Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Tesla, TSLA & the Investment World: the Perpetual Investors' Roundtable

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
So who on here won the megamillions and more importantly, will you be purchasing more Tsla shares with the winnings?
My current cost base on my 'original' investment is $7/share, and while I typically just hold long (I'm no day-trader) - had a couple of sell high & re-buy low during some of the early FUD-heavy days (thanks to the cool heads on here that helped me recognize hit pieces).

I sold about $100k of shares when it hit $100/share (current $20 equivalent) to ostensibly pay for my Signature Model S (I didn't need to, but it was symbolic and helped my ego - I never buy luxury cars, and back then was insecure about others' incessant judgments - so I could say "I paid for my Tesla with Tesla shares"). I wish I held on...!

I'm trying to delay my capital gains until I move to a more tax-friendly province next year (I donate a share or two every year to charity, which almost feels like cheating, but it's a win-win), but I did sell another ~$100k this year when it hit my price target of $1150/share, and I repurchased a few shares on the way down this spring (at 860, 760) - and I regret not selling more/buying more (I was so tempted when it dropped below 700), but I'm building a house over the next year and didn't want to get stuck being forced to sell low when I know the company will be much higher next year!

#TSLAshareholderproblems

I will be selling a lot of the 'normal stuff' recommended by my brokers in the past first, though I know there will be more TSLA dips and challenges in the future.
 
Anyone know if the United States was horse feed independent back at the previous turn of the century? Did buggy makers get tax incentives to keep buggy prices reasonable?
Yes, the US was horse feed independent. And those vehicles included SAE Level 3 autonomy with a self-fueling feature known as "grazing". Even my Tesla can't match this technology just yet.
 
There's a part in the video where the S&P guy plus others are saying that Tesla is not as dominance in the ultra luxury segment against the Taycan and EQS because their data shows the following the last 5 months

EQS owners going to a S: 2
S owners going to EQS: 90

S owners going to Taycan: 115
Taycan owners going to S: 25

They are using these metrics trying to prove that S/X are in shaky grounds due to the competition, but stipulate it with S/X had a lack of production which may be the cause of this.

I don't know how people freaken get paid to make these idiotic conclusions.

If 200k S owners are looking for a new car..even if 99% owners decided to stay with a new S and 1% leaves, you can say "oh my 2000 people migrated away from Tesla to their competitors!"

However when there are like 200 EQS on the road, 2 migrating to the S is also the same 1%. Also this doesn't even account for the fact that EQS are brand new cars and people usually don't migrate with new cars vs 200k model S owners who had theirs for multiple years.

If they pull up refresh S sales..they will most likely find that 20k+ migrated for an old S to a new one which puts the competition to shame and hence we are talking about strong loyalty here. So in reality that was a dumb take from these data guys.
There is a simple explanation for why these guys brought up this specious argument.

The show started out praising Tesla up and down. They were sounding like Tesla fan boys and this is not a Tesla channel. If they did nothing but talk about how Tesla is so far ahead then their listeners would be irate.
 
Yes, the US was horse feed independent. And those vehicles included SAE Level 3 autonomy with a self-fueling feature known as "grazing". Even my Tesla can't match this technology just yet.
But the autopilot was known to spook, especially in new routes. Some models were better than others.

They also weren't emission-free at the 'tailpipe' - but the waste was good for composting.

And no self-fuelling up here in the Great White North all winter - we had to have a 6+ month stockpile...
 
Yes, the US was horse feed independent. And those vehicles included SAE Level 3 autonomy with a self-fueling feature known as "grazing". Even my Tesla can't match this technology just yet.
Mine can. When I park at the local hospital parking garage for example, I get a preferred parking space and plug in for free charging during my visit. Free! I would call this the modern day equivalent of "grazing". And I've noticed that in my travels there are quite a lot of public pastures along the way. Look around; electricity is everywhere! :cool:
 
Don’t they know that the loyalty score also includes and reflects everything (including quality, accidents etc…).
The highest loyalty says it all, guys!
The highest loyalty does not necessarily reflect the highest quality. In many categories, especially 'luxury' ones, the highest loyalty reflects non-rational 'best buy' logic. This subject would go far off-topic quickly were wee to explore this by category. However, in cars there is a consistent rule that the simplest, highest volume cars typically are highest quality. The most boring tend to have the best accident rates.

Tesla has consistent high resale value, consistent owner loyalty and an industry leading conquest rate. These are true despite periodic quality lapses, customer service problems and higher accident rates than many others.

Tesla simply reflects buyer preferences better than do others. Nearly all of us are testimony of that.
There are survey sources from, for US only, Consumers Reports for example.
tesla-named-top-auto-brand-in-2-consumer-reports-surveys
These are consistent and true because they measure and track different things.
Other products that have similar seeming discrepancies are: nearly all Porsche, Rolex, Cessna Citation, Maytag, Airstream, John Deere. The lists can get very long. Every such case draws insistent argument from adherents, and often with pretty good counter data.

