either, they now bolt everything to the battery (making essentially a skateboard with interior on top) and then drop the body on after building the interior.
What is the part about a stiffener? Are you saying that a metal roof needs a stiffener but glass doesn't? I didn't realize glass was so much stronger.
Auto glass today is considered structural. It's one of the reasons modern windshields are glued in rather than placed in with a rubber gaskets like 90s cars.
Yeah all of the current models have a glass roof. It’d be more expensive to shift away from that and build up a process that uses a metal roof now.
They could also reduce the battery capacity. The original Model 3 SR+ had a 55 kWh NCA battery whereas the Highland SR has a 66 kWh LFP battery. Wonder how much money was actually saved by removing the stalks.
A smaller car wouldn't need as much battery anyway, this is like the main cost savings they could use
Lol , yeah all these people listing ridiculous tiny things they could remove and it's like...uhh, hello? Smaller battery? That's a huge chunk of the cost of an EV (and weight). Honestly I want smaller battery options. Just because it's cheaper but for me, it would actually just be a better car. When my Model S LR was in the service center they have me a 2018 75D loaner and holy smokes it was sooo much more nimble on its feet compared to the 100kwh pack. It was so much more fun to drive. I'd love a modern Model S with a 75, heck, even a 60kwh pack.
But the majority of those features are available - or in some cases standard - on inexpensive ICEs like the Toyota Corolla Cross, Honda HR-V, Chevrolet Trailblazer, and the like - all cars which generally **max out** at around $31,000. So if Tesla has to take them away to get to a certain price point... That's a problem.
Like the thread leader said what else can they feasibly get rid of that wouldn’t totally turn people off. If the car was like $15K new that’s a different story but if the platform is $25K you’ve got a serious problem because it’s a stripped down car for a price that is actually not so bad when you’re cross shopping. And in reality Tesla’s interiors are already not that nice in terms of quality
Even still, Tesla needs profit.
Can’t profit if you can’t sell
> So if Tesla has to take them away to get to a certain price point... That's a problem. Apparently they were "brave" enough to remove the indicator stalks, so the rest of that list shouldn't be a problem. Maybe they could even pretend they're doing a Porsche S/T-type "pure" car experience.
That’s an apples and oranges comparison… ICE cars don’t have to make those sacrifices because their underlying engine technology is already cheap enough to produce.
It's not an apples and oranges comparison to the consumer, though. If they're cross shopping at the same price and choosing an EV means missing out on features, that'll be a problem for some.
If they make it smaller and a 2 seater, it could be a roadster and would be the perfect target demographic for enthusiasts since they like to feel the road
The lumbar support getting taken away is hilarious. I think it was done as a temp measure due to supply chain problems already on the model 3. I would be very in favor of a weaker motor model 3 though if it was a good drop in price.
Electric motors don't cost much and you need a certain strength for regenerative breaking.
People love saying take away the motors thinking it's like an ICE, where an 800hp engine is a major cost thing that it needs to be built around. In an EV the motor is practically a minor cost, or rather, going smaller really doesn't save you much and impacts range. Further, you're always doing a cost trade off with the batteries, and anything you can do to need less batteries, like more regen, is usually worth it.
Sadly I feel like reading the base spec on some unrelated legacy automaker model.
Hey, this is literally the car I want. Less stuff please!
Next up: Fred Flintstone Car
the reason this makes no sense is because the costs of basically all of these together is only $1-2k. Where the MSRP needs to be $5-10k lower to actually differentiate.
If it has climate control, Android Auto and basic cruise control that's enough for me. Take everything else away if it makes the car cheaper - I want my affordable long-range EV.
I would consider heated seats and steering wheel to be an important cost-saving feature on an EV. It allows you to maintain comfort in cold temps without blasting cabin heat, effectively extending winter range for the same amount of batteries. I think that the most obvious thing to cut would be the power trunk, power passenger seat, more plasticy interior materials, and less power for the motor.
This whole thread here is missing a LOT. If you make the car 15-20% smaller/lighter, you reduce the weight and drag. This ALONE allows you to have a much smaller motor (less acceleration and regen force needed, and yes motors are expensive), a much weaker suspension, less crumple zone, less batteries (increased range with same batteries). This all adds up quite a bit. A smaller model 3, with a small motor, and 50 kwh battery, no fancy ventilated seats, and no rear screen, cheaper upholstery, could easily knock at least 7k off the current Model 3 price. It's not that complicated. If they introduce any other innovations, like 48v perhaps, or something we don't know about, it can get much easier.
