MrQuackers
Site Donor 2024
Market manipulation.
Explain to me why Tesla stock tanked...broken glass?
- Thread starter Vern_in_IL
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted by SirTanon
Because the 'truck' looks like a Delorean had sex with one of the trucks from Mad Max and this was the outcome. Everyone thinks it's stupid or a joke.
My theory? Musk has lost it and is now just thinking "I'm super rich. Time to make the most outlandish and ludicrous thing I can and see if anyone will actually call me out on it"
It looks like something designed by a blind engineer with a T square.
Because the 'truck' looks like a Delorean had sex with one of the trucks from Mad Max and this was the outcome. Everyone thinks it's stupid or a joke.
My theory? Musk has lost it and is now just thinking "I'm super rich. Time to make the most outlandish and ludicrous thing I can and see if anyone will actually call me out on it"
It looks like something designed by a blind engineer with a T square.
Looks like a pinewood derby car made by a Boy Scout who's dad doesn't have enough time for him.
Originally Posted by JeffKeryk
Is is normal, even correct for the company to not be profitable at this point.
You don't really believe that, do you? Tesla has been around since 2003. That's 16 years without a sustained annual profit. To top it off, Tesla only survives because of tax credits. ZEV credits, non-ZEV credits and US Federal income tax (FIT) credits. In Q3 of 2018 alone Tesla benefited from $713 million in US tax credits-one single quarter of 2018. $189 million arrived directly on Tesla's own books, another $524 million ($7,500 x 69,925 cars) benefited Tesla indirectly. One single quarter of the year. Without almost 3/4 of a billion dollars every quarter in credits, Tesla would not be in business. Total credits per car are just over $10,000.
Without subsidies and credits there would be no Tesla.
Is is normal, even correct for the company to not be profitable at this point.
You don't really believe that, do you? Tesla has been around since 2003. That's 16 years without a sustained annual profit. To top it off, Tesla only survives because of tax credits. ZEV credits, non-ZEV credits and US Federal income tax (FIT) credits. In Q3 of 2018 alone Tesla benefited from $713 million in US tax credits-one single quarter of 2018. $189 million arrived directly on Tesla's own books, another $524 million ($7,500 x 69,925 cars) benefited Tesla indirectly. One single quarter of the year. Without almost 3/4 of a billion dollars every quarter in credits, Tesla would not be in business. Total credits per car are just over $10,000.
Without subsidies and credits there would be no Tesla.
This was a disaster, a Pontiac Aztek for our day without the cool factor of Breaking Bad. It may sell in Cali but the rest of the US isn't going to buy that truck without a major asthetic redesign. Look at what Honda had to do to get people to finally buy Ridge-lines, pickup truck buyers in most of America don't do revolutionary styling. Unless the good Darth Musk intends to try and convince GM to let him build the new EV Hummer (or the drivetrain) for them, in which case yeah ok this was probably a brilliant little bit of theater.
Originally Posted by UncleDave
No one cares about the glass -
The truck is too severe and not what the market wanted - its what elon wanted
The market cant see this competing with the f150 and view it as a fringe purchase which wont grow the company as hoped.
UD
The problem is you can't make an F150 electric that appeals to the buyers of an F150.
Who would want an electrifyed f150 that has a 20 mile range?
And that is what you would get since the f150 is less aerodynamic than a brick.
Musks design demonstrates why an electric truck isn't made, to be efficient and have a useable range it needs to look very similar in shape to musks truck, don't like it? Too bad can't overcome physics
No one cares about the glass -
The truck is too severe and not what the market wanted - its what elon wanted
The market cant see this competing with the f150 and view it as a fringe purchase which wont grow the company as hoped.
UD
The problem is you can't make an F150 electric that appeals to the buyers of an F150.
Who would want an electrifyed f150 that has a 20 mile range?
And that is what you would get since the f150 is less aerodynamic than a brick.
Musks design demonstrates why an electric truck isn't made, to be efficient and have a useable range it needs to look very similar in shape to musks truck, don't like it? Too bad can't overcome physics
No one cares about the glass. IMO it got ahead of itself, and the smart money took profits. It also appears the market and Elon aren't in agreement about the truck.
