Remix.run Logo
sgjohnson 9 hours ago

Tesla will become a case study on how to completely waste the first-mover advantage.

For many people, the very term EV itself is still ubiquitous to Tesla.

And somehow Tesla is still worth more than every other non-Chinese automaker combined. $1.5T.

GM? $80B. Stellantis? $40B. Toyota? $280B. Mercedes-Benz? $60B. BMW? $55B. Volkswagen Group? Also $55B.

I’m sure I’ve missed plenty of others, but I could miss some 18 $50B automakers, and Tesla would still be worth more than all of them combined.

If Tesla was valued fairly, it would probably be at the tune of $5B. But I’ll never bet against it, because the markets can remain irrational for longer than I can remain solvent. And for some unbeknownst to me reason, the markets value Tesla as a hot tech company, not a 3rd rate automaker, which is what it actually is.

And to add insult to injury, even GM Super Cruise is widely renowned as better and safer than Tesla’s current “FSD”.

gwbas1c 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> And to add insult to injury, even GM Super Cruise is widely renowned as better and safer than Tesla’s current “FSD”.

My Huyndai's Autopilot equivalent (I don't even know what they call it) is better than the enhanced Autopilot in the Model 3 that I traded in. It actually changes lanes when I put on the blinker, instead of only changing lanes 70% of the time, and the other time just sitting with the blinker on and a clear lane.

not_ai 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I did not know this and explains why I see so many teslas with their blinkers on and not maneuvering despite having ample room and time. Ultimately this behavior makes them unsafe for their occupants as well as others around them.

Cars only work because we can predict driver behavior, if they break that prediction that’s when bad things are likely to happen…

Lately I’ve started to ignore Tesla blinker.

smotched 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Autopilot doesnt turn on the turn signal or change lanes, what you are dealing with is humans.

gwbas1c 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Enchanced autopilot and self-driving do.

philistine 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Most probably because it has a radar that the Tesla lacks. That means your car has two sources of truth and can very efficiently and quickly make an informed decision about whether or not there's anything in the way.

hbarka 3 hours ago | parent [-]

My Model 3 has radar. It’s no longer functional and just a useless appendage. Until 2020-21 all Tesla had radar but Musk directed Tesla to disable the radar from the software stack, nerfing this hardware on tens of thousands of cars. Why? Because he staked on camera-only and to find out there’s still radar fusion would be against that. The real truth is probably they were derisking the part cost (during Covid) and the development timeline to improve the radar integration (after dangerous false braking incidents). It was wonderful when it worked, especially the time-of-flight ability to sense a decelerating car ahead of the car ahead of the one in front of you. When it didn’t work the Navy Seal guy driving and watching a video was the first statistic.

The real Tesla engineers must be in all kinds of frustrations getting whipsawed by their chief engineer-designer-physicist-scientist-government economist-savant but probably the stock options assuage that.

Lastly Tesla still doesn’t have real birds-eye view / 360 surround view for parking. It’s year 2026 and even cheaper cars have this.

gwbas1c 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I don't think my 2018 Model 3 with enhanced autopilot ever used it radar for lane changes. As I noted above, it would just drive with the blinker on and a clear lane.

groos 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

My 8 yo M3 has radar and it still is active since the yellow radar symbols light up when passing by obstacles. It's also used to figure out obstacles in the front and back and if disabled, the relatively poor cameras on my car would not be able to figure out the distance to the next car in the front.

hbarka 2 hours ago | parent [-]

That’s your ultrasonic sensors. The millimeter-wave-radar was front only and designed for far focusing out front.

noboostforyou 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Kia Telluride here but I assume it's the same underlying system as Hyundai - I can attest that it's very good (and doesn't cost anything extra like Tesla charges lol) which makes sense considering they have the majority stake in Boston Dynamics since a few years ago.

gkfasdfasdf an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

Tesla FSD will change lanes when you use the blinker. It will also accelerate and remain engaged if you press the pedal, e.g. if you want to coax it forward at an intersection.