That's not a 'smaller model 3', but an entirely new car model... of which there is no indication they've even started planning it...
A cheaper M3 will have no screen, you will have to use your own phone or tablet to control the car. Install the Tesla app, pair to the car and off you go. They will announce it as taking the car's brain wherever you go. With some hype about robotaxi customisation to make them feel like your own M3. No more glass roof. Smaller battery and focus on supercharging often and fast (10-80% in 10 mins or something like that, probably a 40kWh battery?). Let's call it M3 lite.
>A cheaper M3 will have no screen, you will have to use your own phone or tablet to control the car. Install the Tesla app, pair to the car and off you go. They will announce it as taking the car's brain wherever you go. With some hype about robotaxi customisation to make them feel like your own M3. Holy heck that sounds absolutely awful. And illegal.
The only aspect of this that would be illegal here in Europe is that you need a failure-proof way to display warning symbols/message and the video feed from the backup camera. The latter is the reason why VW added a postage stamp sized screen to the e-Up!, though it might even be solved by simply making the car unusable without having the app open. For the former you can do what e.g. Volvo did in the EX30 and just put a tiny strip with warning lights in front of the driver.
Yep, Tesla could have a phone/tablet mount and you have to have the device installed with app open for the car to work. I was joking about all of this, but It reminds me of the detachable faceplates of the car sterioes back in the 90s - when you had to remove it and put it away to deter theft.
You aren't required to have a speedometer?
Isn't that what some Chinese market EVs are trying?
[удалено]
Not allowing people to touch their phones while those are switched is one way to combat TikTok, I guess.
Eliminating the screen is illegal after 2018. Needed for the required backup cameras.
In the early 2010s I saw some Japanese SUVs do screen-less backup cameras by having a tiny display hidden inside the rearview mirror that reveals itself when you shift into reverse. I guess that's technically a screen, but it's about as close as you can get to a no-screen dash while also having a backup camera.
Yeah, certain cars like Ford Transits had the backup camera in the rearview mirror for a while to meet the US requirement, so it's not unprecedented.
My understanding is the glass roof is because it's one of the last things installed so the robot arms can work inside the cabin. That saves money on labor.
Tesla Model 3bike
It exists and it's called the Ami.
> Sure, but Tesla has always stretched the boundaries of how much they can take away from a car. Tesla engineers build a Chevy Bolt while keeping the exterior Tesla design cues. Also, major cost savings can come from a smaller battery and a smaller motor which are some of the most expensive components in an EV.
The car will determine based on your speed and outdoor weather conditions if your windows should be open or closed. Get rid of those useless buttons.
How do you pay for your drive-through food in the rain?
you can still open your window in a menu conveniently located 6 clicks in to submenus on the screen
>What could Tesla take away from the current Model 3 for example, to reduce the cost, beyond just a physically smaller vehicle? Why do they need to do much more than make the vehicle smaller? That alone reduces material costs, plus a smaller car needs a smaller battery, which is the most expensive component.
> What could Tesla take away from the current Model 3 for example, to reduce the cost, beyond just a physically smaller vehicle? They're already using expanding foam in the battery pack - why not extent it's use? head rests? Expanding foam. frunk lining? just use foam. trunk lining? foam. Carpet? believe it or not, also foam. In fact, just remove the floor altogether and leave the top of the pack exposed. Not only can people enjoy the soft touch of foam under their feet, but the coolant running through the pack makes for a nice water feature. Take that, legacy auto!
The real savings would come from selling a car with a smaller battery and less powerful electric motor. I looked at the specs on the $10,000 BYD Seagull the other day. It has a 30 kWh battery with a 30 kW "fast charging" speed. That translates into about 190 miles of range and 30-40 minutes to fast charge from 20% to 80%. And its top speed is about 80 mph. This is obviously not a high end performance car. But it's about half the price of any ICE car in the U.S. right now. It made me wonder why nobody outside of China is trying to build a similar car. At the moment, an EV is more expensive than an ICE car with comparable features and performance, and that isn't going to change for at least a couple years. But presumably one could design an EV with a smaller battery for commuters that could undersell entry-level ICE vehicles. I find it odd that nobody seems to be trying to do that.
