Zibb

Paul RakoTechnical Editor Paul Rako looks at analog technology in power supplies, interface, the signal path, and life in general.



   Advertisement

Profile

RSS Feed

  • Add this blog to your RSS newsreader!

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Most Commented On

Archives

By Category

Analog Design Articles

Blog

Thursday, October 16, 2008

Tesla cancels new model, fires CEO, will lay off large part of workforce

Oct 16 2008 10:14AM | Permalink |Comments (32) |


Read the grim news here. I hope my pals that work there make it through the layoff, but I am not encouraged. Any tech worker can read between the lines and see what is going on. After thousands of hours of free overtime and I am sure 100s of all-nighters, the tech staff has made a workable electric vehicle. Now the finance guys that seem to run the world have decided to fire all the engineering staff and go into “harvest mode”. They are blaming the economy and credit markets, but the real reason is that they mismanaged the project. But things are never the finance guy’s fault. Ever. Things like sales and advertising will be kept up, but all those people who lived and breathed the technology to get the car working are deemed expendable. My buddy John saw this at Seagate a decade ago. The “brilliant” finance whiz kids determined that if they fired the entire R&D staff the quarterly numbers would go thought the roof. Things were pretty rosy for a good six months. Unfortunately, the design cycle of a disk drive is about six months, even a decade ago. So after that six-month period of looking good, Seagate tanked. Since all the good tech people already had good jobs at decent companies, Seagate never really recovered, even to this day. Finance people are as narcissistic as the rest of humanity. They want to surround themselves with people just like them, not tech types or manufacturing people. So companies load up on finance weenies and run the company into the ground, just like GM, Ford, and Chrysler have done the last 50 years.

I guess the founder and moneyman behind Tesla has finally realized what I knew all along: It is easier to design a space ship than a car. Especially an electric car. Elon Musk, the founder who got rich on Papal should know, he is also funding SpaceX, a rocket ship company. I am not trying to take anything away from rocket scientists, but the car market just has higher expectations. Once you design a car to go down the road at 35 miles an hour, well that is about 5% of the design effort. Then you have to have it go 1 MPH and 100 MPH. Then you have to have it accelerate and brake well. Then you have to get the NVH (noise vibration and handling harshness) to be world-class. Now you have a car that maybe, just maybe 10,000 people might buy. Then you to design all the “comfort” features, air conditioning, radios, telematics, navigation, radar avoidance and oh, I forgot to mention you have to hit pollution and safety targets or you can’t sell it in volume. So once it works and once it is comfortable and once it is legal, that still is not enough. You have to make it pretty. So it better have great styling and magnificent paint job. Tasteful use of chrome and accents and everything else including how the radio antenna looks. But that still is not enough for the fickle consumer. Once you have it work and be comfortable and look pretty, you have to make it cool. It can be hep or groovy as was explained in the movie Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, but that is not enough, it has to be cool. This is why BMW can sell a low-quality compact car for 40 grand. And up. This is why Range Rover can sell the lowest quality vehicle in the world year after year. It’s cool. An engineer would say it’s a piece of crap, but as long as the emotional American public see it on Nature Channel specials, well then they think it is cool and will buy it.

And don’t forget that thanks to the Japanese we all have expectations of fantastic reliability and quality for our cars. It has taken 30 years, but the US auto business has finally managed to make at least a couple cars with the quality of a Japanese econobox sedan. Finally, and this is what is killing Tesla, the car has to be dirt cheap relative to the value and engineering it contains. Let’s hope that the people that buy Teslas are far enough removed from this little economic hiccup we are in so that they keep buying. Tesla has shipped about 25 cars and that is great news. I hope they make it, but I will be much less enthusiastic about their survival if they fire all my engineer pals in order to keep the cash-flow positive.


Related entries in: Analog | 


Reader Comments



at 10/16/2008 2:43:40 PM, bruce said:
the Tesla was slain long ago, it simply took this long for the blood to drain out. as a former techie now turned finance person, i may be damned from both sides, but it was obvious from the get-go that this was doomed to fail.



at 10/16/2008 2:50:50 PM, Scott said:
You should correct the incorrect headline; the new model isn't canceled, just postponed. Unless of course you're trying to be sensational at the expense of the facts.



at 10/16/2008 2:53:28 PM, Johnny said:
How will this action at Tesla affect the plant the company agreed to build in San Jose, CA?



at 10/16/2008 3:03:08 PM, RobS said:
$70 oil. 'Nuff said. The technology will be back.



