toyota mvp parts
Artikel Terkait toyota mvp parts
Proton X50’s CKD program to buy over RM 1.8b worth of local parts annually
Syed Faisal Albar revealed that the X50 project will purchase about RM 1.8 billion worth of automotive parts
Parts shortage, export losses, impact of MCO 2.0’s stop-work order to be felt until 2022
When you supply parts that goes into cars that carry the label of major international brands, you have
All-New 2021 BMW 4 Series (G22): Here's the M Performance parts catalogue
There will be a catalogue of M Performance Parts for the all-new 4 Series.
Spot the fake! Here's how to recognize fake from genuine car parts
It’s so easy to shop for consumable car parts these days.
Philippines positioning itself as manufacturing base for Korean EV parts makers
Korean manufacturers, with the intention of attracting investments in the field of electric vehicle (EV) parts
Fix for Proton’s after-sales parts supply shortage underway, IT problem the cause
been waiting for months to get parts for their accident-damaged Proton cars.
Scissor-doors, 200 PS, and made by an auto parts shop! The ASL Garaiya
you’re a big fan of JDMs, you probably heard of Autobacs, that legendary one-stop Japanese auto parts
80% discount for Hyundai and Ford spare parts at SpareXHub's clearance sale
SpareXHub, a stockist of geniune spare parts, is having a special clearance sale with up to 80 percent
Toyota GR Sport models to be launched in Malaysia soon?
First GR Garage to operate outside of Japan Genuine aftermarket tuning parts for all Toyota models GR
2020 Toyota Hilux gains Gazoo Racing parts, cost as much as a new Myvi!
Yes, the team behind the Toyota GR Yaris raided their parts bin and dumped some good stuff on a 2020
Japan's 2021 Toyota Camry gets RM 35k worth of GR parts - best daily next to GR Yaris?
The 2021 Toyota Camry has just received a facelift in Japan, encompassing a minor visual update as well
Ford Malaysia offers 20% off on parts, 10% off on labour - until Feb 2021
February 2021.SDAC customers can take advantage of savings up to 20 % on vehicle maintenance on selected parts
Top Rank: Proton, Toyota, Perodua top Malaysia's most-stolen cars list
Toyota Vellfire - 19 units stolen in Q1 2020The Vellfire has grown to be a favourite among those looking
These Toyota Corolla KE70 and AE90 are still cared for by a Toyota dealer
Toyota authorized dealer Laser Motor’s outlet in Seksyen 19 Petaling Jaya has a quite a good reputation
NISMO Heritage Parts adds new R32, R33, R34 Skyline GT-R parts to lineup
Nissan Motorsports International (NISMO) announced that they will be remanufacturing genuine replacement parts
Up to 90% cheaper! Sime Darby Motors offers clearance sale for BMW, Ford and Hyundai parts
Those on the hunt for genuine Ford and Hyundai car spare parts can rejoice as Sime Darby Motors and e-Commerce
Toyota C-HR dropped from Malaysia’s line-up, Toyota Corolla Cross to fill the gap?
The quirky-but-stylish Toyota C-HR has been quietly dropped from UMW Toyota Motor’s line-up, leaving
Toyota Malaysia introduces unique Toyota Service Savers package
Regular service is part and parcel of car ownership, UMW Toyota (UMWT) aims to make servicing Toyota
2021 Subaru BRZ not hot enough for you? How about some STI performance parts?
performance arm, Subaru Technica International (STI for you and me) teasing a catalogue of performance parts
Proton Iriz Facelift Has 367 New Parts, But Is It Any Good?
However, beyond the frivolous parts, Proton engineers have invested a substantial amount to improve the
Review Post toyota mvp parts
Toyota Genuine Market Value Priced Radiators and Condensers could be the right choice for your repair needs. Watch a second new video featuring four reasons MVP parts can help complete your job. #promoted by #ToyotaWholesaleParts https://t.co/WC2uM5dhgQ https://t.co/GYdT4KQE9h
@Toyota Plastic content %? # of parts, more/less than previous model? mvp minimum viable product why the need for all the different colors? burn the planet.
