- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Tesla Model 3 announced: release set for 2017, price starts at $35,000
Posted on 4/1/16 at 12:09 am to Porcine Human
Posted on 4/1/16 at 12:09 am to Porcine Human
quote:
I feel like trying to navigate the touchscreen could be a problem while driving.
put it in autopilot mode.
0
Posted on 4/1/16 at 12:10 am to Barf
quote:
Holding out for the Model X but I've been very happy with the xc90 plug in hybrid.
Posted on 4/1/16 at 12:12 am to WhoDat937
quote:
Doesn't Tesla have the highest, or near the highest, customer satisfaction?
I don't know how it compares to other cars. I do know that Consumer's Reports does not recommend them because of reliability problems reported by their owners.
That can be overlooked if the car's performance is excellent provided there is a reasonable repair and service network to address problems with minimal inconvenience to me. That's not the case with the Tesla. My nearest Tesla repair shop is 5+ hours away. Even the one marked "coming soon" on their website is still an hour away from my house.
Posted on 4/1/16 at 12:23 am to euphemus
Posted on 4/1/16 at 12:24 am to Asgard Device
quote:
The front end without a grill looks weird but frick, I'd probably still be interested in getting one.
Car doesn't need a grille since there's no engine behind it that needs cooled. That low-mounted air intake is all that's necessary.
Posted on 4/1/16 at 12:24 am to euphemus
So... Bland. Ugly.
Posted on 4/1/16 at 12:26 am to dragginass
quote:
When the cars are feasible enough to no longer need government subsidies, I'll consider one.
So you don't drive cars at all?
The Mississippi state government alone has given Nissan $400 million in subsidies, for example.
This post was edited on 4/1/16 at 12:26 am
Posted on 4/1/16 at 12:26 am to euphemus
quote:
The slowest base model will go from 0 to 60 in less than six seconds. “We don’t make slow cars,”
That's slow.
Posted on 4/1/16 at 12:30 am to Asgard Device
quote:
So you don't drive cars at all?
The Mississippi state government alone has given Nissan $400 million in subsidies, for example.
There's a difference between attracting business and pushing technology that is otherwise irrelevant and unprofitable.
Posted on 4/1/16 at 12:58 am to dragginass
quote:
There's a difference between attracting business and pushing technology that is otherwise irrelevant and unprofitable.
So basically you're making things up on the fly to fit your political narrative. Keep believing that Nissan Titans are relevant technology that should be subsidized by the government while simultaneously believing that all electric vehicles are irrelevant technology that should not be subsidized.
I mean really, the hypocrisy is amazing but par for course.
Posted on 4/1/16 at 1:12 am to Asgard Device
You're right, I'm clearly overlooking the many other profitable electric car companies.
If you want a Tesla, buy one, but they aren't a profitable model.
Petrol powered vehicles are the profitable standard by which others are measured, and have thus far failed to equal. In that sense, yes, the Nissan Titan is superior. The state subsidy to Nissan brought in more revenue to MS. Federal subsidies to Tesla have gotten us what?
This is a stupid discussion, as your understanding of technology and profitability is nonexistent.
If you want a Tesla, buy one, but they aren't a profitable model.
Petrol powered vehicles are the profitable standard by which others are measured, and have thus far failed to equal. In that sense, yes, the Nissan Titan is superior. The state subsidy to Nissan brought in more revenue to MS. Federal subsidies to Tesla have gotten us what?
This is a stupid discussion, as your understanding of technology and profitability is nonexistent.
Posted on 4/1/16 at 1:16 am to dragginass
quote:
There's a difference between attracting business and pushing technology that is otherwise irrelevant and unprofitable.
quote:
and have thus far failed to equal
Therefore never will? Come on.
quote:
The state subsidy to Nissan brought in more revenue to MS. Federal subsidies to Tesla have gotten us what?
Nissan hasn't been receiving similar federal subsidies?
quote:
This is a stupid discussion, as your understanding of technology and profitability is nonexistent.
Says the one who brought up revenue while ignoring other factors. The latest job report does not shine favorably on the $1+ billion in subsidies Nisson will receive over the 30 year window.
This post was edited on 4/1/16 at 1:29 am
Posted on 4/1/16 at 1:29 am to WhoDat937
quote:
Therefore never will? Come on.
