Jump to content
Create New...
  • David
    David

    Will Competition Destroy Tesla?

      It is hard to judge a company by one month of auto sales let alone two months, but when you have 3 months or more in a market that had no competition and now does, dropping near the bottom in sales should make any CEO question what needs to be done to improve sales. Norway with 60.4% of new auto sales being EV is becoming a struggle for Tesla and Ford is the latest to show them up!

    Norway has been in the news lately and not just a little but across a wide range of news organizations. Norway has been very embracing of the move to EVs supporting just about every version that has come out from small EVs that would remind one of a Golf cart and illegal on the roads in the US to the luxury level of Tesla with the X and S auto's.

    Snag_6d5e1a38.png

    Norway has even been leading the world in the change over of their countries taxi fleet to EVs. One benefit to the taxi owner is the ability to write off half of the auto cost in the first year and the rest in the second year as long as the taxi travels over 100,000 kilometers per year. This allows private taxi drivers to purchase their own luxury ride to use as their work tool every day.

    Snag_6d5a8385.png

    Snag_6d5b7cd9.png

    Tesla was the first to build out a very extensive network of charging infrastructure to support their auto's allowing owners to drive their EVs in any type of weather even very cold snowy winter.

    Snag_6d57bbe9.png

    As anyone in sales would know and to help everyone else understand, single month sales, and quarterly sales sales cannot always clearly show a trend about the success of a company. Even bi-yearly sales numbers while getting close to be considered a trend by some is not enough to state that a company has been a long term success.

    Tesla ever since they started to sell auto's in Norway back in 2009 with just 13 sold has pretty much had a captured market to themselves especially since Norway has been trying various ways to push a clean green agenda going back into the 1990's. Tesla sales spiked in 2019 at 18,798 EVs sold before plummeting as VW introduced the much more affordable ID.4 and other luxury makers such as Audi with their e-tron came on the market in 2020.

    image.png

    As per the jalopnik story, Tesla did not sell many auto's in association with other auto choices till recently making the sample size very small in auto markets around the world. Norway then becomes an even more important picture on EV sales as a country that was in many ways the first to embrace EVs, will be the first to phase out all new ICE auto sales starting January 1st 2025. Currently contrast Diesel auto's that sold in 2011 with a 75.7% market share to only 8.6% market share in 2020.  A market where there are more EV options at various price points than any other market has transformed their auto market.

    Lately, Tesla sales have not been that great and Ford Motor Company is off to a hot start with their Mustang Mach-e. Yes one can contribute this to the Ford EV being a new model but keep in mind that a year ago new auto sales had BEVs make up 43.1% of sales, this year, BEVs are averaging 60.4% of new auto sales with Ford having sold 1,384 Mach-e in May for a 10% share of Norways auto market. Toyota RAV4 hybrid is in second place and Skoda's electric Enyaq is in third. Currently in the top ten EVs sold in Norway, Tesla is coming in at 6th place.

    Let's let the monthly numbers speak for what is being sold in Norway:

    May 2021 top 10 best-selling auto's in Norway.

    image.png

    April 2021 top 10 best-selling auto's in Norway.

    image.png

    March 2021 top 10 best-selling auto's in Norway.

    image.png

    We then have no numbers, but a list was produced of the top 10 auto sales and unlike March, Tesla was in 8th place for auto sales in February:

    image.png

    The clear observation is that Tesla is NOT the dominant auto company in Norway and a concern for the CEO and company one would think. Clearly now that real competition is showing up, Tesla is going to have to address concerns about fit n finish, service, warranty issues, etc.

    In 2019 Tesla dominated the market for BEVs:

    image.png

    Per Norways largest news covering the auto industry, December pretty much saved the year, but even then shows some very interesting changes from 2019.

    image.png

    This on top of the full 2020 year showing that Tesla is only #6 in auto sales in Norway.

    image.png

    At this point, Tesla needs to deliver on a low end solution of BEVs for Norway and the world if they are to remain competitive and survive it would seem. This would be the time for a Model 2 and even maybe 1 to come out of Tesla giving low end solutions for auto buyers that currently cannot afford higher priced auto's.

    Ford Is Beating Tesla In One Of The Most EV-Saturated Markets In The World (jalopnik.com)

    • Norway: Tesla car sales 2009-2020 | Statista

    Ford's electric Mustang tops Norway car sales in May | Reuters

    Ford's electric Mustang tops Norway car sales in May | Nasdaq

    Historic December saved car sales | Dn

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    1 hour ago, balthazar said:

    I didn't realize Daimler finally pulled the plug on smart- about a decade too late. Good riddance.

    The KBB chart seems to make sense then, tho I question whether Daimler is 'reverse-sandbagging'... with the a-class in addition to the CLA, PLUS the 50% decline in s-class sales / the killing off of the s-class coupe... I'm not seeing how the ATP is up around 3-4 thousand over a couple years ago. Smells fishy.