Review Q&A toyota mvp parts
When is taking the minimum marketable feature path, the wrong choice?
I appreciate your contribution to this question along with your time and interest. Based on my prior experience as a developer, designer, DBA and customer, I have some feedback to provide and some additional questions on some of your comments: "Wrong set of features", - Completely agree, the feature set must be balanced, cohesive and understandable in relation to your customer acheiving their goal. "Wrong understanding of "minimum".", - Personally, I think that AGILE SCRUM contributes to problems here based on focus. On my team, we practice AGILE, so I am aware of the benefits in iterative improvement that it provides. Typically anything that has size and value is judged by size alone, which means that these artificial time-boxes, kill feature value immediately, based on this problem, typically an MMF approach is considered to get the feature in the release. Often this results in an under-delivered feature that provides very little value to customers. In addition, sometimes you really don't have the customers you really want? Serving this type of customer with low expectations only ensures that you will get more like customers of this type. I think we all saw this happen when Detroit collapsed based on targeting the mass market with MMF Automobiles and then rode the downhill slope to mediocrity. While Toyota rode the swell upward from early adopter to mass with Prius and was hugely successful. I think MMF also contributes to the "Me too!" complex that sales presents when they lose a deal and blame the loss on a feature gap vs. selling the features that they have well. This contributes to your point, "Lack of differentiation", which I think is actually a different issue from "Ignoring superior competitive offerings" "Lack of differentiation (ignoring superior offerrings)", - Here is where I think AGILE is most detrimental and MVP/MMF fail Features and Products. AGILE in development is great! I love it! Agile in Product Management is not, too often, I see a whole plate of MMF features presented that are, "Me too", but not quite what is needed, because they are inferior based on their foundation being weak and the thought behind them being limited. This strategy eclipses the big feature that you really should have addressed instead. In addition, typically the guidance is to go MMF from the start of ideation. I think this is truly the most soul killing part of Product Management. If you have no idea of what you are doing, this is the way to go! Typically in this case you will ignore superior offerings for the opinions of your inferior customer type, because they are vocal. You will then commit time and resources without listening to the internal experts that you hired. In addition, if you are designing features for software, every decision can impact the overall data model. From what I hear, Google is smart in regards to this, because they require Product Groups to be technical which means the first question is about scale. So if you plan to go MMF, start with a vision of what a full-featured product would look like, carve it down and then identify what is truly important and avoid the pitfalls identified by the responder. Thanks...
What is a lean startup?
What Is A Lean Startup...Is It Enough To Succeed? All startups could benefit most from combining both Lean Startup methodologies and Design Thinking. However, according to Professor Bill Burnett (Stanford University), there are still significant philosophical and practical differences between these approaches. The common elements between Lean Startup vs. Design Thinking are that: Both assume extreme uncertainty. Both assume users don’t know what they want, and can’t tell you what to make. Both assume that a rapid cycle of building and learning is the only process that yields actionable data. Although the Lean Startup and Design Thinking Processes have a lot in common, the Lean Startup would benefit from incorporating more Design Thinking during the front end of the startup process. This can be achieved by ‘outing’ vision and technology assumptions, and instead applying Design Thinking principle of ‘need-finding’. Design Thinking, on the other hand, could benefit from employing the Lean Startup practices of forming management blueprints and defining actionable metrics. Two Paradigms The Lean Startup paradigm assumes; most startups are technologically driven and founded by visionaries who are looking for product/market fit. The Lean Startup is, therefore, focused on finding product/market fit as rapidly as possible (before running out of money). Unlike Design Thinking, the Lean Startup begins with a founder vision and a product-in-hand. Design Thinking, on the other hand, is not reliant on the vision of the technologists/founders, and there is more early-stage empathy/need-finding. Design Thinkers find the need (market fit) first, and only then select appropriate implementation technologies. Design Thinking does not offer the entrepreneur a management blueprint for high uncertainty (startup) environments. Design Thinking does not (at the beginning of the