Yes, they do. What point you think I'm trying to make and the point I'm making may not be the same, but if you're in disagreement with the point I'm making then you're just wrong.

The point being made is that stock price movement is based upon shifts in expectation and to understand the movement you need to understand the new expectation as well as the old expectation. If the market believes Tesla is going to grow at 50% annually on average over the next 5 years on 30% margins and expectation shifts to 35% growth on 20% margins the stock price necessarily falls even though the expectations are that the company will continue to grow. He seems to think it means that the company is failing.

The differentiation in market cap between Toyota and Tesla is built upon the expectation that Tesla can grow in outsized proportion to Toyota over the next several years, but that is not growth is not wholly contained within their vehicle business. The vehicle business could grow well, but if the energy business fails the stock may not grow and vice versa.

It's why the stock fell 5% when Reuters released a report that Tesla was canceling their low cost vehicle because it reduces the likelihood of outsized growth in the car business, and it rebounded 4% when Elon called them liars. The 1% delta is in part uncertainty of who is being truthful in the dispute.

It's why the stock price jumped in the after hours 3% when Elon announced the reveal date of their Robotaxi concept, because it's perceived as more confidence from the company that they will solve autonomy.

The market is also not perfectly predictive/understanding of information. Which is why it's entirely possible Tesla's vehicle business can grow and EVs can overtake gas over the next 10 years and Tesla can lose investors money. It's why NVDA fell from 330 a share at the end of 2021 to 112 a share midway in to 2022 and then skyrocketed after the reveal of ChatGPT and AI became more than a thing that can play board games.

Never Ev-ers continues to state that they don't care what people buy and their only issue is with subsidies. But now close to 150 pages and 95% complained about everything from range anxiety to Musk to stock prices to volume to FSD.

Just strange how many are so fixated on hating everything Tesla/Musk. Some of you guys sound like liberal left wingers who hates the man and his politics. I for some reason can't find a thread on electric lawn mowers, power washers, leaf blowers, trimmers.

BTW, just drove from Austin to Dallas, got free level 2 charging at hotel. Now home and car will be 80% charged when I wake up and never needed to drop by a gas station.

Oh, but if I did, I drove by 3 right outside of Dallas that would have taken me 20 minutes to get about 200 miles getting me comfortably home.

If I could build a in home gas station for 1K, reduce the cost of gas to 33% of pump prices, and made gas stations take 30 minutes for a fill up; 99.5% of people complaining would switch.

Meanwhile sales continue to slump and troubles keep piling up.

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2024/04/07/business/tesla-ev-sales-slowdown-stock

Something about EV mandates reminded me of this.

wow:

Quote:

---

• EVs account for half of the 10 vehicles that have depreciated the most after a year on the road, making them potentially good used car deals.
• The Range Rover is currently the only model that has appreciated after 12 months.
• Hybrids hang onto their value well, and account for half of the top 10 models that have depreciated the least.

Buying a lightly used vehicle is a great way to get a deal on a relatively sound car, as long you aren't too picky about options. But not every used car depreciates equally, so here are the vehicles that lose the most and the least value after a year of ownership.

If you're only interested in the amount that you can save, there is no better segment to look at than EVs. The new technology has been expensive to develop, driving up MSRPs, but is still relatively young, meaning that consumers are unsure how long the batteries will last.

Those factors, among others, have conspired to make EVs five of the most aggressively depreciating cars in America this year, according to a study from iSeeCars. The VW ID.4, the Hyundai Ioniq 5, the Kia EV6, and the Nissan Leaf all lose more than 30 percent of their value in the first year of ownership.


However, the king of the depreciators is the Mercedes-Benz EQS. With an average used price of $71,231, buyers can save as much as $65,143, or 47.8 percent of the vehicle's value when they buy second-hand.

---

Wow. Thanks for posting that. Yeah I saw Tesla was again talking about lowering prices, this time on the Model Y. If so will just demolish their second hand market again.

People who said they would never buy an EV b/c it costs too much, now are complaining that they are lowering prices?

