They've either lost their grip on reality or are just cynically trying to manipulate sentiment without regard for the facts. Either way, life is too short.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Short Sellers drove WSJ Reviewer Dan Neil to deletion of his Twitter
- Thread starter Pluto
- Start date
They've either lost their grip on reality or are just cynically trying to manipulate sentiment without regard for the facts. Either way, life is too short.
strangecosmos
Non-Member
People can reasonably disagree on all kinds of things about Tesla. For example, whether Tesla is overvalued or undervalued as a company. To answer that question, you have to do financial modelling, and make assumptions about the future that are uncertain.
If someone states something as fact that isn’t true, or makes an unsubstantiated factual claim, that’s another matter. There are a lot of weird conspiracy theories about Tesla on Twitter, which is a topic in its own right. But what I’m talking about is just regular ol’ disagreement.
nwdiver
Well-Known Member
Peel back the 'opinions' and you usually find that they're based on nonsense. i.e. Tesla is overvalued because there are thousands of 3s sitting in a parking lot they can't sell....
Like most every “news” comment section. It’s all hate mongering. I get free speech and all, but these “podiums” are abused. It was very different when people had to take the time to write the editor. Or have real conversations with other people. But the world has evolved into 140 character semi-anonymous one liners. Sad.
strangecosmos
Non-Member
That is the case sometimes, but not all the time. For example, here’s NYU Stern professor Scott Galloway’s argument:
Tesla has an amazing product, but has been mistaken by investors as an internet firm. Tesla lacks the frictionless networking effects of a Google or Facebook and doesn’t have the Hermés-like margins of an Apple. Yet, it’s trading at a valuation more reflective of a firm that can scale like a Facebook or generate the profits of an Apple.
In addition, Main Street and Madison Avenue both had it coming. Mercedes and Ford? Not so much. This is a hugely competitive, relatively efficient sector that has kept prices in check with inflation. An auto manufacturer should have approximately 20% of production volume ($25B for Tesla) in cash on hand (so $5B). Tesla has $2.7B. This means by the end of the year Tesla analysts will begin wringing their hands over liquidity concerns and dilution. This fear, coupled with rising interest rates, could spook bondholders and result in the equity being the tail of the whip as enterprise value drops.
Prediction: Tesla stock drops 30–50% in the next 12 months as markets realize it’s a great auto company, not a tech firm.
There is nothing factually incorrect in what he wrote. Personally I also think this is a reasonable argument, even though I disagree.
nwdiver
Well-Known Member
Shades of grey but I think reducing Tesla to an Auto company is factually incorrect.
Dr. J
Active Member
Tesla also sells solar products, and an argument can be made they sell software (on the cars). It's still basically an auto company, is it not?
nwdiver
Well-Known Member
It's disingenuous to structure an argument around that premise. You can't take one part of a whole and try to compare it to a peer of that part. Tesla also has an Energy component. They're a huge battery manufacturer now. They also have talent at Space X that can be called on if needed.
It's somewhat similar to renewable critics that point out solar doesn't work at night, wind doesn't work when it's calm and batteries don't work because the energy source is dirty while ignoring that solar, wind, storage and demand response combined are a triple threat...
Dr. J
Active Member
OK, battery storage, too. And there are synergies between these components that will impact profitability, I take it? You can compare parts and pieces of companies in different but overlapping industries if you have a handle on the profitability of the various parts, and how the parts enhance the value of the whole.
Hey, I'm just providing the foil you guys can fence against. I have no interest in TSLA other than hoping Tesla stays in business. I just can't wrap my head around the profit expectations embodied in the market value. I will say the shorts have struggled mightily, and they seem desperate.
Here's an article from 2014 (4 years ago), an interview with JB Straubel;
Tesla CTO on Energy Storage: ‘We Should All Be Thinking Bigger’
You'll note his mention of an experiment with behind-the-meter aggregation. Now think about what's happening in South Australia.
As an energy company, Tesla's current challenge is meeting, not generating, demand.
