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

[ZsoZso]

Could be deep into some Boring Company work, no cell signal. Perhaps he turns up in China shortly.

That's one way to reduce shipping costs
Use gravity-assist acceleration on the way down and gravity-assist breaking on the way up win-win

 

[TheTalkingMule]

There is a war out there in twitter.. literally. But for the valiant efforts by a few to spotlight the lies and deceit of the TSLAQ gang, this war would have been lost and the repercussions would have been disastrous in terms of the false narrative taking root in public's mind. And once that happens, organic sales growth would come to a grinding halt, which is pretty much how Tesla sells.

So please take a moment to acknowledge and appreciate the efforts of Twitter Tesla warriors. They are doing an amazing service. We could be here all day in this echo chamber called TMC. It is the Twitter posts that is spread and seen widely.

A lot of the time pushing back only makes it worse. Most FUD nonsense needs to simply be ignored, not partially validated by debating obvious lies.

 

[Unpilot]

A lot of the time pushing back only makes it worse. Most FUD nonsense needs to simply be ignored, not partially validated by debating obvious lies.

Agreed. The earth is not flat...we did walk on the moon...contrail's are not Chem trails...elevating any of these to "discussion" level only helps further nonsense.

 

[dgodfrey]

A lot of the time pushing back only makes it worse. Most FUD nonsense needs to simply be ignored, not partially validated by debating obvious lies.

The problem with ignoring the lies is that they are only obvious to people like us that try to separate reality from fiction. The average guy on the street doesn't know they are lies until we expose them. This is assuming you're arguments are publicly viewed by those wanting to know the truth and not only interested in their confirmation bias. Agree that debating with the trolls individually is like playing chess with a pigeon.
He knocks over all the pieces, craps on the board and flies away thinking he won.

 

[woodisgood]

When I first became aware of TSLAQ and much of the short-selling crowd, I thought to myself, "Ok, it's just another perspective - they think there's a slim to none chance Tesla will succeed, and some are just looking to make money a different way than I would."

What I since discovered is hideous and grotesque and makes me sad about the state of the world. Like what the actual F is up with these people?

 

[Krugerrand]

I purposely only picked a few in the last 24 hours since they are more recent. Didn't even try to post or look for more.

I wasn't expecting any fender benders for such a low speed summon. I assumed that Tesla had much more awareness of its' surroundings than I thought. Especially when Elon said this would blow my mind. Some comments in those topics indicate blindspots which could be a concern if there isn't an update soon?

So yeah, I was expecting a little more progress as an investor.

Right?! It doesn’t even make toast.

 

[HG Wells]

Right?! It doesn’t even make toast.

SEE that's just one more reason to get an ICE.

 

[Krugerrand]

Should tag this as "NSFW", but latest night shots of GF3, gorgeous.
T☰SLA Mania on Twitter

Interesting seeing the trailers at the docks, too.

CGI and Photoshopping has come a long way, eh? #potemkinvillage

 

[UncaNed]

Whelp. Looks like our MMD is now a "buying opportunity".

 

[woodisgood]

Bet it's still a field of mud if someone actually visits.

 

[StealthP3D]

BTW., we now finally are seeing the "GF3 production is imminent" signature @KarenRei was expecting:

View attachment 468429​

(NSFW justified: we should expect quite a few baby Model 3's in the coming days.)

How do you know those are real tractor-trailers? They kinda look like bamboo and silk mock-ups.

 

[Pezpunk]

well, since the greenery hasn't been installed yet, it is pretty much still a field of mud ... with a gigafactory in the middle of it.

 

[humbaba]

Agreed. The earth is not flat...we did walk on the moon...contrail's are not Chem trails...elevating any of these to "discussion" level only helps further nonsense.

When someone tried telling me that contrails were chem trails I did not remain silent. Doing so would have left them with the wrong impression.

Okay, there's a difference between in-person interaction and social media. But dispelling myths in public is important or those who don't know better think there must be something to it. Where things get annoying is when a "reputable" media outlet gives a platform to kooks (flat earthers, moon landing fakers, etc.) and pretend that they are just being impartial by being balanced and presenting "both sides."

So if talking about the latter, I agree. Don't give the kooks and frauds a platform. But for the former? Such narratives must be countered. That it is an unequal and exhausting effort doesn't change the importance.

 

[avoigt]

The problem with ignoring the lies is that they are only obvious to people like us that try to separate reality from fiction. The average guy on the street doesn't know they are lies until we expose them. This is assuming you're arguments are publicly viewed by those wanting to know the truth and not only interested in their confirmation bias. Agree that debating with the trolls individually is like playing chess with a pigeon.
He knocks over all the pieces, craps on the board and flies away thinking he won.

I believe both of you are right.

I ignore all trolls, fudsters and haters on Twitter that attack me every other day and this just dropps of me like having a teflon skin. Their interest is not to have a thoughtful exchange of controversial opinions but to influence the greater network of people listening with a half knowledge.

But if you decide to go for the fight which I did a while ago at Reddit a few times you have to argue with facts and need to bring them back to facts again and again and don't fall in the trap them asking you for prove all the time if they can't prove their position. This is a tactic to put you in defense.

Once you go that path go it to then end and I have seen them starting insulting me because they been short (!) of arguments and facts at the end.

Thats the moment they lost and they know it.

 

[Unpilot]

When someone tried telling me that contrails were chem trails I did not remain silent. Doing so would have left them with the wrong impression.

Okay, there's a difference between in-person interaction and social media. But dispelling myths in public is important or those who don't know better think there must be something to it. Where things get annoying is when a "reputable" media outlet gives a platform to kooks (flat earthers, moon landing fakers, etc.) and pretend that they are just being impartial by being balanced and presenting "both sides."

So if talking about the latter, I agree. Don't give the kooks and frauds a platform. But for the former? Such narratives must be countered. That it is an unequal and exhausting effort doesn't change the importance.

My few interaction's with "true believer's" were both of the chem trail variety. No matter the fact's presented I could not shake their "faith"

Sad ...but I tried.

 

[humbaba]

My few interaction's with "true believer's" were both of the chem trail variety. No matter the fact's presented I could not shake their "faith"

Sad ...but I tried.

Well, at least you tried. In my case it was someone who was naive and had encountered some truther nonsense that they were not adept enough to see through. Because they were not themselves a truther I got through.

And that illustrates what I mean: okay, so you will not sway a truther. Fair enough, and if you know at the outset that they are there is little point. But if there are bystanders (such as with social media) the point of the exercise is not to persuade the truther, but to educate others.

 

[ggr]

Amazing that there's no mention on e.g. Yahoo Finance that GF3 is beginning production, and very little trading volume, so the shorts manage to drive the stock into the red. Definitely a buying opportunity according to me (50).

 

[HG Wells]

My few interaction's with "true believer's" were both of the chem trail variety. No matter the fact's presented I could not shake their "faith"

Sad ...but I tried.

Well, since you are a pilot, they KNEW you were in on it.
You have to throw that switch after reaching 30,000 ft

 

[humbaba]

Insurance discussion is, I think, relevant in the investor forum as it can affect adoption rate -- particularly outside the premium/luxury market into which Tesla is extending its reach.

The analysis is comparing one of the cheaper family sedan, a Camry, to a Tesla. Not a luxury brand 2-seater. Little doubt your insurance might have gone down.

Beat me to it. Going from a used car to a new car should almost always be expected to increase your insurance costs, unless a big price difference / safety difference outweighs it.

The real question is how two new cars compare, insurance wise.

A used Honda Accord costs less to insure than a new Tesla? Yes, every time I bought a new car my insurance rates went up. That's because the replacement cost of a used car is a lot lower.

If you want low insurance rates, drive a car that's worth less.

All very reasonable comments and yet? When I switched out insurance from a ~15 year old Honda Accord to a brand spanking new Tesla M3 the rate went down. The catch is, that was for the same coverage and as my Tesla was purchased with a car loan I had to increase coverage.

So, yes, my insurance did go up when changing to a Tesla. But for the same coverage the rate went down. Despite the Tesla being new and the other old with plenty of miles. That surprised me.

If your insurance goes up with insuring a Tesla having comparable coverage, well, what can I say. But it is far from a foregone conclusion. Insurance companies only care about one thing: making money. And while they will certainly charge as high of a rate as they can get away with, they absolutely will always insure that they charge more than their probability weighted payout. So anyone who overcharges for risk will, in the long run, lose customers to those who charge more appropriately. Naturally, it is always more complicated: even if Tesla's insurance was offered in the midwest and was competitive I likely would not switch because my house insurance is bundled. But all this means is that pricing discrepancies can survive, not that they are inevitable.

IMO the pricing differences that people have seen relate to the newness of EVs and likely a certain amount of profiteering (until recently Teslas were practically exclusive to the wealthier half of the population). But if the costs of insuring a Tesla are actually lower (and they should be*) then those insurers who substantially overcharge will gradually lose business driving the average rate down.

* I'm fairly confident that the major cost to the insurer is medical coverage from accidents, but I'm having trouble finding a source for insurer cost breakdown to either back up (or refute) this claim. If true, the safety features of a Tesla would drive lower insurer costs. I'd love to see a citation for a break down of insurer costs.

 

[SW2Fiddler]

But for the same coverage the rate went down. Despite the Tesla being new and the other old with plenty of miles. That surprised me.

Me too. Removed a 1997 Chevy Blazer and added a new 2014 S85...
Nothing else in the policy was changed.
Premium went down.

Must be the CQuartz Finest ceramic coat, eh?