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

#321

Post by aeternum » Thu, Jan 05, 2023, 5:29 PM UTC

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…

That's true with most batteries. It's foolish for car-markers to not include an air-temp variable when making range claims, I predict you will see all of them do that.

Battery longevity will also soon include depth-of-discharge and temp limits as well.

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

#322

Post by thebooktocome » Thu, Jan 05, 2023, 5:30 PM UTC

adolph wrote: post #283

bartread wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Minimalistic interiors Is this something you see as a benefit? For me Tesla's overall aesthetic, including both their exterior looks and interior design, along with the absence of physical controls that go long with that represent their biggest downsides (outside of build quality).

>> Minimalistic interiors > Is this something you see as a benefit? Yes. It's a distraction free operating environment. Tesla's aesthetic choices are semi-scandinavian/Ikea. Minimal doesn't have to be that style specifically. The early New Beetle did a passable job. The typical car is like MS Word with every ribbon open at once. A minimalist interior is focus mode.

The lack of tactile buttons increases distraction considerably.

I cannot activate most controls on a Tesla without taking my eyes off the road.

They also seemingly refuse to keep the GUI stable for more than three or four months at a time.

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

#323

Post by TheCleric » Thu, Jan 05, 2023, 5:31 PM UTC

Animats wrote: post #318

Right. Tesla's problems are car-company problems. Build quality. Production backlog. Delayed new models. Repair parts stocking. Repair center operations. Cost growth. All the dull and boring stuff they have to fix, or their market cap shrinks to what their production output justifies.

Well, they have those problems AND a CEO that (at best) can be called divisive, and who staked a lot of his stock in a separate company that is also (at best) divisive.

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

#324

Post by izacus » Thu, Jan 05, 2023, 5:32 PM UTC

darknavi wrote: post #298

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…

> The mapping and charge planning on the BMW and particularly the EQE/EQS are arguably slightly superior now to Tesla Really? One of the main selling points for me is that the center screen in Teslas are actually usable, non-laggy POS like most cars these days.

None of the infotainment systems on new EVs are particularly laggy anymore - BMW and Mercedes systems are quite good.

VW is the only one still shipping a piece of crock.

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

#325

Post by Scaevolus » Thu, Jan 05, 2023, 5:32 PM UTC

md_ wrote: post #77

hef19898 wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even back when I worked there in logistics, I wondered how much of AMZN share price comes from AWS and how much comes from retail. But then it is difficult, cash flow comes from retail, profits come from AWS. So Amazon might actually be both, and benefiting from it.

Definitely. I'm not claiming it's black and white or either/or, to be clear. But, what are the characteristics investors should look at for "tech company P:E"? Presumably a non-linear profit curve driven by low unit costs, linear or increasing revenue per unit, and strong network effects. IOW, if you're building the next Microsoft, each unit of Windows sold costs you nothing, makes you the same revenue (and thus more…

Are retailer unit costs fixed? The larger they become, the better contracts they can negotiate with suppliers, the cheaper they can make their logistics and delivery network with economies of scale, and the less they have to spend on advertising.

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

#326

Post by bbbbb5 » Thu, Jan 05, 2023, 5:32 PM UTC

mbesto wrote: post #319

darknavi wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The mapping and charge planning on the BMW and particularly the EQE/EQS are arguably slightly superior now to Tesla Really? One of the main selling points for me is that the center screen in Teslas are actually usable, non-laggy POS like most cars these days.

Ya, anyone have a video to back this up? For all of Tesla's woes, their mapping screen is above and beyond superior to any native GPS I've ever seen.

Tesla is far behind everyone else on navigation due to the simple fact that Teslas do not have Carplay. There's no Waze on Teslas, how can you drive without it?

But here's how the current Mercedes navigation looks https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DCgy3askMcM The AR stuff works really well and is arguably way ahead of anything Tesla offers.

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

#327

Post by DustinBrett » Thu, Jan 05, 2023, 5:32 PM UTC

I don't own a Tesla or stock cause I am poor, but I believe in Tesla and a lot of what Elon Musk has said in the past. I thought the Giga Factory idea was great. The Cyber Truck actually looks cool to me, mostly cause it's futuristic and different. I also don't think Elon cares that much if the stock goes down, as long as he is able to move forward with his vision, which hopefully he is able to do, because if I were being optimistic and taking him at his word, then it's an exciting future. It won't all go as planned, but nothing ever does.

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

#328

Post by crypot » Thu, Jan 05, 2023, 5:32 PM UTC

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…

Real world tests show something different:

"Every Tesla we've tested has failed to hit its EPA range estimate"

https://www.edmunds.com/car-news/electric-car-range-and-cons...

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

#329

Post by DennisP » Thu, Jan 05, 2023, 5:34 PM UTC

KKKKkkkk1 wrote: post #301

DennisP wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Debt in itself doesn't matter when you value a company. What you want to look at is shareholder equity, which is assets net of liabilities. When you look at that indicator, Tesla comes behind GM and Ford. Tesla: $31.0 bn GM: $65.3 bn Ford: $42.1 bn

That's a good way to look at it, sure. But it includes the value of fixed assets like factories. Debt compared to income is still a valuable indicator, since it's income that makes the debt payments, and also pays for things like R&D.

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

#330

Post by chrisandchris » Thu, Jan 05, 2023, 5:36 PM UTC

fowkswe wrote: post #137

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…

> * To overtake a slower vehicle, the Megane and i4 are better : simply push the left blinker, then the car switch lanes and accelerates BEFORE having entirely switched lane, like a human driver would do. Teslas do this in FSD mode.

My 2015 Seat did that too with cruise control enabled (well, minus sone stuff that is self-driving), but he did accelerate with cruise control enabled and auto-keep-distance).

No need to buy a $x FSD Tesla to get some extra.