process) have actionable measurements of processes. Furthermore, Design Thinking does not address down-stream issues (customer segmentation, technology platform choice, business architecture, channel strategy, etc.). Lean Startup The Lean Startup is, ,a human institution designed to create a new product/service under extreme uncertainty,. ,The primary goal of the Lean Startup is to, ,eliminate waste and increase value-producing practices,. ,This approach is derived from, ,lean-manufacturing practices (Toyota), and S. Blank’s customer development model., ,There are, ,five lean principles which the Lean Startup adheres to: Entrepreneurs are everywhere Entrepreneurship is management Validated learning Build-Measure-Learn Innovation accounting Furthermore, there are a number of practices that define the Lean Startup: - MVP: Minimal Viable Product, A version of a new product that allows a team to collect the maximum amount of validated learning about customers, with the least effort. - Build-Measure-Learn, Turning ideas into products (MVP), measuring how customers respond, and learning whether to preserve or pivot. - Actionable Metrics vs. Vanity Metrics, High levels of uncertainty make traditional accounting useless. Thus, Lean starts with the MVP (baseline), moves from that baseline towards the ideal, and then makes a decision (pivot or preserve). The riskiest assumptions are tested first. - Pivot, A strategic hypothesis that is testable. The changes made are designed to test a new fundamental hypothesis about the product, business model, and engine of growth. - Other:, Continuous deployment (SW) and A/B (split) testing. ,Design Thinking Process Design Thinking is built upon a five-stage process: Empathize Define Ideate Prototype Test During this Design Thinking process, the designer's mindset is driven by; curiosity, mindfulness of the overall process, re-framing of ideas, radical collaboration, and a bias-towards-action. ‘Needfinding’ is also a critical part of the Design Thinking process ‘getting beyond what people say and do, to what they think and feel’. However, some needs are apparent and easy to see, but others are latent and deep (like an iceberg): Explicit needs (above the waterline) lead to incremental improvements. Implicit needs come from the meaning embedded in stories. The Design Thinking philosophy also adheres to the belief that 'understanding implicit needs lead to unique insights and big new ideas'. This philosophy is based on the understanding that people (customers) often can’t tell you what is important, but they can signal what’s important with their behavior. Therefore, Design Thinking represents: A dynamic problem-solving approach (ideal for poorly-bounded problems, and achieved through prototyping, iteration, and rapid learning). A problem finding approach (involving re-framing, ethnography, and prototyping). A value-creation perspective (a human-centered, co-creation process focused on real end-user needs). The Lean Startup is a management blueprint that influences; ways of managing, measurements, metrics for progress, places an emphasis on testing & learning and is actionable. Design Thinking, on the other hand, seeks to create a ‘culture of creativity’ and innovation… regularly, places more emphasis on empathy & collaboration, and is focused on a bias-to-action (plus prototype/test cycle). Professor Burnett (Stanford University) feels that all startups should consider combining Lean Startup methodologies and Design Thinking, to their benefit. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The author has no affiliation with Stanford University of Prof. Burnett.
What are the best tools, steps and approaches to putting Eric Ries' Lean Startup methodologies into practice?
If you read the books that Eric Ries Read... you will understand a lot from where all his ideas came from. So the tools that I am telling you maynot be very much popular in Lean Startup Circle but they are the original roots from where Lean Startup movement has emerged and where its real power resides. 5 WHYs, - Can't stress the importance of this tool in words. Kaizen/Continuous Improvement, - The Heart and soul of Lean concept. You can't be called Lean if you don't understand this. I mean really understand it. Improvement Loops(Part of Kaizen), : Eric ries has used his Build Measure Learn Loop which is a clever adaptation of PDCA Loop. I prefer the good old PDCA loop but can be confusing for newcomers. Take your pick. ,Jidoka, : There is no English counterpart of this term and it is difficult to explain to new people because it is deep.... really deep. In short it is Automation with a human touch. It is one of the pillars of the Toyota Production System which Ries has mentioned so many times in his book. And it is even more important in tech. ,Andon, is a part of it. Heijunka, : In short, Hare and Tortoise Race but extremely difficult to master especially when implemented with other techniques because it is paradoxical to other concepts in Lean. Also it requires lot of patience. There are many more but this is my MVP. :D. Will improve it if people want to know more. :D
How should one proceed to start tech company?
