394 comments

[ 3.5 ms ] story [ 239 ms ] thread
I have waited 4 years for this moment. I can hardly believe it's finally happening. Cheers.
>Flash plugin missing

>Get the latest Flash player to view this content

A car from 2016, a video from 1996.

Edit: https://www.ustream.tv/embed/22190759, original link had a "html5ui" parameter but it doesn't seem to help.

Livestreamer with --default-stream mobile_720p gets 403.

the ustream link is no longer available per the broadcaster's request
Yep. The player on the event screen (after you fill in information) has no timeshifting controls either. Stuck watching the whole thing with no fast-forward or rewind. Just tried to do so but got bored after 10 minutes of Model S commercials.
You're watching a few commercials in a loop before the event starts, and you want a fast-forward button?
I may have misunderstood. I thought the event had already occurred and that this was a recording. I didn't check the event start time. The event hasn't started yet? I'm on the East Coast so I guess it just seems late.

It would've been helpful if there was some visual indication that the event hadn't started yet, like a countdown.

you can pad mash any name and email
I did just on principle.

So Tesla can enjoy their millions of undeliverables and bouncebacks. Good luck on those leads Tesla sales.

nah they just want the number for marketing purposes

>1 million tuned in to watch the unveiling and we got this list of emails to prove it

>dick@dick.penis

Oh, good, "unveil" is a noun now, too.
Actually the title was originally "Model3 Unveil Live-stream [video]" but it mysteriously changed to what it is now. I'm not complaining though.
We changed it to the page title, which is what the HN guidelines ask you to use in the first place, unless it is misleading or linkbait.
Thank you for simply correcting it instead of just deleting it. I didn't mean to do that.
You're most welcome, but just so you know, we'd never delete a story for that reason. That would be an awful lot of deletion :)
Since its nounage was baity enough to elicit off-topic snark, I guess we'll go for the gerund.
Just reserved mine. Of course, I double checked the terms to make sure it was refundable, but I'm ready for it to change the game.
Over 115k reservations in 24hours! This is going to put serious pressure on other auto makers to step up their game.
More like game over for some auto makers. You have to think for $35,000 would most people rather get a Tesla, a BMW, a Lexus, a Mercedes, or an Audi? Tesla is going to grab many of these guys customers. I for one, can't wait for my lease to be over.
The last time I looked at a reasonably loaded Honda Odyssey it was over $40k. $35k is not really a high end price point any longer. Also for those who care about such things, $35k buys you more social status with a Tesla than with one of those other ICE cars.
It will take a while. BMW, Mercedes and Audi each sell 1.5MM a year [1]

Tesla have targeted 500k vehicles a year, which would be a huge stretch from their current 70k a year.

1. http://www.autonews.com/article/20140113/COPY01/301139914/bm...

In comparison, Nissan only sold 170k LEAFs from 2010-2015.[1] Three years of Nissan LEAF sales in 24h? Fantastic!

[1] http://evobsession.com/nissan-leaf-sales-climb-to-over-17000...

I don't think that's a fair comparison. Even I could go put $1k down for a Model 3 and then renege when they start shipping. But the Nissan Leaf sales are buying a whole car.
Or renege at any point in that 18 month waiting period.
Well, they need to deliver them. Right now, 170K car is also 3 years of production for Tesla. Also it means if you want you Tesla Model 3 you have to wait until 2021 (time for Tesla to deliver the 115K one already booked) which is a long time to wait, 1 full leasing cycle.

Of course, we basically have no details currently. The spec of the car, and the delivery capacity of Tesla will change until the actual release day but it is way too early to compare to actual existing cars.

Tesla is claiming they'll be able to produce 500,000 cars a year by the end of 2017 when the cars are finally available.

This is a very agressive goal, and I'm not sure they can meet it, but I'm fairly certain their production capacity will be higher than it is today, especially given the unused capacity in the gigafactory that will come online over the next 1.5 years.

Hopefully. That is IMO what's taking them so long to get the Model 3 out, pretty sure it would be on the market today if not for their production capacity.

You can do alright as a brand with limited availability of luxury car like the Model S, but in the premium category you really need to be able to produce some number.

In Europe in particular, the big customer of that car segment is corporate leasing, unfortunately they need somewhat short lead time. For example, most of my friends in continental Europe have company car, but they only have 2 to 3 months to order and pick their car ( they also have a limited set of brands and models, but I'm sure Tesla will make the shortlist ), so that means until they can get a Tesla that fast, they will stay stuck with BMW/Mercedes for another 4 years cycle.

