| ▲ | fieryscribe a day ago |
| If McDonald's was profitable, they wouldn't try to franchise it. That's what this is. You take on operating costs and you understand your local market. They own the brand. |
|
| ▲ | pseudosavant a day ago | parent | next [-] |
| One problem in your analogy, for McDonalds, the franchisee is the one who actually operates the business. For the Cybercab, Tesla is the one operating it via "Full Self Driving", their app, and the Tesla rideshare network. As the owner, the only thing you do is own it, insure it, have a place to park it, and take on the risk of what happens if the vehicle registered to you is in an accident. Clearly, a pretty one-sided assignment of risk. |
| |
| ▲ | bluelightning2k a day ago | parent | next [-] | | Actually, while I still like your point there really is still a lot of operational work. You need to clean, inspect, repair, insure, secure and charge the cars. To do so efficiently you will need to custom develop premises full of chargers and efficient charging and cleaning infrastructure. That absolutely is operationally intense. Premises, permits, construction and then significant operations. | | |
| ▲ | pseudosavant a day ago | parent [-] | | That seems like even more downside risk, expenses, and maintenance that don't generate any revenue for you the vehicle owner. |
| |
| ▲ | fieryscribe a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Maybe? It's how McDonald's runs things too. They make the food centrally and ship it to franchises. They take on brand risk, food logistics at scale and so on. Franchisees deal with local demand, operations, hiring, local laws and so on. It's not an exact 1:1, but that seems to be the model here. Tesla does the things that can scale (FSD, manufacturing, etc.) and operators do the things that can't. | |
| ▲ | esalman 15 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I think a more apt analogy is iPhone. You pay Apple for a brand new one, they make more money when you make in-app purchases. Another really important issue is depreciation. You own the car for a few year and eat a cost of depreciation, and then figure out how to dig yourself out of the hole the way Hertz did. Similar to iPhone- you use one for 2+ years and then get a new version- you're also responsible if the phone breaks. | |
| ▲ | bluelightning2k a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | That's actually a very good point. Also if Elon Musk has a demonstrable superpower it's the ability to raise capital. So they really could order 100,000 of these themselves. | | |
| ▲ | fieryscribe a day ago | parent [-] | | They could, but running local operations isn't his forte, preference or interest, it seems. Even if he had a massive fleet of these, he'd have to navigate local laws, demand, operations and logistics. His revealed preference is to run things centrally and at massive scales. | | |
| ▲ | hackingonempty a day ago | parent [-] | | > They could, but running local operations isn't his forte, preference or interest, it seems. Even if he had a massive fleet of these, he'd have to navigate local laws, demand, operations and logistics. Doesn't Tesla operate its own dealer network? |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | jerlam a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Companies have to convince potential franchisees that they will be successful. Usually, the franchiser needs to already be wildly successful and have a playbook of how the franchisee will also be successful and how the franchiser will protect them, often via regional exclusivity. I don't know if Tesla has proven that their own fleet is successful. |
|
| ▲ | dyauspitr a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| The key thing here is liability. A McDonald’s franchisee is protected if the thing that makes someone sick was a result of bad food supplied by the McDonalds corporation. In the case of Tesla, irrespective of the self driving software the Tesla corporation provides, the “franchisee” is always the one liable. |
| |
| ▲ | amazingamazing a day ago | parent [-] | | > In the case of Tesla, irrespective of the self driving software the Tesla corporation provides, the “franchisee” is always the one liable. Precedent for this? |
|
|
| ▲ | HardCodedBias a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| It's more than that, Tesla owns the brand, the manufacturing, and the software. They are much more than McDonalds. But indeed your comparison is an apt way to reply to this "article". |
| |
| ▲ | newsclues a day ago | parent [-] | | McDonald’s owns the brand, supply chain and real estate. | | |
| ▲ | yellowapple a day ago | parent | next [-] | | And the software, if the saga around the constantly-broken ice cream machines is any indication. | | |
| ▲ | newsclues a day ago | parent [-] | | I was going to mention that but I don’t know about it but assume they have some interesting supply chain, inventory management, marketing type software that no one will see, and just think about the POS, in store displays and web and mobile applications that millions of users interact with daily | | |
| |
| ▲ | seanalltogether a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | But critically they don't own the sale. Will Tesla own point of sale, or will the Cybercab owner? |
|
|
|
| ▲ | thescriptkiddie a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| actually most franchise restaurants are not profitable and eventually go out of business. subway is famous for being basically a pyramid scheme that only makes money by fleecing aspiring restaurateurs. mcdonald's is an exception because they are primarily a real estate company and commercial landlord. |
| |
| ▲ | fieryscribe a day ago | parent [-] | | Most things go out of business. That's why the franchising model exists. Local owners know their local market best and they take a calculated risk on it. From what I understand, McDonald's franchisees can make 5-15% of gross revenue of their location. That's a decent return, along the lines of other investments. As with all investments, you may lose too. |
|
|
| ▲ | cyanydeez a day ago | parent | prev [-] |
| [flagged] |
| |
| ▲ | amazingamazing a day ago | parent [-] | | Telsa is going for a certain rough aesthetic with both the Cybertruck and Cybercab branding. | | |
| ▲ | cyanydeez a day ago | parent | next [-] | | The rough: youre living in apocalyptic hellscape because money buys mental insecurity, not love. Better armor up and avoid humanity! | |
| ▲ | spiderfarmer a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | [flagged] | | |
| ▲ | a day ago | parent | next [-] | | [deleted] | |
| ▲ | zulux a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | I agree. National Socialists and Fascists are unacceptable. Also their cousins - International Socialists. Any ideology that has a body count measured in the millions is my enemy. | | |
| |
| ▲ | hnthrow550055 a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | [flagged] |
|
|
