Featured Joint venture for BEV and hydrogen fuel cell vehicles

Wow, just wow... Toyota didn't have a single thing to do with how Tesla started. Only car maker you could attribute to the start of Tesla is Lotus, which supplied the first frames for the roadster, which was later scrapped because the weight of the batteries nullified the crash safety architecture of the frame. And maybe Toyota's $50 million investment played a role after Tesla was up and running but Toyota bailed out on that deal as quick as they could, which ultimately will be considered a leading cause of their ruin.


And Tesla is no threat? Tesla produces a tiny number of cars compared to Toyota and is worth double Toyota in valuation, which means Tesla has near unlimited borrowing power and is building brand new state of the art mega-size factories on three different continents simultaneously and Toyota's valuation is so low they can't even finance their transition to electric car production anywhere but in China and the head of Toyota is resorting to delusional rantings about cooking and recipes when Tesla comes up in the conversation?

My god man... Get some facts and some perspective. Granted Toyota was stronger than any other car maker in the last economic downturn in 2008, but when the next one hits, they're gonna be ruined because they failed to secure funding for the future of car making, which is one of the main reasons Wall Street places their value so low compared to Tesla.

 

Until the next great crash.

 

If Tesla isn't a threat, why did Toyoda give a speech on comparing Tesla to the food industry. If they aren't threat, they aren't on your mind.

 

Actually that's not entirely true. Toyota sold the NUMMI GM/Toyota factory in Fremont, California to Tesla after it had closed in 2010. Toyota was also an early investor in Tesla (I'll bet they are sorry now they sold their stock!)

In return, Tesla supplied batteries and a drive train to Toyota for their electric RAV4. I remember reading press statements at the time. Elon Musk was saying that they were expecting that Toyota was going to increase its very-low production of the RAV4 EV. At the same time Toyota put out a press release that said that since they had met the requirement for California's zero emission rules, that they weren't going to build any more. In other words, they were admitting that this was just a compliance car.

I'll bet Elon upset about this. He was really trying to help Toyota build a nice electric car. (The RAV4 EV was well liked and they are still driving around today. I saw one on the freeway with a 'Powered by Tesla' licence plate frame).

 

Toyota invested $50 million in Tesla and ditched their antiquated Fremont factory to, in part, get out of their investment way earlier than any successful investor would have chosen to do so.

Had Toyota doubled down on their Tesla investment and then tripled down on a partnership to put Tesla drivetrains in Toyota's Tesla would of been more successful sooner and Toyota would have a viable future for maintaining market dominance, as well as a higher valuation than Tesla currently has.

Instead they're just over 1/2 the valuation of Tesla and Tesla hasn't even ramped up production yet. Tesla is still making hardly any cars compared to Toyota, but in a decade the opposite will be true. And when we look back on this years from now and analysts explain why Toyota went broke and crashed beyond being recoverable, this is the mistake they'll point to.

 

Lol... We all know the reasons why Toyota thrived while all the other automakers barely survived in 2008... Clearly you don't, especially when it comes to what happens to antiquated car makers who can no longer compete with technological advancements.

 

Wow, Tesla will build 10milion cars a year, and Toyota much less than that?
How many Teslas will be build for Asian, South American and African countries by then, do you have a clue already?

 

maybe the Toyota market cap would have been a lot higher had they not sold off their stock so soon, but rather waited a couple years - or longer. Live & learn, hopefully.
I was tens of millions they made on Tesla stock could have sponsored a lot of those free hydrogen cars that they have to give away once they'd deppreciate 100%, in only 3 years.

.

 

He was be interviewed by the press and this question on Tesla came up to him, he did not just bring it up out of the blue.

 

But what makes Toyota antiquated? Because they do have the ability to build high quality BEV’s if they desire to. Hybrid is doing well for them and the also see a future in Hydrogen. Nothing wrong with that.

 

so, what you don't think ..... the media brought up EV's / Tesla to him (again) for nothing? or because they KNOW the largest segment (at least over & during the 1st year) of car buyers abandoning ship, are Prius / Toyota owners?
of course not

no, actually they don't have the ability. Toyota got caught behind the 8-ball ... no long term high quality traction battery contract sources? then no - juice e juice. Too late - all vendors are loaded to the gills with long term contracts -making them for VW, Kia/hyundai, GM, heck - even chrysler/fiat saw the writing on the wall. It's all Toyota can do to now - to scramble up enough traction pack inventory to build ev's that china is forcing them to build .... and likely w/ Chinese batteries. Kinda sad. I wish Toyota would have used the same forward thinking they did - back when they went all out to get the Prius out on the road.
.

 

Both Buck & i agree



Most don't know it, but the Gen II Rav4ev was not Toyota powered, but ratherTesla powered --- lots of get up & go, & only a 40kWh traction pack. A few enterprising owners hacked them to be able to charge at up to 10kW's.
That era was a GREAT style ... almost a mini highlander look - & much easier to see out the back then the newest.
.

 

Toyota will have partners to go in on together for battery manufacturing when the time is needed. You act like Toyota is broke.

 

Tesla motors with the funding at the time from Toyota and Mercedes

 

Having all the money in the world won't help you, if no one has supply to sell.

Or if it simply more than you wish to spend. Toyota could have had batteries to make more Rav4 Primes, but the price was unacceptable if they didn't want to sell cars at a loss.

Isn't that how business transactions are suppose to work. You give someone money, and they provide you with a good or service.

And don't forget, the Rav4 EV, and whatever the Mercedes was, saved those companies from having to buy ZEV credits.

 

as a side note - unlike an EV that can actually get all its electric fuel from 100% green PV (especially at home, where it can even be free) Fool cell cars typically only get 1/3 at best from renewable energy (and only because Cali mandates it). Yet hydrogen cars still get the full $3,000 ZEV credit that a BEV gets. Hydrogen refueling can cost owners between $10 - $15 per quantity equal to a gallon of gas .... unless the manufacturer pays for it - just to keep them on the road, so they can get the ZEV credits, & thus not get penalized for their land barges. nasty system
.

 

1 gal = 3.79 kg wt. Mirai holds less than 5 kg of Hydrogen.

 

A Mirai holds 5kg of Hydrogen and can go 300 miles.

A hybrid car can get about 50mpg, so it would take 6 gallons of gas to go that same 300 miles.
Lets say that gas costs $3/gallon (I'm in California, and we pay even more than that). That's $18.

Hydrogen costs about $16/kg, so 5kg costs $90. That's 5 times the price of gasoline for driving the same distance.

So that matches to hill's "$10 - $15 per quantity equal to a gallon of gas"

Who the heck is going to buy a car that costs 5 times as much to fill as a gas car? Sure, it's great when California taxpayers are paying subsidies so Mirai drivers can fill up for free (you can thank me later orenji), but surely that cannot scale.

 

The cost of 1KG of Hydrogen is $13.00 not $16.00. So 5KG if you actually buy 5KG, it’s usually lesser amount to get a full tank. You would spend $65.00 the same I spend to fill up my Infiniti G37 and get 250 to 280 miles per tank. So no real difference to me for the cost. But your forgetting I am getting $15,000 worth of free fuel. So the actual costs of ownership is lower.