Electric vehicle war, is gas soon to be toast?

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Tesla does not have anywhere near the lead or ongoing advantage that some of you believe.

90% of the electric market, going forward, will be lower-cost vehicles ($40k and down). Tesla will have no advantage there against Hyundai, Kia, Toyota, etc. And profit margins at the low end are all about production efficiency, not technological advantages. Tesla will not be able to compete with those companies in that market, within 3-5 years.

In the higher end market, the Germans will destroy them for the same reasons. The big 3 are all already making electric vehicles, and their lineups will expand significantly over the next 3 years. Again, they have massive advantages over Tesla on all aspects of automobile design, with the small exception of electric-specific tech, which they will catch up on in no time.

In order to justify the stock price, Tesla needs to gain a VERY significant market share. But as all the other (much larger and more efficient) manufacturers start rolling out their lineups, that market share just won't materialize.

But think of the disruption.

[zamler]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Tesla does not have anywhere near the lead or ongoing advantage that some of you believe.

90% of the electric market, going forward, will be lower-cost vehicles ($40k and down). Tesla will have no advantage there against Hyundai, Kia, Toyota, etc. And profit margins at the low end are all about production efficiency, not technological advantages. Tesla will not be able to compete with those companies in that market, within 3-5 years.

In the higher end market, the Germans will destroy them for the same reasons. The big 3 are all already making electric vehicles, and their lineups will expand significantly over the next 3 years. Again, they have massive advantages over Tesla on all aspects of automobile design, with the small exception of electric-specific tech, which they will catch up on in no time.

In order to justify the stock price, Tesla needs to gain a VERY significant market share. But as all the other (much larger and more efficient) manufacturers start rolling out their lineups, that market share just won't materialize.

I will quote this because it will age very very badly. This is EXACTLY the same things the short sellers have been saying for years and have lost their shirts.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by zamler

I will quote this because it will age very very badly. This is EXACTLY the same things the short sellers have been saying for years and have lost their shirts.

yes they have, but stocks don't go up on hopes forever

[zamler]

Some of you sound exactly like Bob Lutz.

https://youtu.be/GHb8kC2LEaM?t=83

He recently came out and half heartedly admitted he was dead wrong.

[Enoch Root]

Daimler Benz revenues: $173B Euros ($200B US), market cap $48B Euros

Tesla revenues $24.6B, market cap $360B

The stock price suggests that Tesla will sell 7x as many vehicles as Mercedes (simplistic valuation, I know), good luck with that.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by zamler

Some of you sound exactly like Bob Lutz.

https://youtu.be/GHb8kC2LEaM?t=83

He recently came out and half heartedly admitted he was dead wrong.

past and future

Tesla has risen farther than many believed they could. That doesn't mean that they will keep growing as projected forever.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Daimler Benz revenues: $173B Euros ($200B US), market cap $48B Euros

Tesla revenues $24.6B, market cap $360B

The stock price suggests that Tesla will sell 7x as many vehicles as Mercedes (simplistic valuation, I know), good luck with that.

I do hate it when math comes between us.

[jammies]

The biggest, richest companies in the world used to be oil companies, and now they have been supplanted by tech companies that didn't even exist a few decades ago. That's why Tesla is valued in the hundreds of billions, being a tech company at core, and having the best tech. They might lose that edge, but to the likes of Ford and Nissan? Toyota and Daimler - maybe. But history is littered with companies that failed to retool and rethink fast enough to quell upstart competitors. Where is US Steel* now?

In the 1970s and 80s, Japanese vehicles went from unreliable, cheap jokes to almost causing all three big American manufacturers to go bankrupt, with only government bailouts saving them. Nobody thought in 1972 that anyone could break into the American market in any significant way - until fuel economy became paramount, and Detroit couldn't adapt quickly enough despite the technology theoretically being merely an extension of what they already did, and not an entirely different field.

Being big and being established in a market doesn't guarantee anything when that market drastically changes. Some of the titans will adapt, some will go under, and someone else will take the place of those that die. Maybe not Tesla, but they've got an enormous head start on anybody else.

*Once the biggest company in the world, now number 27... among steel companies.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by jammies

The biggest, richest companies in the world used to be oil companies, and now they have been supplanted by tech companies that didn't even exist a few decades ago. That's why Tesla is valued in the hundreds of billions, being a tech company at core, and having the best tech. They might lose that edge, but to the likes of Ford and Nissan? Toyota and Daimler - maybe. But history is littered with companies that failed to retool and rethink fast enough to quell upstart competitors. Where is US Steel* now?

In the 1970s and 80s, Japanese vehicles went from unreliable, cheap jokes to almost causing all three big American manufacturers to go bankrupt, with only government bailouts saving them. Nobody thought in 1972 that anyone could break into the American market in any significant way - until fuel economy became paramount, and Detroit couldn't adapt quickly enough despite the technology theoretically being merely an extension of what they already did, and not an entirely different field.

Being big and being established in a market doesn't guarantee anything when that market drastically changes. Some of the titans will adapt, some will go under, and someone else will take the place of those that die. Maybe not Tesla, but they've got an enormous head start on anybody else.

