Want to rent my cyber for 6 months?

[GlockandRoll]

Yeah, the one in the truck photo is a Fender signature replica with zeebs and a printed head, which isn't at all like the original electronically. Kitty uses a electronically similar lipstick pickup. Very good sound for what was once a Squire ^-^

-Crissa

The one in the truck photo is an ernie ball music man signature model that was painted for the Runaround video.

Sponsored

 

[SwampNut]

 

[Crissa]

Cybertruck will likely be reselling for $80k - $150k Even if the new price is in the ballpark of the launch day pricing. Any lease/ rental prices are likely going to be set based on market price, not purchase price which is unavailable to all but the tiniest number of buyers.

A short-term lease for a high demand truck I would expect would be more like $1,000/ month, likely more.

Every $5,000 you lower the price of the vehicle you double the amount of people that can afford it.
Reverse is True
Every $5,000 you increase the price of the vehicle you cut buyers by 50% of the people that can afford a EvTruck.

$44,900 cuts 500,000 pre orders
$49,900 cuts 750,000 pre orders
$54,900 cuts 875,000 pre orders
$59,900 cuts 937,500 pre orders
$64,900 cuts 958,750 pre orders
$69,900 cuts 984,375 pre orders

At $70,000 CT there is only 15,000 maybe 16,000 buyers that can afford that EvTruck.
Back log orders gone; Production stagnant.
Truth
Ford now @ $80,000 is worried that there are no or limited EvTruck buyers
Rivian now @ $80,000 had to renege on that price and drop to their original money losing price
Chevy now @ $89,000 is worried and betting on the name Chevy EvTruck

Tesla knows $80-$90-$100,000 it will be a short run production. All the buyers will dry up in the first few months.

Tesla Model S less than 20,000 sold

Model S is expensive, and if the CT is also expensive it will cut into that limited 20,000 number.

...Although I think the market for expensive trucks is easily double that for sedans. Because more businesses buy more trucks (expensive ones) than sedans. That's still alot fewer trucks.

-Crissa

 

[charliemagpie]

A rule of thumb is not a rule of law.

If the CT went to $45,000.. if it is now 4 years since ..... maybe 50 people will drop out and maybe 100,000 will opt in.

If 40,000 to 50,000 is a price point

50,000 to 60,000 is a price point

70,000 to 80,000 is a price point.

5000 movement within those price points will lose trickles not 500,000.

imo

 

[Crissa]

A rule of thumb is not a rule of law.

If the CT went to $45,000.. if it is now 4 years since ..... maybe 50 people will drop out and maybe 100,000 will opt in.

If 40,000 to 50,000 is a price point

50,000 to 60,000 is a price point

70,000 to 80,000 is a price point.

5000 movement within those price points will lose trickles not 500,000.

imo

Ahh, but that much movement outside of the average increase in income will. And it's exponential, not incremental. So when you drop half, you mostly do it in the last third of the step

-Crissa

 

[charliemagpie]

Ahh, but that much movement outside of the average increase in income will. And it's exponential, not incremental. So when you drop half, you mostly do it in the last third of the step

-Crissa

If people want something enough, they upsize... and it's still the same market. !!!

 

[rr6013]

If people want something enough, they upsize... and it's still the same market. !!!

That’s accurate for those who upsell.

 

[rr6013]

Cybertruck will likely be reselling for $80k - $150k Even if the new price is in the ballpark of the launch day pricing. Any lease/ rental prices are likely going to be set based on market price, not purchase price which is unavailable to all but the tiniest number of buyers.

A short-term lease for a high demand truck I would expect would be more like $1,000/ month, likely more.

Every $5,000 you lower the price of the vehicle you double the amount of people that can afford it.
Reverse is True
Every $5,000 you increase the price of the vehicle you cut buyers by 50% of the people that can afford a EvTruck.

$44,900 cuts 500,000 pre orders
$49,900 cuts 750,000 pre orders
$54,900 cuts 875,000 pre orders
$59,900 cuts 937,500 pre orders
$64,900 cuts 958,750 pre orders
$69,900 cuts 984,375 pre orders

At $70,000 CT there is only 15,000 maybe 16,000 buyers that can afford that EvTruck.
Back log orders gone; Production stagnant.
Truth
Ford now @ $80,000 is worried that there are no or limited EvTruck buyers
Rivian now @ $80,000 had to renege on that price and drop to their original money losing price
Chevy now @ $89,000 is worried and betting on the name Chevy EvTruck

Tesla knows $80-$90-$100,000 it will be a short production run. All the 15,000 buyers will dry up in the first few months.

Tesla Model S less than 20,000 sold

Model S is expensive, and if the CT is also expensive it will cut into that limited 20,000 number.