Isn't this a good thing? If Tesla can make a profit while lowering prices, this is exactly what most businesses do. They lower prices, get market share, and then produce money from other streams. Regardless, Techno should be praising Tesla for lowering prices under the average car price. Yes, a Model Y will be lower than the average new car price even without any credits.

Some do not realize that tesla is not a car company, just as amazon's valuation is not being a marketplace. Their high valuation is not how many cars they will sell, it is if they will be the dominate EV player and all the streams of $$$ they can produce from supercharging, robotaxi, robots, battery storage, AI, Computing, etc. Not something I want to debate because no one knows, but only the mis-informed thinks that Tesla is a car company.

Not complaining just noting. It hurts a lot of people who bought one. It Hertz for a rental car company when the used market prices cratered.

They make something like 3 times the margin per car that Toyota does. I'd say that makes them a car company.

You are missing the point; their valuation is not on how much cars they sell or will sell.

But I think you already realize this.

Medaggie said:

---

People who said they would never buy an EV b/c it costs too much, now are complaining that they are lowering prices?

Isn't this a good thing? If Tesla can make a profit while lowering prices, this is exactly what most businesses do. They lower prices, get market share, and then produce money from other streams. Regardless, Techno should be praising Tesla for lowering prices under the average car price. Yes, a Model Y will be lower than the average new car price even without any credits.

Some do not realize that tesla is not a car company, just as amazon's valuation is not being a marketplace. Their high valuation is not how many cars they will sell, it is if they will be the dominate EV player and all the streams of $$$ they can produce from supercharging, robotaxi, robots, battery storage, AI, Computing, etc. Not something I want to debate because no one knows, but only the mis-informed thinks that Tesla is a car company.

---

Tesla has had great growth and I am a Musk fan/admit freely they make the better options on the BEV side. The issue though is not as you frame it, from my seat/keyboard.

• Lowering prices hurts other entrants significantly, from capturing more of the nascent BEV segment.
• More entrants would be needed as 'good' options if it is to be a viable market/competitor long term.
• Tesla's valuation should be tied to their market position, and as with all companies publicly traded, ultimately to their profitability. Even with their crash in stock price lately their PE is still around 40:1, and it's tough to see that improving a lot, any time soon. But, still, I think the comparison to AMZN is relatively fair as it is a growth trajectory stock in a newish business model globally still.
• I'm not complaining about the price of their cars, I am simply not a target customer; I prefer the superiority of ICE vehicles from a convenience, tech maturity, environmental impact, and political impact perspective.
• Let me know what percent of Tesla vehicle batteries replaced/removed from service this year were recycled, where, and how efficient that was. I really don't know. I suspect it is less than 5 percent and probably under 25,000 vehicles total, a minuscule share of the total market. This is an expensive toy, not akin in scale to an iphone etc, to just dispose of.
• Robotaxi/Supercharging/battery storage/AI sound nifty, but don't impact any of the above. We have real grid, and national security matters that need to be addressed, and catch phrases or ideations around what could happen are not helpful to meeting those urgent issues.

Thanks for the thoughtful reply. This is the stuff I like to discuss and learn from other's opinions rather than throwing gotcha links that has little bearing on what is discussed.

Tesla has had great growth and I am a Musk fan/admit freely they make the better options on the BEV side. The issue though is not as you frame it, from my seat/keyboard.

• Lowering prices hurts other entrants significantly, from capturing more of the nascent BEV segment. Yes, IMO they did this because given interest rates/poor economic conditions, they are able to lower prices while making money compared to other makers already having negative margins. It absolutely hurts the other BEV makers, but they want market share. More car drivers, more data, quicker to Autonomy which is one pillars of Tesla. Selling a car is a proof of concept towards Autonomous. Autonomy will happen, and the one with the data will get their first then everyone will have to purchase it.

• More entrants would be needed as 'good' options if it is to be a viable market/competitor long term. Tesla knows they are so far ahead right now, it doesn't really matter. There just are no other EV makers close other than the Chinese which will never see the US market. There will eventually be good options but by that time Tesla will be making most of their $$$ on autonomy/battery/charging. Having other healthy EV makers really doesn't change the narrative.