We Tesla loyalists are quite skilled at finding ways to refute facts. I do it too. That simply means we have quite different expectations and values than are indicated in surveys. I have personally owned several of my brand examples, each of which were pretty poor on conventional quality measures but had other dominating values. So, too, it is with Tesla.
 
Possibly you have someone that takes long road trips on a regular basis and doesn't want to put in the extra time associated with EV charging (yes, I know it's not as bad as some make out-still, you're not adding 400 miles in 5 minutes). Or someone that regularly goes in remote, rural areas, where the nearest DCFC might be 200 miles away (lots of the country isn't like the East or West coast). Or someone that tows on a regular basis (PHEV makes a lot of sense in a truck for that reason). Or simply someone that can't afford the premium of a full EV at this time.

Yes, from an engineering standpoint, they suck. All the complexity, maintenance and failure modes of ICE, plus the cost, weight and complexity of EV, plus the complexity of getting both systems to play together. Still, some companies do so extremely well, and get pretty amazing FE out of them. When the energy density of batteries, and range, is up another 50-75%, charging times come down to no more than 15 minutes for a charge to 100% and DCFCs become as readily available as gas pumps, PHEVs (let alone ICE) make no sense. And I'm convinced that point is coming. But not in the next year or two. It took over a century to get ICE as reliable, inexpensive (relatively speaking) and to build out the infrastructure we have now. Same will happen with EVs, IMO in far, far less time. But not today or tomorrow. By 2030-hopefully. Maybe even 2025-26. When you can buy a Equinox/Rav4/CRV sized CUV that has 300 miles of range at highway speeds (in a fast-charging part of the battery curve) with AC on, with 15 minute DCFC charging and sell for the ~$30k price of those cars in ICE (sure, adjust for inflation), EVs are truly mainstream for everyone. Again, I think it's coming, EVs have so many fewer components and entire systems vs ICE so there will be a lot of room to slash prices as battery manufacturing progresses. Just takes a bit of time.
I think you are defending the Hybrid for rural? You are brave ;)

For people who can't afford a BEV or are too rural for charging conveniences, the stop gap solution is not to buy a new Hybrid. These people are rural and you bring up the remote scenario which can be challenging, agreed.

There are plenty of used ICE vehicles to get everyone through the transition IMHO without a single new ICE or Hybrid. We don't need more, they can just go buy a small beater for $1,000 if it still runs. There are existing vehicles for this and plenty of them, too many IMO.

The relative price of a car is not expensive; the average home is too expensive but nobody complains and people borrow 1/4M because "they can afford it?" The cheap gas car was always a farce. And the Hybrid only makes matters worse down the road as I mentioned.

It's a crazy thing to go from a $20K car to $50K for a new vehicle - until the math adds up and reality sinks in that we've all been duped into believing that gas is OK, starter solenoids always fail, and our atmosphere is too big to fail. And that fuel savings estimate when you buy a Tesla online.... that's conservative and only calculates a few years out, not lifetime savings, and at current prices only. Besides, we're about to have a rather large used Tesla BEV market, which is exactly why the new used Tesla purchasing process is evolving into the digital world, and still has a few bugs as of yesterday in fact.

If I were rural, the last thing I'd get is a Hybrid. I would need maintain my own vehicles out there, and reliability is more critical, spare tire required, different world. When the first Hybrids came out, I saw the illustrated cut-away of a Hybrid. I've seen jet engines that were less complicated.
 
<<I remember an Apple product I had that had me convinced that they were the leading edge and had a great future.>>

I thought of Apple as a "gadget" company. They made great gadgets. Lots of companies make great gadgets though and end up going out of business. What I was missing about Apple was the network they were building. Once they got you, they got you for life. Even if someone else makes better products it's not worth the effort to switch. That's one problem with Tesla, the network effect is not that strong. (I'm hoping autopilot provides it but I'm not sure about it.) If someone else builds a better car it's easy to switch. Grid battery, solar panels ... not much of a network effect. If the pace of innovation slows, Tesla is not safe. Any idiot could run Apple, Google or Amazon for the next ten years and they'll do fine. It's also why I like BTC.

Network Effect: The value of a network is the square of the number of people using it.
I think about this a lot with regard to Tesla.

Tesla is developing a Network Effect of its own. That's what storing driver profiles in the cloud is all about. Eventually, it will be more than just your seat and mirror preferences. I could see features like the ability to have lunch waiting for you at your next Supercharger stop. The possibilities are really endless and there are features that could encourage people to spend more time in the car and consume more and more Tesla services. Then throw in Tesla home automation services and you've got a customer who is effectively captured.
 
