Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-11-2015, 12:12 AM
 
Location: LBC
4,156 posts, read 5,524,718 times
Reputation: 3593

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by shooting4life View Post
Probably trying to get California to waive certain environmental restrictions, like they did for the basketball stadium in Sacramento and to drive up the bid from other states as well.
Or continue to play the refs re: reg burden to put political pressure on CA to cough up an additional billion dollars?

If CA had done that, do you honestly think they go to NV?

Last edited by nslander; 09-11-2015 at 12:23 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-11-2015, 12:16 AM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
12,287 posts, read 9,766,313 times
Reputation: 6509
Quote:
Originally Posted by nslander View Post
Or have CA pony up an additional billion dollars and surpass NV? Just maybe?
So you think Musk just decided to lie to us when he said over regulation caused him to not want to open the plant in California?

Even then, the tax break given to tesla seems to be worth it when they are estimated to spend 100 billion in the area over 20 years.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2015, 12:27 AM
 
Location: LBC
4,156 posts, read 5,524,718 times
Reputation: 3593
Quote:
Originally Posted by shooting4life View Post
So you think Musk just decided to lie to us when he said over regulation caused him to not want to open the plant in California?

Even then, the tax break given to tesla seems to be worth it when they are estimated to spend 100 billion in the area over 20 years.
Why would you expect him NOT to play that card when he's pitting one state's public money against another's? Particularly when the other state is known to welcome nuclear waste.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2015, 12:30 AM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
12,287 posts, read 9,766,313 times
Reputation: 6509
Quote:
Originally Posted by nslander View Post
Why would you expect him NOT to play that card when he's pitting one state's public money against another's? Particularly when the other state is known to welcome nuclear waste.
Just wondering, do you expect Musk to open the plant in California that required years of red tape against the best interests of his company when his stated goals were to get up and running asap so that batteries are available for a new product line to get lower priced electric cars onto the market?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2015, 12:34 AM
 
Location: LBC
4,156 posts, read 5,524,718 times
Reputation: 3593
Quote:
Originally Posted by shooting4life View Post
Just wondering, do you expect Musk to open the plant in California that required years of red tape against the best interests of his company when his stated goals were to get up and running asap so that batteries are available for a new product line to get lower priced electric cars onto the market?
Do you think he was lying when he said "CA was back in the game" and $750 million had nothing to do with the ultimate decision?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2015, 01:31 AM
 
Location: So California
8,704 posts, read 11,041,227 times
Reputation: 4794
Quote:
Originally Posted by nslander View Post
Why would you expect him NOT to play that card when he's pitting one state's public money against another's? Particularly when the other state is known to welcome nuclear waste.

Problem is California just doesnt play the game very well anymore. Not sure if its ego or what, but in the future picture an ad campaign similar to what New York is doing now......please come back!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2015, 08:25 AM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
12,287 posts, read 9,766,313 times
Reputation: 6509
Quote:
Originally Posted by nslander View Post
Do you think he was lying when he said "CA was back in the game" and $750 million had nothing to do with the ultimate decision?
Everyone is in the game when you are trying to drive up the price. This is negotiating 101, that is why you have the Musk saying one thing (the truth) and then the communications director trying to walk it back so they can use ca as leverage.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2015, 10:48 AM
 
Location: Living rent free in your head
42,710 posts, read 25,867,327 times
Reputation: 33793
Quote:
Originally Posted by shooting4life View Post
Everyone is in the game when you are trying to drive up the price. This is negotiating 101, that is why you have the Musk saying one thing (the truth) and then the communications director trying to walk it back so they can use ca as leverage.
If it was regulation that kept Tesla out of California, not the extra 750 million that NV offered, then explain why Tesla choose Arizona, Texas or New Mexico? It will be difficult for you because the only real answer is that they sold out to the highest bidder- Nevada. California had announced to Tesla that they would change the regulatory process for them, so I think that is a non-issue.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2015, 11:22 AM
 
Location: Living rent free in your head
42,710 posts, read 25,867,327 times
Reputation: 33793
Quote:
Originally Posted by shooting4life View Post
Even then, the tax break given to tesla seems to be worth it when they are estimated to spend 100 billion in the area over 20 years.
But you really don't know do you? And there are already signs that this deal might not be quite what Tesla promised:

Tesla announces lower wage than promised in NV deal

Tesla contracts with Mexico for Lithium "I can't say that Tesla intentionally misled us, but if we're the lithium capital of the world why are they going to Mexico?"

Panasonic sending hundreds of it's employees to Tesla

Only 1/2 the jobs at Tesla have to be offered to Nevada employees: "Every quarter, an audit of the jobs will be performed, Hill said, and if at least half the hires aren’t from Nevada, all the subsidies come off the table and Tesla would need to repay any benefits it received, with interest."

The promised economic benefits aren't based on fact: "To assume that the economic impact is $100 billion assumes that everybody who was ever going to work at that battery plant was unemployed," said Enrico Moretti, an economics professor at UC Berkeley"

I lived in Nevada, I watched this deal unfold, just as I watched Nevada hand out millions to Apple for a lights out data center that will never require more than a few employees. IMO this idea of paying companies to open shop in your state is as stupid as building stadiums and paying incentives to sports teams for agreeing to bring their team to your area, that is called the "field of schemes" for a good reason...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2015, 11:47 AM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
12,287 posts, read 9,766,313 times
Reputation: 6509
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2sleepy View Post
If it was regulation that kept Tesla out of California, not the extra 750 million that NV offered, then explain why Tesla choose Arizona, Texas or New Mexico? It will be difficult for you because the only real answer is that they sold out to the highest bidder- Nevada. California had announced to Tesla that they would change the regulatory process for them, so I think that is a non-issue.
We don't know the deals other states offered but we do know California regulations would have made it harder for tesla to open the plant, costing them money as stated by Musk.

These things are not either or, many factors go into where they decided to move. One of the factors that crossed California off the list was the severe regulation. Then the other states made various offers and NV was then chosen.

BTW, introducing a law to remove regulation is not actually changing the regulation unless the bill actually passed and signed by the governor. It was a feel good stand to make the electorate believe they were doing "something" to keep the fleeing jobs in ca.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top