Do Fisker and Tesla deserve government money?

Should the government really help build this kind of vehicle?

Over the next several years the government is going to dole out many tens of billions of dollars in grants, loans and tax credits to help green the automotive landscape. Thus, startups such as Tesla and Fisker are hoping to obtain as much of this money as possible to increase their green automotive efforts. Yet, after a $7,500 tax credit, neither will offer a vehicle priced much below $50,000.

Does this really help green the auto industry?

Minimally, it will take more than a decade, if everything goes extremely well, for these companies to sell anything priced close enough for mass consumption. Yet, both stand to reap huge IPO rewards with the help of government money.

Still, I cannot help but question the real world prospects of either company. Every major automaker has multiple plug-in options these days in the pipeline. Can either Tesla or Fisker contribute anything to this landscape? Can they really compete at anything but luxury vehicles?

Perhaps. Thus, maybe these companies are deserving of massive government assistance, but I dare say neither Fisker nor Tesla is outside of the box in their automotive thinking these days. All this makes me wonder, are just batteries and a plug the solution to America's auto woes and energy policy? Are we really thinking far enough outside of the box?

Don't make fun of the Volt

Let's get real for a second

So, David Letterman crossed Bob Lutz's line. Letterman made fun of the Chevy Volt when Tesla's Elon Musk was on Dave's Show.

Relax, Bob. The Volt is worthy of a few jokes. We've been hearing about the Volt for more than 2 years and it's still almost two years away from putting rubber to the road. Nonetheless, if it lives up to the hype I'm sure you'll be the last one laughing.

Still, why get hot and bothered? What have Musk and Tesla proven?

GM could have a developed a Roadster-like vehicle a decade ago. A DECADE ago. So could have Toyota, Honda, Nissan, Ford, etc. Unfortunately, unless you're goal is an IPO such a vehicle would have helped GM accomplish next to nothing. GM would still be facing bankruptcy, and its EV would still be losing tons of money.

Ultimately, both Tesla's Roadster and the Volt are a good bit of hype. When either vehicle achieves sales of at least 100,000 units, I'll become a believer. Of course, until either starts selling at least 100,000 units per year, both vehicles will continue to be more experiment than reality - and worthy of a joke every now and again!

What's up with Tesla?

Great looking car

I don't know what to make of Tesla. While I've always respected Elon Musk's endeavor into electric vehicles, I've never fully bought into Tesla's business model, at least as far as EVs for the masses.

Today's press conference, however, was weird.

"What we really wanted to show the car industry is that it is possible to create a compelling electric car at a compelling price," Musk said. "We hope the industry will follow our lead?"

You mean like the Chevy Volt, which Musk claimed was too cost-ineffective, yet is cheaper than the Model S? Or, how about the numerous EVs expected by numerous automakers due out exactly when, or even before, Tesla starts actually producing these vehicles?

Certainly, the Roadster was a shot off the bow of the Big 3, but not the Model S. Quite honestly, the auto industry is going to quickly outsell the Model S as soon as Tesla actually starts selling this EV.

While I still commend Musk and Tesla on this incredible achievement, I can't help but feel this press event was about Fed funding more than anything, which I'll bet will be quickly followed by an IPO - not that there is anything wrong with that. Still....

Taxing: A $50,000 Tesla Model S or a $33,000 Chevy Volt?

Or neither?

In 2011 environmentalists and foreign-energy hawks will have a number of interesting choices available when purchasing their next car. Two of the top picks will, undoubtedly, be the Tesla Model S and the Chevy Volt.

After tax incentives, the Tesla Model S will cost about $50,000,the Chevy Volt about $33,000, although it seems the Model S will be more of a luxury sedan than the Volt.

The Model S will offer an electric range of about 225 miles between charges. The Volt should offer at least 300 miles, but the Volt also offers the ability to use gasoline to generate electricity.

Personally, I'd love to have both vehicles, but neither make sense for my driving needs. However, if I had to pick one, it would easily be the Volt and for one reason only, cost.

