ByeByeJohnny
Member
I think you missed something here.Nameless Karen? I realize that pop culture has co-opted "karen" as a name but thats not what people here mean when they say Karen
Edit: @Lessmog beat me to it.
I think you missed something here.Nameless Karen? I realize that pop culture has co-opted "karen" as a name but thats not what people here mean when they say Karen
Brilliant Volkswagen. Sell 50% more of your EVs direct to your Dealers than they can sell due to pushing out ICE, and have these +14,000 vehicles sit on Dealer lots so Volkswagen avoids paying the heavy carbon credit fines. This may have worked for 2020. They won't be able to hide in 2021.Great to see some sites catching on to what a few of us here said around the New Year. Volkswagen cheated with the numbers. In the real world model 3 was likely by far the best selling EV in Europe in 2020.
Let's see if any mainstream media cares.
How Many 2020 Volkswagen ID.3 Sales Were Volkswagen Sales To Itself?
I think he'll want it up to 99.8% or better.
Brilliant Volkswagen. Sell 50% more of your EVs direct to your Dealers than they can sell due to pushing out ICE, and have these +14,000 vehicles sit on Dealer lots so Volkswagon avoids paying the heavy carbon credit fines. This may have worked for 2020. They won't be able to hide in 2021.
You seem to be newer here? Had not heard of the uproar after Elon's tweet about funding secured? Nor the $20M fine SEC deemed fit (on very hazy legal grounds) to lay on both Elon and Tesla for hurting "investors" -- which Elon was quick to make the company whole for by buying new shares for that amount. Which turned out to be a big gain. Sorry, Short-seller Enrichment Commission.SEC has ZERO grounds to do go after Tesla or Elon himself.
Sorry but I consider it irresponsible to make a post with a vague "could" have grounds and not list an actual example of why you think they could even be responsible or exactly what they're responsible for.
You seem to be newer here? Had not heard of the uproar after Elon's tweet about funding secured? Nor the $20M fine SEC deemed fit (on very hazy legal grounds) to lay on both Elon and Tesla for hurting "investors" -- which Elon was quick to make the company whole for by buying new shares for that amount. Which turned out to be a big gain. Sorry, Short-seller Enrichment Commission.
There has been a revolving door between SEC and WS for quite some time. They don't like us very much.
Sorry. I agree with the nameless Karen on this issue: BTC is a distraction and so to speak off-topic for Tesla the company. It has no authority to use its cash for anything not connected to its core (or at the very least, fringe) business. Cash goes to investing, or back to the shareholders -- as dividends or stock buy-back.
If we want to, we can buy Bitcoin with our own money. So can Elon. But he REALLY should not buy it WITH OUR MONEY -- and let's face it, that is what it is while we own the stock.
In my unschooled view that was a big mistake. One that SEC could actually have legal grounds to punish, in contrast to the previous silly incident. Fiduciary duty? Whozzat?
Apologies to Mods if this is deemed to be off-topic (in fact I'd agree) but it is a focus of discussion at present. Would that it was not.
EDIT: I type slower than @Paracelsus.
EDIT 2: I also read slower. Let me just reiterate in other words: SPECULATION IS NOT A CORE BUSINESS OF TSLA. Use our capital, or give it back.
Yeah, they are quickly running out of airfield parking space after Berlin AirportWhich is why I think the Euro EV credits will be higher this year for Tesla. The lots can only fill up so much before VW has to stop this tactic.
It also sounds like they won't even be able to fill up the lots thanks to their inaction on securing batteries and chips.
Alex on Twitter: "VWs supply crisis deepens Not only that VW doesn't have a sufficient chip supply, not having enough batteries supply is the next problem VWs worker council head, Osterloh, "We don't have enough battery cells to fill all the orders"" / Twitter
So they don't have enough batteries to even fill the "orders" that are just going to be sold themselves.
You can't make this up haha
Like I already said, SEC has not been eager to follow open rules in the past. Why rely on their honesty now, all of a sudden?I was a lurker long before I joined here. My first TSLA buys date back well before 2013.
And again......people should have a sense of responsibility when posting. You've had multiple people here point out how silly it is to be fearful of any SEC action. I still don't even know what you think Tesla or Elon would be in trouble for. I guess that's what I'm really unclear about here. What is the thing you actually think they're in trouble for?
Thanks, just saw that after starting to reply. I can go back to your previous lurk mode. (My avatar is auto-ban, after all ... )Edit: And to be clear, sorry not trying to get on you. But it's been shown that FUD gets published from conversation that happens here on this forum from people lurking or care-bears. Not saying you're one of them.