A gated experience to watch the unveil video?

Is Tesla desperate for leads and sales? This tells me Tesla is hurting for numbers or they're worried about GM Bolt and others. So they want to spam the interested parties or keep them from committing to other brands for the next year or so until Model 3 is available.

BTW, Bolt has already been unveiled [0]

And some manufacturing has already started [1]

[0] http://arstechnica.com/cars/2016/01/chevrolets-bolt-is-an-el...

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KqJ7Ob9I5eQ

Or they could just be collecting marketing data.
You can fill in false data if you like, they aren't checking.
Bolt? That's a car for girls(at least by design).

Collecting emails is a good marketing tactic and they won't load the servers with everyone.

(comment deleted)
> Bolt? That's a car for girls(at least by design).

I totally get that you don't like the Bolt's design, and that's perfectly fine.

But, seriously, it is 2016 can we put the "that is for girls" "that is for guys" nonsense to bed? It is sexist against both genders. The whole implication is that "girly = bad" which is sexist, and then you have guys who are going to be emasculated if they enjoy a "girly" thing which is also sexist.

Essentially it victimizes everyone. Let's leave that phase in the past along with gendered toy isles and pink/blue.

(comment deleted)
> The whole implication is that "girly = bad" which is sexist, and then you have guys who are going to be emasculated if they enjoy a "girly" thing which is also sexist.

Cars are designed with specific genders in mind.[0][1][2]

I don't know if it's a good thing or a bad thing, but it is. The linked articles come to some conclusions as to why.

Also please note that no one made the 'girly=bad' assertion but you.

[0]: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2012-02-02/hormones-f...

[1]: https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ohim/womens/chap6.pdf

[2]: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/10077069/Designing-cars-...

> Also please note that no one made the 'girly=bad' assertion but you.

It was implicitly made. They dislike the Bolt's look so described it as "girly" (using the term as a negative). So unless you're claiming that they meant "girly" as a compliment, my point stands.

If they didn't mean "girly=bad" then their entire statement makes no sense. It only makes sense if they meant it negatively.

Maybe s/he was just making a statement? Let me re-quote it, there's no judgment of any sort attached to the statement

"Bolt? That's a car for girls(at least by design)."

Any negative connotation with that is in the eye of the beholder.

Lol :)

What's with this non-sense rant? Where did you get that girly=bad?

Sexist? I don't even bother...

I'm free to share my opinion, or not? Simply, it's a car I would buy for my daughter, not me. This is not the case for Tesla designs.

What's so special about 2016 that a company can't design a car more targeted at a specific demographic anymore?
cant even. in the current year too
If this thing looks even remotely like a bolt I'll be mashing the refund button. I'm expecting something more like a Nissan Maxima (S) -> Nissan Altima (3) not Cadillac -> Golf Cart.
I'm guessing the refund button is safe.
They had lines around the block at stores all over the world today, with people reserving a car they haven't even seen yet, and putting down $1,000 for the privilege. I don't think they're hurting for numbers.
Wow, I didn't even realize I had to fill in my information, I just figured the stream hadn't started or wasn't working.

I guess I'm marketing form blind.

re: the commercial barrage, How the hell much to they pay postal carriers in Rural Minnesota? I'm definitely in the wrong business and live in the wrong place.
Not sure if the commercials are geo-targetted but if you get the Australian guy his name is Simon Hackett. He founded an Internet business here.

An interesting thing is Hackett is executive chairman of a company called Redflow which claims its Zinc Bromine home storage solution is better than Li-ion ones like Tesla Powerwall (though it seems to be a fair bit more expensive).

I want to see this ad - is it on UStream?
I was curious too, but it looks like the USPS reimbursement rates [1] for rural personal vehicles are decent, and are no doubt geared toward gas cars that have much higher operating and maintenance costs. Depending on how far a mail carrier drives, it could plausibly cover the cost of the Model S. Not a bad gig.

In the video, the postal carrier mentions the Tesla being better than spending $30 on gas per day. At $2.50/gallon, that's 12 gallons of gas. Assuming 20mpg (all of the stop and go), that's about 250 miles per day, or ~5000 miles per month assuming five-day delivery.

1. https://about.usps.com/postal-bulletin/2012/pb22340/html/inf...

