Down to 72% now. (Just voted Yes).
-
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
The Accountant
Active Member
Interesting. I did a quick search on the 10Ks for Stellantis, VW & Ford and found no mention on where they record Regulatory Credit Expense in their financial statements. I guess the SEC deems it not material enough to bother them about it.
StealthP3D
Well-Known Member
I clicked on the link and clicked yes, YMMV
Should Tesla and other car companies be allowed to sell directly to consumers in Connecticut?
www.hartfordbusiness.com
Every TMC member should vote and leave a reasonable comment.
edit: Nix leaving a comment - it looks like they never approve them for any of their polls.
Last edited:
It might be fun to compete in a demolition derby with it, that way it would take it out of business completely!
StealthP3D
Well-Known Member
For anyone who might not know, the reason Tesla detractors like to exclude regulatory credits is because they are (starting about now) a declining source of revenue. That's because most OEM's are starting to make EV's (at least to some degree) and this creates more credits which, of course, devalues them going forward. They are also devalued with declining ICE production. So we should all hope they go to zero as soon as possible because a successful mission requires emission credits to be worthless.
But the SEC is being very irrational here by trying to make Tesla account for these as non-automotive revenue and claiming they have a zero cost to produce. Because if you don't make an EV, you don't get the credit. It's the sale of the credit that has a very low cost, the creation of the credit requires the manufacture of a car. Therefore it should be counted as revenue from the production of cars. It would be like the SEC telling Ford and GM they have to account for the sale of GPS navigation units under "electronics" even though they can't sell the nav system without making the car.
Does anyone know how legacy auto accounts for the cost of the credits? Because it logically should be applied as an expense of selling the ICE car which would reduce their reported gross margins. But this SEC action leads me to believe legacy manufacturers might be hiding that expense as a non-automotive expense to make their margins look better. However, if they are reporting it as a cost of making and selling the vehicle, then that makes this SEC action look even more ridiculous!
StealthP3D
Well-Known Member
It could accelerate the mission if we could successfully re-popularize demolition derbies and increase the potential winnings, maybe by leveraging a new reality show with behind the scenes drama. It would be awesome to make it into a highly profitable franchise. Perhaps people could be encouraged to enter with the prospects of fame and fortune in an Internet reality drama that was wildly popular and people wouldn't think twice about entering the series, even with cars worth $10-$20K or more, just for a chance at the fame and prize money associated with being a derby champion.
I like the death and destruction of ICE cars and if it can simultaneously entertain the masses, all the better!
woodisgood
Optimustic Pessimist
Saw a Hummer EV with new tags parked on a very ordinary residential San Francisco street. Truly bizarre. The thing is a monstrosity.
Its an EV! Should be celebrated for getting a ICE hummer off the road. We want every vehicle to be an EV, even the ugly ones!
Besides have seen quite a few people on tesla forums saying they intend to buy a tesla semi as a tow vehicle for there camper trailers / caravans. I imagine that would also look more out of place than the hummer parked on a suburban street, but I dont begrudge them for wanting to do it.
RobDickinson
Active Member
Semi is probably more efficient and cheaper.
And even more fun to park in a residential San Francisco neighborhood street.
thesmokingman
Active Member
That's fundamental to the movement but the Hummer EV is very far from the goal. There's 3000lbs of batteries, 9000lb+ curb weight, with the world's record for most inefficient EV ever. Those are not goals we want to aspire to ya know? This is why Tesla developed their own battery advancements that would allow a most efficient big truck platform. How legacy and Rivian are doing it is just throwing more battery at it, just cuz it's EV doesn't mean it's trying to save the world. The Hummer will literally crush everything in its path lmao. /soapbox off
Let's call the Hummer, something for those with more money than sense.
The EV market has to cater to every buyer, even the foolish.
The Hummer isn't good value for money, so sales will probably be minimal, and those batteries can eventually be recycled.
More choice for the customer, even including some very bad choices, is welcome..
Isn't that a while away? At the least not until Q1 results?
The current macro with a hot CPI incoming before then makes it risky to accumulate this early?
This is meant to be GM’s Roadster. A vehicle to showcase for their technology.
What they’ve showcased is that they can’t make a truck which is as nice, as attractive, as practical, or as affordable as a startup. And I’m not talking about the Cybertruck here, I’m looking at the Rivian. I’m far from a Rivian fanboy, but in pretty much every single metric, it is a better and more interesting vehicle than the Hummer.
It’s not just inefficient and wasteful. It’s pointless. It fails to accomplish it’s primary objective because they look like fools.
When the F-150 and the Cybertruck are released, GM is going to look even more foolish each time. The Hummer is GMs Waterloo. After years of taking government subsidies to build an EV business, GM‘s best effort is a punchline to a joke. Stellantis might beat them to market with something viable.
SageBrush
REJECT Fascism
An E-hummer strikes me as a fool's errand, but I say that about GM.
Tesla chose a top bottom approach to EVs and has succeeded. That does not mean it will work for others, but it will be copied. GM is a truck company, so their version of top bottom was the hummer. GM also tried the same top bottom approach with hybrids and failed miserably.
Phew. I'm glad that a normal German drivers license doesn't allow you to drive such a thing
We will never see such monstrosities here.
The normal car-license limits the effective weight you are allowed to drive to 3.5 tons (including driver, luggage, ...) So around 7000lb..
The Hummer EV is literally a waste of batteries.
Even if there was a limitless supply of batteries in the world, it would still be a folly.
Even if there was a limitless supply of batteries in the world, it would still be a folly.
So, you believe there is a huge market for this thing? That it will outrank all other BEV and ICE?
Talking about stats. So far this month 25% of the cars sold in the Netherlands were BEV. That is encouraging. In a recent media report it was said that the total percentage of BEV on the road is 3%. There is still a very very long way to go.
This month Tesla Model Y was ranked 14 in the BEV list with 193 cars. Model 3 ranked 37 with 125 cars.
Last edited:
I, for one, really don't want Hummers to take over the streets, electric or not.
Kids can't safely play in their neighbors nowadays. I can't even walk without being overly prudent against bigger and bigger vehicles. I live in Paris (France) where I commute by bike. Pickup trucks like the F150, are popping up here and it makes absolutely zero sense.
I really hope Tesla will not to sell Cybertrucks in Europe: too few people need such vehicles but because of the cool factor, I bet many will buy it to impress others, show their manliness or some other reasons (house moving every 15 years, zombie apocalypse, WWIII…). Who, among Hummer buyers need such dangerous and inefficient vehicles?
Tesla Norway participated in a meeting with an electric car association. And revealed some of their thoughts on opening up Superchargers for other cars:
They will probably open some more chargers before the summer. But not all. Some locations are too small and cannot be extended.
They want to control the opening up process so that customer satisfaction is maintained.
They may install longer charging cables to make it easier for other brands to charge. But they will need more info on the issue first.
Source in Norwegian: Kommer SuC-nettverket til å bli åpnet??
They will probably open some more chargers before the summer. But not all. Some locations are too small and cannot be extended.
They want to control the opening up process so that customer satisfaction is maintained.
They may install longer charging cables to make it easier for other brands to charge. But they will need more info on the issue first.
Source in Norwegian: Kommer SuC-nettverket til å bli åpnet??
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
