copyhacker
Member
Not necessarily. People tend to fear loss more than they desire the equivalent amount of gain. And since the potential for loss on a short sale is unlimited, you might be motivated to go to greater lengths to protect yourself.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Not necessarily. People tend to fear loss more than they desire the equivalent amount of gain. And since the potential for loss on a short sale is unlimited, you might be motivated to go to greater lengths to protect yourself.
SageBrush
REJECT Fascism
It is more than that. An unbiased person is unlikely to pass on rumors or information that lacks context. So the odds are in favor of OP having a negative ulterior motive.
Moreover, OP states that he is positively biased which would be doubly unusual to throw out negative rumors. All the more reason to suspect he is lying.
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
Well I didn't say it was nonexistent, just much less likely. Basically I don't feel there is equal likelihood of false positive rumors and false negative rumors being posted here.
And I want to separate rumor from speculation. Rumor is the person claiming to have heard from a source, speculation is without that. Lots of positive speculation here, much fewer positive rumors.
And the only positive rumors I come across is from established owners who hear something from a service advisor or store staff. However, the negative rumors tend to come from people with little/no post count, posting as their first thread (multiple examples of this). I haven't seen a positive rumor come in this flavor yet.
Super_Popular
Well-Known Member
Tesla is building a brand new car, to be expected are the following:
1) It will not be delivered as said, it will be delayed
2) it will not be as priced, it will be over $35K
3) it will have building/quality issues for the year, maybe 2
This is all common practice of Tesla and those that have been around for a while know and expect this. Those of you that are new to Tesla you better get used to it or by a Bolt or Jolt or whatever it is called.
Is it worth the wait and drama, hell yeah!
1) It will not be delivered as said, it will be delayed
2) it will not be as priced, it will be over $35K
3) it will have building/quality issues for the year, maybe 2
This is all common practice of Tesla and those that have been around for a while know and expect this. Those of you that are new to Tesla you better get used to it or by a Bolt or Jolt or whatever it is called.
Is it worth the wait and drama, hell yeah!
JeffK
Well-Known Member
While I don't know about number 3, numbers 1 and 2 will be met no matter what. There will be some produced in 2017 and they will be $35,000 base
bonnie
I play a nice person on twitter.
Agree. One way or another, Elon will hit the base price he originally said.
For those who weren't around prior to the Model S launch, he made similar claims well in advance re the base price for Model S - pretty sure it was $55k, with a 40kWh battery. Hardly anyone ordered that config, but he met his claim of $55k base price.
Keep the faith. I was part of a significant ($1bn market at risk) product development, where there were critical "show stopper" quality issues less than a week before the announcement and ship date.
We shipped on time, with quality. They've got time, and engineers can be a very insightful and creative lot.
We shipped on time, with quality. They've got time, and engineers can be a very insightful and creative lot.
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
#3, I would say applies to any new car platform. Even the most reliable car brands tend to have problems when they introduce a new platform. That's why Consumer Reports will not recommend a new generation of a model until they have enough data (even if previous gen was recommended).
AnxietyRanger said:
What makes you think positive attempts are not the result of fear of loss? A positive attempt at influence can be, for example, an attempt to paint negative rumor as a short invention, even if it might be true. This most certainly happened in the case of Eds, who was right, yet was painted as a short by people known to own TSLA.
I would speculate many a short-hunt on TMC is driven by TSLA investors fearful of their losses, which in turn means they would be less likely to consider real negative news as real than, say, someone who does not have the same losses to fear.
It is only human. Hence I repeat me thought that all posts need to be looked at sceptically. This one included, but there is no fear that it won't be...
The S40 is an interesting example, though, as it was a limited-time run in the end and Model S starting price settled at 10k+ afterwards. Hitting the base price for a short amount of time is not the same as hitting it permanently. It may not have been popular in that initial audience, but I do think many more would have gone for it later...