at 10/16/2008 3:11:16 PM, Bob said:
Go to a flea market and pick up old copies of Mechanix Illustrated or Popular Mechanic from the 50's, 60's, and 70's. Stillborn dream cars that are the brainchild of some millionaire are as perennial as the grass. There will be another electric 'savior' car tomorrow. T-Boone Pickens, perhaps?



at 10/16/2008 3:26:03 PM, Bill said:
First, no battery in the world has the energy density that comes close to the amount of energy contained in gasoline. Second, after selling cars to the multi-billionaire Hollywood Green Types, no working-class stiff who needs a car for cheap, reliable transportation would buy one. And finally, just how green is one of these cars? Hasn't any of those engineers ever heard of the conservation of energy or the first law of thermodynamics? Looks like the finance guys know more than the engineers. Tesla sounds good when a idiot like Al Gore sells his vision to other idiots like Obama and Bono. But eventually reality sets in.



at 10/16/2008 4:25:59 PM, Bill said:
And I keep wondering how much more money will this country atr rich idiots who have nothing to lose since they are playing with someone else's money. America is fooling itslef into thinking the electric cars are the solution. What happens to the spent batteries when they reach the end of their useful life. Look at Europe and what they are doing with Hydrogen cell technology and wonder why America continues on the road to mediocrity



at 10/16/2008 6:33:38 PM, Bob G said:
Apparently, Bill never bothered to read the car magazine reviews of the Tesla. It's real, and it's real fast. Real expensive, yes, but guess what? When all the other car companies start selling electrics in 2010, the cost of all that new technology will start to go down.
Without something like the Tesla to aim for, none of them would even be trying. New tech is always expensive at first. Remember the first digital watches? I believe they were $10k. I was in elementary school.
As for 'engineer Bill' questioning how green the Tesla is, what exactly does the conservation of energy and the first law of thermodynamics have to do with it? I AM and engineer. Explain it to me.
One more thing, engineer Bill. Just because that paragon of hard science Dubya thinks hydrogen is such a good idea doesn't make it so. Ever hear of infrastructure, Bill? Know what that means? Where are you going to get a fill up for your fancy hydrogen car? I guess you never thought of that, because I doubt there are many of us without electricity in our homes these days.
I also don't want to be around the first time a hydrogen car gets into a major crash. I don't even drive close to CNG cars or busses. That's gonna be a real big eye opener for the non-technical public, because if the schrapnel from the storage tank doesn't do enough damage (with over 8000 psi inside) the fire surely will.



at 10/16/2008 7:51:24 PM, Alex said:
I 100% agree with Bill. That was a nice car, but completely out of reach and practicality for anyone except the reach or the green paranoid (or a combination of both). Toyota Prius packs by far more technology and practicality for 1/3 of that price.




at 10/17/2008 12:33:38 AM, Dave said:
I think it is a bit premature to start writing the obituary, but I agree it isn't good news.

However, can we stop perpetuating the myth that Elon Musk founded the company - he didn't, it was Martin Eberhard. Check with your pals.



at 10/17/2008 12:43:31 AM, LS said:
Sad about the Tesla. Electric cars, Hydrogen Cars, Hybrids, and so on are needed. There is no "best" solution today, but gas is not the future either. Change is never easy, but it is needed.

Anything that polutes the air or water or earth should be looked at as an opportunity to improve. Polution by its nature is waste. Engineeers abhor waste, right?

Please, use that brain and THINK about what is going on and where we need to be when a few billion more people will live as Americans do now!



at 10/17/2008 5:17:29 AM, Steve said:
Most of you missed the point of the artical... These engineers poured their life into creating this car, often without compensation, just pure passion and dedication. Then when it comes time to reap the rewards what does management reward then with? Pink slips!! Remember you reap what you sow. I am constantly amazed at the selfishness and greed being displayed by the people in management these days. It all about them and only them getting rich as fast as possable. You wonder why the economy and stock market is in the condition it is today? CEO's and upper managements needs to take a good look in the mirror and start showing some decent ethical and moral behavour.



at 10/17/2008 6:43:09 AM, myfriendhenry said:
The REAL moral of the story is: When offerred a management position, TAKE IT!
-ex techie



at 10/17/2008 6:46:25 AM, Pator said:
If you are going to use the name Tesla it better be on the cutting edge of technology something never seen before. Connecting 500 batteries in series and running an electric motor is no engineering feat worthy of Tesla's name.



at 10/17/2008 10:42:07 AM, Dave English said:
OK OK, but "the people that"???



at 10/21/2008 1:17:01 PM, John D said:
Bob G, why the fear of hydrogen or CNG in an accident? Your tank of "safe" gasoline is about as powerful as explosives get. Any high energy density fuel has a risk involved. Hydrogen and CNG offer no more risk then our present accepted risk for gasoline. It serves no purpose to scare uninformed people about risks no different then what is present today.



