TheDonEffect

Imo no one would've bought a Tesla had it not looked the way they did. Tesla took a page out of Apple's playbook in that they put an emphasis on product design and not just capability. Before Apple, all computers were literally beige boxes, Apple came out with products that looked like it was designed in a modern furniture studio. It's something that I can never grasp about companies, that they can make something like a Leaf or Bolt, or even Prius and think yeah that looks great. Toyota benefited from being a pioneer in the field so people bought them despite the looks.
I'm not saying they should all look like exotic sports cars, but the Tesla S was a clean, elegant shape that really isn't earth shattering in terms of design, but it's a design that traditionally looks good. Elon also emphasized the human interaction, so he put touches like the door handles etc, because he understand consumer touch points.
How the hell do you make a Bolt or an i3 and think yeah people will want this. It just shows the disconnect sometimes between engineers and the public. Apple was a design first company, whereas most tech companies were engineering first.

JonBoy

They did about 1500 Model 3s in the last quarter (call it 91 days). That's less than 17 cars per day (roughly 0.7 cars per HOUR) ...and they're saying they'll do nearly a car per minute? Improve their efficiency by 850% (quickly)? Not happening.

This is my problem with Elon Musk - he writes cheques his team can't cash. He throws his people under the bus by making outlandish claims with no basis in reality. He's a braggart. He's completely outside the realm of probability, much less possibility.

His approach to "new" things is great because he's not necessarily trying to make a business out of it. Problem is, he's building cars to make money and there's a way to do that and it's not by trying to reinvent EVERY PART OF THE CAR AND MANUFACTURING PROCESS. Baby steps with some solid standard technology would have his production far higher than it is, give him a financial base for the future and stabilize his company.

JonBoy

Good points....but your phone is a throwaway item every two years. Your car? Not so much. The engineering requirements are very high to get a vehicle to be reliable and usable. If you put design before engineering, you end up with a throwaway car or a toy.

Also, Apple made great designs but they also HIT THEIR PRODUCTION GOALS. That's a huge difference! Apple actually did what they said they were going to do (above and beyond, actually). Tesla? Nope.

TheDonEffect

True but Apple products of yore were also known for their longevity as well, people who bought power books/macs would go years before trading up, and even then still had a useable piece of tech, they didn't try to set the benchmark but rather used more tried and true approach and made up for it with design.
Considering the amount of cars that are leased vs purchased, a similar approach should still work, and considering electric drivetrains are reliable in general, it should work out. With Teslas it's not the motor that people have issues with, it's all the other stuff like collision repair, and other small but critical things that come up.

JonBoy

So, to summarize, to be like Apple, Tesla has to:

1. Make a quality product
2. Hit their production goals
3. Match (or beat) the reliability of the competition

To date, they haven't done any of the above. Their reliability record is poor, they can't hit production goals and the competition are rolling out waves of electric vehicles that will be in direct competition. Lots of pressure on Tesla!

Tesla is first to market but they've failed to capture the market because they can't actually produce enough cars that the masses can afford. So they've squandered their advantage. Here in Canada, there's a 9-month waiting list for a Chevy Bolt!

mosesbotbol

I wonder if the financial realities will come to bear. I see parallels between Tesla and Delorean.

ishtori5

There is a 9 month wait because there is a lot of demand or GM has limited production quantities due to manufacturing constraints? EVs are still relatively new thing and I think OEM suppliers are still trying to learn and catch up on the demand of the components. Compared to the suppliers for ICE which had decades to build up the supply chain and know hows.

You don't need to build quality products, hit your production numbers or beat your competition to be like Apple. Many successful companies do that but they are not thought of as Apple-ish. To me Tesla is Apple-ish because they are a disruptor in an established industry. Think of it years ago when everyone was using Windows PC and then Apple creates the Mac, iMac, Macbook, iPhone, etc. They were products different than what everyone else was using. Sine the beginning, Hybrids and EVs were built and designed to be efficient and practical but they were not pretty and had sub-par performance. Then comes Tesla who builds EVs that are both sleek and also had very good performance.Other companies have tried (Fisker/Faraday) but Tesla by far is the most successful. I like to think for car enthusiasts, Tesla is the go to car for EVs.

gerry100

I'll say it again - building a car is far more than developing a drive train and a sexy package,

TheDonEffect

I think my point is kinda missed here. Tesla has a lot of issues moving forward, many of which I have pointed out. Their overall quality really isn't there and frankly the products suffer from the lack of R&D that the major manufacturers have, especially when you read up on collision repair on these cars. My Apple comparison is that they took a design centric approach, and by doing so has captured the attention and desire of the consumer they are targeting. Many Tesla Model S owners have never owned a 7 series or S class, yet here they are shelling out 6 figures. And much like Apple products, it's alot of hype, but Tesla was smart in that they took heavy strides to take care of their customers whenever they can, and in essence doing damage control. There are a ton of issues with these cars, with largely go overlooked, and they are still a darling in the public's eye. It's like a food truck with a long line, the idiots in line still haven't figured out that 1) they're not paying any less than a restaurant 2) the food isn't that innovative or better than that at a restaurant and 3) theyre buying more into the image/marketing/hype (full disclosure, I have waited in many long lines, but I am a fatass).
The point I'm trying to make is that if the major manufacturers took this approach which would then benefit from their vast R&D and resources and actual ability to produce the car, Tesla would struggle more. Toyota missed a huge opportunity in developing high end hybrids and electrics since they were the darling of the industry, and Tesla proved that there were affluent consumers itching for a premium electric car. But Toyota overthought it, and still produces one of the ugliest cars to date.
The leaf, volt, bolt, i3, prius, etc etc, how did the designer of those cars think yeah that's awesome. Utility does not have to be ugly, look at Teslas, hell look at Mazda.
Here;s something I just though up, what if Lexus came out with an E division like BMW has M, but for their electric car portfolio, and produced exciting electric/hybrid cars? It fits the Lexus ethos, luxury, quiet, efficient, forward thinking, hell the Lexus ES might as well be electric since it's the most sedated car ever. I'm sure Toyota figured out it's hard to go toe to toe with BMW, so why not just make fast electric cars. That's pretty much what Tesla is doing, and it got alot of people excited and accepting all the shortcomings of owning a Tesla to get one.
I get that some of this is the fact that Tesla is brand new name and there's hype around that, but with correct brand strategy I don't see how the other makes couldn't capitalize on it. They are now though with Mercedes' "Model 3 Killer" coming out, and other manufacturers following suit.

JonBoy

Thanks for the clarification. Well said, and I agree.