Around 190% since the low in April

cecil77 said:

---

Quote:

---

Unless you are living under a rock, EVs are the future.

---

This is one of those statements that goes unchallenged, but it's not so clear.

Future? 10 years? 100 years? What "future". We'd have decades of effort to build enough powerplants and expand the grid to service that "future".

Part of that "future" is reliance upon improvements in technology, e.g. batteries. How about other technologies that might improve enough to surpass battery powered evs? Fuel cell technology, although could be considered an "ev" it's not part of the current model, but could well surpass the current notion of an ev and be the "future".

It's also possible that some unforeseen development (if I knew what that was I'd be rich) will be "the future". Heck, star trek transporters, magnetic rail cars, I don't know - the issue is that predicting "the future" rarely works even for those not living under rocks.

In 1985 CDs were the future of recorded music if you weren't living under a rock. Thirty years later they were essentially irrelevant. It's like the 1870 prediction of life not being possible in New York City in 1970 because of no place to put the manure.

---

A person in 1985 that said the CD would become the dominant way to listen to recorded music would have been correct. The fact that it didn't persist as the dominant way to listen to music doesn't make the prediction wrong. People take in available information and make predictions about the future and they are actually pretty freaking good at making those predictions. It's why humans are the dominant species on the planet, our capacity to predict and plan for the future is unrivaled.

hph6203 said:

---

techno-ag said:

---

Big fan of Elon and I'm happy Tesla has bounced back in the stock market.

Have to laugh at the arrogance of EV fanboys though who can't take any criticism of their favorite product and project and name call etc.

Good civil conversation here. Appreciate you fellas for keeping it clean.

---

Almost exactly 2 months ago you posted that it was getting harder and harder to defend Tesla stock and mocked people for criticizing that take as low information. What you perceive as arrogance is often (not always) a massive knowledge gap between what you know and what the person you're arguing with knows. That happens often on this thread.

Stock is up ~92% since you posted that by the way.

---

Yup. It was down back then. Glad to see it back up.

Again I don't hate the company. That is pure fanboi projection.

tk for tu juan said:

---

Around 190% since the low in April

---

Buy some Tesla booze to celebrate.

https://www.barrons.com/amp/articles/tesla-mezcal-tequila-sale-79e6bfb0

I do not have shares of Tesla stock, I have shares of Ford stock; that is why I am still poor

nortex97 said:

---

some smug looking guy hopping out of the Rivian.

---

I probably do look smug to you, but the Rivian is still really fun and I'm enjoying the hell out of it.

No one said you hate the company. What you have is a blind belief that you are correct without any reflection on whether or not you have historically been correct. October you said it was hard to defend Tesla stock, meaning that you anticipated it doing worse, not better. That was based upon your lack of knowledge and an article written by Jalopnik (biased outlet) stating that Tesla had "yet again missed deliveries." What you didn't know was that the delivery estimates had risen throughout the quarter and what Tesla ended up delivering was less than an overly bullish estimate by Wall Street. It has mooned since then.

In April you were writing the obituary for Tesla, because their deliveries had fallen into the ~380,000 vehicle range for Q1. It was explained to you why that occurred and you called it fanboyism. So twice in this thread you have claimed superior knowledge about the topic while arguing with others, and in that timeframe the stock has almost tripled in contradiction to your understanding of reality.

You have consistently expressed a belief that EVs are going to fail throughout the history of this thread and during the period that this thread has been active the market share of EVs in the U.S. has risen from 3% to 9%. When people criticize your lack of understanding you express a self perception that you are correct and that the person arguing with you is a delusional fanboy that can't accept reality. The inverse has generally proven to be true.

You have the absolute worst ratio of opinions expressed to knowledge possessed combined with a terrible ratio of knowledge possessed and arrogance. That's because you have a window of knowledge that lasts all of about (maybe!) 15 minutes, which is why you can defend what you incorrectly said in October by saying the stock was actually down on that day, not understanding the totality of why.

iow you need to be more bayesian and update those priors yo

Waymo matches Lyft for market share in SF for the locations it currently operates.

Waymo's market share is now equal to Lyft within SF. Incredible.

