[antzcrashing]

Originally Posted by SCOTT26

Unless you elect a greater socialist than the last time.

You'll have to be more specific, there are 3 socialists running this primary

[Kjenndal]

Originally Posted by clbmw

Mercedes seem to have cottoned on

http://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/ne...pired-supercar

Well, Daimler is consequent.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by antzcrashing

You'll have to be more specific, there are 3 socialists running this primary

I definitely have two picked out on the Dems side ... Kasich?

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by SCOTT26

But the industry is already in the game and developing more sustainable alternatives than just electric or plug-in hybrid which is not just about range but also performance.
I do not think it will wipe out the German auto industry as badge prestige remains a primary option for our and everybody else's customers globally.

The Tesla threat? Well if BMW had a 3er that attracted 400,000 units for pre sale then the factory would be expanded to make way for expansion on production or a new plant built and ready to deliver the car on schedule. Both i3 and i8 reached the market on schedule and that involved building a new plant to manufacture CFRP as well as a completely new production line at Leipzig all due thanks to massive investment from BMW.

Both recent Tesla models have been affected by delays. And with the production units expected in late 2017 but again could be possibly delayed by that time there will be direct competitors and many customers will have probably dropped out from the list either due to another product or price adjustments?

Where Tesla will do damage will be with the volume domestic manufacturers.

Which either way whoever wins the battle? The American taxpayer will still be paying for it.

We actually (partially) agree on something! Except for the "do damage to the domestic volume manufacturers." Tesla sells more Model S's than BMW sells i3 or i8

But could you please clarify "The American taxpayer will still be paying for it"? If that means we are subsidizing the Tesla Model S and some of the Model 3's (maybe) with the (max) $7,500 tax incentive, I believe it applies to the i3 ($7,500) and i8 ($3,793) as well, does it not?

Total Sales May '14 thru March '16 (data from Good Car Bad Car website)
Volt ---------- 33,032
Mod. S ------- 44,350
i3 ------------- 17,888 (i3 sales started in US May 2014)
i8 -------------- 2,295

[SCOTT26]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

We actually (partially) agree on something! Except for the "do damage to the domestic volume manufacturers." Tesla sells more Model S's than BMW sells i3 or i8

But could you please clarify "The American taxpayer will still be paying for it"? If that means we are subsidizing the Tesla Model S and some of the Model 3's (maybe) with the (max) $7,500 tax incentive, I believe it applies to the i3 ($7,500) and i8 ($3,793) as well, does it not?

Total Sales May '14 thru March '16 (data from Good Car Bad Car website)
Volt ---------- 33,032
Mod. S ------- 44,350
i3 ------------- 17,888 (i3 sales started in US May 2014)
i8 -------------- 2,295

Certainly, speaking hypothetically if Tesla where to cripple the US Auto Industry or any Domestic US brand. Then hello Bailout no.2.
But if Tesla collapsed can you see the government throw more dollars at them?
Two but hypothetical scenarios. No matter who wins or loses? you will still pay for it.

[Flying Ace]

Nice, can't wait to see the i8 knockoff

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by SCOTT26

Certainly, speaking hypothetically if Tesla where to cripple the US Auto Industry or any Domestic US brand. Then hello Bailout no.2.
But if Tesla collapsed can you see the government throw more dollars at them?
Two but hypothetical scenarios. No matter who wins or loses? you will still pay for it.

You know, I really can't argue either situation. But BMW got bailed out by the Quaint family in the 1950's when it was a tiny company and almost absorbed by Daimler-Benz, so bailouts aren't so bad are they? In reality, I'm expecting the US Gov't to reestablish the tax break program as Tesla and Chevrolet near the 200,000 unit mark. The Model 3 is banking on the the $7,500 tax credit, which may not even be there for production unit No.1 delivery if the Model S reaches 200,000 units by the time the (delayed) Model 3 reaches the public. I'd lobby for the new EV tax break law to apply to only domestically-produced EVs...

Or, if Trump gets in Tesla may be toast...

[spmd11]

Originally Posted by SCOTT26

The Headline is misleading. BMW haven't lost their development team, they have lost their key EV executives some of which were working on other non-BMWi developments.

OH! thanks, Scott.. for a moment I was worried...

[spmd11]

Originally Posted by FogCityM3

Agree, this is incredible. M division and now i-division (where all the money is invested) talent is leaving. Biermann was a lifer and lived, ate, and breathed ///M and to go to Hyundai at this juncture in his career? As I stated many times before, there is something going on at this company where they cannot retain key managers. Management turnover at this pace is just another indication of a bad fact pattern that coupled with less than inspiring vehicles demonstrates a company that may be at or near the peak of its success.