    Of course it is.

    GLE has a $75k ATP according to iseecars, the E-class has the same price structure so I imagine its the same, and GLE and E are 2 of their top 3-4 sellers.  GLS's is $95k and it sells about as well as a GLA that transacts in the high 40s, so average those 2 together and that is about $70k.  AMG GT 4 door wasn't around 3-4 years ago, and new G-wagon since then that has sold well, so that should offset the A-class.  $64k average seems to make sense.  S-class is down now due to the changeover and there aren't any to sell since Europe got the first production run of the new S-class but it is arriving here this summer.

    • Haha 3
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    17 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

    GLE has a $75k ATP according to iseecars, the E-class has the same price structure so I imagine its the same, and GLE and E are 2 of their top 3-4 sellers.  GLS's is $95k and it sells about as well as a GLA that transacts in the high 40s, so average those 2 together and that is about $70k.  AMG GT 4 door wasn't around 3-4 years ago, and new G-wagon since then that has sold well, so that should offset the A-class.  $64k average seems to make sense.  S-class is down now due to the changeover and there aren't any to sell since Europe got the first production run of the new S-class but it is arriving here this summer.

    Except the bulk of their sales come from their much cheaper models. I know you want to paint this prefect picture of Mercedes instead of just accepting simple facts but you are really reaching here and clearly ignoring the fact that the bulk of sales are from models that are priced far south of $64K, I mean $59K. That’s what makes the most sense here on this Tesla thread. 

    Edited by surreal1272
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    50 minutes ago, surreal1272 said:

    Except the bulk of their sales come from their much cheaper models. I know you want to paint this prefect picture of Mercedes instead of just accepting simple facts but you are really reaching here and clearly ignoring the fact that the bulk of sales are from models that are priced far south of $64K, I mean $59K. That’s what makes the most sense here on this Tesla thread. 

    Do the bulk come from cheaper models?   Their top 5 sellers in Q1 2021:

    #1 GLE

    #2  GLC

    #3  E-class

    #4  C-class

    #5 GLS

    Those 5 cars are 71.1% of their sales volume, 3 of them have ATP of $75k or higher.  And 46.9% of their total sales are models with over $75k ATP. 

    Screen Shot 2021-06-08 at 10.43.25 PM.png

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    E class is bundled with the CLS...

    In effect, putting the C Class in 3rd place...

    With the exception of the GLE, what I posted are in effect the models that sell the most in the US...

     Their bread and butter lease queens...  

    7600 C Class

    7000 GLBs 

    15 000 GLCs

    THAT right there, is a LOT (30 000 units) of  $38 000 - $43 000 vehicles.  And I know those are just starting price points. Id say the avg lease prices of these probably leave the store at 45 000 - 46 000 dollars. 

    Still... 

    If you take a looksie at Buick...  

    https://www.buick.com/

    These fall under a Buick level of competition and YOU yourself dont consider Buick as luxury...

    This little exercise just brings home the points:

    1. Mercedes is not entirely luxury...ESPECIALLY to what their bread and butter vehicles selll at IN the USA...

    2. Further proof that Mercedes-Benz is akin to General Motors  rather than Cadillac.

    And if we factor in the HOME market of Europe...those A Classes, CLAs and C Class cars are just Chevrolets for Europe...

     

    • Agree 2
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Why are we still talking about Mercedes on a thread about Tesla? Stop feeding the fanboy. 

    9 hours ago, smk4565 said:

    Do the bulk come from cheaper models?   Their top 5 sellers in Q1 2021:

    #1 GLE

    #2  GLC

    #3  E-class

    #4  C-class

    #5 GLS

    Those 5 cars are 71.1% of their sales volume, 3 of them have ATP of $75k or higher.  And 46.9% of their total sales are models with over $75k ATP. 

    Screen Shot 2021-06-08 at 10.43.25 PM.png

    I suggest you do some actual math (instead of just staring at numbers that don’t even support your argument) and bring this back up on a thread about Mercedes. This is getting old. For the record though, four out of that top five you provided ALL start under $60K. We are done here. 

    Edited by surreal1272
    • Haha 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Interesting read on Tesla and Competition. While they do not say that Tesla will go away any time soon, Tesla does need to pay attention to adding product and freshening up their portfolio faster as Companies like Rivian come to market, Ford and GM start producing their BEVs and other companies especially the Chinese enter the global market as they have shipped their first batch of 100 BEVs to Norway all pre-sold.

    I think we will see a very different landscape in the auto industry by 2025.

    Tesla Might Finally Have Some Competition. From Ford. - The New York Times (nytimes.com)

    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    18 hours ago, oldshurst442 said:

    E class is bundled with the CLS...