Network effects is one of the best sources of defensibility. But it's proven to be not that important in ridesharing.

You need a minimum network size, but once you have that, there are diminishing returns. In… pic.twitter.com/0l0fKk9qoC

— Alex Immerman (@aleximm) December 12, 2024

FSD V13.2 now operating on Tesla's most recent inference computer, showing substantial improvement.

hph6203 said:

---

cecil77 said:

---

Quote:

---

Unless you are living under a rock, EVs are the future.

---

This is one of those statements that goes unchallenged, but it's not so clear.

Future? 10 years? 100 years? What "future". We'd have decades of effort to build enough powerplants and expand the grid to service that "future".

Part of that "future" is reliance upon improvements in technology, e.g. batteries. How about other technologies that might improve enough to surpass battery powered evs? Fuel cell technology, although could be considered an "ev" it's not part of the current model, but could well surpass the current notion of an ev and be the "future".

It's also possible that some unforeseen development (if I knew what that was I'd be rich) will be "the future". Heck, star trek transporters, magnetic rail cars, I don't know - the issue is that predicting "the future" rarely works even for those not living under rocks.

In 1985 CDs were the future of recorded music if you weren't living under a rock. Thirty years later they were essentially irrelevant. It's like the 1870 prediction of life not being possible in New York City in 1970 because of no place to put the manure.

---

A person in 1985 that said the CD would become the dominant way to listen to recorded music would have been correct. The fact that it didn't persist as the dominant way to listen to music doesn't make the prediction wrong. People take in available information and make predictions about the future and they are actually pretty freaking good at making those predictions. It's why humans are the dominant species on the planet, our capacity to predict and plan for the future is unrivaled.

---

It's a matter of scale. There's an implied "forever" in most "are the future" predictions. And it's a subtle difference but I would submit that its our capacity to predict, plan, adapt, repredict, etc that is what's important. In the case of EVs, there needs to be very careful planning and prediction with room to adapt so that massive resources aren't wasted, of much more consequence than all of the cd (much less VHS) players no one ever uses anymore. Those technologies were a path that was adapted to a digital future. I've not ev proponent suggest that it's a path to anywhere, but rather is THE future (for personal transportation). Which it may be for awhile, I'm confident in 100 years we'll have even better technologies..

The message is that denigrations like "anyone not living under a rock has to agree" are poor form.

i mean... this exact same argument was made about gasoline engines. and gasoline required a whole lot more specialized and dedicated infrastructure than electricity does today.

by this argument we should never make a prediction about the future because all of them are wrong, in the long run. the era of the gasoline automobile is not much past the century mark.

Zobel said:

---

i mean... this exact same argument was made about gasoline engines. and gasoline required a whole lot more specialized and dedicated infrastructure than electricity does today.

by this argument we should never make a prediction about the future because all of them are wrong, in the long run. the era of the gasoline automobile is not much past the century mark.

---

Not, not at all. I said nothing about gasoline engines and the future. The point is smug "it's the future (and anything else is NOT the future)" denigrations " toward anyone with a differing views are fruitless.

And I repeat, what future? If you mean 20 years, why should I care? If you mean 50 years, why should you care? ("care" as to today's personal transportation choice) The entire "it's the future" argument is useless, and certainly not persuasive - EVEN IF PROVEN CORRECT OVER TIME.

I think a better term is "it's part of the future". ICE vehicles will be part of any equation in the forseeable future.

Feel better? Wowzers. Love you too.

bobbranco said:

---

---

Yet here you are, totally not being obsessed on a thread dedicated to a car you don't even own.

I don't understand what you're talking about, so im gonna bow out.

Teslag said:

---

bobbranco said:

---

---

Yet here you are, totally not being obsessed on a thread dedicated to a car you don't even own.

---

It's dedicated to all EVs, not just your username. The one you changed it to, speaking of obsession.

Exactly. Thin skinned and can never laugh at a joke to boot...

bobbranco said:

---

---

If the anti EV obsessed posters stopped their pathological hatred of EV's, this thread would die. Instead they keep projecting that EV owners share their obsession. Pretty sad. Maybe find a constructive hobby.

