181–190 of 376 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
GM isn't a threat to tesla unless Cadillac starts selling something to compete with the model S. As a Tesla shareholder what keeps me up at night are Mercedes, BMW, and Lexus.
Have you seen the 2016 Cadillac ELR? [ 1 ] As it turns out, it's already discontinued? [1] http://www.cadillac.com/legacy-vehicles.html
Is this showing that they haven´t found a Chinese company that could compete against tesla? China is investing a lot in Solar energy, batteries and have car companies that want to become global players, and most of Tencent investments are on Chinese companies that make products focused on China and Asian markets. I do not know if they buying in open market tells more about Tesla potential or about China future in car…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
EVs are unpopular because cheap ones aren't very good yet. You have to choose between almost unusably short range, or a very high price. Something like the LEAF is affordable, but only useful as a city car. A Model S is a great car, but extremely expensive. The cost is coming down. Chevy is now selling the Bolt, which has pretty good range, for under $40,000. Tesla's Model 3 is coming soon. More will follow. The high…
I've had the exact same discussion with somebody else today on /r/futurology, more exactly I told him that "under $40,000" it's still pretty damn expensive for a small hatchback. My 1.4l European small hatchback costs around 13,000 euros new, you just can't expect people to not take into consideration the huge difference between the 2 prices.
So, nobody pays the full price of an EV at the moment. You can currently buy 1-2 year-old, certified Nissan Leafs for less than $13,000.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Or withdrawals from people. The deposits are non-committal so people can cancel without losing anything. I feel this is going to be the killer for them.
I would assume that a company investing billions would try very hard to make accurate sales estimates. I would be surprised if Tesla isn't surveying random people on the list, asking questions about their planned purchase and making estimates on the % that will end up cancelling.
I hope this would give an accurate result. People might say one thing and do something else when they have to actually shell out the money...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm curious about what you would consider a tech company. For me a tech company is any company that uses the development of technology as a competitive advantage. Solar is not, major solar companies are not developing innovative technology. Tesla is, they do not have an advantage in scale or low prices, but have advantage in how their vehicles function.
For me a tech company is any company that uses the development of technology as a competitive advantage. So then is Ford a tech company? If not, then I'd be interested to hear why not, based on that criteria. Their cars are technology and they continuously develop and improve them as a competitive advantage. I think people think of Tesla as a tech company because the founder is Elon Musk. If Tesla were a spin-off bra…
I've been thinking about it, and this is where I've landed.
Most companies develop technology as a competitive advantage these days, certainly any large company. Walmart has innovated a lot in the supply chain management space, but most people don't consider Walmart a tech company. It's a company that uses technology to deliver goods and services cheaper, more reliably, etc. This is essentially true for Ford also. People generally don't buy a Ford because of any technological innovation. So even though it is Ford's technology that lets them deliver an affordable, reliable car, people don't think of Ford as a tech company.
Whereas Tesla's primary focus is on developing new technology. Their product is not really cars; their real product is inventing and applying new scientific knowledge. The car is a way to fund that research, i.e., it's the opposite of a traditional car company where research is a way to sell cars. Elon Musk has said that Tesla is a battery company, not a car company. His stated goal of Tesla is to "is to change the way the world uses energy at an extreme scale."
So, that feels like a legitimate difference to me. But I think you're actually right that it's a tech company mostly just because the founder is Elon Musk, insomuch as he is the one driving the focus and vision of the company. That is, he is the one saying Tesla is a battery company instead of a car company.
A more interesting comparison to me would be Volvo. I don't know if it's still true, but for decades Volvo was a leader in passenger safety. They had the first 3-point seat belt, first side impact airbags, first blindspot detection system, among others IIRC. I'm still not sure they'd be considered a tech company, in that they were using the safety innovation primarily to drive sales of cars. But I think it's a bit more nebulous. If they'd had a marketing-savvy CEO who proclaimed, "Volvo is a safety innovation company, not a car company," I don't know. :)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> when they seriously start releasing electric vehicles They've been "serious" for a long time. Chevy has been selling the Volt since 2010. If they were going to muscle out Tesla they would have done it by now. And it's not just about technology. Tesla has the customer reputation that companies like GM will never have again.
GM isn't a threat to tesla unless Cadillac starts selling something to compete with the model S. As a Tesla shareholder what keeps me up at night are Mercedes, BMW, and Lexus.
Tesla recently announced they are ramping up their Model 3 production even more than what some people thought was already optimistic numbers: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-03-27/tesla-mod... > For Musk to hit all of his targets, Tesla would need to build about 430,000 Model 3s by the end of next year. That’s more than all of the electric cars sold planet-wide last year. > Even if half of the Model 3 in…
> environment as well It's not going to do anything great for the environment and we've been over this on previous Tesla threads (years ago). Driving electric cars instead of hybrids in areas where the electricity is primarily derived from unclean sources is not better than hybrids for the environment.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes. Short-selling pioneer Bob Wilson nailed the key insight on these situations. They are "manana stocks," Wilson declared, way back in the 1970s. Their valuation is premised on the notion that something wonderful will happen in the future. Time horizons keep being pushed out, but the stocks' fans don't mind. Shorts can get very cranky and righteous about each little bit of slippage. But as long as new enthusiasts k…
Best case: you're shorting Sun Microsystems at the beginning of 2000, and it goes from $300/share to $3/share in the next 3 years. ( http://www.1stock1.com/1stock1_211.htm ) My advice is to just not touch tech stocks; going short on them is just as dangerous as going long.
Tesla shorts can't get a break. First a smooth $1B+ capital raise without a stock hiccup and now this.
I didn't short the stock but I can understand why someone would. They are expected to generate over 90% of their value after 2020 [0]. There's the expectation that Elon Musk will definitely deliver, that Tesla market share will not be eaten up by other carmakers when they seriously start releasing electric vehicles. The expectation that electric and not another form of energy, such as hydrogen, will dominate, etc. Th…
Tesla recently announced they are ramping up their Model 3 production even more than what some people thought was already optimistic numbers: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-03-27/tesla-mod... > For Musk to hit all of his targets, Tesla would need to build about 430,000 Model 3s by the end of next year. That’s more than all of the electric cars sold planet-wide last year. > Even if half of the Model 3 in…
That quote implies people won't choose to buy that many Model 3's. We know there are almost that many pre-orders, so it's not a question, and it's not something to be doubted. It's a fact people will spend their money that way.