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

Auto manufacturer family tree: Who owns what?

whichcar.com.au

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 171 posts

Re: Auto manufacturer family tree: Who owns what?

#141

Post by mistrial9 »

matsemann wrote: post #108
mistrial9 wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

good direction but impractical.. a tech lead at Starbucks quipped "we don't actually know how many people work at Starbucks right now" .. huh? because, though they do have modern cloudy tech, there is meat-space time involved in edge transition from state of employed to not-employed, etc. So it is true, even with "perfect" observation of events, the leaders have ranges, not hard numbers. So it is with markets. There…

Impractical? Isn't it already being done? At least here in Norway, I can look up an organization and see all owners of that company last year. And press a button and it calculates the "true"/indirect owners up the chain as well. I can also go the other way. Select a person, and see what they own through multiple layers of companies.

there is no rational comparison to the economy and laws of Norway, to that of the USA. Even with oil wealth, the population and value of the Norway economy amounts to a tiny percentage of the activity in the USA, and many, many USA-based companies are multinational. Hvordan kan du bruke Norges lover til å styre USA? alvor

Re: Auto manufacturer family tree: Who owns what?

#142

Post by asciiresort »

kergonath wrote: post #140
asciiresort wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> he’s also completely unqualified to be called an engineer What qualifies someone as an engineer? Math? What kind of math? Building stuff? What kind of stuff? Writing code? What languages count and what languages don’t? Does CSS count? Or are you talking about some kind of academic certification or standardized exam? It seems like you are basing someone’s engineering prowess based on their personal, social, politica…

> What qualifies someone as an engineer? Depends on the country. In some, it's a certification that comes with responsibilities, in others it's just a job. In any case: 1) he hasn't got anything that comes close to an engineering qualification (no, dropping off a Ph.D. after a a B.Sc. is not enough); 2) his job does not involve anything like an engineer's job, which is to "invent, design, analyze, build and test mach…

> Depends on the country. In some, it's a certification that comes with responsibilities, in others it's just a job. In any case:

Yes, this was a rhetorical question. Those countries that require a certification is not relevant to the discussion, because Elon Musk is operating out of America which does not require a certification to be a software engineer. In which case, by your definition, it's just a job or more specifically a job title. That's useless information because then people without a job title or don't care for one aren't engineers, and people who have the job title would automatically be an engineer. So if Elon Musk changes his job title to engineer instead of CEO, is he qualified now? Maybe he should prefix Senior to the title while he's at it.

> 1) he hasn't got anything that comes close to an engineering qualification (no, dropping off a Ph.D. after a a B.Sc. is not enough);

So people who don't have a Ph.D. aren't engineers?

> his job does not involve anything like an engineer's job, which is to "invent, design, analyze, build and test machines, complex systems, structures, gadgets and materials to fulfill functional objectives and requirements while considering the limitations imposed by practicality, regulation, safety and cost."

Yes, he's a CEO. Are the CEOs of Google and Facebook still engineers if they aren't writing code? And what kind of complex system? Are organizations not complex systems?

> there is no evidence that he did any of this at any point

The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. If you're an engineer, you should understand this.

How do you think someone gets accepted into an engineering PhD, drop out or not, if they've never did any of this at any point in their life?

Re: Auto manufacturer family tree: Who owns what?

#144

Post by kergonath »

asciiresort wrote: post #142
kergonath wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What qualifies someone as an engineer? Depends on the country. In some, it's a certification that comes with responsibilities, in others it's just a job. In any case: 1) he hasn't got anything that comes close to an engineering qualification (no, dropping off a Ph.D. after a a B.Sc. is not enough); 2) his job does not involve anything like an engineer's job, which is to "invent, design, analyze, build and test mach…

> Depends on the country. In some, it's a certification that comes with responsibilities, in others it's just a job. In any case: Yes, this was a rhetorical question. Those countries that require a certification is not relevant to the discussion, because Elon Musk is operating out of America which does not require a certification to be a software engineer. In which case, by your definition, it's just a job or more sp…

> In which case, by your definition, it's just a job or more specifically a job title.

Yes, a job title he bought, which is just as meaningful as the "Tesla founder" title he bought himself.

> So people who don't have a Ph.D. aren't engineers?

The issue is not the lack of a ph.D. It's the lack of anything beside a B.Sc.

> Are the CEOs of Google and Facebook still engineers if they aren't writing code?

Well, those who did an engineer's job are former engineers. If the status is tied to the job title as you imply, then no, a CEO is not an engineer.

> Are organizations not complex systems?