I disagree with almost everything he says, but I would not call him a troll.

He does not spam the board repeatedly. He agrees to disagree and moves on. And he is on record that he is OK with everyone disagreeing with him.

Obviously, one cannot post that every last one of us would keel over dead if oil stopped flowing out of the ground without caring about ridicule. Some of us know how to subsist in very inhospitable environments indefinitely, without any outside support. It makes you wonder how humanity lived 99.99% of their time here on earth without big oil pumping oil out of the ground for us!

Don't get me wrong, some people would die without big oil, big pharma, industrialized food production, etc. But making inflammatory statements that are laughable and obviously false, is the definition of trolling. If it was a serious statement, well, let's just say that too should be grounds for termination. There's no fixing that.
 
Ah, no, no, no.

Please, stop misleading those on this thread--we deserve better.

The fossil fuel industry DOES need to be vilified for they are evil, perpetuating misinformation re: climate change for decades so as to line their pockets at the expense of our only planet's future.

Are you not familiar with these facts?


And:


Key quote:

Earlier this month — about two weeks after receiving a $1 million donation from a natural gas executive whose company made more than $2 billion during the winter storm — [Texas] Gov. Greg Abbott told the PUC to incentivize gas, coal and nuclear power while adding costs for renewables.

And:


And, a recent THREE-PART PBS documentary on just how long they've been at this:


And, please, at least watch the trailer:


YES, I do concur on this singular point: for now we still require unburned fossil fuels for a wide variety of products (tires, etc.) but at least those are not converted into GHG's. So that gives them a pass for decades of lies and more, not to mention likely funding the incessant attacks on Tesla and Elon Musk? I'd posit that the unburned part of their product stream is ~20%, or less? Does that allow us to forgive that the firms and their lobbyists are 100% evil?

p.s. Want more recent examples of their work to screw over the entire planet? How about the material from just the past few months and weeks regarding how Sen Manchin has been THE roadblock on BBB and how the latest legislation version remains a huge boon to oil and gas?

WARNING: THE FOLLOWING ARTICLES MAY CAUSE NAUSEA AND RAGE:


And:


Key point:

The bill would also require the Interior Department to offer at least 2 million acres a year for onshore oil and gas lease sales. Unless it holds those lease sales, the bill says, the department could not offer rights of way for solar and wind power projects.

And:


Key point:

But the fossil fuel donations he received in recent months overwhelmingly came from the oil and natural gas industry, not coal.


Key point:

Senator Joe Manchin III of West Virginia, who took more campaign cash from the oil and gas industry than any other senator, and who became a millionaire from his family coal business, independently blew up the Democratic Party’s legislative plans to fight climate change.
Wow, this is good stuff! Could be a goto for the deniers. Thanks for all the sources too.
 
Ah, no, no, no.

Please, stop misleading those on this thread--we deserve better.

The fossil fuel industry DOES need to be vilified for they are evil, perpetuating misinformation re: climate change for decades so as to line their pockets at the expense of our only planet's future.

Are you not familiar with these facts?


And:


Key quote:

Earlier this month — about two weeks after receiving a $1 million donation from a natural gas executive whose company made more than $2 billion during the winter storm — [Texas] Gov. Greg Abbott told the PUC to incentivize gas, coal and nuclear power while adding costs for renewables.

And:


And, a recent THREE-PART PBS documentary on just how long they've been at this:


And, please, at least watch the trailer:


YES, I do concur on this singular point: for now we still require unburned fossil fuels for a wide variety of products (tires, etc.) but at least those are not converted into GHG's. So that gives them a pass for decades of lies and more, not to mention likely funding the incessant attacks on Tesla and Elon Musk? I'd posit that the unburned part of their product stream is ~20%, or less? Does that allow us to forgive that the firms and their lobbyists are 100% evil?

p.s. Want more recent examples of their work to screw over the entire planet? How about the material from just the past few months and weeks regarding how Sen Manchin has been THE roadblock on BBB and how the latest legislation version remains a huge boon to oil and gas?

WARNING: THE FOLLOWING ARTICLES MAY CAUSE NAUSEA AND RAGE:


And:


Key point:

The bill would also require the Interior Department to offer at least 2 million acres a year for onshore oil and gas lease sales. Unless it holds those lease sales, the bill says, the department could not offer rights of way for solar and wind power projects.

And:


Key point:

But the fossil fuel donations he received in recent months overwhelmingly came from the oil and natural gas industry, not coal.


Key point:

Senator Joe Manchin III of West Virginia, who took more campaign cash from the oil and gas industry than any other senator, and who became a millionaire from his family coal business, independently blew up the Democratic Party’s legislative plans to fight climate change.

