Uber is a taxi hailing company. They don't provide a service that no one else can provide. Uber is the market leader because they have the most drivers, not because they have the most people on their platform.

If it was easy to acquire drivers on your platform, Uber wouldn't have that advantage. The data Uber currently has is meaningful but hardly a deal breaker. Google has probably better data in that realm anyways.

I don't think people will own cars once self-driving cars become a thing - at least not for a long time. It then becomes a major disadvantage to buy from outside vendors.

I agree with you on Uber. However, GM are far (years) ahead of Tesla on both autonomous driving and fleet management.

We'll never agree on this. I can't comprehend your hard on for American car makers. They've failed in the past and that was during times when the demand for their cars was at an all time high.

Of course we won't. You're pure crazy when it comes to Tesla.

Look at the video below. If Tesla put this out, you and lots of others in this thread would be doing backflips, sayiing that Tesla is far ahead of all others, months from Fully Self Driving, and going to the moon.



I mean, heltok got super excited about a faked video that Tesla put out, far far less impressive, badly navigating a few low traffic country roads.

Because GM put out the video above, you ignore it. Such is the level of your pure nuttery. You're a personality cult true believer with zero objectivity when it comes to Tesla. Tesla can't even get automatic braking working on their own, after 9 months of development time with a large team. But they're ahead of the guys above, according the Tesla lovers in this thread. Just unbelievable.

The Tesla SDC data that got released was/is very bad. They have some in built advantages (shameless data aggregation, lack of morality with beta testing products that will be misused and lead to death/injury), but its hard to rejoin their CA interventions with the idea they're not currently a laggard in the space.

Citation needed for it being fake. The navigation seemed fine to me, maybe the vision system could have been improved, but it wasn't that bad mostly just a bit sensitive.

Your hypothesis seems to be that Elon is a liar, hundreds of managers and engineers are also liars and fooling investors and in actuality the company is just mostly a big scam. I mean it could be true, but if it was I would find it very unlikely that EVERYONE would stay silent about it. It would be such a huge coverup and so many rich and successful people would pretty much ruin their social status once it implodes in a few years. I just don't see it.

TS,

I never said that the GM video was not impressive, not sure if I said it ITT but I was impressed.

The reason why Tesla is ahead in my opinion is due to the fact that they have all the hardware built into their cars already and can collect data as we speak. This makes a huge difference.

The Tesla video was months ahead of GM and while GM's video was smoother, you don't know how much time they put into training the algorithm.

GM has multiple videos include one that runs for 20 minutes. Perhaps the route is planned, but the way it navigates obstacles, lights, signs and unknowns like roadwork and bikes is impressive.

The difference between navigating simple country roads - which the Tesla car was obviously trained on - and navigating complex city traffic with stop signs, traffic lights, roadwork, pedestrians, lanes partially blocked, and multiple other confusing elements is pretty big. Years worth of development.

If GM's video represents the state of their development, they are a long way ahead of Tesla.

there's not gonna be the one leader of autonomous driving who will suddenly eat up the whole car industry. there will be many competing solutions coming out within a few years. someone will make the first step and call their car fully autonomous, taking on the legal risks that come with it.
competitors will follow within a few years if it turns out it is a big selling point. everybody who doesn't have their own product will just buy a third party system.

turnover of cars is pretty slow, first to market won't achieve a big enough market penetration to defend a monopoly.

You mean the one that was taken in California where they have like 1 intervention every 3 miles or something totally insane that was likely the dataset they used to splice that video together?

I think that is what he is referring to as "fake".

Elon is a liar. A self-admitted liar at that. I don't think that is even remotely up for dispute.

Yeah the data is pretty damning:
GM - testing in city centers - has 5% of the disengagements of Tesla, who can't drive in city centers yet. 5%.
Google - testing in city traffic - has 0.05% of the disengagements of Tesla.

Yet people claim Tesla is ahead in the autonomous car race. At this stage we have:

- Videos of competitors many levels above Tesla
- California traffic data of competitors 1-3 orders of magnitude ahead of Tesla on errors/situation failures
- The completely inability of Tesla to even make automatic braking work after 9 months.