A startup is a human institution designed to create a new product or a service under conditions of extreme uncertainty. Success under such scenarios requires rapid experimentation. Learning There is a lot of learning involved in the process, and sometimes, when things go south, people resort to saying “I learned a lot”. What’s more important is to figure out validated learning. The goal is to cut down to the absolute minimum effort required to learn what customers want and eliminate everything else. Eric Ries wrote 3-D avatars as IM add-ons for popular IMs in 2004. During the user testing phase, he realized that not only do users not understand what an add-on is, they also don’t mind installing a new IM software. A lot of heavy IM integration turned out to be a waste of the effort. After this, Eric and his team launched several experiments regularly to test what works and what doesn’t. Another counter-intuitive thing which IMVU experimented with is charging early. Many startups delay charging their customers. Not having any revenue is better than having low revenue since the former invites imagination of the overnight success once they start charging. The downside is that it can lead to the creation of a product no one is willing to pay for. Conclusion: start with a low-quality prototype, charge customers from day one, and use low-volume revenue targets for accountability. Experiment Nick Swinmurn, had a hypothesis that people will buy shoes online. Rather than buying inventory upfront, he took photos of shoes at local shoe stores, and if the users bought it, he would buy and ship it to them. This absolutely minimum product tested customer demand as well as many other business issues like payments, returns, and customer interaction. Amazon acquired Zappos acquired for $1.2 Billion. An experiment starts with a hypothesis. A value hypothesis tests whether the product/service will deliver the value to its users. A growth hypothesis tests whether new customers will be able to discover the service. To test value hypothesis, find some customers to experiment. Don’t go for an average customer but find an early adopter, whose needs are most accurately served by the product. Now, build a concierge minimum viable product. Such early adopters are more forgiving of the quality of the product, and their feedback is useful to know whether the product fulfilled their needs or not. If users complain about a missing feature and they’re on the roadmap, that’s a good thing, since it implies that the team understands their customer. If there is a feature which is on the roadmap but the user does not complain about it being missing, then that’s an indication to remove that feature. The results will guide you to validate the hypothesis. Steer The Build-measure-learn feedback loop is at the core of the Lean Startup model. After building the MVP, the goal is to rapidly learn and iterate upon the product based on the user’s feedback. Leap All startups make some assumptions (leap of faith) about their viability. In the case of iPod, there were two assumptions, users would put earphones in a public place (“analogous to Walkman”), and they would pay for the music (“antilogous to Napster”). Only the second one was a leap of faith. Verifying these assumptions is paramount. Toyota does it via Genchi Gembutsu (“go and see for yourself”). Toyota’s minivan Sienna’s chief engineer drove through North America. He realized that kids are most appreciative of their environment and launched the new model with a special focus on interior comfort for the long trips. This lead to a significant ,success, for Toyota. Scott Cook, the founder of Intuit, believed that someday people would use a computer to pay bills and track expenses. He verified that the market for such a product by calling random people over the phone. One pitfall to avoid here is analysis paralysis. One can keep repeatedly talking to customers and whiteboarding over and over again. But many errors in such a strategy would go unnoticed since they depend on subtle interactions between the user and the product. Test Groupon was meant to a “collective activism platform”. That assumption failed. Andrew Mason ,experimented, with a WordPress blog and a mailing list to sell discount coupons. They had no fancy forms on the site. The idea took off and slowly every aspect of it was automated. It is important to get early results with a buggy product then to perfect about based on assumptions which might not hold true in the future. It is counter-intuitive for the entrepreneurs who want to build a high-quality product. Drew Houston had a hard time convincing investors about DropBox. VCs thought that the market is crowded, no one made money, and the problem was not an important one. Drew believed that all that was because all the current products were of low-quality. Rather than spending years doing thorough integrations, he made an excellent video demonstrating the seamless behavior. Wizard of Oz, is a useful testing process for such situations. Rather than building an automated system, fake it with a human. It is faster for learning what users want. Sometimes, user’s quality metrics are very different. Users care about how much they enjoy the product, not how much time was spent building it. IMVU had no time to build a smooth movement of avatars from one place to another. So, they decided to and were ashamed of, cheat by making avatar re-appear at the destination instantly. Users rated this teleportation among top three most liked features. Therefore, it is of paramount importance, to remove any feature, process, or effort which does not contribute to the learning you seek. Some entrepreneurs fear the competition that MVP will bring in, usually, from large companies. Most of the times, the Product Managers at the