Look! We share a hobby. TexAgging. And I own an EV. Not a BEV.

So you own a hybrid

Y

GAC06 said:

---

bobbranco said:

---

---

If the anti EV obsessed posters stopped their pathological hatred of EV's, this thread would die. Instead they keep projecting that EV owners share their obsession. Pretty sad. Maybe find a constructive hobby.

---

We have stressed repeatedly we don't hate EVs. But there's a lot to take issue with. It's good to have a thread to discuss them.

Then don't buy one. Seems easy enough.

bobbranco said:

---

Y

---

So you don't own an EV. HTH

techno-ag said:

---

GAC06 said:

---

bobbranco said:

---

---

If the anti EV obsessed posters stopped their pathological hatred of EV's, this thread would die. Instead they keep projecting that EV owners share their obsession. Pretty sad. Maybe find a constructive hobby.

---

We have stressed repeatedly we don't hate EVs. But there's a lot to take issue with. It's good to have a thread to discuss them.

---

The most prolific poster on the "I hate EV's thread" doesn't hate EV's now? Devastating

Teslag said:

---

bobbranco said:

---

---

Yet here you are, totally not being obsessed on a thread dedicated to a car you don't even own.

---

This is a thread dedicated to NOT owning one

Plug-In Hybrids qualify as an EV under the Cali laws (for now)

Seems like you'd only need one post to say you are not buying something

Teslag said:

---

Seems like you'd only need one post to say you ar not buying something

---

Apparently 7,590 posts will do the trick

GAC06 said:

---

techno-ag said:

---

GAC06 said:

---

bobbranco said:

---

---

If the anti EV obsessed posters stopped their pathological hatred of EV's, this thread would die. Instead they keep projecting that EV owners share their obsession. Pretty sad. Maybe find a constructive hobby.

---

We have stressed repeatedly we don't hate EVs. But there's a lot to take issue with. It's good to have a thread to discuss them.

---

The most prolific poster on the "I hate EV's thread" doesn't hate EV's now? Devastating

---

He never did. Sheer projection by others.

tk for tu juan said:

---

Plug-In Hybrids qualify as an EV under the Cali laws (for now)

---

They do. And most stats such as the current percentage of EV sales, lump them in there as well.

techno-ag said:

---

GAC06 said:

---

techno-ag said:

---

GAC06 said:

---

bobbranco said:

---

---

If the anti EV obsessed posters stopped their pathological hatred of EV's, this thread would die. Instead they keep projecting that EV owners share their obsession. Pretty sad. Maybe find a constructive hobby.

---

We have stressed repeatedly we don't hate EVs. But there's a lot to take issue with. It's good to have a thread to discuss them.

---

The most prolific poster on the "I hate EV's thread" doesn't hate EV's now? Devastating

---

He never did. Sheer projection by others.

---

It's ok to be wrong, you should be used to it. It's not that your hatred of EV's is decreasing, it's just that the growth of your hatred is slowing

Techno sounds like a buddy of mine who about 3 years ago was anti Musk/EV/Tesla .

All i said was Tesla was the leader in EVs and have a huge lead in tech/software. He came back with Big 3 knows how to manufacture cars so it would be easy for them to flip a switch and make cars at the cheap. I rebutted that making EVs is not like throwing a battery instead of an ICE then flipping a switch. There is alot of software and engineering involved.

So we made a $100 bet. 2023 Tesla vs Big 3 EV sales. I think Tesla made sold more than all 3 combined in about 2 wks.

He continued with the same line without much knowledge. Blah blah blah, big 3 will just flip a switch. When you proclaim something that you really don't understand, you just sound ignorant but impossible to argue with. So we bet 2024 Tesla vs big 3. I think the current count 1.8M to 300K.

The flipping the switch was so dumb but he tripled down. $100 that Ford will sell 2024 500K EVs which he will be off by like 400K and $100 GM would hit 2024 500K EVs which they will be well short.

Not wanting to give up, he wants to double or nothing on the $400. I have a heart and can't take real money from a friend so I refused to double or nothing.

Sometimes its ok to say you are wrong.