• Tesla's valuation should be tied to their market position, and as with all companies publicly traded, ultimately to their profitability. Even with their crash in stock price lately their PE is still around 40:1, and it's tough to see that improving a lot, any time soon. But, still, I think the comparison to AMZN is relatively fair as it is a growth trajectory stock in a newish business model globally still. This is the current debate which is making their stock go up and down rapidly. I am a long term investor, believe they will get to Autonomy and energy storage, which will be the catalyst. When it goes down, I get more. If you do not believe, then you should sell or short because the stock will trade like a car company which is around 10x PE if lucky.

• I'm not complaining about the price of their cars, I am simply not a target customer; I prefer the superiority of ICE vehicles from a convenience, tech maturity, environmental impact, and political impact perspective. Fair enough and I respect that. I believe in EVs because for my driving purpose, it is close to perfect. I don't subscribe to climate nonsense and wish it wasn't politically tainted.

• Let me know what percent of Tesla vehicle batteries replaced/removed from service this year were recycled, where, and how efficient that was. I really don't know. I suspect it is less than 5 percent and probably under 25,000 vehicles total, a minuscule share of the total market. This is an expensive toy, not akin in scale to an iphone etc, to just dispose of. I don't pretend to know enough about climate impact vs gas. But from a consumer standpoint, this car is light years better than my BMW X5 which the consumer I am. My house will always have 1 ICE unless charging is faster. We have an ICE, but all cars for the kids will be EVs. Never will I have 2 Ice cars.

• Robotaxi/Supercharging/battery storage/AI sound nifty, but don't impact any of the above. We have real grid, and national security matters that need to be addressed, and catch phrases or ideations around what could happen are not helpful to meeting those urgent issues. I am an investor and stay out of political/climate debates which goes no where. As an investor, I bank of all of the above and willing to put alot of my $$$ betting on it. We do have Grid issues but EVs are not even close on that list. Why is no one complaining about all of the data centers and crypto mining that takes up way more energy? We should just build more nuclear and fix all the supply issues so to pick on EVs is not seeing the real issues through the forest.

The world’s new largest Supercharger is coming soon to Yeehaw Junction, Florida!!!

Last month, Tesla filed plans to build a 200-stall “Mega Site” at Exit 193 of the Florida Turnpike.

The site will feature 160 PSU stalls and 40 standalone stalls, 8 of which are for trailers. pic.twitter.com/AoR76aQKTJ

— MarcoRP (!newsfeed) (@MarcoRPi1) April 6, 2024

This kind of implementation is going to become more and more common. 200 charging stalls, 4+ megapacks, solar canopy over stalls. Grid -> Battery storage -> Charging stalls for peak demand periods. During off peak demand the battery will operate as a demand curve flattener. i.e. charge when demand is low/energy prices are cheap, deploy when demand is high/energy prices are expensive.

Will work similarly for apartment complexes that have the space for it, except less power and storage will be required, because the draw will be ~1/20th per charging port and the total draw per session will likely be ~1/5th.

There will be enough ingenuity and innovation to make the "what about the chargers" complaint a non-issue. It won't happen overnight, but it will happen. Its silly to think the landscape we see today would be the exact same 10 - 15 years down the road.

Something to watch and see how they do as they try to scale their system.

Thx, mostly fair, I see it from the investor side as well, just approach this thread mostly from the political angle.

From an investor angle, I think Tesla will keep doing pretty well, but likely feel some pain as China is decoupling from them a lot (taking what they have co-developed like the 'gigapress' and copying it), and also think it's inevitable that in the next 18-24 months China will announce BYD is going to enter the US market.

Then, the long term issue is that it is largely dependent as an investment on Musk himself. If/when he somehow goes away, I think it is going to follow something more like a Zenith path than Standard Oil. I could be wrong, and hopefully that is 10+ years away, but still, it could/will be a big/huge impact.