Also the excuse-fest and spin-zone word smithing only serves to further reduce BMW credibility. Many of us are not fooled and BMW should be very concerned and not take any comfort by record sales numbers. Remember Toyota? Tesla is in a very competitive position to eat BMW's breakfast, lunch, and dinner!

QUOTE=Viffermike;19795744]This is now even bigger than Albert Biermann leaving BMW M for Hyundai. BMW i has now lost not just its program chief; it's lost what amounts to its entire upper brain trust. In one month.

Something's not right at BMW i -- and it probably has much more to do with corporate priorities and resources than the threat of Tesla on its face. (Typical that a newspaper would overgeneralize like that, though the WSJ is better about that than most). After all, a relatively small manufacturer can only do so much ...

To me, this is likely evidence that BMW has spread itself too thin.

At this years Geneva auto show, BMW CEO Harald Kruger, was caught by a reporter checking out a Tesla model X. The reporter recognized him and asked him what he thought of the model X. He replied that it was merely a prototype and immediately panicked that he was recognized and scrambled to get out of the car, bumping his head on the rear gull wing door. Really? THE BMW CEO doesn't realize that the model X is in production? Wow, that says a lot about the current BMW management. Also, the german translation of his words was a disrespectful tone about the car.

http://electrek.co/2016/03/07/bmw-ce...el-x-hit-head/

[SCOTT26]

Originally Posted by spmd11

At this years Geneva auto show, BMW CEO Harald Kruger, was caught by a reporter checking out a Tesla model X. The reporter recognized him and asked him what he thought of the model X. He replied that it was merely a prototype and immediately panicked that he was recognized and scrambled to get out of the car, bumping his head on the rear gull wing door. Really? THE BMW CEO doesn't realize that the model X is in production? Wow, that says a lot about the current BMW management. Also, the german translation of his words was a disrespectful tone about the car.

http://electrek.co/2016/03/07/bmw-ce...el-x-hit-head/

I was there and they (Tesla) did say it was a prototype for European specification, hence why the vehicle was then roped off to the general public but leaving the Falcon doors open.

[antzcrashing]

Originally Posted by SCOTT26

Certainly, speaking hypothetically if Tesla where to cripple the US Auto Industry or any Domestic US brand. Then hello Bailout no.2.
But if Tesla collapsed can you see the government throw more dollars at them?
Two but hypothetical scenarios. No matter who wins or loses? you will still pay for it.

We are thrilled that you guys are watching usa like a hollywood movie, banking on our downfall. We are watching you bmw, banking on your downfall. Funny the world isnt it?

Our scenarios:

A) tesla kills it with the model 3 taking enormous mkt share from bmw 3 series, the first time bmw loses mkt share on the precious 3 series in awhile, bmw ignors the threat again, and investors sell and short the stock like crazy

B) tesla kills it with the model 3 taking enormous mkt share from bmw 3 series, the first time bmw loses mkt share on the precious 3 series in awhile, bmw builds more 3 series plug in hybrids with insufficient range, which people continue to not buy, and investors sell and short the stock like crazy

C) tesla kills it with the model 3 taking enormous mkt share from bmw 3 series, the first time bmw loses mkt share on the precious 3 series in awhile, bmw has been building a 200+ mile (350km) range car to hedge this very possibility, and they release it gaining respect and admiration and mkt share back from tesla and others that are running away with the game, and investors buy the stock and bmw gains new buyers and enthusiasm

[spmd11]

Originally Posted by SCOTT26

I was there and they (Tesla) did say it was a prototype for European specification, hence why the vehicle was then roped off to the general public but leaving the Falcon doors open.

Seriously Scott? Do you think the average bimmerpost reader is that naive? Even if that particular car on that particular stage was a prototype, this is the wrong answer from your CEO. His response on that stage at that moment is perhaps a clue to his situational awareness (lack there of) of the automotive disruption that is happening right in front of his eyes. At a minimum, he displayed arrogance and a lack of respect for an incredible automotive achievement, the likes of which, the world has never seen

[FogCityM3]

So instead of focusing on product, you (as the face of BMW on these forums) instead implicitly complain how unfair it is to compete in the US and laugh that US residents will pay the price of better competition through hypothetical bailouts? Talk about biting the hand that fed BMW for all these years, which admittedly was won fair and square in the US with superior BMW product that excited and inspired entire generations. Now that the product no longer excites and seems to be straying from its core values, now BMW seeks to use diversionary tactics and excuse-fests, including some pathetically ineffective jabs at CUSTOMERS on the forums!?