    In effect, putting the C Class in 3rd place...

    With the exception of the GLE, what I posted are in effect the models that sell the most in the US...

     Their bread and butter lease queens...  

    7600 C Class

    7000 GLBs 

    15 000 GLCs

    THAT right there, is a LOT (30 000 units) of  $38 000 - $43 000 vehicles.  And I know those are just starting price points. Id say the avg lease prices of these probably leave the store at 45 000 - 46 000 dollars. 

    Still... 

    If you take a looksie at Buick...  

    https://www.buick.com/

    These fall under a Buick level of competition and YOU yourself dont consider Buick as luxury...

    This little exercise just brings home the points:

    1. Mercedes is not entirely luxury...ESPECIALLY to what their bread and butter vehicles selll at IN the USA...

    2. Further proof that Mercedes-Benz is akin to General Motors  rather than Cadillac.

    And if we factor in the HOME market of Europe...those A Classes, CLAs and C Class cars are just Chevrolets for Europe...

     

    The GLS outsells the GLB, and almost outsold the C-class, but I think the C-class was maybe down to a new model coming, or maybe just no one buys sedans anymore too.  You also realize C-class and GLC are priced the same as a Lexus RX or Cadillac XT5, which are the best sellers for the competition.  And I looked at my local dealer, they have about 10 or so GLB250's all around $47-49k, the C300s and GLC300s are around 50 to low 50s and obviously the AMG's are more but that is low volume.  

    Mercedes can't be akin to General Motors because Mercedes is 1 brand.  GM since its inception has been a group car car companies/brands. 

    • Disagree 2
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    10 hours ago, surreal1272 said:

    Why are we still talking about Mercedes on a thread about Tesla? Stop feeding the fanboy. 

    I suggest you do some actual math (instead of just staring at numbers that don’t even support your argument) and bring this back up on a thread about Mercedes. This is getting old. For the record though, four out of that top five you provided ALL start under $60K. We are done here. 

    I thought it was about average sale price, not base MSRP, because base models doesn't exist?  5 of 6 Cadillacs start under $49k.   Only 1 of 4 Tesla's starts under $50k.  And yet people want to claim Cadillacs bring more money than Teslas?  As if every Cadillac sold is maxed to limit in options, and every competitor is only selling base models with zero option, that isn't happening.  

     Probably like 60-70% of any car's volume is the mid-level trim, the base price is false advertising, like the Jeep Wagoneer that starts are $59,900 but has a $2100 destination charge so really it starts at $62,000 but they don't want to advertise that, and probably the base model isn't even built unless custom ordered so the $3,000 "convenience" package is added on, and now it is $65,000 is the real world cheapest version, but the magazine ad says $59,900.  And I just picked that as an example, 100% of car companies to that.  

    • Disagree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    8 hours ago, David said:

    Interesting read on Tesla and Competition. While they do not say that Tesla will go away any time soon, Tesla does need to pay attention to adding product and freshening up their portfolio faster as Companies like Rivian come to market, Ford and GM start producing their BEVs and other companies especially the Chinese enter the global market as they have shipped their first batch of 100 BEVs to Norway all pre-sold.

    I think we will see a very different landscape in the auto industry by 2025.

    Tesla Might Finally Have Some Competition. From Ford. - The New York Times (nytimes.com)

    100% they need to keep coming out with updated versions of the existing models, and also more models because consumers like to be able to pick from more than 4 vehicles.  And the truck and roadster will help.  But there is a reason most car companies have a dozen or so models because they want to appeal to every buyer.  Tons of EV competition is coming, but the EV market is growing.  EV sales in the USA are like 500k units a year, on a SAR of 17 million or whatever it is.  By 2025 EV's might be 4 million units a year, Tesla could still double their volume with all these other entries coming.  I think the people that need to be worried are those late to the EV game, or without funds to pump into EV's, small companies like Mazda and Subaru, cash strapped companies like Nissan, not sure what Stellantis is doing, but being run by the French I imagine a green push will be coming, but will they be too late?

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    1 hour ago, smk4565 said:

    EV sales in the USA are like 500k units a year, on a SAR of 17 million or whatever it is.

    328,000 in '20. Extremely unlikely to hit 500K in '21, sales are growing very slowly.

     

    1 hour ago, smk4565 said:

    By 2025 EV's might be 4 million units a year

    They won't. If the stars align, maybe 1 million.

    Edited by balthazar
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    3 hours ago, smk4565 said:

    Mercedes can't be akin to General Motors because Mercedes is 1 brand.  GM since its inception has been a group car car companies/brands. 

    Ignoring the other crud, Mercedes = GM End of debate. They both build cheap ass auto's to luxury auto's and Daimler current owner of MB also builds Vans like GM, Trucks and Buses. 

    MB is NOT a Luxury brand only. It is a brand that builds some Luxury models.