That said, for me the expectation of Model 3 base price actually goes the other way around: unlike Model S base price, Model 3 $35,000 base price will be hit, for the long term - absolutely no doubt about it. The existence of the company hinges on that promise, much more so than with Model S base price.
But the question with Model 3 is, will a $35,000 version be orderable and deliverable immediately, or will Tesla for example start with a higher premium larger battery at first and thus keep an elevated level of pricing for a while... say first 6-12 months? I think that is fair speculation.
Sorry, that makes no sense to me. First of all, nobody is unbiased. Most of the people posting on this forum are either somewhat biased for or against Tesla, no news there - it is a result of plenty of TSLA investors (bias for Tesla) and Tesla car owners posting negative practical experiences as the likelihood of posting negative experiences is higher (you have a problem, you post it, hence a resulting bias against Tesla on the experiences forums). In between these is a positive bias generated by Tesla fandom, which certainly exists.
Second, on a forum such as the Model 3 forum - or pre-release Model X forum before it, or Model S back in the olden days - limited data and context is part and parcel of the stage at which the product is in. Tesla the company is not sharing with us anything that is not in their interest, yet the buyers, active investors (longs often are not) and other interested parties have an interest in knowing more than the company is sharing. Finding out is, by nature, limited and incomplete - rumors, leaks, speculation.
Leaks - even those very true leaks - are nearly always incomplete data, partly to protect the source of the leak or the person posting the leak (e.g. new anonymous account and details omitted), partly because the information itself gathered and available through this method is often incomplete. That doesn't mean it can't be valuable or accurate, it is just partial...
It is a game, really. The company putting on the best face they can, for their own interests, and on the other end other parties trying to see beyond that face and find out reality, for their own interests.
p.s. I'm sure there are also the occasional short still, though I would guess the number of those has actually gone down over the years, TMC just does not matter for that as much these days. But it remains exactly the kind of place where someone who has learned something from a friend, would go to post. Hence I find the news in this thread plausible. It may also be false, of course.
This thread is not about delays, though. It is a specific claim that Tesla that has a yield problem with a Model 3 component that someone is not confident will be sorted out in time, resulting in an early ramp-up speed being limited to a smaller number of cars. So, it is - if accurate - some guidance into the Model 3 ramp-up curve. Of course it can also be false data.
Unlike you it seems, not all are here just for TSLA stock. You kind of gave away your bias there, though.
The impact of those unveiled quality issues on the Model X story has been massive and still on-going (supplier lawsuits, continuing quality problems). That information continues to be pivotal insight into the Model X ramp-up process, still part of the check-lists people take with them to Model X deliveries.
Does it matter to someone buying a Model X today? Obviously less so. It was useful insight into those waiting for Model Xs and dealing with those early quality issues. But that can be said of anything two years old, by that same token we might as well delete the entire Model 3 forum, why talk anything as an eventual launch will make most of it irrelevant.
However, what it does do - the Eds insight into Model X behind the scenes - is offer us insight into how a Model 3 ramp-up might play out at the same company and how to interpret public smoke signals and non-public smoke signals coming from there. It also gives us insight into how TMC as a community works and what knee-jerk reactions we often have and might be wise to avoid.
Why do you think behind the scenes books and memoirs are so often written, even years after the facts? Of course partly because people writing them want to share their legacies, but also because there are lessons to be learned from those private stories, to be applied to future events.
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
He is talking about a common concern troll tactic: pretend to be part of the group and say explicitly so.
concern troll - Wiktionary
A genuine person rarely sees the need to explain themselves in this way. That's why spammers/astroturfers/concern trolls who do a long con, would post in other unrelated topics first for some time to built up some legitimacy and history, before switching to the real topics they want to discuss. This avoids having to explain oneself explicitly, which draws suspicion from people used to such tactics.
Anyone with a hint of reading history on TMC would be defensive posting negative information.