Seems like a bunch of petty "schadenfreude" to me (despite the irony that it is the US manufacturers are making a leap), and is the perfect parallel to Kruger's awkward and embarrassing dissing of the the model X. Ford just paid $55,000 over sticker to get their hands on an early model X and LEARN from it, whereas the CEO of BMW takes the "ignorance is bliss" approach to dealing with the competition.

Looks like BMW's culture is pretty consistent up and down the ranks and as such, will probably get it into trouble.

Originally Posted by SCOTT26

Certainly, speaking hypothetically if Tesla where to cripple the US Auto Industry or any Domestic US brand. Then hello Bailout no.2.
But if Tesla collapsed can you see the government throw more dollars at them?
Two but hypothetical scenarios. No matter who wins or loses? you will still pay for it.

[lemetier]

Originally Posted by SCOTT26

But the industry is already in the game and developing more sustainable alternatives than just electric or plug-in hybrid which is not just about range but also performance.
I do not think it will wipe out the German auto industry as badge prestige remains a primary option for our and everybody else's customers globally.

The Tesla threat? Well if BMW had a 3er that attracted 400,000 units for pre sale then the factory would be expanded to make way for expansion on production or a new plant built and ready to deliver the car on schedule. Both i3 and i8 reached the market on schedule and that involved building a new plant to manufacture CFRP as well as a completely new production line at Leipzig all due thanks to massive investment from BMW.

Both recent Tesla models have been affected by delays. And with the production units expected in late 2017 but again could be possibly delayed by that time there will be direct competitors and many customers will have probably dropped out from the list either due to another product or price adjustments?

Where Tesla will do damage will be with the volume domestic manufacturers.

Which either way whoever wins the battle? The American taxpayer will still be paying for it.

I agree the "Tesla Threat" is imaginary overall. They have and will continue to exert some impact for the mid range, but the only real Tesla Threat is the one they have hooked themselves onto, that being the retail structure. They don't have a conquest plan that supports sustainable growth outside of what are still early adopters and novelty buyers. They've courted me twice in the past 7 years for a significant position at the company and the only change I've seen between the two occasions is the introduction of misdirection techniques to reduce the damage resulting from known program flaws.

What has been a silent concern among the execs and lead engineers at every major group is if Hyundai attracts a leader who can right the company and steer it straight to where it's capable of going before they do too much damage and make themselves a joke from which recovery and strong growth in the short to mid term is not possible. Biermann may just very well be that person and the nightmare become reality.

BMW's main mistake was over producing the i3 (IMO it should have been a Mini EV/REX) and i8 while failing to bring a mid market iX crossover for better use of the capital investments made to facilitate the BMW i product manufacturing. Mini needs some serious rethinking, and BMW needs to finally make the move to right size the product portfolio and features, reduce the internal competition, while staying diverse enough to grow in the most profitable segments. At least Rolls is on a roll in the right direction.

[Agni]

The response I expected from scott26 was something like: "Not to worry BMW will have an appropriate answer to Tesla soon". These responses just prove how unprepared and ignorant BMW is. I really hope BMW gets its act together because I love what the brand stands for.

Additionally, people fail to realize that the Gigafactory is going to give Tesla unprecedented efficiencies of scale in their supply chain. BMWs CFRP plant in Washington will not help much, they need to work on driving the cost of batteries down. Let's also not forget about that supercharging network, another obstacle competitors have to overcome.

[Imola.ZHP]

Originally Posted by zer0cool

It appears BMW is simply not interested in developing EVs, which is OK. I don't see EV becoming really mainstream in the foreseeable future. Many people either despise EVs or can't really own EVs due to other reasons.

Moreover, for all manufacturers other than Tesla, without a supercharging network, EVs aren't really mobile...

A friend of mine who is a very high earning millennial just put in a deposit for Model 3 (he can easily buy a Model S cash, but he's really frugal). He cares nothing about cars, drive an old Hyundai, but lined up on the first day to put down a deposit. A Model 3 will be his only car. He can't really buy a BMW i3 since a BMW i3 is not truly mobile (+ we all think it's hella ugly). It's a city commute car, you can't go anywhere with it. Unless other manufacturers adopt Tesla SC or builds thousands of them themselves, I just don't see any other EVs being competitive.

