Tesla Motors turned the "penny wise, dollar foolish" axiom on its head by staking its lithium-ion battery technology on a more expensive and more complex layout than its competitors, according to Tesla Chief Technology Officer JB Straubel in an interview with Bloomberg News.

Instead of using battery packs with hundreds of larger cells for its Roaster, Tesla deployed thousands of smaller lithium-ion cells for its inaugural model in 2006. This made the battery pack more expensive to produce, but this costlier architecture was considered safer and less prone to breakdowns. Straubel said. Since then, Tesla has cut the cost of its battery packs in half during the past seven years while avoiding any recalls or reports of breakdowns due to the packs.

Earlier this month, Tesla said it delivered its first quarterly profit during the first quarter, boosting its sales 83 percent from a year earlier to $562 million and selling 4,900 Model S EVs, which was more than what the Chevrolet Volt extended-range plug-in and Nissan Leaf battery-electric achieved.


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
  • 65 Comments
      Ricardo Gozinya
      • 1 Year Ago
      Exactly, Tesla's making the most news lately, so they get the most attention.
      otiswild
      • 1 Year Ago
      If next-gen energy densities (400-500wh/kg and up) get into 18650 cells first, then Tesla should stick with them, otherwise they should maintain the same overall battery formfactor while switching its internals around to take best advantage of those densities.. I'm thinking they'll be prismatic pouch formfactor cells rather than the 18650 cylindrical.. But to get to a $40k car with 40-50kWh of battery that can credibly take on a BMW 3-series they'll need those next-gen batteries which pack more power at the same or lower cost per kg..
      Giza Plateau
      • 1 Year Ago
      In 2004 there weren't many options, today laptop cells is not the right way except for a marathon distance model which doesn't have a lot of merit anyway. It gets particularly bad when it's a 2.1ton luxury barge, then you have a lot of batteries on your hand. Something like 10000 cells in S85. Sooner or later they will depart that approach. The 450kg battery pack in the Roadster had only an effective density of around 120Wh/kg. I think (I know) it would have been a much better value performer with a smaller more agile pack like A123 cells. It's a mistake to just pile on batteries.
        Rob Mahrt
        • 1 Year Ago
        @Giza Plateau
        You should start your own company to compete. I do not see how, if this is the wrong way to go about it... no one else is able to offer anything anywhere close to what they put out 7 years ago.
        purrpullberra
        • 1 Year Ago
        @Giza Plateau
        Says the know-it-all who does nothing with all its knowledge. Many people, all of whom are smarter than you and more driven than you (pun intended) have put more thought than you'll ever manage into their wise decision. We all know that it ended up being a key, brilliant and gutsy call that makes sense then and now. It is a main ingredient in Tesla's 'nearly faultless execution'. Has any business publication referred to your billion dollar corporation that way? Didn't think so. Truth time: If anyone listened to you they'd be abject failures. I haven't heard one sensible proposition or insightful observation from the random insanity you pile up here. If you occasionally peppered your lunacy with something funny or NOWAY true, you might not suffer the condemnations you bring upon yourself. BTW I still haven't seen you reply to me, ever. (If I'm wrong will someone tell me where/when.) What's wrong? Can't defend the illogical ravings of a poorly educated crackpot. You might as well be posting about alien abduction.
      Rotation
      • 1 Year Ago
      News source links back to itself. Here is the proper link: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-05-14/tesla-s-straubel-keeps-motors-rolling-as-stock-surges-57-.html All the interview is is a company principal talking up his company. Any real merit to small cell versus big cell is not going to be accurately evaluated by an officer in the company which has declared itself the small cell champion. It's just a PR piece.
      paulwesterberg
      • 1 Year Ago
      And... TSLA is over 100.
        Joeviocoe
        • 1 Year Ago
        @paulwesterberg
        Closed at $110 today.
          theflew
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Joeviocoe
          I just hope Tesla isn't the next stock bubble - hopefully it's not based on wishful thinking and promises.
          Rob Mahrt
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Joeviocoe
          On company cannot be a stock bubble but.. in my opinion, Tesla is currently over valued (in stock price alone) but I guess that is what happends with potential hyper growth companies (Tesla, Netflix, Amazon), I don't like any of them at their current prices based on fundamentals.. but that doesn't mean they will not all be very successful.
