StealthP3D
Well-Known Member
The Bolt prevents GM from having to buy regulatory credits from Tesla.
Maybe a stronger incentive to keep producing the Bolt is that Mary doesn't want to surrender her lead in EV's to Tesla.
/s
Last edited:
You can install our site as a web app on your iOS device by utilizing the Add to Home Screen feature in Safari. Please see this thread for more details on this.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The Bolt prevents GM from having to buy regulatory credits from Tesla.
Maybe you should respond to op who mentioned the hardware then. I was simply pointing out that Elon has not lied to him yet.Tesla has already said that they will upgrade anyone whose hardware won’t work with FSD to the hardware required for FSD when it is 100%.
So the idea that someone paid for hardware that won’t work doesn’t really mesh. If the hardware won’t work, they will upgrade your car.
Yes macro was bad too, but we all know that most of daily volume is just HFTs, etc. passing the same shares back and forth. Those were 1.6m new shares entering the market. So the relative impact is certainly bigger than it seems at first glance.Not sure "confirmed" is the right word there.
Average daily volume over the same reported period was over 34 million shares. Per day.
You think an extra 1.6 million total shares sold short, and those spread over a 2 week period, is "the" cause of a large drop in share price- at the same time macro saw significant dips too?
If Elon believes he is speaking the truth, or giving his best estimate, that isn't a lie, merely being over optimistic..He lied to me when Tesla told me that my car had all the necessary hardware to operate as a robotaxi or be summoned, empty, from one coast to the other. And there are whole threads here about his long string of broken promises regarding FSD, promises he has to have known could not be met, yet he still keeps making them.
Are there any examples of a particular hardware solution being specified for auto safety requirements? When I was involved with government procurements, we were very careful to specify performance requirements, not anyone's favorite hardware solution. The reason was obvious - so as not to promote/penalize any particular competitor.FUD is all about delaying the inevitable...this would do just that.
Lyriq deliveries start in March.The Bolt prevents GM from having to buy regulatory credits from Tesla.
I'll at least give them credit for coming up with ways of extending the idea (opening various openings, playing particular media at particular volumes, etc), they didn't just rename "Dog Mode" to "Pet Mode" and submit the patent.The shameless copying continues. This week alone, insurance and now this.
Ford files a patent for 'Pet Mode,' a spinoff of Tesla's 'Dog Mode'
Ford has filed a patent for its “Pet Mode,” a spinoff of Tesla’s revolutionary “Dog Mode” feature that created a safe interior vehicle environment for animals when a human is not present. Made public earlier this week, US Patent 11,247,693 describes Ford plans to utilize a Paw Print-shaped key...www.teslarati.com
Also, remember their Ford chargers from a few weeks back?
Why? CCS2 is around 350kw today - still same charging time as any other EV, just higher power right? At 1,5C around 50minutes 10-80 I`d guess - that's better than my nerfed P85+Oh .. they will get so much hate when they block fast charges for hours on end ....
The shameless copying continues. This week alone, insurance and now this.
Ford files a patent for 'Pet Mode,' a spinoff of Tesla's 'Dog Mode'
Ford has filed a patent for its “Pet Mode,” a spinoff of Tesla’s revolutionary “Dog Mode” feature that created a safe interior vehicle environment for animals when a human is not present. Made public earlier this week, US Patent 11,247,693 describes Ford plans to utilize a Paw Print-shaped key...www.teslarati.com
Also, remember their Ford chargers from a few weeks back?
Depends much on the location as those 350kW (non-tesla SC) are peak under perfect circumstances. Normally a lot is shared between different stalls. Also we do not know if the Hummer is somehow limited in charging to protect the battery pack. Or if the location even has the powergrid to support that. I mean .. not every supermarket-lot can put up a 4x 350kW infrastructure without proper backing (or expensive buffers in the form of batteries).Why? CCS2 is around 350kw today - still same charging time as any other EV, just higher power right? At 1,5C around 50minutes 10-80 I`d guess - that's better than my nerfed P85+
Money Quote: "No crashes or injuries stemming from the braking issue have been reported."Bloomberg and AP are reporting about the NHTSA opening a formal probe into Tesla for phantom braking after receiving 354 complaints.
Bloomberg - Are you a robot?
