Quoting the first paragraph of a whole page to make a dismissive one liner as usual, not surprised coming from the peanut gallery.
I quoted the last paragraph
of the whole page, so not only is that not my "usual", I didn't even do it *THIS* time
You, misrepresenting me? Yeah, that is rather typical for you: You once quoted me as saying something that not only did I never say, but that no one else in this thread did either.
You never explained that, corrected it, or apologized for it.
As to my dismissal of them--Credibility is sort of like a math theorem: If someone can a find a single example where it doesn't hold, the whole thing fails.
The other expert in the video has deep industry credentials as well, coming in from Chyrsler as a project leader for vehicle systems:
I also note that you don't even respond to what I've quoted, which is damning: self-proclaimed "evangelists" are explicitly claiming they aren't neutral or non-biased.
He works for "Munro & Associates", that is, this is just a subsidiary of the first guy, Sandy MUNRO. As such, so what? Same brand.
Al has worked with OEM and supplier clients such as Ingersall-Rand, DaimlerChrysler, Bentley, Magna, Cummins, TACOM, TRW, Bosch, BorgWarner, Blue Bird Corporation, Laird, L3, Lockheed Martin, American Axle, Akebono, FEV, Ricardo, Allied Motion, Duke, Coca-Cola, Starkey, EPA, CARB, NHSTA, Tata, Harley Davidson, PACCAR, United Bank of Switzerland (UBS) and FCA.
That's almost *THIRTY* companies, which means he's a consultant
and pretty mercenary one to boot.
That means that even if you've been in the industry for 35 years, you've worked at all of these places for an average of 13-14 months at best, and realistically, since you spent a decade or two getting established at 1-3 companies before you got into the game, it's really like ~7-8 months or something.
I have a lot of experience with such consultants, and ~6 months isn't much time to make any sort of (good) impact. Realistically, the sort of people who do make such impacts are called contractors
, those guys might not work for huge stretches of time on projects but at least that's what people who actually *DO* as opposed to just *TELL* are usually called.
And with good reason: Consultants consult, that is, you ask them questions, they give you advice. They don't really "do" anything.
Whereas contractors contract, that is, you have specific agreement with them in relation to the specific work they will be performing.
This, as a rudimentary sorting hat, is not a terribly bad indicator for evaluating the contributor of a short-timer: Contractor? Is, or at least should be, doing something useful.
Consultant? Isn't, and probably won't be, doing anything useful.
Maybe debate the talking points of these two industry veterans instead? What do you disagree with and why? Attacking them as individuals does nothing for your argument.
"debate talking points" --- er, no. Talking points are deliberately reductionist approaches to situations that are designed to elicit buy-in. They are marketing.
It is a PR term, not a technical one.
If you can't even bother to have something written, you're not serious. If you want me to engage with talking points, at least give me the single powerpoint slide they're contained on so I have something to respond to, not a 1 hour of video. (by the way, as I'll discuss later, your list isn't even talking points--it is summary of what these guys said, most of which is simply declarative, and not in any sort of rhetorical way).
And that's the thing, this isn't about engagement with technically-minded skeptics, this is a promotional tool to maintain and deepen pre-existing mind share. This is about trying to get *you* to aspirationally buy a tesla, which is why the video's creator literally has a referral link. It is not meant to engage, abstractly, with someone discussing the idea of EV generally or Tesla specifically, generically.
What do you disagree with and why? Attacking them as individuals does nothing for your argument.
There are twenty plus pages, half of which happened in a period in which you explicitly said you were ignoring me and then didn't respond to me, of me engaging with innumerable different EV related topics.
Feel free to chuck in one of their arguments that's novel to this discussion at any point, I'd be happy to discuss it with you. I'm not going to watch a 1 hour video to find someone else's arguments for you. Do yourself the dignity of selecting them yourself.
The blogger interviewing them drives a Tesla. The two experts he's interviewing are old guys from Detroit, they don't drive Teslas.
Yes, the guy making the video and directly driving the agenda of the video is TESLA TESLA TESLA.
That was my point. I don't even understand what you are getting at, that the people the agenda-setting is using aren't Tesla people?
So what? It's the Tesla's agenda, under his control complete. That's the relevant part.
So you work for a Detroit car manufacturer, interesting, that explains some things.
Again, take your time to actually read my remarks in this thread, especially the ones directed at you:
"I call tell you as someone who works in a related industry that soft vehicle demand overall has trickled up the chain"
I don't work in, or for, the Automative industry, but the places your paranoia takes you sure are interesting...
Anyway, I did my best to summarize from the video so people didn't have to do the legwork, feel free to watch the video directly if you guys disagree with the points.
Yes, you summarized
Just because you bulleted "they then said this, then they said that" doesn't mean you have a list of points.
What "point" did you make when you say
"The auto market's challenges posed by the potentially impending recession."
"The four major battery manufacturers controlling most of this market (Panasonic, Samsung, LG, and CATL)."
"Maxwell as one of the clients these experts worked with, insight into the technology they have relating to all this."
Poorly taken minutes of a meeting don't constitute a position paper, OK?