big companies are overwhelmed by good ideas. If not, they can still copy the product at a later stage. And the fear of being out-executed remains. Measure After building an MVP and putting it out for the early adopters, test the riskiest assumptions first. Now define a baseline metric, a hypothesis to improve the metric, and a set of experiments targeted towards the same. Once you have the results, decide whether to pivot or persevere. One of the biggest dangers is to get stuck with vanity metrics like total registered users. They paint a rosy picture but does not tell you whether the product improvements are making it better for the user or not. AAA (actionable-accessible-auditable) metric would measure the impact of a particular feature. Grockit, followed the Kanban model, where there are four buckets – backlog -> in progress -> built -> validated. Each containing at most three features. After validation, either they built the feature or discarded it. Pivot or Persevere A startup’s runway is the number of pivots it can make. ,Votizen, started as a social network for verified voters to discuss civic actions. That did not take off. Then it pivoted to @2gov, which allows users to recruit more verified voters for their petitions. This product has higher usage, but still very few were willing to pay for it. They pivoted further to businesses as customers, who despite signing the letter of intent, decide to eventually not buy the product. The final pivot was to use Google Adwords for acquiring users who want to pay to acquire more users. That worked out. Startup Visa Act was solely a result of that social lobbying. Wealthfront pivoted from a virtual stock trading/gaming platform to an online service offering money management by professional money managers (ashishb’s note: and after the book was written, further to index-based investing). Most entrepreneurs regret delaying the pivot. Vanity metrics, not having a clear success hypothesis, and being afraid of the failure are the usual causes of the delaying the pivot. Types of pivots Zoom-in Pivot- where a current feature becomes the new product. Votizen moved from voter social network to a voter contact product. Zoom-out Pivot – where the current product becomes a feature of the new product. Customer segment Pivot – where the target customers change. Customer needs Pivot – where the customer base remains the same, but the product changes to suit them more. ,Potbelly Sandwich, shop started as an antique store in 1977. It decided to sell sandwiches to bolster traffic. It eventually pivoted to become a sandwich shop. Platform Pivot – where the product changes from a single use product to a platform for the other products. Business Architecture Pivot – Geoffrey Moore observed that most companies follow either a high margin, low volume model or a low margin, high volume product. Former is usually for B2B, and the latter is usually for B2C. A business architecture pivot is jumping from one to the other or vice-versa. Value Capture Pivot – where the way business makes money changes. The engine of Growth Pivot – where how business reaches new customers changes. Channel Pivot – where the distribution channel for the product changes. Technology Pivot – where the underlying technology to do the task changes. When pivoting to a strategy followed by a successful company, it is important to copy the essential and not just the superficial features. Accelerate Batch It is counterintuitive, but smaller batches are much better for the lean startups. They appear inefficient but allow faster turnaround for the product leading to a more rapid iterative cycle. It helps in earlier detection of a problem as well as quick feedback from the customers. Toyota used the small-batch approach to compete with its much more capitalized American counterparts whose batch sizes were relatively bigger. Grow New customers come from the actions of the past customers. They inform others, end up showing the product to others or end up purchasing the product again. Sabeer Bhatia grew Hotmail by adding a signature “Get your free e-mail at Hotmail” to every outgoing email. If you are asking whether your startup has achieved a product/market fit, then you are not there yet. When product/market fit happens, it leaves no room for doubt. Adapt As a startup grows, it has to adapt to the changing customer base. Early adopters are more forgiving of the quality; later ones are not. ,Five whys, help one to diagnose the problems and build the right set of things which should go into an employee training manual. Innovate Big companies can innovate but for that to happen, they should secure resources for internal teams, provide an independent development authority, and the internal team should get a stake in the outcome. Toyota calls manager in charge of running the development of a new vehicle, shusa (Chief Engineer). To create the platform for experimentation, the parent organization must be protected, if the existing managers feel threatened, they will have an incentive to work against the new project. Also, if such a unit is kept hidden, it will attract more political battle since existing executives will be wondering what else could be hiding. Therefore, any team should a complete ownership to run an experiment and see the end-to-end results. Every company has to deal with four types of works – launching a new product, scaling it for the broad adoption, combating its commoditization by incremental improvements, and maintenance of the product in the longer run as a part of the company’s product line. All the steps are important, but the last step of becoming the status quo is a hard one to swallow as an entrepreneur. Source-: THE LEAN STARTUP BY ERIC RIES
Product Development: When should you listen to the advice of early adopters?