Bubblez said:

---

There will be enough ingenuity and innovation to make the "what about the chargers" complaint a non-issue. It won't happen overnight, but it will happen. It's silly to think the landscape we see today would be the exact same 10 - 15 years down the road.

---

Utopia is just around the corner.

nortex97 said:

---

Thx, mostly fair, I see it from the investor side as well, just approach this thread mostly from the political angle.

From an investor angle, I think Tesla will keep doing pretty well, but likely feel some pain as China is decoupling from them a lot (taking what they have co-developed like the 'gigapress' and copying it), and also think it's inevitable that in the next 18-24 months China will announce BYD is going to enter the US market.

Then, the long term issue is that it is largely dependent as an investment on Musk himself. If/when he somehow goes away, I think it is going to follow something more like a Zenith path than Standard Oil. I could be wrong, and hopefully that is 10+ years away, but still, it could/will be a big/huge impact.

---

I thought the same when Jobs died but they were so dominate in their space it didn't matter. I think the same will happen to Tesla. They have such a big lead, it won't matter.

Companies can easily copy Tesla and catch up on manufacturing, hardware, battery. A more difficult moat will be software. An almost impossible moat will be autonomous driving.

I drove FSD in 2020 when the MY came out. I was quite disappointed. It was essentially an upgraded lane assist system. Fast forward to 2024 with the latest "AI" upgrade and it is close to autonomous. I know there will be many people who think I am exaggerating, but they are getting close. Does close mean a few years or 10 years, I have no idea.

On my drive from Austin to Dallas a night, I put it on FSD 50% of the time and I never had to take it off FSD because of any wrong decisions. I did take it off a few times just to avoid being boxed in.

Drove back and had FSD on 90% of the time and no issues.

Haven't really used it in the City but the limited use tells me it behaves much more human.

Give them time, more compute, more data, more training and they will be the 1st to break the code. While others are trying to "program" out all the bugs, Tesla is teaching their system to learn from what is done by humans without much code. I guess this is what AI is all about but whatever they are doing, the FSD is amazing. Things that have improved that really bothered me.

Bubblez said:

---

There will be enough ingenuity and innovation to make the "what about the chargers" complaint a non-issue. It won't happen overnight, but it will happen. Its silly to think the landscape we see today would be the exact same 10 - 15 years down the road.

---

This is what Never EV-ers do not take into account. They think battery, charging, infrastructure, battery chemistry will never improve. My 2023 MY battery is better than the 2020 version.

No way!

The value of the data they are collecting from all the cars around the world has to be incredible.

Build It said:

---

The value of the data they are collecting from all the cars around the world has to be incredible.

---

I believe Tesla currently runs its FSD through its NVIDA chip supercomputer which is around the 10th fastest in the world. They are working on a 1+Bil dojo supercomputer that may end up being the fastest supercomputer in the world to speed up FSD/robotaxi.

Anyone who thinks Tesla is a car maker is mistaken. There is a reason they are putting in 1-2B to make Dojo and their own chip design specifically to solve AI Self driving.

There is no other car company even in sniffing range of their data collection, computing, software. There is a reason they are way ahead of any car maker in terms of software. They are more of a software/tech company than they are a car maker.

Companies are already signing up for the charging network. Soon it will be their software suite. Then autonomy.

Some say data is king and Tesla has 3+M cars on the road collecting millions of FSD miles a day.

I drove 20 miles at night in Austin today on FSD and did not have to disengage once.

Wife and I had an Uber in Florida last week that was a Honda Accord hybrid. Emphasis on hybrid.

Nice looking car. Lots of space inside. Acceleration seemed good. Just a nice overall vehicle.

I don't understand why this isn't "the push". Best of both worlds. Great car and both options available.

The left is just so unreasonable about everything.

Urban Ag said:

---

Wife and I had an Uber in Florida last week that was a Honda Accord hybrid. Emphasis on hybrid.

Nice looking car. Lots of space inside. Acceleration seemed good. Just a nice overall vehicle.

I don't understand why this isn't "the push". Best of both worlds. Great car and both options available.