Krugerrand
Meow
Online hate and abuse are bananas. Ultimately it's a cultural problem because these behaviours exist offline too, in no short supply. But 1) it's easier to be cruel and hostile to someone when you can't see their face. And 2) there is something about the landscape of the Internet that disproportionately amplifies abusive voices. One hunch: people who are abusive are much more vocal than others, often being obsessive about the targets of their abuse.
There are a handful of folks who are extremely vocal online, and who are also bullying and abusive, who seem to have decided it's their life purpose to take down Tesla. They have devoted their lives to something they hate. The unceasing, day in, day out tweets and comments are disturbing. I have 1600 comments on Seeking Alpha and it's had horrible psychological effects. It boggles my mind to see people who have 10,000 or 20,000 comments.
I can understand being obsessed about something you love. But that kind of obsessive hate feels scary and dark. It reminds me of my experience with radical leftist activism. Obsession with what you hate is a dark path to walk. Fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, hate leads to suffering.
I've had perfectly lovely interactions with people who disagree with me about Tesla. I would love to have more. When someone can challenge you intellectually and yet remain respectful and friendly, that is a gift. It's fun and it's an important way to advance your thinking. This is not about disagreement. It's about abuse.
Take for example Montana Skeptic (whoever that is). His interactions with me on Seeking Alpha were totally erratic. At times friendly and complimentary, at times shockingly hostile and insulting. When Seeking Alpha staff removed some of his comments because they broke the rules, this is how he lashed out at me in a direct message:
This followed comments and other messages that were similarly abusive. To me, this kind of behaviour is a sign that someone is not emotionally healthy. I feel empathy for Montana Skeptic and others like him because I think how badly you behave is a measure of how much suffering you experience. A person must be suffering a lot to behave like this.
This is one major reason I think the answer is not to counteract this bad behaviour with the same bad behaviour. I see a lot of people on Twitter creating accounts like this and I don’t like it. I block those accounts. Online hate and abuse perpetuated by people who happen to be pro-Tesla is equally bad.
Dana Hull is a journalist who seems to get a lot of hate from people who are pro-Tesla, which is awful. No one should be harassed online for any reason. Moreover, Dana seems to be a perfectly fine journalist who is doing her job well. Disagreement is good and healthy, but harassment is not. I find this example particularly surprising and disconcerting because Dana’s coverage on Tesla seems pretty neutral or even positive overall, adjusted for journalists’ inherent focus on problems and bad news. I can imagine that Dana might feel how Dan Neil feels. Tesla fans are capable of the same abusive behaviour as Tesla critics.
Montana Skeptic’s allusion to critics going at him “tooth and claw” (perhaps those critics are the same sort of Tesla fans who go after Dana) reinforces my hunch that experiencing online abuse contributes to people becoming abusive online themselves. I worry that Elon is absorbing too much online abuse and it’s pushing him down that path. Maybe he should hire some assistants to read his @ replies for him. I used to feel sure that he did that until I noticed him responding to random mean tweets from random people with almost no followers. I can’t imagine the amount of abuse targeted at someone with millions of Twitter followers. I’ve experienced a lot of abuse with virtually no following at all. I can see the effect it’s had on me. I hope Elon stops exposing himself to that abuse.
I don’t know if there is anything we can do to make people stop abusing. My hunch is that people need to have that awakening for themselves and seek healing for their suffering on their own. I don’t think you can persuade, coerce, bully, or beg someone into doing that.
But there is probably a lot more we can do to protect people from abuse online. Probably number one on that list is just awareness and education. Once you have a clear understanding of what is abuse and what isn’t, it is easier to decide who to engage with and who to block. Setting firm boundaries is the key to avoiding a lot of unnecessary suffering caused by other people’s bad behaviour.
It might also help in a situation like Dan Neil was in for someone to discreetly let the person who is being targeted know that one or more of the people he’s engaging with have a long history of abusive behaviour. If someone has a reputation for abusing or trolling, it is easier to ignore them. That’s why I shared my experience with Montana Skeptic. I also feel more comfortable doing that because he’s anonymous and can just abandon his online persona anytime without any real life consequences.