The problem with listening to customers is that it can distract you from your vision. How many great products can you think of that were designed and delivered by a team that worked based on a checklist of customer requests? The Model T, the 747, the iPhone... all vision. Ultimately, to make a great product you need a vision that helps you stand apart from, and beyond, the broader market. If you get hung up listening to customer requests you can be distracted from that vision. Distraction from vision leads to chasing perceived needs that may not even be actual needs. The problem with being driven by a vision is that it can blind you to your customers actual needs and behaviors. The Concorde, the PCjr, Windows Phone 7... all great products, made with a clear vision, which it just seems nobody actually wants. If you get stuck in your vision then you roll out the Segway while Toyota's working on the Prius and really changing the world in a way that people will pay for. Focusing too much on vision can leave you stuck in your ivory tower. How do you balance these two? This is why identifying the Minimum Viable Product is so important. The MVP represents what you believe -- what your vision tells you -- you need to enter the market with. Don't be distracted when building the MVP; yes, you should articulate your assumptions and test them, but the vision should be set before you begin building, and you should never stray. A car for the masses; an airplane to carry the masses; a computer you can do anything and everything you need with, in your pocket; there's an MVP for all of them. The first Model T, the first 747, the first iPhone... all of them were that MVP. And then you iterate. The 747's on its 8th major version, the iPhone on its 5th, and all have incorporated vast amounts of feedback to become almost unrecognizable. That feedback has been channeled back to enhance and mature the vision in internally-consistent ways. That's the challenge of product growth, versus product creation: maintaining the vision through all the changes. (You could argue that Boeing lost the vision with the 747-8). You can also see what happens if you don't iterate: the Model T is surpassed by competitors who offer... colors. Not just custom paint; cheap, reliable paint that lasts. That was truly part of the vision, and Henry Ford missed it.
What should a lean startup functional spec / product requirements doc look like?
I was researching best practices for a pre-MVP (Minimal Viable Product) stage of a startup, basically answring my question "how do I order my thoughts in to something easily transformable for implementation", and realised that only two things matter: 1) a single short document that states a very clean vision, current status and the desired status of the sprint towards the MVP. Treat it as a Toyota Kata approach, ,https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_Kata I agree, the longer the specification documentation, the more Waterfall-ish the implementation, the less chance to fail fast and recover by next release in agile way, the more delay in Time-To-Market and Feedback. So just keep it really short. 2) a list of user stories and an easy way to track them against effort, per-component of the implementation. The (1) is important for onboarding and interviewing talent and influencers, and also as an "Am I Smoking Crack?.." focus-checking reference, meaning the original clear idea isn't deviated into something different on the way to MVP. To make sure, like, if your idea is about tracking hot dog stalls in Chcago, not to end up with global butchery listing and IRC chat. Sounds familiar?.. The (2) could be, as stated by other posters, a sticky note board, a startup service or just about any format (Excel). I've researched a lot of user stories trackers and settled on ,www.pivotaltracker.com, from ,Pivotal.io, , if you didn't know Pivotal it's a company that is part of EMC Federation, and they use this tracker themselves for pretty much any Data Science and CloudFoundry projects. So, we decided to use it for our Sprint to MVP and it just works well. If you're in to re-thinking innovation management, the book I recommend is "Lean Enterprise" - ,http://www.amazon.com/Lean-Enterprise-Performance-Organizations-Innovate/dp/1449368425
What needs to happen before Elon Musk and Tesla Motors can supersede the Big 3?
