>An autopilot is a system used to control the path of an aircraft, marine craft or spacecraft without requiring constant manual control by a human operator. Autopilots do not replace human operators. Instead, the autopilot assists the operator's control of the vehicle, allowing the operator to focus on broader aspects of operations (for example, monitoring the trajectory, weather and on-board systems).
Autopilot, meaning a system which will keep speed with the car in front of it and keep your car in the lane, is a pretty apt description of the system. Autopilot on an airplane will do what it can to keep the plane reasonably level, keep it on its set waypoints, and try to keep a constant speed. Isn't keeping the car in the lane and matching traffic a pretty similar comparison?
Sure sounds to me like calling a decent ADAS system "autopilot" is pretty accurate.
The real reason for this change is probably that it allows them to recognize some FSD revenues this quarter - without that, the numbers would look even worse.
Cybertruck vs $25k Model 2. Focusing on FSD that doesn’t work well enough to sell in meaningful quantities (and may never work well enough to be unsupervised).
People want and will buy cheaper EVs. See: BYD. Make more, less expensive EVs faster. But this won’t support Teslas robotaxi/AI company valuation, which Elon needs to stay wealthy and powerful.
> BYD, China's biggest electric vehicle (EV) maker, reported first quarter 2024 sales fell 43% compared to the fourth quarter of 2023, handing back the title of world's biggest EV seller to Tesla after winning it last year.
The near 8x increase in compute capacity since March 2023 is the eyebrow raiser for me. My belief is that the vast majority of speculative value in Tesla has almost nothing to do with their hardware and everything to do with the potential of FSD.
If you believe the hypothesis that Americans will pay a huge premium (directly or indirectly by subsidizing the poor build quality) to decrease the mental load by 85% on their twice-daily 35 minute commute, then the company is in good shape.
On top of this, their data moat is enormous and their pipeline is mature. Other car companies seeking this level of autonomous fidelity will need to either race to start harvesting as much data as possible, or make a bet that this quantity will be unnecessary with future models.
Then again, if you don't buy the value-add promise of FSD hypothesis then this company is faltering hard. Cybertruck is flopping in sales (with life-threatening build issues as a bonus), the company is facing deteriorating public perception, the tightening economy makes the 'premium'/'apple' presentation less appealing, serious competitors recently entered the EV market, on and on.
> On top of this, their data moat is enormous and their pipeline is mature. Other car companies seeking this level of autonomous fidelity will need to either race to start harvesting as much data as possible, or make a bet that this quantity will be unnecessary with future models.
From what I've seen in the past, it's not clear that Tesla is actually collecting all that much data in practice. And the concerns over the quality of FSD isn't something that is easily resolved by mass harvesting of existing drivers' habits.
Tesla is not the leader in self driving, they are pretty far behind both Cruise and Waymo, which have or used to have driverless vehicles legally operating on public roads. If you're betting on driverless tech why would you go with Tesla and not Google or GM?
> 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.
That's pretty amazing and I don't believe it for a second.
So last quarter, Musk said that they were very advanced on the new platform with a 'mind blowing' new production line, and now it states that they can magically release a new model on the current production line...
And of course, all India, Mexico etc factories are out of question now. It just doesn't add up at all.
The stocks up 8% within seconds of the announcement. It has nothing to do with slide 10. It's unlikely anyone but bots read it before it was up 8%. And now it's just gamblers buying after hours as they always do.
More likely what happened was shorts who have tanked this stock down in one of the biggest bull runs of history are covering off rather flat news. The stocks is sitting down where it was in 2020. That is hardly a positive for investors, considering the other popular SP500/Nasdaq stocks are all breaking all time highs.
Interesting that they seem to flip flop on the affordable models.
Other companies (e.g. VW) have started with higher cost models for experimentation on the market, leaving the lower cost models for later. The ID.2 will be coming quite soon, interesting what Tesla plans.
Based on Elon’s history of making statements, them working on cheaper vehicles would most likely be them selling Model Y with lower range and/or cheaper batteries, but Wall Street will interpret that as them making a bet new $20000 hatchback.
The statement about platforms implies to me a whole new car.
VW and Renault have been in talks about developing an EV like that. Both manufacturers have always focused more on large scale low cost vehicles. Certainly Tesla will be competing in a much more difficult market, where they will face competition.
Interesting that apparently they are still pursuing lower cost offerings. But it really didn't make much sense what they said about it taking stuff from new and old platforms, that sounds really stupid.
I think tesla makes great mid level cars. Their high end offerings don’t feel high end enough, but the cheaper model 3s have a comparable fit and finish to other similarly priced vehicles and have some good tech.
The question is whether they can survive if they are up against established competition.
