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

Tesla raises $1.8B

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 207 posts

Re: Tesla raises $1.8B

#51

Post by diegoperini »

ajross wrote: post #24
diegoperini wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tesla, just like any other successful company games the system well. The system is neutral at its wildest.

The seventy first worthless coin offering just made umpteen million dollars and this site feels it's the market speaking truth to power. The most innovative industrial manufacturer in decades raises money, and it's "gaming the system". Right.

Your poetic parody reflects a truth, that's why I stated it is neutral. Gaming the system isn't inherently evil, it wasn't an accusation of bad ethics. To clarify my point, I'd like to paraphrase my previous statement without metaphors.

Many evil/fraud companies game the system to access unjust benefits. But every now and then one is able to find some company rising among the other, deserves appreciation. It is only natural to think that such companies must have analyzed the system more than the ones they surpassed, otherwise they would go unnoticed among all the cheaters.

Back to metaphor; The system is like a blade: a killing device on a killer, a life saving device on a surgeon. It is true that there seems to exist more killers than savers.

Re: Tesla raises $1.8B

#52

Post by wavefunction »

TheSpiceIsLife wrote: post #34
SubiculumCode wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious. How is what was flippantly suggested related to securities fraud?

Crytocurrencies serve one purpose very well: they're presently not being prosecuted as Ponzi schemes. Which they argueably are .

Ponzi?

Re: Tesla raises $1.8B

#54

Post by Robotbeat »

justicezyx wrote: post #46
KGIII wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought it common knowledge. That's probably a mistake on my part. I know it because I invested pretty early on. My mistake is in thinking others would have read the history and knew the details. I'd like to hope a journalist would know, however. Well, at least research it. I'm pretty sure Wikipedia knows all about it. Still, I think it's a mistake on my part, to think others would know - more so, given the pervasi…

Musk is a genius business man... You should not underestimate his skill of creating illusions. I for myself only learnt this ~2010... Before I always thought he was the founder...

It's not much of an illusion. Tesla was still working on hybrids when Musk joined on. For better or for worse, Tesla as it is now is Musk's baby. Not untruthful to say he was a cofounder, though with a heavy caveat.

Re: Tesla raises $1.8B

#55

Post by Inconel »

Pulcinella wrote: post #49
sondr3 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Burning (through) it mostly.

On what though?

This[0] discussion from the other day has some interesting comments about employee compensation. And then there are acquisitions like this[1], in addition to the infrastructure costs that have been mentioned.

[0]https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14983800 [1]https://techcrunch.com/2017/06/21/snapchat-buys-zenly/

Re: Tesla raises $1.8B

#56

Post by [deleted] »

moxious wrote: post #45
Animats wrote: post #39

Tesla sold $1.8 billion of eight-year unsecured bonds at a yield of 5.30 percent. That's considered junk bond level today. Historically, it's not a bad interest rate. It's an OK deal for Tesla.

Yes, it's a testament to how strange the financial environment is that people would lend such money speculatively at low interest. Those are the prevailing rates but I think the bond holders are getting a lousy deal considering tesla's actual risks

[deleted]

Re: Tesla raises $1.8B

#57

Post by PakG1 »

KGIII wrote: post #41
droidist2 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm surprised to learn he wasn't, but I hadn't given it that much thought.

I thought it common knowledge. That's probably a mistake on my part. I know it because I invested pretty early on. My mistake is in thinking others would have read the history and knew the details. I'd like to hope a journalist would know, however. Well, at least research it. I'm pretty sure Wikipedia knows all about it. Still, I think it's a mistake on my part, to think others would know - more so, given the pervasi…

The interesting question is whether Musk himself portrays himself as the founder. I don't think he does? There are lots of stories though of how people take a business and make it huge, and take credit for being the founder when they weren't. The most popular story these days may be Ray Kroc due to his work at McDonald's and the corresponding movie The Founder.

Re: Tesla raises $1.8B

#58

Post by totalZero »

simonebrunozzi wrote: post #22

A little imprecision in the article: "The company, founded by Musk in 2003" is untrue. Musk joined the company after it was funded.

https://www.cnet.com/news/tesla-motors-founders-now-there-ar...

'....a Tesla representative said that Eberhard and other principals in the dispute have come to an agreement. The company did not reveal any details of the resolution, except to say that there are now five, rather than two, agreed-upon "founders" of Tesla.'

Re: Tesla raises $1.8B

#59

Post by 11thEarlOfMar »

Let's talk about Solar City.

Their product is intended to be a solar roof, indistinguishable from a typical roof from street level. Costs look to be in the $50,000+ range. The marketing is that homeowners will not only drive electric vehicles, but go completely off grid by storing the energy collected into Tesla batteries.

In order for this to make financial sense, there needs to be an ROI for the homeowner. So... how long will it take the homeowner to recoup that, say, $75,000 investment?

I am currently spending about $125/month on electricity. That's $1,500 per year. Two Tesla's would run through about $1,000 [0] of electricity in the same year. That's $2,500 per year I'd spend on electricity to my grid operator.

That's 30 years to break even.

I could probably buy an equivalent roof-mounted system for half that, and the batteries, and see a return in 15 years. Is the aesthetic worth the longer term payoff?

Or would Tesla see more uptake in new home construction where the cost of the roof can be amortized into the construction cost?

I understand that Solar City has a different financing biz model, are they going to continue with that.

[0] http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1090685_life-with-tesla-...

Re: Tesla raises $1.8B

#60

Post by mattnewton »

11thEarlOfMar wrote: post #59

Let's talk about Solar City. Their product is intended to be a solar roof, indistinguishable from a typical roof from street level. Costs look to be in the $50,000+ range. The marketing is that homeowners will not only drive electric vehicles, but go completely off grid by storing the energy collected into Tesla batteries. In order for this to make financial sense, there needs to be an ROI for the homeowner. So... ho…

Yeah, I kinda think they and the investors are hoping that electricity demand increases and the tech becomes much cheaper while their RnD is funded by millionaires who care about the aesthetics and the environment.
Post reply on HN