- Joined: Mar 25, 2022
- Last Login: Jun 1, 2022, 9:23am EDT
- Comments: 189
Share this profile
Comment 3 replies, 7 recs
Netflix has had some good stuff, but I don’t think they capitalize off of it very well. They aren’t getting people to talk about there shows to build interest, they aren’t doing spin off shows, and they aren’t selling enough merchandise to help cash in on what few franchises they built.
Lost in Space is a good example. That was a potential franchise, but they’ve done very little with it. No spin offs, no merchandise. When the last season happens (is it over already?), I’ll watch it and forget about it.
Comment 4 replies
There is a hybrid Maverick available. I have no idea whether maverick makes sense as an EV…never really even seen one. And a 100 mile range is only practically if it’s your second vehicle.
As far as Ranger goes, I wonder if it’s smaller size, but still needing to carry a heavier payload and tow, different than just a passenger car, makes it more difficult to convert to EV than the F150. I have no idea, just guessing.
Regardless, Ford probably wants the flagship F150 to establish the idea of EV trucks before expanding to the vehicles with less volume sales.
Comment 2 recs
I can’t tell either. I think there is a point though in that the ‘new’ USMCA trade agreement probably had an impact on the decision to build in the US rather than Mexico. Not the only reason, as Biden has been pushing to give tax incentives to union made EVs, changes in supply chain, etc.
Comment 1 reply
Up until Tesla came along, EVs were just small cheap cars that no body really wanted to drive, accept to make a statement that you were a planet saver. Then Tesla made it more of a luxury/performance type car that was thought of as unobtainable to the masses. I think Ford is going to have the largest impact because they made a practical work truck that will thought of as reliable and useful. Not only that, but they are going to expose a lot more people to the idea of owning an EV, signs they got to drive one for work.
As far as hybrids go, Ford helped a lot with that too with the powerboost since they gave it the ability to act as a portable charger. What I think will really sell hybrids is they starting making them with bigger batteries and plug in. If you get it 60-100 mile range on battery alone, enough for your daily needs, then you can use it as an EV when you need it and a long range ICE vehicle when you need that for longer trips and such.
Comment 1 reply, 1 rec
I wouldn’t call it a gateway to audiophile world as it wouldn’t call Sonos an audiophile product. Yes, they sound good, but there selling point is wireless multiroom audio, and trying to do it in a way that’s easy to use and works for your home.
But yes, it’s a gateway product for some, but it also could be just be a good add on to someone who already has Sonos but doesn’t want to spend $450 to add a speaker to the guest room TV.
Comment 1 reply, 3 recs
There should not be a ‘right to work from home’ or ‘flexible hours’. Employer sets the rules, and if the employees don’t like it, they can find another place to work.
As far as caring about what’s good for the company, if you own Tesla stock, you absolutely should care about what’s good for the company. If you’re an employee, you probably should care as well, so that you can continue working there.
Comment 3 replies
There’s no reason to assume micromanagement is the reason for this decision. He simply doesn’t think people are as productive from home as in the office, and he thinks its important for people to be seen, particularly management. Also worth noting that there are factory workers who obviously can’t work from home with Tesla. You don’t want to build resentment between the different working classes.
My CEO has a similar take on things. I don’t agree, but it’s not my call. Personally, I think US government should offer tax incentives to companies that allow/enable employees to work from home. That would reduce use of gas, as well as wear on vehicles and roads.
Comment 7 replies, 7 recs
It’s just silly to say that requiring employees to actually show up at work is abusing your employees. No one would make that statement pre pandemic.
Besides, the article pointed out the reasons. One being that some employees aren’t pulling their work load. Two being that it’s good for people to be visible to others.
It’s not a matter of whether you like the possible or agree with it, it’s simple isn’t abusive to require employees to show up to work.