    How does this relate to Tesla? 

    It does not! End of debate.

    • Thanks 1
    • Haha 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Somebody does not know and understand Benz's history...

    I suggest that somebody learn it. At the very least, that person could just use Wiki...

    A couple of merges and acquisitions and introduction of new brands  in the early history of Benz motor cars between the three gentlemen that bear confusingly the name of the company today. 

    Herr Benz, Herr Daimler and Herr Maybach all had their own proper automobile companies to which they merged together, collaborated together before and after mergers and created a new brand together with a new name (Mercedes) and further merged and formed and acquired each other's  companies to form new companies... 

    And then furthered their merger traditions in the late 1990s with an American company using the name Daimler-Chrysler in the NEW company that if we actually do the math, we would see that at THAT point in time, Daimler-Chrysler had MORE brands then General Motors did...

    Let us not forget to mention acquisitions of American and European lorry manufacturers...

    I dont blame him tho, the history of this company and its names are most definitely confusing...

    But, seeing that he is a fan of the company, Id think he would know better...

    Mercedes, over time, has taken over as the MAIN brand name...  But in this company's history, all three gentlemen had their names of Daimler, Maybach and Benz adorn a vehicle under its convoluted branding system including models under the Mercedes name in the company...

    All three gentlemen engineered their own stuff on their own brands bearing their names, but also engineered stuff under their mergered and acquisitioned convoluted company.  And all three gentlemen worked and engineered stuff on the brand named Mercedes.

    Same but different when we compare the histories of Dunbar Buick, Louis Chevrolet, Ransom E Olds and GM founder that was ousted but clawed his way back into buying himself into the company and acquiring and buying out Louis and Ransom and creating new brands like Pontiac and Cadillac...  

    Not quite accurate and profound this history lesson, but good enough to put things into perspective to show that GM and Daimler-Benz or whatever they are calling themselves today are indeed apples to apples.  

    The German company just decided to consolidate all models and brands into one name over time.  GM decided to create an empire with several brands, then shut down some of these over time but continue on with a multiple brand strategy.  

     

     

     

     

    • Thanks 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    1 hour ago, oldshurst442 said:

    Same but different when we compare the histories of Dunbar Buick, Louis Chevrolet, Ransom E Olds and GM founder that was ousted but clawed his way back into buying himself into the company and acquiring and buying out Louis and Ransom and creating new brands like Pontiac and Cadillac...  

    Not quite accurate and profound this history lesson, but good enough to put things into perspective to show that GM and Daimler-Benz or whatever they are calling themselves today are indeed apples to apples. 

    I understand your generalization & get your point, but I am duty-bound to correct any historical fact stated in error; not to correct YOU but to have the facts in cyber-print for the future.

    All modern GM brands were independent autonomous companies except Pontiac (created) and GMC (reorganized from the merger of 2 independents). Cadillac's roots as an engine builder, machine shop & foundry begin in 1890.

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1
    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Seems many are starting to rethink Tesla, over half of the investment community has changed from buy to Hold or sell on Tesla after their stock has dropped 15% this year equal to 2019 and seems now that the Plaid S is out, Plaid S+ is canceled making some Tesla Fans concerned. Seems the new battery tech also now will not show up in the Plaid. 

    Tesla (TSLA) Elon Musk Splashy Event May Underwhelm as Battery Questions Loom - Bloomberg

    Seems also bothering Wall Street is the lack of a COO and any succession plan for Musk if anything was to happen to him.

    Tesla desperately needs a COO or No. 2 for Elon Musk (msn.com)

    On top of this, at the event, yes blamed on higher material costs, but an immediate price in crease by $10,000 for Plaid S reservation people. The Plaid S will now start at $129,990 compared to a Long range Model S at $79,990 starting price.

    Tesla Luxury Model S Plaid Hits the Road With Higher Price Tag (msn.com)

    Crazy price increases, stock down 4.81% in June on top of the 15% down through the end of May. No succession in leadership, executive leaders leaving the company. Battery Day was a bomb per Wall Street, New 4680 battery cells are missing in action, UltraCapacitor Maxwell bought in 2019 for $200 million for their tech to make Tesla go faster and longer is still missing.

    Tesla acquires ultracapacitor and battery manufacturer for over $200 million - Electrek

    One has to wonder / question about the leadership in Tesla right now and for future products.

    • Haha 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    3 hours ago, David said:

    Seems now that the Plaid S is out, Tesla has also quietly decided to raise prices on another auto. No anouncement, but if you go to the configurator, base price for a Tesla Model Y is now $500 more.

    https://insideevs.com/news/513232/us-tesla-modely-price-increase/

    image.png

    I thought high transaction prices were a good thing?  And since there is no negotiation or incentives with Tesla, that is the sale price, plus options of course.