73.5 cents per mile, if he's doing 250 miles per day then that's about $180/day reimbursed, and about $10 for electricity. If he does this six days a week, that's something like $4,000/month just in mileage reimbursement. That'll cover the monthly payment on any Model S you care to configure, at least twice. You'll wear the car out a lot faster, but even so, sounds like a pretty good gig.
Buckle your seatbelts!
Hey wow it's Simon Hackett [1]. I wouldn't be surprised if he did this for free - he's always been a big supporter.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon_Hackett

He is a huge fan. He had a Roadster as well.

Fun fact is he appears to be heavily involved in a company aiming to compete with Tesla's Powerwall: http://redflow.com/about-us/board-management/

Aha! He was being cagey about the name of this company so they must be getting closer. He lost a lot of respect after being on the NBN board but this might go a long way to restoring it.
EDIT: Found a live stream on youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_FLSxJjdnLU

Also, I made a reservation at the Fremont factory today. Took around 15 mins including line, but I went in around 10:30-11am. I'd estimate there were around 600 people before me in the morning. Fairly certain they will hit 100k before the stream starts.

That's a really fast line! I went to the Burlingame shop at 8:30am (they open at 10am) and it was almost noon when I finished.
Stanford, 9am. Out by 11:10.
This youtube stream was much more reliable for me.
He announced 115,000 reservations before the stream began. That's $115m spent on a product no one had seen. Crazy.
The car looks comparable to a Honda CRZ or a Toyota Prius (or a Subaru BRZ). They should have gone with the small-sedan form factor, but I think they believe it will cannibalize Model S sales.
> "for a luxury car"

Since when is a car under 35K is considered luxury?

It's all relative. I think many would consider a $35k BMW a "luxury" in comparison to a $15k Honda.
Ok, if they consider $35K BMW a luxury car, then how would they call a $90K Porshe? Or $300K Rolls-Royce?
They are luxury cars too. Luxury cars are those over the average income, basically.
I would call the Porsche a mid-size luxury car [0] and the rolls-royce a full-size luxury care [0] and the BMW maybe an entry-level luxury car.

I don't know if I agree with the naming conventions but it seems appropriate when coupled with the article on wiki [0]

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Car_classification

35k is definitely a luxury vehicle.

Brand new cars like Honda Fit and Ford Focus are $15k. Nissan Maxima / Honda Accord is ~$22k starting.

$35k is where BMW and Lexus start. He's still competing against the luxury segment, but "entry" luxury.

I disagree, bmw 3 series and basic Lexus are not "luxury" cars, they are called "Premium" cars. Luxury cars are Porshes, Maseratti, Bentley, bmw 6 series, mercedes CLS etc... Honda Fit and Ford Focus are small budget cars, Nissan maxima and accord are regular sedans. If you call bmw 3 series a luxury car - then what would you call a porshe than?

Edit: Mercedec CLA is considered a luxury vehicle in a different class (just like you mentioned SUVs and trucks), it's a compact car, compact cars have a different starting price compared to the class we were talking about, thus it's considered luxury in that class.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercedes-Benz_CLA-Class

The Mercedes Benz CLA starts at $32k. Its considered a luxury vehicle by everyone I know, including Wikipedia.

Argue with someone else, like whoever wrote the Wikipedia article. A "luxury vehicle" is anything basically any sedan above $30k. There are a ton of vehicles below $20k, and plenty between $20k and $30k.

Vans and Trucks are a bit different, because they provide extra utility and often cost $30k+. Luxury SUVs, Vans, and Trucks are closer to $40k to $50k.

Most people I know don't even have new cars for crying out loud, and "new" is basically a luxury.

I'm sorry, but luxury is relative to class. If you think a 6 series is luxury, but a 3 series is not, .... what is your definition, exactly? A 3 series is luxury because its compared to smaller generic cars, where a 6 series is ALSO luxury because it's compared to larger generic cars.

I'd never call a Porsche a luxury car because I consider them sports cars, even though many of their model lines are not particularly sporty anymore. Bentley/Rolls/etc are in a whole entirely different splashy show-off league where even many billionaires wouldn't buy one, simply because they're too ostentatious.

What's hilarious here is that you call the CLA (which is a bargain basement car) luxury, while a 3 series is not. Seriously, compare them. The 3er is a larger car and it's nicer. IF you're saying a CLA is luxury "in that class", then so is a 3 series.

But my Golf is nicer than a CLA. Of course, it's not considered a luxury car either, which is part of the appeal :)

> What's hilarious here is that you call the CLA luxury

I never called it luxury, I was referring to a link from wikipedia where it says it is a "luxury compact car".

My original point was in response to a comment (that is now edited) that model 3 does not look luxury for what it costs. My point was that none of the cars in that price range look luxury if you compare them to a higher priced cars.

