Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm • Hacker News Board

Re: Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm

#231

Post by ellieh » Thu, Jan 05, 2023, 4:24 PM UTC

usrusr wrote: post #144

wazoox wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually after having tested a couple of other cars, for instance the Renault Megane, the BMW i4 and the Mercedes EQE have better enhanced drive assistance than Tesla. For instance: * when in full-auto on a single lane road, when there's an exit on the right the Tesla 3 almost always slightly swerve towards the exit before coming back in its lane. None of the Megane, the EQE or the BMW i4 do that. * To overtake a slo…

> * when in full-auto on a single lane road, when there's an exit on the right the Tesla 3 almost always slightly swerve towards the exit before coming back in its lane. None of the Megane, the EQE or the BMW i4 do that. A minor nuisance. Unless you happen to be at the ready attentively double-checking whatever the assistance is doing - then it must be infuriatingly annoying! Guess what you're supposed to be doing, a…

Any car behaving differently to a human driver is outright dangerous.

For example, motorcyclists depend on inferring behaviour more than the average driver. Someone swerving towards an exit is far more reliable an indicator of them taking it than a signal - many drivers don't bother using them.

Many bikers I know avoid Teslas like the plague, as they're deeply difficult to read at best, and lethal at worst.

Re: Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm

#232

Post by rllearneratwork » Thu, Jan 05, 2023, 4:24 PM UTC

DennisP wrote: post #129

_uhtu wrote: post #7

I'm not sure you can say that when the market cap is still 10x car companies that deliver orders of magnitude more cars than them. Even a high growth car company wouldn't justify that valuation. No, Tesla is still very overpriced for a car company based on hype.

I'm not gonna say TSLA isn't overpriced but number of cars isn't a great metric. Let's look at some financials: Tesla: mcap $388B, debt $9B, op income $12B, free cash flow $9B GM: mcap $49B, debt $110B, op income $10B, free cash flow $1B Ford: mcap $48B, debt $139B, op income $11B, free cash flow $3B Tesla makes more money than Ford or GM, while having much less debt. The fact that they sell fewer cars means their ma…

yeah, and then there is a "little" asset like Superchargers network which makes Tesla ownership, at least in US, much more attractive.

Edit. I'm not implying that Tesla is fairly priced, underpriced or overpriced. But this whole situation reminds me a time when I invested in Tesla IPO after reading lots of "Don't DO IT!" articles in media.

Re: Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm

#233

Post by elil17 » Thu, Jan 05, 2023, 4:25 PM UTC

moonchrome wrote: post #95

elil17 wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’re wrong. Auto manufacturers source parts from a huge variety of outside manufacturers. Auto manufacturers: 1) manage supply chain (hardest part) 2) spec parts (establish quality metrics, change small aspects of design) 3) come up with car concepts 4) assemble parts certain components (e.g. weld the frame, install all the premade parts) They are not building or designing every component in a car - not even close.

I mean what do you expect - for them to build everything down to a screw in-house in order to do manufacturing ? Final assembly, fit and finish - those are very important things on high end cars - and as Tesla demonstrated - not that easy to do even when you're flush with cash. Apple outsources all of it's production - I'd be surprised if they can get premium car assembly from Foxconn model when Tesla is still having…

Final assembly, fit and finish aren't really the key part of what they're doing, though. There's no reason they can't outsource that too.

Re: Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm

#234

Post by kylecordes » Thu, Jan 05, 2023, 4:25 PM UTC

msoad wrote: post #4

I have a Tesla and I also hold a short position on TSLA. My Tesla is a great car. The best car that I've ever driven but I'm not sure if it has anything that other car manufacturers can't replicate. I think Apple can make an even better car than Tesla if they build the hardware and software like their phones and computers. The idea that Autopilot has some magic sauce that nobody else can replicate is laughable.

It appears so far that the good UI/UX Tesla offers is something other makers could replicate, but stubbornly refuse to.

Still... that doesn't mean the stock is infinitely valuable. Presumably the market will shake out and TSLA will end up with a valuation kinda high for a car company, but not in tech-company range.

Re: Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm

#235

Post by DoughnutHole » Thu, Jan 05, 2023, 4:25 PM UTC

graycrow wrote: post #119

Every time there is an article about Tesla, the vast majority of comments here are either too critical, too ignorant, or just FUD. It's too unbalanced, no other company (good or bad) gets such bad treatment here. I see many of the HN audience here are just repeating the media narrative without their own experience or even trying to understand the topic. Yes, Tesla is moving at the forefront of EV development, and yes…

Because the explosive rise and sudden collapse of the company's valuation are interesting in and of themselves as a market story.

The valuation of the most valuable car company in the world has fallen 70% in the past year. Tesla has shed more in market cap in the past year than the GDP of most countries. How is that not remarkable?

