812 Market Dynamics

Will do...

 

Definitely get your sentiment here. Unfortunately, all of the cars you own are almost certainly vulnerable if not by the OEM but by others. Gadgets have consequences.

 

Key word there is "current" and is missing key words like "future."

Can you name a single, new technology that is "sustainable" from day 1? Do you know how many technologies were actually subsidized by the government early on? Hell, do you know how much of the "reserves" on oil companies' balance sheets might not even be economically feasible to extract?

You have to spend money to make money. You invest money now so that you can make money later.

Tesla has so far done what most people said was impossible. They're selling hundreds of thousands of cars and the cars are actually really really good with really really good reviews.

 

“A policeman driving a Tesla patrol car almost ran out of power during a suspect chase in Fremont, California. The police eventually called off the chase after the assailant began driving recklessly through thickening traffic, according to the report. “

I’m not interested at all in EV but when I recently read this new in the internet I asked myself the following question - what’s the real range at high speed of one of these electric vehicles ? I often travel in different motorways and I notice that Teslas I pass by are always driving slowly. I've wondered if they are saving battery charge ? Recently a friend of mine who has the most performant Tesla confirmed that theory and explained to me that if he presses the accelerator pedal like I do always with the one in my Ferrari, the range drops drastically and then he might not reach the destination. The graph below shows what happens to an EV range when speed increases.



Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

This is supposed to be about 82 second hand pricing

 

The key part of my concern is "remote" ability, that is while I am simply using the car or it is parked, not referring to if the car is at a dealer for service.

Point being, if the OEM can remotely control it, potentially so can others.

And to do that requires the vehicle to have the ability to be connected to via remote means, typically a "hidden/embedded" cell/satellite phone type device that can communicate in such a way that the vehicle's operations can be manipulated in any way.

That does not apply to any cars/trucks I use. None have any gadgets per se.

If you know of another manner such remote changes can be made, please let me know.

thank you

 

Electric cars have been around more than 100 years, we are very far from 'day 1' ...

Tesla would not exist in its current form without many billions of government handouts....
https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/if-tesla-is-worth-more-than-gm-why-are-taxpayers-still-subsidizing-it/

I know of using money to make money, but, a money pit is something else entirely different, no way to climb out, we'll see how this all plays out but so far it is not economically feasible as a stand-alone entity (recent 'profit' of Tesla is a series of accounting tricks, again, they only exist due to massive taxpayer subsidies that are continuing...)

As for oil reserves, yes, I do know quite well, hence the recent slacking off of fracking due to overheads until price per barrel increases, etc.

As for really good Tesla reviews, ok those do exist as well as just as many bad ones...
https://www.trustpilot.com/review/www.teslamotors.com
https://www.consumeraffairs.com/automotive/tesla_motors.html?#sort=top_reviews&filter=1
https://www.cars.com/research/tesla-model_3-2018/consumer-reviews/?sort=lowest-to-highest
https://www.consumerreports.org/car-reliability-owner-satisfaction/tesla-model-3-loses-cr-recommendation-over-reliability-issues/

 

Very true, but at the opposite extreme of driving less than 20 miles per hour (32 hours to go 600 miles) you can get 600 miles from a Tesla, never mind how far an ICE car could travel using same "technique"
https://electrek.co/2018/05/27/tesla-model-3-range-new-hypermiling-record/
ICE car using a similar but average speed was quite a bit higher:
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2007/01/guy-can-get-59-mpg-plain-old-accord-beat-punk/
clocked 1,397 miles from just one 12.8-gallon tank of gas—a new record. They had averaged 109 miles per gallon.

 

Question: Are any Ferraris, as produced (not including anything an owner does afterwards), vulnerable to remote manipulations?

Here's an interesting one, has nothing to do with Ferrari but interesting just the same:
https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a15342391/is-your-connected-car-at-risk-previous-owners-may-still-have-access/

So, as far as I know, all Ferraris made are "off grid" and are not "connected" cars, if that's inaccurate, please provide details.

thank you

 

I think the thing you really have to worry about remote control of cars is 5G. It will bring many wonders, but also new risks.

I don't think Ferraris are remote controllable like others- but for how long will that last?