If TSLA stock was valued like other auto companies, and IMO, it should be at some point, it's way overpriced.
Originally Posted by Vern_in_IL
They just revealed their Tesla Cyber truck and Elon managed to break the "unbreakable" glass during the presentation. Stock was down 4%...
Why would a mishap at a PR launch move the stock? That Chevy "reliability study" commercial didn't affect GM stock If your investing in Tesla, you need to be looking at the product, not speculation, speculation of what? to fail?
Stock tanked?
Stocks go up and down daily, monthly yearly. Its the long term not the "day" Your looking for news to fit the movements of the stock and this stock goes up and down like a see/saw.
Telsa is still higher now then it was at the start of Nov, hardly a "tank"
Furthermore Telsa is a speculation stock, a company that constantly looses money but speculates one day they are going to become profitable.
CLICK
__disclosure, I dont follow the stock so take my comments with a grain of salt, there are much better speculative stocks out there for me personally.
In Jan 2014 the stock was $200 a share, 5.5 years later, June of 2019 the stock was $200 a share. Stock is up 50 to 60% since June of 2019, this is what happens with companies that do not make any money but speculate someday it will and so the see/saw ... the one that really makes the money on this stock are the daytraders.
They just revealed their Tesla Cyber truck and Elon managed to break the "unbreakable" glass during the presentation. Stock was down 4%...
Why would a mishap at a PR launch move the stock? That Chevy "reliability study" commercial didn't affect GM stock If your investing in Tesla, you need to be looking at the product, not speculation, speculation of what? to fail?
Stock tanked?
Stocks go up and down daily, monthly yearly. Its the long term not the "day" Your looking for news to fit the movements of the stock and this stock goes up and down like a see/saw.
Telsa is still higher now then it was at the start of Nov, hardly a "tank"
Furthermore Telsa is a speculation stock, a company that constantly looses money but speculates one day they are going to become profitable.
CLICK
__disclosure, I dont follow the stock so take my comments with a grain of salt, there are much better speculative stocks out there for me personally.
In Jan 2014 the stock was $200 a share, 5.5 years later, June of 2019 the stock was $200 a share. Stock is up 50 to 60% since June of 2019, this is what happens with companies that do not make any money but speculate someday it will and so the see/saw ... the one that really makes the money on this stock are the daytraders.
Last edited:
Originally Posted by JeffKeryk
Slow day for the market. Investors did not like the initial Cybertruck reaction but this is a blip on the radar.
Recently TSLA has been at the high for the year, as has many Silicon Valley tech stocks.
They are all slightly down.
Tesla is an incredible company and is in a huge growth mode.
All the other car manufacturers are trying to build EVs and are far behind.
Is is normal, even correct for the company to not be profitable at this point.
The equities market has been at artificially high levels for years now as a consequence of the very poor returns available in debt. Low interest rates have made bonds a very unattractive investment option, so more money has flowed into stocks. Unlike bonds, stocks are bought and sold in huge volumes every day and it's normal to see price fluctuation for any company, including Tesla.
WRT Tesla's supposed lead in EVs, it should be noted that almost all of the tech required to make an EV viable is found in the batteries and makers other then Tesla have the same access to commercially available cells out of which they build the battery packs for their EVs.
Most of what looks technically advanced in a Tesla product is really more of a GUI then anything particularly leading edge.
Slow day for the market. Investors did not like the initial Cybertruck reaction but this is a blip on the radar.
Recently TSLA has been at the high for the year, as has many Silicon Valley tech stocks.
They are all slightly down.
Tesla is an incredible company and is in a huge growth mode.
All the other car manufacturers are trying to build EVs and are far behind.
Is is normal, even correct for the company to not be profitable at this point.
The equities market has been at artificially high levels for years now as a consequence of the very poor returns available in debt. Low interest rates have made bonds a very unattractive investment option, so more money has flowed into stocks. Unlike bonds, stocks are bought and sold in huge volumes every day and it's normal to see price fluctuation for any company, including Tesla.
WRT Tesla's supposed lead in EVs, it should be noted that almost all of the tech required to make an EV viable is found in the batteries and makers other then Tesla have the same access to commercially available cells out of which they build the battery packs for their EVs.
