And you’d be competing directly against the company that controls the platform. Tesla can undercut your prices, prioritize its own cars in the app, change the revenue split, or geofence you out entirely. You don’t own a business in that arrangement. You own the downside.
Well done, friend.
They’re probably limiting their liability, the same way they partnered with local roofing companies to install solar roofs.
But as Electrek also reported on recently, Tesla discontinued solar roofs, and left those roofing companies with hundreds of thousands in losses from wasted investment.
Now if anyone in Europe wants a solar roof, Solarstone sells them and I don’t think they’re going anywhere unlike Tesla, given that this is their main business. Plugging it because they’re from Estonia like me, gotta support local businesses lol
I love supporting real tech companies rather than investment scams
the fact that they wont just put a steering wheel on it and call it a model 2 tells me this is an investment scam.
They will never make another car with that naming scheme because the current lineup spells “SEXY” and Elon Musk is a pathetic manchild. Shoutout to Ford Motor Company for forcing him to rename it to the model 3 instead of E and forever ruining his stupid joke.
I’d disagree. The man tells that he’s selling perfume and it’s selling out instantly. I bet he’s just folding extra money on top of the profit. There isn’t any regulation so who can check?
I mean, fuck Musk, but the same would apply for literally any manufacturer of commercial or industrial equipment.
By this logic ASML would never sell their world-leading computer chip lithography machines. They would just run their own production lines instead.
On the other end of the cost spectrum, no manufacturer would ever sell robot vacuum cleaners or lawn mowers, instead contracting these out as cleaning services.
The truth is companies will sell profitable machines to other companies simply because the entirety of civilization is built on the specialization of labor. This applies to both individuals and groups of individuals. Sure, ASML could raise capital and try to invest in their own chip fabs, but why? If they have the money to invest, they would be better off buying more equipment and hiring more employees to make more of the tools they already sell. This company’s machines are one of the major bottlenecks in global compute production. They can sell machines as fast as they can make them. They know how to make a really good lithography machine. They don’t know how to run a full fab well. Instead they focus on just their one part of the industry.
Specialization of labor built civilization. It’s why we’re not still living in caves. I would never by a Cybercab because I don’t want to give money to nazis. And it’s actually likely that Musk is lying about the profitability of these things. At the same time, however, it is very poor logic to assume that simply because a company is selling a piece of commercial or industrial equipment means that equipment is unprofitable to own.
it is very poor logic to assume that simply because a company is selling a piece of commercial or industrial equipment means that equipment is unprofitable to own.
The article is not making this generalization, it’s specifically about Tesla’s situation and offer.
Your ASML analogy would work, if 1) ASML already ran their own chip foundries, 2) ASML was offering you the chance to buy a lithography machine that would not work except inside an ASML foundry, 3) ASML promised they would lease “your” lithography machine back from you, on terms they set, at some unspecified future date.
Broadly, you have a point. However with Tesla Musk has been pretty consistent that they would be directly doing it and they have the Tesla app managing the rides.
Their strategy has been all in one, they make the cars, they own the chargers, and they don’t really partner with anyone in any significant way.
While it does happen that companies end up partnering and competing at the same time, it’s relatively less likely. So for Tesla it is extra strange to be pitching being a supplier for other autonomous taxis while simultaneously being in the market.
So yeah, generally it is a poor argument, but in the context of Tesla, it is at least a bit out of character for them.
The more likely case is that the equipment (an autonomous cab) is unprofitable to own once you factor in risk with liability and damages.
mechahitler controlled optimus robots are expected on the same “income plan”. Musk has been saying FSD/full autonomous was 1 year away since 2015. OP is right to be skeptical. First Tesla shows it can run a robotaxi fleet, then you can consider buying one/several for same purpose, even though price would rise if it made money and didn’t crash too often.
LOL, anything connected to Elon Musk is the last place I’d trust my money.
But I wanna live in the automate luxury communist future Elon promised!!
Best he can do is fascist
Not without my lgbtq homies.
Truth. So I’m not misunderstood. I’m just pointing out Musk’s bullshit commitment to essentially are the ideals of a techno-utopia with no jobs. I am in no way stanning him
Word, it’s Fully Automated Luxury GAY Space Communism. Can’t leave that bit out
You could apply the same logic to airlines, most aircraft manufacturers don’t operate passenger services using the aircraft they manufacture.
And yet, airlines make money.
The difference here is that running an airline is hard. If you could buy a plane and press a button for it to make money autonomously,then Airbus and Boeing wouldn’t sell their planes either.
Heh yeah but not from flights from credit cards.
The same pitch you hear from ads on instagram where they tell you the “secret” how to earn millions without doing anything. All you have to do is buy this eBook for $49
My friend bought such ebook and the secret was make more ebooks and sell it to gullible people, unlike you
I read this as Cybercrab and was immediately disappointed
You know who wins out in a gold rush?
The person selling picks.
Ya sure. Like he would give a thin dime (or cab) to anyone to make any sort of profit. Anyone who buys into that scam deserves everything they get and more and it surely will not be profit.
“If oil rigs were profitable, the shipyard wouldn’t sell you one”
I despise Musk as much as the next Group 14-based lifeform, but there is such a thing as specialisation.
Oil rigs aren’t billed as automatable. This is most likely just a way to offload liability
This is most likely just a way to offload liability
And to make the owners pay for maintenance and electricity.
If they lock the feature behind a higher price tier, a subscription, or a cut of the profits, it’s a low-risk income stream with minimal expenses.
And to make the owners pay for…electricity.
Tesla is an electric utility, they could probably make more money providing it to themselves than passing the costs off to their contractors.
Doubt it would be more. Electricity is going up in the US. Selling is more profitable right now
That is such a disingenuous comparison lol
Musk is a scam artist there is zero chance the terms are favorable to anyone other than himself.
He is a scam artist, but this specific argument in the broader reality doesn’t really stick. The argument is that no one ever sells something that yields value to anyone else, which is obviously off.
It works better if you highlight that Tesla is less like those companies. They are demonstrably big on vertical integration, including the ride shares, so for them, it is out of character, but as a generic business strategy, it’s perfectly routine.
Reminds me of the crypto mining rig kickstarter projects.
