surreal1272

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?

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.

@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/

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/ 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.

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

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.

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.

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.

I think this one just needs to be put down lol.

I would sincerely hope the hell so. And again, those KBB numbers are for DAIMLER. What are you not getting here?

But you don’t buy into marketing remember?

Only goes to show that lifted trucks are nothing but "chick trucks" lol!

(Remembers living in Arizona for twelve years and seeing all those "chicks" driving useless jacked up/lifted Pick Ups") In other words, it shouldn't matter if it is a "chick" truck. Just skip the fact that Fords best selling full size pick up comes with a bed that is a whole foot longer than the much smaller Maverick. The 10 speed is for RWD applications I believe. The 8 speed should be fine.

At least they had sense enough to use the 8 speed for the AWD model.

Saw the MT articles on it. Great starting price point but I really wish they had not slapped a CVT in there for the hybrid.

Again, it’s just under $60K, not $64,900. You even used those same vans as an excuse why it was lower than Cadillac. Your figure was for Daimler.

How many times does this have to be explained to you? Mercedes numbers vs Cadillac is misleading as Mercedes has to cover a larger gamut of vehicles from top to bottom, than Cadillac. GM has Chevrolet (The Vette anyway) and to some extent Buick to compete with certain vehicles from Mercedes. And David is just playing your game when it comes to what to count and not what to count, so maybe you ought to sit that one out lol. It wasn't when you thought Mercedes had the better ATP because you decided to count in ALL of Daimler with that figure. Dollars and Euros David lol. Those numbers are in Euros.

No no and no. Your bar moving does not apply here. Fact is that their ATP is LOWER than Cadillac and as it has been pointed out, even the Daimler figure is skewed because they include their higher priced heavy truck division. It’s really that simple so just stop the nonsense already. If you honestly feel like Mercedes is so damn great, then their ATP would not bother you to the point that you make endless excuses for it. No. Here is what you said that led to my response about the vans so don’t try and twist my words when you are missing proper context here. “Sorry but since you stated already that Tesla was a "luxury" brand, you don't get to pad Mercedes numbers in with their OBVIOUS NON-LUXURY vans. Try again.” And you’re the one who doesn’t want to count them in Mercedes ATP. You can not have this both ways. If you want to count them in their passenger cars sales, then you have to accept the fact that they have a lower ATP than Cadillac. Again, it’s really that simple. Besides, this entire diatribe of yours started with Tesla and their ATP, which like Mercedes, is lower than Cadillacs despite having more $100K models available for sale than Cadillac. Basically, you have nothing but excuses instead of just dealing those simple facts.

So now that you realized that you were wrong about the ATPs, you’re going to make excuses about Benz having to sell vans and thus skewing their numbers? LMAO! The Metris at the same price as the A-Class? That takes a big ole dump on your dropped average claim unless you want to also make the case that their cheap entry line FWD A-Class is also skewing the average. Guess it never occurred to you that you already made these two claims (at one time or another): 1.) Cadillac has three models starting in the 30s. And 2.) Cadillac also has only one model crossing the $100K threshold while Benz has at least five starting above that. That does not help your ATP excuse at all. Just stop it already with the ridiculous excuses. Tesla is still in the hole financially and have been since day one. They are not that fine.

Not The Same Thing And you’d do well to understand the difference between an E-Commerce company and a car company. You could not make a worse apples to oranges comparison.

That should read “feature”, not “gesture”. Thanks again autocorrect. You do get that those issues are not a fault of Ford or GM but more a result of a quick bounce back economy that is outpacing the supply of certain components, which faaaar different than the host issues with Tesla right? Please tell me you’re not conflating the two.

Again, skewing numbers. By brand, Cadillac has a higher ATP than Benz which is actually pretty impressive since, as you’ve stated numerous times on this site, Benz has far more $100K+ models available for sale. You can’t have it both ways, wanting individual numbers for specific cars while skipping brand ATPs to point out irrelevant corporate numbers. Umm, if those people think Tesla makes a better car then they need to be better informed on their reliability and constant gesture cutting while ever increasing their prices for no damn reason. Stop making excuses and delving into obvious opinions and review the actual facts that have been presented to you here. Try it sometime.

That’s because Mercedes has the much cheaper FWD A Class to fill that slot (which is $1K cheaper than the cheapest Cadillac CT4). Way to miss the point entirely.

Again, just throwing out numbers that ignore facts. Teslas sales are up due to adding more models not because of demand for prior existing models and you should understand the difference there. Comparing them to companies like Ford is equally ignorant of the facts. Up until the Mach-E, Ford didn't even compete with Tesla, not even cross shopped. However, since they do have the E-Mach, it makes the Y look like the hastily put together junk that it is and in places like Norway, where EVs ARE the dominant powertrain of choice, the Ford is beating Tesla. Now we get to soon the Lightning in the US show Tesla how it's done when it comes to pick ups (again, more than a century building the damn things). As far as Teslas "growth, that's been real easy to do when there were NO other real players in the EV market and again, a gain due to added models. Get back to me on that "growth" in about 2-3 years and everyone else is playing the same EV game as Tesla.