Musk's Boring Company Proposes High-Speed Underground Subway To Dodger Stadium (geekwire.com) 240
Elon Musk's Boring Company wants to build a transit tunnel connecting Dodger Stadium to a Los Angeles subway station. An anonymous reader quotes GeekWire:
The Boring Company laid out the plan for the Dugout Loop on its website, saying that the linkup could take baseball fans and concertgoers to the stadium in less than four minutes for a roughly $1 fare. This ride would be nothing like your typical subway trip: Loopers could book their tickets in advance, through an app-based reservation system that's similar to what's used to purchase theater tickets, or buy them over the phone or in person for a given time (say, 5:45 p.m. heading for the stadium).
At least initially, the Dugout Loop clientele would be limited to about 1,400 people per event, or roughly 2.5 percent of stadium capacity. The Boring Company says that capacity could be doubled over time. Loopers would board electric-powered pods (also known as "skates") that are based on the Tesla Model X auto design and are capable of carrying 8 to 16 passengers at a time. The skates would be lowered into the tunnel system, and sent autonomously at speeds of 125 to 150 mph from one terminal to the other. The Boring Company says it'll cover the cost of digging the roughly 3.6-mile tunnel with no public funding sought.
The Boring Company's site says this project will preempt construction of their proof-of-concept tunnel under Los Angeles' Sepulveda Boulevard.
"The Boring Company has made technical progress much faster than expected and has decided to make its first tunnel in Los Angeles an operational one, hence Dugout Loop!"
At least initially, the Dugout Loop clientele would be limited to about 1,400 people per event, or roughly 2.5 percent of stadium capacity. The Boring Company says that capacity could be doubled over time. Loopers would board electric-powered pods (also known as "skates") that are based on the Tesla Model X auto design and are capable of carrying 8 to 16 passengers at a time. The skates would be lowered into the tunnel system, and sent autonomously at speeds of 125 to 150 mph from one terminal to the other. The Boring Company says it'll cover the cost of digging the roughly 3.6-mile tunnel with no public funding sought.
The Boring Company's site says this project will preempt construction of their proof-of-concept tunnel under Los Angeles' Sepulveda Boulevard.
"The Boring Company has made technical progress much faster than expected and has decided to make its first tunnel in Los Angeles an operational one, hence Dugout Loop!"
Is that it? (Score:5, Interesting)
At least initially, the Dugout Loop clientele would be limited to about 1,400 people per event, or roughly 2.5 percent of stadium capacity. The Boring Company says that capacity could be doubled over time
Is that it? 2-3 subway trains worth of people per event? If someone just built a real subway system then it could potentially shift everyone to the stadium and back.
Re: (Score:2)
Or just even normal sized trains in the tunnels. Why have car capacity limitations?! That's the whole point of a fucking train. You've can easily hold 10+ people in the same square area of a train than you could in car.
Re: (Score:2)
Trains aren't the right shape to make efficient use of the space. These "skates" are like a carnival ride where you load in an area with headroom, but when they're traveling you're seated.
You would need to tunnel out 4x as much volume per traveler to fit a regular train.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: Is that it? (Score:5, Insightful)
Google has changed the game though. The cost doesn't have to be the rider's cash. $1 is enough for their contract. The real funding would come from advertisers and vendors in the portal. If you had 1400 people traveling to a specific area for a specific reason, you have a pretty good guess who they are and what they like. That's some good target advertising.
Re: (Score:2)
An advertisement that only 1400 people will see? Worthless.
For 1% of the price you could run a bus shuttle to Dodger Stadium, it would carry the same 1400 people and have the same ads. Why hasn't anyone found this to be profitable?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I can see Twitter pivoting as we speak to become the next Exxon
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Let's see. Virtually all passengers will be making a round trip, so $2 per passenger times 1500 vict ^h^h^h ... clients =$3000 per gameday. And I think Dodger Stadium is used for things other than baseball sometimes. Let's say it's used 150 "days" a year. So, revenue = $450,000 a year. Seems a bit low. By a factor of maybe 100. But what the hell do I know?
Re: Is that it? (Score:5, Insightful)
It's a proof of concept, and also an introductory price. It doesn't have to make a profit, it has to demonstrate the concept so that some city/company will buy the tunneling service for something else.