    • Disagree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Musk has stated in the past he envisions EV's for everyone, but with monthly price jacks and the 2nd cheapest model starting at $49 grand, he's not following his own mantra. $50 grand eliminates a huge swath of car buyers. So while it may be good for Tesla's the Company's revenue stream, it's not good for Tesla the Mission Statement's claim for existing.

    • Agree 2
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    4 hours ago, smk4565 said:

    I thought high transaction prices were a good thing?  And since there is no negotiation or incentives with Tesla, that is the sale price, plus options of course.

    Not when the prices go up multiple times in the same year on the same cars without any tangible gain in the product. In fact, those price increases are happening while they REMOVE features like power lumbar support. Don’t get sour just you don’t understand the difference between ATPs and just being greedy for no damn reason. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    ^ I don't think it's 'greed', I think Musk is well aware that the drying up of carbon credits is going to have Tesla back where it usually is; in the red. Plus, the stock is off by a third... he's looking at mounting cash flow problems.

    Another issue :
     

    Screen Shot 2021-06-11 at 12.55.49 AM.png

    Edited by balthazar
    • Like 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    7 hours ago, balthazar said:

    ^ I don't think it's 'greed', I think Musk is well aware that the drying up of carbon credits is going to have Tesla back where it usually is; in the red. Plus, the stock is off by a third... he's looking at mounting cash flow problems.

    Another issue :
     

    Screen Shot 2021-06-11 at 12.55.49 AM.png

    True both it could be both. I have a bigger problem with charging more while removing features. 

    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    19 hours ago, balthazar said:

    ^ I don't think it's 'greed', I think Musk is well aware that the drying up of carbon credits is going to have Tesla back where it usually is; in the red. Plus, the stock is off by a third... he's looking at mounting cash flow problems.

    Another issue :
     

    Screen Shot 2021-06-11 at 12.55.49 AM.png

    Musk doesn't have a sales problem or a demand problem.  If he couldn't get $140k for a Model S, he wouldn't price it that way.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    21 hours ago, surreal1272 said:

    Not when the prices go up multiple times in the same year on the same cars without any tangible gain in the product. In fact, those price increases are happening while they REMOVE features like power lumbar support. Don’t get sour just you don’t understand the difference between ATPs and just being greedy for no damn reason. 

    The just delivered the first Plaid models, fastest 0-60, fastest 1/4 mile of any production car, safest car in the world, infotainment has as much power as a PS5, 187 miles of charge in 15 minutes, faster around Laguna Seca than a McLaren P1 or a Corvette ZR1.  I'd say he gave some tangible gain.  Sure there are features it doesn't have, and it would be nice if Tesla had more models or if the Model S had more of a change to the body styling, but people are still buying and it's still the fastest car with a lot of tech.

    • Disagree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Finally; quicker in the quarter than a Dodge. 

    Impressive numbers... just don't see many takers out there. 

    2 hours ago, smk4565 said:

    Musk doesn't have a sales problem or a demand problem.

    No, like I said; he's looking at a looming CASH FLOW problem.

    • Agree 3
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    14 hours ago, smk4565 said:

    Musk doesn't have a sales problem or a demand problem.  If he couldn't get $140k for a Model S, he wouldn't price it that way.

    Cash Flow Problem? Hell Yes he does, what part of he just lost $500 Million in Carbon Credit sales with only a $430 Million profit means he is cash positive?

    If he did not have a sales problem, then he would be selling millions globally rather than a few hundred thousand.

    The auto business has not been profitable yet if you look at the SEC filings, he had Tesla turning a profit due to Carbon Credit sales to other auto makers and now that the mergers have addressed those needs, the sales have stopped, so yes, Tesla has a Cashflow problem.

    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    11 hours ago, David said:

    Cash Flow Problem? Hell Yes he does, what part of he just lost $500 Million in Carbon Credit sales with only a $430 Million profit means he is cash positive?

    If he did not have a sales problem, then he would be selling millions globally rather than a few hundred thousand.

    The auto business has not been profitable yet if you look at the SEC filings, he had Tesla turning a profit due to Carbon Credit sales to other auto makers and now that the mergers have addressed those needs, the sales have stopped, so yes, Tesla has a Cashflow problem.

    Tesla has near $20 billion in cash, no cash flow problem.  

    • Haha 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    8 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

    Tesla has near $20 billion in cash, no cash flow problem.  

    According to actual stock filing as of the end of Q1, they had $17.141 billion. With all the construction at Texas, Germany and Nevada, that can disappear overnight if payment from various companies was demanded.

    Cash flow in regards to sales, is a different matter.

    Tesla Cash on Hand 2009-2021 | TSLA | MacroTrends

    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    10 hours ago, smk4565 said:

    Tesla has near $20 billion in cash, no cash flow problem.  

