Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Nor would it be remotely strange for these wealthy people to have multiple cars. We're not wealthy and I have 3 cars. No one is going to bay an eye if someone showed up in a 250,000 Merc. Now, if they pulled up in a Chevy Bolt or a Volvo Recharge, you might have a point...
No one is telling Ellison what to drive. He shows up in Acura NSXs more often than anything else and no one is going to stop him. I'm not sure you understand who is and was on the Tesla board. No one is telling pretty much any of them what to drive. I think this relates to the other thread on this forum where you conflated the kind of vehicles that OP was talking about versus limited edition hypercars / ultra premium vehicles--they are completely different segments. This is also analogous to your mention of his family's large Pepsi bottling and distribution board--they are a distributor, a regional partner. They are not the kind of wealth that an actual Pepsi board member would have. They are orders of magnitude different.
Well, Ellison left and wasn’t replaced, so maybe Elon was annoyed with him not showing up to board meetings in his vehicle he’s on the board of. Look at this way, you don’t even use the product you’re on the board of…that speaks volumes in my head. The friend who gets paid from Pepsi and doesn’t work, it’s the same premise, just on a smaller scale. He can’t and won’t promote Coca Cola, same with Budweiser as they are also a Miller Coors distributor.
Well, Ellison left and wasn’t replaced, so maybe Elon was annoyed with him not showing up to board meetings in his vehicle he’s on the board of. Look at this way, you don’t even use the product you’re on the board of…that speaks volumes in my head. The friend who gets paid from Pepsi and doesn’t work, it’s the same premise, just on a smaller scale. He can’t and won’t promote Coca Cola, same with Budweiser as they are also a Miller Coors distributor.
Dude, look at the other board members. They are not firing them for driving another vehicle. They especially aren't going to do it since Tesla has a fairly limited number of models to choose from throughout its very short history. This might make a little bit more sense with an octopus like Stellantis or VAG that has a huge selection of current and past models in extremely diverse number of segments and eras. It makes no sense with Tesla.
Is your friend actually on the board of PepsiCo--and I mean actually PepsiCo, not the board of some regional distributor. Does he get a walloping if he's caught drinking a nice champagne even if PepsiCo doesn't do champagne? I'm not sure if you understand the difference.
And again, even if true, it has pretty much no bearing on the argument at hand. People can have a wide variety of preferences in vehicles especially when they have a massive amount of wealth There are certainly those with great wealth that daily an EV, whether Tesla or not. There are automotive geeks out there who daily EVs. There is a lot of preference and personal history that changes that. All that can be reasonably deduced from what he said, if you believed him which you certainly seem to, is that there are people who prefer Porsches. That's not that unbelievable given that Tesla in its history has a grand total of five models of consumer vehicles to choose from and none of them are in the hypercar territory while Porsche has released over its lifetime dozens of models and it does include hypercars.
Last edited by OyCrumbler; 10-24-2023 at 02:03 PM..
Oy, we've been around this circle a million times.
"They" look for any and every piece of information, real or fake, fickle and flimsy, to continue painting the angry narrative. It is what it is, and it isn't changing any time soon. In fact I think it's getting worse.
Throw a completely made up anti-EV meme up on Facebook and watch the comments roll in. It's the same attitude we deal with here.
I propose writing that EV's caused peanut butter manufacturers to switch to ground up bugs dyed light brown.
Mark my words, it will be shared and confirmed by more people than you'd imagine could be that stupid, simply because it is what they want to hear.
Oy, we've been around this circle a million times.
"They" look for any and every piece of information, real or fake, fickle and flimsy, to continue painting the angry narrative. It is what it is, and it isn't changing any time soon. In fact I think it's getting worse.
Throw a completely made up anti-EV meme up on Facebook and watch the comments roll in. It's the same attitude we deal with here.
I propose writing that EV's caused peanut butter manufacturers to switch to ground up bugs dyed light brown.
Mark my words, it will be shared and confirmed by more people than you'd imagine could be that stupid, simply because it is what they want to hear.
Yea, you're right. I should stop wasting so much time on this as it goes nowhere.
Location: East of Seattle since 1992, 615' Elevation, Zone 8b - originally from SF Bay Area
44,550 posts, read 81,117,303 times
Reputation: 57750
Quote:
Originally Posted by OyCrumbler
Dude, look at the other board members. They are not firing them for driving another vehicle. They especially aren't going to do it since Tesla has a fairly limited number of models to choose from throughout its history. This might make a little bit more sense with an octopus like Stellantis or VAG that has a huge selection of current and past models in extremely diverse number of segments and eras. It makes no sense with Tesla.
Is your friend actually on the board of PepsiCo--and I mean actually PepsiCo, not the board of some regional distributor. Does he get a walloping if he's caught drinking a nice champagne even if PepsiCo doesn't do champagne? I'm not sure if you understand the difference.
And again, even if true, it has pretty much no bearing on the argument at hand. People can have a wide variety of preferences in vehicles especially when they have a massive amount of wealth There are certainly those with great wealth that daily an EV, whether Tesla or not. There are automotive geeks out there who daily EVs. There is a lot of preference and personal history that changes that. All that can be reasonably deduced from what he said, if you believed him which you certainly seem to, is that there are people who prefer Porsches. That's not that unbelievable given that Tesla in its history has a grand total of five models of consumer vehicles to choose from and none of them are in the hypercar territory while Porsche has released over its lifetime dozens of models and it does include hypercars.