Do they focus on that segment and try to establish themselves against the competition there or do they plan on capturing other parts of the market? Budget cars are always far harder to make then these midrange models atleast the margins will be lower and you need scale to compensate.
Tesla had the enormous advantage of being early to market with a mediocre car with extremely great software. Now nearly every other car company is competing with them. To be honest, if I was buying a Tesla priced EV today, I wouldn't buy a Tesla.
Sure, but if you are making a new car you should decide what platform you use. Picking from two different platforms defeats the purpose of building platforms.
You build platforms to be able to quickly make new models, maybe with minor upgrades to platform parts down the line.
Taking what works from an old platform and developing it further for different needs is known as "building a new platform". What the said is that they would mix and match parts from the old and new platform, which makes very little sense.
What choice do they have? It's too late to be a small, profitable car company, even if that's the best path. They told everyone they are going to own the market.
I just got a FSD trial of 12.3.4 on my Model Y. It's better than I expected, but still feels far from something that can fully autonomously drive. Freeway driving works really well and has for years. Street driving is hit and miss. So much that I basically turn it off unless I'm driving a known good path. It handles intersections, street lights, and stop signs just fine. It goes around cars blocking the road, waiting first for a clear path in oncoming traffic.
On the bad side, it brakes REALLY hard a lot and accelerates REALLY hard off of stop signs.
It often freaks out when pedestrians are near the side of the road. My car came to a rapid full stop because some bikers were standing looking at their phones about 6 feet from a crosswalk. Besides being jarring and annoying, it pissed off and scared the person behind me. The car wouldn't have moved if I didn't disengage FSD.
It drove right towards a very low curb that suddenly appears in the roadway by my house. It's an old curb that sits maybe only 3 inches high but would definitely feel like a slam and maybe damage the tire if we hit it. I'm guessing it doesn't look enough like a normal curb to FSD
There are a bunch of small experiences just like these. I disengage nearly every trip and often at least twice.
I'm also on the free trial, this is relatively close to my experience. It's phenomenal on the highway, but it's too "good" of a driver in town that it feels like you'd never get anywhere because you're the only one actually obeying traffic laws.
> The car wouldn't have moved if I didn't disengage FSD.
I didn't realize it at first, but you don't have to fully disengage if it's hesitant about going. You can just push the gas pedal and it'll move along the path it was planning on going.
The indicator stalk is also super helpful. Not only can you use it to tell it to change lanes or to to prevent it from doing so, you can change the route with it.
It's a super impressive tech demo, but not worth $100/month IMO.
Yes, exactly this - FSD is MUCH better if you occasionally override it with the accelerator pedal and don't let it be stupid timid.
I keep reading bad reviews of people trying FSD for a day and not liking it because it didn't enter a roundabout quickly enough or slowed unexpectedly, which I agree is annoying, but I love that I can just hit the accelerator and FSD happily plays along.
The pros are that I've seen very human behavior from it like speeding up to get through a yellow light and letting people merge when they have a turn signals on. It also slows down for speed bumps and avoids blocking 4 way stops if pedestrians are crossing in the far side.
The bad is hard braking and acceleration at stop signs and there are just some situations where it waits too late to brake and then brakes too hard.
Just looking at that second page, it's truly a bloodbath in terms of numbers for Q1. Down on nearly every measure. They give a bunch of excuses on the first page. All of the excuses are just them pointing the finger externally and not taking enough ownership.
Anecdata alert, but I think Elon's connection to the company is increasingly problematic for Tesla. Among my friend group, 5 years ago it was cool when someone you knew bought a Tesla. Now, it's cringe. This is hyperbolic but it's almost like someone buying a Trump EV. Tesla isn't just the "Apple" of EVs like it used to be, it increasingly has all of these politically questionable and cringy meme ideas of its owner wrapped up in its brand. Which is a bummer, because it really shouldn't be that way. I believe there are great people that work (and worked before this recent layoff) at Tesla. But Tesla's owner is just a liability for them all.
Tesla has long been experimenting on customers to see how much abuse they can suffer: bad service center experience, bad software updates that degrade functionality, stout refusal to introduce features that people want, braindead decisions like removing turn stalks and ultrasonic sensors, constant assembly quality issues, etc.
Turns out, that customers do have a limit on the amount of abuse they can take.
I own a 2018 Model 3, after owning a Model S. I would love to upgrade, but new Model 3 cars are just inferior to what I have (except for the range).
All the comments here remind me of the same sentiment [0] when Meta went all the way down to $89 and nobody bought it and it was all over for Zuckerberg and Facebook.
What happened next was just business as usual with the price rising from $89 to $500.
Lets hope that $TSLA's price crashes 50% and it would be a perfect time to buy.
What a silly and self-contradictory name. "Full", until it isn't.