Computers were very expensive back then. I don't think Apple was an expensive computer at the time of its launch and part of what was so compelling about it was a personal computer not a work station.
Tesla is an extremely expensive car. Especially if you consider its value-to-price.
Ok Apple also sold expensive computers. The point remains, Apple was founded on selling computer and bringing the power of computers to middle class 'normal' people.
Tesla was founded on selling cars to a wealthy niche market.
Sorry, are you interested in Tesla's founding story, or your opinion about it? Because, just like your recollection of the price-points of Apple products in the past, your opinion diverges from what Tesla says their goals are and were:
"Tesla's primary goal was to commercialize electric vehicles, starting with a premium sports car aimed at early adopters and then moving as rapidly as possible into more mainstream vehicles, including sedans and affordable compacts"
Lol you are quoting marketing material at me now... When Tesla becomes a affordable car seller then ok they will no longer be a company that specializes in selling very expensive cars to a wealthy niche.
I looked up the price points, they are accurate... so fuck you and your condescending tone.
> When Tesla becomes a affordable car seller then ok they will no longer be a company that specializes in selling very expensive cars to a wealthy niche.
Another take is that Tesla is a company that's doing what it needs to, to get into a position where they can sell affordable cars to low-to-middle class people.
But damn Elon Musk, that nasty capitalist oppressor pig that abuses poor people by pricing his cars higher than they can afford, just like Motorola when selling their first mobile phone http://mashable.com/2014/03/13/first-cellphone-on-sale/ .. those filthy bastards!
> Tesla is an extremely expensive car. Especially if you consider its value-to-price
I'm not sure what you mean with "value-to-price", but aren't pretty much all Tesla owners in love with their cars? They seem to be valued very highly, and considered worth the price.
Aren't most sports car owners in love with their cars?? I'm sure Tesla's cars are nice luxury vehicles, maybe even "objectively"(lol...) nicer than other sports/luxury cars. I have no clue, never driven, touched, or even seen one. By "worth the price", if you are someone that considers a 60k to 120k car "worth the price" then yes. But personally I would rather not fool myself and admit I have the money and I want something luxurious.
Particularly if you look at it from a price-to-value standpoint of someone balancing a budget for a car. Luxury, ascetic, and cool-factor do not play a huge roll in that. Maybe they do in your life and then you are most likely either single, upperclass, or bad with money. The first two are ok, expensive luxury vehicles are ok. Am I touching a nerve here?
> By "worth the price", if you are someone that considers a 60k to 120k car "worth the price" then yes. But personally I would rather not fool myself and admit I have the money and I want something luxurious.
Value is subjective, by the way.
That means that if a Tesla costs $70k and someone buys one, then he demonstrably values the Tesla higher than his $70k, which means it's safe to say he considers a Tesla worth the price.
> maybe even "objectively"(lol...) nicer than other sports/luxury cars
Nope, not "lol". For example, Teslas are objectively safer than other cars. That's because they can be constructed to be like that because they're electric vehicles, but that doesn't make it any less objectively true.
Also, there's no problem with someone having the money and wanting something luxurious. The fact that some people do is the reason why lots of jobs involved in serving their wants exist, which surely you'd agree is a good thing.
(So basically: Teslas getting bought for their current prices is a Good Thing for us little folks, so I'm not sure what your problem is)
> My point is. [..] They. Are. Not. Within. The. Price. Range. Of. The. Middle. Class... [..] Apple. Computers. Were.
If both of those claims are true, then you've established that "Tesla is not like Apple that way". But is that what you mean?
It seems you're more concerned with some other people being able to afford Teslas than whether Tesla is like Apple that way.
> if you look at it from a price-to-value standpoint
Again, what the hell does "price-to-value" mean?
> Maybe they do in your life and then you are most likely either single, upperclass, or bad with money.
Huh? If someone buys a Tesla, it most definitely doesn't follow that he's bad with money.
> The first two are ok, expensive luxury vehicles are ok. Am I touching a nerve here?
Did you accidentally a word there? But no, you're not touching a nerve. I'd like to have a Tesla for myself, in the right circumstances (which don't even currently apply), but I couldn't afford one anyway.
That's perfectly fine with me though. It's alright that I don't have one, and it's fine I wouldn't even have the money. It's also perfectly fine that some others do, and buy them. If that touches a nerve with you, then there's something wrong with your nerves.
No I am not concerned with who can actually purchase a Tesla. I was reiterating that because people kept bring up that in the "future" Tesla plans to expand into the lower end markets. My concern is not with what they say/will do, but with what they are doing. But my main point was:
The Article says Tesla is following a similar business model as Apple. I disagree, Tesla's business model, at least currently, is to sell expensive cars to a wealthy niche while Apple's business model was to sell computers to the middle class.
-
> Maybe they do in your life and then you are most likely either single, upperclass, or bad with money.
There is an Or in that statement. However if someone who earns 60 to 100k buys a Tesla, then yes they are bad with money.
Tesla is an extremely expensive car. Especially if you consider its value-to-price.