-
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
cliff harris
Member
Shanghai megafactory build is apparently going well:
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
I'm....not entirely in agreement with the reading here... Chevron essentially said when a law is unclear the courts must by default defer to the agency's way of reading it---ie If it could go either way the agency is presumed to have the correct reading since they're the 'experts' on the topic... that's it. So with Chevron gone it just means the court, not the agency, gets to make the final call when a law is unclear on something- the agency and whatever expert info they've got on reading it that way still get presented to the court vs whatever case the other side has to present. It doesn't mean the agencies explicit powers to regulate goes away at all or that clear regs are no longer enforceable by that agency.
Generally speaking I like getting rid of Chevron- but I don't think it's quite the slam dunk for benefitting self driving this guy seems to think it is.
And given how more likely this change is to help gut environmental protections (the original Chevron case was explicitly about that topic) it's probably a net negative for the whole mission of Tesla.
"The first deliveries of the Tesla Cybertruck with Tactical Grey interior have started."
www.teslarati.com
Tesla Cybertruck with Tactical Grey interior deliveries are starting
The Tesla Cybertruck Tactical Grey interior would likely be a popular option among drivers who would be using the pickup truck for work.
www.teslarati.com
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
Troys final Q2 P&D estimate is in, 416,823 production, 423,000 deliveries... FWIW the 423k BTW would be down a bit over 9% YoY for Q2, and the largest YoY delivery decline ever.
Last edited:
Musskiah
SemiGruntled
Also, the first comment on that post states "Because people are asking about BYDs sales, the company sold as of the data that is available on June 30th a total of 5,934 BEVs in Europe in Q2" which seemed relevant considering all the concern about BYD eating Tesla's lunch. BYD is going to have a difficult time competing in Western markets (even without considering the massive tariffs). BYD may sell less expensive products, however those products are inferior/cheaper with less intuitive software. They have a long way to go, especially once FSD owns autonomy.
Having now read several authoritative legal reviews of this decision I begin to doubt that there will be any direct chilling effect on Executive Agency decisions. It certainly points towards more robust justification of any decision not explicitly ordered by Federal legislation. That at best will mean less bureaucratic interference in private decisions, at worst stifles rapid adaptation to changing circumstances.
I doubt there is material consequence for Tesla. There probably is major change for the EPA, FDA and anything having to do in any agency related to health changes (e.g. communicable diseases). Emergency response of any kind is probably to be even more politicized than it already is.
Any of us really interested should read the actual opinion, including dissents. Beyond that lies conjecture, not fact, including my comments above. This one is important enough to justify any TSLA long term shareholder to do homework. Will anything of EPA and NTSB survive that is not denoted by legislation? The answer may be implied but it is not known.
Responses were quick to point out 1 year drop for TSLA at 20%. Is the reason found in overall battery constraint? Other headwinds this quarter? German rebates gone? Or just plain demand down from interest rates?
Likely a mix so hard to isolate.
Absent tariffs such as those of US and now EU BYzd and others compete quite well, and do with features, function and design rather than just price. It’s hard to believe for NA p expletive who’ve largely been sheltered. Quoting my next door neighbor in Rio, “I’m shocked how good my Seal is.” From my personal impressions I think my model Y wins on FSD (12.3.6 is mine), but in many respects the Seal is more conformance, quieter, smoother.
The is solid reason why Elon keeps mentioning how good they are.
Without punitive tariffs they and other Chinese brands. Volvo and MG have been the most visible but more are coming.
People keep talking about cheap Chinese cars. Nope! Not any more, they have Gigacasting (remember hit was invented by a Chinese owned company) which was invented at Tesla’s behest.
Cheap, not so fast. Innovative, rapidly iterating, better every year.
When Tesla has high market share in China that means more than having high market share with tariffs barriers keeping the best EV producers out, except for Tesla native of China, EU and NA. Rather smart of Tesla to have multiple homes is it not?
Musskiah
SemiGruntled
I agree the tariffs against BYD are unfair and punitive.
I have heard the Seal has an impressive build quality, HUD screen, and ride.
Tesla's basic safety features and lane keep that ride on top of FSD are superior to BYD. After driving FSD for 8 years now, unless BYD is investing $10B a year in AI as Tesla is, and unless they are solving for AI-vision, I don't think they will be in the same class for very long. Soon vehicles will come in two forms, like (smart) phones - "cars" and "smart cars."
The primary reason I own a Tesla is not speed, acceleration, environmental, intuitive software, excellent voice integration...it's safety. Here's a nice comparison below...
