They're right, of course, but I'm not sure this is a great marketing move, because it dignifies the metric Tesla has chosen as their strongest. The fact that Tesla can even mount an argument that they're in a horse race with Audi, let alone outselling them, is a gigantic coup for a car company that's just a few years old.
The fact that Audi had to write this says that they feel threatened. And while Tesla does only sell one model at a time, they are able to produce cheaper models and sell more of them. As for the question posed by USA Today:<p><i>There are questions, too, about whether it can keep its order books full, or whether the number of people who crave electric cars is limited.</i><p>With the new financing offer, a Tesla is within reach for many people, but I think we'll see a tipping point once they can get below $50k.
For kicks, re-read the article as something written 4+ years ago substituting "Apple" for "Tesla" and any other cellphone manufacturer for "Audi."<p><i>“Tesla has to show it can be consistently profitable with a single product that is priced so high that most buyers can’t afford it,”</i><p>Indeed.
Now here's an interesting question, or maybe some interrelated questions. First, will Tesla be able to manufacture profitably in the sub-$50k range (competing with the Audi/BMW/MB low end), with a car that is range-comparable to the S? In other words, can they build a genuinely useful electric drivetrain for about the same price as an internal combustion drivetrain?<p>Next, as they start spinning up long-term reliability figures (real people driving real Teslas in real conditions for the 100k+ miles we expect today), will costs remain comparable?<p>Third, how long will it take Audi/BMW/Lexus/etc to develop fully electric cars of their own that are performance-comparable and compatible with whatever public charging systems start to develop?
The CNN headline is definitely misleading:<p>“Tesla sales beating Mercedes, BMW and Audi.”<p>No one would guess they are talking about "per model sales" vs "per manufacturer sales", since they are naming manufacturers. It's just linkbait. Tesla really is the new Apple!
This is the old guard problem. You need a new company to come along once in a while and push through a new industry or new industry focus with real effort.<p>Current car companies, to protect their current products, they didn't put the full force behind electric, that is why they saw less demand and their looks and cars weren't pretty. Audi could benefit if they would have had the same focus and get news that tips in their favor like Tesla, people rooting for them. It costs money to start new product lines, eventually they won't be as expensive when the technology is refined and then other car companies will be behind. It wouldn't be surprising to me if Tesla was later the tech that helps other car companies succeed. If Tesla does succeed the others will be caught on their heels.<p>This is why older companies can't innovate as much, protecting the main source/bottom line. The only company that has really attacked their own product lines with new innovative products is Apple with the iPad (which directly hit their other models, but also hit their competitors bottom line harder). Other companies follow or start too late when they are comfy on their big bottom line cushion.<p>All that money Audi has and they are essentially losing the PR battle. Maybe make an investment in Tesla or compete with it then, stop crying that they'll get more focus. People want electric cars to succeed and will be more forgiving when it is done right. Audi your PR just backfired, you look threatened.
Its interesting to see how they try to cover it up. Especially BMW has researched alternative fuels, mainly hydrogen, but stopped its test fleet in 2009 [0]. Only one super expensive image car, a BMW 7, remains [1]. Audi and VW also dabbled in alternative energies, but none of them really got into it. Hopefully, Tesla can breath some new live into this area. We live in the 21st century, I demand vehicles fueled by anything other than oil.<p>[0] <a href="http://www.spiegel.de/auto/aktuell/alternative-antriebe-bmw-stellt-wasserstoff-testflotte-ein-a-665549.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.spiegel.de/auto/aktuell/alternative-antriebe-bmw-...</a> (german, Google Translate here: <a href="http://translate.google.de/translate?hl=de&sl=de&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.spiegel.de%2Fauto%2Faktuell%2Falternative-antriebe-bmw-stellt-wasserstoff-testflotte-ein-a-665549.html" rel="nofollow">http://translate.google.de/translate?hl=de&sl=de&tl=...</a>)<p>[1] <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMW_Hydrogen_7" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMW_Hydrogen_7</a>
I thought it was implied in the original article that Tesla was beating the other car makers for their specific high-end models only.<p>It's pretty obvious that Tesla cannot beat Mercedes, BMW, and Audi in ALL models.<p>Still, its funny to see a car company write a blog post like this. They are all scurrying about trying to make sure Tesla can't operate in all states because they want to sell directly instead of through dealerships.<p>The car industry is being disrupted.
Well at this point I would much rather own a Tesla car than an Audi car so suck it Audi. Then again it's hard to envision making those kinds of purchasing decisions with the depressing state of my bank account.
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.<p>There are a lot of interesting aspects to electric-only cars, especially from a manufacturing aspect. There are lots of parts that you just don't need in an electric car, which can lead to efficiencies of mass production. Now that electric cars are no longer either improbably futuristic nor merely the butt of jokes a lot of people are finding it easier to have an electric car be a part of their lives, and that's a pretty big deal. I don't know how things will go, but it'll be nice to get a lot more R&D into electric vehicles for a while.