Investor's Corner

Tesla guides EV industry’s shift from niche production to mass market

Published

7 years ago

April 6, 2018

Evannex

As Tesla continues to push the boundaries on automation in its factory production line, 2018 could be the year when the company and the electric vehicle (EVs) industry shifts from being seen as niche production to the mass market. Noting that roughly 1.3 million EVs were sold around the world in 2017, a 57 percent increase over 2016 sales, global consultancy McKinsey predicts that EVs’ share of total passenger vehicle sales could reach 30 to 35 percent in major markets like China, Europe, and the US by 2030. In partnership with automotive benchmarking specialist A2Mac1, McKinsey took a deep dive into EV technology, and identified four strategies that automakers should follow to remain relevant as the industry transforms itself.

EVs reached a major milestone in 2017. The main obstacles to mass market adoption have been driving range and price. With the launch of Tesla’s Model 3 and GM’s Chevy Bolt, both of which offer a range of over 250 miles, McKinsey believes that the range issue has basically been solved, and that automakers can now focus on reducing price points, either by increasing design efficiency or reducing manufacturing costs. To be successful at this, McKinsey believes they will need to follow four technical strategies.

1 – Build native electric vehicles

Native EVs – cars built on a custom electric platform, rather than adapted from legacy fossil-fuel vehicles – cost automakers more to develop, but offer multiple advantages. A native EV doesn’t have to be designed around bulky components that are no longer needed, such as drive shaft tunnels and exhaust systems, so it can accommodate a bigger battery pack. The pack can also be placed where it makes the most sense – at the bottom of the vehicle. This “skateboard” design, made famous by Model S designer Franz von Holzhausen, has since been copied by other automakers. Not only does it improve handling by giving the vehicle a lower center of gravity, it also opens up much more space for passengers and cargo.

2 – Push the boundaries of powertrain integration

McKinsey’s benchmarking revealed a continuing trend toward EV powertrain integration: EV-makers are integrating components such as inverters, motor controllers, etc, into fewer modules. One indicator of the increased level of integration is the design of the electric cables connecting the main electric powertrain components (battery, motor, power electronics and thermal management). McKinsey observed a decrease in both cable weight and the number of parts in the latest electric models compared with earlier vehicles.

EV powertrains are inherently more flexible, as the components are smaller, and designers have more freedom to place them in the best positions to optimize space. McKinsey found that the Chevy Bolt seems to use an ICE-like positioning of its powertrain electronics, whereas the Tesla Model 3 integrates most components directly on the rear of its battery pack and rear axle.

3 – Stay ahead in the technology game

Electric vehicle customers tend to be tech-savvy – they expect to have the latest driver-assistance systems, connectivity features and infotainment goodies. This almost obligates EV manufacturers to equip their vehicles with the highest levels of technology available. However, McKinsey sees this as an opportunity, as it creates a great testing field for the new technologies that OEMs and third-party providers are developing.

Vehicle controls are steadily migrating from physical knobs and switches to a more central, smartphone-like user interface. Of course, Tesla’s Model 3 is the ultimate example of this, but most EVs are following the trend of clearing the clutter. “We observed EVs in our benchmark that have as few as seven physical buttons in the interior, compared with 50 to 60 in many standard ICEs,” says McKinsey.

Rimac Concept_One digital controls being demonstrated at Monterey Carweek

Behind the scenes in vehicles’ electronic control units (ECUs), the trend is also toward more consolidation. Legacy autos are controlled by a jumble of different computer systems, often from different suppliers, that talk to each other in limited ways or not at all. Once again, Tesla led the way. In a 2014 interview, Tesla founder Ian Wright told me that his 2008 Volkswagen probably had “sixty or seventy electronic black boxes, 300 pounds of wiring harness, and software from 20 different companies in it.” Tesla’s vehicles use one central computer system. “The major reliability problem with those cars is the electronics and software,” said Wright. “I think Tesla did take a real Silicon Valley systems architecture perspective in designing all the electronics in the Model S.”

In an EV, electronics and software are the heart of the vehicle, and Wright predicted that, as the majors began to produce EVs, they would eventually be forced to adopt a more systems-oriented approach. McKinsey found that this prediction is coming true. Automakers are finding that a centralized approach gives them the chance to own a key control point in the vehicle, helps to save on weight and costs, and may improve reliability. Central, high-power ECUs “could also be the backbone for developing fully autonomous driving.”