Thats funny, I just took my i3 (with REx) on a 1500 mile trip last month. If I had been in a Tesla it would have taken at least twice as long as there was no superchargers along the way.

BMW is adding a plug (or offering a plug might be a better way to put it) on all of their upcoming models, so to say BMW isn't interested in EV's might be a bit off. Yes a PHEV isn't a pure EV but neither is my i3 REx technically nor the i8, but REx EV's and PHEV's are a bridge to EV. If I don't keep my REx at lease end I'll switch to a non-REx facelift (2017) rumored to have 50% more range. That should hold me over until my Model 3 is available. I don't want to leave BMW but I don't think a PHEV 3er will cut it for me. Perhaps something crazy will happen between now and then.

[antzcrashing]

Originally Posted by Imola.ZHP

Thats funny, I just took my i3 (with REx) on a 1500 mile trip last month. If I had been in a Tesla it would have taken at least twice as long as there was no superchargers along the way.

BMW is adding a plug (or offering a plug might be a better way to put it) on all of their upcoming models, so to say BMW isn't interested in EV's might be a bit off. Yes a PHEV isn't a pure EV but neither is my i3 REx technically nor the i8, but REx EV's and PHEV's are a bridge to EV. If I don't keep my REx at lease end I'll switch to a non-REx facelift (2017) rumored to have 50% more range. That should hold me over until my Model 3 is available. I don't want to leave BMW but I don't think a PHEV 3er will cut it for me. Perhaps something crazy will happen between now and then.

If the price of the model 3 is the same or less than the i3, tesla will have a hard time keeping up w demand, the i3 on the other hand bmw can hardly give away. I am not discounting your purchase, but from a desirability standpoint, sexiness (tesla 3) is beating functional (bmw i3) right now

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by Agni

The response I expected from scott26 was something like: "Not to worry BMW will have an appropriate answer to Tesla soon". These responses just prove how unprepared and ignorant BMW is. I really hope BMW gets its act together because I love what the brand stands for.

Additionally, people fail to realize that the Gigafactory is going to give Tesla unprecedented efficiencies of scale in their supply chain. BMWs CFRP plant in Washington will not help much, they need to work on driving the cost of batteries down. Let's also not forget about that supercharging network, another obstacle competitors have to overcome.

The current Model S sells for an average transaction price of $100,000+. As of the year ending 2015, Tesla has not made a profit on any sale of any Model S, which count at the end of 2015 was 64,000 units in the US and an additional 30,000 units for OCONUS, for a total of around 100,000 sales worldwide. 18 months ago the Tesla website was offering a $10,000 battery pre-purchase program for a replacement battery at the point when (if) the original battery fails (I haven't looked lately if Tesla still has the battery program). Even if one assumes that the $10,000 replacement battery is sold a $0 profit, which it is not, reducing the battery cost by gaining 100% efficiency in battery production only reduces the cost of the battery by $5,000. So this means that in order to produce a Model 3 for an average transaction price of $42,500 (Elon's stated number) Tesla somehow has to increase the efficiency of the Model 3 production by nearly 100% to get more than $60,000 out of the production cost of the Model 3 over the Model S. This means reducing the cost of materials and more importantly production labor (meaning building nearly twice as many cars in the plant as Tesla does now for the same amount of labor cost).

At the Tesla Tysons Corner Tesla store sits a bare Model S chassis (floor pan) to show off the battery design. The chassis is, from a design and production perspective, really a work of art. From my eye, with a background in manufacturing engineering, it is beautiful to look at. It is also very expensive to produce. It is made entirely of aluminum: large and complex castings, extrusions, stampings, all welded together, truly beautiful to look at; but also tell tale of why a Model S costs $100,000. My understanding is the Model X is based off the Model S architecture. The Model X was supposed to come in at a base price some $10K to $15K lower than the Model S; it didn't. Unless Tesla comes up with a completely different chassis design for a lower-cost production methodology and lower-cost materials use (aluminum is far more expensive than steel) for the Model 3, gaining that much cost efficiency over the Model S production has to be on the order of what Henry Ford did with the Model T by developing the moving assembly line for unit production and constantly improving the efficiency of it. Even at 400,000 pre-production reservation agreements and Tesla's implied unit sales of the Model 3, getting $60K out of the production cost is a seriously tall order for the company. I'd love for Elon to do it, hopefully he has people working for him who can figure it out, because it will definitely have to be unprecedented, and it will not all come from reducing the battery cost by building it at the Gigafactory.