'They' have to come up with some sort of hit piece every day and that's just today's. There will be another along tomorrow.Bloomberg and AP are reporting about the NHTSA opening a formal probe into Tesla for phantom braking after receiving 354 complaints.
Bloomberg - Are you a robot?
Correct. The Leaf isn't a compliance car, but it is a second car. You can't use it for everything a first car would be used for. I have a 2015 that Denise drives. We got it because Denise didn't want a large car and the Leaf was the only choice at the time (she just totaled her previous car). It's been fine except for the horrid dealers. If you need a second cheap car that doesn't need to go more than a few miles back and forth to work, it's a good choice.The leaf was the best selling EV in the world in total sales from 2010 until early 2020. A decade of being in the lead overall.
Not sure how you call it a compliance car to avoid buying Tesla credits, especially when it launches years before Tesla had any significant number to sell.
Oh please... they sold FSD as something that would get to L4/5 until 2019 when they removed any promise. Daniel is absolutely right that he made promises that cannot be fulfilled. They can't. Period. End of story. Broken promise/Lie. Some people are forgiving given the mission and most people that could plop down thousands for a Tesla could afford to lose some on a broken promise. Does not mean the promise was not broken. A broken agreement is what if not a lie?I've never seen Elon make any promises regarding FSD. I've seen him make estimates (which turned out to be wrong) based on information available at the time.
Your equating of the two confirms my guess about your knowledge of his actual behavior.
Strange before the article on the graph published by a newpaper we have 100 phantom breaking and suddenly 354 ?????Bloomberg and AP are reporting about the NHTSA opening a formal probe into Tesla for phantom braking after receiving 354 complaints.
Bloomberg - Are you a robot?
There's a difference between lying and making bad predictions. It's all about what the actor know at the time. If Tesla shut down their autonomous division or is planning on shutting it down while Elon is on stage making promises about the company trying to bring autonomous driving to paying customers, then that's a lie.Oh please... they sold FSD as something that would get to L4/5 until 2019 when they removed any promise. Daniel is absolutely right that he made promises that cannot be fulfilled. They can't. Period. End of story. Broken promise/Lie. Some people are forgiving given the mission and most people that could plop down thousands for a Tesla could afford to lose some on a broken promise. Does not mean the promise was not broken. A broken agreement is what if not a lie?
I can't stress the following enough for all you investors: Tesla is building risk into the company re it's approach to interacting with regulators and statements are approaching lies. As someone that dealt with IG solutions related to investigations and litigation on some of the largest companies in the world I can assure you that companies that build a reputation of disdain for regulators have risk. When you blame not opening a GF on regulators when you haven't submitted the paperwork needed to BEGIN the approval process, and get called out for it by the regulator, and you do similar behavior again and again ...there is risk. This is what ended up costing VW . IT was VW's attitude as well. It wiped out 30% of VWs stock value which was never inflated. Tesla must change how they manage regulatory agencies and engage in communication and process or they will find a crisis and no friend. I had something to do with the VW outcome, though peripheral. VW's communication and hubris and attitudes were the problem for regulators, more so than the actual facts. Tesla is at the point where they could find themselves with a Court appointed compliance manager reporting not to EM and the Tesla BOD but to the Court of CA. I don't think many here are valuing that risk appropriately. It sucks. Court appointed monitors ...suck. They drain management hours at rates you can't believe. They slow things down. They can quickly move from State to Federal. Like a cancer.
In summary. Yes, EM has some challenges regarding truth- I don't think it is malicious but he has broken promises and the FSD software he sold to Daniel will never work - not debatable. He has hubris that has permeated his companies- good. Hubris is impacting the companies relationship with those charged with ensuring safety and well being of society- BAD. If you disagree with this you have not read the current statements from CA by the govt regulator- they are public docs. They are a shot across Tesla's bow. They are all FACTUAL. When regulators say Tesla has not responded to inquiries it means Tesla did not respond. My $0.02 from someone that has actually managed the IG actions of one of the world largest automotive entities. I don't have a dollar in Tesla but if I did I'm at the point where the history of EM and regulators seems to be coming to a head and increasing risk.
Yes, EM has some challenges regarding truth- I don't think it is malicious but he has broken promises and the FSD software he sold to Daniel will never work - not debatable.