| ▲ | NoPicklez 20 hours ago |
| Why is it seen initially so negatively? There's nothing inherently wrong with a company deciding to stop producing models that are extremely old, have newer comparable models that are more widely available globally and sell multiples more of. So why would you keep those older models? If anything its a good thing. But its Tesla so nothing they do will be spoken positively of. |
|
| ▲ | breve 18 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| > Why is it seen initially so negatively? Because Tesla is being measured against the benchmarks they set for themselves. It's not a good look with cancelled models, declining sales, and a lot of self-inflicted brand damage. Musk used to claim Tesla will sell 20 million vehicles per year: https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/tesla-... The new goal is to have sold 20 million in total by 2035. That target represents a further decline in sales. And, given that Tesla over-hypes everything, maybe they won't achieve it: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/05/business/elon-musk-tesla-... |
|
| ▲ | addaon 18 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > Why is it seen initially so negatively? They went from being able to profitably produce a luxury car, to not being able to profitably produce a luxury car, to not being able to produce a luxury car at all. All while becoming uncompetitive in the econobox market, and losing huge chunks of it even before their real competitors arrive in market… |
| |
| ▲ | jeltz 18 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Yeah, in Europe Tesla is not losing to BYD. They are losing to VW and BMV before the Chinese manufacturers have entered the competition for real. | | |
| ▲ | WorldMaker 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | And Renault and Dacia and MG and… Europe doesn't seem to want for EV competition in anything like the same way that the US is falling behind. |
| |
| ▲ | MBCook 16 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | But they’re making a robot! It will totally save the company! On top of all the problems you have identified, as well as more, they’re clearly now just aiming for fantasy land. |
|
|
| ▲ | tensor 18 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I'm not surprised at the X, but the S has always been the flagship model with all the best features and the top performance. The 3 is a fine mid-sized car but it's very strange to get rid of your flagship model. Those always cater to a small audience anyways. |
| |
| ▲ | jerlam 16 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Yes, flagship models aren't intended to be good sellers. They often are where new features are tested out on customers willing to overpay to be early adopters. Tesla did test out the new steering yoke and removing the control stalks in the S: both features were met with tepid reception and partially rolled back. This is also bad for the 3 and Y, since there will be low confidence in any changes before they are released. | |
| ▲ | groundzeros2015 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | What if they have planned product lines we don’t know about. | | |
| ▲ | WorldMaker 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Then the smarter PR move would be to tease those before announcing massive cuts? | | |
| |
| ▲ | NoPicklez 17 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I guess from my perspective you can't buy the S or the X in Australia, all I see everywhere are the 3 and the Y. So for me its not flagship but I do know that the S was the original popular Tesla and has all of the bells and whistles. | | |
| ▲ | WorldMaker 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | The S was a true American "land yacht" in the classic style of an Oldsmobile. There's a lot of reasons for it to be seen as the US flagship model and for it to have done poorly in other markets or not even released to them. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | browningstreet 18 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| As a car company the expectation is that they develop new car models for consumers. They don’t seem to be doing that either. |
| |
| ▲ | NoPicklez 17 hours ago | parent [-] | | They developed the Model 3 and Y, which is partly why they're stopping the S and X? They completely refreshed the Model Y last year and made a number of updates to the Model 3 including different body word. | | |
| ▲ | TulliusCicero 9 hours ago | parent [-] | | "Completely refreshed" is doing a lot of work here in that sentence. The new refreshes don't look nearly as big in terms of changes as new generations of car models for other manufacturers, and Lord knows even Tesla fans have plenty of things they'd like to see improved. | | |
| ▲ | EnPissant 6 hours ago | parent [-] | | A 2020 Tesla Model Y and 2026 Tesla Model Y are at least as different as a 2020 Nissan Rogue and a 2026 Nissan Rogue. | | |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | protastus 11 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Because it looks like Elon recognized Tesla's inability to compete against BYD and gave up making cars. This is negative. Since he couldn't leave it at that, he announced a pivot to a product that doesn't exist. This is also negative. |
| |
| ▲ | NoPicklez 8 hours ago | parent [-] | | How did he give up? The model Y and the model 3 were refreshed last year. With the model 3 now pushing 750km of range. Ford got rid of plenty of popular models including all hatchbacks and many sedans. |
|
|
| ▲ | cosmicgadget 18 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Toyota sells a lot of Camrys and Corollas. It is nice that they also make (made?) Supras and 86s. Also we can have a conversation without tossing the "everyone hates Tesla!" poison down the well immediately. |
| |
| ▲ | NoPicklez 17 hours ago | parent [-] | | The difference there is that Supra's and 86's are performance cars, whereas Camry's and Corollas arent. You can't compare a Hatchback to an 86. The Model S is comparable performance to the Model 3 performance. My point is that the latest models 3 & Y are more affordable alternatives to the S & X and more widely available globally. | | |
| ▲ | cosmicgadget 17 hours ago | parent [-] | | Okay that's my ignorance of Tesla models then, I assumed the more expensive models were also faster. I guess then it's more like Toyota EOLing Lexus or GM getting rid of Cadillac. I understand the point that the cheaper models are higher volume. Historically that had not precluded the creation of sports and luxury models for most manufacturers. Are the legacy brands wrong to do this? Currently I doubt their business acumen far less than Elon's. | | |
