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

Tesla ending Models S and X production

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

751–760 of 1001 posts

Re: Tesla ending Models S and X production

#751

Post by WarmWash »

jacquesm wrote: post #691
sgjohnson wrote: post #485

Tesla will become a case study on how to completely waste the first-mover advantage. For many people, the very term EV itself is still ubiquitous to Tesla. And somehow Tesla is still worth more than every other non-Chinese automaker combined. $1.5T. GM? $80B. Stellantis? $40B. Toyota? $280B. Mercedes-Benz? $60B. BMW? $55B. Volkswagen Group? Also $55B. I’m sure I’ve missed plenty of others, but I could miss some 18 $5…

Tesla benefited from tax payer subsidies.

Trust me, I hate Tesla and Elon as much as the next naysayer

But just to keep the story straight

Tesla received ~$3 billion in subsidies.

When Elon exercised his Tesla options in 2021, he paid $11 billion in taxes on it.

By all accounts those subsidies were an incredibly good use of taxpayer money, and similar subsidies should keep being handed out, even if the byproduct is another big troll on twitter.

Re: Tesla ending Models S and X production

#752

Post by mdavid626 »

flakeoil wrote: post #490
mdavid626 wrote: post #372

So many Tesla/Musk haters around here.

People are just being rational and pragmatic.

It’s always funny to me that hating is fine if the person justifies it by some reason, but it’s generally not accepted, when that person doesn’t care about the reason.

“Stop the hate”, but of course only if it’s not me hating. Because that hate is valid and justified.

Re: Tesla ending Models S and X production

#753

Post by jordanb »

Traster wrote: post #517
sgjohnson wrote: post #485

Tesla will become a case study on how to completely waste the first-mover advantage. For many people, the very term EV itself is still ubiquitous to Tesla. And somehow Tesla is still worth more than every other non-Chinese automaker combined. $1.5T. GM? $80B. Stellantis? $40B. Toyota? $280B. Mercedes-Benz? $60B. BMW? $55B. Volkswagen Group? Also $55B. I’m sure I’ve missed plenty of others, but I could miss some 18 $5…

I think you're totally wrong on this. Tesla didn't waste the first mover advantage. They benefitted from it whilst it existed, but Electric vehicles turned into a commodity, which was entirely expected and there's no moat. You've explained yourself why it would be untenable for Musk to pursue becoming the biggest car manufacturer in the world - if he succeeded in that goal... he would have succeded in shrinking the v…

Tesla's original "secret plan" (published on their website) was to become a commodity car manufacturer faster than electric cars became a commodity. Such that the other manufacturers would find them selling obsolete vehicles and Tesla just becomes the new General Motors.

This was the justification for their stock price for quite a few years: "It's logical that Tesla is worth more than all other automakers combined because it will soon be the only automaker."

Then in 2022 Elon basically admitted that they couldn't win on production and had to continue to win on technology and they'd do that with self driving. [https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-tesla-worth-basica...]

But now Tesla is way behind on self driving (which was oversold by the whole industry tbh). So what's their new plan? Now they're no longer a car company and will make robots!

Re: Tesla ending Models S and X production

#754

Post by ted_dunning »

CalChris wrote: post #282

One of Oxide+Friends predictions was "6 year: Tesla is out of the consumer car business". https://oxide-and-friends.transistor.fm/episodes/predictions...

Even Tesla pessimists would probably agree with that. The question is whether they will be in any other business by then.

Re: Tesla ending Models S and X production

#755

Post by WarmWash »

sebastian_z wrote: post #715

A genuine question, what are the use cases for Tesla's Optimus robots? Are they consumer products that help with household chores, industrial robots for warehouses or manufacturing, a play toy, something else?

>A genuine question, what are the use cases for Tesla's Optimus robots?

A longer horizon promise of multi-trillion dollar wealth generation for Tesla.

As the whole robotaxi thing is starting to fizzle, Elon has quite notably talked more and more about how actually Optimus is the true gem of Tesla.

Re: Tesla ending Models S and X production

#756

Post by groundzeros2015 »

throwaway132448 wrote: post #733
groundzeros2015 wrote: post #721

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People are losing money and a product they liked because they imagine disliking it hurts an individual they don’t like. This is a lose/lose enemy centered mindset, and a weird personification of a corporation.

[flagged]

It’s more like a vodoo doll. You hurt yourself AND don’t make the world any better, but maybe it feels good to imagine the symbol getting hurt.

Re: Tesla ending Models S and X production

#758

Post by vdm »

Deklomalo wrote: post #520
lacker wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they actually worked right now, the demand would be high. Demand is certainly high for Waymos. Even if they worked worse than a Waymo I think the demand would still be very high. But it's hard to tell if (or when) it will work well enough to actually be a real product.

The question is what 'high' means in context of revenue. Uber, the globally available taxi company, is valued 8 times less than tesla. If you are now able to kill all the costs for the taxi driving and reduce the cost for the car also, how much revenue is left? Robotaxi has to be cheaper than a normal taxi to kill taxis. The margin of that company can't be that much more than a company like uber. And uber itself will…

> has to be cheaper than a normal taxi

... plus 24/7 shifts of human drivers

Re: Tesla ending Models S and X production

#759

Post by iamleppert »

mustyoshi wrote: post #694
Deklomalo wrote: post #520

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The question is what 'high' means in context of revenue. Uber, the globally available taxi company, is valued 8 times less than tesla. If you are now able to kill all the costs for the taxi driving and reduce the cost for the car also, how much revenue is left? Robotaxi has to be cheaper than a normal taxi to kill taxis. The margin of that company can't be that much more than a company like uber. And uber itself will…

>Robotaxi has to be cheaper than a normal taxi to kill taxis. The margin of that company can't be that much more than a company like uber. This just isn't true. If you're a woman, choosing a slightly more expensive robotaxi over a ride share where you might meet your end is a valid choice.

At the end of the day, you're still trusting a misogynistic man to get you from point A to point B. One drives the car and works as a gig worker and wears a flannel shirt, and the other sits in an office at Waymo HQ, wears a patagonia vest. Both are still part of the patriarchy and have very little interest in making sure you're safe, unless there's money to be made.

Re: Tesla ending Models S and X production

#760

Post by maxglute »

thesmtsolver2 wrote: post #350
defrost wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And yet Chinese EV's are flying out of their factories, well, a few are - most are self driving out to the shipping yards. This despite the 2025 support by the Chinese state for the Chines EV industry now being almost nothing. By contrast, defenders of China could point out that the data show that subsidies as a percentage of total sales have declined substantially, from over 40% in the early years to only 11.5% in 2…

You should also factor in lax human rights enforcement in China (which acts like a subsidy essentially in effect and is not factored in these calculations): https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2024/10/human-rights-... BYD is at the bottom of the list (worst for human rights). Tesla is second at the top (better for human rights).

This is a retarded list of self reported paper commitments, not actual practice, i.e. no actual supply chain assessment was done, not that you can trust a propaganda shitrag like amnesty. Tesla simply "promises" in their PR to be better for human rights. Hint 50%+ of Tesla exports come from Tesla Shanghai which uses same supply raw material supply chain as rest of PRC auto, functionally they're the same.

Meanwhile how do you factoring in PRC manufacturing is simply more modern with more labour saving automation, i.e. they simply have less people to "abuse". PRC simply be peak human rights by eliminating the most humans from process.

Post reply on HN