*Once the biggest company in the world, now number 27... among steel companies.

Tech companies use your own interests and behaviours to addict you to their products so they can figure out which ads to target you with. For this, they are the most valuable creations in human history.

Tesla builds cars. It’s a car company. Cars are depreciating assets if their name doesn’t end with “911”.

You can’t Addict someone to something that takes 45 minutes to refuel. If that’s how heroin worked, nobody would do it.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by jammies

The biggest, richest companies in the world used to be oil companies, and now they have been supplanted by tech companies that didn't even exist a few decades ago. That's why Tesla is valued in the hundreds of billions, being a tech company at core, and having the best tech. They might lose that edge, but to the likes of Ford and Nissan? Toyota and Daimler - maybe. But history is littered with companies that failed to retool and rethink fast enough to quell upstart competitors. Where is US Steel* now?

In the 1970s and 80s, Japanese vehicles went from unreliable, cheap jokes to almost causing all three big American manufacturers to go bankrupt, with only government bailouts saving them. Nobody thought in 1972 that anyone could break into the American market in any significant way - until fuel economy became paramount, and Detroit couldn't adapt quickly enough despite the technology theoretically being merely an extension of what they already did, and not an entirely different field.

Being big and being established in a market doesn't guarantee anything when that market drastically changes. Some of the titans will adapt, some will go under, and someone else will take the place of those that die. Maybe not Tesla, but they've got an enormous head start on anybody else.

*Once the biggest company in the world, now number 27... among steel companies.

History is filled with startup and niche car companies that failed or were bought out by the giants. It's pretty rare for a car company to exist independently, and has been that way for decades. Which Is why I suspect they may get bought eventually, probably by one of the majors that finds themselves with no other choice after they fail to adapt. So probably Chrysler.

I don't think Musk would really care in 10 years if that happened. He'd take the money and invest in something else new. I think his goal through all of this was creating the tech, not so much a car company. That just came along with it.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by standinmotion

While EV has less parts and hence less production challenges, it's still not that easy to just stand up a car manufacturing at scale. Tesla learned it the hard way, but it seems like they have figured it out.

To be fair, in comparison to most other auto-makers, Tesla has figured out how to do maybe 1% of comparable ICE production with their EVs.

But that is 1% that nobody else has figured out, and most seem to agree that nobody will figure out for 3-5 years.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Daimler Benz revenues: $173B Euros ($200B US), market cap $48B Euros

Tesla revenues $24.6B, market cap $360B

The stock price suggests that Tesla will sell 7x as many vehicles as Mercedes (simplistic valuation, I know), good luck with that.

Again, you simply can't value a startup like Tesla based on profitability and revenues.

The Diamler Benz stock has been basically dead for 5 years, with little to no real growth. They have $30B in cash on hand, but over $100B in long-term debt and over $250B in liabilities, a number that has actually gone up quite a bit the last few years.

Tesla on the other hand has $8.5B in cash on hand, $10B in long-term debt, and $27B in long-term liabilities.

Why is all that important? Because if Diamler Benz wants to raise capital, they will need to tap into the debt markets. With their stock price already flat for basically 5 years, albeit with slight growth the last year, how much spending with their shareholders tolerate?

Tesla on the other hand just raised $5B in cash from a stock sale, and their stock price barely moved. There are a LOT of analysts that have targets on their stock from $500 to $1200.

Why is that important? Because it means over the long-term that Tesla will be able to raise capital WITHOUT having to tap into the debt market, which will keep their share holders happy, and will also be a neat trick to keep their stock price elevated from the perspective of the analysts that actually check the quarterly results.

If you compare stock prices and use it as a method to explain how many vehicles Tesla should sell, go over there and stand with the short-sellers that have been doing the same thing for years and have lost billions.

It doesn't matter what we think, the market clearly looks at Tesla otherwise, and I see that as a good thing.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

Tech companies use your own interests and behaviours to addict you to their products so they can figure out which ads to target you with. For this, they are the most valuable creations in human history.

Tesla builds cars. It’s a car company. Cars are depreciating assets if their name doesn’t end with “911”.

You can’t Addict someone to something that takes 45 minutes to refuel. If that’s how heroin worked, nobody would do it.

lol.

You clearly have no idea what Tesla is.

Which explains your rather ignorant and quite honestly, stupid viewpoint on their long term valuation.

One thing is right, anyone can build cars. But not anyone can build the AI and software that Tesla has, nor collect the 3 billion miles of data they have.

The future of transportation is self-driving cars, and Tesla is quite clearly years ahead of everyone else in ACTUAL real world options available on their vehicles.

It amazes me how often people look at Tesla and see the company from 3-5 years ago and use that company to predict or say what will happen. Hint, it is not the same thing. Not even close.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by Azure

lol.

You clearly have no idea what Tesla is.

Which explains your rather ignorant and quite honestly, stupid viewpoint on their long term valuation.

One thing is right, anyone can build cars. But not anyone can build the AI and software that Tesla has, nor collect the 3 billion miles of data they have.