Elon and Tesla initial release might differ on the lower threshold but appear to recognize there is “money-on-the-table” implied in that breakdown. Quad is transparently obvious a scheme to vacuum those loose Big Spenders at the outset.

BUT atypical it would be of EM and Tesla to subsequently walk back the MSRP to recapture lost opportunity. Elon is a “hell no” kind of thinker who wants the homerun not grounders. So getting to first base is not what Giga is all about.

Tesla own the biggest bat in the EV game. What they do with it is what no others can – scheme that!

 

[cvalue13]

Every $5,000 you lower the price of the vehicle you double the amount of people that can afford it.
Reverse is True
Every $5,000 you increase the price of the vehicle you cut buyers by 50% of the people that can afford a EvTruck.

$44,900 cuts 500,000 pre orders
$49,900 cuts 750,000 pre orders
$54,900 cuts 875,000 pre orders
$59,900 cuts 937,500 pre orders
$64,900 cuts 958,750 pre orders
$69,900 cuts 984,375 pre orders

Interesting. curious where this rule of thumb is from?

New-vehicle average transaction prices (ATPs) were $47,148 in May 2022. The average price paid for a new non-luxury vehicle that month was $43,338. The average luxury buyer paid $65,379 for a new vehicle. Trucks had an ATP of $56,216. Tesla had an ATP of $65,000.

The average price for a new electric vehicle was over $64,000, more aligned with luxury prices than mainstream prices.

Considering then where that ATP willingness floats to given:

• the limited “pool” of buyers for a brand new EV pickup truck,

• reducing that pool further by the pool of buyers willing to drive anything that looks like the CT,

• and then reducing that pool further to those who reside only in North America (for the foreseeable future)

• and then reducing that pool further to those willing to buy the more expensive trim packages (surely the lion’s share of the initial few years of CT production)…

…

If Tesla can make a low cost $39,900 CT and have a 3-shift production and keep its 1.2 Million pre orders the CT will be profitable for Tesla.
If Tesla can't ???

something just doesn’t add up, in terms of what Tesla must be “banking on”

 

[rr6013]

Interesting. curious where this rule of thumb is from?

New-vehicle average transaction prices (ATPs) were $47,148 in May 2022. The average price paid for a new non-luxury vehicle that month was $43,338. The average luxury buyer paid $65,379 for a new vehicle. Trucks had an ATP of $56,216. Tesla had an ATP of $65,000.

The average price for a new electric vehicle was over $64,000, more aligned with luxury prices than mainstream prices.

Considering then where that ATP willingness floats to given:

• the limited “pool” of buyers for a brand new EV pickup truck,

• reducing that pool further by the pool of buyers willing to drive anything that looks like the CT,

• and then reducing that pool further to those who reside only in North America (for the foreseeable future)

• and then reducing that pool further to those willing to buy the more expensive trim packages (surely the lion’s share of the initial few years of CT production)…

…



something just doesn’t add up, in terms of what Tesla must be “banking on”

Conceptually, DFW scheme’s a useful academic thought experiment. SteveJobs liked to say that people don’t know what they want until you show them. 650k+ RN holders to the Cybertruck provides a lower limit to the size of that pool of buyers who liked what was shown. It quantified how many people are willing to buy a Tesla brand new EV pickup truck.

Reducing that pool further by the pool of buyers willing to drive anything that looks like the CT, is a non-iterative(NOP) function. Non-CT buyers self exclude. That function was effectively parsed with the $100 deposit requirement.

Reducing that pool further to those who reside only in North America (for the foreseeable future). OK fair enough but I expect @JBee and others will buy stateside anyway. That’s a leaky limit. Foreign sales are fractional(1/20th?)until they aren’t. Wolverine(mini-Me CT) was thought to be a follow-on variant for export.

And then reducing that pool further to those willing to buy the more expensive trim packages (surely the lion’s share of the initial few years of CT production)… Using OEM-speak as QuadCT is a trim package, the Venn diagram shrinks to a subset of the total pool of CT buyers, of course. Who knew that Venn diagram existed in the first place?

Big Surprise as owners stepped forward and wanted a Quad variant. More surprising many wanted the Quad for reasons. Good reason beyond McCybertruck! My RN doesn’t count among them, but there they are with fistfuls of dollars ready to take delivery. How few? Tesla doesn’t even need to take deposits, lottery or draw for numbers.

Every RN can buy a Quad; correct not all will. EM and Tesla haven’t given everyone a reason to go Quad. AND its true. Not all want or need a Quad CT. Many won’t want to pay for what they don’t need. Although, nor has the case for QuadCT been revealed yet. by Tesla.

