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

Panasonic sells its $3.6B Tesla stake

finbold.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 185 posts

Re: Panasonic sells its $3.6B Tesla stake

#101

Post by saalweachter »

lmilcin wrote: post #88
codeulike wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So selling = dumping? Edit: ok so dumping=selling the whole lot I guess that makes sense. I think this post explained it better https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27633163

No it is not. Stop trolling or go learn financial slang. It is not hard, you can google it. I worked on an exchange and currently with trading systems for one of the largest banks in the world.

I mean, yeah, but at the same time, stocks are different from inventory because they (can) appreciate in value. Inventory in a store depreciates over time.

There are two and a half reasons to sell a stock: because you need the cash, or because you think the stock has stopped appreciating and will depreciate going forward.

Once a stock has become a depreciating asset it's really no different than the bedroom set that's been sitting in the corner of the showroom for too long, and before too long they'll be happy to take 50% or 40% or less of what they were originally asking just to get it off their hands, even if they end up selling at a nominal loss at the end.

So I'd argue that a stock being "dumped" really is no different than a printer being sold, but that that doesn't look any better for the stock than the negative term would suggest.

Re: Panasonic sells its $3.6B Tesla stake

#102

Post by elliekelly »

FartyMcFarter wrote: post #18
paulpauper wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People said this 3 years ago too, arguing Tesla was too big. guess what: it got way bigger. Tesla is forcing other brands to have to adapt or die. They are way behind Tesla in technology, infrastructure, and marketshare for electric vehicle and battery tech.

> it got way bigger. It's still unclear whether this is due to fundamentals like the ones you mention, or just an irrational stock market. Now that more and more companies are coming out with their EVs, the truth might become clearer.

I think you have to ask whether Tesla would have the same or similar valuation in any of the following circumstances:

- If literally anyone else were CEO.

- If Musk hadn’t used twitter to gather a cult-like following of people who idolize him, think the tech is cool, and can’t afford a Tesla but can afford a few shares of the stock.

- If Musk hadn’t repeatedly inserted himself into the WSB “meme stock” & crypto counter-culture to cultivate fans within that group of risk-taking investors who are known for ignoring fundamentals and buying stock on their intuition (or even the internet’s intuition!) alone.

I’m not saying Tesla is worthless and I even have to give Musk credit for creating an internet persona where he’s helping middle class millennials “stick it to the man” while _being_ the billionaire man. But IMO its very obvious that at least some substantial portion of Tesla’s valuation comes from Musk and his internet antics/persona and is completely detached from the underlying value of Tesla itself.

Re: Panasonic sells its $3.6B Tesla stake

#103

Post by _wldu »

foobarbazetc wrote: post #92
avelis wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah "dumping" a winning trade isn't dumping. It's taking profits to move onto other investments.

Why would you completely exit a winning trade that you have more insight into than most people since you’re the sole supplier of the primary component in the thing if you thought it was going to have a higher ROI than other investments? … you wouldn’t.

They see the writing on the wall. Big Auto is going to dominate electric vehicles. Take the Ford F-150 as one example.

https://www.ford.com/trucks/f150/f150-lightning/2022/

Re: Panasonic sells its $3.6B Tesla stake

#104

Post by wpietri »

kuerbel wrote: post #80
paulpauper wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People said this 3 years ago too, arguing Tesla was too big. guess what: it got way bigger. Tesla is forcing other brands to have to adapt or die. They are way behind Tesla in technology, infrastructure, and marketshare for electric vehicle and battery tech.

BMWs next electric cars will have batteries with zero (!) rare minerals, they are on the way to produce cars with renewable energy and they can recycle 96% of their batteries, just not the thermoplastic. There is much more they are doing. Where they forced to adapt? Yes, they weren't at the forefront. But they are taking huge leaps forward. All that while providing, well, the quality of a german car. I drove a model…

I think this point is key. Musk was fast out of the gate and did well out of it. Existing car companies are slower to adopt innovation, but they've been doing it for 100 years at this point. Musk is a darling of the early-adopter market, but that's a small percentage of the total market. The more established car companies have huge advantages there, and Tesla's going to have to work very hard to overcome them.

Re: Panasonic sells its $3.6B Tesla stake

#105

Post by dehrmann »

avelis wrote: post #13

A more appropriate headline would be: Panasonic uses gains from stock investment (TSLA) to expand car battery operations.

That's the story people might tell, but it's untrue. Interest rates are low. Panasonic has a medium investment-grade credit rating. Yields those bonds would be something like 3.5%. Panasonic would rather sell Tesla shares to fund a project than pay 3.5% interest.

Re: Panasonic sells its $3.6B Tesla stake

#106

Post by GhostVII »

foobarbazetc wrote: post #92
avelis wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah "dumping" a winning trade isn't dumping. It's taking profits to move onto other investments.

Why would you completely exit a winning trade that you have more insight into than most people since you’re the sole supplier of the primary component in the thing if you thought it was going to have a higher ROI than other investments? … you wouldn’t.

Unless you think investing in yourself is better than investing in other companies.

Re: Panasonic sells its $3.6B Tesla stake

#107

Post by mft_ »

Closi wrote: post #78
shiftpgdn wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I own both a Audi e-Tron and Tesla Model Y (well, it’s the wife’s but you get the idea.) Taking a road trip in the Audi is all but out of the question because of how awful the charging infrastructure is. That is not say nothing in regards to the litany of design flaws, poor consumption, and miserable dealer support with the Audi. Tesla is easily 10-15 years ahead of all other manufacturers.

> Tesla is easily 10-15 years ahead of all other manufacturers. Well the majority view is that the Porsche Tycan is a better car, but at a different price point - considering the (im)maturity of the market 10-15 years seems a stretch, particularly considering there are some great cars coming out like the mini electric.

Depends on how ‘better’ is being judged. Premium fit/finish, interior quality, handling, etc. - i.e. the things that the legacy Porsche business was already good at, Taycan is better.

Battery tech, motor tech, vertical integration, and (arguably most importantly) overall efficiency, Tesla is ahead, and probably by many years.

Tesla also far ahead in effort/time out into developing self-driving, though the jury is obviously still out on how meaningful their approach finally turns out to be.

Re: Panasonic sells its $3.6B Tesla stake

#108

Post by systemvoltage »

Wowfunhappy wrote: post #45
synaesthesisx wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> until it doesn't. That's not necessarily the case. Financials are irrelevant for stocks like Tesla, and it can continue to moon indefinitely if the market dictates it.

So I guess “stocks like Tesla” are really just tulip petals? What are people paying for?

It's a great question. Future potential, leadership, tech stack, manufacturing capacity, etc. There is a lot of "soft" aspects of running a company and valuation is one of the most difficult/error-prone things to do.

Damodaran's Google talk kind of does a good job describing valuation of high-growth companies (it is deceivingly simple): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z5chrxMuBoo

Re: Panasonic sells its $3.6B Tesla stake

#109

Post by wpietri »

JPKab wrote: post #100
halotrope wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just look at Norway and the Netherlands which seem to have a 2-3 year lead on EV adoption. Volkswagen brands have already surpassed Tesla sales there. Tesla makes a terrific product and they single handedly provoked that change we are seeing now. However, the German and Korean brands make great cars too. Given the choice I would trade good build quality, some more physical buttons and a quiet cabin at highway speeds…

They are catching up, but currently the VW and other EVs, with the exception of Porsche, are pretty inferior. (A notable exception is Hyundai's Ioniq5, which is very impressive). My biggest concern with other auto manufacturers EV projects is how absolutely abysmal these companies are at building software. It's just not even close. And software makes a HUGE difference with EVs. My wife's Audi has absolute shit softwa…

I'll note that "inferior" to somebody on HN may not be very much like "inferior" in the judgment of a mainstream consumer. I agree with you that traditional car company software is terrible. But if there's one lesson I've had to learn over and over, it's that terrible software is not much of a barrier to market success.

Re: Panasonic sells its $3.6B Tesla stake

#110

Post by sigstoat »

foobarbazetc wrote: post #92
avelis wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah "dumping" a winning trade isn't dumping. It's taking profits to move onto other investments.

Why would you completely exit a winning trade that you have more insight into than most people since you’re the sole supplier of the primary component in the thing if you thought it was going to have a higher ROI than other investments? … you wouldn’t.

you should exit any trade, winning or loser, the instant you have a better plan for deploying the capital.
Post reply on HN