      Electron
      • 1 Year Ago
      @ Spec, no, what they did is using high energy density cells rather than the high power density cells the rest was interested in because they wanted to do small packs for city EVs rather than a large pack for long range EVs. The result: Nissan Leaf 24KWh@ 660LBs, Models 85KWh@ 1100LBs Imagine what the Leaf's battery would have weighed if Nissan had used the low energy density/high power density chemistry to do an 85KWh battery. This game is not just about slapping in more cells.
      Val
      • 1 Year Ago
      Selling a turd for six figures is THE definition of marketing success, so yes, fisker was one. When another car from another company comes that has more range and less weight, at similar price, then they will be the technology leader. Currently, tesla IS the technology leader. The fact that anyone else is free to copy their approach doesn't mean it is not the best approach, or that anyone will do it. Anyone is also free to copy android and start selling smartphones with the same parts HTC or blackberry use. As is evident, very, very few can pull it off, and even fewer can make money doing it.
      James
      • 1 Year Ago
      Should start calling this site autoblogtesla with the amount of telsa fluff stories we are starting to see.
        Joeviocoe
        • 1 Year Ago
        @James
        For years, ABG has reported on concepts, conversions, political talk and other vapor about a POSSIBLE future of the Green Automotive sector. Tesla, GM, and NISSAN are now the ONLY "REAL" players making changes. Now ABG is full of Tesla, Volt and Leaf stories. And of those 3, Tesla is the most revolutionary and interesting. So why wouldn't this site focus on that?
        Rob Mahrt
        • 1 Year Ago
        @James
        I have heard more about Tesla on most news outlets in the past 3 weeks than in the last 3 years I have been following the company... Oh and I have seen more Model Ss (or Teslas in general) in the past 3 weeks than in all of the weeks combined before that point.
        raktmn
        • 1 Year Ago
        @James
        The only thing that has become excessive is the amount of endless whining in every Tesla story. If you don't want to read about Tesla, skip over the story. If you are tired of Tesla stories, don't after seeing the short version, click on the story to see the long version and the comments. Then don't write a comment in response to a story about Tesla, and for pete's sake, don't come back, click on the same story again, read the comments, and post responses!
        2 wheeled menace
        • 1 Year Ago
        @James
        I like Tesla a lot but i agree, it's became a bit excessive.
      purrpullberra
      • 1 Year Ago
      This is an interested facet of the design process early on at Tesla. It seems that it was the right move since the car (and company) are enjoying success unknown to every other EV makers. Two parts of the success are: No Fires and Longer Range. Those are directly related to the specific choices of battery type and configuration. It may not be a decision that required great intellect but they obviously made the right one considering Tesla's success. None of this is to say that this current set up is the way forward beyond ModelX but it has served very well so far. The most informed people think Tesla wouldn't have made it this far had they chosen a solution that gave less range per lb of battery. I can't understand how someone could think or say Tesla did anything wrong about batteries let alone act like they could do better. It's Harry Potter magic Giza uses to build the only EV's that should exist! Does the tooth fairy help build them? How can Tesla use batteries that were never available? A123 couldn't supply Tesla with batteries for ModelS. They could barely supply Fiskar. Just more insane vomit from the resident bozo.
      brotherkenny4
      • 1 Year Ago
      "considered safer and less prone to breakdowns". It may have been considered that, but it's hard to find the rationale that would make me believe it has something to do with small size. A more likely reason they were a better bet at the time is because they were off the shelf mass produced, which means that the manufacturing was more mature, and less likely to suffer problems. However, that will not likely continue as the manufacturers of larger format cells begin to produce higher numbers and gain experience. If all other things are equal, a battery with more parts and more connections should be more prone to problems, not the one with fewer.
        Val
        • 1 Year Ago
        @brotherkenny4
        You are trying to figure out how much a cell would cost by looking at the cost of the car? Mercedes will buy less than 5% as many cells as Tesla. So yeah, they're going to spend more per kWh. This does not give you a way to compare the cell prices apples to apples. Audi just canceled the R8 production because they said it made no economic sense. They expected the batteries to be cheaper by now. So yeah, if they cancel a whole car, for which they spent hundreds of millions in development, it seems the batteries are expensive enough. Give me an apples to apples comparison which shows CLEARLY that prismatic battery packs are cheaper and I will shut up, seriously.
        raktmn
        • 1 Year Ago
        @brotherkenny4
        brotherkenny -- You are right that large format cells may someday catch up with what Tesla is doing. But that is the beauty of the Tesla design. If Tesla wants to change to a different pack, they can any time they want in the future.