Re: (Score:2)
No public funding? Why not then. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
‘Literally No One Calls Me That Or Has Ever Called Me That’: Our Interview With Ol’ Musky [theonion.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Right of ways are valuable property rights and government subsidies.
aka Personal Rapid Transit (Score:2)
book their tickets for local trains does not work (Score:2)
book their tickets for local trains at X time does not work.
Right now the local trains work with tickets have no fixed time and trains run at head ways from each 2-3 min each to 15-60 min.
and after events / games they run on load and go no fixed times.
Book in advance with gates can jam up line / lead to people getting crushed. In some places right after an big event they just make the gates go to open and do quick checks of tickets.
What if you get stuck in line getting out and miss the time? get there befor
Re: (Score:2)
Here in the Puget Sound area, people can buy their tickets ahead of time from Sound Transit (our local multi-county transit agency). It doesn’t seem to cause any problems.
Now, we don’t have turnstile gates to contend with - instead, we have fare enforcement people doing frequent spot checks on our trains. It seems to work decently, and it’s rare that I see someone get caught without a ticket.
Even with gates/turnstiles... I’m not sure why there’d be a problem. It’s not lik
Re: (Score:2)
On that last point, I stand corrected - I see that the press release actually claims people could buy tickets for a specific time.
I suspect the person who came up with that specific statement (Musk?) has never ridden on mass transit. It seems inefficient and likely unworkable, as the OP stated.
However I expect they’d figure that out one way or the other, and it’s not like they couldn’t shift to single-trip tickets easily enough.
BTW that Geek Wire article’s statement about being
Running the numbers (Score:2)
Assuming Dodger stadium is limited to one event per day, and there are only a finite number of days per year (365 or 366), with a daily capacity of 1,500 passengers per day, and assuming full-capacity, every day, with every passenger booking round-trip passage, that gives you:
1,500 passengers x 2 trips (round-trip) x 366 days = annual revenue of about $1,098,000 with a one-dollar fare.
How can this venture support itself on a million dollars/year? Add in the reality that Dodger Stadium probably hosts fewer t
Re: (Score:2)
If they look far enough ahead, then they make it trivial to connect multiple systems into 1.
Billionaires should get smart (Score:2)
Howsabout he get the tech PERFECTED? (Score:2)
Before he starts all his unicorn jizz and fairy fart-laden pie-in-the-sky BS?
#Monorail!
Doesn't matter... (Score:2)
How cheap? (Score:2)
...to the stadium in less than four minutes for a roughly $1 fare.
...the Dugout Loop clientele would be limited to about 1,400 people per event
So, even operated every day, they would only have revenue of about $500k/year? Even if they could somehow build this tunnel system for $5mil (which I highly doubt), and even if this thing ran with zero overhead operational costs, you are STILL looking at a decade to break even.
I actually doubt you could pay for the operational costs for $500k/year.
Only 1400 per event? (Score:2)
Has nobody informed Musk that baseball games generally don't pull the entire crowd simultaneously? Some people arrive early and watch batting practice, while others don't show up until after the game has already started. Now getting everyone out of the facility at the same time might be a bigger challenge.
Personally, I have found that parking at Union Station and then walking up the hill to the ballpark just isn't that bad, and keeps me out of the horrible traffic that always results when 60,000 people try
Musk = Trump (Score:2)
Re:Rome 2.0 jive (Score:5, Informative)
It's funny that most of the comments in this thread so far seem to be... upset about people going to sports events. I mean, I'm no sports fan, but this just strikes me as weird.
Neat that they're going to make their first full LA tunnel an operational one. A connection to Dodger Stadium was drawn up on their longer-term man of plans for the LA area, so looks like they're jumping ahead a step. I wonder what upgrades they're going to be making to Godot for it? Maybe bringing it closer to Line-Storm? I know they've been modifying Godot over time in order to test tech for Line-Storm.
Boring Company has been going through phases as they transition from standard TBM approaches toward their ultimate goal. In their first tunnel with Godot (a mostly standard TBM in the beginning), they required the standard laying of tracks and power lines (time consuming and expensive, particularly the power lines) and a powerful ventilation system to deal with diesel exhaust from the diesel locomotive that hauls ore, as well as pushing off the casing ends and using normal cutting discs. Their third TBM, Prufrock, will be using delivered/replaced battery packs, no tracks, a battery powered electric locomotive, pushing off the wall sides and automating their assembly, and advanced alloy highly cooled hot swappable cutting discs; it's in the advanced design stage. Between Godot and Prufrock is Line-Storm, which has nearly completed construction, and is a mix of technologies between Godot and Prufrock, and is expected to be 2-4 times as fast as Godot (Prufrock is expected to be 10-15x faster). Line-Storm will be used on the east coast.