at 10/21/2008 1:25:26 PM, W17053 said:
Don't hold back, Paul, tell us how you really feel about the 'finance guys'.



at 10/21/2008 1:49:37 PM, DickMS said:
BobG, have you seen the way ammonia stores hydrogen? Maybe Europe puts H2 in high-pressure vessels because that's all that is commerically available (from the storage side) ATM. However, if you do the math, you'll see that ammonia can be electrolyzed to H2 at very low cost (as far as energy), and so it can store nearly as much energy per unit volume as gasoline. And it's no more difficult to handle in a commercial filling-station environment(and a LOT safer in a crash!). So, there is - near-term future - a reasonable way to get H2 for cars... and not have it be explosive!



at 10/21/2008 1:55:34 PM, Jim A said:
If it was up to the finance guys the Tesla plant will move to China. If it is up to the oil producer''''s it will go to the mid-east or more correctly half way there and then be sunk. The original Tesla went for about $100K the new was suppose to go for about $50K. When and if it is offered in central New York with some sort of heater for the winter I will buy it if I am still alive.



at 10/21/2008 1:57:07 PM, DickMS said:
And, to answer JohnD's question about explosives - pressurized H2 has a LOT of energy in the pressurization that would be released when the vessel was breached. That is slight-to-moderately destructive. However, the release of high pressure H2 GREATLY facilitates the mixing of H2 and air, thus producing a potential for a bomb that mimics the military's "overpressure" bombs (FAEs), like the daisey-cutter and bunker-buster.
Gasoline is a bit different. It would need, in order to be truly explosive, to somehow be well mixed with air, and that just doesn't happen in most accidents, Hollywood car-wrecks notwithstanding. Yes, the gasoline's energy could be released, but the damage would come from flame, rather than explosion, and thus be much lower and more contained levels of damage, despite the large amount of stored energy.



at 10/21/2008 2:28:08 PM, Sam said:
Bob, you seem to get what most people here don''t.

Nuclear is only "clean" energy source available in quantities we need at the present time. Electric car makes all the sense as next transportation technology to solve fosil fuel deficit and carbon emission problem. Most of really clean sources of energy like solar and wind have generators with electric output anyway.

Hydrogen is clean medium, but it also has low energy volumetric density as gas. As liquid, would require constant evaporation to maintain low temperature. In accident if spilled, it would rapidly evaporate creating explosive mixture.

Ethanol is bad idea as primary source as it would create destruction of natural habitats, create food price increases as it already does, and it would still not nearly enough cover our consumption on current level. It just creates jobs in agricultural sector and money for political campaigns.

This car is valiant effort in pushing transition to alternative energy sources and I am rooting for this company to succeed. Unfortunatelly, absence of reliable and cheap automotive electrical battery is still big hurdle. Until it reaches volume to become cheap enough for average consumer, or new cheaper battery technology is invented, it''s hard to see that any electric vehicle will show profit. I am sorry that people behind creation of this vehicle are loosing jobs and hope that this is not the end of it. I am sorry that at my sallary I can''t afford to be buyer of their 26th car. 1000nd maybe?

As for Tesla''s name for this vehicle, I think he would be happy to land his name for product like this. He was himself working on finding clean way of generating and transporting energy, and he also saw future of electrical power. Not to mention that motor like one used in Roadster is his invention. Maybe someone will figure out his vision of efficient wireless electrical energy transport and solve problem of powering electric vehicles.



at 10/21/2008 4:25:19 PM, anonymous.... said:
The problem these days is that most companies, specially public companies, are driven on a quarterly basis... and this not only the fault of finance guys... this is the fault of short sighted people (finance, lawyers or engineers) that for some unknown and strange reason got to manage a company!!!





at 10/21/2008 9:00:09 PM, Paul said:
The problem with efficient wireless electrical energy transport is that there is no way to profit from it, since you can't control who receives it.

Also, if the laid off workers had stock options, and the company does eventually succeed, their efforts are not in vain. But it still sucks to get laid off after working so hard.



at 10/21/2008 9:02:54 PM, Paul said:
RE: anonymous

You are an idiot. Stockholders and "rich" people demand quarterly management, not us. And the finance guys answer to the stockholders ALOT more directly than the engineers, since they create the fictitious balance sheets the stock is values with. You must be in finance?



at 10/21/2008 9:07:04 PM, mikey said:
Hate to see them go, but they will never get to their second design. See tinyurl.com/6ahsks (long form automotivedesignline.com/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=211201018&cid=NL_autodl for the cold wind down Tesla's neck. China and Warren Buffett are going to be a hard combo to beat...




at 10/22/2008 8:49:45 AM, Richard said:
Why, whenever Hydrogen is mentioned, does no-one ever think of discussing the energy required to make it? I seem to recall a huge thermal reformer is required, running at over 1000oc, and fired by (guess what) - burning natural gas.