        Weapon
        • 1 Year Ago
        @brotherkenny4
        I can explain to you why small cells are superior. The amount of connections is irrelevant because these are not mechanical moving parts. The problem with bigger cells is very simple. Lithium batteries need sensors and thermal management. So that is where the problem comes. When you have a large battery, the sensors are looking for a needle in a haystack. There could be a thermal meltdown going in the center of the battery and the sensors may fail to pick it up until it reaches the edges which is already too late. To add to that it is much harder to cool the center then it is the edges. You probably learned the concept of surface area in chemistry class. When you would have done the experiment of melting ice in water. You notice that when you have multiple small ice cubes, they melt faster then 1 large ice cube. The same concept applies, by having smaller cells, you are able to thermal manage cells more efficiently. There is an upside and a downside to this approach. The upside is improved safety. The downside is there is more cost as you need more materials to individually wrap each cell. Tesla manages around this downside by using the 18650 form factor which due to economies of scale has brought down the cost.
          JakeY
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Weapon
          @2 wheeled menace Large format pouch/prismatic cells are improving but still not as developed as 18650. We just had a couple of high profile examples of battery defects for a123 used by Fisker and the GS Yuasa cells used by the Mitsubishi. This is much more rare in the 18650 industry. The most recent was for the bad batch of Sony cells manufactured in 2005. For large format prismatics, there just isn't the push for best energy density. The ideal there is to take a "balanced" approach that does not require as aggressive thermal management as Tesla uses. That's why cell-wise, large format prismatics will have a tougher time overtaking 18650s in energy density. Pack-wise they might be able to overtake Tesla's pack given a chemistry that is more balanced in the density side (LFP, LMO, LTO as currently used is not enough for this, NMC which Nissan will probably use for their next gen cells is a nice candidate). Tesla is taking advantage of the fact that with a huge pack, they don't need high C-rates, while automakers are making small packs that require high C-rates (side effect of taking a "balanced" approach).
          Rotation
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Weapon
          2wM: I don't agree properly specced cells need no thermal management. Maybe for some uses, but cars aren't one of them. The car has to work in a larger thermal range than cells currently work. So the pack temperature may have to be actively adjusted to stay in the working range. Furthermore, quick charging puts heat into the pack. While the pack can handle the heat from a quick charge, repeated quick charging and high ambient temperatures can mean that quick charging becomes unavailable. If you want to be able to QC all day, you need thermal management. Tesla has it and can quick charge all day. A LEAF doesn't and cannot, Nissan has to limit it to about 5 quick charges a day as a form of thermal management. I'm much rather have a liquid-cooled pack so it can get the heat out in high ambient temps to extend pack life, and allow repeated quick charging.
          Rotation
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Weapon
          Val: Your statement that clearly prismatic cells are not superior (and I must say so!) until Tesla uses them is junk. It has no factual basis. You then go on to complain about the batteries intruding into the interior space in a Volt or Fisker. This is not an attribute of a cell, but how a vehicle is packaged. And before you even say such things you should probably get in a Tesla. First notice how long it is, it is a very long car. Then get inside and notice that when you sit in the rear seats your knees are up because the floor is elevated. And that if you sit up straight, your head touches the roof. The fact is the pack is taking up a ton of interior space on the Tesla too, it's just the space it is taking up is a different shape. It makes the interior have much less vertical space than a comparable car. Judging by the price of what? You are trying to figure out how much a cell would cost by looking at the cost of the car? Mercedes will buy less than 5% as many cells as Tesla. So yeah, they're going to spend more per kWh. This does not give you a way to compare the cell prices apples to apples. The point is that Tesla selected 18650 cells for the Roadster because they couldn't get the attention of the battery suppliers to get a custom cell made. So they bought commodity cells, just like someone like 2WM would. When the Model S started, they continued with the 18650 form factor because that's where their expertise lied, they didn't want to delay the car to change. They stopped buying commodity cells because now they at the attention of suppliers. Buying from one supplier is desirable because it means less work qualifying and testing cells and pack configs. But this path of getting to this config doesn't actually mean it's the best config for the vehicle Tesla is making and they will make next. It's just the one that got them here with limited money (they almost went broke once or twice in this timeframe) and huge time pressures. As such, Tesla will consider other options in the future. And large cells make a lot of sense. Tesla has money now and can get the attention of any supplier. They'll be evaluating large cells, and don't be surprised if they end up using them.