 

Batteries were invented more than 100 years ago too, but not the kind we need today for EVs. We are still very much in the early stages of EV technology. It's why Teslas are so much more efficient than everyone else. If the technology was mature, the Europeans wouldn't be so far behind in many respects.

Tesla wouldn't exist without many billions from the government, but neither would GM or Chrysler given then $100B bailout they got to keep them and the entire automotive supply chain alive not too long ago. Every major automaker gets billions in state and federal subsidies. VW got like $1B in subsidies for their plant in Tennessee alone...

 

To understand, if not for government forcing for the CO2 fairy tale, there would be no EVs or not very many, the only reason the larger car companies are even considering it because of the huge penalties in EU and China.

From nearly its inception Tesla has only existed due to government handouts. And not just federal.

Chrysler was given a loan in the 1980s and they paid it all back in record time, that is not comparable at all.

Chrysler several years ago after being truly decimated by MB's raiding its cash during that failed merger and then dumping it, was picked up by Cerberus Capital and then bailed out and then paid off by Fiat, true enough.

GM should of been left to end on its own, it would of gone through proper bankruptcy procedures and rebuilt itself stronger, but government intervention twisted the entire process up, complete mess that should of never occurred in the way it did.

However, neither Chrysler nor GM were government funded from their respective inceptions and continued that way for their respective corporate lives, so, not comparable to Tesla in any way whatsoever.

Likewise on subsidies
https://subsidytracker.goodjobsfirst.org/parent/volkswagen
In the case of VW, those were not to keep the company economically viable but more like handouts to bring in new economic activity to those governments providing, really apples to oranges, VW would not of gone out of business without those, they simply would of made other arrangements.

 

And now, we return to our regularly scheduled programming...

 

Usually threads go off topic and onto ADMs and values of cars, this was a value thread that went off topic to electric vehicles

 

Tesla paid back its loan too...

They have to force these things on manufacturers because car manufacturers are known not to do anything good that they don't have to. It's why they'll still sell cars without airbags and that crumble like tin cans in South America. It's why VW just got fined $30B for emissions cheating instead of spending a little extra money and developing the right technology. ICE is dying, outdated technology. Burning fuel is not an ideal technology for the vast majority of things. If you didn't force car companies to move on to better tech, they never would. If VW could immediately switch to EVs profitably today, they would. The reason they can't though is because they never bothered to invest in developing the technology. They were more concerned about their bottom line and now Tesla is eating everyone's lunch and they're all playing catch up.

And hey, they had all the same advantages as Tesla. VAG, GM, BMW... they all had the same great EV subsidies, yet they slept on them and laughed at Tesla's ambition. Now Tesla is selling like 400K cars a year, has two giant factories, the tech is sound, affordable, and great.

The old guard has no vision. They are clueless. It's why Google's Waymo division has automotive IP that's probably worth more than every manufacturer less Toyota. It's why Tesla's efficiencies are far beyond everyone else. It's why it's taken until 2020 for others to come out with cars competitive with a 2012 Tesla.

And so Porsche magically just today had a breakthrough that lets them sell $100K Taycans profitably? It's just now gotten technology that allowed it to get good reviews? They couldn't have developed this 10 years ago like Tesla? The Taycan could have been sold 10 years ago, but Porsche didn't want to spend the money developing it.

The reality is that the government subsidized development of a good technology because everyone else was unwilling to do it. Governments forced that "fairy tale" because no one else was willing to develop the technology otherwise.

Tesla is the only reason you have a Taycan today.

 

Most of that is just factually inaccurate.

Customer demand mostly drives what manufacturers do - they try to offer lower pricing, or more power, or more luxuries, more safety and they try to do that best, cheapest, with most style. Marketing teams try to ‘tell’ customers what to want, with some success. But if customers don’t want it then a company is heading for extinction. They sell poor design cars in Latin America because the population is generally less wealthy and there is less competition raising the standard. If someone there offered a car with airbags at a similar price to one without, guess what happens.

On the other hand emissions penalties and fines force manufacturers to do things that customers don’t necessarily want. It is really not complicated. At the moment battery tech is not enough to make most customers want it at the price it costs to build. Tesla have got close by offering a high-margin luxury car for early adopters. When they try to sell to the lower-price mass market it all comes a bit unstuck. And they have not really been very profitable have they?