    And that is a bit of an illusion that can go up in a flash with one bad year (or increased competition form literally everyone else). A snippet from one article regarding their cash flow.

     

    Be reminded that debt repayment and refinancing do not fall into the operating activities of the company and hence, it’s not part of the cash outflow or cash inflow discussed here

     

    https://stockdividendscreener.com/auto-manufacturers/tesla-cash-position/

    On 6/11/2021 at 8:12 PM, smk4565 said:

    The just delivered the first Plaid models, fastest 0-60, fastest 1/4 mile of any production car, safest car in the world, infotainment has as much power as a PS5, 187 miles of charge in 15 minutes, faster around Laguna Seca than a McLaren P1 or a Corvette ZR1.  I'd say he gave some tangible gain.  Sure there are features it doesn't have, and it would be nice if Tesla had more models or if the Model S had more of a change to the body styling, but people are still buying and it's still the fastest car with a lot of tech.

    Must be why their ATP is around $50K, which in case you haven’t been paying attention, means that FAR more folks opt for the cheaper models than they do the $140K models, much like certain other high priced makes. They might actually move a thousand of those a year, which is a drop in the bucket against overall sales. Nice to have on the brochures but it doesn’t really do much for the bottom line.

    Edited by surreal1272
    • Agree 2
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    @smk4565 You really to pay attention here and read this article. Their profit hasn’t even come from their product, but a shell game of carbon credits and selling off bitcoin. Tell us again how that is good for the long term bottom line.

    https://www.autoweek.com/news/green-cars/a36266393/tesla-made-more-money-selling-credits-and-bitcoin-than-cars/

    Edited by surreal1272
    • Agree 3
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    2 hours ago, surreal1272 said:

    @smk4565 You really to pay attention here and read this article. Their profit hasn’t even come from their product, but a shell game of carbon credits and selling off bitcoin. Tell us again how that is good for the long term bottom line.

    https://www.autoweek.com/news/green-cars/a36266393/tesla-made-more-money-selling-credits-and-bitcoin-than-cars/

    I know that is how they have done it, doesn't mean they will always do it.   I am not concerned with their financial health, and investors wouldn't have put $600 billion into this company if they were concerned either.

    • Haha 2
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Investors get in & out at the snap of their fingers. There's never been a dividend, so buy in, if it rises an appreciable amount; sell out.
    The company's financial health is marginal; that's not why investors bought in. They bought in for the (stock) ride.

    And BTW, I'm sure those that bought in between $600 and $900 are plenty concerned. 

    • Thanks 1
    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Compare to a stock like Exxon-Mobil. It doesn't move much, price-wise (tho right now it's 100% above it's 52-wk low). But it pays a dividend- last one I saw was .87 cents/share. Have 500 shares and Exxon is paying you around $1750/yr. So even if the stock flatlines, your money is making you money. Take it as cash or buy another 28 shares and earn $1850 in dividends next year.  

    Tesla gives you nothing.

    • Agree 2
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    56 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

    I know that is how they have done it, doesn't mean they will always do it.   I am not concerned with their financial health, and investors wouldn't have put $600 billion into this company if they were concerned either.

    So again, ignore the actual facts about product and try to cover with some nonsense about investors who, has Balth clearly stated, were in it for the stock ride. It sure as hell isn’t for the unreliable product that has yet to put them in the black long term. A third of those have already dropped them on a dime because issues the last five months. 
     

    Just a little screenshot about those “non” worried investors and Tesla. 
    49476BD0-1A19-4980-AA87-D0299266290C.thumb.png.a8555f89ee10784da1dae8f1c4f0797b.png

    Edited by surreal1272
    • Agree 2
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    1 hour ago, smk4565 said:

    Well if Tesla runs into financial trouble, they can just get a government bail out like GM and Ford did, and Chrysler did twice.  

    And way to deflect. Fun fact. They’ve been getting bailouts since day one but maybe you missed that part while not coming up with an actual argument. Without those subsidies, they would have went under years ago. 
     

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/cleantechnica.com/2020/08/03/tesla-subsidies-how-much/amp/

     

    Got any other cute and non-sensical remarks you want to make?

    Edited by surreal1272
    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    @smk4565 Oh and Ford didn’t take a bailout like GM and Chrysler did. Furthermore, the last time I checked, Chrysler was under Daimler just prior to their bailout but shhhhh, we don’t talk about the failings of German companies and this isn’t about them or the traditional domestic makes anyway. This is about the house of financial cards known as Tesla. 

    • Agree 2
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    3 hours ago, smk4565 said:

    Well if Tesla runs into financial trouble, they can just get a government bail out like GM and Ford did, and Chrysler did twice.  

    You really need to look at the hard facts of Tesla, Current Valuation to Debt to Equity.

    Tesla Current Valuation vs Debt to Equity | TSLA (macroaxis.com)

    This makes it pretty clear that Tesla has some big hurdles.