"Luxury car", and "luxury car in a specific class" have different meanings in my opinion. You can't blame model 3 for not looking luxury, if other cars in that price range look the same and have almost the same set of features.

The actual specs haven't come out, but based on the video, it looks like the Model 3 size is somewhere on the order of Ford Focus / BMW 3-series / Mercedes CLA size. (I do realize that's a pretty big range of cars, but I'm being vague on purpose because its hard to get accurate measurements from a youtube reveal)

The Model 3's trunk AND frunk are abnormally short, kinda reminds me of the Honda Fit in some ways: save on costs by cutting back on the trunk and front of the vehicle... but put emphasis on the cabin space so that things feel comfortable from inside.

I'm willing to bet that the car feels larger on the inside than it looks... but from the outside... comparisons to the Mercedes CLA / BMW 3-series seem appropriate. I'll have to wait for the damn thing to come out to know for sure of course.

But in any case, that means that the Model 3 should probably still be considered a luxury vehicle. Compact-size at $35,000 starting? Yeah, that's luxury-class cost.

It's just a marketing thing, what "entry-level luxury" or "luxury" or "exotic" means is defined mostly buy the companies selling the cars, and the media industry talking about those cars.

The hive mind of Wikipedia considers the marketing segment to include the Audi A4 and the BMW 3-series: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luxury_vehicle#Luxury_market_s...

Enterprise Rent-a-Car runs a Lincoln MKZ or similar: https://www.enterprise.com/en/car-rental/vehicles/us/cars/lu...

Car and Driver includes a bunch: http://www.caranddriver.com/flipbook/swank-for-less-bank-ent...

"In economics, a luxury good is a good for which demand increases more than proportionally as income rises, and is a contrast to a "necessity good", for which demand increases proportionally less than income. Luxury goods are often synonymous with superior goods and veblen goods"

From Wikipedia.

That's a > $600 car payment every month assuming 60 months and 3% interest. That's out of reach of most American families.
I dunno, I see an AWFULLY lot of new pickups and SUVs on the road, and most of them are in that ballpark new if not way, way above.
Probably leases? They only offer leases on the Model S AFAICT.
A lease doesn't make the payment any more manageable...
Lease payments are about half as much as purchase payments. You're only paying for the depreciation in a lease.
You can buy serviceable vehicles for $15-20k that are reliable, last for a decade, and meet the critical needs in the US for a car [commute, almost all shopping trips, etc].

Adding what is effectively the price of another car ($15-20k) onto that is a luxury. Pretty much paying double the price you need to pay is something I'd consider a luxury regardless of the class of good.

Source: I paid $12k for a 2 year old car.

Honda Fit, etc as well are in that price range new:

http://automobiles.honda.com/tools/build-price/trims.aspx?Mo...

A Honda CR-Z is a compact 2-seater in the United States.

A Toyota Prius is an economy sedan with a surprisingly large back seat.

A Subaru BRZ is a small 4-seat sport coupe.

Your comparison can't possibly be valid because it's all over the map. From what I've seen, it IS a small sedan in the vein of a 3-series of A4 (larger than a Civic, smaller than an Accord).

It looks like it's a hatch-back, so wouldn't 1 Series or A3 be more fitting?
Some nitpicks: The CR-Z is a subcompact 2-seat hybrid hatchback. The Prius is a compact hybrid hatchback (NOT sedan). The BRZ is a 2+2 sport coupe (the back seat is nearly unusable).
I was focusing on the number of doors in pointing out how the parent's post didn't make sense. Thanks for the clarification, I don't know the exact vehicle classes obviously.
That's $115m spent on a product no one had seen. Crazy.

Cough Star Citizen Cough ;)

Hopefully this turns out a little better.
What went wrong with Star Citizen?
Long, extremely detailed analysis here: http://dereksmart.org/
That guy is easily the biggest tool in the industry. Just because he doesn't have what it takes to make even half decent games, he criticizes people with higher ambitions and skills.
nothing, still in production with regular updates
The scope of the game has gotten very big with how much money they've raised, which means it's taking longer to develop that originally planned. Some people aren't thrilled with that.

As far as the Derek Smart guy that somebody linked, he's a nutter who likes the attention from his doomsday predictions of Star Citizen falling apart (it's the only reason anyone's every heard of him). Most famous for claiming last October [1] that Cloud Imperium Games would run out of money and collapse within 90 days.