Most of what looks technically advanced in a Tesla product is really more of a GUI then anything particularly leading edge.
[/quote]
WRT Tesla's supposed lead in EVs, it should be noted that almost all of the tech required to make an EV viable is found in the batteries and makers other then Tesla have the same access to commercially available cells out of which they build the battery packs for their EVs.
Most of what looks technically advanced in a Tesla product is really more of a GUI then anything particularly leading edge.
[/quote]
With Tesla's acquisition of Maxwell Technologies they have access to the Ultracapacitors and Dry Battery Electrode technologies that Maxwell developed. They also recently purchased HIBAR, a manufacturer of equipment used to manufacture batteries. HIBAR was a supplier to Maxwell among others. Add the use of Ultracapacitors to the Tesla's electrical systems to handle power when needed and the cost, weight & bulk advantages of batteries with dry battery electrode construction instead of using electrolyte, and combo Lithium Ion/DBE battery cells or other advancements over the next 2 years and Tesla will be so far ahead of the competition that there will be no contest. They expect their batteries to have a 1 million mile service life with 70% of their original performance within a year.
The elimination of thousands of feet of wire harness used in the upcoming Model X will increase their profitability and lower weight. I would also estimate that by 2022 that Tesla models with a range of 500-750 miles on a charge are pretty much standard.
It is one of Musk's goals to manufacture batteries so advanced that other EV makers have to buy their batteries from Tesla if they want to compete in the EV marketplace. Musk will vertically integrate his manufacturing in such a way that profits are maximized and other automakers will still be making mediocre EV's with 200 mile ranges.
WRT Tesla's supposed lead in EVs, it should be noted that almost all of the tech required to make an EV viable is found in the batteries and makers other then Tesla have the same access to commercially available cells out of which they build the battery packs for their EVs.
Most of what looks technically advanced in a Tesla product is really more of a GUI then anything particularly leading edge.
[/quote]
With Tesla's acquisition of Maxwell Technologies they have access to the Ultracapacitors and Dry Battery Electrode technologies that Maxwell developed. They also recently purchased HIBAR, a manufacturer of equipment used to manufacture batteries. HIBAR was a supplier to Maxwell among others. Add the use of Ultracapacitors to the Tesla's electrical systems to handle power when needed and the cost, weight & bulk advantages of batteries with dry battery electrode construction instead of using electrolyte, and combo Lithium Ion/DBE battery cells or other advancements over the next 2 years and Tesla will be so far ahead of the competition that there will be no contest. They expect their batteries to have a 1 million mile service life with 70% of their original performance within a year.
The elimination of thousands of feet of wire harness used in the upcoming Model X will increase their profitability and lower weight. I would also estimate that by 2022 that Tesla models with a range of 500-750 miles on a charge are pretty much standard.
It is one of Musk's goals to manufacture batteries so advanced that other EV makers have to buy their batteries from Tesla if they want to compete in the EV marketplace. Musk will vertically integrate his manufacturing in such a way that profits are maximized and other automakers will still be making mediocre EV's with 200 mile ranges.
Last edited:
Originally Posted by fdcg27
WRT Tesla's supposed lead in EVs, it should be noted that almost all of the tech required to make an EV viable is found in the batteries and makers other then Tesla have the same access to commercially available cells out of which they build the battery packs for their EVs.
Most of what looks technically advanced in a Tesla product is really more of a GUI then anything particularly leading edge.
If this is true, then I wonder why no other car company, with their considerable economic might and experience, has not developed an EV comparable to new comer Tesla?
WRT Tesla's supposed lead in EVs, it should be noted that almost all of the tech required to make an EV viable is found in the batteries and makers other then Tesla have the same access to commercially available cells out of which they build the battery packs for their EVs.
Most of what looks technically advanced in a Tesla product is really more of a GUI then anything particularly leading edge.
If this is true, then I wonder why no other car company, with their considerable economic might and experience, has not developed an EV comparable to new comer Tesla?