The opiate of the masses (Score:2, Offtopic)
Many of us have come to realize how dangerous it is to have a massive sports industry centered around what is essentially an opiate for the masses to keep the surly proles from revolting.
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds about right (Score:2)
The herd is generally inert, but sports/entertainment/beer keep them unlikely to do anything but keep going to work and complaining on the weekends. Mentally disorganized people are harmless.
Placebo (Score:2)
This placebo effect allows people to engage in sports tribalism instead of pursuing their own interests as a group (religion, ethnicity, class, race). In theory, this keeps us all unified so that we can pursue the ideology that Government lays out for us.
Re: (Score:2)
"It's funny that most of the comments in this thread so far seem to be... upset about people going to sports events"
Agreed.
"Neat that they're going to make their first full LA tunnel an operational one"
I wonder who will invest in this without a 'proof of concept' of the tunnel and transport system.
Re: (Score:2)
Right now, Boring Company is working entirely on private funding. Mostly from Musk. Obviously that will have to change before they go large scale, but I doubt this one line will cost that much.
Re: (Score:2)
Obviously that will have to change before they go large scale, but I doubt this one line will cost that much.
A 3.5 mile tunnel in Los Angeles sounds like a very expensive project, actually.
Re: (Score:2)
They've already made a 2-mile tunnel under Hawthorne.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"Right now, Boring Company is working entirely on private funding. Mostly from Musk. Obviously that will have to change before they go large scale, but I doubt this one line will cost that much."
So basically no outside investors to speak of, no plans, no cost estimates, and the expected revenue is extremely low.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, we all know that the NYT ran a hit piece on Friday containing false information (including a claim that Tesla was looking for COO which Bloomberg has since debunked [bloomberg.com]), and whose author made a snarky brag on Twitter about lowering Tesla's stock price [twitter.com].
And OMG, stop the presses, a few cars out of over 70000 turned out bad! Hint: the plural of "viral anecdote shared endlessly by short sellers who scour twitter and Tesla forums for any bad examples they can find" isn't "data". If it's data you're looking f [google.com]
Re: (Score:3)
Considering the New York Times routinely runs hit pieces on the best things the Western world has to offer, why would that be any surprise? Elon Musk would be doing us a favor if he bought it just to burn it down.
Re: (Score:3)
I'm just getting bored (pun intended) of all these stories about random stuff Musk and his companies say. The chances of it actually happening are 50/50 at best and this seems like one of the more half baked ideas.
Get back to us when they start digging it
Re: (Score:2)
Where did you get this info? Would like to read up more...
Re: (Score:2)
So the guy isn't perfect. He still developed a cheap, reusable rocket and a popular and coveted electric car.
I'll give you he's a bit of a bullshitter, but he isn't going to go to jail over one ill-considered tweet. Worst case, he pays a stiff fine and learns a lesson about shooting off his mouth.
Why so bitter? Because Elon Musk turned out to be human, just like the rest of us?
Re: (Score:2)
they do not want poor people coming into middle class neighborhoods.
You are thinking of zoning. Public transit is opposed because it generally sucks and is a pasted-on solution to what is essentially a planning problem. In places where it makes sense, it is quite popular and is used to bring huge numbers of low-income people into service jobs in areas that they could not possibly afford.
No, really, I am not (Score:2)
No, because the market regulates who can be in a neighborhood more effectively than that.
Most cities have nice northwestern suburbs and a toxic, cheap southeastern area. The worry is that proles from the cheap areas will be easily able to go to the suburbs and raid them. After all, suburbs were formed when people fled the prole infestation of the inner city.
Re: (Score:2)
No, because the market regulates who can be in a neighborhood more effectively than that.
Absolutely not. A piece of land can be zoned single-family, which completely subverts the market drive to put high-density housing up.
The worry is
No, the worry is that people will blow a bunch of money on a useless suburb-to-suburb transit system that even the proles have no use for. Good luck getting a bunch of loot on a bus or train, anyway.
Zoning (Score:2)
Only if you zone everything else around it in the same category, which in the age of the car would mean many miles.
