Barefoot Investor Scott Pape exposes a growing concern with electric cars
Mr Pape explained his dad was looking to buy a new car when he suggested he consider investing in a Tesla
'I told him about the Model Y, which did something that would have that old Henry Ford turning in his grave. It rolled off the factory line last week and drove itself – no humans – 30 minutes to its new owner's house.
'And presumably, if you miss a repayment, it'll get a notification that you're a deadbeat, turn itself on, open the garage door, and silently creep back to the showroom in the middle of the night'
But his dad wasn't interested.
'Why would I want a bloody electric car?' he fired back.
Mr Pape explained his dad's concerns were not uncommon
'My old man's concerns with EVs were more practical: where he would charge it, how much it'd cost to fix, and what it'd be worth in a few years.
'And he's not alone. While the Government reckons we'll all be driving EVs soon, last month they made up just 10.3 per cent of car sales - and that's actually a record high
Mr Pape warned car manufacturers would continue to discount prices, sending the value of used electric vehicles plummeting
'With China flooding our market with cheap electric cars, prices are only going one way.
'In China, BYD – the world's biggest EV maker – recently slashed its local car prices by 34 per cent overnight
He said that while EVs may make you feel like you're doing the right thing, they're still money pits.
'Cars have always been a terrible investment
Reflecting on how the car market is changing, Pape said his own childhood was defined by Ford vs Holden - but his kids will have a very different experience
'I'm convinced that, for my kids, cars will be like shopping for a TV at JB Hi-Fi: lots of weird-sounding Chinese brand names that get better and cheaper every year.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
an hour ago
- Reuters
Tesla ordered by Florida jury to pay $243 million in fatal Autopilot crash
Aug 1 (Reuters) - A Florida jury on Friday found Tesla (TSLA.O), opens new tab liable in the 2019 fatal crash of an Autopilot-equipped Model S and ordered Elon Musk's automaker to pay $243 million to the family of a deceased woman and an injured survivor. Jurors in Miami federal court awarded the estate of Naibel Benavides Leon and her former boyfriend Dillon Angulo $129 million in compensatory damages, of which Tesla is responsible for 33%, plus $200 million in punitive damages, according to a verdict sheet. Lawyers for the plaintiffs said the trial was the first involving the wrongful death of a third party resulting from Autopilot. The plaintiffs had sought $345 million. Tesla has faced many similar lawsuits over its vehicles' self-driving capabilities, but they have been resolved or dismissed without getting to trial. A judge rejected Tesla's efforts to dismiss the case earlier in the summer, and experts said this may encourage other litigants against the EV maker. 'I think it's a big deal," said Alex Lemann, a professor at Marquette University Law School, who said this may make future settlements more expensive for Tesla. "This is the first time that Tesla has been hit with a judgment in one of the many, many fatalities that have happened as a result of its auto-pilot technology." Friday's verdict could impede efforts by Musk, the world's richest person, to convince investors that Tesla can become a leader in so-called autonomous driving for private vehicles as well as robotaxis it plans to start producing next year. Shares fell 1.8% on Friday. Tesla plans to appeal, according to published reports. The Austin, Texas-based company and its lawyers did not immediately respond to several requests for comment. The trial concerned an April 25, 2019 incident where George McGee drove his 2019 Model S at about 62 mph (100 kph) through an intersection into the victims' parked Chevrolet Tahoe as they were standing beside it on a shoulder. McGee had reached down to pick up a cellphone he dropped on his car's floorboard and allegedly received no alerts as he ran a stop sign and stop light before hitting the victims' SUV. "We have a driver who was acting less than perfectly, and yet the jury still found Tesla contributed to the crash," said Philip Koopman, a Carnegie Mellon University engineering professor and expert in autonomous technology. "The only way the jury could have possibly ruled against Tesla was by finding a defect with the Autopilot software. That's a big deal." Benavides Leon was allegedly thrown 75 feet to her death, while Angulo suffered serious injuries. "Tesla designed Autopilot only for controlled-access highways yet deliberately chose not to restrict drivers from using it elsewhere, alongside Elon Musk telling the world Autopilot drove better than humans," Brett Schreiber, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, said in a statement. "Today's verdict represents justice for Naibel's tragic death and Dillon's lifelong injuries," he added. Last month, Tesla posted its biggest quarterly sales decline in more than a decade, and profit fell short of Wall Street forecasts.
