T 2.0

whatithink said:
I'm not sure about that - Musk has talked about robotaxis, AI and robotics generally, but he has a separate AI co., now merged with X. Why would those shareholders subsidize Tesla or the opposite. Waymo and others are way ahead in the robotaxis. Robotics ... OK, sure.

He says lots and but isn't delivering. By any financial measure Tesla is way over valued. Future promise means nothing esp. if multiple competitors are already in that space and on a par or way ahead of you.
Click to expand...
So, you’re shorting his stocks?
 
whatithink said:
From what I can find, EV sales in 2024 were at 10.8M units of which Tesla had 1.78M (10.3% share) versus BYD had 3.84M (22.2% share).

China dominates EV sales at 7.2M units, followed by Europe 2.2M and then the US & CA at 1.3M - with the ROW at 900K.

Tesla isn't dominant anymore and needs to being new products to market.
Click to expand...
I was speaking as to vehicles sold in America as this is an American issue. Nevertheless, BYD (which doesn't sell vehicles in the US) only just passed Tesla this quarter for quarterly automotive revenue and the decline in 1st quarter sales for Tesla has been mostly attributable to political backlash. The other contributing factors that you cite predate December 2025 when Tesla stock was at an all time high. Also note that BYD sells hybrids in addition to EV's and hybrids account for 60% of its sales. BYD sold slightly fewer EV's worldwide than Tesla. BYD models also start at $10k for entry level and $16k for a mid-level model which comprises the bulk of their sales. Could you imagine Tesla offering vehicles at this prices? So comparing BYD to Tesla is apples to oranges. (and yes I had to Google all this)
 
whatithink said:
Whitmer or Shapiro I'd have thought (but Gavin is in the game), either way its way too early to pick for 2028. I thought either of them would have been the VP pick for Harris and was v surprised by Waltz, but I wonder now if they both refused as they have their own ambitions.

Who the GOP is going to run is just as interesting.
Click to expand...
The good thing for the Dems is that having AOC and Crockett out front now, they’ll have plenty of ammunition to justify selecting someone else when the time comes. Of course, it didn’t help with Harris who was and is an absolute joke of a candidate - the @dad4 endorsement notwithstanding. It’s way too early for me to even think about the midterms. Besides, the current moment has so much to “enjoy”.
 
watfly said:
I was speaking as to vehicles sold in America as this is an American issue. Nevertheless, BYD (which doesn't sell vehicles in the US) only just passed Tesla this quarter for quarterly automotive revenue and the decline in 1st quarter sales for Tesla has been mostly attributable to political backlash. The other contributing factors that you cite predate December 2025 when Tesla stock was at an all time high. Also note that BYD sells hybrids in addition to EV's and hybrids account for 60% of its sales. BYD sold slightly fewer EV's worldwide than Tesla. BYD models also start at $10k for entry level and $16k for a mid-level model which comprises the bulk of their sales. Could you imagine Tesla offering vehicles at this prices? So comparing BYD to Tesla is apples to oranges. (and yes I had to Google all this)
Click to expand...
I would just add that Tesla's PE ratio in December was over 400 (potentially overvalued). Some of the decline in stock price might just be market correction and that PE ratio certainly makes them more vulnerable to the negativity of the past 3 months.
 
whatithink said:
From what I can find, EV sales in 2024 were at 10.8M units of which Tesla had 1.78M (10.3% share) versus BYD had 3.84M (22.2% share).

China dominates EV sales at 7.2M units, followed by Europe 2.2M and then the US & CA at 1.3M - with the ROW at 900K.