Traster 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I think you're totally wrong on this. Tesla didn't waste the first mover advantage. They benefitted from it whilst it existed, but Electric vehicles turned into a commodity, which was entirely expected and there's no moat.

You've explained yourself why it would be untenable for Musk to pursue becoming the biggest car manufacturer in the world - if he succeeded in that goal... he would have succeded in shrinking the value of the company significantly.

It's pure logic that Tesla has to pursue bets that would justify billion dollar valuations and being a car company isn't that.

jordanb 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Tesla's original "secret plan" (published on their website) was to become a commodity car manufacturer faster than electric cars became a commodity. Such that the other manufacturers would find them selling obsolete vehicles and Tesla just becomes the new General Motors.

This was the justification for their stock price for quite a few years: "It's logical that Tesla is worth more than all other automakers combined because it will soon be the only automaker."

Then in 2022 Elon basically admitted that they couldn't win on production and had to continue to win on technology and they'd do that with self driving. [https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-tesla-worth-basica...]

But now Tesla is way behind on self driving (which was oversold by the whole industry tbh). So what's their new plan? Now they're no longer a car company and will make robots!

misiti3780 4 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

way behind compared to whom ?

Deklomalo 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

[dead]

sgjohnson 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> It's pure logic that Tesla has to pursue bets that would justify billion dollar valuations and being a car company isn't that.

But it's make-believe. Tesla is a car manufacturer. They haven't shipped anything else other than cars. And they even suck at making cars these days. Tesla Semi? All but dead. The new roadster? Also dead. Full Self Driving? Doesn't exist. Robotaxis? Even if they got them to work, at this point the brand is too toxic for widespread adoption of those.

They could have persisted at being a disruptive car manufacturer and still held a several hundred billion dollar valuation. Now they are a very mediocre car manufacturer, with their only actual success being conning everyone into believing that they are a bleeding-edge tech company so their $1.5Bn valuation seems justified.

usaphp 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> And they even suck at making cars these days

Aren’t model Y and model 3 considered the best cars in their class by most motor journalists?

Arainach 3 hours ago | parent [-]

No, not by a long shot, unless you define "class" so tightly as to only include those vehicles and no competitors.

dannyfritz07 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

A quick search verified they also manufactured batteries, solar modules, and solar shingles.

gamerdonkey 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Ford Motor Company manufactured charcoal, but in the end it stayed a car company.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingsford_(charcoal)#History

testing22321 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I know it’s popular to hate on Elon and therefore Tesla, but you need to be accurate when doing so. They’re still chipping away.

> Tesla Semi?All but dead.

They’ve been running a pilot all this time, and the factory in Nevada to mass produce them is on schedule. Production ramp is second half of this year. The factory is ginormous.

> The new roadster? Also dead.

Elon said yesterday the unveil is in April “hopefully”

> Full Self Driving? Doesn't exist. Robotaxis?

Cars are driving passengers around Austin now with nobody in either front seat.

It takes automakers almost a decade to bring a new vehicle online, Elon just does it all publicly while everyone else doesn’t take the wraps off until the final 6 months.

Obviously everything is way behind elons hype timelines, but I do still think it’s all coming.

SR2Z 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> Cars are driving passengers around Austin now with nobody in either front seat.

This is a good example of Tesla being sketchy: https://electrek.co/2026/01/28/teslas-unsupervised-robotaxis...

Musk made the announcement before earnings, put a few cars on the road, and now has pulled them all back because the earnings report is out.

This is a little more than doing it publicly - remember, Musk has been saying FSD will be functional every year for more than a decade.

kjs3 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

They’ve been running a pilot all this time

So did Nikola.

Elon said yesterday the unveil is in April “hopefully”

Who could possibly argue with that.

Obviously everything is way behind elons hype timelines, but I do still think it’s all coming.

At least you've identified it for what it is.

alistairSH 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Cars are driving passengers around Austin now with nobody in either front seat.

Unless the reporting was wrong, they've moved the supervisor to a chase car. The hobo-taxi still isn't operating on its own.

