Posted on 04/12/2019 11:15:27 AM PDT by catnipman
The Gigafactory in Nevada is a joint operation between Panasonic and Tesla.
But now, according to the Nikkei, the partners have frozen the planned 50% expansion of the Gigafactory in Nevada, and Panasonic has suspended its investment in Tesla’s Shanghai plant that is currently under construction.
And now there is this awful question about demand for Tesla vehicles hanging over the battery plants, as deliveries plunged 31% globally in Q1 from Q4, to 63,000 vehicles:
Model S and X in Q1 deliveries plunged 56% from Q4 to just 12,100 vehicles. And it’s not just a seasonal blip: this was down a catastrophic 44% from Q1 2018. Model 3 deliveries in Q1 dropped 19% from Q4 and 8% from Q3, to 50,900 cars.
After having saturated its Model 3 pent-up demand, created during years of hype, the company is now facing the issue that every automaker is facing in the US: Total car sales have plunged over 30% since 2014, while truck and SUV sales have boomed.
(Excerpt) Read more at wolfstreet.com ...
Wow Tesla really mis-read the market, like Airbus did with the A380.
They should have done a SUV!
Here’s a better story on the situation:
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/panasonic-says-reviewing-further-investment-095456810.html
TOKYO/BENGALURU (Reuters) - Panasonic Corp and Tesla Inc will continue to make new investments in the U.S. electric carmaker’s Gigafactory as needed, but believe they can squeeze more out of existing resources than previously planned, Tesla said on Thursday.
The two companies were responding to a report by Japan’s Nikkei that said they had frozen previous plans to raise the capacity of the plant, which supplies battery packs for Tesla cars.
“Both Tesla and Panasonic continue to invest substantial funds into Gigafactory,” a Tesla spokesperson said.
“That said, we believe there is far more output to be gained from improving existing production equipment than was previously estimated.”
...
Tesla is also in the process of buying Maxwell, which should give them a significant boost in battery production and capacity, which could give another reason for them to delay expansion until that acquisition is complete.
“They should have done a SUV!”
They did.
This company is a loser.
I wouldn’t buy a Tesla at any price...
think Delorean...
What model is that? Is it selling?
Model X doesn’t look like an SUV even though they call it an SUV.
82K base is pretty steep.
“Total car sales have plunged over 30% since 2014, while truck and SUV sales have boomed.”
And that is because SUVs and Trucks meet our needs. We’re on our second Chevrolet Avalanche ( and we’re sorry that they are no longer being produced). The first one was with us for 9 years and 175,000 miles before we decided to get a last of the Mohicans 2013 which now just broke the 100,000 mile mark. They have been two of the most reliable and useful vehicles we have ever owned. Guess the next time it will have to be a pickup.
I call those cars Teslickles. But not in polite company.
Tesla’s sales woes is another triumph of simple economics over ideology...
If you’re referring to the Tesla Model X SUV, they’ve priced the majority of their potential buyers out of market at 82K$ MSRP...
I realize tech comes at a price but they’ve effectively insured the electric will probably remain a virtue signaling status symbol among the well-heeled for the foreseeable future...Narrow-minded of me, I know, but when I see a Tesla the first thing comes to mind is “tree-hugging Progtard”...
Most of what remains of the middle class in the market for a family wagon don’t have and won’t spend that kind of money on a vehicle to haul kids around, when gas is still relatively cheap and there are so many gas-powered offerings on the market, so their sales will remain small...
Kinda puts the Tesla to shame.
My recently acquired diesel,which is somewhat bigger and has a much bigger engine,has a highway range of about 675 miles.
No: U G L Y
“at any one of about 40,000 “recharging” stations nationwide”
number is closer to 150,000:
https://www.google.com/search?q=number+gas+stations+in+us
now figure 4 minutes gas/diesel vs, say, 90 minutes for electric recharge, and electric has to recharge, say 3 times as often, then that means we’ll need 10,125,000 charging stations for the entire fleet at a cost of, say, $5,000, that’s an infrastructure cost of only $50 billion dollars ... peanuts for the Green New Deal folk ...
Only about 10% of Tesla charges are done at a supercharger. The rest are done at home or work.
The great advantage of electric charging is it can be done almost anywhere.
So Boise to Seattle is 500 miles. What kind of time do you estimate to make the trip? A gas or diesel vehicle is 8 hours or less.
If most people who buy Teslas use them for commuting why would your question matter?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.