4 – Design to cost

Legacy automakers are still struggling to make a profit on their EVs, mainly because of high battery costs (not Tesla, which claims to be earning margins of over 20% on Model S and X sales). Now that the range issue has been more or less solved, McKinsey believes OEMs will need to apply design-to-cost (DTC) strategies to produce EVs at attractive price points while earning decent margins. Fortunately, this something that established OEMs and suppliers are good at, so they may be able to quickly catch up. For example, improvements in battery technology may allow automakers to switch from lightweight but costly aluminum to more cost-efficient steel (a shift Tesla has already made with Model 3).

Can the traditional automakers make money in the volume EV market? Many industry observers are skeptical – one reason for the companies’ reluctance to embrace EVs may be that they see them as a lower-profit proposition. In the first public acknowledgment of this dynamic, Daimler recently announced that it foresees an end to profit growth this year, partly due to the high costs of making the shift to EVs. Certainly, it’s difficult to imagine that any EV will ever yield the prodigious profits of a vehicle like Ford’s F-150 pickup, which has been called the most profitable consumer product in history.

However, McKinsey believes that, if automakers heed its sage advice and take the aforementioned four EV design steps into consideration, they should be able to reduce the higher manufacturing costs of EVs and find their way to a positive mass-market business case. An era of profitable mass-market EVs could be on the horizon, and that would be good news for consumers, the environment – and forward-looking automakers that are willing to take some risks and embrace change.

===

Note: Article originally published on evannex.com by Charles Morris; Source: McKinsey / A2Mac1

Up Next

Tesla fan makes 3D Elon Musk tribute video, and it’s pretty darn awesome

Don't Miss

Kimbal Musk’s Tesla Model 3 giveaway is about the bigger picture

Evannex

EVANNEX carries aftermarket accessories, parts, and gear for Tesla owners. Its blog is updated daily with Tesla news.

Comments

Investor's Corner

Shareholder group urges Nasdaq probe into Elon Musk’s Tesla 2025 CEO Interim Award

The SOC Investment Group represents pension funds tied to more than two million union members, many of whom hold shares in TSLA.

Published

1 week ago

August 22, 2025

Simon Alvarez

Credit: xAI/X

An investment group is urging Nasdaq to investigate Tesla (NASDAQ:TSLA) over its recent $29 billion equity award for CEO Elon Musk.

The SOC Investment Group, which represents pension funds tied to more than two million union members—many of whom hold shares in TSLA—sent a letter to the exchange citing “serious concerns” that the package sidestepped shareholder approval and violated compensation rules.

Concerns over Tesla’s 2025 CEO Interim Award

In its August 19 letter to Nasdaq enforcement chief Erik Wittman, SOC alleged that Tesla’s board improperly granted Musk a “2025 CEO Interim Award” under the company’s 2019 Equity Incentive Plan. That plan, the group noted, explicitly excluded Musk when it was approved by shareholders. SOC argued that the new equity grant effectively expanded the plan to cover Musk, a material change that should have required a shareholder vote under Nasdaq rules.

The $29 billion package was designed to replace Musk’s overturned $56 billion award from 2018, which the Delaware Chancery Court struck down, prompting Tesla to file an appeal to the Delaware Supreme Court. The interim award contains restrictions: Musk must remain in a leadership role until August 2027, and vested shares cannot be sold until 2030, as per a Yahoo Finance report.

Even so, critics such as SOC have argued that the plan does not have of performance targets, calling it a “fog-the-mirror” award. This means that “If you’re around and have enough breath left in you to fog the mirror, you get them,” stated Brian Dunn, the director of the Institute for Comprehension Studies at Cornell University.

They don’t even HAVE an investment with Tesla. They are just a political activist group using a loose relationship with a “coalition of unions” to write letters to advance an agenda that IS NOT making Tesla and AI, robotics and energy leader. Their letter does not include any…— Amy (@_SFTahoe) August 21, 2025

SOC’s Tesla concerns beyond Elon Musk

SOC’s concerns extend beyond the mechanics of Musk’s pay. The group has long questioned the independence of Tesla’s board, opposing the reelection of directors such as Kimbal Musk and James Murdoch. It has also urged regulators to review Tesla’s governance practices, including past proposals to shrink the board.

SOC has also joined initiatives calling for Tesla to adopt comprehensive labor rights policies, including noninterference with worker organizing and compliance with global labor standards. The investment group has also been involved in webinars and resolutions highlighting the risks related to Tesla’s approach to unions, as well as labor issues across several countries.

Tesla has not yet publicly responded to SOC’s latest letter, nor to requests for comment.

The SOC’s letter can be viewed below.

Nasdaq+Letter Tsla Socig Final by Simon Alvarez

Investor's Corner

Tesla investors may be in for a big surprise

All signs point toward a strong quarter for Tesla in terms of deliveries. Investors could be in for a surprise.