Don't misunderstand what I'm saying. As battery technology evolves, electric cars will become cheaper, lighter, more powerful, and maybe even globally profitable. However, the technology is not yet there to make this the case. Maybe it happens in 5 years, but it might be 50...or never. The electric car is also fighting an uphill battle against current low oil prices.
If you like the cars, get one. The instant torque of electric power is awesome, and Tesla makes good looking vehicles.
I wasn't talking about any of that though....
Posted on 4/1/16 at 1:32 am to dragginass
No, you just said this:
While every car company receives a ridiculous amount of government subsidies. In the South alone:
Just seems a bit hypocritical to me
The industry is littered with government subsidies.
quote:
When the cars are feasible enough to no longer need government subsidies, I'll consider one.
While every car company receives a ridiculous amount of government subsidies. In the South alone:
Just seems a bit hypocritical to me
The industry is littered with government subsidies.
This post was edited on 4/1/16 at 1:37 am
Posted on 4/1/16 at 1:38 am to WhoDat937
Again, you are comparing state subsidies to bring in manufacturing plants vs the outright subsidization of unprofitable technology. It's no different than the residential solar panel discussions.
Since yall keep bringing up Nissan for some reason...the Nissan "Leaf" is no different in regards to federal subsidies. It too is being artificially propped up like it's electric brethren.
Since yall keep bringing up Nissan for some reason...the Nissan "Leaf" is no different in regards to federal subsidies. It too is being artificially propped up like it's electric brethren.
Posted on 4/1/16 at 1:40 am to dragginass
quote:
Again, you are comparing state subsidies to bring in manufacturing plants vs the outright subsidization of unprofitable technology.
I'm comparing government subsidies, which you seemed to be against by your own words, to government subsidies
Why did GM and other US automakers need a bailout?
This post was edited on 4/1/16 at 1:41 am
Posted on 4/1/16 at 1:44 am to WhoDat937
quote:
Why did GM and other US automakers need a bailout?
Poor business management. Had nothing to do with hydrocarbon powered vehicles being unprofitable technology.
You're also forgetting the federal credits to buyers. $2500-$7500 for buying a plug in vehicle. That's electric car welfare, and often the prices listed for the vehicles has already taken these credits in account.
This post was edited on 4/1/16 at 1:46 am
Posted on 4/1/16 at 1:52 am to dragginass
quote:
You're also forgetting the federal credits to buyers.
I'm not forgetting anything. That's a subsidy.
quote:
That's electric car welfare, and often the prices listed for the vehicles has already taken these credits in account.
Corporate welfare is only acceptable if you agree with the industry. Got it. I mean there are an endless amount of subsidies for the entire energy and transportation industries. I'm personally grateful for them in O&G, but Louisiana suffers from them.
And it isn't just state subsidies:
quote:
Five corporations have achieved a trifecta, ranking among the 50 largest recipients of three kinds of funds: state subsidies; federal grants and tax credits; and federal loans, loan guarantees and bailout assistance. Those businesses, which Good Jobs First defines as the “most successful at obtaining subsidies from all levels of government” are Boeing, Ford Motor, General Electric, General Motors and JPMorgan Chase.
This post was edited on 4/1/16 at 1:58 am
Posted on 4/1/16 at 1:59 am to WhoDat937
quote:
Corporate welfare is only acceptable if you agree with the industry. Got it.
You have changed the discussion from electric vehicles being unprofitable to corporate welfare. In this case, corporate welfare is just one symptom of the issue.
Posted on 4/1/16 at 2:08 am to dragginass
quote:
You have changed the discussion from electric vehicles being unprofitable to corporate welfare. In this case, corporate welfare is just one symptom of the issue.
No, I brought up the hypocrisy of your post about government subsidies while ignoring that not only the entire US auto industry, but also the entire energy sector, is heavily fueled, if not reliant, on government subsidies.
The demand for Tesla's vehicles are there. They are slowly building the company, developing a loyal customer base, and improving their product. They don't need to be profitable right now to be successful with the support of shareholders.
There have been other companies, backed by confident shareholders, that have increased their revenue without turning much, if any profits. Hell, look at Amazon.
Goodnight.
This post was edited on 4/1/16 at 2:09 am
Page 2 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News