Connect with us

News

Tesla’s Cybertruck does not need traditional ‘truck people’s’ support to succeed

(Credit: Tesla)

Published

on

The Tesla Cybertruck is not a vehicle that could be appreciated by everyone. Uncompromisingly futuristic and angular to a fault, the vehicle looks less like a traditional pickup compared to other all-electric trucks like the Rivian R1T. Thanks to its polarizing looks, Tesla critics have predicted that the Cybertruck would be a flop, since the vehicle would not appeal to traditional “truck people,” who have preconceived notions about what a pickup should look like. 

To be fair, the Cybertruck has received harsh criticism from a good number of classic pickup truck enthusiasts. Yet, despite this, the idea that the all-electric truck would fail because it would not appeal to a “typical Ford F-150 buyer” will likely be proven wrong. In fact, if one were to look at the history of Tesla’s vehicles, particularly the Model 3, one would note that the electric car maker’s cars do not really need the support of an existing demographic to be a success. 

Tesla made a rather strange decision when it decided to start the Model 3’s rollout on the United States. During that time, some of the company’s critics pointed to the alleged folly of this strategy, particularly as the US’ luxury sedan market was in a steep decline. Yet, when Tesla hit its stride with Model 3 production, this bearish thesis was proven wrong. American car buyers bought the electric sedan, ending 2018 as the best-selling luxury car on the market with over 145,000 units sold. 

The Tesla Model 3. (Credit: Tesla)

Tesla’s later discussions on Model 3 trends featured interesting insights about the vehicle and why it continued to buck the trend by thriving despite the decline in the US’ sedan sales. As it turned out, the Model 3 did not just convert existing luxury car buyers when it was released — it actually inspired a new type of electric car buyer. What are these customers? They were people who have never considered buying a premium vehicle before. 

This is why some of the top vehicles traded in for the Model 3 include more affordable vehicles like the Toyota Prius and the Honda Accord. By offering the best tech and safety at a price point that’s justified by a significantly lower total cost of ownership, Tesla ended up encouraging customers to acquire the Model 3, even if they have to make a stretch to do so. By doing this, the Model 3 was essentially able to create a market for itself. The same could happen to the Cybertruck. 

Tesla Cybertruck giving test rides at Los Angeles unveiling event, Nov. 21, 2019 (Photo: Teslarati)
Tesla Cybertruck giving test rides at Los Angeles unveiling event, Nov. 21, 2019 (Photo: Teslarati)

Thus, while it is true that the Cybertruck may never convert die-hard “truck people” who are loyal to veteran brands, the vehicle may also easily attract buyers who were previously not in the market for a pickup truck at all. This is already hinted at by some reservation holders who have shared their insights online, with some admitting that they are not “truck people” at all, but they are attracted to the Cybertruck’s cost and features nonetheless. Starting at $39,990, the Cybertruck is only a bit more expensive than the Standard Range Plus Model 3, which is a sedan. 

The Tesla Cybertruck is still more expensive than entry-level pickups on the market, but it is priced very competitively against full-sized, double-cab pickups from rival carmakers. The vehicle is also loaded to the teeth with standard features that would otherwise require an aftermarket modification, such as its motorized tonneau cover. Couple this with a lower cost of ownership compared to massive fuel and maintenance costs incurred by conventional gas-guzzlers like the Ford F-150 and the Cybertruck becomes a very attractive vehicle, pickup veterans and otherwise. 

H/T u/Dandan0005/Reddit

Advertisement
-

Simon is an experienced automotive reporter with a passion for electric cars and clean energy. Fascinated by the world envisioned by Elon Musk, he hopes to make it to Mars (at least as a tourist) someday. For stories or tips--or even to just say a simple hello--send a message to his email, simon@teslarati.com or his handle on X, @ResidentSponge.

Advertisement
Comments

News

Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile are trying to shut Starlink out before FCC vote

AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile want 290 MHz cut from an FCC satellite plan before Thursday.

Published

on

By

Starlink D2D direct to device vs Verizon, AT&T (Concept render by Grok)

AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile are asking the Federal Communications Commission to pull nearly 300 MHz of spectrum out of a proposal that would let satellite companies like SpaceX offer cell service directly to ordinary phones. The request lands one day before the agency votes on it.

The FCC will vote Thursday, October 29, on a notice of proposed rulemaking that would make an additional 482 MHz available for direct to device service, expanding the number of eligible bands from five to 13, according to the FCC fact sheet. It would also scrap the rule requiring a satellite operator to lease spectrum from carriers, replacing it with a certification that the operator has coexistence agreements in place or holds the terrestrial license itself.

That second path matters for SpaceX. As Teslarati reported earlier this month, SpaceX agreed to buy Grain Management’s nationwide 800 MHz portfolio to turn Starlink Mobile into a full US carrier, adding to the spectrum it already bought from EchoStar.

