Hacker News Reader

Comment by neya | Hacker News Reader

Not necessarily. Almost all car manufacturers are anticipating this kind of transition and have back up plans already [1]. I bet Tesla will become what Apple is to smartphones and then the rest will gradually pace up and someday attain equilibrium (or even overshoot) with Tesla's roadmap.

For example, a lot of manufacturers are already developing electric vehicles for masses, just that they don't want to get their feet wet and they want someone else to do it first , so they can just jump in and join them if the market is actually ripe.

Mass adoption of electric vehicles is what most manufacturers fear and which is a valid concern, which is why Tesla's move is particularly so important.

Automotive industry is one industry where nobody is 'too late' for the party. As of now, I personally want to see Tesla succeed.

[1]Nissan, Toyota, Mistubishi, Chevrolet, Hyundai, BMW, Audi, etc. all have EV's in their roadmaps, some are budget EV's too.

View on HN

Apple managed to maintain their strong lead for a relatively long time by creating the app ecosystem.

Tesla could do the same with their supercharger network, where they offer free charging. Although I think (and hope) that eventually they'll let other car manufacturers "license" access to Tesla's network, and this way they'll be able to not only pay for the maintenance and cost of the network, but also make a bit of money from it, too. They shouldn't charge too much, though. Maybe $100 per car.

By turning the network into an actual business and not just a "cost", they would have to incentive and capital to expand the network all over the world as fast as possible.

And that's how we all get free charging for all cars, forever. Goodbye oil industry.

Agreed. But 'Goodbye oil industry' will never happen in the near future. Not with the level of corruption with the top dogs right now. They'll do everything they can to suppress the viable alternatives. They'll buy out the media, pay the right guys to write stories about how unreliable and dangerous these EV's are and why oil based transport is still the best, and so on.

And co-incidentally, I am reminded of the Tesla-BBC fiasco...[1]

[1]http://green.autoblog.com/2013/03/10/uk-appeals-court-dismis...

I don't know if you need to ascribe malice there, Clarkson has always hated EVs, even before they were serious contenders.

What you hate or like is your personal prerogative. But when you are addressing a public audience, who have faith in you and your brand and trust you, you are morally obliged to be factually correct and not let personal opinions distort the facts. If you read that article, Tesla claims that they forged a scene as if the car just stopped randomly which is highly unlikely when there is enough charge (I am with Elon Musk on this one).

(You doesn't literally mean you, but BBC in this case)

Clarkson is not a news reporter. He's an entertainer. He is expected to be controversial and opinionated, and - depending on your viewpoint - quite delusional.

If he started being objective and serious, the show would be cancelled. As it in fact was before he pitched the new, less serious, format and convinced the BBC to relaunch the show.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but the oil industry is far from just being gasoline and diesel.

Tesla will have to move down market, that will seriously restrict their profit per car. Where they are now with the S is in a price range which is less than twelve percent of the market but provides the majority of many automakers yearly profits. Get down to that below 40k mark and they are going to be in the same boat with everyone else. I doubt we will see a sub 40k car from them for years.

Tesla already has the ability to pay for the supercharger network by selling excess power back to to grid.

The legacy automakers all seem to think 100 miles on a charge is good enough; of them, only Nissan seems to be trying to do much more than build the minimum number to comply with California regulations.

The sales figures of Leaf vs Tesla seem to suggest that people bought the Leaf when the Model S wasn't yet available and the Leaf was the best EV available, and largely lost interest after that.

It seems entirely possible that the legacy automakers' EV plans could turn out to be too little, too late.

Tesla becoming the Apple of vehicles would be a worse case scenario for the other manufacturers considering that Apple assumes the (vast?) majority of profits.

Which is...good and will force them to innovate better, no? Case in point - Samsung was nobody a few years back, though they were very much popular as a 'budget' phone maker. But look at Samsung today, they make phones much better than even Apple's iPhone (though this is subjective) in terms of features, performance, etc. But what forced Samsung to become what they are today? Pressure from its competitors. Competition is always good....(until they start suing each other).

You were trying to link that automakers might not be scared because Tesla might "only" become the Apple of cars (I guess implying that less marketshare is not scary). But Apple's "small" marketshare enables it to reap most of the industry's profits which is far scarier to competitors.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com