CleanTechnica is the #1 cleantech-focused
website in the world. Subscribe today!


Cars image

Published on October 29th, 2014 | by James Ayre

10

Former Fisker CEO Drops Tesla Some Advice

Share on Google+Share on RedditShare on StumbleUponTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on FacebookPin on PinterestDigg thisShare on TumblrBuffer this pageEmail this to someone

October 29th, 2014 by  

Tesla shouldn’t have spent resources on the development of the all-wheel-drive version of the Model S, but rather should have used those resources to speed the development of the “affordable” 4th model, according to former Fisker Automotive CEO (and ex-Chevrolet Volt vehicle-line director) Tony Posawatz.

In addition to the advice/criticism, the former luxury-PHEV CEO offered some praise as well — giving note to a number of Tesla’s recent actions.

image

Given that Tesla’s stock actually fell somewhat with the announcement of the D, perhaps Tony has a point? Though, of course, you should always note who the person giving feedback is (as far as actions/effectiveness goes), and in this case that’s the ex-CEO of Fisker…. Hmm.

Interesting interview either way. Here are some of the best excerpts (via Benzinga):

“I do have some general concerns around their ability to make a profitable model that’s a high-volume model,” Posawatz stated. “I think, if you look at their dependence currently on the [Zero Emission Vehicle] credits for revenue and profit … it’s not a business model that I think is sustainable.”

Another key element that Posawatz pointed out that would be key to Tesla’s success is partnerships, because the automaker could benefit from the scale partners could provide.

“[The automotive industry] is an industry that requires a lot of capital, and scale does matter as it relates to trying to get your costs down,” he explained. “If you’re buying a million steering columns, it costs you a hell of a lot less than if you’re buying a few thousand steering columns.”


 

Not so sure that I agree with some of Posawatz’s inferences, but the point about focusing more on “affordable” models does seem to be a reasonable point.

The next few years look to be a roller coaster for Tesla, and should help to offer some clarity on the intelligence of the company’s recent choices.

Regarding Fisker, a new Fisker Karma was recently unveiled… but it’s basically the same as the previous one. We’ll see if Fisker can stay afloat this time around.

More Tesla news.

Tesla Motors website.

Image Credit: Tesla Motors

Keep up to date with all the hottest cleantech news by subscribing to our (free) cleantech newsletter, or keep an eye on sector-specific news by getting our (also free) solar energy newsletter, electric vehicle newsletter, or wind energy newsletter.



Share on Google+Share on RedditShare on StumbleUponTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on FacebookPin on PinterestDigg thisShare on TumblrBuffer this pageEmail this to someone

Tags: , , , , ,


About the Author

's background is predominantly in geopolitics and history, but he has an obsessive interest in pretty much everything. After an early life spent in the Imperial Free City of Dortmund, James followed the river Ruhr to Cofbuokheim, where he attended the University of Astnide. And where he also briefly considered entering the coal mining business. He currently writes for a living, on a broad variety of subjects, ranging from science, to politics, to military history, to renewable energy. You can follow his work on Google+.


Related Posts



  • OAB

    Regarding the comment that Tesla should have focused on developing the new (relatively cheap) model 3, rather than AWD for S/X model.

    I don’t think there is any doubt that the new AWD will increase Tesla sales and profits. Since it is the profits that decides what Tesla can spend on future development, I cannot see how this could be bad for the new model 3 even if it had no carry over value.

    But actually part of what is new for the Tesla AWD is that the big rear wheel motor have been replaced with a smaller one. And since it is, I would think, certain that the model 3 will have a smaller motor than the non-AWD model S it is not impossible that the new rear (or front) drivetrain will carry over directly to new model 3. Personally I don’t think it is likely that they will use the exact same motor/components, but I am quite sure Tesla learnt a lot from using a smaller motor that will have value for the model 3.

  • David in Bushwick

    More sour grapes from the fossil fools.
    Tesla is already successful, obviously. Why do these armchair experts think Tesla can only be successful if they are as big as Ford or BMW?
    Being the best is all that matters.

  • 2ndConstitution

    If low oil prices continue for more than a year, Tesla will be another green flop.

    • Marion Meads

      Untrue. The main reason cited by Tesla buyers are sporty performance, luxury or status symbol. Being green is just a minor side-issue. There will be plenty of buyers even if gasoline becomes free.

      • 2ndConstitution

        Tesla is only surviving because of one thing, POLITICS and green credits. Take away those two things ( and it is highly possible within two years) and Tesla will be a memory.

        • Benjamin Nead

          Gasoline autos are only surviving because of a century-old policy of government subsidies for oil companies. Take THAT away internal combustion engines will be relegated to museums overnight.

        • Bob_Wallace

          Take your trolling back under the bridge you came from.

    • BigWu

      Gas prices would need to drop below $0.86 per gallon to erase Tesla’s cost advantage on a per mile basis!

      Having spent many years in the energy biz, I can say with a great deal of certainty that we’ll never see sub-$1 gasoline again. At that price tar sands operations and tight oil plays would be mothballed as well as most active offshore wells and no new drilling would occur. Production would simply collapse. So barring a global depression or catastrophic collapse in population, its simply not possible.

  • BigWu

    The ‘D’ all wheel drive variant was, by all accounts, not a Model S R&D effort but rather a Model X effort (the upcoming AWD Tesla based on the S platform). There definitely was some level of effort required to apply this R&D to the S, but Posawatz’s criticism goes much too far.

    The addition of the AWD ‘D’ variant created a tremendous media splash not just within the EV world but throughout the automotive press, prticularly the muscle car world (it out accelerates nearly all production cars regardless of price!) This proved to even the most die-hard gasmobile motorheads that electrification has not just arrived but is now, and will be for the forseeable future, king of the hill.

    Additionally, given Tesla’s robust sales in Nordic countries, the AWD ‘D’ opens up a major new market segment for those who require (or believe they do) AWD winter performance capabilities.

  • Kyle Field

    I wouldnt be in any hurry to take advice from anyone related to the Fisker brand if I were Tesla. I personally agree that this announcement and associated R&D seems like it would have been better spent to cut the lead time on future lines of cars. Having said that, this may have just popped out of their R&D department as an innovation that lays the foundation for future lines so along that vein, it might make sense. I hope they don’t fall down that rabbit hole, with endless minor innovations delaying their core products from making it to the masses.

    Tesla has been unwaveringly brilliant up to this point so I suppose it’s inevitable for them to stumble eventually…just a matter of time as nobody’s perfect.

Back to Top ↑

© 2014   Sustainable Enterprises Media, Inc.



Back to Top ↑