Obviously it's been longer than that and development is still moving along. Alpha doesn't have a huge amount to do in the universe yet, but it's very playable. For example: the most recently flyable ship (Khartu-al) [2], and the much larger Starfarer [3] which is mostly done on the art side but not yet flying.

They've said Squadron 42 (single player campaign) will be out this year, with the multiplayer universe following sometime after.

[1] https://archive.is/Ofyjz

[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fNfsSUfxp0c

[3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AxDIGQb2kOY

> (it's the only reason anyone's every heard of him)

Derek Smart was an internet celebrity in the 90's. He was well known for his bombastic statements and engaging in flame wars about his own game, Battle Cruiser 3000AD.

Hm, I must have been on the wrong parts of the internet back then. I've seen his more recent projects (Line of Defense), but I had a Mac at the time so my selection of games was ... slightly limited.
Well, to be fair. In the 90s you were an internet celebrity if you had over 1000 viewers.
Elon noted that they got more than 115,000 orders so far.
I was at Fremont at 0450, number 35 or so in line (there were tents of people ahead, was hard to count). Had my car reserved by 1007. 5h well spent.
Just a sign up form? For a hamburger menu icon?
For a live stream that was yet to start.
> If you buy a conventional car, your interaction with the people who made it has ended. With Tesla, that interaction has only just begun.

There's something unnerving about this. Your car has access to so much information about you. Where you go, where you work, what stores you like to shop at, and what restaurants you like. To me, a car is a tool. When I purchase a car, I'm purchasing The engine, the wheels, and the right to use the software running behind the scenes. I couldn't care less about forging a one sided, Orwellian relationship with a large company. Even if that company is freakishly awesome.

I assume you're not using a smartphone?
Different strokes. Tesla can have my $50K-100K. I'm buying everything you're worried about.
It's ugly and bad value. There will be better options in 2 years.
I have money to spend on things I don't have to wait for.
Maybe, but I am coming to believe more and more that battling climate change will require a fundamental reexamination of core principles, up to and including privacy.

I am aware that this is an unpopular opinion.

What does this have to do with climate change?
I assume that the value of metrics acquired can help a lot when determining efficiency in driving habits.
I believe most modern cars you buy today (even low-end ones) have a GSM modem connected to a phone carrier which is probably active regardless of your payment for the "connected" features, so not much better unless you figure out a way to pull its power.
You could remove the SIM card I suppose. On some cars this is super easy (it just pops right out of the dash), on the Model S unfortunately its a lot harder to access (but still doable). And while most cars seem designed to do just fine when you pop out the SIM, nothing prevents Tesla from making the car inoperable without the SIM (I have no idea what the current behavior is, just speculating).
I did not look hard, but didn't find an obvious location to remove the SIM from my Mercedes. It is certainly undocumented in the owner's manual.

Note that [depending on the modem], simply removing the SIM might not be enough to turn the radio off. It might still try connecting to the network and naturally send your IMEI to the carrier. For instance, handsets are usually configured so you can call emergency numbers without SIM cards. They need to reach out to a network to do so. You might still be tracked. It's better to make sure it is not powered.

I agree that Tesla probably takes the Orwellian issues to a whole new level, but I'm not sure this sort of lockdown would be limited to EVs for long.

source? If so, I may need to go to my garage for a sec....
If your car has any "Telematics" system (OnStar, mBrace, ConnectedDrive, Car-Net, etc.) it definitely uses a SIM card to phone home. It varies based on the car, but I know as of ~MY2012, every single GM car comes standard with the OnStar functionality. I wouldn't be surprised if other manufacturers are the same.
I'm with you. I don't want a relationship with company.

Conventional modern vechicles might not track your movements, but they keep you tied to the mothership/dealership after purchase.

These conventional modern vechicles are complicated. They are loaded with propriatiatry features, unbelievably complicated emmission devices, and computers I can't access--even if I spend 5 grand on the right scanner. (If they will sell to an owner?)

That vechicle in the movie Vacation comes to mind. These modern vechicles, not Elan's, are just a time bomb waiting to break down. Good luck finding an independent shop that knows how to efficiently repair these modern masterpieces. Most people are going to have a relationship with a dealership, at dealership prices.

I just got smogged a '87 Toyota yesterday. What I spent on parts/my labor was rediculious. Yea--it passed, but it's rediculious how stringent CARB has gotten. My little car is not a threat to the enviornment. Plus, how much carbon did I spare the enviornment by not buying a new vechicle every few years?

This rant is Not about Tesla. I understand why they need access to most of the vechicle's electronics.

It's about these conventional vechicles you people are buying. I want a vechicle that I can keep for a long time.

