It took them two years to set up a department that sells their first product (besides gas and electricity): an outdated EV charger, from a company they bought that stopped innovating after acquisition and is now lagging behind competition. Not a car, just the charger.
Two years to set up the business structure isn't that much time in the scheme of multinational conglomerates. Especially when the market isn't yet that big and none of the other players are making meaningful profits.
On a separate note, SolarCity stopped innovating after it was acquired and went from being #1 worldwide for solar panel installations to a very distant #8 in the US (and not meaningfully ranked on a global scale).
> On a separate note, SolarCity stopped innovating after it was acquired
You're conflating innovation with sales.
SolarCity was a financing business more than they were a product company.
They were selling financing of solar generation via Power Purchase Agreements. Installation and equipment manufacturing was largely outsourced.
That was a business model innovation and for a while it worked splendidly, which is why SolarCity became no 1 installer of solar in US.
But the model stopped working which is why Tesla had to restructure the whole business. That's why their sales dropped: they stopped doing what they were doing.
Acquisition happened at end of 2016.
Just in recent weeks Tesla launched a "rent solar" scheme. It remains to be seen how it'll do in the marketplace, but it's a business model innovation comparable to original SolarCity innovation.
They are also working on Solar Roof - another huge innovation with great potential.
And if we're charitable, we can also throw the energy storage business in the same bucket: powerwall, powerpacks, megapacks. Winning high-profile installations and growing business at 100% YoY.
Techies really like to knock down financial innovation as if technological development was the only thing that mattered. Must explain why Betamax and HDDVD won the home media wars.
SolarCity's innovation was the financing model. It was adopted by the rest of the solar panel industry. The problem was that they fucked up the investment side and paid for this business model with expensive debt instead of cheap capital.
They are also working on Solar Roof - another huge innovation with great potential.
Tesla/SolarCity was never the first, or even the frontrunner, when it comes to developing solar shingles. Just the ones who spoke the loudest and retroactively declared themselves the inventors of a product they haven't yet successfully made and that has been in development by the rest of the solar panel industry for a few decades.
A lot of the financial innovation was about obscuring the actual costs (and potential cost/obligations) and benefits to consumers. For example, liens and potential maintenance obligations down the road. It was also driven by the tax incentives that existed for a time. I notice I don't get practically tackled by solar panel installers every time I enter Home Depot any longer.
Two years to set up the business structure isn't that much time in the scheme of multinational conglomerates. Especially when the market isn't yet that big and none of the other players are making meaningful profits.
On a separate note, SolarCity stopped innovating after it was acquired and went from being #1 worldwide for solar panel installations to a very distant #8 in the US (and not meaningfully ranked on a global scale).