PERFECT touchdown. Of course I Love You!
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Tesla, TSLA & the Investment World: the Perpetual Investors' Roundtable
- Thread starter AudubonB
- Start date
Could be. But recall these are Jan-Feb numbers, so not many new Teslas to the EU yet. Next set of numbers should show FCA-Honda-Tesla to be some better.
larmor
Active Member
Where are you supercruise and consumer reports? Did you just miss that landing, because that is rocket science.
Does anyone have a chart handy that shows SP vs analyst price targets? Feels like we are at a point where these two numbers are the farthest they have been from each other. We really need V9 to be mind blowing when it comes out. God forbid it's a meh like advanced summon was. Well, that and we need the government to crap or get off the pot with this EV credit.
OT
have you noticed during launches they seem to be accelerating a bit faster
hit over 1,100 at 1 minute and we saw landing all the way down to middle of bullseye
OT
Well.. on 23rd there is the next meeting where some people rumor that they will enact rues to get the average CO2-emissions to BELOW 43g/km in 2030 (goal this year: 95g). Those numbers are always fleet-average. So if you keep on selling trucks/Semis/... you have to offset those with EVs or by credits from EV-Makers.
I did not watch the launch, (boring, reliable now), only caught the landing. Coming in, I swore they were short a few hundred feed "south." Must be the lens playing tricks.
About freakin time... squeaks in at $673.99 for the close.
I'm in Launch mode now. Nice fast accelerated launch mode.
I'm in Launch mode now. Nice fast accelerated launch mode.
And someone pushes it up a penny. Whew, I was worried there.
Don TLR
Active Member
Check out Trevors animation, it made quite the correction near OCISLY
I guess the Internet has the answer:
Mission v0.9 - May 23 2019 (first launch with 60 satellites):
Starlink Launch 25 (today):
Looks about the same to me - give or take the different moment I likely pressed pause
Instead of lowering the emission limits, they should rather fix the silly test specifications. WLTP is already much better than the old one. But "real-world" test with acceleration like a grandma, average speed below 30mph and over 10% stops? Come on!
They should at least put a max acceleration pull up to the advertised top speed at the end...
I was watching @Gabeincal's Youtube videos and noticed that a new tent (rounded top vs original triangle top tent) has been installed (labeled GA 4.5) alongside the original tent in Fremont. Going back through his videos, the tent first appeared between Feb 8 and Feb 21, 2021.
Feb 8 - No rounded tent visible at 3:46
Feb 23 - Rounded tent visible at 1:52
May 4 - Further expansion of tent at 4:00
What will they be building in there?
Feb 8 - No rounded tent visible at 3:46
Feb 23 - Rounded tent visible at 1:52
May 4 - Further expansion of tent at 4:00
What will they be building in there?
The standard does not matter. See
I don't care if that would be 110g under WTLP now or 90g under NEDC or 125g under EPA ..
You just need a test-framework and then lower the sh*t out of that. Even if they are inaccurate - they are CONSISTENTLY inaccurate.. which is no problem if you want to lower the average. Getting 10% reduction means roughly the same thing - no matter the test.
Those were never designed for "real life" but for "comparability in-between".
Joe F
Disruption is hard.
Here's the second Heavy landing. They don't fall straight down to hit the landing pad. I thought the same about the landing today, but then remembered this:
Words of HABIT
Active Member
I disagree.
1. First they ignored Tesla.
2. Then they laughed at Tesla.
4. Then Tesla won!
5. Now they whine and complain relentlessly about Tesla. My shoelace became untied. The dog ate my homework. Making BEVs is really hard. Tesla only makes money because of ZEV credits and Bitcoin. Tesla's AP and FSD is not fair since we can't beat or match it, we don't even understand how it can work without Lidar.
There is no stage 3. They chose not to fight, not to bring to market anything worth while. It is an unfair competition after all, an upstart Silicon Valley company taking on 100 year old multi-billion dollar industries. Clearly we are full on in the final stage 5 where they whine and complain themselves away into oblivion.
Make no mistake about it that Tesla has already won. Their first four production vehicles produced are the four safest vehicles ever manufactured according to NHTSA results. Their first four production vehicles have the highest range and best KwH battery rating (kwH needed per mile) than any other BEV ever made. With Tesla vehicle performance reserved formerly for elite supercars. And Tesla is improving with each upgrade, with each vehicle produced. If anyone is basing a Tesla win on its share price reaching XXX or XXXX, then you will be disappointed 50% of the time. And that is not on Tesla or Elon, that is on you. The relentless discussion on TMC on the hourly share price is a major distraction. The battle has already been won, and as time goes on and Tesla continues to fulfill its Mission by using its winning approach, its share price will be reflected accordingly. It is time. Only time. Enjoy the ride.
Last edited:
It seems to me Elon is more correct than wrong about the Rawlinson's "Chief Engineer" title:Hmmm, it seems Elon should fact check his memory before shooting off comments on twitter:
Elon Tweets That Rawlinson Was Never Chief Engineer At Tesla, Except He Was
We look into the assertion made by Tesla CEO Elon Musk that Lucid CEO, Peter Rawlinson, was never the Tesla Chief Engineer.insideevs.com
He is (rightfully) upset when journalists are twisting facts to suite their agenda instead of reporting reality. So he should follow his own advice and not commit the same mistake. Probably, he is relying on faulty memory that is heavily colored by negative emotions toward some person he had disputes with, but that does not justify publishing false information. It is one thing to make an incorrect statement of fact during a diner conversation based on faulty memory, but it is quite another publishing it on twitter with millions of followers. His voice is more powerful than most journalists, so he should hold himself to the same standards he expect from them.
GlobeNewswire: Tesla Motors Announces Senior Engineering and Manufacturing Executives
Tesla Blog: Tesla Motors Announces Senior Engineering and Manufacturing Executives
Official titles: Vice President and Chief Vehicle Engineer. I don't think "chief vehicle engineer" and "chief engineer" are interchangeable, at least to the person who appointed him.
PS. Just noted insideevs's article has a screenshot (and link) to Tesla's blog about the hiring. Why does that article insist that Elon remembered wrong?
To me, Rawlinson inflated his credential at Tesla by conveniently omitting one key word from his three-word title to a two-word title. Big difference, just like "Vice President" of US is not "President" of US.
Last edited:
Tesla created GA 4.5 rounded tent in February 2020 (Tesla files to expand Fremont factory, make Model Y 'tent' permanent) and expanded it several times, they only filed the paperwork for GA 4.5 to be made permament mid February 2021.
And Elon's tweet clearly states "chief engineer" (lower case). As you rightly point out, Rawlinson was hired to be the chief creator of Model S, but just as clearly, he never really did that job, according to Elon. The rest of Elon's tweet is:
"He arrived after Model S prototype was made, left before things got tough & was only ever responsible for body engineering, not powertrain, battery, software, production or design."
You have to ignore most of the tweet to conclude that Elon is lying or mistaken. But of course many people are eager to do that.
I see no gray area here. Regardless of Rawlinson's title, according to Elon, Rawlinson is not entitled to take credit for Model S, as he or others have been suggesting.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