Tesla isn't dominant anymore and needs to being new products to market.
Click to expand...
These are much better looking cars than I would have thought. This model is $46k but still a lot cheaper than a Tesla with similar specs.

 
watfly said:
I was speaking as to vehicles sold in America as this is an American issue. Nevertheless, BYD (which doesn't sell vehicles in the US) only just passed Tesla this quarter for quarterly automotive revenue and the decline in 1st quarter sales for Tesla has been mostly attributable to political backlash. The other contributing factors that you cite predate December 2025 when Tesla stock was at an all time high. Also note that BYD sells hybrids in addition to EV's and hybrids account for 60% of its sales. BYD sold slightly fewer EV's worldwide than Tesla. BYD models also start at $10k for entry level and $16k for a mid-level model which comprises the bulk of their sales. Could you imagine Tesla offering vehicles at this prices? So comparing BYD to Tesla is apples to oranges. (and yes I had to Google all this)
Click to expand...
Its not an American issue for Tesla. Less than 40% of their sales are in the US. They have a factory in China as that market is key and currently they are getting beat by BYD and there are other Chinese EV players in the market too. BYD recently came out with a battery announcement which would be a game changer also - BYD battery charger.

Tesla undoubtedly built / created the EV market from an extreme niche / scratch to what it is today. With that comes every other existing car company plus the new ones out of China & elsewhere who are matching Tesla for cars at the same and lesser price points and innovating at pace (which was always Tesla's biggest advantage imo). For the first time really, they have competitors coming at them from all angles in all markets. That would be a challenge but add in Musk's political actions and words in the US and Europe esp. ...
 
whatithink said:
Its not an American issue for Tesla. Less than 40% of their sales are in the US. They have a factory in China as that market is key and currently they are getting beat by BYD and there are other Chinese EV players in the market too. BYD recently came out with a battery announcement which would be a game changer also - BYD battery charger.

Tesla undoubtedly built / created the EV market from an extreme niche / scratch to what it is today. With that comes every other existing car company plus the new ones out of China & elsewhere who are matching Tesla for cars at the same and lesser price points and innovating at pace (which was always Tesla's biggest advantage imo). For the first time really, they have competitors coming at them from all angles in all markets. That would be a challenge but add in Musk's political actions and words in the US and Europe esp. ...
Click to expand...
Doesn't change the fact that rooting for and participating in the demise of a successful American company that produces a product that is a key backbone of your policies to fight what you believe is the greatest existential threat to the country, is shameful and putting politics ahead of Americans (royal you and your).

Again, the other factors you cite were long accounted for in Tesla value before the political backlash significantly decreased his stock value. Ironically, even at its lowest value post-election value, it was still higher than Tesla's stock price only 6 months ago. So Dems, knock yourself out protesting, burning, spray painting and keying Teslas, as well as, assaulting Tesla drivers, you just look like the complete idiots that you are.

This doesn't mean Tesla won't face strategic, competitive and economic issues in the future that could negatively impact stock price. However, those issues have had virtually nothing to do with the stocks post-election stock decline.
 
whatithink said:
Yeah, just murder, rape, incest etc vs hand jobs!
Genesis 19:33-36
2 Samuel 13:11-14
1 Samuel 18:25-27
Deuteronomy 22:23-24
Judges 19:22-29
Click to expand...
Yes, thanks for proving my point. No explicit descriptions of sex acts or graphic illustrations. Not passages (nor a book) I would recommend to my children, but not remotely close to what is included in the books that Dems describe as "banned". Huge difference between a reference to an act and a "users manual" with a play-by-play of explicit sexual acts with illustrations.
 
watfly said:
This doesn't mean Tesla won't face strategic, competitive and economic issues in the future that could negatively impact stock price. However, those issues have had virtually nothing to do with the stocks post-election stock decline.
Click to expand...
The stock went up like crazy post election, its only really dropped in the last 40 days. Its still trading above election day.
 
watfly said:
Yes, thanks for proving my point. No explicit descriptions of sex acts or graphic illustrations. Not passages (nor a book) I would recommend to my children, but not remotely close to what is included in the books that Dems describe as "banned". Huge difference between a reference to an act and a "users manual" with a play-by-play of explicit sexual acts with illustrations.
Click to expand...
OK. On the other hand, the bible does say that you have to be high to be gay, i.e. "let two men who lie together be stoned" - no pictures though, so that can be left in.
 
