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

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

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 463 posts

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

#241

Post by elisharobinson »

wahnfrieden wrote: post #150
elisharobinson wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"carmaker" != "electric carmaker" , all other carmakers DO NOT make profitable EV's and require heavy subsidies to be in parity. Tesla has better margins because it is vertically integrated . Apple will NEVER make a car , cars require a totally different supply chain not as simple as moving a low mass objects like phones and PC's , ie cant move them multiple times across different continents. other car makers will ha…

isn't tesla heavily subsidized via carbon credits?

"carbon credit" != "tax credit"

carbon credit: EU law fines ICE car makers for making cars. they inturn purchase carbon credits to have the right to keep polluting. further more tesla made 53 B$ in rev for 2021. 1.5B is not nothing but not > 5% of revenue for the year. ie bulk of it came from actually making and selling cars.

tax credit: the US federal govt had a tax credit program which was lobbied by GM in the 2010's that gave car buyers 7.5K as a tax write off . this was only eligible for less than 100k cars sold (tesla sold 405,300 in q4 2022) and was only useful if you made enough income where a tax writeoff made sense. 2023 new laws are in place with more rules which makes them almost useless (or only useful for those who lobbied for it).

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

#242

Post by jcfrei »

cainxinth wrote: post #45
judge2020 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference seems to be that Tesla was 5-10 years ahead on everything: Minimalistic interiors, modern infotainment, mobile app performance, and of course they lead the way in making electric cars viable by showing that they can both look good and blast off in record time. But you're right that other automakers see Tesla as a threat and are catching up; for example, the range and charging curve improvements on mode…

> 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…

Tesla Long Range (573km) and Mercedes EQS (566km) are basically on par. Here's a good overview by independent testers: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1k1DOw-NwvW8E8tQeXlac...

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

#243

Post by michaelt »

leetcrew wrote: post #116
theduder99 wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Last time I went car shopping, I saw a digital speedometer which irritated me for some reason so I rejected that model from further consideration.

I take it you're not shopping for new cars then? the cheapest new car I'm aware of that has analog gauges is a porsche. btw I have the same preference, just letting you know you are in for a disappointment.

You just haven't looked cheap enough. For example, the Fiat Panda [1] the Nissan leaf [2] and the Kymco VSR-125 [3] all have analog speedometers.

[1] https://www.topgear.com/car-reviews/fiat/panda [2] https://www.parkers.co.uk/nissan/leaf/review/interior/ [3] https://www.kymco.co.uk/scooters-and-motorcycles-range/125cc...

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

#244

Post by conductr »

sumeno wrote: post #194
throwaway894345 wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I haven’t checked in a while, but last time I looked Tesla was supply constrained—they couldn’t make cars fast enough to meet demand, so (unless that has changed) they’re probably not too worried about hypothetical demand reduction.

Their global backlog of orders has gone from ~470k to ~74k over the last few months. There is no backlog of orders at all in the US or Canada and the backlog for the rest of the world is dropping quickly. https://twitter.com/TroyTeslike/status/1609346097733828609?s... (This is the most recent data made public, the Patreon data goes through Dec 31 with the numbers quoted)

Just to add, I used the 'build a tesla' recently for Model Y and was quoted delivery time of about 30 days. Not sure if that's accurate, but doesn't sound too supply constrained compared to discussions with other automakers I've spoken to recently (6-12 months out in some cases). I backed out because I'm really concerned with build quality issues that seem to be worsening, and generally losing confidence daily this company will be around in 5 years.

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

#245

Post by badpun »

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…

It’s not that they don’t build. They don’t even design a lot of the car components (incl. gear boxes, abs, traction control etc). They’re bough from OEM companies, who design and manufacture them.

