surreal1272

And let me end this diatribe with this. You talk about what Daimler gave Chrysler, like the LX platform (again, sloppy seconds) like it was such a great thing. Well, as an eight year owner of one of those LX models (Magnum), I would personally like to tell Daimler to go F themselves. Don’t get me wrong. I loved the car overall but the interior was not one of those reasons. Daimler was responsible for the budget of those cars and let the bean counters turn a decent car into a Fisher Price plastic laden nightmare on the inside. That is a fact.

Which was Daimler’s fault since they were the owners. What are you not getting here? Fact is that Chrysler/Dodge/Jeep did BETTER under Fiat ownership than under Daimler. The problem there was Sergio siphoning profits from those groups to fund his steaming piles of junk in Italy. Again, this is a fact, not opinion. Again, the fault there lies with its owners. Who was that btw? Thats’ right. It was Daimler. You are not making as convicting argument here. The lesson here was that a company like Chrysler could not succeed off of platform sloppy seconds like the Crossfire and the 300.

You need to pay attention in class. That was a decade ago. They are making a profit now on cars like the Challenger and Charger while Tesla loses money on their cars. I sure as hell know that Daimler didn’t do a damn thing to help them. In fact, their ownership is what accelerated their bankruptcy but again, shhhhh, we don’t ever speak ill of your German masters. Btw, it’s been common knowledge for the last eight years that Sergio siphoned of the popular profit making domestic brands to fund those piles of $h! from Italy. You know that already so stop trying to play dumb about it just because other folks here don’t worship Elon Musk and his money losing cars.

Are you sure about that? Again, profit.

The exact same thing can be said about the Challenger and Charger. Difference here is that Dodge makes an actual profit from theirs while Tesla does not.

Which goes back to the core point others have made about profit on actual product and not hype. FCA makes money on the Challenger and Charger, hand over fist so why would they change that just because Tesla can go 0-60 faster while costing considerably more coin and being more unreliable? It should be noted that the current Tesla model S is on a now 9 year old platform but shhhh, that's only an issue with the competition.

That does not change Balth’s core point. All I know is that a 4500-5000lb. Tesla has its own handling challenges, which is something the resident Tesla cheerleader here seems to forget.

I have it too and that’s not how that works. You missed the point by a damn mile, once again. And his selling of his homes has zero to do with carbon footprint reduction. A direct quote from an article about his house sales. “Musk has repeatedly said he plans to sell most of his possessions, including all his houses, to fund a colony on Mars. He has said he wants to send 1 million people to Mars by 2050.” Maybe you need to actually educate yourself about the man before trying to worship him and his supposed wealth.

Because the so called “genius” is selling his homes to fund colonization of Mars. If he is so damn rich, as SMK claims a thousand times here, why the need to sell some homes to fund his pet projects? His wealth is beyond smoke and mirrors if you ask me. His only claim to any wealth has basically been market manipulation, which can be construed as illegal in some sectors.

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.

Tell that to early 2000s GM and Chrysler.

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.

You have totally misread what I’ve said apparently. I’m talking about people not cars. Robert covered it. Eventually, that demand simply ages out. And both of those idiots fall under my same point about suckers. Something about a fool and their money.

It’s no different than the idiots who spend $50K to jack up and put useless lights all around a pick up that already cost them $50K. There is always a market for suckers and their money. Thought you knew that. I was comparing what I said to your statement about folks preferring the tactile feel and such. Those same kind of folks are dwindling in numbers much like folks who drive a stick shift.

That was from a study dating back to 2019 (from 2015-2019 EV owners) which was mostly due to people not doing a little research and making sure that had viable charging options at home (like folks in rental homes, condos, or apartments). Much has changed on that front since then. https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/ev-owners-switch-gas-power-study/ But much like the number of folks who grow up knowing how to drive a stick, that number is going down every year. The younger generations know less and less to what you are referring and twenty years form now, hardly any will grow up knowing that.

@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.

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.