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

Tesla Repays Department of Energy Loan Nine Years Early

teslamotors.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 192 posts

Re: Tesla Repays Department of Energy Loan Nine Years Early

#81

Post by enraged_camel »

sillysaurus wrote: post #76
jforman wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Make no mistake, this is as much a PR ploy by Tesla to pump up their offering." I don't get your negativity here. The fact that a major green tech company working with government support is able to shift financing over to the private market is, indeed, a remarkable feat and is absolutely something they have a right to crow about. The government, too — it's an example of a progressive system working as designed. As f…

I don't get your negativity here. It didn't read as negative.

Ploy, Noun: A cunning plan or action designed to turn a situation to one's own advantage. Synonyms: trick

It definitely has a negative connotation.

Re: Tesla Repays Department of Energy Loan Nine Years Early

#82

Post by benaiah »

EGreg wrote: post #73
Shivetya wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

they are not free, they are paid by any consumer who directly or indirectly has a relationship with someone who purchases a vehicle from one of the makers who is paying these credits. Voluntary my ass. If they don't pay what happens? Your fined. Its a tax. It is paid by consumers because they buy cars. If anything its California's way of having people in other states fund their initiatives. I guess kudos can go to Mu…

Voluntarily it would take a lot to resist making maximal short-term profits from gas guzzlers for long term unproven gains such as the ones Musk's company has been doing. Are you saying governments shouldn't institute any regulations, including carbon credit systems, and everything should be decided by the free market? Sure, it's not voluntary, but then again neither is most of the stuff that producers of things do.…

Don't confuse free market advocacy with anarchy. Buying up judges, bribing other officials, and other fraudulent transactions, including stuff like misrepresentation of goods and other deceptive business practices, are not necessarily okay in a free market. However, direct government interference is. I don't advocate for a completely dog-eat-dog, caveat emptor society, but I do advocate for one in which those in power cannot control the flow of private wealth (often to their own benefit).

Re: Tesla Repays Department of Energy Loan Nine Years Early

#83

Post by enraged_camel »

encoderer wrote: post #75
wamatt wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Musk had very little to do with PayPal. That's rather inaccurate. Musk's company was X.com and Thiel/Levchin/Noseks's was called Confinity. They had a 50/50 merger in early 2000, and at first the new company was called X.com. Furthermore, Confinity [1] was doing Palm Pilot payments under the PayPal brand [2] , while X.com was working on internet money transmission over email. Which idea was more useful in the long r…

My knowledge of this comes directly from the Levchin interview in Founders at Work by YC's own Jessica Livingston. I consider that a primary source. Regarding the name, PayPal the product -- which included a web app and not just the Palm Pilot product -- launched before the merger. I remember evaluating both x.com and paypal when I was in high school selling computer parts on auction -- at Haggle.com. Finally, starti…

So wait... Levchin counts as a primary source but Musk doesn't?

It must be fun to give more weight to the side you support.

Re: Tesla Repays Department of Energy Loan Nine Years Early

#84

Post by duck »

rayiner wrote: post #49
snprbob86 wrote: post #4

The subtitle says: "ONLY AMERICAN CAR COMPANY TO HAVE PAID BACK GOVERNMENT" Assuming that's true, I'm not sure whether I should be proud of Tesla, ashamed of our Government, or angered at other car companies. Probably all three...

Who ever pays back the government for stuff? It's largely besides the point. The government didn't bail out say GM because it wanted to get a return on its investment. It did so because of the fear that letting Detroit go bankrupt would have a domino effect that would leave a gaping crater in employment. If the car companies manage to pay back the government, great. Even if they don't, that wasn't really the point.

fear that letting Detroit go bankrupt would have a domino effect that would leave a gaping crater in employment

You mean like the +20% currently unemployed in Detroit? The best thing about Detroit is that one day it will be used as a case study of why entitlements don't work out the way people think they do.

Re: Tesla Repays Department of Energy Loan Nine Years Early

#85

Post by encoderer »

enraged_camel wrote: post #83
encoderer wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My knowledge of this comes directly from the Levchin interview in Founders at Work by YC's own Jessica Livingston. I consider that a primary source. Regarding the name, PayPal the product -- which included a web app and not just the Palm Pilot product -- launched before the merger. I remember evaluating both x.com and paypal when I was in high school selling computer parts on auction -- at Haggle.com. Finally, starti…

So wait... Levchin counts as a primary source but Musk doesn't? It must be fun to give more weight to the side you support.

> So wait... Levchin counts as a primary source but Musk doesn't?

> It must be fun to give more weight to the side you support.

No, actually an interview with Musk is a primary source, too. You realize "primary source" is an actual thing and not just something I made up? Are you trolling or just being argumentative for no reason?

Re: Tesla Repays Department of Energy Loan Nine Years Early

#86

Post by rayiner »

duck wrote: post #84
rayiner wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who ever pays back the government for stuff? It's largely besides the point. The government didn't bail out say GM because it wanted to get a return on its investment. It did so because of the fear that letting Detroit go bankrupt would have a domino effect that would leave a gaping crater in employment. If the car companies manage to pay back the government, great. Even if they don't, that wasn't really the point.

fear that letting Detroit go bankrupt would have a domino effect that would leave a gaping crater in employment You mean like the +20% currently unemployed in Detroit? The best thing about Detroit is that one day it will be used as a case study of why entitlements don't work out the way people think they do.

I was using "Detroit" in this context as a metaphor for the car industry. GM going bankrupt would bankrupt a ton of suppliers spread throughout the midwest.

As for Detroit, its problem has nothing to do with entitlements. Detroit was never New York or San Francisco, after all, in terms of entitlements. The midwestern industrial cities all have the same problem, and it's not entitlements, it's the automation of American manufacturing. Optimists tell me that its a good thing and any day now there will be new jobs for these folks, but looking at cities like Detroit, Buffalo, etc, that have been gutted for decades now doesn't make me optimistic.

Re: Tesla Repays Department of Energy Loan Nine Years Early

#87

Post by damoncali »

pbreit wrote: post #80
damoncali wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gross margin, and it's tiny without the credits. Tesla's most recent quarter resulted in an operating loss and a net loss. Edit: my bad. Seems the net income was slightly positive last quarter (with regulatory credits included, without them it's a big old negative).

But the Model S itself is gross margin positive? That's all I was wondering.

I didn't see it broken out in the financials, but I didn't look terribly hard. I don't think it's unreasonable to assume it's similar to the overall gross margins in the low single digits (2% by my math - ignoring emissions credits).

Re: Tesla Repays Department of Energy Loan Nine Years Early

#90

Post by rz2k »

EGreg wrote: post #73
Shivetya wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

they are not free, they are paid by any consumer who directly or indirectly has a relationship with someone who purchases a vehicle from one of the makers who is paying these credits. Voluntary my ass. If they don't pay what happens? Your fined. Its a tax. It is paid by consumers because they buy cars. If anything its California's way of having people in other states fund their initiatives. I guess kudos can go to Mu…

Voluntarily it would take a lot to resist making maximal short-term profits from gas guzzlers for long term unproven gains such as the ones Musk's company has been doing. Are you saying governments shouldn't institute any regulations, including carbon credit systems, and everything should be decided by the free market? Sure, it's not voluntary, but then again neither is most of the stuff that producers of things do.…

I suspect that the above commenter is skeptical about carbon emissions as a legitimate externality. There are also plenty of people who do not think we should be able to address externalities through legislation.

It is strange though because it is often the people who acknowledge or advocate the use market approaches who later complain about them when they are put in practice.

Post reply on HN