First of all, the term "Big 3" isn't all that useful. The auto industry is global, and there are really 6 companies that we talk about when we use the word "Big": VW - 10-11 million sales a year Toyota - 9-10 million GM - 8-10 million, depending on how you count some subsidiary sales in China Nissan/Renault - 8 million Hyundai/Kia - 7-8 million Ford - 5-6 million ... Tesla (,not ranked,): 25-40k sales this year This is how Tesla stacks up against "the big 6." To put Tesla's current ranking in perspective, ,Ford will typically sell more F-150 pickup trucks during Labor Day weekend than Tesla will sell in all of 2013! So, if we take the Big 6 out of our sites and just focus on superseding a "small" automaker like Honda - who only sells 3 million (or so) cars per year worldwide - Tesla will need to grow exponentially. It's hard to imagine this sort of growth happening any time soon, regardless of Tesla's product offerings. Frankly, ,asking this question is like asking your neighbor if their 8 year old is going to be an all-NBA MVP or just an All-Star,...the question itself is sort of silly. In any case, setting aside the tremendous amount of growth Tesla would need to enjoy and focusing merely on the tasks needed to finish to become a top 10 automaker (in terms of volume): Tesla needs a much bigger product line-up,. They've got one model right now - they need about a dozen different models. You can't sell 3 million people a year 3 different cars...you need sedans, coupes, vans, SUVs, etc. Tesla needs to hit mass-market price points,. If you look at the world's best-selling cars (Toyota Corolla, Ford Focus, VW Jetta, etc.) they're $20k. Considering that the Model S costs $60-90k...there is work to be done here. Tesla needs a system to distribute cars, at least in the USA,. This "buy a car over the Internet" business is fine when you're only trying to sell 20k luxury sedans a year, but it's never going to move 1-2 million cars. Tesla needs a dealership network (something Musk has said himself) or a massive change in franchise laws in all 50 states in order to grow. Tesla needs a massive leap forward in battery technology OR a new technology to address range and charging time concerns,. US consumers want 200-300 miles in range between charges, and/or they want quick re-charging. These "wants" are feasible with existing technology, but the cost of meeting these requirements far exceeds a mass-market vehicle price. In order to make something consumers will buy in droves, Tesla needs a leap in technology. Granted, consumer expectations about range and recharging can change given enough time, but time isn't something Tesla has a lot of because... Tesla needs to stay ahead of the competition, which is awfully hard to do when the competition is so good,. When people think of what's wrong with the auto industry, they think of bloated and inefficient automakers like the "old" GM. This is strange, as the world's best automakers are demonstrably awesome. Toyota, VW, Hyundai/Kia, and Nissan-Renault set the standard for the world, producing incredibly complex yet affordable products that are safe and reliable. All automakers have electrics cars available (or planned), and a couple of them (Toyota and GM) are specifically targeting Tesla buyers with new products debuting in 2014. When you consider that: Cadillac is building the ELR, a luxurious and sporty coupe that will offer comparable performance to the Tesla Model S at a (supposedly) better price. Toyota claims to have game-changing fuel cell technology right around the corner (should hit the market next year) Nissan has the Leaf, a mass-market electric car (something Tesla needs) available at your local dealer right now. Automakers I haven't mentioned (Ford, VW, Honda, Hyundai/Kia) aren't exactly sitting still right now. Tesla's competition is as serious as a heart attack. Summing Up: ,If we're merely talking about ,survival,, Tesla has a tremendous task in front of them. From a purely statistical perspective, there's little to no reason to believe the company will ever become truly BIG without being part of a merger or acquisition. I'm sure Elon Musk knows this as well as anyone, so I can only presume his next trick will be to leverage Tesla in such a way as to acquire a much larger company (much like when Porsche ,almost, bought control of the much larger VW). However, failing some incredible financial maneuver that puts Elon Musk at the helm of an existing automaker that has merged with or been acquired by Tesla, the likelihood of Tesla becoming a major automaker anytime soon is low. If I were to guess, I'd say that Tesla is most likely to be acquired by a much larger automaker looking to flesh-out their existing product line.
Beranda