So, in summary:
- Please do not draw the line between pro-Tesla and anti-Tesla.
- Instead, draw the line between disagreement, which is good, and abuse, which is bad.
- Please do not seek to harass, abuse, or troll people who have harassed, abused, or trolled others. This is equally bad and only perpetuates the problem further.
- Instead, extend support to the person who is being harassed, abused, or trolled, and let them know if the person who is targeting them has a history of abuse — that may be what they need to hear to give themselves permission to block the person abusing them.
- Please do not villainize people who engage in abusive behaviour. This won’t help and will hurt.
- Instead, understand that people who are hurt often hurt others. We may not be able to help someone in that position, but at least we can avoid adding to their pain.
In theory I agree. In practice I don’t for the simple reason, people need to be held accountable for their actions even if they are hurting. Personal responsibility appears to be at an all time low.
I don’t like to wish ill on others because Karma, but these people are not just ugly inside, they are black inside, and that seriously tries that personal rule of mine.
Dr. J
Active Member
Interesting read. I like this part:
He said that there will be improvements in cathode, anode and electrolyte materials, but that for the next five or ten years, things will look pretty much the same. There was little reason to battle about the size of the cell or the 18650 form factor, in the CTO's view. The improvements to the cell will come with better anode and cathode material, not with the shape and size of the cell.
So they've moved much faster, with the Model 3 battery, than that comment anticipated.
Good points about behind-the-meter aggregation. It does appear that the storage market is growing quite fast, and Tesla is positioned to take advantage of it.
Online hate and abuse are bananas. Ultimately it's a cultural problem because these behaviours exist offline too, in no short supply. But 1) it's easier to be cruel and hostile to someone when you can't see their face. And 2) there is something about the landscape of the Internet that disproportionately amplifies abusive voices. One hunch: people who are abusive are much more vocal than others, often being obsessive about the targets of their abuse.
There are a handful of folks who are extremely vocal online, and who are also bullying and abusive, who seem to have decided it's their life purpose to take down Tesla. They have devoted their lives to something they hate. The unceasing, day in, day out tweets and comments are disturbing. I have 1600 comments on Seeking Alpha and it's had horrible psychological effects. It boggles my mind to see people who have 10,000 or 20,000 comments.
I can understand being obsessed about something you love. But that kind of obsessive hate feels scary and dark. It reminds me of my experience with radical leftist activism. Obsession with what you hate is a dark path to walk. Fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, hate leads to suffering.
I've had perfectly lovely interactions with people who disagree with me about Tesla. I would love to have more. When someone can challenge you intellectually and yet remain respectful and friendly, that is a gift. It's fun and it's an important way to advance your thinking. This is not about disagreement. It's about abuse.
Take for example Montana Skeptic (whoever that is). His interactions with me on Seeking Alpha were totally erratic. At times friendly and complimentary, at times shockingly hostile and insulting. When Seeking Alpha staff removed some of his comments because they broke the rules, this is how he lashed out at me in a direct message:
This followed comments and other messages that were similarly abusive. To me, this kind of behaviour is a sign that someone is not emotionally healthy. I feel empathy for Montana Skeptic and others like him because I think how badly you behave is a measure of how much suffering you experience. A person must be suffering a lot to behave like this.
This is one major reason I think the answer is not to counteract this bad behaviour with the same bad behaviour. I see a lot of people on Twitter creating accounts like this and I don’t like it. I block those accounts. Online hate and abuse perpetuated by people who happen to be pro-Tesla is equally bad.
Dana Hull is a journalist who seems to get a lot of hate from people who are pro-Tesla, which is awful. No one should be harassed online for any reason. Moreover, Dana seems to be a perfectly fine journalist who is doing her job well. Disagreement is good and healthy, but harassment is not. I find this example particularly surprising and disconcerting because Dana’s coverage on Tesla seems pretty neutral or even positive overall, adjusted for journalists’ inherent focus on problems and bad news. I can imagine that Dana might feel how Dan Neil feels. Tesla fans are capable of the same abusive behaviour as Tesla critics.