I would really like to see the energy balance here, particularly after transportation and distribution is included.

No arguments, burning Hydrogen is great in terms of minimising the pollution at source, but unless it is produced by energy from nuclear it''s hard to see how it helps (sorry all you fuel cell people).



at 10/22/2008 11:27:58 AM, WestHighlander said:
Still don't have Batteries worth a Bleep in terms of energy density per vol or energy density per wt compared to gasoline!

Until we do -- all we can expect from the affordable electric car market is scooters and golf carts on steroids

OK for commuting short distances (comparable to what could be bicycled) in relatively nice weather (not too cold -- heating is a terrible way to use precious battery energy-- and cooling is not much better)

Then we come back to the matter of generation of the electricity to charge the batteries

So -- at this point in the development of our transportation infrastructure -- the best plan is to:
1) drill baby drill everywhere to make sure we've got the gasoline we will need for the next few decades
2) build nuclear power plants for clean and nearly unending supply of electricity and
3) fund R&D on batteries, fuel cells and
4) develop more comprehensive tools and models for traffic management -- there are probably a few billion gallons of gasoline to be retrieved from not being stuck in traffic jams -- and on top of that -- a big boost to our GDP and state of health

Westy



at 10/23/2008 9:40:55 AM, lifespurpose said:
I know this won''t fly, but no one has yet mentioned a global lifestyle change: slow down! Move less mass! Local manufacture and markets! The consumption of energy could be cut more than half if people''s mindset would change. (If the economy keeps going down, we may not have a choice.) Nor do I mean destroying all quality of life. Analyze: list all you do in pursuit of happiness (and in the end, isn't that what life is about?) that really _requires_ this massive consumption of energy.



at 11/2/2008 2:45:29 AM, Tom said:
Well, I think Paul is exactly right in his characterization of the finance and management types. They''re just evil people. They want to make money and they wil hurt anyone to do it. This seems to be a central feature of capitalism: a total inversion of compensation versus productivity. Those who do the most, get the least. And those who do the least, get the most. There is nobody on this planet who is worth a million dollar a year salary. Nobody. Especially not these people who are the CEOs of these companies. Have you looked at the resumés of some of these CEO? They really don''t know much or have many useful skills when you compare them to an engineer with anywhere from 4 to 8 years of university education who has taken classes in all sorts of extremely difficult subjects such as differential equations, complex variable analysis, singular Sturm-Liousville equations, quantum mechanics, numerical analysis, etc, etc, ad nauseum. By comparison, these CEOs are useless people. To put it briefly, they''re parasites. I have a lot more respect for the garbageman than a CEO. The garbageman does a difficult demanding, necessary job and probably puts in a full work week. When you see some of these CEOs are also on the board of other companies, you know they don''t put in a full work week like the rest of us.
I think every publicly held corporation should have caps on CEO salary and they should be forced to pay a dividend to every shareholder during a profitable year. That way they really will be accountable to the stockholders.



at 11/11/2008 3:19:22 PM, CUCUZZO said:
THEY DESIGNED THE WRONG CAR.PEOPLE WITH MONEY DON'T WANT SPEND 100K ON AN UNKNOWN ELCTRIC SPORTS CAR. THEY BUY THE ESTABLISHED BRANDS.
THE CAR HAD TO BE A SEDAN GEARED TO THE MIDDLE CLASS.



at 11/11/2008 3:23:42 PM, Tamza said:
I am an ex-techie who worked closely with the finance and management types. Just like we used to reverse engineer our experiments, they reverse 'engineer' their financial statements. The management usually maintained 'plausible deniability', so that if/when problems arose they would be able to have others take the fall. Tom (11/2/2008 2:45:29 AM) please dont use such a wide brush to paint ALL CEOs, there are some decent CEOs .. granted not that many. The CEOs are cheerleaders for their company, and most of all for themselves.



at 4/30/2009 7:54:00 PM, Online Payday Loans said:
I found lots of interesting information on www.edn.com. The post was professionally written and I feel like the author has extensive knowledge in the subject. www.edn.com keep it that way.

Post a comment



Display Name

Change Image
Before submitting this form, please type the characters displayed above.
Note the letters are NOT case sensitive.


ADVERTISEMENT

©1997-2009 Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Use of this Web site is subject to its Terms of Use | Privacy Policy

Please visit these other Reed Business sites