The Taycan has absolutely zero to do with Tesla. It has everything, literally everything, to do with the emissions and homologation environment in Europe, the US and China. If Porsche want their model to work in this new era they have to find a way to make an EV into a Porsche (or is it the other way around?)

Tesla is mostly irrelevant to Porsche save giving them a product target to aim at.

Most EVs around the world are still fuelled by burning things and the technology is quite old and mature now. If it is really the future, it needs new tech (solid state for example) to be developed properly for production. Tesla doesn’t have that and nor does Porsche. Everything you see now is a stop-gap. It is not the answer. Most likely one of the Chinese battery manufacturers will find a new solution but until they do it will take government intervention to keep EVs going because below high-priced Taycan and Models S and X, petrol cars are still too good a solution to the personal mobility question even if they are not an acceptable solution to environmental campaigners.

 

And like the Energizer Bunny, “it keeps on going and going, and going and going” ... (for our European friends, a USA small battery-maker’s infamous commercial slogan)

 

Not unique to FCA or any other OEM:

https://www.wired.com/2015/07/hackers-remotely-kill-jeep-highway/

Now back to 812 market dynamics.

 

Has anyone received trade in numbers for 812s int he US? The best asking prices I have seen are in the $340K range and the cars look pretty basic. Also, do most of these come in around $400k retail? I have never built one and priced it.

 

It looks like the average sticker for decently optioned 2018 was $410k. 2019s around $435. Used they seem to be asking an average of $370k for 2018s and $390k for 2019s. Of course base cars, odd color combinations, and ones with miles are outliers on the lower side. There doesn’t appear to be any wholesale MMR values so it’s tough to know what they trade in for.

 

Well you can't have customer demand for a product that has never existed, can you? Car manufacturers don't mainly follow customer demand for technologies, they follow business models and profitability more than anything. Traditional automakers have a terrible track record of adopting new technologies, especially ones that are consumer driven. Look how long it took to get Android Auto and CarPlay integration. Look how late companies are getting OTA in a world where people are connected 24/7 OTA. Look how bad their SoC and display choices have been. Look how bad even bluetooth integration can be.

These companies are not forward thinkers.They don't take risks. They don't like change. They are analog thinkers in a digital world.

The idea that emissions are forcing consumers on a large scale into something they don't want is absurd. This is the thought process of exotic car buyers who want exhaust noise. It's not the thought process of the vast majority of car sales. Nearly every consumer in the world wants improved efficiency, better reliability, lower operating costs, and to be able to refuel at home each night. You say that most customers don't want battery tech at the price it costs, yet huge numbers of luxury cars sold today are sold at prices that could offer EV models. 5er, 7er, GLC, G-Class, X5, Q7, S-Class, E-Class, A8, Panamera, Cayenne, Macan, LS... and the list goes on. All of these models typically sell with pretty high price tags that could easily support an EV powertrain... if they had bothered to develop one. A ****box E-Class just wouldn't be as profitable for Mercedes if it were an EV. How is it that Rolls Royce, a car that's meant to be quiet and already weighs as much as a semi, doesn't have a massive batter pack with 600 miles of range? I mean, it's pretty much the ideal EV -- low center of gravity, huge torque to move large mass, quiet, customer who have absolutely no price sensitivity.

You cannot improve technology that you never developed in the first place. You cannot just wait forever until every component is at perfection. Civilization defining breakthroughs are increasingly rare as technology has progressed throughout time. Do you know what will improve the speed of solid state battery and infrastructure development? Huge demand for stop-gap EVs which will create huge investment of time/money/resources into solid state battery development and infrastructure.

Tesla has significant technology advantages not because they waited for the ideal battery or input energy, but because they've spent the last 10 years developing stuff they're going to need regardless of what battery they use.

 

Since this thread started talking about batteries and and that car Ponzi scheme in California my 812 has lost 5 grand.

 

At least !

 

It might still have enough value to trade for a Tesla . Ferrari fastest depreciating cars in the world. They have to win every metric.