Which brings me to a touchy subject. Tax incentives for wealthy people. Or, more precisely, tax incentives for cars costing far above $30,000 - a number most Americans cannot afford. Shouldn't the government focus it's tax incentives on cars with the most mass-appeal? Cars that provide the quickest adoption for the greatest numbers possible?

If you can afford a $50,000 auto, how badly do you really need a $7500 tax credit?

Is Fisker a Tesla killer?

The Karma convertible

In about a year, Fisker Automotive will begin production on the Karma plug-in hybrid sedan. Already the company is finalizing the details on its dealership network and at least 1,300 vehicles are already on the books according to reports.

Yet, what is really interesting about Fisker is the plan to produce 15,000 plug-in hybrids per year. By the time the Karma goes on sale, on the other hand, Tesla might still not have produced 1,000 Roadsters.

Is Tesla quickly becoming irrelevant?

In terms of cost, both the Roadster and the Karma are in the same league. Yet, the Karma seems to offer so much more. For instance, a wider dealership network, better range, and more seating.

Yes, Tesla will eventually offer a 4-seat sedan that could cost-cut the Karma, yet Tesla's manufacturing history is a serious question mark. If Fisker can come out of the gate with all their manufacturing pistons firing, is there any room left in the market for Tesla?

Tesla's cheap, $57,000, EV dependent on government aid

100th Roadster finally delivered

Tesla will delay plans to build it's new $57,000 four door sedan if the government doesn't give it $350 million in auto loans. If the government does deliver the money, Tesla hopes to build 20,000 sedans per year by 2011.

While I have great respect for Elon Musk, I have a hard time buying this business if it requires government help. Thus far Tesla has produced just 100 cars. In 2011, if Tesla can start selling $57,000 EVs, they will have to compete with much cheaper plug-in hybrids and EVs from numerous major automakers.

In my opinion, unless gas costs at least $5.00 in 2011, $40,000 for a Volt is too expensive. Still, I'd take a range extended $40,000 Volt over a $57,000 EV any day of the week.

I just don't see a legitimate business case.

Can a company like Tesla become a player?

Has it already changed the auto industry?

GM's car guru, Bob Lutz, has stated that Tesla was a factor in the decision to move aggressively towards the Chevy Volt. Thus, if not for Tesla, would there even be a Volt?

Possibly, but without doubt, Tesla motivated GM to move faster towards vehicles such as the Volt. But back to Tesla.

Thus far, the automaker has over-promised and under delivered, though there are signs the company has turned a corner with deliveries finally reaching some consumers. Still, making a few thousand cars per year is far different than making hundreds of thousands per year.

Even if a company such as Tesla perfects its technology and manufacturing, can such an automaker become a major US automaker? Or is a buy out the only future for such companies?

Tesla sues Fisker

Supposed to have been White Star?

Tesla has filed a lawsuit against Fisker Automotive. According to InsideLine, "The action contends that Denmark-born designer Henrik Fisker's company fraudulently agreed to take on Tesla's $875,000 design contract for the White Star sedan to gain access to confidential design information and trade secrets, according to media reports. Afterward, Fisker announced the Karma, a competing vehicle."

I thought White Star was supposed to be a an affordable electric sedan, unlike the Roadster? The Fisker Karma design certainly doesn't appear to be a design built for affordability.

Tesla has been an inspiring story, but the company has way over-promised and way under-delivered. I continue to wish them luck, but......

Tesla production set for March

Production set for March 17

Sure Tesla has undergone delays and transmission problems, but the $100,000 Roadster is finally becoming a a real-world reality.

Still, don't get too excited, it's going to take some time to get more than a couple dozen vehicles on the road. To start, Tesla plans to produce about 1 car per week as the company figures it out the production process. By the end of 2008, the automaker could be churning out 40 cars per week.

Unfortunately, due to those transmission bugs, the vehicle won't quite live up to initial specs. Still, the Volt will buzz from 0 t 60 in about 6 seconds.