What looks like a concern troll, can also be someone with a realistic understanding of how their information will be perceived.Look, I do get that there are a lot of fake posting going on, on the Internet in general. I have been around long enough, going back to the newsgroups ~30 years ago. So I am not disputing the fact that there is and has been also fake posting on TMC.
But it would be naive to think it only applies to negative rumor and only appears in the form of made-up stories. Another more elusive form is subjective bias (and that includes positive bias for Tesla or TSLA) guiding the flow of conversation.
The OP can be fake. I just don't know if he/she is, and reality is, neither do you.
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
This is getting more and more off topic, but I never argued it "only" applies to negative rumor, just that there are factors that make it much more likely to apply to negative rumor, not equal likelihood with positive rumor as you are saying.Anyone with a hint of reading history on TMC would be defensive posting negative information.
Look, I do get that there are a lot of fake posting going on, on the Internet in general. I have been around long enough, going back to the newsgroups ~30 years ago. So I am not disputing the fact that there is and has been also fake posting on TMC.
But it would be naive to think it only applies to negative rumor and only appears in the form of made-up stories. Another more elusive form is subjective bias (and that includes positive bias for Tesla or TSLA) guiding the flow of conversation.
The OP can be fake. I just don't know if he/she is, and reality is, neither do you.
For example, I haven't seen a single example of someone starting a positive rumor thread matching the same heuristics (extremely low post count, the subject thread being the first or second of the person). On the other hand, there are many examples of negative rumor threads starting in this way.
For the record, note that I never said the OP was fake. I started participating in this thread by pointing out the irrational short explanation is an extremely old excuse, that I have seen personally before.
SageBrush
REJECT Fascism
I didn't mean to confuse you.
Split the range of bias into three parts. My comment referred to the middle third.
Now here is an exercise for you: I'm telling you that experienced TMC regulars think OP's thread is garbage. But don't tell anyone I said so ... I like keeping a low profile. Of course if you would like to post this information on TMC in a separate thread I guess I am OK with that.
Oh, and since you like rumors, it just popped into my head that GM is considering buying Tesla. Completely possible, right ? Start that rumor too, from a "deeply interested party."
If you get the feeling that I am mocking you, there is still hope. Read up on the difference between possible and plausible.
Last edited:
Yep. For context, automotive reliability and durability testing has some insight into what other established automakers do for testing. Some of them aren't known to consistently produce vehicles that are reliable in the short or long term.
Examples I cited there:
- Arizona company was loaned a Nissan NV 3500 van. They put on 7500 miles/week for 80K miles in 3 months. Video showed the van w/557K miles on the clock.
Unfortunately, my thread on that has been mostly crickets.
Look how many years it took for Tesla to finally seem to get Model S drive units issues under control w/them developing noises and some (much smaller number though) failing?
Fair enough, but to be clear I never inteded to suggest these things appear in equal form in negative and positive posting, just that both negative and positive skewing does appear - perhaps even in equal numbers (that is just a rhetorical point, not a mathematical one). I would not claim positive rumors are started necessarily as eagerly as negative ones by low-count posters. However, I do think the positive bias does result in a lot of posting that does counter negative posts - even real negative posts - with perhaps an equal (or even larger) opposite force.
Just because positive bias and resulting "faking" manifests itself in different ways than its negative opposite, does not mean both don't exist. That was my point, to be clear.
As for an example of positive rumours, I would say Elon himself is one of those parties that likes to make vague statements that he knows or should know are likely to get out of hand in the rumor mill. Tesla uses this for good effect at times.
/like
Experienced TMC regulars also were convinced Eds was garbage. He was not.
I would consider your rumor, were it presented in a manner I would consider plausible. For some reason, my intuition rejects it.
SageBrush
REJECT Fascism
No problem. I'll sign up as a new member first and not tell you that it is garbage. That should do it. And you really should not dismiss my GM rumor out of hand. REMEMBER Eds !!I would consider your rumor, were it presented in a manner I would consider plausible. For some reason, my intuition rejects it.