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

#246

Post by [deleted] »

hutzlibu wrote: post #131
pjdemers wrote: post #88

Tesla, and even more Uber, were priced as if self driving cars are almost here. The idea that services like Uber without the drivers would make car ownership obsolete drove those valuations. Now that self driving cars are many decades away, instead of less than one decade away, is bring stock prices down. I always questions how fast we would see self driving cars, not because of the technology, but because of consume…

"Now that self driving cars are many decades away, instead of less than one decade away" The promise was, that it will be here today. And this is clearly not happening and this is (one reason) why people feel bullshitted and so the trust and the stock go down. So I also would not bet, that in 10 years FSD is ready, but I certainly see it as a possibility.

[deleted]

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

#247

Post by AlexandrB »

humanistbot wrote: post #206
macspoofing wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The idea that services like Uber without the drivers would make car ownership obsolete drove those valuations. Huh? What? No. That's not where the valuation came from. To be fair to Uber, they created a new type of market for which there was an immense demand for. Their self-driving initiatives were a moonshot and maybe got some people excited and therefore invested in Uber (see Tesla/Musk), but not quite the same a…

You must have missed part of the huge hype bubble when Musk claimed that Teslas with FSD would be "appreciating assets" because owners would be able to rent them out as robotaxis when not using them. He said they should be worth up to $200k because of that, and also this p2p robotaxi fleet would make Uber and all taxis obsolete. If FSD was actually full self-driving, then the idea makes a lot of sense. Yes, Tesla cus…

> You must have missed part of the huge hype bubble when Musk claimed that Teslas with FSD would be "appreciating assets" because owners would be able to rent them out as robotaxis when not using them.

If Musk actually believed this it was irresponsible of him to sell any cars at all since holding onto them would have yielded a better return for investors/stockholders.

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

#248

Post by abledon »

NickM wrote: post #164
l33tman wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many of the competitors are STILL building on an ICE chassis and stuff batteries where the center axle would have been etc. When enough of them finally switch to pure EV platforms things will quickly improve I guess. But designing a new chassis that behave as well as their previous premium models, is not something they do in 1 year so it makes sense there is some delay.. The competitors also charge much less quickly,…

Like, on paper they can do 250 kW but you never get more than 100 when actually charging it etc Yeah this is one area where there's a lot of deceptive marketing. For example the Kia EV6 specs list a max fast charging rate of 350 kW but what that actually means is that you need a 350 kW charging station to reach the car's actual max charging speed of 240 kW (or 180 kW, depending on the battery options). Granted, that…

> For example the Kia EV6 specs list a max fast charging rate of 350 kW but what that actually means is that you need a 350 kW charging station to reach the car's actual max charging speed of 240 kW (or 180 kW, depending on the battery options).

Wow that is the scummiest thing

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

#249

Post by LarryMullins »

dlivingston wrote: post #228
hannasanarion wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean the range that a major governmental agency declared to be false advertising just a few days ago? https://www.cnbc.com/2023/01/03/south-korea-fines-tesla-for-...

> South Korea’s antitrust regulator said it would impose a 2.85 billion won ($2.2 million) fine on Tesla for failing to tell its customers about the shorter driving range of its electric vehicles in low temperatures. As a Tesla owner: range and ambient air temperature are significantly correlated (i.e., your 300 miles of range plummets to ~120 when below freezing). But, on a good, sunny, warm day, their range claims…

I bet if Tesla were in Detroit instead of California, they'd remember that winter exists.

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

#250

Post by bombcar »

dlivingston wrote: post #228
hannasanarion wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean the range that a major governmental agency declared to be false advertising just a few days ago? https://www.cnbc.com/2023/01/03/south-korea-fines-tesla-for-...

> South Korea’s antitrust regulator said it would impose a 2.85 billion won ($2.2 million) fine on Tesla for failing to tell its customers about the shorter driving range of its electric vehicles in low temperatures. As a Tesla owner: range and ambient air temperature are significantly correlated (i.e., your 300 miles of range plummets to ~120 when below freezing). But, on a good, sunny, warm day, their range claims…

And IIRC from a previous post, Tesla by far wins the "loses least range during shitcold temps".
Post reply on HN