Re: (Score:2)
They do exactly that in suburbs, with only relatively small areas sequestered away as high density or mixed use - usually right next to high-density commercial or even light industrial .Even inside the city limits, they will often restrict building heights in residential zones. For instance, in Philadelphia the building height limit is 38 feet in most of the residential-zoned areas. That is the vast majority of the city by area.
Small areas are enough (Score:2)
If small areas are allowed, that enables apartments to coexist with the burbs.
This strengthens my point, which is that people coming out of the inner city are not wanted in the suburbs, which is why Americans oppose public transit.
Re: (Score:2)
If small areas are allowed, that enables apartments to coexist with the burbs.
Sure, they coexist - but once developed, there is no more more market force at work. Density cannot be increased and so prices go up, up, up as demand increases with no more supply. Demand is artificially constrained by the free market. The only place for poor people to go is where market forces are still free to work: blighted areas with depressed demand and further away from the city where land values have not yet appreciated and supply is still keeping up with demand.
This strengthens my point, which is that people coming out of the inner city are not wanted in the suburbs
It rather depends on the city. In Man
Re: (Score:2)
I think this has been changing over time. Certainly the ridiculously rich still opposed any pass through of mass transit, or even expressways. But I see lots more new upscale condos and apartments being build next to or near rail or light rail stations, places previously associated with either poorer neighborhoods or retail. I think this is because there are a lot more young people who don't use autos.
Re: Rome 2.0 jive (Score:2)
I would say most people in the US reject public transit because they don't want to pay the extra taxes. Even if there is public transit, most families will still have carS so they see that transit as just extra taxes.
Yes, Americans can do without cars, but it's just the thing here. The exceptions exist in places like New York City, cities in California & Florida. Until there is a major cultural shift where the "American Dream" doesn't include cars, a single family home, and two kids, it won't change.
Wha
Re: Rome 2.0 jive (Score:5, Interesting)
We can also do without plumbing, central heating, electricity, paved roads, refrigeration, telephones, and computers. Why would we want to? Those things all make life better.
For example, Los Angeles has hundreds of bus routes, yet few places have buses that run more often than once every 20 minutes, and some places it's every 2 hours and not on Sundays. Would you want to wait 20 minutes before you can go someplace, and another 20 if you have to make a transfer? Repeat that for the return trip? Even while not waiting a bus goes half the speed of normal traffic because it has to let passengers on and off. Time is money, and time is life.
Cars make life better, and for most Americans car ownership and use is a rational choice.
Re: Rome 2.0 jive (Score:4, Insightful)
Not sure how much better they make life in Los Angeles. The region is at a breaking point, and everything that can be done to limit individual car trips makes life better for everyone.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Toll the roads with demand-based pricing to keep them moving and use the proceeds beyond road maintenance to fund public transit. This fleeces the well-to-do and subsidizes everyone else. A compromise that lets everyone wait in line if they really want to is a parallel express highway like they have in Virginia near DC - this fleeces the rich to pay for the roads while letting everyone else continue wait in line like they always have.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Rome 2.0 jive (Score:5, Interesting)
This is why Musk's tunnel-boring is so important. Transit often makes gridlock on city streets WORSE... unless it has its own dedicated right of way. Tunnels are the least-objectionable way to do that, but traditional methods are just too expensive to do it large-scale.
With cheap tunneling, you CAN pitch transit to NIMBYs by saying, "it might reduce gridlock, and at LEAST won't make it even worse than it already is". You can't say that honestly about buses, streetcars, etc.
It's a shame the ADA made future transit projects based on overhead suspended cables impossible (no way to provide a 3-foot wheelchair-accessible egress path from vehicles... floor hatches with unrolled ladders to climb down aren't legal anymore), because it eliminated potential cheap solutions that could literally run overhead with widely-spaced support towers (especially as a way to increase the "reach" of subway stations by a mile or two perpendicular to the main line).
Musk's subways can potentially do that. You could take a subway station that was built in a less-than-ideal location (with a major trip-generator a mile away), and build an automated mini-subway a-la-Musk to shuttle people between that destination and the subway.
Illustrative example: downtown Miami. When Metrorail opened 35 years ago, the "downtown" station was a good half-mile west of what most of what Miamians considered "downtown", and the station in Brickell (Miami's original financial district) was ~2/3 mile from all the tall buildings. The elevated PeopleMover ("Metromover") VASTLY increased the reach of both stations & made most of downtown Miami accessible via Metrorail. Without Metrorail, Metromover would have been a useless toy. Without Metromover, 80-90% of the people who voluntarily used Metrorail (despite owning cars) to commute to downtown Miami in the 80s and 90s would have driven instead.