Deklomalo 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

[dead]

breve 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Why is making humanoid robots a moat? Other companies have been making robots for longer, humanoid and otherwise, and doing it better.

Has Optimus signed up for any sports yet: https://edition.cnn.com/2026/01/02/china/china-humanoid-robo...

Is Optimus close to what Boston Dynamics is doing with Atlas: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YIhzUnvi7Fw

dstroot an hour ago | parent | next [-]

Anyone who owns a tesla vehicle with "full self driving" is probably chuckling to themselves about Tesla ever making useful general purpose robots any time soon. Disclaimer, I own two tesla's with FSD and it's far from "full" or "self". I am very sceptical of robotaxis unless they have the appropriate sensors & SW (e.g. Waymo) which Elon has not done.

Finally, I know lots of people who own cars, but none who own robots. Many friends will not have Alexa in their homes due to privacy concerns. How many people will trust Elon to have a robot in their homes and assume he's being benign and safe with your personal data?

SideburnsOfDoom 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> Why is making humanoid robots a moat?

It really isn't. (1)

Also, what's the first billion dollar market for humanoid robots? Industry? "lights-out manufacturing" exists already, and doesn't require humanoid robots.

Hyundai and BYD (among others) say they're going to put humanoid robots in their factories (2). They won't be Tesla robots. Is this really such a huge use?

1)https://www.topgear.com/car-news/tech/here-are-nine-humanoid...

2) https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvgjm5x54ldo

edmundsauto 2 hours ago | parent [-]

I want my laundry robot!

SideburnsOfDoom 33 minutes ago | parent [-]

Is that a billion dollar market, is it within reach, and does it require a humanoid? And if so, will any 1 company have a lock on it?

jcranmer 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Brand value is definitely a moat. Not the deepest of moats, but it is a moat nonetheless.

> It's pure logic that Tesla has to pursue bets that would justify billion dollar valuations and being a car company isn't that.

Tesla is valued as if it is a tech company with a car business as a side gig. Its balance sheet is a car business, and I'm not even sure it spends enough on tech to have tech qualify as a side gig. And the other tech avenues it has been pursuing (autonomous vehicles, humanoid robots) are areas that other people have been doing for better and longer. Hell, Honda had autonomous (not tele-operated) humanoid robots working 20 years ago.

To be honest, at this point, I mostly consider the other bets that Tesla is pursing are just passion projects to keep the stock price artificially high. Were Tesla more realistically valued, it would lose probably 90% or more of its value, and Musk would be a much poorer man.

sosomoxie 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Pure logic would dictate that Tesla has a market cap of around $5B. It's actually fraudulent that it's not, and for some reason the SEC allows Musk to lie on every earnings call without repercussion.

FuriouslyAdrift 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Seems low on a company that is profitable and consistantly has around a $100B a year in revenue with only $13B in debt...

dmbche 3 hours ago | parent [-]

more like 12b in 2022 and less every years since down 30% in 2025

3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]
[deleted]
elzbardico 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Welcome to 2026:

Companies routinely, exaggerate, obfuscate and mystify investors. Most of investors don't care. The SEC is a joke.

freakynit 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Everything tends toward commodification in a hyper-competitive, hyper-connected world. The only variable is time... and this "time" keeps shrinking.

As commodification accelerates, consolidation follows. In the current landscape, where private capital and state power are deeply entangled under the banner of national security, this consolidation no longer stays economic. It becomes geopolitical.

The end result... it translates to not just corporate monopolies, but geo-monopolies... enforced not by markets alone, but by coercion, conflict, and control over resources.

arbor_day 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It's not that EVs are a commodity. Competition and speculative production capacity buildouts combined with lower than expected consumer demand made the market less profitable.

JumpinJack_Cash 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> > It's pure logic that Tesla has to pursue bets that would justify billion dollar valuations and being a car company isn't that.

You can pursue everything with words, even you can pursue Sydney Sweeney but then you have to show the receipts.

The receipts of Tesla (Factories, lines of production, expertise of people hired, 25 years of history...) are one of car company.

