Tesla Passes Ford by Market Value • Hacker News Board

Re: Tesla Passes Ford by Market Value

#251

Post by iamacynic » Mon, Apr 03, 2017, 6:27 PM UTC

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #111

oculusthrift wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

except ford is spending an order of magnitude more than tesla. it's much easier to spend 100 dollars meaningfully than a 100 billion. I also hope you're willing to level the same charge at Google and Apple.

It is like comparing a spunky startup to an entrenched corporation. Ya, IBM once spent more than Facebook, but Facebook was worth more because it had potential while IBM didn't. Ford doesn't have any good ideas for the future, they are too busy with the here and now and haven't shown an ability to do anything but incremental improvements with their R&D spending. Like we don't expect much more from IBM, we don't expec…

> Ford doesn't have any good ideas for the future, they are too busy with the here and now

according to who? your average HN reader who basically hates cars? yeah, sure. the guy who hates cars is bearish on ford, shocking.

what about all the people buying raptors and gt350s and fgts and fists and fosts, hand over fist?

do you even know what i'm talking about? do these insanely popular cars even register on your radar?

it sounds like you're not-a-car-guy-but-a-tech-guy which makes up for a huge portion of tesla fans. and you're exposed when you make shit up like "ford doesn't innovate" or whatever your thesis is.

signed,

-not even a ford guy. porsche, there is no substitute.

Re: Tesla Passes Ford by Market Value

#252

Post by allendoerfer » Mon, Apr 03, 2017, 6:29 PM UTC

crabasa wrote: post #57

dan1234 wrote: post #2

Interesting, but market cap isn’t everything - FTA: "While Tesla’s market capitalization has swelled in size, Ford still overshadows the Palo Alto, California-based company in most other financial metrics. Over the last five years, Ford has posted net income totaling $26 billion, while Tesla has lost $2.3 billion. Last year, Ford had annual revenue of $151.8 billion compared with Tesla’s $7 billion. And when it comes…

> Over the last five years, Ford has posted net income totaling $26 billion, while Tesla has lost $2.3 billion. Ford: "We have no idea how to invest this money. I guess let's just put it in the bank." Tesla: "We have so many idea for investments, we're only constrained by cash. Let's go back to the capital markets!"

> Ford: "We have no idea how to invest this money. I guess let's just put it in the bank."

> Tesla: "We have so many idea for investments, we're only constrained by cash. Let's go back to the capital markets!"

I think becoming as big as Ford already is, is one of Tesla's most positive possible futures if all of their many ideas play out. But they are already valued higher than that. How can this possibly work? There are so many car makers, there is no monopole they could get. Same for solar and batteries.

Re: Tesla Passes Ford by Market Value

#253

Post by truebosko » Mon, Apr 03, 2017, 6:30 PM UTC

This is exciting, but Ford continues to be a major player. They just invested $1 billion in R&D in Ontario, Canada. Seems like they are on the right path, but perhaps don't have the flexibility and velocity of a (relatively) smaller company like Tesla.

Re: Tesla Passes Ford by Market Value

#254

Post by calpaterson » Mon, Apr 03, 2017, 6:30 PM UTC

dan1234 wrote: post #2

Interesting, but market cap isn’t everything - FTA: "While Tesla’s market capitalization has swelled in size, Ford still overshadows the Palo Alto, California-based company in most other financial metrics. Over the last five years, Ford has posted net income totaling $26 billion, while Tesla has lost $2.3 billion. Last year, Ford had annual revenue of $151.8 billion compared with Tesla’s $7 billion. And when it comes…

No, market cap is not everything. Specifically it is not enterprise value, which is the correct measure of the value of a business.

Market cap is the value of the equity. Enterprise value is the value of the business (ie including debt). Tesla's EV is $52bn. Ford's EV is $150bn.

Re: Tesla Passes Ford by Market Value

#255

Post by _pmf_ » Mon, Apr 03, 2017, 6:31 PM UTC

Spooky23 wrote: post #48

dan1234 wrote: post #2

Interesting, but market cap isn’t everything - FTA: "While Tesla’s market capitalization has swelled in size, Ford still overshadows the Palo Alto, California-based company in most other financial metrics. Over the last five years, Ford has posted net income totaling $26 billion, while Tesla has lost $2.3 billion. Last year, Ford had annual revenue of $151.8 billion compared with Tesla’s $7 billion. And when it comes…

The market makes mistakes over value all of the time. Look at the sad tale of post-bankruptcy Kmart, and how they used hype, valuation and newly available credit to gobble up Sears. Predicable trainwreck ensued. Tesla is alike and different. They have an amazing management team, Apple-like religious fervor/hype machine, but a marginal product category. Their continued growth is only possible as long as they can convi…

> Apple-like religious fervor/hype machine

But Apple won people over with the actual product, not with a great product promise that has been implemented haphazardly.

Re: Tesla Passes Ford by Market Value

#256

Post by briandear » Mon, Apr 03, 2017, 6:31 PM UTC

jernfrost wrote: post #72

aphextron wrote: post #59

Ford has dozens of production facilities across every continent on earth producing millions of vehicles a year. How can Tesla possibly be more valuable?

It is all about who owns the future. E.g. how much would you value the stock of SpaceX competitors now that SpaceX can fly reused rockets? Doesn't matter how many factories these guys have. They will be destroyed because they will never be able to compete on price, with somebody who can just refuel their rocket while you have to build a whole new one each time. People value stocks based on what they think the future…

Do you actually think other rocket companies won't be able to do that? Tesla doesn't have a monopoly on the future. Also SpaceX isn't Tesla.