Not one you invent, design, analyze, build, or test. I mean, yes, you can stretch the meaning to the point that putting a motherboard in a PC case is engineering, but don't expect to be taken seriously. Same if you include all bureaucrats and politicians (and a country is vastly more complex than Tesla so they would have a better claim).

Re: Auto manufacturer family tree: Who owns what?

#145

Post by [deleted] »

kergonath wrote: post #144
asciiresort wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Depends on the country. In some, it's a certification that comes with responsibilities, in others it's just a job. In any case: Yes, this was a rhetorical question. Those countries that require a certification is not relevant to the discussion, because Elon Musk is operating out of America which does not require a certification to be a software engineer. In which case, by your definition, it's just a job or more sp…

> In which case, by your definition, it's just a job or more specifically a job title. Yes, a job title he bought, which is just as meaningful as the "Tesla founder" title he bought himself. > So people who don't have a Ph.D. aren't engineers? The issue is not the lack of a ph.D. It's the lack of anything beside a B.Sc. > Are the CEOs of Google and Facebook still engineers if they aren't writing code? Well, those who…

[deleted]

Re: Auto manufacturer family tree: Who owns what?

#146

Post by pmcollins »

camjohnson26 wrote: post #120

And a few months ago Tesla was valued more than all the brands on the list, combined. If that isn’t a sign of a stock market bubble I don’t know what is. https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/14/tesla-valuation-more-than-ni...

if apple were worth more than all of the other personal computer makers combined (maybe it is idk) would that also be a sign of a bubble? is that all it takes or does growth rate matter?

Re: Auto manufacturer family tree: Who owns what?

#147

Post by PraetorianGourd »

option wrote: post #82

Before buying any Volvo or Polestar consider that those are owned by China.

Almost without a doubt, so is the company that made the device you are typing on. Likewise, the chair you are sitting on. If you are standing, there is a good chance one of the articles of clothing on you are "owned by China". If you are driving today, a vast majority of the parts in your car were made in China by Chinese companies. The brakes that you depend on were made in China, as were the spark plugs which ignite the fuel (most likely not domestic) that is transferred through the gears (of Chinese origin). The energy moving the Chinese made differential being transferred to the axels and eventually the tires, made in China, to the road, perhaps financed via Chinese loans.

But yeah, buying a Volvo is what keeps the CCP in power.

Re: Auto manufacturer family tree: Who owns what?

#148

Post by twoWhlsGud »

s0rce wrote: post #131
pr0zac wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I already don't buy Arc'teryx cause their stuff is way over priced but good to have yet another reason not to do so!

I liked their stuff more when it was made in Canada. Some of it is still pretty good and if you get on sale/clearance/used its not that bad. I've had some jackets for 10 years.

Same here - fond memories of visiting the factory to buy seconds in Vancouver. Recently had a bad experience with a failure of a brand new glove followed by lousy customer service - ended up just throwing away the thing. (The plural of anecdote is not data, I know...) But with so many alternatives that don't fund dictatorships I don't see why I should buy their stuff if I don't have too...

Re: Auto manufacturer family tree: Who owns what?

#149

Post by 2143 »

mabbo wrote: post #58
netfl0 wrote: post #6

I did not know TATA owns Land Rover and Jaguar!

Interestingly, TCS (Tata Consultancy Services) which many people on HN would recognize, is a publicly traded company- yet something like 70% of it's shares are owned by Tata Group, and it's a massive part of their income.

> it's a massive part of their income I'm pretty sure the income is massive, but it might not be where the majority of the money comes from.

Tata is a huge conglomerate with businesses that apparently have nothing to do with each other.

Steel, Salt, coffee/tea, hotel chains, multiple airlines, IT, car companies, watches, financial companies, phone companies (?), jewellery, air conditioners, the list goes on.

(Whether any of their products are good is a different matter; it may or may not be — I don't really know.)

Tata motors in India has been pretty good over the last few years. They now make very desirable products designed for the Indian market — ie., spacious, efficient, practical cars with good enough performance, reliability, high scores in GNCAP crash tests, at a price which a lot of Indians can afford.

Tata cars probably won't win any races, but they have finally figured out the pulse of the Indian market.

Re: Auto manufacturer family tree: Who owns what?

#150

Post by 2143 »

arethuza wrote: post #87
helij wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also, one of the oldest car manufacturers in the world.

And a maker of great value practical cars - my last 3 cars (and my wife's last 2 cars) have all been Škodas. However, I was disappointed that they stopped making the Yeti.

Are Skoda cars with DSG transmissions reliable in Europe?

They're unreliable where I'm from.

Otherwise, they make fabulous desirable cars.

Post reply on HN