Auto Blog
2 hours ago
- Auto Blog
Federal jury finds Tesla partly liable for fatal Autopilot crash
By signing up I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy . You may unsubscribe from email communication at anytime. The Macan will return with gas power, only it won't be the Macan at all. Tesla Could Now Be On The Hook For Other Autopilot Cases A jury in Miami has determined that Tesla should be held partly liable for a fatal 2019 crash involving the automaker's 'Autopilot' driver-assist system, and is requiring Tesla to pay $329 million in damages to the family of the deceased and an injured survivor, multiple news outlets reported Friday. Previous Pause Next Unmute 0:00 / 0:10 Full screen Rivian R1T delivers on this EV feature that Tesla forgot Watch More The payout includes $129 million in compensatory damages and $200 million in punitive damages against Tesla, according to CNBC, while attorneys for the plaintiffs had asked the jury to award damages of around $345 million. The trial, which began in the Southern District of Florida July 14, is the first involving an Autopilot-related case in a federal court. Technological Vs. Human Error Source: Tesla By providing your email address, you agree that it may be used pursuant to Arena Group's Privacy Policy. The case involved an April 2019 crash in Key Largo, Florida. A Tesla Model S driven by George McGee sped through a stop sign and struck Naibel Benavides and her boyfriend, Dillon Angulo. Benavides was killed, while Angulo was left with a traumatic brain injury and broken bones. The couple were standing near their parked car stargazing as McGee approached in his Tesla with the 'Enhanced Autopilot' system engaged. He had dropped his phone and was trying to pick it up. During the trial, McGee reportedly said he believed Enhanced Autopilot would brake if an obstacle was in the way. Instead, the Model S continued at over 60 mph, striking the car and its owners, according to testimony. Tesla has argued that the fatal crash was wholly due to driver error, and continued to argue that its driver aids were safer than manual driving even as the trial went on, but the jury did find the automaker partly responsible in the end. More Trouble For Tesla? Source: Tesla Autoblog Newsletter Autoblog brings you car news; expert reviews and exciting pictures and video. Research and compare vehicles, too. Sign up or sign in with Google Facebook Microsoft Apple By signing up I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy . You may unsubscribe from email communication at anytime. As CNBC notes, the verdict could set a precedent for other Autopilot-related suits against Tesla. There are currently around a dozen cases in progress alleging that Autopilot or Tesla's 'Full Self-Driving' system contributed to fatal or injurious crashes. The California DMV has also asked a state court to suspend Tesla's sales license for 30 days and levy financial penalties against the automaker due to alleged misleading promotion of its driver-assist tech. The DMV is reportedly concerned not only with names like Autopilot and Full Self-Driving, but also Tesla statements implying capabilities these systems don't have, such as one claiming that they are 'designed to be able to conduct short and long-distance trips with no action required by the person in the driver's seat.' All of this comes as Tesla CEO Elon Musk doubles down on promises that the future of the company lies in automation, and that it can pivot from being primarily an automaker to operating fleets of autonomous vehicles. Musk has been making similar promises for at least nine years, but Tesla's declining sales and minimal product updates indicate very little effort is being put into the existing parts of its business. About the Author Stephen Edelstein View Profile
The Independent
2 hours ago
- The Independent
Lando Norris plays it very cool when asked on F1 title battle: ‘Won't matter once we're all dead'
Lando Norris has offered a remarkably philosophical take on his Formula One championship battle with McLaren team-mate Oscar Piastri, declaring that the outcome ultimately matters little because "in 200 years we will all be dead". Norris arrives at the final round before Formula One's three-week summer shutdown 16 points adrift of Piastri, whose title momentum surged after last weekend's rain-affected race in Belgium. Despite starting on pole, Norris was overtaken by Piastri in treacherous conditions. With McLaren's current superiority, it is Piastri who has emerged as Norris's primary rival for this season's crown, holding six wins to Norris's four. When asked if he needs to get under the Australian's skin to secure his maiden F1 title, Norris replied: "I don't enjoy that. In 200 years no one is going to care. We'll all be dead. "I am trying to have a good time. I still care about it, and that's why I get upset sometimes and I get disappointed and I get angry at myself. And I think that shows just how much I care about winning and losing. But that doesn't mean I need to take it out on Oscar. I just don't get into those kind of things." Historically, intra-team title battles in F1 are fraught, but Norris maintains a pragmatic view. "Yes, he (Piastri) is the guy I want to beat more than anyone else," he admitted. "But if I don't beat him, then that's just because he has done a better job. I will do it the way I believe is best for me, and just because one person did it a few years ago, it doesn't mean you have to do that, too. I don't really care about those things." At the Hungaroring on Friday, Norris demonstrated his prowess with an impressive practice double, narrowly beating Piastri by just 0.019 seconds in the first session before extending his lead to nearly three tenths later in the day. Norris has an unblemished record of never being out-qualified by a team-mate in his six previous visits to this circuit, a promising sign from his practice performance. Elsewhere, Lewis Hamilton, a record eight-time winner and nine-time pole-sitter in Hungary, struggled for pace. The 40-year-old, still seeking a podium in Ferrari colours, complained his car didn't "feel good" and ran off track after a major lock-up in the first session, ending the day sixth, three tenths and three places behind team-mate Charles Leclerc. Max Verstappen, who recently committed his future to Red Bull for at least another season, also had an uncharacteristically difficult day, finishing a distant 14th in practice, 1.1 seconds slower than Norris. "I don't know what is going on," Verstappen radioed. "It is just undriveable." He also faced a stewards' investigation for throwing a towel from his cockpit but received only a warning.