Re: Tesla Passes Ford by Market Value

#257

Post by hackuser » Mon, Apr 03, 2017, 6:31 PM UTC

hackuser wrote: post #237

Often discussed outside HN, but almost never heard here: Many are investing in his relationship with President Trump. At least two major investment banks [0][1][2] advised their clients of it and many other observers and investors think so too. [3][4] Again, outside HN it's not an uncommon idea; just search a news aggregator for "musk trump". EDIT: It's a very serious problem if we lose free market competition, and i…

@dang, @mods: I don't care about this one comment, and obviously HN is your forum and you can score things however you want. However, please let us know your policies so that commenters can willingly follow them and so that they don't waste their valuable time contributing things that are unwanted and will be underutilized (and in fairness those contributions are most of HN's value). Please be open about it (whatever 'it' is); we shouldn't have to guess.

When the above comment was posted, it immediately was below 7 other threads and hundreds of comments, and it dropped quickly since then, despite no downvotes. That is odd behavior; usually new comments start at the top, or near it, unless the user is brand new or has some other problem (I'm in neither category AFAIK; most of my other comments seem to behave within the range of normality). I've seen other recent comments exhibit this different behavior. I see nothing that would algorithmically trigger anything; it's not short, it contains no inflammatory words, no all caps, etc.

My guess, based on eyeballing the anecdotal evidence is that mentioning "Trump" is the problem. If you object to it, please just say so. I think it's a bad idea to single him out - his presidency will have a very serious impact on the IT industry, startups, and many broader things that HN readers hold dear. But that's a different issue. Please give us the courtesy of letting us know, whatever it is, Trump or not.

EDIT: You objected previously to something I wrote that mentioned Trump, but I wasn't clear what the objection was - mentioning Trump? something else? I responded and asked, but I think too late to be noticed, so I still don't know. I really have no idea what's going on. The thread with my question is here:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13880838

Re: Tesla Passes Ford by Market Value

#258

Post by toddmorey » Mon, Apr 03, 2017, 6:32 PM UTC

dan1234 wrote: post #2

Interesting, but market cap isn’t everything - FTA: "While Tesla’s market capitalization has swelled in size, Ford still overshadows the Palo Alto, California-based company in most other financial metrics. Over the last five years, Ford has posted net income totaling $26 billion, while Tesla has lost $2.3 billion. Last year, Ford had annual revenue of $151.8 billion compared with Tesla’s $7 billion. And when it comes…

I'll put the math behind the numbers aside just for a moment to consider this is still a pretty impressive feat. I wouldn't have believed it 24 months ago. Also wouldn't have predicted for Ford and other nameplates to remain so static in this category. A high performance luxury EV just seems a great asset for any brand at the moment, even selling in lower numbers. We're at one of those shifts in technology where the cards get shuffled. I think Porsche gets it. Jaguar. Maybe Chevy.

Tesla is reminding me a lot of early Apple—equally rapid supporters and detractors. If anything, that means people find your work interesting. (Wonder if Elon will send out a staff note mirroring the note Jobs sent when Apple first passed Dell in market cap.)

Re: Tesla Passes Ford by Market Value

#259

Post by mywittyname » Mon, Apr 03, 2017, 6:33 PM UTC

awj wrote: post #63

John23832 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That makes no sense. Companies seek to be viable in the future. If Ford or GM feel that an electric car is on the horizon and that car will eat their (ICE) lunch, they will pivot. By your logic Tesla would have been locked out of the VC/investment market due to Big Oil. Money flows like water.

> Companies seek to be viable in the future. Companies seek to outperform themselves relative to the last quarter and year. Long term strategy like this takes a backseat, if it gets attention at all. It certainly doesn't get the luxury of a whole company pivot that could tank short term value. Need proof? Look at all of the American companies that got caught with their pants down shipping nothing but bigger SUVs when…

Ford has much more private interests (the Ford family) than other car companies so tends to think more long-term. Remember they weathered 2008 without needing a bailout.

They've also ditched the high-end SUV market right as that market exploded all over the world, thus missed out on massive profits because they no longer sold an Expedition. They openly admit to ceding the market to GM in their annual letters to shareholders specifically because they don't see gas-guzzling SUVs as long-term investments.

They also lead the market in fleet and industry-oriented products. They offer both technology and core-products designed to keep the incredibly lucrative fleet buyers happy.

In this regard, Ford is akin to Microsoft: their consumer products aren't mind blowing, but their corporate products are so well entrenched that they will be a practical ATM for the next decades. Ford sells six times as many F150s as Toyota sells Tundras and they own the entire small cargo van market.

Re: Tesla Passes Ford by Market Value

#260

Post by paulpauper » Mon, Apr 03, 2017, 6:33 PM UTC

hodder wrote: post #223

Can anyone long the stock who is bullish about the future growth of production, cars, batteries etc write down some quick napkin math on future expectations that would justify your investment at this valuation? I have yet to hear a bull case with any actual math behind it, but am willing to hear you out. Something like: cars sold by yr, Margins. battery wall, solar sold by year. Margins. multiples assumed on revenue…

The thing is, Wall St. already factored all that stuff into their valuation and determined that the 'fair price' is $290/share (as of today).

Tesla's car business is quite profitable and has huge growth...that's what matters http://greyenlightenment.com/another-correct-prediction-tesl...

In the late 90' during the tech bubble, companies that had negative cash flow operation were bid to the stratosphere. Tesla and Amazon however have positive cashflow for operations and huge growth.

People said the same thing about Facebook in 2012-2013 and Google in 2004-2005: how will they (Google and Facebook) justify their valuations? Well, they did. Wall St. sometimes get it terribly wrong (Infospace in 2000) and other time very right.

Sometimes it doesn't make sense...but there is a method to the market's madness.