2021 Tesla Model Y on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Akerson calls for GM tech to stymie Tesla

Electric vehicle maker Tesla has had some good days lately as sales of the Model S have exceeded expectations as much as the company's profits, thanks in no small part to innovative thinking that has resulted in mass sales of ZEV credits to other manufacturers, free charging stations, 90-second battery swaps and manufacturer-owned dealerships. All of this has the attention of General Motors, who views Tesla as a disruptive force to the auto industry and as a threat to the 104-year-old automaker.
Case in point: GM recognizes that Tesla must be doing something right if it can sell more of its $69,900 Model S sedans than the $39,145 Volt. So what is GM doing about it? Chief Executive Officer Dan Akerson assigned a small team to study Tesla so the company won't be caught off guard in the future. In an interview with Bloomberg, Steve Girsky, GM vice chairman, said, "History is littered with big companies that ignored innovation that was coming their way because you didn't know where you could be disrupted."
GM was one of those big companies at one point, and it hasn't quite broken that mold. It has struggled to move on from the old, inefficient practices of its past, leading Akerson to chide employees at a recent conference in Houston because so many in-house patents had failed to be commercialized and implemented in GM designs. This, of course, resulted in a huge research-and-development budget that was wasteful. But Akerson knows that GM must rely on innovation and a tight focus on technologies that customers want if it is to be profitable and survive in the long term.

Ford files trademark application for 'Model E'

In early December, Ford filed an application with the US Patent and Trademark Office for the name "Model E." Historically, Ford never produced a Model E, and while automakers are known to file for trademarks they never use, some have wondered if the application might be used for a concept car.
Based on other recent events, though, it could be a legal move. In 2000 Ford sued an online start-up called Model E over the similarity of that name to Ford's industry-shaping Model T, but the judge dismissed the case citing lack of proper grounds. In August 2013, Tesla applied for trademark registration for Model E, and at the time, Ford said it would review the application. Tesla actually made two applications for Model E, one for automobiles and structural parts therefore, the other for "providing maintenance and repair services for automobiles," and there are plenty of theories about what the name could be applied to.
The Published for Opposition date for Tesla's applications is December 31, 2013, after which anyone who thinks they'd be harmed by Tesla being granted the trademark gets 30 days to register their issues. This is just speculation, but Ford's application - which was filed for automobiles only - might be about protecting what it sees as unwelcome encroachment on the name Model T, protection it wasn't able to enforce before when the stakes were only online and much smaller.

Tesla's ZEV credit allotment changing under new CARB rules

Could the California Air Resources Board (CARB) be taking a $55-million bite out of Tesla Motors' profits? The state regulator, which grants zero-emission vehicle (ZEV) credits for automakers making plug-in vehicles, is planning to reduce the number of credits generated by each Model S battery-electric sedan from seven to four, Bloomberg News reports. That means the California-based automaker will have fewer credits to sell to big buyers such as General Motors and Chrysler, who don't make enough ZEVs on their own to comply with state mandates. While the selling price for these credits isn't disclosed (they're private transactions), the market was a lucrative one for Tesla, which generated $129.8 million in revenue from California zero-emissions credit sales and about another $65 million selling US Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) credits last year. All told, California and federal zero-emissions credit sales accounted for about 10 percent of Tesla's sales last year. A Tesla representative didn't immediately respond to a request from AutoblogGreen for comment. This issue first came up last year when CARB hinted that it wouldn't give Tesla credit for having a battery-swapping option as it's method for quick-fueling compliance. Tesla, which appears to have been preparing for just this scenario, has been collecting revenue on credits since 2010 and achieved its first-ever profitable quarter in the first quarter of 2013 because of such credits. While the maximum number of zero-emissions credits a vehicle could garner was increased from seven to nine in the new rules, Tesla can't take advantage of that because it meets neither of the most stringent criteria: that the car in question is rated to go more than 300 miles on a full tank or battery and be able to be "filled up" (or fully charged, in this case) within 15 minutes. Those are more hydrogen fuel-cell-like targets, but Tesla has the EVs that come closest to meeting them.