If things don't change, I forsee throwaway vechicles. Essentially a bunch of bricks.

Maybe that's what they want. "Oh they will just by the newer version? They loved the voice assisted gps?

I'm driving around my old vechicle that's running a stoichiometric number of 14.7:1. Meaning it's running well. I'm throwing out 20 ppm's of HC. 02 was .1 percent. My CO was .04 at idle. My N0 was 0 due to a $300 catalytic converter.

In California, my little 4 banger is a horrid high emitter?

Good luck smogging these newer vechicles when that warranty runs out. Good luck repairing these overly modernized vechicles. They will break down.

Tesla vehicles are almost solid state devices, with relatively few moving parts compared to an ICE equipped vehicle.

I have an electric leaf blower, that never requires maintenance, lubrication, oil changes, etc. My next door neighbor has an ICE powered leaf blower and has to change the oil and lubricate it every season.

I'm not sure how you can argue that an ICE equipped vehicle will be easier to maintain than a fully electric one.

Smog? There is no smog on an EV - it's zero emissions.

If you want to build truly autonomous cars, data capture and analysis of the data that is gathered will be mandatory. Provided Tesla performs a reasonable job of anonymizing the data and not storing personally identifiable information, I'm fine with it.

If it gives us self driving cars a couple years earlier than we would have otherwise, I think it's worth the tradeoff.

can't stand those yelling people in behind...I wish I can turn on subtitles and turn off the volume
I love Tesla the company and respect the hell out of Elon.

But his presentation style is hard to watch - he is literally stammering through what feels like a dry script.

I've never seen him live before is this par for the course or nerves?

Edit - wow that is a better looking car than I expected. You can be as awkward serving as you like if that's the main course!

It looks like he always talks like that, at least from other videos I've seen with him
I think the crowd is more unnerving than Elon's presentation style... really cringy whoops and whistles and "YES!".
They must've had an open bar while people were waiting for the presentation to start or something. The crowd is ridiculous.
Those people are drunk on themselves, no need for an open bar.
He's usually like that. It kind of of makes you appreciate the Steve Jobs product unveils a bit more. Can't remember the last "product" that was hyped this much.
That's actually just the way he talks according to every interview/presentation/video I've seen of him, albeit maybe with some added nerves.
He does seem like a pretty genuine guy. Just a big kid living out his childhood fantasies.
He's a good reminder that it's not necessary to be the best speaker to be an amazing and inspiring leader. You could imagine another universe where Elon interviews at a tech company and doesn't get hired, just based on his presentation style.
(comment deleted)
Edit - wow that is a better looking car than I expected. You can be as awkward serving as you like if that's the main course!

I mean, I'll reserve judgement until I see some more photos, but when he revealed the car it felt like a huge let down in the room. And I think we all know the car will be a success, but I got the impression that the people in the room were let down a bit by the design. I was surprised Elon didn't showcase the design at all.

The people in the audience were also viewing the car from below stage level. They really had to rely on the video and pictures to see it.
I actually thought they seemed more bummed with the range. 210 miles is pretty vanilla, for a Tesla. It would have been nice to see it in the low 300s as a starting point.

Not that this stopped me from putting down my deposit.

215 miles is the starting range, and its likely that they will have battery upgrades available that increase this.
I know. I was hoping they would have had the entry level range higher to really stretch consumer expectations when the established luxury brands start competing properly with Tesla in the next few years.
I rather like his presentation style. For some reason it strikes me as genuine, like he's someone I can relate with and look up to. He doesn't need to be a flashy salesman because his projects will sell themselves.
"For some reason it strikes me as genuine, like he's someone I can relate with and look up to."

That's typical of salespeople at the higher levels. The smooth-talking types are down at the midmarket dealerships.

For the other extreme, see Shai Agassi, who ran an electric car company, Better Place. This is his 2009 TED talk.[1] I heard him speak once. He's really good looking, he sounds very convincing, and his business plan was total bullshit. ("E-miles follow Moore's Law.") But he convinced people to invest $900 million, met with many national leaders, and got massive press coverage. Better Place delivered a only a few hundred cars, built by Renault, before it went bust.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FcoJt2KLC9k

"That's typical of salespeople at the higher levels."

Similar isn't Same.

And on top of that we are talking about different kind of resemblance.

Incredible. To me, everything about that guy screams snake oil salesman.
Does he appear a snake oil salesman in light of the facts you know now? Or you're saying you would have thought the same thing back in 2009? Do you have any specifics on why you feel that way?

