Do you think Tesla should partner up with another automobile company why or why not?

Tesla has partnered with other Automobile companies. Tesla developed the Second Gen Toyota Rav4 EV. Toyota RAV4 EV - Wikipedia. Tesla also built Daimler Second Gen ED2 Smart electric drive - Wikipedia, Mercedes-Benz A-Class - Wikipedia and the Mercedes-Benz B-Class - Wikipedia . Daimler and Toyota each, at the time, bought a 10% stake in Tesla for about 50 million, I believe. It is regarded as a critical turning point in Tesla saving them from going under.

Why did these relationships go sour? Well in the case of Toyota. Toyota needed there California ZEV (Zero emission vehicle) credits. Each EV earned 3 credits. After 2500 Rav4 EV they had enough credits. Toyota then went hard into FCEV (hydrogen fuel Cell EV) which they see as the real future of green automotive. Each FCEV earns 9 credits.

As for Daimler's reasoning for ending there Tesla partner ship. I can only speculate but I think it is likely something along these lines. Daimler like Toyota also needed compliance cars. Daimler initially wanted to produce 1000 ED2 vehicles but demand was so high they ended up producing 2000. The drivetrain and batteries where Tesla's design and as everyone in the auto industry is quick to point out, Tesla designs are not unique and any OEM can do the same or better if they so choose.

Which leads to a problem. If you continue with a hit design from single part supplier you become subject to or dependent on that supplier. Tesla whom had at that point already made it clear they wanted to be a car company not a parts supplier, would have been happy to produce thousands more cars and self fund there own car development. Daimler is not in the business of selling Tesla cars. So at the end of the day Tesla walked away with credibility to get new investors and Daimler walked away with 4500 compliance cars and $750 million in profit from the sale of there 10% stake.

As an interesting side note. The Chevy Bolt/Opal(EU) and the Hyundai Kona EV are 85%- 87% designed by LG Chem. Given the high ratings vs the number of Chevy Bolts sold, its clear Chevy is still treating it as a compliance car. LG Chem does not want to be a car maker but does want to supply 100,000 cars systems a year. Hyundai might be a better partner able to push LG Chem towards its goal.


Your question starts with "Do you think..." so you are looking for my opinion, so this is the my personal opinion, and mine only. Furthermore, your question asked specifically about an automotive company, not just another company, like a software or battery or energy producer, etc.

So, my opinion is "why in the world would they even WANT to partner up with an automotive company?" I, along with many other people, think of Tesla as a technology company, not an automotive one. Their product comes in the form of an automobile. Let me ask you this, do you think Apple is a PHONE company? Look at the acquisition that Apple has done (because it is Apple, and well, they just don't partner, they buy companies), it is not another phone competitor, it is complementary technology to make their product, which happen to take the form of a phone, better.

Same as Tesla, what technology advantage would an automobile company offer to Tesla? Manufacturing? The limiting factor is the battery assembly. Chevy, Toyota, Kia, Jaguar, etc. have no battery assembly expertise. Software? Almost an afterthought for the traditional car manufacturers.

Now that being said, Tesla did offer partnership in one area, and was rebuffed: the Supercharger network. Tesla offered to share access to the network and its proprietary connector if the car manufacturer helped with building out the network. Nobody took them up on that offer. For what it is worth, the network is the main reason that I bought a Tesla. The ability to drive from one state to another, and be able to stop on a normal 30–60 minute break and charge to 100% does not exist for any other EV.


I don't think Tesla should partner with a traditional auto company.

Main reason is traditional auto companies just don't get it yet. It's not who they are.

For example, traditional auto companies will never think to create a tent city to increase production. If they partner with someone, it has to be someone who thinks outside the box and not someone who is stuck in a legacy box.

Remember, Tesla is re-engineering not how cars are made, but how factories are made. They're applying Agile software principles to manufacturing in order to make the process more nimble.

Given the above, who fits that criteria?


Tesla has successfully developed launched and scaled Model S and Model X without any automobile partner.

Recently they have developed and launched Model 3 which is ramping very fast and now 5th best selling sedan in the US. They are about to break even and as they continue to ramp, cash will flow in and help finance future endeavour .

There is simply no reason to partner with auto companies that are way behind in innovation. There actually is no reason to make any changes at all, except maybe for the CEO to be a little more careful when tweeting.


What kind of people are people watchers?

Short answer: I have no clue.Slightly longer answer: It's a broad question and any factor could cause someone to want to watch people. I'd consider myself a people watcher. I'll tell you a little about me and maybe that will mean something...I study Anthropology and I've done well in studying Psychology, Sociology, and Anatomy/Physiology.

Why does the sun emit the full light spectrum?

The fusion reactions in the sun happen in the center ten percent or so and run at millions of degrees, putting out gamma rays, mostly.  The outer 90 percent absorbs and scatters and re emits the energy, and after a few

How to capture night sky photos

I am not a digital man but would suggest what I know from my old style technology.Using film speed of about 200 iso camera speed on about 1 second, as a relatively long exposure would be necessary. Aperture about f8 and play