Let's hope they keep the ball rolling.

A rumor about Tesla

Over promised, under delivered?

After the debut of the Chevy Volt, Tesla's CEO Martin Eberhard aggressively and viciously attacked the Volt calling it a marketing gimmick, while claiming the $100,000 Tesla Roadster was the real deal. While I was a fan of what Tesla was trying to accomplish I thought Eberhard's statements were groundless and dumb.

Less than a year later, after multiple product delays, Eberhard is no longer with Tesla and not by his choosing. Ultimately, at least in terms of sales and marketing, Eberhard's attack on Tesla set up Tesla to over-promise and under deliver.

Now comes the rumor, and I reiterate, this is only a rumor, but from a very reliable source. A media-friend, whom now refuses to write about the Tesla until orders are delivered, told me that one of his contacts had put a deposit on a Roadster. A little disappointed, he stopped by Tesla to find out what was going on and took another test drive. Then asked for his deposit back.

Eberhard out at Tesla

Can Tesla get focused

Martin Eberhard is no longer a member of Tesla Motors according to Straightline.

While I've not been a big fan of Eberhard and his tenure at Tesla, I will not celebrate this split. I think Eberhard is a brilliant person, he just seems to let his ego get the best of him at times.

Let's hope that Tesla can get it together and roll out its Roadster as soon as possible.

Tesla picks new CEO

Ready to move forward

Last year, following the Detroit Auto Show, Tesla's CEO Martin Eberhard couldn't contain his criticism of GM's Chevy Volt. Yet, under Eberhard's leadership, Tesla has missed multiple targets and has begun to resemble nothing more than a big PR, fund-raising gimmick.

That might be about to change, as Tesla has now, finally, hired a new CEO to take Tesla to the next level.

"To that end, it is with great pleasure that I announce that Ze'ev Drori will become CEO of Tesla Motors, effective December 3rd."Ze'ev is a successful high-tech entrepreneur and an experienced chief executive with the proven ability to create and manage companies with innovative products in both the high-tech and automotive sectors. He has more than 30 years of continual success and has demonstrated the ability to lead a company from conception to profitability, a public offering and thousands of employees. Elon Musk

Tesla's Martin Eberhard explains how Tesla will succeed

I have to admit, I have not been a big fan of Martin Eberhard ever since NAIAS when Eberhard mocked GM's Volt, but that's another story.

However, after watching this video, I have serious questions about Tesla's plans, according to Eberhard.

Eberhard states that all other electric car companies have failed because they tried to save the world, making cheap electric cars - because they started from the bottom up. That's not how businesses succeed according to Eberhard. According to Eberhard you have to start at the top. Thus, the $100,000 Roadster.

Hmmm. Henry Ford anyone? Vizio? Just exceptions in the world according to Eberhard?

Tesla delays delivery on first Roadsters

Rumors are finally confirmed

I have nothing but praise and envy for what Tesla Motors is trying to accomplish, and now that Martin Eberhard is out as CEO, I can go back to fully defending the electric car company.

Not that I stopped defending Tesla during Eberhard's reign, I just thought that his arrogance was unacceptable.

But, back to Tesla.

Unfortunately, Tesla will have to push back their delivery date on the Tesla Roadster. According to Tesla's website, Tesla hopes to deliver the first 60 Roadsters before March 2008, and another 600 of the electric vehicles should be delivered before the end of 2008.

Additionally, for those interested in purchasing a Roadster, the company will no longer take deposits, although interested parties can still put their name on a waiting list, and they will be notified when vehicles are available. So, don't give up faith Tesla fans!

Hopefully, Tesla will keep pushing ahead. The kind of entrepreneurship that Tesla is demonstrating is exactly the kind of innovative leadership that America desperately needs.

PG&E and Tesla partner on V2G

Tesla isn't dead yet

Over the last few months, a few knowledgeable sources have told me that Tesla Motors is having problems, and that delivery of already ordered Roadsters could be significantly delayed. Ultimately, this doesn't surprise me greatly. It's not as if Tesla is producing toasters, they are producing some of the most advanced automobiles ever produced.

