• 13
Tesla has been saying that without a $350 million loan from the government, the Model S Sedan will be delayed. Heck, they've been saying since October that the delay will happen. Also in October, Tesla made it clear that the Model S won't be shown to the public until spring 2009, maybe at the Geneva Motor Show. We'd hoped to see it sometime in 2008, but no dice.

Nonetheless, Inside Line today confirmed that we will not be getting a surprise sneak peek of the all-electric sedan at the Detroit Auto Show next month. So, just in case you were making a secret wish to Santa concerning a certain California-based electric automaker, you might want to save your effort and just hope that Tesla survives the economic turmoil to bring us the Model S at all.

[Source: Inside Line]


I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 13 Comments
      • 6 Years Ago
      It takes time to develop a new technology to bring it down to where it is affordable to the masses. This happened with Personal Computers, PV Panels, wind generators, iphones, pretty much any new technology. It makes sense because a premium product (such as an all electric sports car) is able to absorb the higher R&D costs associated with building out the technology. As that is honed, and the kinks are worked out, the prices can come down.

      The problem with the Big 3 getting a big injection of cash and companies like Tesla, Aptera, etc., not getting any government cash is that it essentially raises their cost to market and reduces their ability to compete (which is already handicapped).

      That's the problem with the government getting involved in markets, like in physics, every action as an equal reaction. First off, it's not like the governments money just grows on trees, it has to come from the people, which reduces the peoples ability to consume, etc. Secondly when you subsidize one producer, you harm another existing producer or potential future producer. (would you decide to start making widgets if the other widget maker got a big fat government check every year? Not if you were smart.)
      • 6 Years Ago
      What you have to remember is that the TESLA has
      the ability to be a zero emission car , surely isnt
      that what we all want , like the reason we read this
      site ?
      OK , its a hundred grand ,its a lot of cash and myself
      cannot afford one , however it is by its very exsistance
      going to help with the introduction of new green
      technology into mainstream production .
      Already the prices of the once massively expensive
      lithium cells are dropping dramatically , myself
      and a friend have just taken delivery of 16Kwh
      of batteries ,the same capacity that would have
      been used in the VOLT for $10000 ,ok that is also a
      lot of cash, but a year ago it would have cost double !
      and used in a light small car as we intend too will
      give us a 100 miles range .
      Car companies have for many years been using
      the excuse of high cost as a reason for not adopting
      these technologies , Tesla has shown it can be
      done, and will I believe leave its shaky start behind
      it to become a highly successful company in the
      future .
      I personally wish them well
      • 6 Years Ago
      It is extremely annoying how companies like Tesla are trying to strong-arm the government into loaning them 350 million plus. And announcements that its sedan won't be revealed till then makes it worse--of that is the logic, then we'll never see it. Ever. That's too bad, I think it could be a hot seller and I may be a buyer.
        • 6 Years Ago
        I think Tesla is just trying to keep the government from taking all the money set aside specifically for companies like Tesla doing advanced drive train work to bail out the big car companies. I don't think there would be this much publicity about it from Tesla if there had not been so many recent stories spreading the misinformation that Tesla was asking for a "government bailout to produce cars only for the very rich" so the 2007 Advanced Drive Train Manufacturers money set aside for new technology, would be better repurposed to propping up GM, Ford and Chrysler. Now Tesla feels like it needs to advertise that they would like to use some of that money for these specific projects, and the projects will be delayed without access to credit. Not trying to strong-arm per se -- just trying to keep access to the cash it has been counting on since 2007 from being pulled away for GM
        • 6 Years Ago
        Tesla is not strong-arming the government. Tesla is not a big enough company nor does it possess enough lobbyists to do so. The 350 million, not billion, dollar loan that Tesla is talking about is part of a program to help companies develop alternative technologies to ICE cars. It is not a bailout. A bailout is money that was not part of the federal budget that is used to keep a company from going into bankruptcy or default. Tesla is not asking for a bailout. Tesla is asking to be considered for a loan that the DOE gives to alt tech companies. The loan would allow Tesla to expand their operations by opening a factory to product their wholly original car the Model S.
      • 6 Years Ago
      Tesla deserves the money more than Gm et al. At least they don't squander the money on corporate jets, huge parties, outdated distribution methods, too many brands, overpaid top executives, and the list goes on. All this to tell us that EV are not possible and they are still wasting money on hydrogen...Yes, GM is the winner. Tesla is, on the other hand, able and willing to bring EV's to the market and help make a dent in out terrorist troubled times fueled by countries that don't like us very much because we keep buying oil from them. That's the truth. Chris, you may not be able to afford the model S, nor could I...brand new. But eventually these cars will trickle down to the used car market, and the savings will still continue. GM, on the other hand will continue to bring gas burners that will stay with us for another 15-20 years. Is that what you read this web site for?
      • 6 Years Ago
      Tesla is one company i wouldn't mind seeing go under. If it's not apparent yet, no one on this website will ever be able to afford a Tesla. It's a car for the rich and will always be that way much like a Porsche or Ferrari. Tesla just uses websites like this as free advertising, sort of like word of mouth, the best advertising out there.
        • 6 Years Ago
        Wow, chris, I do believe you are jealous, Tesla is getting all the attention and the adulation, not you, so you kinda hope they fail?

        "Never" is a long time. While there aren't many that can afford a Tesla now, that could easily change. I remember seeing the Apple Lisa (Mac XL) going for $9,995 and wondering who could afford that. Now darn near everybody can afford a computer with a lot more power and speed than the old Lisa.

        Perhaps in a decade or so, with inprovements in batteries and manufacturing techniques, Tesla could be churning out nice affordable electric cars that the average consumer could afford. There is a precedence: The first cars Henry Ford sold were called "The Gentleman's Roadster", and it cost over $2k, the equivalent of $140K after adjusting for inflation. The model T was also a costly at first, but the price quickly dropped as Ford improved designs and assembly techniques until most families could afford one.
        • 6 Years Ago
        People already know they can't afford a Ferrari or Porsche as they have a price tag yet Tesla wants to keep stringing people along saying it will be affordable, just wait a few more years!
        • 6 Years Ago
        I could afford one, by selling a bunch a stock, but cars are a bad investment, especially with the road salt in winter, also I have a wife and a dog so maybe I'm too practical to ever own a tesla.
        I would be much more tempted to buy a model S.
        • 6 Years Ago
        The founder of this website can afford a Tesla
        • 6 Years Ago
        By that same reasoning, Autoblog should stop doing stories about Porsche and Ferrari? If, as you say, "no one on this website will ever be able to afford a Tesla," then what is the point using "websites like this as free advertising." Your comment exhibits a failure of logic.
      • 6 Years Ago
      THE TESLA ROADSTER IS THE BEGINNING OF THE ELECTRIC VEHICLE HISTORY.

      TESLA MOTORS IS DEDICATED TO PRODUCING ELECTRIC VEHICLES. DO YOU THINK A START-UP COMPANY WOULD PRODUCE A VEHICLE FOR THE POOR TO SHOW OFF THERE PRODUCT. OR WOULD YOU START YOUR COMPANY OFF WITH A HIGH PERFORMANCE VEHICLE TO HIGHLIGHT WHAT TECHNOLIGY CAN ACTUALLY BE SOLD TO THE CUSTOMER (UNLIKE THE BIG 3 WHICH WANT TO SHOW US THE TECHNOLIGY IS STILL A 100 YEARS AWAY).

      TESLA MOTORS WILL EVENTUALLY PRODUCE EV'S FOR ALL LEVELS OF PEOPLE. IT WILL TAKE SOME TIME TO GET TO THAT POINT. ON A PERSONAL NOTE I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A UTILITY EV CAPABLE OF TRANSPORTING PEOPLE, CARGO AND POSSIBLE A TRAILER.

      IF BRAND NEW TECHNOLIGY IS ADVANCED FURTHER, HOPEFULLY PEOPLE WILL OPEN THERE CLOSED EYES AND SEE THE FUTURE. THE BIG 3 SHOULD LEARN FROM A START-UP COMPANY THAT MIGHT PUT THE DINOSAURS TO REST!!!
    • Load More Comments