Re: (Score:2)
Rode the bus to work today in LA. There are some great bus services (like Commuter Express) that solve problems for people that can afford a car... and can afford someone to drive them to work. The areas with direct service to downtown via train work well too.
What is painful and makes a lot of people avoid public transit in LA is the need to transfer. That is an urban planning issue more than a transit issue though.
Re: (Score:2)
Cars make life better, and for most Americans car ownership and use is a rational choice.
Cars also make life worse. It's not an either-or thing. An overabundance of ICE-based automobiles is why Los Angeles led the way with emissions standards, and guess what? It worked.
Self-driving public transportation is what will finally put the nail in the coffin of excessive vehicle ownership. People who make long trips will probably continue to own their own vehicles for some time, but commuters will give them up as soon as there is a viable alternative. And that alternative doesn't look like buses or eve
Re: (Score:2)
Cars make life better,
Where? For whom? In which situations?
A blanket statement like that is simply not true.
Re: (Score:2)
Where? For whom?
In Detroit. Well, at least they did, for a while.
I think the GP's point (Score:2)
Cars are what I'd call an irrational rational choice. We fight approximately 8 wars, breath toxic fumes and spend a large chunk of our GDP for the sake of those cars. Plus we devote a huge mount of prime real estate to parking them (there's a researcher who calls them the deserts of the city). There is literally not enough metal on the plant to give one to everybody, almost guaranteeing some form o
Re: I think the GP's point (Score:2)
If "prime" property is used as a surface parking lot, its "prime-ness" is more a case of wishful thinking. Most new skyscrapers (the TRULY prime property) have their parking sandwiched between ground-floor retail & rooftop resort-like park/garden in the 10-20 story pedestal below the tower itself. One of the ironies of downtown Miami is that an average tower built within the past 20 years actually has more parking spaces per leasable square foot than Sawgrass Mills (a huge outlet mall on the Everglades-
Re: (Score:2)
It depends what you use the bus for. If you just turn up randomly to go somewhere you have an average wait of 10 minutes, but if know the timetable or make the same journey every day you can get the wait down to nothing.
In some places like Tokyo the train/bus is often the fastest option.
Re: (Score:2)
Paris most of the time, too. And cheaper than the gasoline/insurance/maintanance of a car most of the time.
Re: (Score:2)
Ever driven in LA? Takes 2 hours to get ANYWHERE in a car. Busses are equally fucked.
Re: Rome 2.0 jive (Score:2)
Right, except it is possible to live in NYC without a car. With Uber/Lyft it is possible to live in many US cities without a car. With rideshare it is possible to get to work without a car. I know people who only had one car and two people working 30 minutes apart. This was quite common 20 years ago. I know people who only have a bicycle! I know people who live in walking communities with major grocery stores within 1/2 a km. My youth was spent without a car for a few years. I was a full time travel con
Re: Rome 2.0 jive (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
I only know two kinds of motorcyclists, young ones and those that have been in serious accidents. Even then, the Venn diagram has a big overlap.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Rome 2.0 jive (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, you know the saying... Something like 94% of all Harleys ever sold are still on the road today.
The other 6% actually made it home.
:) I like the reliability I get. I ride - a lot. My current main ride is a Honda CTX700 (mid-sized cruiser) with 49,000 miles on it in 3.5 years. And I'm overseas for about 4 months a year. So I typically put about 2200-2500 miles a month on the bike. It's been rock solid. Four rear tires, two front tires, 6 oil changes, one air filter, two sets of front brake pads,
Re: (Score:2)
I would say most people in the US reject public transit because they don't want to pay the extra taxes. Even if there is public transit, most families will still have carS so they see that transit as just extra taxes.
Yes, Americans can do without cars, but it's just the thing here.
And you would be wrong. What you fail to realize is that the US is really fucking large. No seriously, look at it on a map and you will see that almost every state dwarfs the size of almost every European country. On top of that, we built most of our populated areas after the invention of the car. Unlike European cities, they were designed to be traversed using a car instead of being shoehorned in afterwards.
Until there is a major cultural shift where the "American Dream" doesn't include cars, a single family home, and two kids, it won't change.
That is to say that it won't change.