But of course, it's all narrative so people will keep outbidding each other to own a piece of this company.

The financialization of hope, that's what it is.

outside1234 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Tesla's moat is constantly moving to the next thing and claiming it has a moat before moving on to the next thing.

Elon's business model is moving from one government subsidized thing to the next (see SpaceX now bribing for tax dollars to go to Mars).

Deklomalo 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

[dead]

epolanski 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Bingo.

gkfasdfasdf 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> And to add insult to injury, even GM Super Cruise is widely renowned as better and safer than Tesla’s current “FSD”.

Do you have any sources for that claim? I can attest that current iteration of FSD is very, very good, and very likely is a safer driver than I am. At least one major insurance company agrees [0]. I don't have any experience with Super Cruise though.

[0] - https://www.lemonade.com/fsd

root_axis 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> Do you have any sources for that claim? I can attest that current iteration of FSD is very, very good, and very likely is a safer driver than I am.

That's a damning statement about your driving skills, and probably not true or you'd have had your license revoked by now. I've had FSD for five years, and even today it regularly makes dangerous mistakes. For example, left turns and roundabouts are the equivalent of Russian roulette, but just last week my FSD started driving through a red light because it interpreted a green left-arrow as a sign that it could proceed forward.

If you need to do 50 miles on the interstate it's pretty solid though.

SOLAR_FIELDS 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> If you need to do 50 miles on the interstate it's pretty solid though.

So L2 is great, the issue is calling L2 "Full Self Driving"

IncreasePosts 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

If your Tesla is 5 years old aren't you getting a degraded FSD model due to weak hardware?

root_axis 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I took it in for a HW update in 2023. I do believe there is an even newer hardware stack since then, but as far as I'm aware the HW doesn't impact the supported capabilities.

iknowstuff 16 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

You’re wrong. Your fsd12 is a very different beast from the current fsd14, so stop talking authoritatively about the latest fsd.

gkfasdfasdf 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Congrats on the upgrade - what exactly did they upgrade and what version of FSD are you running? Hardware and software definitely matters. My FSD experience applies to 2026 Model Y, latest FSD (v14.x).

pibaker 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

"The computer is not beefy enough" is not an acceptable excuse for blowing a red. If your model cannot comply with the most basic law of traffic, it should not be sold to consumers as "full self driving."

memish 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Do you think your anecdote is more likely to be true than an insurance company putting its money where its mouth is?

"Tesla Full Self-Driving is twice as safe, so Lemonade takes 50% off every mile driven with FSD."

root_axis 2 hours ago | parent [-]

I don't know anything about Lemonade, so I can't comment on the logic behind that business strategy, but by definition all the dangerous behavior of FSD is excluded from the analysis since you have to shut it off to avoid the danger.

Beyond that, the effect size of my anecdotes assures me that it is not safer than a human driver. It's just obvious.

enragedcacti 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Lemonade doesn't support your claim that FSD is a safer driver than you are. It just says that, most charitably, they believe FSD and a human operator are safer than just a human operator (The co-founder said exactly this to Reuters [0]). Further, the program has only been around for a week and their marketing copy specifically cites "Tesla's data" as the source for the 50% reduction rather than any sort of independent analysis.

https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/lemona...

digiown 2 hours ago | parent [-]

They are putting their money behind their words, unless there is some backroom deal we don't know about. If a human operator + FSD is twice safer than human operator alone, then FSD is still a large safety improvement. Considering how human operators behave with these systems, I'd also wager having the human operator (many don't even look at the road!) makes only a small difference.

enragedcacti an hour ago | parent [-]

> They are putting their money behind their words, unless there is some backroom deal we don't know about.

Their product is dynamically priced and individualized, and there is no guarantee of what the base rate will be. I don't see any reason they can't keep offering the 50% discount and then adjust the base rates to reverse engineer a sustainable price regardless of FSDs real safety.

> Considering how human operators behave with these systems, I'd also wager having the human operator (many don't even look at the road!) makes only a small difference.