Montana Skeptic’s allusion to critics going at him “tooth and claw” (perhaps those critics are the same sort of Tesla fans who go after Dana) reinforces my hunch that experiencing online abuse contributes to people becoming abusive online themselves. I worry that Elon is absorbing too much online abuse and it’s pushing him down that path. Maybe he should hire some assistants to read his @ replies for him. I used to feel sure that he did that until I noticed him responding to random mean tweets from random people with almost no followers. I can’t imagine the amount of abuse targeted at someone with millions of Twitter followers. I’ve experienced a lot of abuse with virtually no following at all. I can see the effect it’s had on me. I hope Elon stops exposing himself to that abuse.
I don’t know if there is anything we can do to make people stop abusing. My hunch is that people need to have that awakening for themselves and seek healing for their suffering on their own. I don’t think you can persuade, coerce, bully, or beg someone into doing that.
But there is probably a lot more we can do to protect people from abuse online. Probably number one on that list is just awareness and education. Once you have a clear understanding of what is abuse and what isn’t, it is easier to decide who to engage with and who to block. Setting firm boundaries is the key to avoiding a lot of unnecessary suffering caused by other people’s bad behaviour.
It might also help in a situation like Dan Neil was in for someone to discreetly let the person who is being targeted know that one or more of the people he’s engaging with have a long history of abusive behaviour. If someone has a reputation for abusing or trolling, it is easier to ignore them. That’s why I shared my experience with Montana Skeptic. I also feel more comfortable doing that because he’s anonymous and can just abandon his online persona anytime without any real life consequences.
So, in summary:
- Please do not draw the line between pro-Tesla and anti-Tesla.
- Instead, draw the line between disagreement, which is good, and abuse, which is bad.
- Please do not seek to harass, abuse, or troll people who have harassed, abused, or trolled others. This is equally bad and only perpetuates the problem further.
- Instead, extend support to the person who is being harassed, abused, or trolled, and let them know if the person who is targeting them has a history of abuse — that may be what they need to hear to give themselves permission to block the person abusing them.
- Please do not villainize people who engage in abusive behaviour. This won’t help and will hurt.
- Instead, understand that people who are hurt often hurt others. We may not be able to help someone in that position, but at least we can avoid adding to their pain.
What a great presentation, she would be the perfect counselor for Elon Musk.
nwdiver
Well-Known Member
If you read Elons biography by Ashlee Vance it's clear he has a deep rooted pathological distain for 'bullies'. The cave diver clearly triggered Elon.
Not sure it's possible to have extreme tenacity in one area and not others. The same drive that has him sleeping on the factory floor when production stalls sometimes pushes him over lines that shouldn't be crossed on twitter....
Genius comes as a package. Tesla invented the AC induction motor... and fell in love with a pigeon. Sometimes you gotta take the good with the bad.... I think it's possible to explain, understand and to an extent tolerate or deter behavior without accepting or condoning it.
Last edited:
Trent, you comments in this thread seem to me to be missing an important point, namely that much of the discussion around Tesla is not proceeding under good faith. It is not regular disagreements between individuals. You earlier post (19) contains lots of great stuff for communicating with good faith and is helpful for elevating discourse.
I think what many are struggling with is the bad faith nature of events like Dan's harrasment. "Commercial trolling" much like its State-supported counterpart, does not play by the normal rules of good discourse. It seeks to undermine them. It is designed to spread misinformation, and if that misinformation is challenged, as Dan attemped to do, reasoned responses are simply overwhelmed or responded to with harrassment. If the misinformation is ignored, it spreads. If it is challenged, they overwhelm or intentionally devolve to threats.
It is a difficult strategy to counter. While remaining civil is helpful, I dont think it solves the problem.
Terms of Service Violation
How social media bots could tank your stock price
Exactly. These people have a financial incentive to trash Tesla, whether shorts or financially dependent on the status quo. They’re crowing about chasing Dan Neil off Twitter in hopes it causes other reviewers to temper their enthusiasm for the Model 3.
Similar threads