Re: Rome 2.0 jive (Score:2)
The US is huge, but the population isn't all evenly-distributed. Look at a night satellite image of the US... the lights will show you where most Americans REALLY live.
Take Florida... vast & sprawling, but ~90% of Floridians live within 10 miles of I-95, I-4, or I-75. Ditto for Georgia, where ~80% of the state lives in Atlanta or Macon.
Re: Rome 2.0 jive (Score:2)
As a frequent flier, I am well aware how big the US is. Most people fly rather than drive to get around it. But traveling those distances isn't what we are talking about. US cities are just as dense and similar in size as many other foreign cities but with worse public transit.
Most of our cities are designed around horse drawn carriages, trollies, and pedestrian traffic. Only in the last 80 years have we really redesigned them for automobiles. We basically pushed pedestrians to the side (get it?), phased
Re: (Score:2)
I would say most people in the US reject public transit because they don't want to pay the extra taxes.
No. Republicans reject transit, because taxes. Blue states usually have good transit, and taxes to pay for it. In my area, when the transit district wants more money for new routes, we vote on the tax increases, and they're often approved. They're not approved as often as school and fire department taxes, but more often than for police, or new administrative buildings. They're like parks; people want to say yes, but they do check the plan first. Schools, people just vote "yes" if D, "no" if R.
LA, the place
Re: Rome 2.0 jive (Score:2)
From what I have seen there are only two places with Ok transit. NYC and DC. Those would be passable in the EU. All the others don't hold a candle to the likes of EU, Singapore, and Japan. Heck places like Hong Kong, Hyderabad, and Moscow have better transit systems than some US metros.
Re: (Score:2)
Your understanding of technology, and even everyday life, is sorely lacking. Do you know the difference between open-cell and closed-cell foam? Paint is more likely to crack and flake off than "have bubbled up and melted off".
With regard to the Tesla in space, so what? Nobody claimed it was going to be driveable, or even pretty. It was just a publicity stunt, and almost everybody knows it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They could easily install solar to charge the pods before and after each event, and add battery storage to have it available when needed.
Granted, the production of those materials will have some impact, but one they are there, it runs on the sun.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Zero emisions? (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
1) $60k is around 80th percentile in price people are optioning out their Model 3's to - even today where production is starting with the more expensive variants. But by all means, inflate, because price distortion totally makes your points legitimate.
2) The median Model 3 buyer is spending around $24k more on their Model 3 than on their previous car. Aka, they're not "rich", they just really want the car.
3) See the production volumes linked here [slashdot.org].
Unlike other manufacturers, Tesla can't sell vehicles at a
Re: (Score:2)
Rei! You're back! You're needed over on the "Musk made Tesla shorts billions" [slashdot.org] thread... But anyway...
The average new car in the US today is around $34000; the typical Model 3 is between 60 and 100% higher than that. In other words - it's well above what the average person is willing to spend on a vehicle.
Tesla LOSES MONEY on every car sold. How many times do I have to correct you on this? They lost over $700 million last quarter, selling around 41,000 cars. You talk about "gross margins" and ignore
Re: (Score:2)
Meanwhile... [insideevs.com]
In other news... [bloomberg.com]
Re: (Score:2)
1) Tesla is on a roll [bloomberg.com]. Their production rates make everyone else look like they're missing a zero [insideevs.com]. They're well en route [tesla.com] to being sustainably profitable starting this quarter.
2) I have no clue what you mean by "lack of investors". Obviously, all of Tesla's stock is owned. Actually in a way well more than "all of Tesla's stock", as people who've shorted the stock have put other people's borrowed stock back on the market, and people have bought *that* as well. If you mean "lack of interest in a capital ro
Re: (Score:2)
Tesla lost $700+ million to sell those cars. They already lost money just making them and selling them, before any R&D or debt servicing or other expenses are included. They lose money on every vehicle they sell, and are down to less than 3 quarters of cash in the bank, at current burn rates. Not very good...
PS: SG&A was, once again about 20% of revenue. It's continuing to scale linearly with revenue growth, there is no savings in volume at all.
Re: (Score:2)
1) Is your view that companies should offer lower-margin variants of their vehicles while they're still scaling production to meet the demand for their higher margin vehicles?
2) You do realize that most EV manufacturers are doing this right? I-Pace is doing this, Taycan is doing this, Kona is doing this, etc.
3) Nice distortion of Musk's statements on the interview. He was very careful to repeatedly express the cav
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)