The left is just so unreasonable about everything.

---

Hybrids are doing a good job of stealing the show right now, especially with the Tesla sales slump.

https://www.investors.com/news/hybrid-cars-ev-electric-vehicles-ford-gm-tesla-toyota-honda/

Oh **** it. I'll buy an EV. Maybe used T3 for about $10k as long as electricity is about 10-13 cents per kwh. Just to get around town. It'd be more like a souped up golf cart. To work... Store, golf.

jonb02 said:

---

No way!

---

Because gearbox fluid, gasoline and radiator fluid are not a Haz-Mat! Right?

A golf cart that goes 0-60 in 2 seconds, and can go 200 miles an hour. I see why your on board.

VitruvianAg said:

---

jonb02 said:

---

No way!

---

Because gearbox fluid, gasoline and radiator fluid are not a Haz-Mat! Right?

---

More like multiple batteries on fire slung all over the freeway. That won't stop burning.

I think the figure was that it would take around 30K gallons to put out/finally extinguish a BEV battery fire. Finding a lake to smolder in is comparatively fortuitous but for the impact on the lake.

nortex97 said:

---

I think the figure was that it would take around 30K gallons to put out/finally extinguish a BEV battery fire. Finding a lake to smolder in is comparatively fortuitous but for the impact on the lake.

---

Now imagine a wreck between two BEV 18 wheelers carrying much bigger batteries than a car. How much water will that take to extinguish? How many forest fires will be started, when insufficient water sources are available to extinguish these unusually persistent fires? How much CO2 will that release? How much petroleum/coal based fuel will be used in the cleanup and disposal of the waste products and repairs to the roads? The left NEVER considers unintended consequences, just whatever feels good at the time.

All of this ICE vs EV hostility and economic issues surrounding it could be solved simply by removing the mandates/subsidies and allowing the market to decide the future. There's nothing wrong with a healthy mixture of both options. Mandating ICE vehicles or at least desirable ICE vehicles out of existence is monumentally stupid and anti American.

I really wish the automotive industry and the Republican party had the balls to fight the commies tooth and nail on this issue.

I agree. The automotive ICE industry is as much at fault. The UAW voted for Biden. Biden is trying to give the UAW and Big 3 Auto a bone with tax credits. He is literally trying to save them during this transition.

All of the hate at Tesla is misdirected. Biden, UAW, the left all hates Tesla. The tax credit has little to do with Tesla and more to do with votes, appeasing the UAW, saving the Big 3, and pandering to the dems.

Medaggie said:

---

I agree. The automotive ICE industry is as much at fault. The UAW voted for Biden. Biden is trying to give the UAW and Big 3 Auto a bone with tax credits. He is literally trying to save them during this transition.

All of the hate at Tesla is misdirected. Biden, UAW, the left all hates Tesla. The tax credit has little to do with Tesla and more to do with votes, appeasing the UAW, saving the Big 3, and pandering to the dems.

---

Didn't the big 3 get saved in the late 2000s? Screw them and the government trying to force what the market doesn't want. Let them all make it on their own. Dems claim to hate big business but always seem to be saving it.

I think Ford avoided bankruptcy and the "Obama bailouts." Chrysler's been broke so many times it's tough to keep track, and GM is at this point basically Government Motors.

nortex97 said:

---

I think Ford avoided bankruptcy and the "Obama bailouts." Chrysler's been broke so many times it's tough to keep track, and GM is at this point basically Government Motors.

---

And then there was the $36B bailout of the UAW pension plan….

Kansas Kid said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

I think Ford avoided bankruptcy and the "Obama bailouts." Chrysler's been broke so many times it's tough to keep track, and GM is at this point basically Government Motors.

---

And then there was the $36B bailout of the UAW pension plan….

---

That's true.

Yeah, that one shocked me.
One billion would have been a lot of money to GIVE AWAY,
but 36 billion dollars is a whole lot even these days.
And hardly a squeak about it in the news.

Edit - I wonder who Trump should give 36billion to?