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

921–930 of 1001 posts

Re: Tesla ending Models S and X production

#921

Post by Calavar »

marcusverus wrote: post #834
radlad wrote: post #741

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I assume OP meant something closer to "fair market value" than "fair vs. unfair." Tesla is not priced according to its underlying assets or technical analysis (e.g. P/E ratio), but solely based on hype/sentiment. Interestingly, retail investors and company insiders collectively own more of Tesla than institutional investors.

Fair market value: the price at which a thing would change hands between a willing and informed buyer and seller. A company's market cap is, by definition, its fair market value. > Tesla is not priced according to its underlying assets or technical analysis (e.g. P/E ratio), but solely based on hype/sentiment. You're right that it's not priced according to underlying assets, but it doesn't follow that it is priced on…

Talk about market cap, especially meme stock maket cap, reminds me of that old XKCD comic on extrapolation. Market cap is what you get when you extrapolate the fair market value for the 1% of a company's shares currently on the market all the way out to 100%. But demand doesn't work that way - it doesn't scale linearly.

Re: Tesla ending Models S and X production

#922

Post by BadBadJellyBean »

apublicfrog wrote: post #916
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. I'm not sure that's true. Self serve checkouts are killing the checkout. Washing machines killed the washing board. Something can be the same price or dearer if it's more convenient.

That comparison has the problem that it is not comparable. A robo taxi is not much different from human taxi. I can not see much of an improvement for the rider. Whereas washing machines are an incredible time saver and self checkouts can be faster (especially if you use these little hand scanners).

Re: Tesla ending Models S and X production

#923

Post by insane_dreamer »

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 these days you have to look at Tesla stock more like crypto -- you're betting on the hype and hope to ride the wave and exit before it crashes.

Re: Tesla ending Models S and X production

#924

Post by crusty »

CursedSilicon wrote: post #339
JasonBorne wrote: post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course it will be high. Transit is a huge market. They would just need a small share of Uber, lyft, regular taxis, public transit.

Private taxis don't compete with public transit. They operate in completely different spheres

I imagine this seems "true" to people who don't consider public transit an option for whatever (class) reason.

As others have said, they definitely compete in the same market.

Re: Tesla ending Models S and X production

#925

Post by maxglute »

yorwba wrote: post #908
maxglute wrote: post #814

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's not really NEV oversupply, the EV adoption curve will keep shooting up from 50% to 100%, many PRC EV companies will die from competition/pricewar consolidation not broader oversupply, since EV industrial base is still undersupply relative to 100% adoption curve. Oversupply is in legacy ICE displacement due to rapid domestic EV penetration. "Zero-milage used car" accounting trick is primarily to export excess…

The Reuters article focuses on exports because that's what their target audience is likely to be interested in, but the People's Daily article they reference in passing https://paper.people.com.cn/rmrb/pc/content/202506/10/conten... is treating it as a domestic problem, highlighting the appearance of "zero-mileage used cars" on the second-hand market, specifically calls out EV companies for putting quantity over qual…

Domestic problem as in domestic involution problem not a EV overcapacity problem. I'm pointing out important to distinguish between ICE and EV, ICE is structural overcapacity, EV is under capacity but involution. ICE zero mile shenanigans is to liquidate/ unload excess inventory that doesn't have demand in PRC, mostly targeting loopholes in russia, central asia, mena. There's (less regulates) markets other than EU.

BYD/EV zero mile hack is more for subsidy harvesting, they're trying to dip on domestic subsidies for new sales then skip on stuff like servicing/warranty because used sale, i.e. shady involution behavior that abuse national policies, hence crackdown. It's not because EV are excess capacity, but so many EV players involuting and accountants find creative ways to carve margin. It's not EV sector makes 100 cars can only sell 50, because overcapacity, so discount to sell 100. It's EV sector makes 100 cars, sell 100 @1% margin but with some engineering they sell 100 @2% margin.

Yes, there are some brands that does use it for price cuts, premium brands, i.e. nio/xpeng, who won't lower sticker price, so they have to flip to lower price in used market. But that's also less overcapacity, more PRC EV moving so fast last few years no one wants 12 month old models. AKA tech stack progressing so fast / involution pressures so hard consumers won't pay sticker for anything older than 1 gen. What happens PRC manufacturing turns car cycles into phones obsolescence cycles. The broader the point here is EV makers are generally not doing accounting tricks to sell more cars due overcapacity / lack of demand (what over capacity implies), they're doing accounting tricks to sell the same amount of cars to make their razer thin involution margins slightly less razer thin, at the expense of the government.

Re: Tesla ending Models S and X production

#926

Post by xnx »

lnsru wrote: post #355
rswail wrote: post #334

So he milked Tesla for another $2B to subsidize xAI, has dropped the models to 2 (3 and Y), revenue is down, growth is negative, BYD is eating Tesla for lunch, followed by the other CN and KR vehicle companies. He doesn't have FSD, camera only navigation without sensor fusion with LIDAR will fail, the only thing keeping Tesla where it is is the bullshit dispersal field that surrounds Musk.

