Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Tesla Says Model 3 on Track as Quarterly Loss Beats Estimates

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–267 of 267 posts

Re: Tesla Says Model 3 on Track as Quarterly Loss Beats Estimates

#261

Post by Retric »

soperj wrote: post #244
Retric wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are assuming it was lost in the same time period. Instead, there was ever refined stone construction techniques through medieval Cathedral's. So, sure 4500 years ago making a giant stone hill was hard, but the 1311 Lincoln Cathedral @ 524 ft was actually significantly taller structure and far more difficult.

It's not a stone hill. It was completely smooth before the limestone casing was removed. Also I don't know how 524ft is _significantly_ taller than 481 feet.

If the pyramid was 524ft tall it would have taken at 29+% more stone which is kind of a large difference assuming they did not need to change the slope. Anyway, scaling buildings is a lot more complex as every extra foot get's harder than the last. In design you don't really build up, you keep adding layers under your existing structure that need to hold it up.

Re: Tesla Says Model 3 on Track as Quarterly Loss Beats Estimates

#262

Post by vkou »

erikpukinskis wrote: post #145

The reason so many people think Tesla is expensive is because some are valuing the company relative to Ford and GM, but others are looking at Tesla Energy and valuing the company not just in automotive but in GE's business, and even in Exxon's business. GM + GE + Exxon = $765 billion Tesla at $45 billion is still just 6% of that market. There's a lot of uncertainty there, so only a small slice of that $765 billion is…

Maybe because Ford and GM shouldn't be in Exxon's business, just like how Google shouldn't be in Exxon's business, and Bank of America should probably not be in Exxon's business?

Energy is an undifferentiated low-margin commodity. (Unless you're getting sweetheart resource extraction rates.) Especially when it comes to grid energy - there is zero synergy between being a producer of it, and selling products that consume it.

Re: Tesla Says Model 3 on Track as Quarterly Loss Beats Estimates

#263

Post by mikeash »

idiot_stick wrote: post #258
mikeash wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, Tesla said that the base Model 3 will be under 6 seconds for 0-60, and I'm perfectly confident in trusting them to deliver on that. "You realize that there are far more regular chargers across the nation than superchargers, right?" You realize that the vast majority of "regular chargers" are L2 units putting out 6-10kW and are therefore completely worthless for long distance travel? And that the CCS infrastructu…

> Yes, Tesla said that the base Model 3 will be under 6 seconds for 0-60, and I'm perfectly confident in trusting them to deliver on that. This is different from a "fact". > Plan a drive from NYC to LA using the Supercharger network and "regular chargers" and compare how long the trips would take. Plan a drive across Canada, where I live, and see how far you get with the Supercharger Network. I'll be stranded 300 mil…

The moment someone actually ramps up non-Tesla fast charging infrastructure to make long-distance travel in non-Tesla EVs, I'll remove this as a "pro" on the Tesla side. Until and unless that happens, it remains an advantage.

Re: Tesla Says Model 3 on Track as Quarterly Loss Beats Estimates

#264

Post by sabertoothed »

vonmoltke wrote: post #248
sabertoothed wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tesla is not only a car company anymore. The commenter above is right on this one and it is not a subjective statement. This is a fact.

Tesla is as much a car company as GM, BMW, Honda, and Toyota. >90% of Tesla's revenue is from selling cars. They certainly have aspirations to be more, but they aren't there yet.

You're not wrong; but you are not right either.

Of course, most of the revenue today is generated from selling cars. But we were talking about the value of the company. And this includes expected _future_ returns. And, obviously, Tesla has more than just aspirations. They have built a large part of the Gigafactory already.

Honda certainly is not a car company - but much more than this as well. This was not a good example for your case. Same with GM. I am not sure if your intention was to list companies that are much more than car companies? You were just making my case.

Re: Tesla Says Model 3 on Track as Quarterly Loss Beats Estimates

#265

Post by tim333 »

tim333 wrote: post #43
nickff wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Investors are not fools; anyone reading these statements and reports is smart enough to understand the difference between GAAP and non-GAAP. Investors should make up their own minds as to which metrics are useful, just as you have made up yours that reporting the non-GAAP numbers is intrinsically suspect.

Also the non-GAAP numbers can give a more accurate impression of how the company is doing if done sensibly.

See the latest Berkshire letter for some examples http://berkshirehathaway.com/letters/2016ltr.pdf

Re: Tesla Says Model 3 on Track as Quarterly Loss Beats Estimates

#266

Post by vonmoltke »

sabertoothed wrote: post #264
vonmoltke wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tesla is as much a car company as GM, BMW, Honda, and Toyota. >90% of Tesla's revenue is from selling cars. They certainly have aspirations to be more, but they aren't there yet.

You're not wrong; but you are not right either. Of course, most of the revenue today is generated from selling cars. But we were talking about the value of the company. And this includes expected _future_ returns. And, obviously, Tesla has more than just aspirations. They have built a large part of the Gigafactory already. Honda certainly is not a car company - but much more than this as well. This was not a good exa…

> Of course, most of the revenue today is generated from selling cars. But we were talking about the value of the company.

You were talking about what Tesla is. Despite its aspirations, Tesla is a car company right now.

> I am not sure if your intention was to list companies that are much more than car companies?

That was my intention. The discussion was about how we can't compare Tesla to GM or Honda because Tesla "isn't a car company". My point is that those other companies are not either, and so that is not an argument to reject the comparisons out-of-hand.

Re: Tesla Says Model 3 on Track as Quarterly Loss Beats Estimates

#267

Post by Reason077 »

intrasight wrote: post #249
kodfodrasz wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you actuallly beleive what you are writing? From outside the SV bubble the future is cars. Electric, self driving, rentable and owned as well. Where I live there is reasonable public transport infrastructure. Self driving ridesharing mobility service from my point of view. I do not find it clean enough, I do not like the people I often have to share my ride. I prefer an own car. This won't change by "self driving…

I do believe that the future is mobility services. I don't think it's going to happen soon but I do believe it is going to happen. I believe that it will, within my lifetime, become illegal to drive your own vehicle on public roads.

I believe that it will, within my lifetime, become illegal to drive your own vehicle on public roads.

I don't think that's going to happen. It might happen on some roads, in order to reduce congestion or whatever, but there's no reason to ban human drivers in general.

That's because "autopilots" can run in passive/safety mode, ready to take over and prevent you doing anything really stupid. This is already starting to happen, in fact, with AEB to be installed in all new cars by 2022.

Post reply on HN