But Tesla are ahead of everyone on autonomous driving. Because they have a fleet of cars they're collecting totally worthless data from (all the highway driving data in the world isn't going to solve the problem of traffic lights, roadworks, pedestrians and all the other stuff).

Musk is a dbag as a person. Love how he provoked shorts who have provided plenty of juice on the upside, looks like an alright few days in "Shortville" as he put it.

He posted that when the price was around that mark (admittedly a bit higher).

He's a PR whore as much as anything. Mentioned a couple days ago that he sees Tesla at an Apple like valuation over the next decade. They better get there given the premium you have to pay now to wait.

My favorite tweet on expectations and the bull case, don't worry guys though I'm sure they'll stop bleeding cash on the vehicles they are selling SOMEDAY.

“@CGrantWSJ: $TSLA FactSet adj. EPS consensus for 2018 down to 88 cents. Was at $1.59 on December 30. Was at $6.51 (!) On 5/31/2016”

he's got to do everything to push the stockprice up, doesn't matter how ridiculous it looks, what's his alternative at this point?

he promised the world and his name is fully linked to the success the company. they need a high stockprice to even compete. the moment people don't buy their offerings anymore the company is toast.

That's the unbroken history of Tesla - pure lies about future deadlines and profits. This is 2015 forecast's vs reality as the date approaches:



Pretty hilarious.

That's a fantastic chart

I still don't get the chart. Is this supposed to be analyst forecast minus actual non-GAAP EPS or what is this supposed to mean?

Everything except the last "actual" is analyst projections for the actual 2015 non-GAAP results, which was reported where the "actual" is.

In other words, based on Tesla's absurd timelines and claims of profitability in a year, analysts made the predictions above over time.

The exact same thing happened in 2016. It started off at $5.50 projected 2016 EPS back in 2015, and end up (just now) hugely in the red. I don't have a graph but it looks near identical to above.

I'm sure analyst/TSLA projections for Model 3 are accurate though.

Ok, got it.

Analyst predictions and reports are the definition of fake news.

It is difficult to make predictions, especially about the future.

The predictions are based on Musk's production claims, timeframe claims, and profitability claims.

Model S was supposed to come out two years earlier than claimed. Musk consistently shifted the target later and later, incrementally and dishonestly, missing every one of those new target

Model X was supposed to come out nearly two years earlier than when it did. Musk consistently shifted the target later and later, incrementally and dishonestly, missing every one of those new targets:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla_Model_X
High volume production didn't begin until well into 2016 due to all kinds of flaws.

The analyst projections are based on Musk's blatant lies. He also frequently claimed he would profitable years before now (losses are accelerating).

The 2016 graph looks like 2015.
Guess what the 2017 graph looks like so far?

Why is every single prediction Musk makes:

a) outrageously wrong
b) falling on the side that increases his personal wealth?

Either he so horrific at understanding process engineering that he's frequently, innocently out by hundreds of percent on all his predictions. Or he's deliberately lying to you.

So I saw this yesterday and was a little confused.

http://www.businessinsider.com/peopl...model-3-2017-3

I asked some Tesla owners at my work about it and they confirmed the story. They said there's a "large" number of people that believe that Model 3 will greatly outperform the Model S.

Pretty bizarre, because that's like saying the BMW3 series would outperform the model 7 series but those fanboys...

Sounds like a number of people who threw down deposits are in for a surprise....

It is just data, not some conclusive proof. We don't really know what the data was used for. I been have in self driving cars where we have done plenty of interventions for many reasons, not because we were faking anything. For example we often did interrupts to test how it recovered from being out of the center of the lane.

While this is a potential explanation, it seems rather flimsy and delusional. Out of all the testing the Tesla has allegedly done, none of which has previously been in CA (atleast legally), we suddenly have a video of them driving on public roads along with an exceptionally high amount of interventions (orders of magnitude higher than other places).

But ya, intentionally intervening totally seems like a legit response, since it wasn't like they tested this at all in nondisclosed areas. They just decided to make their way to a public road, make a video, and then do a bunch of human interventions that they knew they'd have to report since they wanted to make the data look really really bad.

NB: This is why people think you're not objective, because you aren't.