          Val
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Weapon
          @Rotation Not that there is any chance of anyone seeing this a week after it was posted, but let's have a little fact check anyway... "And before you even say such things you should probably get in a Tesla. First notice how long it is, it is a very long car." Tesla: wheelbase - 116.5in, length - 195.9in Fisker: wheelbase - 124.4 in, length - 195.67 So Fisker has much longer wheelbase, same length, but is classified as a subcompact, due to limited interior space. Tesla, on the other hand, with much shorter wheelbase, which ultimately constraints the size of the battery pack, is classified as a full-size sedan. When you look at just the rear cargo area, and ignore the front trunk, the difference gets even more staggering. So yeah, tell us again how i should sit in a tesla to see it's not that big inside. Even if a crown victoria has more interior space, that doesn't in any way change the fact that the fisker is a jike in terms of interior space, and large part of it is due to the battery.
          Rotation
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Weapon
          In a moving, flexing vehicle, every connection must be treated as a moving part. It can be severed by vehicle loads as it moves. If you have thermal runaway, no amount of sensors is going to save you. It isn't as much a needle in a haystack or an idea of picking it up before it gets to the edge. Instead it's about managing the charging (and to a lesser extent the discharging) so you don't have a thermal problem in the first place. Tesla is just talking up the solution they know. As more stable cells come around, big cells will win out due to the improvements in cost due to reduction in materials and space. And charging systems will get even smarter so that problems with pack fires will be reduced to rarities mostly dominated by physical issues (intrusion, external fires that spread to the pack) which small cells can't fix anyway. You'll see "slice" cells like the pouch cells 2wm talks about. These have enough surface area to volume ratio (similar to 5/4As like Tesla uses if you really want) that they can be sensored and managed just fine. And you can even space them out if you don't trust your chemistry enough.
          Val
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Weapon
          @Rotation "They stopped buying commodity cells because now they at the attention of suppliers." They are still buying 18650 cells. This is a commodity form factor. They will continue to buy them for at least another 5 years for the model S. They will also use them in the model X, and most likely the GenIII vehicles. The chemistry changed to replace the expensive cobalt with nickel. Panasonic started work on their Nickel based cells way before 2009, as they were already in production back then. In 2009 they started working on mass production of silicon based anodes. http://panasonic.co.jp/corp/news/official.data/data.dir/en091225-3/en091225-3.html In 2009 tesla was NOBODY. They had just sold a few hundred roadsters and had announced the model S. Saying tesla stopped buying commodity cells because they are successful now is wrong, pure and simple, neither have they stopped buying them, nor were they successful at the time the decision was taken. The cells they are buying now were available in 2010. The silicon anode 4.0Ah cells were planned to enter production in Q1 2013 (from their 2009 press release). Nobody knew that tesla would manage to produce the car, or even survive, elon sure hoped so, but he was in no way guaranteed to succeed. http://www.engadget.com/2010/04/23/panasonics-3-1ah-batteries-to-be-used-in-the-tesla-model-s-hav/ http://www.engadget.com/2011/10/13/panasonic-tesla-rekindle-romance-strike-supply-agreement-for-m/
          Val
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Weapon
          Those low C cells also happen to have the highest energy density... oh, wait, it doesn't just happen, it is a trade-off, low C for more energy. When another car company offers an 85kWh model that weighs and costs less, THEN and only THEN can you say large format prismatic cells are superior. Until that happens, they are clearly not. So far, we have seen prismatic cells used in the leaf, where the top-most cell gets all the heat from the ones below it, and in the fisker and volt, where the pack takes up a lot of the interior space, although it has only 1/4 of tesla's capacity. Oh, let's not forget the SLS AMG, which costs $500k, and the battery weighs 1210lbs for 60kWh... Somehow i fail to see the huge weight advantage of using automotive prismatic cells, and judging by the price, they are definitely not cheaper. Sure, it has a higher charge/discharge rate, but so what? This only means you have more power, can travel even faster (as if model S is not fast enough) and deplete your battery quicker, so you'll have to stop more often to recharge. Even if the charge takes less time, you won't be getting to your destination much faster, because you will have to stop more often. And it also means infrastructure costs will be much higher, for more chargers and more power lines feeding them. So tesla apparently did their homework. High C rate batteries can also be made in 18650 format, btw, but tesla correctly realized people want range, not short bursts of power.