    As long as Tesla can keep a crazy high stock price, they have a low debt to Equity, but that does not ensure they can survive long term on the current valuation as markets swing and if they do not start producing a real profit from their products, the Debt to Equity ratio can change to a very large negative.

    image.png

    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    So they're just going to build more & more & more cars at a $6 grand loss on each one??? 9 years of this shit business model and no profits, only driven by the whim of a perpetually-distracted ego-maniacal billionaire?

    He's going to get bored and wander off at some point.

    How long would you do YOUR job if you had to PAY to be there?

    Edited by balthazar
    • Agree 2
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    10 hours ago, smk4565 said:

    I don’t really care if Tesla goes bust or not.  But they aren’t going to go bankrupt or stop selling cars.  It just isn’t going to happen.

    Actually you seem to care an awful lot given the rabid defense of them. Furthermore, if they go bankrupt, it will be exactly because of their cars since that is supposed to be their main business.

    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    If you (almost) never make a profit as a manufacturer, bankruptcy is inevitable. The regular production 'history' of Tesla really begins with the Model S, which came out in 2012

    • Agree 2
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Tesla is not going to go bankrupt. At least not in the 2020s.  In the 2030s...who knows?

    Too many "investors" have poored too many billions into this to just let it fail.  

    However, if Tesla CARS dont overtake the competition in sales market share, then who knows what will happen next. Consumers NEED to BUY your vehicles to STAY IN business...  THAT is just how...business works.

    However, if Tesla cars wont exist, Tesla powertrains and batteries IS a thing and Tesla could provide THAT to OEMs that dont want to invest the billions developing their own tech.  

    Volkswagen Group or GM might not be those that would buy Tesla powertrains and batteries as they have their own technologies...but...  

    Toyota might.   They have fallen behind.

    Honda might.  Honda will be buying GM tech, but having another option like Tesla might benefit Honda...

    Mercedes might also.  Mercedes EV tech is pathetic as of now...

    Keep in mind that VW does outsell Tesla is certain markets NOW.

    Keep in mind that the Ford Mach E also has eroded Tesla market share.

    GM EVs that actually compares to Tesla, like the GMC Hummer EV, well, the Hummer EV has a very very healthy amount of down deposits for one.   Tesla like craze about the Hummer with people... 

     

    • Like 1
    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    2 minutes ago, balthazar said:

    If you (almost) never make a profit as a manufacturer, bankruptcy is inevitable. The regular production 'history' of Tesla really begins with the Model S, which came out in 2012

    Id say with the Roadster 1.0 

    Tesla was considered a legit car company even with just that car and it was just a conversion job.  Elon wanted a legit Tesla EV with a REAL EV platform and that is how the Model S came about, but Tesla as a company starts with the Roadster as the REAL Tesla technology and raison d'etre is the battery tech and electric motor.  

    To this day, Tesla is considered a tech company with their battery tech, motor and software front and center ahead of their car production...

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    12 hours ago, smk4565 said:

    I don’t really care if Tesla goes bust or not.  But they aren’t going to go bankrupt or stop selling cars.  It just isn’t going to happen.

    With out a real profit companies cannot survive for ever and Tesla is having problems. As I stated earlier, Tesla has one of the lowest Net Profits per company around.

    image.png

    $11,000 per employee is pathetic especially when compared to GM.

    image.png

    General Motors Financial Company Inc Net Income per Employee (GM), current and historic results, rankings and more, Quarterly Fundamentals - CSIMarket

    As anyone here with common sense will agree with, the higher the profit per employee, the more stable the company is and the longer that company can stay in business.

    Examples as of today of some of the highest profit makers:

    Profits per employee

    image.png

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    23 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

    Yes, you need to make a profit OR sell technology and/or the company. Bankruptcy isn't inevitable if you're not making a profit. 

    Tell that to early 2000s GM and Chrysler.

    • Haha 2
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    14 minutes ago, surreal1272 said:

    Tell that to early 2000s GM and Chrysler.

    In all honesty...GM's "bankruptcy" was not a conventional one.

    It was a solvency that was restructured.

    Because there actually was revenue streams that were coming in.  Pretty SUBSTANTIAL revenue streams at that.  Its just that a lot of waste and fat had to be trimmed and why a restructure was presented as a solution instead of liquidating the company and dissolving it.

    Tesla on the other hand, is not like GM where there is a healthy revenue stream from actual selling of cars.  

    Tesla does spend billions in factories and their proprietary EV charging network which negates their revenue streams as the revenue coming in just goes directly back into the company. HOWEVER...much data including Sandy Munroe concludes that Tesla's manufacturing of automobiles is very very inefficient.  

    GM did not have that problem.  