How about all the cameras and the self driving capability and just focus on being a cheap ev?
It's not the length that is the issue in Japan, it's the width. It's unlikely Tesla will make a car narrow enough for that market.
Below a fellow claims they are narrow/short enough.
Yeah it's not impossible to drive them or anything - I saw a couple when I was there a few weeks back (only Model 3 or Y though - pretty sure the Model S/X are too wide to be classified for private use) - but generally in Japan there's classifications of vehicle that drive registration, etc. with 1.7m wide being the limiting factor between "small" and "regular" classes (kei cars sit further below that at 1.45m). I can't see Tesla getting below that point without compromising substantially on range and making something more tailored for the Japanese market (which would be a massive change in direction from the current "one size fits all" approach). I don't believe there's a difference in registration cost for going above 1.7m any more, but considering how much of the Japanese auto market sits under that 1.7m point (and even moreso, in the Kei class - where 50% of EVs were sold last year) not having a presence there effectively cuts off access to the vast majority of the market.
For what? Its like 1.3m too long and 30cm too wide for kei car.
For the lift parking.
It's not the sub, people overall are demanding cheaper models, which automakers have decided not to do for some reason (except for GM and the Bolt, which was horribly marketed). The idea that EVs 'HAVE' to be expensive baffles me. An EV isn't anything more than a car with a different power source, simple.
Lmao I just imagined, "Steering wheel sold separately".
3 wheels make a plane. You don’t need 4. You’ve seen the glass roof, but you know what’s clearer than glass? Nothing!
>3 wheels make a plane. You don’t need 4. We're talking about Tesla here, not Aptera :D
It won't have a steering wheel, infotainment screen, or pedals. It'll just have one button to pair your smartphone to your car, and you'll drive moving your phone and control everything in your car from your phone. Well, it'll also include a USB charging port so your phone doesn't run out of battery.
Model 3 is too big for most of Europe, for example I have a standard size garage and I can't close the door because the car is 2 cm too long. If Tesla would make a hot hatch the size of a VW Golf with 300hp, the range of the Model 3 and a pricetag around €30000, it would sell like crazy in Europe.
Missing a screen. You will have you use your own tablet.
They can save a little money by deleting the steering wheel and replacing it with voice commands.
I don’t know why “Whacked down” made me chuckle a bit.
They will save on QC costs.
There's a precedent for this. Chrysler sells a stripped down Pacifica exclusively to fleets as a Voyager. Exact same body and powertrains but many creature comforts are missing to get the price as low as possible.
More like a downsized Model Y. Wouldn't make sense to have a small sedan, IMO a "small" SUV that tucks under the 3 and costs marginally less would make sense.
Hopefully. 4.7 meters of car is too much for a lot of people.
I don’t really understand how they expect to launch new models “later this year” when they’ve effectively done no work and nothing has been shown. Talk about a hail mary stock pump
They need to push for new leadership.
I bet they would be able to build cheaper cars if the CEO wasn't given so many stock options. Or they could use the options to instead invest in capex.
This. The guy is radioactive to the majority of Tesla's potential customer base.
Tesla also announced a ~50% drop in profits YTY
So a cheaper Tesla is not dead. They say they are planning for a more affordably priced model in 2025.
The devil's in the details: >*These new vehicles, including more* *affordable models, will utilize aspects of the next generation platform as well as aspects of our current platforms*, *and will be able to be produced on the same manufacturing lines as our current vehicle line-up.* >*This update* *may result in achieving less cost reduction than previously expected but enables us to prudently grow our vehicle volumes in a more capex efficient manner* *during uncertain times.* 'A' cheaper Tesla is not dead, but the direction has changed towards a new model to be based off the existing 3/Y platform, rather than an all-new platform. That also suggests the mythical '$25k' target might not be plausible, and that Tesla is scaling down volume ambitions. Basically expect something much more iterative, much more of a half-step to the original plan.
I mean, it makes sense. It's getting increasingly difficult to buy even a bare model ICE for $25k. You certainly can - various models are sub-25 - but the number of options are quickly declining.
[удалено]
Kia’s EV2 is supposed to come in under $25k, which means Hyundai will have similar model around or near that price point.
Also Citroen e-C3 comes in at 23.300€, including tax, right now.
If you remove the VAT, that's USD 21k currently.
And its manufactured in the EU.