          Val
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Weapon
          2WM: The moment you have higher energy density in a pouch cell, is the moment you have less power density. You of all people should know that. Tesla could have gone with A123 18650 cells, they cane easily take 10C discharge and 4C charge, but only have 1.1Ah capacity. And those are cells that were made with first gen A123 tech, their pouch cells use newer stuff. It doesn't really matter if you roll a flat cell in a cylinder or not (which is what the cylindrical cell is anyway) in those small sizes, the chemistry determines the charge and discharge rate, and the heat generation. Since the 18650 are so small, they have less thermal mass and can be easier to cool. If tesla had used the aforementioned A123 18650 cells, they may have ended up with just a passive cooling system, or air cooling instead of water. But the car would have had 70-80 miles of range. Wasting 10% of your energy as heat is also quite the bold claim, and even if we assume it is so, this is the price that has to be paid for having a usable range, there is no way around that. When a chemistry comes along that is better, it will be TRIVIAL to put it in a 18650 form factor and use it as a drop-in replacement in the tesla pack (the mechanical part anyway, there may need to be changes in the charger and inverter). The nissan Leaf and Chevy Volt prismatic cells don't seem to be any better in terms of energy density, price, or requirements in terms of heat management, so there is no real advantage for Tesla in going with a similar solution, even if they started development now and not 10 years ago. When prismatic cells become so superior that their advantages simply cannot be ignored (like li-ion vs NiMH in laptops an cell phones), then tesla will clearly be forced to change. I am not counting this possibility out. But as I said, it is very unlikely, as it will be easier for paansonic to modfy their equipment for the 18650 factor and churn them out in great numbers. As it stands, A123 pouch cells (which have superior power and cycle life compared to any Ni or Mn based chemistry) have an energy density of 247 Wh/L and specific energy of 131 Wh/kg. The 3.4 Ah cells used by tesla have 266 Wh/kg and 730 Wh/L. Elon (and I) clearly sees which one is bigger. Sure, it would be nice not to heat the battery, and be able to charge in 15 minutes to full, not just to 50-60%, but right now, it is not possible. At least not with that range. The LG chem prismatic battery in the Volt weighs 400 lbs for 16 kWh. The tesla battery pack is 1300 lbs at 85kWh. Which means, if they had gone to LG chem, the battery would be around 50kWh. So you just lost 30 kWh of your capacity, and around 30% of your range. You also didn't get any price advantage, apparently. You may have gained lees heat losses, but this only matters really during charging, and charging at 120 kW with tesla is free anyway.
          2 wheeled menace
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Weapon
          There are tons of variables for cell design.. all things considered, pouch, prismatic, or cell all have their ups and downs. Tesla based everything around 18650's because back in the mid 2000's, those were the only impressive & economical cells on the market. Pouch cells were very uncommon then. The 18650 has been so quickly developed due to demand for mobile devices like laptops, but pouch has came a very very long way. You can have high energy density in a pouch cell, and also great surface area for cooling but ultimately you should not be blowing 5-10% of your energy as heat as these high energy, low power laptop cells will. Don't write off alternate designs for the future.
          2 wheeled menace
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Weapon
          Properly specced lithium cells need no thermal management at all. You don't necessarily need sensors, other than cell voltage. What Tesla is doing is using a low C rate laptop cell and adding thermal management to make up for all the waste heat they generate, and compensate for their sagging C rate as temperatures go below a perfect 70f. You could thermally manage larger cells just the same, particularly if we are talking about pouch cells, which have tons of surface area to cool. The only advantage is the economy of scale. The cells are cheap when purchased in bulk. They are also the lightest. If one cell fails, the series pack does not fail catastrophically. But there is a lot of extra cost and assembly involved in this method. If a cell starts to suffer thermal runaway, there is nothing you can do. No sensor stops or predicts that, it's the separation of cells that makes what would be a catastrophic failure a non-event. That's where Tesla packs shine. You could do that with larger cells actually. In fact, some companies are probably already doing that.