    Sales were also there for GM.  (Tesla's market share going forward after 2023-2024 is under scrutiny too) 

    GM's problems were that they had an enormous amount of expenses.  Not even debt.  Their debt load WAS manageable. Banks did not want to loan them money BECAUSE there was an over all (and global) bank meltdown (thanks to greedy American bank mortgage loans etc)...  It was their expenses that really did them in.    

     

    Edited by oldshurst442
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    WARNING BELLS WARNING BELLS

    One of Warren Buffett's market indicators has hit a record 133% and it was this way when the market crashed on the Dot-Com Bubble Burst. This could have huge destructive consequences for companies that do not make a profitable product line like Tesla and other BEVs.

    https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/savingandinvesting/warren-buffetts-favorite-market-indicator-surges-to-a-record-133percent-signaling-global-stocks-are-overvalued-and-at-high-risk-of-crashing/ar-AAL1Smg?li=BBnb7Kz

    image.png

    Additional indicators are showing extreme over value too.

    https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/warren-buffett-indicator-200-percent-stocks-overpriced-market-crash-2021-6-1030486280

    image.png

    This is an outstanding read on why Buffett feels so strongly about specific indicators for where the market is at.

    Warren Buffett On The Stock Market

    https://archive.fortune.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2001/12/10/314691/index.htm

    https://www.benzinga.com/top-stories/20/05/15936592/heres-what-warren-buffett-thinks-about-tesla-and-elon-musk

     

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    2 hours ago, oldshurst442 said:

    In all honesty...GM's "bankruptcy" was not a conventional one.

    I know the fine details but it was still because they weren't making enough profit to keep afloat, a result of putting out $h!ty products for decades. My core point stands.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites




    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • google-news-icon.png



  • Community Hive Community Hive

    Community Hive allows you to follow your favorite communities all in one place.

    Follow on Community Hive
  • google-news-icon.png

  • Subscribe to Cheers & Gears

    Cheers and Gears Logo

    Since 2001 we've brought you real content and honest opinions, not AI-generated stuff with no feeling or opinions influenced by the manufacturers.

    Please consider subscribing. Subscriptions can be as little as $1.75 a month, and a paid subscription drops most ads.*
     

    You can view subscription options here.

    *a very limited number of ads contain special coupon deals for our members and will show

  • Posts

    • I have to say that I am very excited by this potential competitor to the Cadillac EscaladeIQ. Both Full size Luxury SUVs. Interiors Yes I know the Genesis is a concept and the suicide doors and flip chairs will not make it to production, but I do hope those chair designs do as they look very comfy and supportive. I have to say that I really like the exterior styling of the Genesis even more than the Escalade.
    • Yeah, it doesn't seem super space efficient.
    • So three major problems with this car, one, terrible Jellybean external shape, not impressed at all with the style. Second is the buttonless dash having everything via a touch screen and rotary knob, terrible safety issue as your eyes will be off the road more than on trying to find the right option in the right menu. Third is the center pack clearly cuts into valuable leg space based on their own picture. This is a hard pass.
    • Great Masculine shape, really digging the style they did here.
    • First seen at the Shanghai Auto Show (see article: Polestar 4 - The New Breed of Electric SUV Coupe), Polestar brought the Polestar 4 to the New York International Auto Show for North Americans to see in person. Polestar calls the Polestar 4 an "electric SUV 4-door coupe". Outside of that marketing speak, the Polestar 4 is a slightly lifted four-door hatchback about 190 inches in length, or roughly 2 inches shorter than a Toyota Camry.  Built without rear glass, the Polestar 4 makes use of a rear camera for visibility astern. Polestar 4 features a plethora of standard content, including 20-inch 5 V-spoke black diamond cut alloy wheels, panoramic glass roof, adaptive cruise control, 360 parking camera with 3D view, energy saving heat pump, front-illuminated Polestar logo, e-latch doors, power-operated tailgate with soft close, Polestar digital key, wireless phone charging, and 8-way electrical driver seat and 6-way electrical passenger seat. The fastest production car the brand has ever developed to date, Polestar 4 can accomplish a 0-60 mph sprint in 3.7 seconds and in top spec can produce 544 horsepower. Long-range single-motor variants have 272 horsepower and a targeted EPA range of over 300 miles. All long range variants have a 102 kWh battery capable of 200 kW charging on a DC Fast Charger and 11 kW on home level-2 charging. Google built-in is ... built in and includes Google Assistant, Google Maps and Google Play. Polestar continues to offer a leading connected in-car experience. As with all other Polestar cars, regular over-the-air updates allow for new features and improvements to be sent remotely to all vehicles. Pricing starts at $54,900, with orders opening in April for deliveries in the latter half of this year.   View full article
  • Who's Online (See full list)

    • There are no registered users currently online
  • My Clubs

×
×
  • Create New...

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search

Change privacy settings