The future of transportation is self-driving cars, and Tesla is quite clearly years ahead of everyone else in ACTUAL real world options available on their vehicles.

It amazes me how often people look at Tesla and see the company from 3-5 years ago and use that company to predict or say what will happen. Hint, it is not the same thing. Not even close.

Okay sweetie.

[Wormius]

Or the conventional car companies let Tesla do all of the expensive and pioneering ground work and perfect the technology then swoop in.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Wormius

Or the conventional car companies let Tesla do all of the expensive and pioneering ground work and perfect the technology then swoop in.

One thing that I will admit, I agree that Musk doesn't care long-term about 'cars'. He has repeatedly stated that long-term he wants to go to transition earth to have better energy sources, and go to Mars.

There is the chance that if he can sell off the car manufacturing part of Tesla to fund SpaceX he might do that.

Especially if he can split off Tesla Energy into a separate company.

But, who will buy Tesla for the $400B it is worth now? Or say $200B if he splits the company into two separate entities.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Azure

One thing that I will admit, I agree that Musk doesn't care long-term about 'cars'. He has repeatedly stated that long-term he wants to go to transition earth to have better energy sources, and go to Mars.

There is the chance that if he can sell off the car manufacturing part of Tesla to fund SpaceX he might do that.

Especially if he can split off Tesla Energy into a separate company.

But, who will buy Tesla for the $400B it is worth now? Or say $200B if he splits the company into two separate entities.

No one buys it for that now. Please don't get angry, but my guess is in 10 years, as I said, other companies will have caught up to Tesla, thus reducing their relative value because they won't have the market to themselves at that point. Someone like Chrysler(I just like to pick on Chrysler) who is really lagging buys it.

But I'd imagine depending on the state of autonomous tech, they may sell that as one company(perhaps to license it to others), sell the car company as another, maybe sell the semi division to another, and solar and batteries to someone else. This doesn't have to happen all at once. But I definitely see Musk wanting to pursue other grander visions than a car company once electric antonymous vehicles are largely established in the marketplace.

Again, no need to get flippant, this is just a guess.

[GreenLantern2814]

Every manufacturer has some form of adaptive cruise control. While their grace and sophistication vary, they’re all pretty legit at detecting obstacles and avoiding collisions on the highway.

People don’t care. They don’t use them, either because they straight don’t use cruise control, or the idea of a machine driving them around scares them.

Even when fully autonomous driving becomes something cars can do, people don’t drive like machines. They like to speed and change lanes and take on-ramps at 110.

That’s part of the fun. Nobody’s going to sit in the back seat of their own car and get driven around by a ghost. They’ll drive their cars. A machine that requires no operator input to move about in the world does not exist, and is not on the verge of existing.

The commercial application of self driving tech is one thing - even then, I think it assists the humans more than replaces them. If you’re running a shipment from Kentucky to Texas and you blow a tire a hundred miles out of Nashville, the truck can’t change its own tire.

What if it’s confronted with a problem it can’t solve because of a hole in its data?

What if the cargo is dislodged and strewn across the highway?

I’m sorry, I just see humans having a little more utility than a cruise control system.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

Every manufacturer has some form of adaptive cruise control. While their grace and sophistication vary, they’re all pretty legit at detecting obstacles and avoiding collisions on the highway.

People don’t care. They don’t use them, either because they straight don’t use cruise control, or the idea of a machine driving them around scares them.

Even when fully autonomous driving becomes something cars can do, people don’t drive like machines. They like to speed and change lanes and take on-ramps at 110.

That’s part of the fun. Nobody’s going to sit in the back seat of their own car and get driven around by a ghost. They’ll drive their cars. A machine that requires no operator input to move about in the world does not exist, and is not on the verge of existing.

The commercial application of self driving tech is one thing - even then, I think it assists the humans more than replaces them. If you’re running a shipment from Kentucky to Texas and you blow a tire a hundred miles out of Nashville, the truck can’t change its own tire.

What if it’s confronted with a problem it can’t solve because of a hole in its data?

What if the cargo is dislodged and strewn across the highway?

I’m sorry, I just see humans having a little more utility than a cruise control system.

Your ignorance is honestly amusing. I get not believing that Tesla is ahead of the competition or 'better' than anyone else, but now you're honestly saying AI, self-driving, etc is not going to be anything? Seriously, have you ever actually looked into where transportation is going? Autonomous vehicles is something most car manufacturers agree is the future.

Keep it up. Your posts are going to be pretty hilarious is about 3 years. Even they already aren't.

[Fuzz]

Ya, autonomous tech has a long way to go, certainly in winter. I see it being really successful in closed access places like shipping terminals though.


I don't really agree that "no one wants to sit in the back seat and be driven by a ghost" thoguh. Once it is reliable enough, most people aren't going to want to drive. Sure, it's fun to rip around on occasion, but if you could do other things while getting driven around? Sign me up. Soul sucking commutes become tolerable, long distance drives allow you to wake up refreshed at your destination, and it would be the end of drunk driving, distracted driving, and just plain ####ty drivers causing accidents. But this is a long way off in winter countries.