[antzcrashing]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

The current Model S sells for an average transaction price of $100,000+. As of the year ending 2015, Tesla has not made a profit on any sale of any Model S, which count at the end of 2015 was 64,000 units in the US and an additional 30,000 units for OCONUS, for a total of around 100,000 sales worldwide. 18 months ago the Tesla website was offering a $10,000 battery pre-purchase program for a replacement battery at the point when (if) the original battery fails (I haven't looked lately if Tesla still has the battery program). Even if one assumes that the $10,000 replacement battery is sold a $0 profit, which it is not, reducing the battery cost by gaining 100% efficiency in battery production only reduces the cost of the battery by $5,000. So this means that in order to produce a Model 3 for an average transaction price of $42,500 (Elon's stated number) Tesla somehow has to increase the efficiency of the Model 3 production by nearly 100% to get more than $60,000 out of the production cost of the Model 3 over the Model S.

At the Tysons Corner Tesla store sits a bare Model S chassis (floor pan) to show off the battery design. The chassis is, from a design and production perspective, really a work of art. From my eye, with a background in manufacturing engineering, it is beautiful to look at. It is also very expensive to produce. It is made entirely of aluminum: large and complex castings, extrusions, stampings, all welded together, truly beautiful to look at; but also tell tale of why a Model S costs $100,000. My understanding is the Model X is based off the Model S architecture. The Model X was supposed to come in at a base price some $10K to $15K lower than the Model S; it didn't. Unless Tesla comes up with a completely different chassis design and production methodology and materials use (aluminum is far more expensive than steel) for the Model 3, gaining that much cost efficiency over the Model S production has to be on the order of what Henry Ford did with the Model T by developing the moving assembly line for unit production and constantly improving the efficiency of it. Even at 400,000 pre-production reservation agreements and Tesla's implied unit sales of the Model 3, getting $60K out of the production cost is a seriously tall order for the company. I'd love for Elon to do it, hopefully he has people working for him who can figure it out, because it will definitely have to be unprecedented, and it will not come all out of the battery cost.

As true as is it that tesla has not made a profit on the model S, it is not to say that the model S doesnt make a profit per sale (purchase price greater than cost), it is only to say that full operation cost of the company as a whole is greater than profits on the whole, the profit per car is largely speculation bc tesla does not divulge that info. Everyone knows it is higher volume that makes these companies profitable. Of course teslas challenge will be to scale up production and deliver on the big promises of the model 3.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by antzcrashing

As true as is it that tesla has not made a profit on the model S, it is not to say that the model S doesnt make a profit per sale (purchase price greater than cost), it is only to say that full operation cost of the company as a whole is greater than profits on the whole, the profit per car is largely speculation bc tesla does not divulge that info. Everyone knows it is higher volume that makes these companies profitable. Of course teslas challenge will be to scale up production and deliver on the big promises of the model 3.

The purpose of an auto manufacturer is to make a profit on the cars it sells. At some point Tesla needs to make a corporate profit by selling cars at a profit. Even selling carbon credits to other manufacturers has not brought corporate profits nor any stock dividends. It is going to be extremely hard for Tesla to fulfill the promises it has set for the Model 3 (delivery date, MSRP price, and performance).

It is not a question if Tesla makes a profit on the production of the Model S (Price vs. actual production cost of the vehicle). The actual cost of producing a car is not just the materials and production labor, it is the entire cost of operating the business, all of it eventually needs to come from the sales of cars at a profit. Tesla has yet proven it can do that. I hope it does.

[lemetier]

Originally Posted by antzcrashing

As true as is it that tesla has not made a profit on the model S, it is not to say that the model S doesnt make a profit per sale (purchase price greater than cost), it is only to say that full operation cost of the company as a whole is greater than profits on the whole, the profit per car is largely speculation bc tesla does not divulge that info. Everyone knows it is higher volume that makes these companies profitable. Of course teslas challenge will be to scale up production and deliver on the big promises of the model 3.

They're also skirting a very precipitous cliff in how they calculate and report GAAP and non-GAAP. The SEC has given them leniency the first time they made a few "mistakes" in 10K and 8K reports, but they won't be as lucky if some of these special accounting programs don't end up where they've gambled they will.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by miamiten

They're also skirting a very precipitous cliff in how they calculate and report GAAP and non-GAAP. The SEC has given them leniency the first time they made a few "mistakes" in 10K and 8K reports, but they won't be as lucky if some of these special accounting programs don't end up where they've gambled they will.

It will be interesting to see what the accounting treatment of the $400 million of reservation Agreements will be.