This is the march of the nines. 99.8% is nowhere near ready for mainstream release. This metric would result in a crash one in every 998 drives. Current human averages are an accident for approximately every 200,000 miles. Tesla would be looking to improve this 10X for an accident rate of one every 2 million miles. At this rate, for FSD Level 5, Tesla needs a 99.99995% success rate. It will never be perfect, however the FSD crash rate needs to be significantly lower than current human averages to gain full acceptance by governing juristictions.My gut tells me true Level 5 FSD won't be until sometime next year. I think they'll get incredibly close this year and they'll release a solid Level 4 FSD which works on all types of roads to the public within a few months, but solving all the edge cases to 100% safety satisfaction will take quite some time yet IMHO. 99% won't be good enough for Elon to truly claim FSD 5 is done, I think he'll want it up to 99.8% or better.
We are close though, so very, very close now. And yes, when FSD 5 does come out it will be a game changer for TSLA, no doubt.
In reality, the EU needs to clarify the definition of "vehicle sales" to close this loophole.Brilliant Volkswagen. Sell 50% more of your EVs direct to your Dealers than they can sell due to pushing out ICE, and have these +14,000 vehicles sit on Dealer lots so Volkswagon avoids paying the heavy carbon credit fines. This may have worked for 2020. They won't be able to hide in 2021.
This is the march of the nines. 99.8% is nowhere near ready for mainstream release. This metric would result in a crash one in every 998 drives. Current human averages are an accident for approximately every 200,000 miles. Tesla would be looking to improve this 10X for an accident rate of one every 2 million miles. At this rate, for FSD Level 5, Tesla needs a 99.99995% success rate. It will never be perfect, however the FSD crash rate needs to be significantly lower than current human averages to gain full acceptance by governing juristictions.
EDIT: Ha ha. What @adiggs said.
This would be the first tax credit that starts in the middle of a calendar year. If this is so, that would stall U.S. delivery for Tesla as long as this bill is debated. Tesla is paying a lot of money to lobbyists, Zach is on this, if he isn't Elon is not going to be very pleased. In other words, heads will roll. Just had a thought, what if they sell BTC and use the profits to lower prices in the U.S. while this bill is debated, take 5k off at purchase. When bill is passed go back to regular prices.I believe only applies to vehicles that are sold after the effective date of the Green Act.
Text - H.R.848 - 117th Congress (2021-2022): GREEN Act of 2021
(c) Effective Date.—
(1) LIMITATION.—The amendment made by subsection (a) shall apply to vehicles sold after the date of the enactment of this Act.
Can you report back in several weeks about the reliability? For example, how often to you lose connectivity.
Uh, 99.8% is 1-accident-in-500 drives. No crashes though...99.8% is nowhere near ready for mainstream release. This metric would result in a crash one in every 998 drives.
You can't.In reality, the EU needs to clarify the definition of "vehicle sales" to close this loophole.
Sorry but what? Legal grounds on what? Tesla can and rightfully will be able to say they made the investment to act as reserves for their future plans of taking bitcoin as payment. They stated on the 10-k that they're considering taking bitcoin as a payment option. They need to have reserves in order to start taking bitcoin as payment. Apparently you've been watching too much of Wall St media and the narrative they're pushing that the SEC could somehow get involved and/or that Elon is somehow in trouble
I'm not fan of it, I'm very impartial to the bitcoin investment. But the SEC fearmongering stories are BS and should not make it's way into this forum.
Tesla's BTC is a small fraction of their cash holdings. There is no reason to sell it and take a taxable gain. Tesla has more cash than they can spend effectively right now and the pile is growing every day.
With Schwab also and It’s states TSLA is 40% and I’m 95%+ in Tesla and 100s shares margined.Schwab is 40%...
However since I have a 'concentrated position' in TSLA [what margin? ;-) ], they raised it to 50%
Tesla will lobby for this to be passed asap, not retroactively.This would be the first tax credit that starts in the middle of a calendar year. If this is so, that would stall U.S. delivery for Tesla as long as this bill is debated. Tesla is paying a lot of money to lobbyists, Zach is on this, if he isn't Elon is not going to be very pleased. In other words, heads will roll. Just had a thought, what if they sell BTC and use the profits to lower prices in the U.S. while this bill is debated, take 5k off at purchase. When bill is passed go back to regular prices.