SpaceX launched 18 last year, all successfully, more than any other rocket. All recovery attempts succeeded, and several rockets were reflown. Their competitors have had to cut their workforce and are now feverishly trying to catch up with new designs (most of which are inadequate for even the current Falcon 9, let alone future rockets). The line between laughing stock and huge success is pretty small if you're in the exponential ramp-up phase.
http://www.spacex.com/news/2013/09/24/production-spacex http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/hybrid-electric/g877/ta...
The production rate is clearly changing from week to week, month to month (increasing at a decent clip on a percentage basis). As long as that is happening, they're still in the ramp-up phase.
And it also assumes that skill in the (relatively) low volume production of rockets can be transferred to mass production of cars.
If Model 3 is not a success money runs out. There will be large changes in the ownership. Musk might sell Tesla to some other manufacturer etc.
The Semi is a huge market.
And even if Model 3 didn’t exist and Tesla pushed itself as developing Model S as the number one car for self driving mobility services, they’d still have a claim at the lions share of the automotive market. Vehicle cost is a much smaller concern in the post-self-driving world.
Let’s imagine Model 3 only pulls Model S numbers, and their annual production only goes to 200k by 2020. I don’t think that’s enough to see a total collapse of the stock the way you seem to be suggesting.
I think Elon has many more cards in play than you let on.
I have yet to see any financial analysis based on Tesla financial that don't see Model 3 as a critical.
Not sure if Musk will be actually making any decisions here when things go south.
>And if they fail, they failed because they took on a challenge that was simply too hard for any company to achieve.
From the way that Musk has recently embarrassed himself arguing with transit experts on twitter over the last few weeks I am increasingly believing in the possibility that Musk thinks he's the smartest guy in the room, is completely ignoring experts in the field, is trying to do something that actually is impossible, and he's doomed to failure.
Paypal, Rocketry and defense startup, hyperloop, electric cars, marketing, upturning the oil industry, etc. etc, not to mention his personal (non-business) achievements.
This is vaporware at this point.
"How long does it take to build such a factory? From that other car company, you may have heard that car factories could be brought from no plans to mass production in two years, no time at all, or whatever is less. I ask Mr. Demeunyck how long the Luqiao plant took from start to finish, and he proudly tells me that it “took only five years. They do things fast in China”... "In Europe, or in other places with tight permitting, it would take a few years longer,” Demeunyck says. If anyone tells you he has picked no location, and secured no permits, but wants to have a new car plant up and running in two years, call an ambulance."
Apparently, what they are really arguing is not that Tesla is bad at production, but that Tesla is trying to do something nearly impossible. In this light, the problems Tesla faces are not because they lack the skills or expertise to deliver, but problems that any other car company would face if they were to do things on the schedule Tesla is trying to achieve.
Thus, Tesla is really just taking a huge gamble -- they have a chance to pull off something very impressive, even if they fall 6 months or a year behind schedule. And if they fail, they failed because they took on a challenge that was simply too hard for any company to achieve. To me, it really resembles the gamble that SpaceX took, which paid off very well in the long run. So while I think there's a real chance that Tesla will fail like all of their detractors believe, I think there is also a real chance that they will be wildly successful.