BYD Seal v Tesla Model 3 2024 Comparison - carsales.com.au
Can BYD’s new Seal electric mid-size sedan topple Tesla’s mighty Model 3?
I've also heard, as the linked article states, "BYD Seal’s infotainment is good, but not quite to the same level" [as Tesla].
Safety excerpt from article:
"The BYD has a five-star ANCAP safety rating awarded in 2023, scoring 89 per cent for adult occupant protection, 87 per cent for child occupant protection, 82 per cent for pedestrian and other vulnerable road user protection and 75 per cent for safety assist.
Technically, the new Model 3 is unrated but given the pre-update version was one of the safest cars ever tested at the time – scoring 96, 87, 74 and 94 per cent respectively for the aforementioned criteria (based on 2019 protocols) – it’s safe to say the facelift is plenty safe, especially as it’s been upgraded with measures like doors that lock into the body structure for greater impact protection.
Where the Tesla really gains the upper hand, though, is in the real world. Its systems certainly aren’t perfect – it loves a phantom collision alert and the lane-keep assist can occasionally be up for a wrestle – but it’s vastly superior to the Seal, which needs a lot more calibration work.
Frequently when driving on two-way roads the BYD will be spooked by oncoming traffic and aggressively steer away – not ideal when there are cars in the lane next to you.
Likewise, the lane-keep assist can be overbearing in its reactions, often in situations that require no input whatsoever. It’s by far the car’s biggest shortcoming."
***Note this is comparing a 2019 (early version without today's FSD) Model 3 to a 2023 Seal. Anyone who owned a 2018/19 M3 vs a 2023 M3 knows that both the car and the safety software improved dramatically. So, for example, the car's awareness of and safety to pedestrians has certianly improved
Last edited:
It also appears - please chime in if I'm definitely wrong - to declaw the SEC. I know many are convinced that agency is anti-Tesla, but I'm only 49% in that camp. An impotent SEC most certainly would be detrimental to TSLA, even if only peripherally affecting Tesla Inc.
Musskiah
SemiGruntled
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
That was actually an entirely different case, though decided in the same week as the Chevron one.
The overturning Chevron case was Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo.
The SEC impacting one was SEC v. Jarkesy- it was a case about the 7th amendment- specific the right to a trial by jury of your peers.
Many agencies- including the SEC- used in-house judge-only administrative law courts to handle things like securities fraud cases (the dept of labor and EPA also used similar in-house courts to judge cases and issue fines) rather than taking those cases through normal federal courts where you can have a jury (but a vastly slower process)
The Supreme Court found this violated the 7th amendment when the defendant would be facing civil penalties... (admin courts that impose other judgements like injunctive relief should be unaffected).
Both reduce the overall power of federal agencies- but in very different ways.
Last edited:
I have seen hundreds of BYDs in Beijing and seal are not popular at all. The sales numbers are true, the Chinese would rather spend the higher dollar on a Nio SUV. Practically zero Seals in HK as well. Been in Japan the past 10 days and I saw zero seals on the road. I did see a BYD Seal only shop in Tokyo. Saw a few model 3s and refresh model 3s. Even got a uber ride in a model Y. Only saw one Model 3 in Kyoto. The roads are narrower with much more of a traditional crowd. Tokyo is where all the teslas are. Lots of porches surprisingly.
We really need a serious professional,legal view on this, and most that I read are too politically biased to view this dispassionately. The SEC, however, has quite a body of practice that evolved informally among SEC regulated entities and those nominally subject to SEC oversight actually have formalized self-regulation. That ruling seems to me to state they’ll need legislative connivance rather than only Executive branch connivance.
The present court being as it is guaranteed they will find an out, somehow. If for Justice Thomas I see an undeniable out of the SEC and all subject to it. The Buttonwood Tree was in 1792, the Constitution in 1787. Close enough to show that ONLY self-governance for securities markets is acceptable so the SEC itself is unconstitutional!
As for @Knightshade and is clever introduction of Jarkesy luckily for originalist thinking, the 7th Amndment applies explicitly and only to cases tried before Federal courts. As per Buttonwood the entirety can be treated ex-Federal. In that respect the securities industry would tend more to resemble the insurance industry.
This may seem far fetched. However, in the environment of debates over all manner of energy, automotive and securities issues, the tenor of the times clearly is in greater devolution of Federal powers and purse.
Tesla might do rather well this way.
Factually, I argue the end point of all this will be the thorny issues of Interstate Commerce.
In 1797 they did a poor job of solving those problems, as the Great Compromise led to the Civil War. Logically that is where we are now.
Without question all this is even more important to Tesla and SpaceX that is is to the rest of multinational business in the US.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