Bill Gates has a 23 car garage and a nice collection, including 2 Porsche, a Mercedes, a BMW, a Tesla, and is rumored to have a Corvette. Back when I had a business in Bellevue near where his daughter took dance lessons, I saw him there a few times in a Prius. While I'm not a fan of EVs I have no objection to people having them if they want to. I might even get one as a 4th car if I had a commute 5 days a week, just for the commute. Where I work currently a 5 day commute (2 now) would cost me about $300/month for gas, so a $40k EV would pay for itself in 11 years, but gas prices are likely to keep going up so perhaps sooner. I just object to the idea of the government mandating what kind of cars people can buy.
I just object to the idea of the government mandating what kind of cars people can buy.
You can't buy a car with no catalytic converter already. You can't buy a car with no airbags already, or setbelts. There are a lot of things the government mandates that have made cars cleaner, safer AND better than ever that you can't avoid when buying a new car (or TV. You can't get an analog TV anymore because the government mandated digital signals. It ended up being better and cheaper overall)
This comes down to gasoline vs electrons as a means of propelling that car. And one of them is at the mercy of international speculators on a global market. A power source that we use military might to ensure we and our allies continue to get.
And it also comes down to people acting like 5 year olds being told to eat their broccolli...
Bill Gates has a 23 car garage and a nice collection, including 2 Porsche, a Mercedes, a BMW, a Tesla, and is rumored to have a Corvette. Back when I had a business in Bellevue near where his daughter took dance lessons, I saw him there a few times in a Prius. While I'm not a fan of EVs I have no objection to people having them if they want to. I might even get one as a 4th car if I had a commute 5 days a week, just for the commute. Where I work currently a 5 day commute (2 now) would cost me about $300/month for gas, so a $40k EV would pay for itself in 11 years, but gas prices are likely to keep going up so perhaps sooner. I just object to the idea of the government mandating what kind of cars people can buy.
I object to bans without much rationale behind them as well. I think an ICE ban is generally unnecessary, so I'm not for that either, but then again, there's not really much of one going around anyways.
What I also object to is garbage posts that are either completely misinformed or seem to point to very little thought put behind them and said with an incredibly unwarranted amount of confidence like so:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hemlock140
But . . .the push for EVs ignores a huge aftermarket industry and their employees supporting the ICE motoring drivers and hobbyists.
Automotive Aftermarket industry size exceeded USD $560 billion in 2021 with expected growth over 6.4% from 2022 to 2028. Very few of the 41,331 brick and mortar Auto parts stores in the United States have parts and accessories for EVs. They depend on the ICE vehicles for their revenue. Same for the many auto parts websites, and the over 239,100 vehicle repair and maintenance facilities and their employees in the U.S. that won't touch an EV due to lack of skills, equipment and parts to work on them.
This forum is full of posts like this repeating lines that are just nonsense. It's less grating when it's some poster with a long history on the general forum but almost never in the Automotive forum chiming in and who don't know better. It's a lot less understandable when it's the same handful of posters who frequent this forum regurgitating out this junk.
It's almost time for another round of that idiotic study where it takes five minutes every day to plug in an EV to charge and turn that into how EVs actually cost more to operate or, oh wow!, EV chargers are powered by diesel generators as if that was common, or another one about the oh so scary fire risks as if this were somehow way out of line with internal combustion engine vehicle fires. Or some idiot rents an EV for a road trip and has no idea what they're doing and never bothered to figure it out and thus has a terrible time that they get to make a clickbait article. Or if there's a dip in sales for one model or one automaker means that, oh yea, EV market is completely saturated, no one's getting these anymore. Just over, and over, and over again. Just the same limited set of nonsense over and over again.
Location: East of Seattle since 1992, 615' Elevation, Zone 8b - originally from SF Bay Area
44,550 posts, read 81,117,303 times
Reputation: 57750
Quote:
Originally Posted by cvetters63
You can't buy a car with no catalytic converter already. You can't buy a car with no airbags already, or setbelts. There are a lot of things the government mandates that have made cars cleaner, safer AND better than ever that you can't avoid when buying a new car (or TV. You can't get an analog TV anymore because the government mandated digital signals. It ended up being better and cheaper overall)
This comes down to gasoline vs electrons as a means of propelling that car. And one of them is at the mercy of international speculators on a global market. A power source that we use military might to ensure we and our allies continue to get.
And it also comes down to people acting like 5 year olds being told to eat their broccolli...
Sure you can, I bought one recently myself, a 1974 Nova, my neighbor bought a 1966 Mustang and another bought a 1934 pickup, none have a cat nor any other smog equipment. You just can't buy a new one without a cat, seatbelts or airbags. The government did not ban analog TVs, the manufacturers stopped making them when the market for them disappeared. People can still get digital TV with an adapter, but everyone wanted a flat screen when they became available. That's just the free market working as it should be.
Sure you can, I bought one recently myself, a 1974 Nova, my neighbor bought a 1966 Mustang and another bought a 1934 pickup, none have a cat nor any other smog equipment. You just can't buy a new one without a cat, seatbelts or airbags. The government did not ban analog TVs, the manufacturers stopped making them when the market for them disappeared. People can still get digital TV with an adapter, but everyone wanted a flat screen when they became available. That's just the free market working as it should be.
What is your logic here? You're fine with these because they only apply to new vehicles rather than retroactively apply to old vehicles. The article the OP posted about changing CAFE emission credits *also* apply to future new vehicles and do *NOT* apply retroactively. You say this is just the free market working as it should be, so what is the issue here?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