whatithink said:
OK. On the other hand, the bible does say that you have to be high to be gay, i.e. "let two men who lie together be stoned" - no pictures though, so that can be left in.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that's bullshit. I'm not here to defend the bible, just pointing out how I believe your comparison is misguided. Don't get me started on religious hypocrisy, it makes political hypocrisy look like child's play (There is overlap of the two on the Republican side).
 
watfly said:
Yeah, that's bullshit. I'm not here to defend the bible, just pointing out how I believe your comparison is misguided. Don't get me started on religious hypocrisy, it makes political hypocrisy look like child's play (There is overlap of the two on the Republican side).
Click to expand...
Ok, I have to backtrack on this post, I haven't been entirely fair about the bible and you made it whatabout the bible, so I will defend the bible. The bible is an ancient text that is sacred to billions of people worldwide. It is the most historically significant book in the world by a longshot (I will leave it to experts to debate its historical accuracy). It has some blunt, but unembellished, descriptions of sexual and violent events, in addition, to some culturally insensitive events. However, it's not gratuitous or explicit. It was also written 3500 to 2000 years ago, so you can't hold it up to today's standards and norms. The current "banned" books that the Dems are whining about are mostly recently minted publications that reflect the opinions of one, or just a few people, and don't come remotely close to the cultural and historical significance of the bible. My whataboutism...Remember that liberals have attempted to "ban" classics like To Kill a Mockingbird and Huck Finn. Again we can't judge older works by todays standards, we need to consider them within the context of times and appreciate the progress we have made.

Anecdotal story. I had relatives that saved the publications from the week or days around when I was born. I was born during a time of significant racial unrest, despite, or maybe as a result of, the passing of the Civil Rights Act (ironically with 74% of the no vote coming from Dems, and after a 74 day filibuster by Southern Dems). The prominent magazines of the time, like Life and Time, would refer to a black individual in their reporting as Negro and then their name, for example, Negro John Smith. Judging by today's standards, that's shameful, but they shouldn't be banned from student use because they're a valuable record of history. When we consider what's age appropriate, we should not just consider content, but consider content of a publication in context of its literary and historical value. I believe both sides fail to do this.
 
watfly said:
Ok, I have to backtrack on this post, I haven't been entirely fair about the bible and you made it whatabout the bible, so I will defend the bible. The bible is an ancient text that is sacred to billions of people worldwide. It is the most historically significant book in the world by a longshot (I will leave it to experts to debate its historical accuracy). It has some blunt, but unembellished, descriptions of sexual and violent events, in addition, to some culturally insensitive events. However, it's not gratuitous or explicit. It was also written 3500 to 2000 years ago, so you can't hold it up to today's standards and norms. The current "banned" books that the Dems are whining about are mostly recently minted publications that reflect the opinions of one, or just a few people, and don't come remotely close to the cultural and historical significance of the bible. My whataboutism...Remember that liberals have attempted to "ban" classics like To Kill a Mockingbird and Huck Finn. Again we can't judge older works by todays standards, we need to consider them within the context of times and appreciate the progress we have made.

Anecdotal story. I had relatives that saved the publications from the week or days around when I was born. I was born during a time of significant racial unrest, despite, or maybe as a result of, the passing of the Civil Rights Act (ironically with 74% of the no vote coming from Dems, and after a 74 day filibuster by Southern Dems). The prominent magazines of the time, like Life and Time, would refer to a black individual in their reporting as Negro and then their name, for example, Negro John Smith. Judging by today's standards, that's shameful, but they shouldn't be banned from student use because they're a valuable record of history. When we consider what's age appropriate, we should not just consider content, but consider content of a publication in context of its literary and historical value. I believe both sides fail to do this.
Click to expand...
I see you are unaware of the southern strategy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top