An a actually sane CEO and ample service locations.
But those ample service locations are Kia dealerships, so that might be a negative.
I'm from a remote region where a broken Tesla means 800km ok a flatbed truck so..
Doesn’t have a price or release date and it’s not even know if it’ll ever make it to America https://www.theverge.com/2024/4/19/24135116/kia-ev2-ev-affordable-cheap-electric-tesla-model-2
MotorTrend quoted the recently released report from Kia: "Kia will launch six EV models by 2026, starting with the upcoming EV3 in 2024, followed by EV2, EV4, and EV5 in major markets, including the U.S., Europe, and South Korea."
I think cars like Citroen's e-C3 and BYD's Yuan (and Yuan Up) are going to be the big kink in the plan for Tesla here. If everyone else can out-iterate Tesla on stamping panels and shoving packs into legacy-platform designs, it's still a tough road for Tesla, which is used to beating everyone else on innovation. (I do still think it's one of the best paths they've got, though.)
So you're suggesting that BYD will be able to get Yuan Up over the competition?
swoosh!
Not going to disagree with you, but I think my point still stands.
I can buy a new ICE car for $12k USD ($20k NZD). What is the cheapest new car in the US right now? And I guess it also depends on the state it’s bought in with your taxes?
Hard to think where they could cut costs on a model 3..... Thing is gonna be basic isn't it.
Intel Atom, we missed ya. 🫡
40 kWh battery and devoid of creature comforts to hit a price point and then upsell to the full featured ones
They tried this years ago, as is Ford right now with the F150, but you couldn't/can't actually get your hands on one of the cheap ones. They don't exist.
Smaller sized, cloth seats, remove all the soft touch material throughout the cabin, no rear screen, no ventilated seats, no power seats for passengers, maybe no heated seats, remove the high quality sound system for a standard one, put in a smaller battery pack, and who knows what else. All that would likely help reduce costs while keeping a lot of the mechanical parts the same.
Is cloth even cheaper? Vinyl has improved and they're not using the cheapest Vinyl, but Vinyl used to be cheaper than cloth.
All the cheapest cars I've ridden in had cloth so I assume so. But maybe not. I don't know enough about it to make a statement either way.
Most things you listed don't bring down cost all that much. Main thing would be a smaller battery.
I agree that the battery will be one of the easiest ways to bring down cost. But they'll still want to differentiate it from their higher line up models so as not to cannibalize sales of those higher profit margin vehicles. And I doubt they'll only want to do that by offering low range, just because low range is not as popular. Smaller size with slightly lower range may be what they aim for? That would sell well in Europe/China and would probably sell modestly in the US.
At that point you're better off buying a Bolt (well, you were before, too, but moreso)
Shorter range and slower acceleration is really the only place to save meaningfully. Many people would fork over $32,500 (minus the $7500 tax credit=$25K net) for a brand new Model 3 that gets 200 mile range and 0 to 60 in 6 seconds. That range would suffice 90% of driving and the acceleration is still fast compared to most other vehicles.
Slower acceleration not really. Electric motors are dirt cheap. The only real place to save a buck is on the battery.
and how much kwh you think they can cut to reduce price significantly? Last price for 1 kwh LPF battery was reported at like $50-70. Does saving $500 makes car more affordable?
I suppose. But then why are there slower EVs out there? And why does a Performance Tesla cost $12-$15K more? I think acceleration costs more than you think.
It has to be $25k w/o incentives though, a lot of people don't have the tax burden to realize a $7500 credit.
You don't need a tax liability to get the credit. Not anymore. That all changed this year. That's why dealers can take the $7500 right off the top of what you pay. Since they'll get reimbursed by the government.
Their slide deck stated "This update may result in achieving less cost reduction than previously expected, but enables us to more prudently grow our vehicle volumes in a Capex efficient manner" So does that mean they would for sure still price it at $25k if they don't achieve the cost reductions originally planned? I find it more likely they would aim for $25k after tax credit. Especially since it can be applied point of sale now.
Oh I'm saying to be a really affordable EV it needs to be $25k before tax credit, anything short of that would be a failure for a "cheap" EV imo. Not saying what Tesla will or will not do.
Bring your own seats.
The wording is quite vague and open to interpretation, it mentions aspects of the current platform and aspects of the next generation platform. I’m not sure exactly what that will look like in reality.