Published

2 weeks ago

August 14, 2025

Joey Klender

(Credit: Tesla)

Tesla investors have plenty of things to be ecstatic about, considering the company’s confidence in autonomy, AI, robotics, cars, and energy. However, many of them may be in for a big surprise as the end of the $7,500 EV tax credit nears. On September 30, it will be gone for good.

This has put some skepticism in the minds of some investors: the lack of a $7,500 discount for buying a clean energy vehicle may deter many people from affording Tesla’s industry-leading EVs.

Tesla warns consumers of huge, time-sensitive change coming soon

The focus on quarterly deliveries, while potentially waning in terms of importance to the future, is still a big indicator of demand, at least as of now. Of course, there are other factors, most of them economic.

The big push to make the most of the final quarter of the EV tax credit is evident, as Tesla is reminding consumers on social media platforms and through email communications that the $7,500 discount will not be here forever. It will be gone sooner rather than later.

It appears the push to maximize sales this quarter before having to assess how much they will be impacted by the tax credit’s removal is working.

Delivery Wait Time Increases

Wait times for Tesla vehicles are increasing due to what appears to be increased demand for the company’s vehicles. Recently, Model Y delivery wait times were increased from 1-3 weeks to 4-6 weeks.

This puts extra pressure on consumers to pull the trigger on an order, as delivery must be completed by the cutoff date of September 30.

Delivery wait times may have gone up due to an increase in demand as consumers push to make a purchase before losing that $7,500 discount.

More People are Ordering

A post on X by notable Tesla influencer Sawyer Merritt anecdotally shows he has been receiving more DMs than normal from people stating that they’re ordering vehicles before the end of the tax credit:

Anecdotally, I’ve been getting more DMs from people ordering Teslas in the past few days than I have in the last couple of years. As expected, the end of the U.S. EV credit next month is driving a big surge in orders.

Lease prices are rising for the 3/Y, delivery wait times are… pic.twitter.com/Y6JN3w2Gmr

— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) August 13, 2025

It’s not necessarily a confirmation of more orders, but it could be an indication that things are certainly looking that way.

Why Investors Could Be Surprised

Tesla investors could see some positive movement in stock price following the release of the Q3 delivery report, especially if all signs point to increased demand this quarter.

We reported previously that this could end up being a very strong rebounding quarter for Tesla, with so many people taking advantage of the tax credit.

Whether the delivery figures will be higher than normal remains to be seen. But all indications seem to point to Q3 being a very strong quarter for Tesla.

Elon Musk

Tesla bear Guggenheim sees nearly 50% drop off in stock price in new note

Tesla bear Guggenheim does not see any upside in Robotaxi.

Published

2 weeks ago

August 14, 2025

Joey Klender

Credit: Tesla

Tesla bear Guggenheim is still among the biggest non-believers in the company’s overall mission and its devotion to solving self-driving.

In a new note to investors on Thursday, analyst Ronald Jewsikow reiterated his price target of $175, a nearly 50 percent drop off, with a ‘Sell’ rating, all based on skepticism regarding Tesla’s execution of the Robotaxi platform.

A few days ago, Tesla CEO Elon Musk said the company’s Robotaxi platform would open to the public in September, offering driverless rides to anyone in the Austin area within its geofence, which is roughly 90 square miles large.

Tesla CEO Elon Musk confirms Robotaxi is opening to the public: here’s when

However, Jewsikow’s skepticism regarding this timeline has to do with what’s going on inside of the vehicles. The analyst was willing to give props to Robotaxi, saying that Musk’s estimation of a September public launch would be a “key step” in offering the service to a broader population.

Where Jewsikow’s real issue lies is with Tesla’s lack of transparency on the Safety Monitors, and how bulls are willing to overlook their importance.

Much of this bullish mentality comes from the fact that the Monitors are not sitting in the driver’s seat, and they don’t have anything to do with the overall operation of the vehicle.

Musk also said last month that reducing Safety Monitors could come “in a month or two.”

Instead, they’re just there to make sure everything runs smoothly.

Jewsikow said:

“While safety drivers will remain, and no timeline has been provided for their removal, bulls have been willing to overlook the optics of safety drivers in TSLA vehicles, and we see no reason why that would change now.”

He also commented on Musk’s recent indication that Tesla was working on a 10x parameter count that could help make Full Self-Driving even more accurate. It could be one of the pieces to Tesla solving autonomy.

Jewsikow added:

“Perhaps most importantly for investors bullish on TSLA for the fleet of potential FSD-enabled vehicles today, the 10x higher parameter count will be able to run on the current generation of FSD hardware and inference compute.”