@wipster Well maybe so. There is no way to end the worlds ICE addiction without the OEMs or someone ramping and ramping as fast as Tesla. Just Tesla can't do it all. So Ford may be one of them and maybe Ford and Tesla push each other on the truck platform. Certainly Ford is copying Tesla (giving notice they are going to end the sales process at dealers, about the need for massive battery capacity, OTA updates, advanced Autopilot, etc) so why can't Tesla watch to see what Ford gets right with the Lightening. A munro teardown of the lightning would be very interesting. I hope they do it.
-
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
See helps to pay attention.
Agree completely. I do think Ford is most likely to be the domestic (well North America at least) ICE manufacturer to make viable BEV's that can be scaled fairly quickly, especially if they just concentrate on a few models, unlike GM. Can you imagine introducing BEV's in the old GM model with Pontiac, Oldsmobile, and
Saturn (a business plan before it's time unfortunately because it would have been a perfect company/division to apply the Tesla model)? I also think the Korean firms and VW are the other companies that can scale up quickly in the BEV world, although not nearly as fast as what they're currently saying.
Would love to see a Lightning teardown, along with as many other BEV's as reasonable. In the case of the Lightning, I would want the CT teardown to be after the Lightning, as to point out the shortcomings of the Ford product.
Exciting times in which we live! Too bad it took man-made climate change to force us to make better vehicles and clean and cheaper electricity. Glad I'm a TSLA HODLer though!
StealthP3D
Well-Known Member
Are any of you starting to get the idea that you are being played? That you are being used by a bad actor to amplify known false narratives?
We've seen this story before. A poster sets themselves up as a Tesla hopeful, as someone who cares about and who supports Tesla's mission and says things in order to be accepted as a real participant. And then they let loose with a barrage of negative FUD that is demonstrably false while ignoring good faith attempts to become educated by the facts. Someone who is more interested in shaking the shares free from unsuspecting/fearful investors. The pattern is clear, not even in doubt, throw shade wherever possible, without regard for the truth of the claims, as long as they can impact the weakest 20% who know the least about the subject matter without being banned, they will consider it a worthy success. The goal is free up some needed shares at key moments. The price is rising and the need for shares is great. Time for FUD.
I can understand people correcting the FUD once it is put out there, thank you to all who do. What I can't understand is why the powers to be allow the forum they represent to be misused in such an obvious manner. I would have assumed their direct representatives, the ones who participate directly, had enough wisdom, and enough discrimination, to identify insincere actors without allowing them to carry on for in such an obvious manner, for so many weeks even when they hide behind a thin curtain of false legitimacy. It's not about reasonable balance as nothing real is being brought to the table, it's about increasing the signal to noise ratio by snuffing out the insincere actors rather than giving them the run of the place. The very things they hate about Twitter are taking hold right here and yet they act like they can't see it.
This is exactly what ruined Tesla Owner's Club (formerly Model 3 Owner's Club). The mods couldn't tell the difference between owner's and people posing as owners. Between sincere opinions and fraudulent FUD. Hopefully, the restraint is due to a shocking inability to discriminate and not because 'all traffic is good traffic'. Either way, it's not a good look and it does the sincere participants here no favors.
StealthP3D
Well-Known Member
That's a funny joke, but...
People who patiently dispel the demonstrably false narratives, no matter how obvious they seem, deserve our thanks, it's not a joke. Just because the person responding is knowledgeable enough to logically dispel the fallacies does not mean every reader who might stumble upon them has the same knowledge and won't fall victim to obvious FUD. And it takes time to correct these false narratives put out there by people who know better.
Last edited:
Advice:
I can't see their posts but judging by the responses they are clearly lying or being intentionally misleading. I'm not sure why they have not been banned yet.
I can't see their posts but judging by the responses they are clearly lying or being intentionally misleading. I'm not sure why they have not been banned yet.
No, it is not the first time. GM has beat Tesla to the "first affordable long range EV" with the Chevy Bolt and there was a lot of chest-thumping about that.