Genuinely curious, as a person who likes to analyze public speaking events.

When I heard him speak at the Commonwealth Club in San Francisco, I though "I'm listening to a con man". He was talking about expanding his company 10x every year for years to come. Few companies have done that successfully, especially in a bricks-and-mortar business, which building battery-swap stations is. And the whole battery leasing model sounded like a financial gimmick. I used to go to VC events where people pitched, so I've heard lots of pitches.

I also thought, he's betting against battery technology. If somebody comes up with a battery that gives enough range and a fast charging system (which is what happened; visit your Tesla dealer) his whole battery-swap scheme is obsolete.

I also thought, if this is so great, and you're operating in countries from Israel to Denmark, why aren't there more of your cars on the road yet?

I agree, if someone was claiming they could grow a business 10x/year, that sounds suspicious. However, I didn't hear him speak at the Commonwealth Club, so I can only go off his TED talk. He says the EV industry will grow 100x between 2011 and 2016.

In that talk, he sounds more reasonable to me. There's a lot of overlap between his ideas and Elon's and he's very upfront about what he is and is not trying to do. He states that he's not trying to change the battery industry (like Elon with the Gigafactory); he's treating the industry as an input. His whole e-Miles concept seems like a different take on making the TCO, of an electric car, more appealing to the mass-market. I'm not saying I agree, I haven't run the numbers, but it doesn't sound unreasonable. In fact, Elon hedged himself by touting a battery swapping station.

My feeling is based off his TED talk alone, and I'm just not understanding where the snake-oil salesman vibe is coming from. It's very pleasurable to watch him present. Of course, if I had seen what you did at the Commonwealth, then my impression would be different.

Exactly, I can pay attentions to what Elon Musk is saying. Wheres others usually try to sugarcoat it. Says the same thing over and over again, and it gets really frustrating.

But Elon Musk jumps right to the point, and doesn't beat around the bush.

I really appreciated the brevity of the presentation. There was enough suspense before the unveiling, but the whole thing was <30 minutes.
(comment deleted)
(comment deleted)
He is always like this. I think his words are generally quite precise and economical even if his delivery seems all over the place. I like it. It seems genuine. And I tend to drift off when things are too smooth and scripted.

He might have some sort of speech impediment and it would be a shit of a world if he were judged on that instead of his achievements.

He is just like you and me (nerds) doing the best he can at a role he isn't very suited for (public speaking). When you consider this and he still doesn't try and palm this stuff off I think he is doing great.
I think it's because he knows the presentation in and of itself is unimportant vs the takeaways delivered, so he doesn't bother wasting time on it specifically since it has low ROI given his speaking capabilities. And I suspect he dislikes acting/faking, so he wouldn't use precise scripts anyway.
He sounds genuine, and he probably is, but he chose to keep it that way, he is not a poor nerd crumbling under pressure.

Think of it: he has over 20 year experience as an entrepreneur. Actually his whole career after school was being a business man, with the majority of it in high level position and with considerable success. During his career he had and still has to talk and negotiate with Heads of States, Nasa Scientists and Astronauts, Banks, other CEO of the most important companies in the world ( his peers ), ...

He chose to do the unveiling, he has the confidence to do that. If he thought he was not up to it or that his style was letting him down, he could have chosen any other unveiling strategy.

I think they could improve things by controlling the audience more. The presentation wasn't helped by people yelling and interrupting (yes, they were enthusiastic).

Apple handles this a lot better, they get applause and cheers, but it always seems to be at the right time. Is it because their audience is apple employees highly trained to give feedback on cue?

The most cringe worthy moment for me was: "...and it can sit 5." CHEERS "YEAH!" WOOOOOOO

I think a lot of people in the audience had just spent 1000$ on a reservation and they needed to rationalise.

The cheering makes sense to me. There was a pretty reasonable fear that the 3 might be too compromised to be good. See the first generation Volt for example: reasonable sized car, supposedly well built and pretty cool, but only seats four. I strongly considered buying one until I discovered that tidbit.

Considering that the $1,000 is fully refundable with no fuss, I don't think there's much need for rationalization.

It likely has more to do with the alcohol being served at the event.
It's even more likely that the people cheering the earliest and loudest were employees that were asked to do so, it's an easy way to hype up the crowd.

It doesn't matter though, the Model 3 would still be just as promising with or without the audience participation.

The difference is that Apple events are strictly invitation only, so the audience tends to be full of journalists and other press people. It's serious to the point where people who make Apple unhappy won't be extended an invite (like the iPhone prototype scandal a few years back).