Fortunately, even if Tesla is having problems they are still moving forward, and they have now partnered with PG&E on Vehicle 2 Grid (V2G) technology. Sadly, the two are only partnering on one way charging, or Smart Charging, as PG&E calls it - at least for now.

"We are focusing our initial V2G implementation on smart charging," said JB Straubel, Chief Technology Officer, Tesla Motors. "Smart charging is a form of V2G in which the vehicle does not provide power back to the grid. Instead, the vehicle charging rate is controlled remotely in order to support the operation of the grid or to best match load to the availability of intermittent renewable energy resources such as wind and solar."

In the long run, it is hoped that V2G technology will enable electric vehicles and plug-in hybrid vehicles to not just smart charge, but to actually pump electricity back into the grid, thereby making the cost of electricity cheaper for such vehicles.

Does Tesla's range reduction highlight the importance of today's hybrid vehicles?

Only 200 miles per charge?

Tesla has begun sending notices to the 400 or so customers that purchased the $100,000 Roadster, notifying them that their amazing electric sports car will only achieve 200 miles per charge, rather than 250 miles per charge advertised, according to the Silicon Valley Business Journal.

Nonetheless, I would STILL buy one if I could afford one.

Still, this points out the complexities of electric vehicles and plug-in hybrid vehicles. It also highlights the importance of today's hybrid vehicles. Electric vehicles and plug-in hybrids will happen, but kinks still need to be resolved. More than anything, these lithium-driven automobiles need more investment, and the best way to achieve that investment is hybrid cars.

Already, Toyota has stated that not only will the 2009 Third Generation Prius utilize lithium-ion batteries, but that all Toyota hybrids will utilize Li-ion batteries. That's hundreds of thousands of battery packs per year - not 400. That kind of investment will be great for Tesla and anyone else interested in all types of hybrids and electric vehicles.

Tesla charges production plans

Is Tesla the next great American auto company?

Electric vehicle automaker Tesla Motors plans to begin selling a new all electric passenger vehicle in 2009. The 5 passenger, four door electric vehicle will probably start around $50,000 and will achieve about 250 miles per charge.

Later this Spring construction will begin on a $35 million 150,000 square foot production facility in Santa Fe, NM that is expected to provide some 400 new jobs.

May the force be with you Tesla!

(Source: MSNBC)

Tesla to offer $30,000 electric vehicle in 2009?

Some think that my last post on Tesla was a little anti-Tesla and pro-GM. I disagree. Regardless, I have always thought that the Tesla Roadster was a phenomenal vehicle. In fact, if I could afford any $100,000 vehicle, that would be the $100,000 vehicle that I would buy - without question. Still, how serious can you take a car company that only offers a $100,000 vehicle?

Well, you might be able to take Tesla far more seriously in 2009. In that year, Tesla is hoping to offer a 5 seat sedan, called the Whitestar which is expected to list at $30,000. Now that's a car I can afford. This is a story that I will excitedly follow.

(Source: AutoblogGreen)

Tesla takes on the Volt

Back in July I wrote about the Tesla electric car, citing it as more evidence that plug-in hybrid vehicles are a real possibility. While, I love the Tesla, how excited can you really be? It's a two-seater. It costs $100,000, and while it achieves an astonishing 250 miles per charge, how much would that mileage be reduced if the vehicle was a four-passenger vehicle?

I mean, let's be real. If I want to drive up to San Francisco, I'm supposed to stop every 250 miles, wait 3 hours then start up again? Oh, yeah, and I have to put the kids in the trunk? In the real world, most Americans can only afford one or two cars; they cannot afford $100,000 two-person, occasional-use automobiles.

Then today, I read an article on AutoblogGreen noting that Tesla CEO Martin Eberhard was ripping on the Volt electric concept, automakers in general, and claiming that "Who killed the electric car" forced GM back into electric vehicles.

Please, let's get real again. (Read the rest)