I’m glad there exists a Quad CT. It’s a variant that advances the platform, broadens the technology and furthers the opportunities for which a Cybertruck can apply. Tri CT is more pickup than any sane individual should need and probably the tug of the CT class(see: Semi). But a halo variant Quad definitely qualifies and justifiably with its force vectoring capability that it affords. In OEM-trim its the “top-of-the-line”! Its supposed to be rarified aire, highest embodiment of the class Cybertruck and not for everyone.

 

[SwampNut]

In my small and casual review of the market, women are the biggest impediment to the cyber truck. Both in my own household, and all around my neighbors and friends, their wives say absolutely no to the cyber truck because it’s too ugly. Doesn’t matter that it’s the wisest choice if you need a truck.

 

[cvalue13]

650k+ RN holders to the Cybertruck provides a lower limit to the size of that pool of buyers who liked what was shown. It quantified how many people are willing to buy a Tesla brand new EV pickup truck.

does it? I appear to in the minority, but I don’t share the same view that this refundable $100 deposits for an imaginary truck are a great proxy for actual sales of the resulting vehicle.

Reducing that pool further by the pool of buyers willing to drive anything that looks like the CT, is a non-iterative(NOP) function. Non-CT buyers self exclude. That function was effectively parsed with the $100 deposit requirement.

again, you’re here treating reservation holders as the relevant set of buyers. On one hand, for reasons set above I don’t think those numbers establish any reliable floor; on the other hand at at the same time, those reservation numbers sure don’t establish a sufficient ceiling that justifies producing the entire line of vehicles.

OK fair enough but I expect @JBee and others will buy stateside anyway. That’s a leaky limit. Foreign sales are fractional(1/20th?)until they aren’t.

elephant in room: of the large number of reservation holders you appear to rely on so heavily for understanding the market, what percentage do you think are in North America? 95? 50?

Using OEM-speak as QuadCT is a trim package, the Venn diagram shrinks to a subset of the total pool of CT buyers, of course. Who knew that Venn diagram existed in the first place?

I’m really not following here.

In OEM-trim its the “top-of-the-line”! Its supposed to be rarified aire, highest embodiment of the class Cybertruck and not for everyone.

except this line of thinking appears to assume that the halo trim won’t be the lion’s share of available units - which was my assumption.

I guess there are people with strong emotional reactions to the idea that Tesla will front load premium trims (those people feeling Tesla would never do them that way), but I think there are a lot of good reasons and precedent to at least call it a coin flip as to whether that ultimately occurs.

Anywho

 

[Crissa]

In my small and casual review of the market, women are the biggest impediment to the cyber truck. Both in my own household, and all around my neighbors and friends, their wives say absolutely no to the cyber truck because it’s too ugly. Doesn’t matter that it’s the wisest choice if you need a truck.

Sticking out invites confrontation, which women are constantly taught is bad for them.

does it? I appear to in the minority, but I don’t share the same view that this refundable $100 deposits for an imaginary truck are a great proxy for actual sales of the resulting vehicle.

A minority that doesn't include Elon. What would be a better proxy? The entire reason to take pre-pre-orders is to poll demand.

except this line of thinking appears to assume that the halo trim won’t be the lion’s share of available units - which was my assumption.

The halo trim hasn't been the lion's share of any prior model orders or reservations...? Only of deliveries while they're constrained.

-Crissa

 

[rr6013]

does it? I appear to in the minority, but I don’t share the same view that this refundable $100 deposits for an imaginary truck are a great proxy for actual sales of the resulting vehicle.

Agree to disagree then. Quantizing pre-order interest, $65MM provides more than imaginary interest in buying.

The maxim has been that $100 bill will stop people from looking elsewhere. But its refundable. Your point is all 650k+ RN could walk away. Understood. That doesn’t translate to imaginary demand.

However, were I FORD, I would be asking the same question. Ford didn’t get 650k pre-orders for the F-150 Lightning. SO that’s fair to cal B.S.

 

[rr6013]

except this line of thinking appears to assume that the halo trim won’t be the lion’s share of available units - which was my assumption.

You might be onto something…you and @JBee

No one has a clue, tell or otherwise what Cybertruck is actually going to platform anymore. SO Until… plebes have to go with what was shown as standard Tesla drive units, plaid CF wrapped motors mentioned. Whatever Quad reveals could halo.

The Big Q then would Tesla platform new motor technology across its entire line to include all Cybertruck varients + car models to max economy of scale for all its vehicles? Doubtful, or we would have heard about a new motor. We have not.

There is no argument for Tesla maintaining dual redundant drive motors. SO it could be EOL downstream if Quad motor technology is scalable, backward compatible and the Quad is just a proof of technology exercise. That’s plausible IMO.

Sponsored