Last edited:
Originally Posted by JeffKeryk
Originally Posted by fdcg27
WRT Tesla's supposed lead in EVs, it should be noted that almost all of the tech required to make an EV viable is found in the batteries and makers other then Tesla have the same access to commercially available cells out of which they build the battery packs for their EVs. Most of what looks technically advanced in a Tesla product is really more of a GUI then anything particularly leading edge.
If this is true, then I wonder why no other car company, with their considerable economic might and experience, has not developed an EV comparable to new comer Tesla?
fdcg27 is off a bit here. Tesla has advanced motors, computers, and battery systems on board. Not a "GUI" only.
That said, other companies can catch up, probably within a couple of years. Several are close enough already.
Example: Chevy Bolt does very well technically. GM should put that in an Equinox-Terrain as is, then add an extra cost rear motor option for AWD similar to what Toyota has at the rear in their Rav4 Hybrid AWD, and they would have a hot-seller with a 210 mile range (Bolt gets 259 miles).
Originally Posted by fdcg27
WRT Tesla's supposed lead in EVs, it should be noted that almost all of the tech required to make an EV viable is found in the batteries and makers other then Tesla have the same access to commercially available cells out of which they build the battery packs for their EVs. Most of what looks technically advanced in a Tesla product is really more of a GUI then anything particularly leading edge.
If this is true, then I wonder why no other car company, with their considerable economic might and experience, has not developed an EV comparable to new comer Tesla?
fdcg27 is off a bit here. Tesla has advanced motors, computers, and battery systems on board. Not a "GUI" only.
That said, other companies can catch up, probably within a couple of years. Several are close enough already.
Example: Chevy Bolt does very well technically. GM should put that in an Equinox-Terrain as is, then add an extra cost rear motor option for AWD similar to what Toyota has at the rear in their Rav4 Hybrid AWD, and they would have a hot-seller with a 210 mile range (Bolt gets 259 miles).
Originally Posted by JeffKeryk
Originally Posted by fdcg27
WRT Tesla's supposed lead in EVs, it should be noted that almost all of the tech required to make an EV viable is found in the batteries and makers other then Tesla have the same access to commercially available cells out of which they build the battery packs for their EVs.
Most of what looks technically advanced in a Tesla product is really more of a GUI then anything particularly leading edge.
If this is true, then I wonder why no other car company, with their considerable economic might and experience, has not developed an EV comparable to new comer Tesla?
Because Teslas are not practical for everyone so these companies don't really have the need to develop vehicles like this. I've been borrowing a Model 3 for the last few days and while it's a blast to drive I would never buy one.
Yes there are plenty of nearby Superchargers but that's because I'm near San Francisco. In a more rural place I'm sure there aren't nearly as many, so that leaves you with those universal charging stations that are super duper slow.
Unless you own a home with a garage where you can charge your Tesla using a 240V circuit or better (because 120V charging is also really slow) you basically can't own a Tesla.
Just sitting in the parking lot at work and the parking lot at home while I'm not driving it, it loses quite a bit of range. All the cameras and computers are running 24/7/365 in "Sentry mode"... While gas doesn't expire for 6 months +
Originally Posted by fdcg27
WRT Tesla's supposed lead in EVs, it should be noted that almost all of the tech required to make an EV viable is found in the batteries and makers other then Tesla have the same access to commercially available cells out of which they build the battery packs for their EVs.
Most of what looks technically advanced in a Tesla product is really more of a GUI then anything particularly leading edge.
If this is true, then I wonder why no other car company, with their considerable economic might and experience, has not developed an EV comparable to new comer Tesla?
Because Teslas are not practical for everyone so these companies don't really have the need to develop vehicles like this. I've been borrowing a Model 3 for the last few days and while it's a blast to drive I would never buy one.
Yes there are plenty of nearby Superchargers but that's because I'm near San Francisco. In a more rural place I'm sure there aren't nearly as many, so that leaves you with those universal charging stations that are super duper slow.
Unless you own a home with a garage where you can charge your Tesla using a 240V circuit or better (because 120V charging is also really slow) you basically can't own a Tesla.
Just sitting in the parking lot at work and the parking lot at home while I'm not driving it, it loses quite a bit of range. All the cameras and computers are running 24/7/365 in "Sentry mode"... While gas doesn't expire for 6 months +
- Status
Similar threads