| ▲ | NoPicklez 16 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | The model 3 performance model does 0-100 in 3.1 seconds, the model S does that in 2.1, it is therefore faster by a second but 3.1 will beat most cars off the line quite comfortably. The Supra for context does that in 4.1 seconds. Nothing wrong with keeping a sport and luxury model, however I would argue that the latest models are quite sporty and luxurious in their own right. Companies like Ford constantly discontinue models, but they don't get the level of attention Tesla does. If Tesla aren't seeing the Model S and X being sold to anywhere near the degree of the 3 and the Y, then why continue making them? They aren't as globally available and its clear people don't want them as much as the others. | | |
| ▲ | cosmicgadget 15 hours ago | parent [-] | | I think we're sort of back at the beginning here. They are welcome to focus on their bestsellers. Traditional automotive wisdom would favor halo models and upper trim models so people can boast about a sedan that can out-drag a Supra. > Companies like Ford constantly discontinue models, but they don't get the level of attention Tesla does. If they axed 2/5 of their models it might. But they're also not run by an attention wh- addict with an Apple-like fanbase. Oh and also they're axing 2/5 of their models to build teleoperated robots. Seems like the attention is well deserved here. |
| |
| ▲ | rossjudson 14 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | The S is faster than any other Tesla. Non-plaid S and X are much faster than non P 3 and Y. Your main point is highly valid. Why does any manufacturer bother to make anything better than a Camry? Because it makes money, of course. | | |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | fortran77 15 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| But the 3 isn’t comparable. It’s cheap, looks cheap and feels cheap. |
| |
| ▲ | rossjudson 14 hours ago | parent [-] | | Someone who owns a BMW 5 series isn't going to switch down to a new model of the 3 series. The X makes the 3 and Y feel like go karts (that are slow). The S is a missile. Fun, but not for me. The other way of looking at this: The X is the only Tesla model with door handles that aren't stupid. | | |
| ▲ | NoPicklez 13 hours ago | parent [-] | | How are they slow the Model 3 high performance does 0-100kph in 3.1 seconds? The X does it in 2.1, both of which are extremely fast and on par if not quicker than a 5 series BMW |
|
|
|
| ▲ | SilverElfin 17 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Having a halo product can be inspiring. A lot of BMW buyers may get a boring old 3 series but they like that the low volume M cars exist, for example. |
| |
| ▲ | MetaWhirledPeas 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | If Tesla wanted to be BMW they could just do all the BMW things. But they are aspiring for more, so they flip the script quite often. I'm not arguing for or against their decisions; just saying that because BMW does it is not a good argument for them. | |
| ▲ | electriclove 15 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Maybe they will finally release the Roadster to serve this purpose | |
| ▲ | seanmcdirmid 16 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Just buy an i4, even the eDrive is pretty zippy 0-60 in 5.4 seconds (the M50 can do it in 3.1 seconds). I’m not sure what the M car EV will look like beyond a motor for every wheel, but I can’t really see a point to it. |
|
|
| ▲ | electriclove 15 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Will they increase specs on the 3 and the Y after the S and X are sunset? |
|
| ▲ | nunez 16 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Ford got a lot of heat for shifting all of their NA production to Mustangs and F-series trucks too a few years ago. |
| |
| ▲ | MBCook 16 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Ford didn’t say it was so they could make a robot butler instead. | | |
| ▲ | kenhwang 15 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | The reason was sillier: China forced Ford to sell Mazda to enter the Chinese market, because Mazda entered the Chinese market before Ford and China considered them the same entity subject to the same outside manufacturer limits). Mazda handled the small vehicle chassis design for Ford. So without Mazda, Ford no longer had the knowledge for continued development of their sedans and crossovers based on sedan platforms. | | |
| ▲ | nunez 12 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Wow! That IS silly! I thought Ford had been in China for a while though. | | |
| ▲ | kenhwang 7 hours ago | parent [-] | | Ford was with Mazda in China with a joint venture with a Chinese company (as required): Changan, and they were building those shared Ford/Mazda platform vehicles there. Ford wanted to also build trucks for the Chinese market, with a different joint venture. However, the rules limited companies to two joint ventures, which was a problem because Mazda also had a joint venture with FAW. Which meant it counted as part of Ford's 2 joint ventures. So Ford sold Mazda. Changan Ford/Mazda got split in their respective halves. FAW was no longer associated with Ford and left with Mazda. Ford could then pick up a new joint venture for trucks, which they did and I don't believe they're doing well. Ford just really wanted to double down on trucks, in more than one market. |
| |
| ▲ | MBCook 15 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Oh is that why they gave up small cars? I didn’t realize that. |
| |
| ▲ | nunez 12 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | No, but they are retooling their MachE factory to make batteries, which felt just as much of a wtf as this BS |
| |
| ▲ | Slothrop99 13 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Ford dropped sedans, they still have plenty of SUVs and other trucks you can buy. |
|
|
| ▲ | EnPissant 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Because it's Elon Musk. 10 years ago people here would be describing this as a good decision. |
|
| ▲ | mrcwinn 19 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| You are, of course, exactly right but you will nevertheless be downvoted for the same reasons you allude to. |
| |