The gamble with Cybertruck failed. It’s common sense, that such a vehicle will fail. The successful cars are made for masses and not for niche buyers. Common sense product could be something smaller than Model 3 for Europe and this car would eat Chinese for lunch. Expensive experiment failed, it’s time for consequences. Does Tesla have resources for another car experiment? Will it stay a car company?.. Or it will be…

A Cybertruck-styled minivan would've been so badass. Like an updated version of the Toyota Van Wagon.

Re: Tesla ending Models S and X production

#927

Post by breve »

assimpleaspossi wrote: post #720
breve wrote: post #546

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. It's a flop: https://insideevs.com/news/784715/tesla-cybertruck-ev-sales-...

A flop is not a truck that was the best selling in the world two years ago and then 3/4 as many as Ford's EV truck and more than everyone else (according to your link). And since when is HN just like Reddit when one is downvoted for asking a question for clarity?

It's a flop. The Cybertruck didn't meet its sales targets and the sales it did have in 2024 were cut in half in 2025. It will continue to struggle in 2026:

https://www.fastcompany.com/91475013/2026-will-be-the-year-c...

Re: Tesla ending Models S and X production

#928

Post by pants2 »

Multiplayer wrote: post #804
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…

GM Supercruise on my 2024 Silverado RST is a joke compared to Tesla FSD. It's not even remotely comparable. Supercruise only works on freeways/highways, does not understand ANY navigation. It's a better cruise control, that's about it. I own 2 Tesla model S of different vintages and FSD is a completely different animal. My 2017 model s can navigate from my house to, well, anywhere, with no intervention. I have been v…

The only thing remotely comparable in the US is probably a Comma 4 with a forked OpenPilot build on a well-supported vehicle

Re: Tesla ending Models S and X production

#929

Post by radlad »

marcusverus wrote: post #834
radlad wrote: post #741

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I assume OP meant something closer to "fair market value" than "fair vs. unfair." Tesla is not priced according to its underlying assets or technical analysis (e.g. P/E ratio), but solely based on hype/sentiment. Interestingly, retail investors and company insiders collectively own more of Tesla than institutional investors.

Fair market value: the price at which a thing would change hands between a willing and informed buyer and seller. A company's market cap is, by definition, its fair market value. > Tesla is not priced according to its underlying assets or technical analysis (e.g. P/E ratio), but solely based on hype/sentiment. You're right that it's not priced according to underlying assets, but it doesn't follow that it is priced on…

That's actually not quite what FMV is: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/f/fairmarketvalue.asp

> Fair market value (FMV) is similar to market value, which is the price that the asset would trade for in the open market under current conditions. However, fair market value has the following additional assumptions: Both buyer and seller are reasonably knowledgeable about the asset, Buyer and seller are behaving in their own best interests, Both parties are free of undue pressure, Each is given a reasonable period for completing the transaction.

However that's why I said "something closer to FMV" as yes - what you described is generally how FMV is calculated for things like stock options.

> but it doesn't follow that it is priced on vibes. Its price is based on potential future earnings

To be clear, I also didn't use the word "vibes," but rather "hype/sentiment" which refers to things like "the expectation that Elon can pull off his plans for a robotaxi fleet or building an Optimus robot that might unlock the massive demand for household and/or general use commercial robots." I'm not sure where you got "vibes" that you quoted in your reply.

Technical analysis uses statistics (e.g. P/E ratios) and marketplace analysis to determine if future potential earnings are worth the price of the stock. TSLA's price is far in excess of any technical analysis I have seen.

> The company is also led by a man who has made and delivered on massive, seemingly impossible promises, which adds credibility to the idea that Tesla might actually bring these markets into existence.

We might have to agree to disagree on this one. (Are we FSD yet?)

Re: Tesla ending Models S and X production

#930

Post by philistine »

hbarka wrote: post #812
philistine wrote: post #774

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most probably because it has a radar that the Tesla lacks. That means your car has two sources of truth and can very efficiently and quickly make an informed decision about whether or not there's anything in the way.

My Model 3 has radar. It’s no longer functional and just a useless appendage. Until 2020-21 all Tesla had radar but Musk directed Tesla to disable the radar from the software stack, nerfing this hardware on tens of thousands of cars. Why? Because he staked on camera-only and to find out there’s still radar fusion would be against that. The real truth is probably they were derisking the part cost (during Covid) and th…

> The real Tesla engineers must be in all kinds of frustrations

That's a very Hacker News point of view, that *of course* engineers have the correct opinion and attitude and are merely suffering under the boots of the real incompetent and nefarious.

Engineers at Tesla are wholly complicit.

Post reply on HN