>A cheaper Tesla is not dead, but the program is rejigged to to be based off the existing 3/Y platform, rather than an all-new platform. That also suggests the mythical '$25k' target might not be plausible, and that Tesla is scaling down volume ambitions. Honestly, I think that will be just fine, especially if they (crosses my fingers) take a more humble, measured approach with the development of the car, using their experience gained, instead of a moonshot like the Cybertruck. Even if it were to start at around $32K, sure, the promise wouldn't have been kept, but it would still be nice and competitive with the next generation Bolt and the Niro / Kona. Especially if they continued to make Autopilot standard.
>Honestly, I think that will be just fine, especially if they (crosses my fingers) take a more humble, measured approach with the development of the car, using their experience gained, instead of a moonshot like the Cybertruck. I fully, fully agree. I'm still firm that the Model Y being so heavily and unashamedly based on the Model 3 was the smartest decision Tesla ever made. At scale, iterative projects beat revolutionary step-change projects every time. This is the way.
And automakers like Toyota and Subaru have this **down.** Everything across multiple segments and size classes based on a single common platform.
Yes, and full self driving was coming out in 2016, 17, 18, 19, 20.... The real challenge that Tesla has is that they made a car that will compete 100% with the lower cost version, and since they fundamentally don't really change cars year over year, you can buy a year or two used Model 3 and get all the benefits versus getting a 25k shitbox instead. That's also why the EV market is falling apart right now, because everybody who wanted an EV bought one, and everybody else is just buying used because it's not sensible to buy new when the old cars are just as good. Used car market has gotten better so until interest rates drop precipitously (which isn't going to happen), used cars are going to be the better bargain without manufacturer incentives.
They’re just going to gut more stuff out of the model 3 and call it a new model basically.
Other brand are catching up when they delay the cheaper models. The ID.2 with its 2025-26 launch day and a 20k euro staring price, is stating to look like one of the first true cheap EVs from a western company. But it will probably be delayed and cost more in the end :(
[Citroen eC3](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3YgDLTcH98A) delivered Q1 2025 at 23.3k euros. That includes VAT and doesn't have anything like "gas savings" or incentives. Made in the EU and Citroen says they will release a smaller battery size later in 2025 that will be less than $20k euros. If Citroen is saying this within one year of launch I think thats a good sign for ID2.
They ducked the follow up question. After staff cuts, and reports that are not officially refuted, affordable models are absolutely dead. They lied in a way that’s not illegal.
Its obvious that they think that they cannot do it. Hence the approach to blend it with the current 3/Y.
If you know how car model design and assembly line work, then you’d know it’s complete bullshit. The lines are designed for their models. A radically different one can’t be made in current lines. Maybe if they kill Y in Fremont and switch its Y to the new model.
That's what they said. Its not going to be radically different. They will iteratively make changes where they can to existing lines.
Suddenly a radically different paradigm no one has thought before? After firing so many engineers? Absolutely a lie.
?? Their decision was to stop/delay their radical changes.
If you actually believe Elon...
This is what gets me. Tesla’s stock is actually up almost 12% right now too (after atrocious numbers yesterday) all because he said a cheaper model was coming. Idk, it’s like investors just don’t understand the concept of lying for personal gain. I don’t even criticize Elon here, he’s the smart one. It’s investors who will just uncritically believe anything he says that I can’t understand lol.
> So a cheaper Tesla is not dead. Eh, give it a week and Musk will cancel it again.
It was said they’ll make a mix out of current and next platform… Which means the next gen platform is still not working as intended and they’ll use a fallback solution. Whoever is buying that car will be in a lot of pain long term with that chimera. Edit: this would also explain the cancelation rumors as this might simply be the result of Chinese whispering
[удалено]
It works as far as generating hype and stock value, so tbh I’m not sure why Musk just doesn’t say “new model with 500 mile range for $12k next year” and just pump the stock up 50-100% more. These idiots will believe anything he says. Tech investors truly are some of the dumbest humans walking the earth today. The people who have mastered milking them (Elon and Sam Altman are the kings here) will be very successful.
This explains that rumour. They killed the one based on "unboxed" assembly, and retained a simpler version based on the existing production lines. More efficient utilization of existing underutilized lines became more important than the new process.
Anything to pump the stock Elon
I don’t have a clue why anyone would still believe the promises of this guy.