You responded to my "we'll all be dead in six months without oil" post with a "the system is corrupt" post. Yes, the system is corrupt and I hate this bill. Maybe you missed the tone of my "Feline rebalancing and .... act" post mocking this bill?

As I recall, my first post was in response to being called a moron for being against climate regulation. Welcome to the "moron" club.
 
Mine can. When I park at the local hospital parking garage for example, I get a preferred parking space and plug in for free charging during my visit. Free! I would call this the modern day equivalent of "grazing". And I've noticed that in my travels there are quite a lot of public pastures along the way. Look around; electricity is everywhere! :cool:
Nah. You can let your horse out in the pasture and it will recharge without you needing to park and plug it in.

Eventually, your Tesla will find its own charging spot and a robot arm will plug it in. Then it will finally achieve technological refueling parity with horses.

I'm afraid the mods might delete all these horse analogies. But at least it's the weekend. So maybe we can get away with a little fun.
 
This is actually relevant to Tesla, because Apple has built a brand with a high customer loyalty and this is something that Tesla is also doing, with what I believe will be similar results.
...
I agree with you, while thinking you did not emphasize much the ecosystem and upgrade reliability. Tesla and Apple do share a nearly seamless upgrade process and generally seamless systems integration. The competitors do not have that. For every competitor there are system conflicts and inconsistencies.

There is no question that rigid control of the entire system makes both Apple and Tesla slower to adopt new developments in user interface than might otherwise be the case.

As an owner and/or user of non-Tesla/non-Apple products too, I am constantly amazed at how simple and efficient both Apple and Tesla are of making everything behave properly. Both also do constant design innovation and manufacturing control that continually reduces their cost base while allowing strong pricing.

The biggest difference is that Apple learned how to make suppliers very efficient and Tesla has done it mostly on their own, while taking an Apple-like approach to battery suppliers. Tesla is more dramatic because the factory design and industrial processes are blatant proof of incredible efficiency. We often ignore that both have managed logistics better than any other industrial enterprises. In that sphere, Amazon pretty much wrote the book originally.

Now, in severe global conditions, we see both Tesla and Apple defy the odds, in large part due to outstanding logistics management. Easy to say, excruciating to execute.
 
<<I remember an Apple product I had that had me convinced that they were the leading edge and had a great future.>>

I thought of Apple as a "gadget" company. They made great gadgets. Lots of companies make great gadgets though and end up going out of business. What I was missing about Apple was the network they were building. Once they got you, they got you for life. Even if someone else makes better products it's not worth the effort to switch. That's one problem with Tesla, the network effect is not that strong. (I'm hoping autopilot provides it but I'm not sure about it.) If someone else builds a better car it's easy to switch. Grid battery, solar panels ... not much of a network effect. If the pace of innovation slows, Tesla is not safe. Any idiot could run Apple, Google or Amazon for the next ten years and they'll do fine. It's also why I like BTC.

Network Effect: The value of a network is the square of the number of people using it.
Can you understand why so many of us are disagreeing with you? If not take only two words: 'Supercharger 'and 'Autobidder', then say "...the network effect is not that strong" again. Then just for fun consider 'dealers' vs 'stores'.
 
Last edited:
Can you understand why so many of us are disagreeing with you? If not take only two words: 'Supercharger 'and 'Autobidder', then say "...the network effect is not that strong" again. Then just for fun consider 'dealers' vs 'stores'.
“Any idiot could run Apple, Google or Amazon for the next ten years and they'll do fine.”

I couldn’t disagree MORE!
 
No worries. You shouldn't ____ ants. (Did I use that one correctly?) :)

(Hope I didn't trigger lafrisbee with that Dutch idiom)
Nope. You've identified why I refer to myself as an ant... I am definitely not even considered to be a part of the big picture...unless it is a painting from 17th century Dutch artists. We ants are significant to Elon's Goals however. Sometimes enough ants move the world, but it was never our intent, nor do we know why we did. or that it happened.

I do not feel like the flower in this internet painting of flower vase inscribed with the monogram "TMC".

The vase was not made to hold me, but to hold so many of you. I am here though.

But many ants are invested in Tesla, and are along for the ride... like bugs in 17th Century Dutch floral paintings ( https://digitalcommons.morris.umn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1079&context=horizons) . We are HERE. We count. We are significant to the Tesla world...we just don't have brains locked on numbers. We didn't chose to be here. We never knew we would be here.
We run around "trying." Our money is just as electronic as You Flowers, the Artful Dodger and his accounting-like ilk. And our money/trying has helped Tesla. And we bugs are fortunate for reasons we don't understand. But we are still fortunate (at the moment)> And man yof you think you are flowers but you're bugs too.
 
Last edited: