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.
There are people like that on both sides of every issue.
I eat meat. There are Vegans who think I do so because I am an ignorant animal abuser who delights in killing things. They can't fathom that I eat meat because that's what us humans are evolved to eat for best health.
In my neck of the woods (SW FL) even coal rolling pickup trick drivers stop and ask me about my car, and tell me how cool Tesla and Elon Musk are.
But I'm positive there are still some people in my area that think I'm an eco hippie/social justice warrior. Can't fix everybody. Best advice is to be kind to everyone and patient. My motto is that if someone says something bad about you, live your life so that no one will believe them. :)
@Swampgator
since you are in SW FL, a year or so back there was a Tesla Roadster at Ft Myers Harbor Freight.
darn thing was essentially a skeleton on wheels, missing a lot of the chassis, at the front end
any idea whos'? just curious (im in CC 'land of the lost')
 
Yeah, or he could pick up the phone or send a letter. They still have those in silicon valley.
Musk and Tesla in general are *remarkably difficult* to reach, in my personal experience. I doubt either a letter or a phone call would work. Filing a federal lawsuit or getting a news story onto Bloomberg seem to be two ways to get their attention. Or asking at the stockholders' meeting, maybe.

The communications problems at Tesla are SERIOUS. I am not kidding. Really really serious.

redFAy shadow-banned me on his blog shortly after my suggestion to Robert Bollinger in the comments section that he tweet Elon. Thus redFay cut that line of communication (for a unrelated selfish reason).

Still, its on Bollinger to follow up if he's serious about Supercharger access, not depend on some rando on the internet for business critical infrastructure. o_O
 
Just thought I’d throw in my .02. ;)

Thanks shorties for the dip! Lowered my cost basis and ready for another launch....
 

Attachments

  • D43C900E-5598-4187-802E-7AE00FA7CB93.png
    D43C900E-5598-4187-802E-7AE00FA7CB93.png
    433.9 KB · Views: 64
Can someone please help me understand this forum and the posting rules (I have no idea how to directly ask the mods). So I was posting updates once a day on the supercharger build-out and the current new inventory for each model - seems very pertinent information that investors want to know (and the 15 and 20 "informative" ratings seemed to verify that). And even if it isn't super necessary info, we're talking about 1 post a day in a thread that gets about 400 per day. But, the mods deleted my post and sent me a message saying not to post this info - they really didn't say why.

You could create a new thread under TSLA Investor Discussions and post your stats there. I would subscribe to your thread.

There's going to be an ~18 month period of transition where those in power shift their money from financing oil to financing renewables and we're certainly within sight of that period.

I was listening to a Norwegian podcast a few months ago. And a representative from a bank argued that investing in companies having green business plans was already profitable over companies who had no such plans. They did not have to have a strong green profile like wind- or solar power. Just traditional companies thinking ahead and shifting their business processes to be a little greener.
 
How is that him willing to stand on the shoulders of other OEMs?

It’s him assuming OEMs would do it but when they didn’t he did it himself. He certainly thought when he showed them how to make an EV that they’d help the transition

He’s never been someone to stand on the shoulders of others in any of his businesses. To do so he’d have to relinquish control and that’s not in his nature as we well know.
OK, fair enough, that wasn't enough evidence. So, more evidence that he IS willing to stand on the shoulders of others -- he is not intent on reinventing the wheel, avoids it actually.

He tried to get Alan Cocconi to commercialize the t-zero (standing on the shoulders of others), then licensed from them (standing on the shoulders of others). He read every antique Russian rocket manual there was at SpaceX (standing on the shoulders of others). He financed Eberhard & Tarpenning's electric car company instead of starting his own. And originally, Teslas were designed to plug into standard NEMA outlets rather than inventing an entirely new car charger which you had to hardwire into your house.

He is perfectly happy to stand on the shoulders of giants. When the giants falter in his opinion, however, he builds his own giants. That's the control aspect.
 
Can someone please help me understand this forum and the posting rules (I have no idea how to directly ask the mods). So I was posting updates once a day on the supercharger build-out and the current new inventory for each model - seems very pertinent information that investors want to know (and the 15 and 20 "informative" ratings seemed to verify that). And even if it isn't super necessary info, we're talking about 1 post a day in a thread that gets about 400 per day. But, the mods deleted my post and sent me a message saying not to post this info - they really didn't say why.

Then, I'm on last night, trying to catch up on some good information about my TSLA investment, and I come across several pages of Ferrari posts - including the one I replied to (all stayed / weren't deleted). So, info about Tesla inventory and superchargers is not pertinent to TSLA, but information about Ferrari's appreciating in value IS?

I'm totally confused and hoping someone can help me understand why I would prefer to read about Ferrari (and totally unrelated to TSLA) instead of facts about how inventory sales are going and how many superchargers are currently being built - both of which shine a little light on the what's going on with Tesla.
Our moderators owe us an explanation of why those posts are unacceptable.
 
So my hypothesis is that the Bolt was mainly a concerted attempt to sabotage the Model 3 with a combination of:
  • Classic price dumping:
    • GM sold the Bolt ~$10,000 below cost
    • LG Chem gave GM a special battery modules deal of $140/kWh, well below production and market prices (they were super unhappy when this leaked - other OEMs were getting $200/kWh deals ...)
  • Anti-Tesla PR directed at consumers and investors:
    • The infamous Chevy Bolt drive-by event of Fremont that mocked Tesla's manufacturing delays
    • Non-stop characterization of the Bolt by Wall Street and the complicit business media as a "Tesla killer"
    • Non-stop misleading tear-downs and bogus margin calculations suggesting that the Model 3 is not competitive and cannot generate a profit.
  • GM hoped to not just cut off Tesla's air supply (demand in the U.S. sedan market), but also pressuring Tesla into making mistakes and trying to squeeze Tesla's source of funding. Note how there never was a SUV version of the Bolt...
Once GM and LG saw that these tactics aren't working (or rather, that they stopped working - these measures certainly had a damaging effect and reduced demand as well), once they saw that the Model 3 is crushing the Bolt and now that Tesla has a $35k car out there that is superior to the Bolt in everything including price, GM quietly started de-emphasizing it: it's cheaper for GM to buy the regulatory credits from Tesla directly than to burn the money on more Bolts produced...

I believe the Bolt was never anything else, and the dealership shenanigans to further sabotage even the Bolt were on top of it - because that's what dealerships do. Both GM and LG knew that the economic basis for the Bolt is not there, that it's an expensive lie, that it was purely a force-financed move to choke Tesla in their home market. GM's primary response, modus operandi and 100 years old corporate history in North America against major competitive threats is to attack the economic basis of the competition with any method available, not to out-innovate them. GM will innovate only if every other measure fails, because R&D is the most expensive and riskiest of methods to compete.

If they truly want to compete with Tesla they'll have to do it the hard way, grounds up - not via a repurposed production line of ~$20k ICE vehicles.

I'm afraid that I basically agree, although I think the *engineers* who designed the Bolt were serious about electric cars, just like the ones who designed the EV-1. The management has been sabotaging its sales nonstop AFAICT.
 
Can someone please help me understand this forum and the posting rules (I have no idea how to directly ask the mods). So I was posting updates once a day on the supercharger build-out and the current new inventory for each model - seems very pertinent information that investors want to know (and the 15 and 20 "informative" ratings seemed to verify that). And even if it isn't super necessary info, we're talking about 1 post a day in a thread that gets about 400 per day. But, the mods deleted my post and sent me a message saying not to post this info - they really didn't say why.
This is useful info, but it should probably have its own thread. "Tesla inventory updates & Supercharger buildout status", perhaps. Get it out of the chat thread, it'll be more useful...
 
OT

This is all way over my head, but some years ago, my brother - who is the Safety Officer at a nuclear power-station in Scotland - told me that there was a new breed of thorium reactors (I think it was), which re basically totally sealed and produce zero waste.
All fission reactors produce massive amounts of waste. You can make a totally sealed reactor, but then the *entire reactor* is waste when its lifespan expires. This actually makes the disposal process easier, but... lots of permanent waste.

The thorium fuel cycle creates very problematic U-232 (extremely radioactive and toxic, much more than other isotopes), and U-233 (which can be used for nuclear bombs).

https://thebulletin.org/2014/05/thorium-the-wonder-fuel-that-wasnt/
 
OT

It's all good till political structures break down and people start coming to where you are because it's "better" there.
Have some nice solar panels producing electric and a nice garden and water well? May need to have armed guards around then 24/7.

Well, we have a whole community that's trying to become sustainable & self-sufficient. I'd never try to do survivalism solo. Only makes sense to do it as part of an entire city + countryside.
 
An lecturer at the MIT Sloan School of Management just wrote compared to Tesla, the Audi etron is a "bad joke":

" Audi, the first legitimate competitor to Tesla, has shipped a working electric car that is a bad joke. Its failure to understand that “it’s the software stupid” has given Musk even more time to extend his competitive advantage. "


Tesla's advantage? 'It's the software, stupid.'