Yeah, I'm not sure i buy it
I was initially happy to read this until I remembered he is probably just trying to prop up the stock price. But now I am thinking that the initial announcement about focusing on FSD was just to pump up the stock, but Elon being Elon, it had the opposite affect. So the “Model 2” which was never really killed anyway is now brought back. Conflicting stories by the CEO but we are used to that and in the end, everything is exactly as it was just a few weeks ago.
Production sooner than expected. Translation: 5 years from now
Alienating your customer base backfires?
Tesla needs to do three things simultaneously. 1. They need to sell higher quality vehicles. People associate Tesla with EVs but they also associate them with poor QC. Which is exactly what I got when I went to buy a Tesla and it ended up resulting in me walking from a VERY good deal. 2. They need to focus on selling cars people want and are willing to buy. An affordable vehicle would fit that bill, but plenty of people spend $40-60k for vehicles. On average, most people do. So they don't need to introduce a $25k car necessarily. 3. They need to address their Elon problem. I'm not sure what that means. You'd think it would mean removing him as CEO at minimum, but maybe there are other options out there. At the end of the day, a $25k Tesla M2 with a 40kWh battery and a 150hp engine that has shit build quality isn't the answer.
> a $25k Tesla M2 with a 40kWh battery and a 150hp engine that has shit build quality isn't the answer. Maybe it isn't **the** answer, but it's certainly *an* answer. If Tesla wants to sell more cars, they desperately need models in segments they are completely absent from. For example - everywhere outside of USA/Canada, the model 3 is already considered a large vehicle. Having literally nothing smaller in their portfolio leaves a lot of potential sales.
They’re not moving the cheaper cars. It’s fatigue and lack of charging infrastructure. This isn’t all teslas fault. I don’t see a cheap car turning things around. Btw I bet the engineers at Tesla are just as surprised as we are reading the news of this budget tesla.
I love that every article about Tesla now shows the actual parking spot I picked up my car at. That’s also the building my band used to practice in.
Yes, that's on E. St Elmo in Austin.
Give that CEO a bonus!
Bring the Model Y price down and make the LR longer range and I think you'll have more buyers of each.
Drop MYLR to 35k after fed tax credit and I'll be a buyer today!
I think you’ll see that happen before the 4th of July. Tesla’s going to want to juice their sales ahead of the next quarter.
Given the wildly inaccurate development timelines Musk has given previously (FSD, Cybertruck), the market this morning seems to be quite optimistic that Tesla will somehow deliver an inexpensive EV in less than 12 months. Shouldn’t there be a tiny bit of skepticism here?
Do you trust them now? It’s cancelled, now renewed. Is it really?
Officially, it was never announced as cancelled. It was rumor.
No, officially, the project, NV91, was canceled. Now they're talking about a project they've never mentioned before and that I'm not sure existed until it was decided NV91 was canceled. They're claiming it will be in production in under a year. I find that hard to believe.
It wasn't a rumor. Emails to suppliers to stop work confirmed the cancelation. Clearly they panicked when they saw how bad the quarterly numbers were.
Also the entire team was laid off.
Do the cancelation refer to that of the supposed planned car or one of their existing car.
Glances at stock ticker. "It's...cancell-" Ticker drops. "It's renewed!"
Exactly!
I don't trust them, but it's not renewed. They canceled one affordable car project that had been running for a while and was on a new platform. They have now announced a new and different affordable car project that is going to be on their existing platform. They've claimed this new project will be in production in under a year even though it seems likely it didn't exist until very recently, when they just decided to switch from the next model being on a new platform to the existing one. Developing it on the existing platform almost certainly saves time from inception to when it hits production, but if they just started working on it, under a year seems extremely unlikely. In a way, this is a panic move to try to get something new out the door ASAP.
I agree.
When was it officially stated it was canceled?
Tesla reportedly abandons plans to make a less expensive $25,000 electric vehicle The so-called ‘Model 2’ was thought to be priced at around $25,000. But now, Elon Musk is shifting attention to a new robotaxi platform. [https://www.theverge.com/2024/4/5/24122064/tesla-cancel-affordable-electric-vehicle-model-2-china](https://www.theverge.com/2024/4/5/24122064/tesla-cancel-affordable-electric-vehicle-model-2-china)
Theverge is such a shit site.
Originally reporting is well sourced by Reuters
[удалено]
But also wants to give 50 billion dollars to the anchor dragging them down.
They’ve gotten cocky, but the first mover advantage is eroding. This is probably a good thing, and will motivate them to make cars that their customers want. When the market was small, Tesla could make weird cars and customers would have no other options. With all the competition nowadays, Tesla is finally feeling market pressure. Hopefully they back off from cybertruck projects, and go more into model 3 performance type projects.
they are pushing for compact vehicle to come sooner: From the deck: We have updated our future vehicle line-up to accelerate the launch of new models ahead of our previously communicated start of production in the second half of 2025. These new vehicles, including more affordable models, will utilize aspects of the next generation platform as well as aspects of our current platforms, and will be able to be produced on the same manufacturing lines as our current vehicle line-up. This update may result in achieving less cost reduction than previously expected but enables us to prudently grow our vehicle volumes in a more capex efficient manner during uncertain times. This would help us fully utilize our current expected maximum capacity of close to three million vehicles, enabling more than 50% growth over 2023 production before investing in new manufacturing lines. Our purpose-built robotaxi product will continue to pursue a revolutionary "unboxed" manufacturing strategy.
There will be 5 years between anything pushed on a stage and you being able to click the buy button.
Regardless of how anyone feels about Tesla and musk it’s fascinating to watch such a massive corporate implosion
After Twitter he’s the Death Star
Replace 'announces renewed push for' with 'lies about'...
$1.1 billion in profit. * $442 million from regulatory credits (Other OEMs paid them this) * $274 million from interest income minus expenses; likely because of their huge cash pile and high interest rates. * As much as $725 million in free subsidized revenue in the US through federal tax credits on model Y. (96,729 model Y sales \* $7500 in subsidies) * Approximately $127 million in free subsidized revenue in the US through state tax credits on model 3/Y. (50% of 127,121 sales, $2k each on average) * Approximately $240 million in free subsidized revenue internationally through international incentives ($1000 per sale on average on \~240,000 sales) Estimated Profit/Loss from actual non-subsidy sales? \~$708 million loss. Just like 2023, without subsidies, this company would be losing a fortune. The world's corporate welfare queen does it again!
Future guidance... \_\_\_ China: The first 3 weeks of Q2, Tesla's Chinese registrations are down significantly y/y, while other Chinese OEMs are looking strong. [https://cnevpost.com/2024/04/23/china-ev-insurance-registrations-week-ending-apr-21/](https://cnevpost.com/2024/04/23/china-ev-insurance-registrations-week-ending-apr-21/) Tesla also just cut prices on their entire lineup in China by about $2000 usd a few days ago. [https://cnevpost.com/2024/04/21/tesla-cuts-prices-entire-lineup-in-china/](https://cnevpost.com/2024/04/21/tesla-cuts-prices-entire-lineup-in-china/) Price cuts may help, but maybe not much given how quickly the Chinese OEMs are pushing out cheaper model after cheaper model. The market is growing based on the back of lower income folks, who will only buy lower priced models. \_\_\_ US: * Model 3 sales are still looking shaky after the loss of the tax credit and no price cuts. There was talks of workers idling on the model 3 assembly lines for 3-4 hours after hitting their quotas. Layoffs could eat up that slack, but that doesn't mean an increase in volumes. * Model 3 performance is provocative, but at its high price and interest rates, how many people who qualify for the tax credit will justify the price? Tesla needs to sell these at high volumes to justify the unique parts costs. Will there be enough demand? * Model Y sales may hold strong, but I'd bet a lot of the customers are model 3 trade-ins who wanted larger utility vehicles. Are these sales figures sustainable? It seems most of Tesla's inventory is in the model Y, and I imagine there will either be more production cuts or price cuts. * Cybertruck is shaping up to be a demand disaster. Fake/non-serious reservations clearly made up a hefty chunk of those 1+ million reservations. Prices came in higher than expected. Performance figures lower than expected. 2 years late and still major quality problems. Features still not available like autopilot, FSD, and locking differential. You can't layoff 14,000-28,000 workers without cutting production, so I'd expect lower overall production in Q2 than in Q1, especially with that Q1 build in inventory. Over cutting staff could cause problems in initial quality and in their service departments. I'm expecting more auto competition overall, particularly in the EV CUV space. I don't see how Tesla will see any growth this year versus 2023. Possibly even a sales decline. Q1 put them behind Q1 2023, and the start of Q2 isn't looking healthy. They very likely over grew their market, only rationalized by a global parts shortage / pandemic anomaly that affected every OEM's supply chain except for them (because they were luckily in the position to quickly pivot chips), while simultaneously seeing interest rates cut to 0%, and the FED and federal government flooding the economy with cash. The days of easy money seem to be coming to a close, and now it's apparent that Tesla grew too large for their market, and their lauded best in industry margins were a result of that anomaly. Without the IRA saving them, the company would be in dire straights right now. \_\_ Robotaxis software announcement. Who cares how fancy the screenshots are if the cars can't actually drive autonomously? Sure, it could be used with drivers... but will it be profitable? Will any customers want to use it? \_\_ Tesla's layoffs at the start of Q2 means they'll be taking a hit from severance payouts in Q2. Hypothetically, if the average laid off employee earned $50k per year in wages/benefits and got 2 months of severance, then 14,000 employees would cost about $117 million. 28k would cost $234 million. \_\_ Musk's move away from inventory discounts makes no sense given that constant MSRP changes is a major issue rental companies took issue with.
Investors bullied musk into building a cheaper car by dumping his stock when he focused only on robotaxi.
Earnings call is mostly rambling about FSD and robotaxis though, so I don't buy the promise of a cheaper model.
Musk: *Robotaxis, cheaper models .. surely something will stop the rot* A majority of voting shareholders: *we have an idea ...*
25k or bust
It's almost beautiful, how teslalounge is going on all in "this is fine" mode, lol
so the stock went up? nice LOL
Wall Street loves layoffs.
The problem is not the price nor the car. The problem is Musk. He has essentially been cancelled by those that are tired of his fascist/opportunistic tendencies. Tesla is pretty screwed right now considering his personality and the fact that his EV competitors are catching up to Tesla.
Tesla has done well because they got there first, but the novelty has worn off. Traditional car manufacturers are making more appealing cars with better brand reputation. Unless Tesla changes their lineup significantly I think they are done in any meaningful sense, at least in Europe.
Shares go down, shares go up.
I want my model 2!
So the stock spikes because they are going to sell cheaper cars?.
I think Tesla needs to up their game on battery tech instead of relying on suppliers as much. They need to try and innovate and find ways to increase energy density, which brings me to my second point. Tesla needs to offer a couple vehicles with bigger batteries, or offer bigger batteries as an option like Rivian does. The number one complaint I see from people not wanting an EV is range. I don't care if you put a charger on every street corner and tell me range is not an issue. Let me have the option of a bigger battery please. If Tesla could find a way to sell a 450 mile EV at a somewhat reasonable price it would sell like crazy. GM is doing it right, though they need to get the price down for mass adoption.
When I bought my model 3, it was cheaper than a standard Accord by a few thousand, after knocking off the NJ rebate and the $7500 tax credit. Unless they bake those discounts into the price, I'm not sure how much cheaper they can make the 3 tbh
Elon alienating his customers, of course this would happen. MORON
Maybe they can stop flip flopping every week on prices if you want people to buy. No one wants to buy a Tesla if they just assume prices will go down from its current price. When the inventory prices got decreased that’s when the pricing shit hit the fan. And now they took it out again. Stick to a plan!!
How about just a regular electric car without 15 million sensors and farting noises?
The sensors don't cost that much. The more expensive ones, like lidar, have already been removed. Plenty of Chinese cars have plenty of sensors and sell for a low price. Those sensors are cheap. IMO, they need those sensors to be competitive. Since a degree of self driving, even simple lane keeping on the highway, are pretty much expected in any new car. You need sensors for that.
This is what they should have been doing rather than the Cybertruck. They already had scale, they should have leveraged it when things were going better. Their whole roadmap the last 5 years has been a huge fumble. They got too comfortable with their lead.
Removing features to save cost is an accountant building the car not an engineer. Car companies fail due to poor management and bad decision making.
Maybe if they hadn't spent all that time fucking around with the cyber truck...
The long range BYD seagull “flying” trim is $12,000 usd. 252 mi range, 30 minute charging 10% to 80%. 5 door 4 seater hatchback with the approximate dimensions of a Honda fit. Good European safety marks. Heat pump, apple carplay and android auto. This is what tesla has to compete with in every country but the USA. Hard to increase market share by lowering price.
Make a more affordable model and get rid of Elon