          Val
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Weapon
          The Volt battery by the way, is also liquid cooled, so no advantage in terms of cost or complexity there. Or is it also not properly specced? If the largest manufacturer of prismatic cells can't specc their product right, who can then? Nissan chose not to have liquid cooling, now they are losing 15% capacity per year in hot climates. And they use prismatic cells... The Spark EV seems to have gone with A123 cells, which is why it can get to 80% charge in 20 minutes, but again, 20 kWh... Let's see an 80 or 85 kWh model with those cells, see how much it costs and weighs, and then say which one is superior.
          Val
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Weapon
          Rotation: "Your statement that clearly prismatic cells are not superior until Tesla uses them is junk. It has no factual basis." I have never ever said that, i said that until any OTHER manufacturer mkes a car that has the same range, power and price, tesla's solution is obviously superior. The interior of he Tesla models S is not any different than a Mercedes CLS or Audi A7, where the low roof line makes your head touch the roof. A "problem" which is solved in the Model X by making the whole car taller. Interiror space is the space inside the car, not what is under it, so the tesla battery pack doesn't take up any of the interior space, just like the leaf. And interior space can be easily compared to other vehicles like the aforementioned and clearly show tesla to be ahead. Maybe Tesla will, in the distant future, consider using prismatic cells, but they haven't got THAT much money, and would rather spend their limited resources on new models, stores, suprechargers and service, not try to reinvent the wheel. There is no financial or engineering logic for them to ditch their perfectly working pack, for which the costs will be absorbed by the model S, when this is their whole strategy for bringing the GenIII model to market. As I said, show me a car with prismatic cells that is better (range, price, power) than Model S, and I will concede prismatic form factor is the better solution. Until that happens, it is not. Clearly.
        PeterScott
        • 1 Year Ago
        @brotherkenny4
        I think it is considered safer because the spacing Tesla uses between cells should prevent one failure from cascading. Tesla has been doing this for a while and I don't think they have had no fires, unlike some airline recently. I think Tesla does have Good pack economics, good BMS and good physical safety in their design. Overall it does seem to be one of the better packs on the market.
      Grendal
      • 1 Year Ago
      What's a "batter pack?" Not sure, but it's making me hungry. In real news, Tesla recently had a meeting with Goldman Sachs in which they hinted that they expect the price, for them, to drop to $100 per kWh. That's why the Gen3 can sell for $30K. They also said that they foresee the sales of the Gen3 to be 200K and the Gen3 SUV to be 150K. That's all guesswork and take it as Tesla trying to impress the bankers but there is some useful information there. It does confirm a Gen3 SUV though.
        pmpjunkie01
        • 1 Year Ago
        @Grendal
        commodity bulk pricing for 18650 cells was already at $120-200 per kWh at the end of 2012. http://news.cens.com/cens/html/en/news/news_inner_42230.html "In the third quarter of 2012, however, the weak demand from the 3C industry drove the prices of 18650 cylindrical li-ion cells to US$0.12-US$0.2/Wh (watt hour), while the prices for soft-pack cells (adopted mainly in ultrabooks or tablet PCs) remained at about US$0.5/Wh. " Seems like you not only need good marketing and good technology, but also good judgement to strike the right balance between technology and economy. Seems like Tesla has it all.
        Jim_NJ
        • 1 Year Ago
        @Grendal
        A "batter pack" is what you eat after you take your lunch out of the "Roaster". Me thinks Danny King wrote this before lunch while his stomach was growling. LOL! By the way, go Tesla! I'm kind of sad that I've sold 90% of my position (highest price of my sale: $92). But, hey, I'm playing with the house's money now, and will still have a nice profit if TSLA goes the way of Fisker (not likely!).
        David Murray
        • 1 Year Ago
        @Grendal
        $100 per Kwh would be very significant! That would put a Nissan Leaf's battery pack at $2,400. At that point it would really make sense that any pure electric should have no excuse to have less than 100 miles range. Even plug-in hybrids should have 60 to 80 miles all electric range. Honestly.. at $100 per Kwh, there would be no stopping the EV movement.
      Vlad
      • 1 Year Ago
      It sold in decent numbers early on, and to high profile buyers. Marketing was successful. As for all these pesky flames... not a marketing problem.
    • Load More Comments