It's emblematic of the collective insanity of tech investors in the past couple of years - that's the interesting story, and that's where the criticism lies. Tech investors have made comically bad, bad bets industry-wide in recent years, and Tesla has been one of the biggest.

It's not overly critical to think Tesla's valuation has been insane and unjustifiable, or that it's "just a car company". At least saying it's "just a car company" is admitting that there's some fundamentally valuable business behind it, unlike some other money-pit companies out there.

Re: Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm

#236

Post by yalogin » Thu, Jan 05, 2023, 4:28 PM UTC

The only advantage Tesla has is their charging network. They were forced to build it out because they were the first car out there and they needed to provide a way for their customers to use their cars. However now it has become their strength. Without a fast charging network all the other cars are restricted to a narrow radius. The car itself should be commoditized any day now.

Re: Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm

#237

Post by firmnoodle » Thu, Jan 05, 2023, 4:28 PM UTC

stoddur wrote: post #70

gwbas1c wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The idea that Autopilot has some magic sauce that nobody else can replicate is laughable. Apparently GM's Supercruise is better, and cheaper. I got enhanced autopilot in my first Tesla. Except for changing lanes, things like summon and autopark are just toys. The auto lane chance is so glitchy I decided I was better off saving seven grand on my second Tesla. But if Enhanced Autopilot was 1-2 grand, I'd have bought…

Wait what, SuperCruise better then AP? Any sources?

It's really a different approach that will yield different outcomes and experiences. Super Cruise works on "pre-mapped divided highways". That suggests it's more like hard coding most of the environment and working with HD-maps. While I don't know what Tesla Autopilot does, Tesla FSD is designed to drive with interpolation of the current input. It's a much harder problem for Tesla to solve but the results mean that it can deal with changes and unusual situations without something like massive case statements pre coding those exceptions.

Re: Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm

#238

Post by frant-hartm » Thu, Jan 05, 2023, 4:28 PM UTC

tgeorge wrote: post #154

eatsyourtacos wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course some do. The point is the vast majority do NOT want the interior of a Tesla. They want everything in the same darn place that 99% of cars have it, with physical switches to be able to change things so you can just feel what you are doing without taking your eyes off the road. Most people see the interior of a Tesla as a complete gimmick.

I think a lot of car manufacturers have gone the path of no physical switches and it's becoming irritating. You shouldn't have to navigate screens to adjust your hvac while driving.

VW admitted it was a mistake and will go back to physical buttons with next gen of their models.

Re: Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm

#239

Post by zethus » Thu, Jan 05, 2023, 4:29 PM UTC

wara23arish wrote: post #180

graycrow wrote: post #119

Every time there is an article about Tesla, the vast majority of comments here are either too critical, too ignorant, or just FUD. It's too unbalanced, no other company (good or bad) gets such bad treatment here. I see many of the HN audience here are just repeating the media narrative without their own experience or even trying to understand the topic. Yes, Tesla is moving at the forefront of EV development, and yes…

Yeah, some comments here also feel the need to justify that they’re not an “Elon fanboi” if they’re saying positives about tesla which shows how bad it is. The whole FSD debacle feels like people just arguing semantics and gotchas. I recently watched some videos of FSD operating in tight, hilly and unusual roads in CA. I was very impressed, its obv not perfect, but its fucking cool. People here made it sound like a s…

As a FSD purchaser, I can tell you that watching videos do not give you the full experience of sitting in the driver's seat while FSD is on. The amount of times I need to regularly overtake control in both urban and rural environments on simple turns is enough to make me not recommend the FSD option to prospective Tesla buyers. At this point, the way it's marketed, I would lean more towards scam than even gimmick.

Re: Investors conclude that Tesla is a carmaker, not a tech firm

#240

Post by xiphias2 » Thu, Jan 05, 2023, 4:29 PM UTC

tshaddox wrote: post #79

cainxinth wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Minimalistic interiors, modern infotainment, mobile app performance None of that is why Tesla was ahead of everyone for so long. It's because their cars have better range, and Tesla is still the range leader. They held four of the top six spots in 2022, and the number one is the Lucid Air (only 3k of them have actually been sold): https://www.caranddriver.com/shopping-advice/g32634624/ev-lo... Also, I just want to…

Is it really that simple? Is there something about Tesla’s technology that enables longer ranges? Surely they just put in bigger batteries and charge more for the car, and competitors could also do that if it was really a primary competitive advantage of Teslas.

As batteries were even more expensive years ago, Elon put energy efficiency above everything else, like putting in lighter seats than ICE car manufacturers and optimizing the thermal system (octovalve).

The ,,false advertising'' that others say come from the fact that when you drive fast it doesn't matter how energy efficient you are, so it works out only with low speeds.