←back to thread

Tesla deliveries down 43% in Europe while EVs are up 31%

(electrek.co)
188 points zfg | 3 comments | 25 Mar 25 13:11 UTC | HN request time: 0.676s | source
Show context
snapcaster ◴[25 Mar 25 13:16 UTC] No.43470829[source]▶
This is so weird, did he miscalculate how intense the backlash would be? or he truly doesn't care?
replies(22): >>43470855 #>>43470861 #>>43470867 #>>43470874 #>>43470876 #>>43470879 #>>43470883 #>>43470896 #>>43470914 #>>43470920 #>>43470931 #>>43470986 #>>43470993 #>>43471010 #>>43471051 #>>43471161 #>>43471431 #>>43471589 #>>43473279 #>>43473806 #>>43474158 #>>43476959 #
RandomBacon ◴[25 Mar 25 13:20 UTC] No.43470879[source]▶
I'm guessing it's a sacrifice he's willing to make towards his goal, especially since he has other ventures such as SpaceX which if I had to guess has more potential value than an electric car company when there are a bunch other car companies getting into the game. There are a lot less rocket companies with comparable experience.
replies(6): >>43470901 #>>43470960 #>>43470976 #>>43471055 #>>43471083 #>>43471427 #
TechDebtDevin ◴[25 Mar 25 13:26 UTC] No.43470976[source]▶
Soonish he will own one of the biggest ISPs in the world (Starlink). Hes going to have a consumer monopoly on cube sats and a lot of the worlds bandwidth in places that dont have other options (much of the world). I thibk Tesla eas just a scam or means to an end to acconplish his other goals.. One app for everything/mega corp or whatever.
replies(2): >>43471146 #>>43471300 #
1. philjohn ◴[25 Mar 25 13:38 UTC] No.43471146[source]▶
Will he? From reading some sources it looks like as more customers are added the bandwidth just isn't there. Part of that is apparently not enough earth stations, but there's a saturation point where they can't add more satellites.

They already limit signups in oversubscribed areas, and as good as starlink is, it's still a technology that has higher latency, and higher ongoing costs from what I can see.

Meanwhile, once fibre is in the ground, with PON there's very little maintenance required. And upgrading speeds is a case of upgrading the OLT and ONT's - I'm going out on a limb and guessing that's much cheaper to do than launching thousands of upgraded satellites.

replies(1): >>43471186 #
2. chuckadams ◴[25 Mar 25 13:41 UTC] No.43471186[source]▶
> there's a saturation point where they can't add more satellites.

Which they are not even close to yet. Starship is about launching the suckers in bulk.

replies(1): >>43475119 #
3. philjohn ◴[25 Mar 25 19:49 UTC] No.43475119[source]▶
I didn't even get onto the power requirements for end user equipment - according to Jeff Geerling, it looks like about 80-90 watts.

My FTTP ONT is using less than 2.

That's 788kWh per year ((90 * 24 * 365) / 1000) and at 25p per kWh that's an extra £197.10 of energy usage per year. Compared to £4.38 for my FTTP ONT.

It's cool tech, no doubt, but it's not a replacement for a fibre connection by any stretch of the imagination, and so the positing that it'll be the, or one of the, bigget ISP's in the world seems off base, most likely by an order of magnitude or more.