This audience seems to be anyone who'd pre-ordered the model 3, so the general (Bay Area?) public. As a result it sounds like a terrible mix between an American stand-up show, a rock concert and a cheesy sitcom where everyone applauds when the main character coughs. Hence also everyone videoing the event on their phones - it's not even like a gig where you'd have to pay for the video...

(They also do this at Apple, but people seem to be a lot more covert about recording.)

This event was invite-only too, Tesla just invites a different set of people. Apple only invites journalists, while Tesla invited a bunch of current owners, mostly chosen by lottery.
Wow, is that Transformers music?
It felt a bit more "IronMan-esque" to me, personally :)
Pretty smart looking car. Doesn't ape the Model S' look too much, clearly looks a little more compact, and the roofline makes it look both roomy and a little space-agey. From the front it almost has a Porsche Panamera look going on... Nice looking car. I wish Tesla good luck, though I don't think they'll need it.
They announced during the livestream that they already have 115k preorders. Pretty crazy considering that they were all made site-unseen (I guess barring Tesla employees that placed their preorder and knew what the car looked like).
True. But based on previous models which are all pretty smart-looking, I'd say it was a safe enough bet that this model would be as well.

It's funny too, I never thought about the price point they're actually selling it for. I can afford one, and might just get one for my wife (my car is still new-ish, and efficient enough).

The panamera is quite possibly the most ugly and awkward looking luxury car out there... (even Porsches CEO admits it! http://jalopnik.com/even-porsches-ceo-admits-the-panamera-is...)

This, on the other hand is genuinely good looking.

The panamera is a very awkward car, I agree. But I get where the parent is coming from. I expected the 3 to look like a scaled down S, and a Tesla employee friend said to expect something between an S and an X (yes, he had seen it.. and no, comparison to the X is not a compliment).

I was pleasantly surprised to see the video footage of it, though I don't think it translates well to the stills/screen grabs we've seen.

The headlights-above-the-beltline look reminds me of the Roadster and the Panamera and maybe a touch like the Dodge Razor concept. it's very much not an S, while somehow being attractive in many of the ways the S is (and ugly in none of the ways that the X is). Overall I'm quite pleased with the looks.

I love that the Panamera looks so off the wall. I can never decide if I love or hate it, but I always love looking at it to figure that out.
different strokes for different folks.

Can't stand the front. Looks more like a Toyota than like a "premium car". But I don't like the Porsche Panamera too. I don't think we have the same taste in cars.

That's just a plastic part, so it's easy to change without a huge expense. As opposed to a metal stamping, where the dies are super expensive to make. Most manufacturers change the look of the bumpers during their mid-model refresh, just to make an older car look attractive again.

What I found interesting was how smooth all the panels are. Obviously for aerodynamics, but I suspect it also lowers their costs, as lots of ridges and dips mean more chance for a panel to be stamped wrong, or to not align with an adjacent panel. Same with the interior - no gauge cluster means a cleaner look and lower costs. Not sure what the DOT and NHTSA is going to say about it...

http://o.aolcdn.com/dims-global/dims3/GLOB/legacy_thumbnail/...

(comment deleted)
Wow it looks really nice. The front is completely sealed.
Yeah, I understand that's a bold "see, I'm electric" statement, but still feels a bit awkward.
Might have been the low angle shot that made it look weird. Before that, I didn't even notice the nose.
Most cars have grills because they need the ventilation to cool the engine. I think they're mostly something we've gotten used to. When electric cars become more common those gas car grills will probably start looking clunky.
I actually think the model 3 looks fine. I've seen several model x driving around and their nose is really hideous. The model s has just like a black section that looks normal and fine. The model 3 has done completely away with the black look and it looks fine. The model x just sort of is somewhere in the middle and it looks really, really awkward.
Only because you're used to a grill(e?); the Tesla doesn't need it, and if they added one for aesthetic purposes, it'd just be bad for aerodynamics and harder to clean.
Interestingly the recent Focus has active vents which open and close in the grill
over 100000 orders... so they just made $100M in less than a day in just reservations. nice.
Well, they're just reservations and they can't exactly spend the money, since they'd have to repay it. Also it's 10M, not 100.
100,000 * $1,000 = $100,000,000
They can totally spend the money.
I can see a good opportunity to start designing an after market replacement nose..... Looks a little uninspired, where as the rest of the design looks amazing.
(comment deleted)
Looks nice. I'm not completely sold on the nose but have no complaints about the rest. I am happy to see 115k+ preorders. Congrats Tesla!