Upload
davidkocsis
View
220
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
8/19/2019 Telsa Competitive analysis
1/25
Competitive Analysis of Tesla
Motors
8/19/2019 Telsa Competitive analysis
2/25
Outline
Outline
1. Introduction
2. Case for the Electric Car
3. Internal Rivalry
4. Barriers to entry
5. Substitutes and co!leents
". Su!!lier #o$er
%. Buyer #o$er
&. Strate'y
8/19/2019 Telsa Competitive analysis
3/25
Tesla Motors
(esla )otors
* California based start+u! co!any
* ,evelo!ed a hi'h !erforance electrics!orts car
* Initial fundin' -"/0 !rovided by #ay#aleBay and oo'le ounders
* Car does /+"/ !h in about 4 seconds
* Car can travel 25/ iles bet$een char'es
* irst 1// vehicles have been sold at theasin' !rice of 1//
8/19/2019 Telsa Competitive analysis
4/25
Industry Facts
Industry
acts* (rans!ortation accounts for "3 of Oil
,eand
8/19/2019 Telsa Competitive analysis
5/25
Industry FactsIndustry acts
8/19/2019 Telsa Competitive analysis
6/25
Industry Facts
Industry
acts * 6S 7utoobile Industry re!resents 5 of#rivate sector ,#
* %" of the aret is ade u! of ord )and Chrysler
* 1& of sales are fro 8a!anese car aers
* "." 7ericans are directly or indirectlye!loyed in the autootive industry.
* 9ybrid sales re!resented 1.2 of thearet in 2//5 1." in 2//" -est0.
* orecasts estiate 5 of car sales $ill behybrids by 2/13
8/19/2019 Telsa Competitive analysis
7/25
Market DefinitionCase for the Electric
Car
* Environental friendliness and lo$eissions
* 9i'h !erforance
* I!roved battery technolo'ies anddrivin' ran'e
* Electric cars are ore ener'y e:cient
than 'asoline cars.
8/19/2019 Telsa Competitive analysis
8/25
Tesla MotorsE:ciency vs.#erforance
8/19/2019 Telsa Competitive analysis
9/25
Internal Rivalry
7 'reen vehicle;• Reduces consu!tion of !etroleu• 6ses rene$able ener'y sources• 9as 'reen vehicle? aret there are fourty!es;• Electric Vehicles• Flexible-Fuel Vehicles• Hydrogen Vehicles• Hybrid Vehicles
Internal Rivalry
8/19/2019 Telsa Competitive analysis
10/25
8/19/2019 Telsa Competitive analysis
11/25
Internal Rivalry9onda Insi'ht A Early
9ybrid
8/19/2019 Telsa Competitive analysis
12/25
Internal Rivalry (oyota #rius + 9ybrid
8/19/2019 Telsa Competitive analysis
13/25
Internal Rivalry (esla Roadster +
Electric
8/19/2019 Telsa Competitive analysis
14/25
Internal Rivalry@enturi etish +
Electric
8/19/2019 Telsa Competitive analysis
15/25
Entry
Barriers to Entry
* Econoies of Scale
* Re'ulation Issues
* (echnolo'ical Innovations* Brand
8/19/2019 Telsa Competitive analysis
16/25
Sustitutes
* 9ybrids
* le uel
* 9ydro'en
* ,iesel
* Co!ressed atural as
* )ass (rans!ortation
Substitutes
8/19/2019 Telsa Competitive analysis
17/25
Ener!y EfficiencyEner'y
E:ciency
8/19/2019 Telsa Competitive analysis
18/25
8/19/2019 Telsa Competitive analysis
19/25
ComplementsCo!leents
* overnent ta breas
* 6tility incentive !ro'ras
* ree #arin' at 7ir!orts* Sin'le Occu!ancy use of car!ool lanes
* o !arin' eter fees
* 5/ discount by California utilities for
chan'in' electric cars
8/19/2019 Telsa Competitive analysis
20/25
8/19/2019 Telsa Competitive analysis
21/25
$uyer "o#er Buyer #o$er
* 7bility of buyer to etract !roDts froseller
* reen aret is eer'in'
* Buyer !o$er is liited due to lac ofco!etition
8/19/2019 Telsa Competitive analysis
22/25
Buyer #o$er
$uyer "o#er
Implementation Phase
Vehicle Technology Market
Competiti
ve vehicle
Penetration
across new
vehicle
production
Major
Penetration
Total Time
for impact
Turbocharged
Gasoline ngines
5 years 10 years 10 years 20 years
!ow mission
"iesel
5 years 15 years 10-15 years 30 years
Gasoline #ybrid 5 years 20 years 10-15 years 35 years
#ydrogen Cell
#ybrid
15 years 25 years 20 years 55 years
8/19/2019 Telsa Competitive analysis
23/25
ConclusionConclusion
* Short to ediu ter strate'y
* Sell 1// Roadsters
* Create reco'niable !roduct
* Self fundin' of future e!ansion!lans
* Chan'e o!inion of electric vehicles
8/19/2019 Telsa Competitive analysis
24/25
ConclusionConclusion
*
8/19/2019 Telsa Competitive analysis
25/25
Conclusion)artin Eberhard
CEO %T&ere &ave een tons and tons of companies' for t&elast () years t&at &ave tried to make little commuter
electric cars* T&e troule is t&at' for t&e most part' it
re+uires t&e uyer of suc& a car to c&an!e &is or
&er nature* ,ou-re uyin! a car t&at is not as !ood
as an e+uivalent !as car at all.slo#er' u!lier' #it&
not as muc& ran!e.and t&ey-re tryin! to compete
essentially on price' #&ere t&ey can-t #in* /one of
t&ose cars #ere uilt for people #&o really like to
drive* I !et t&e feelin! t&ey-re for people #&o don-t
really t&ink you s&ould e drivin!' ut t&ink if you do&ave to drive' it s&ould e an electric car* I t&ink if
you uild a car for people as t&ey are' not re+uirin!
t&em to c&an!e t&eir nature' it-s muc& more likely
for you to succeed* And I t&ink our investors a!ree*0