Not only did they beat Tesla to release, but also to volume ramping and TSLAQ made lots of noise about that, including Anton Wahlman on Seeking Alpha:
November Sales Are In: GM's Bolt Outsold Tesla Model 3 By 9:1 (NASDAQ:TSLA)
November US sales numbers are in, and the verdict is not good for the Tesla Model 3: Only 345 (!) units sold, compared to 2,987 for Chevrolet Bolt EV.
seekingalpha.com
December Sales Are In: General Motors' Chevy Bolt EV Outsold Tesla Model 3 By 3:1 (NASDAQ:TSLA)
Tesla reported another Model 3 sales fiasco, with only 1,550 units sold for the whole quarter. That’s one-ninth compared to the Chevrolet Bolt EV.
seekingalpha.com
Now, look at what the Bolt sales are now vs Model 3. I think history will repeat itself with the CT vs Lightning.
StealthP3D
Well-Known Member
That is not an accurate way to look at it. While no EV is perfect, the problem is not the actual product, the F-150 Lightning, it's that Ford cannot make and distribute them in large enough numbers to put a meaningful dent in all the ICE trucks they sell. Ford knows this. It costs too much to build because it's overweight and inefficient and needs too many batteries for its capabilities. Even at the high prices buyers are paying, Ford loses money on everyone they sell. They only have the F-150 Lightning in order to appear to be on-board with electrification - it buys them time, emissions credits and helps keep the regulators away while they continue to keep selling millions of ICE trucks at a profit.
Don't focus on the product, focus on how many they make available and how cheaply they can sell them and still make a small profit. If it's only a small fraction of the overall market it's inconsequential. Ford will NEVER make the Lightning in large quantities, they don't have enough floor space dedicated to them and, as time goes on, you will see they don't even maximize the space they have allocated to Lightning production.
Last edited:
Elon told me Tesla should be producing 2 Terawatt hours of batteries per year by now. 10 million vehicles per year and 100 million Powerwalls per year.
Tesla is a failure and clearly going to be run over by Huawei and their 100 battery packs per year capacity.
Tesla is a failure and clearly going to be run over by Huawei and their 100 battery packs per year capacity.
This is the core issue. Tesla could source cells for CT the same way Ford is sourcing them for the Lightning, in the open market. That would allow some kind of product to be bought to the market earlier. But it doesn't allow volume production at good ASPs with good margins.
To be 100% sure of being able to do that, Tesla needed to get into 4680 battery production.
BYD and perhaps in the end 1 or 2 other car makers will be able to make their own batteries, most sign contacts with external suppliers. The battery supplier has to make a profit margin and the contact needs to be for a fixed volume of cells by a particular date. Contracts probably need to be signed some number of years in advance, and might be hard to vary. The car maker needs to take delivery of all of the cells in the contract.
Where new EVs will displace higher margin ICE sales, signing lot of high volume battery supply deals years in advance is something most car markers are understandably reluctant to do, until they have no other choice.
Last edited:
Yeah, not sure, I included 20 because it was called put on a JRP007 tweet and I figured I'd give the benefit of the doubt to that data point rather than spend more time proving nw wronger.
So YOU’RE the Twitter lawyer?!In the M&A world, due diligence from the buyer happens before you make your final offer
This explains the process in considerably more detail-
Due Diligence In Mergers And Acquisitions - Business Benefits Group
Learn about due diligence in the mergers and acquisitions process, what you can expect during the process, and why it is important to execute properly.www.bbgbroker.com
and then later in the explanation:
The entire point of DD is for the buyer to try and get all his questions answered before he makes an offer--- since those answers might be material to WHAT he's willing to offer--- or in some cases if he ends up willing to make an offer at all.
But tl;dr is- once you make an offer, and it's accepted, you missed your chance for DD.
To steal from MLs explanation- A merger agreement -- in US public-company M&A usage -- is not an agreement to look into the company, evaluate its business and decide whether you want to buy it. it's an agreement to buy it
Elon jumped right to that final step without doing any DD.
What people are calling "He waived DD" is really "He didn't bother to do any during the period you have to actually do it"-- which is BEFORE you have a purchase agreement.
The things twitter agreed to provide in that agreement are FAR FAR more specific and narrow, and ONLY include things reasonably needed to complete the deal... not about "is this a company with whom one should be offering to make a deal"--- that ship sailed when he made the offer.
This sums it up for me. The WuLing Mini is not the competition.
Well, I at least found out where he signed it:
Attachments
10 posts deleted. I give up. Bye.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