The carriers want two bands removed, 2.5 GHz and 3.45 GHz, which make up 290 MHz of the 482 MHz on the table. Through industry group CTIA, they argued that about 300 million users depend on those bands and that satellite operations in them are not technically feasible. T-Mobile, which calls 2.5 GHz the foundation of its Ultra Capacity 5G network, said in its own filing that satellite interference could wipe out up to 96% of a cell site’s uplink coverage area and cut uplink speeds by 88% to 99%.

Executives from all three carriers met with FCC staff on October 20, and T-Mobile CEO Srini Gopalan met separately with FCC Chairman Brendan Carr. T-Mobile’s role stands out because it is still SpaceX’s US launch partner for Starlink Mobile. The three carriers have also teamed up on their own satellite joint venture to pool spectrum, a move widely seen as a response to Starlink.

Advertisement
-

SpaceX is asking for the opposite. In an October 23 filing after meetings with FCC staff and commissioners’ offices, the company asked regulators to add the 902 to 928 MHz band to the proposal. “Doing so now saves time later,” SpaceX wrote. The company also asked the FCC to modernize interference rules and align satellite deployment requirements with those for terrestrial cell networks, saying the goal is to let satellite and ground networks work together so Americans stay connected wherever they are.

The carriers have not been shy about how they view SpaceX as a competitor. On Verizon’s third quarter earnings call Monday, its chief executive said Starlink Mobile “just can’t compete with a terrestrial network” and estimated SpaceX would need four to six years and $300 billion to $500 billion to build a full US carrier network.

Thursday’s vote will not settle which bands survive. Adopting the notice opens a public comment period, with final rules to come later in the proceeding. The FCC already considered and rejected 2.5 GHz for satellite coverage once, in 2024. SpaceX also is not the only satellite player watching: the FCC approved Amazon’s $11.6 billion acquisition of Globalstar on October 27, giving its planned direct to device fleet its own mobile satellite spectrum.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla Semi catches fire in California: what we know

Published

on

Credit: KTVU

A Tesla Semi caught fire in Hayward, California, which caused both directions of traffic to shut down for hours before being completely reopened early on Wednesday, the California Highway Patrol said.

The fire occurred just after 5:30 local time in Hayward on Tuesday, as the Semi caught fire in the southbound lanes of I-880 before CHP officials made the decision to shut down both lanes of traffic due to potential risks from hazardous chemical smoke.

There were no injuries reported.

The cause of the fire is currently unknown, as neither Tesla nor the CHP have not determined a cause.

However, some images taken before the Semi was completely destroyed by the fire seem to indicate this might have been an older unit, as it appears to be one of the designs that Tesla shipped as part of its pilot program, before revising it and starting mass production just a month ago.

At the time of publication, CHP had not returned our request for a comment for additional details, including the Semi involved and any potential collaboration on an investigation between the CHP and Tesla. We will update this story when we hear back from them.

The southbound lanes were reopened at 3:30 a.m. on Wednesday, with the northbound lanes opening last night a few hours after the fire began. The CHP did state that the lithium batteries were “incredibly difficult to extinguish,” according to NBC Bay Area.

The truck’s driver said that the Semi caught fire, but he did not have an explanation.

An estimated 5,000 to 7,000 semi-truck and large commercial vehicle fires occur on U.S. roadways every year.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla’s ‘Emergency Drive Away’ function gets its first use in the real world

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla’s launch of the “Emergency Drive Away” function a few months back offered owners a safe option to evacuate an area if they were in reasonable danger. The function finally got its first use in the real world, but it appears it was by mistake.

A video shared by u/Joshalander in the r/TeslaLounge subreddit recorded the instance from his vehicle and said the incident took place in Austin this past weekend during the city’s F1 Race.

“Was charging around 6 AM this past Sunday in Austin before heading to the F1 race and heard a pop. Looked over and saw the new emergency drive-away feature in action. Genuinely felt bad for the dude when he got out and realized what happened, since he looked exhausted and only seemed to half-read the prompts.”

Emergency Drive Away unlatches the Supercharger connector from the vehicle, but still causes damage to both the car and the Supercharger. Tesla has said that it will cost up to $25,000 in repairs to have everything fixed back to normal.

Additionally, the company said that if it were not used in an emergency situation, the driver of the vehicle who activated the Emergency Drive Away feature would be responsible for all repair costs.

Tesla constitutes the following situations as reasonable justifications for activating the feature:

  • You face an immediate threat to your life or personal safety.
  • You must leave the area immediately.
  • Exiting the vehicle is unsafe.
  • Unplugging the charge connector would unreasonably delay your departure or expose you to a risk to your personal safety.

After using the feature, Tesla requires the driver to schedule Service so the car can be inspected.

Continue Reading