Lemonade will likely be getting driver monitoring telemetry and calculating rates accordingly, but in either case I'm convinced that we are still on the left hand side of the Valley of Degraded Supervision [0]. Operators may not pay full attention at all times but they likely still have pretty good heuristics for what situations are difficult for FSD and adjust their monitoring behavior accordingly.

Tesla could of course release detailed crash and disengagement data to prove FSD safety. That they do not is itself a form of evidence, and in lieu of that we have to rely on crowdsourced data which says FSD 14.x still has a very long way to go to be safer than the average driver [1].

[0] https://www.eetimes.com/disengagements-wrong-metric-for-av-t...

[1] https://teslafsdtracker.com/Main

xnx 26 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> At least one major insurance company agrees

Lemonade has <1% market share

sjsdaiuasgdia 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> At least one major insurance company agrees

You mean the insurance company that has only existed for 10 years and I never heard of before this Tesla tie-in marketing gimmick?

antiframe 43 minutes ago | parent [-]

Also an insurance company that A.M. Best rates B+. Which is fine, but when buying insurance I want to make sure that my company can weather major catastrophes.

vladms 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> If Tesla was valued fairly

I think it's a wrong mental model to think of stock market value as "fair" or "unfair" (or maybe it's just me thinking of "unfair" when I see the word "fair").

My impression is that if Tesla would be valued based on quantifiable things it would be much much lower (production costs, competition, revenues, potential, etc.). Of course, you shouldn't value something only based on quantifiable things, but in Tesla the "wishful thinking" part seems to be much larger than for others.

johnmaguire 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I assume OP meant something closer to "fair market value" than "fair vs. unfair." Tesla is not priced according to its underlying assets or technical analysis (e.g. P/E ratio), but solely based on hype/sentiment.

Interestingly, retail investors and company insiders collectively own more of Tesla than institutional investors.

marcusverus 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Fair market value: the price at which a thing would change hands between a willing and informed buyer and seller.

A company's market cap is, by definition, its fair market value.

> Tesla is not priced according to its underlying assets or technical analysis (e.g. P/E ratio), but solely based on hype/sentiment.

You're right that it's not priced according to underlying assets, but it doesn't follow that it is priced on vibes. Its price is based on potential future earnings; the expectation that Elon can pull off his plans for a robotaxi fleet or building an Optimus robot that might unlock the massive demand for household and/or general use commercial robots. Both offer the prospect of being the first mover into markets which could be worth trillions. It's speculation, sure, but not mere "vibes". The company is also led by a man who has made and delivered on massive, seemingly impossible promises, which adds credibility to the idea that Tesla might actually bring these markets into existence.

3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]
[deleted]
therealdkz 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

[dead]

misiti3780 5 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I was with you until you compared super cruise to FSD. not even comparable

Multiplayer 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

GM Supercruise on my 2024 Silverado RST is a joke compared to Tesla FSD. It's not even remotely comparable. Supercruise only works on freeways/highways, does not understand ANY navigation. It's a better cruise control, that's about it. I own 2 Tesla model S of different vintages and FSD is a completely different animal. My 2017 model s can navigate from my house to, well, anywhere, with no intervention. I have been very disappointed in how long it took Tesla to get here based on the promises they made 10(!) years ago, but they are there now. Even a year ago FSD used to scare me frequently and cause me to disengage but that never happens now.

asah 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

SpaceX will acquire Tesla and save the shareholders, just like Tesla acquired SolarCity.

extraduder_ire 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Can they afford to do that? I would assume it would be the other way around unless the valuation of either/both changes drastically.

XAI acquiring twitter is probably a better recent example than solarcity.

dstroot 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

And Elon canceled the S and X models but not the Cybertruck? C’mon…

hnburnsy 12 minutes ago | parent [-]

I wonder if they reconfigure it and tone down the look to something more traditional.

memish 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

1. Tesla has $40B in cash and is profitable. To say it's worth $5B is beyond absurd.

2. The market determines what is a fair value, not rando haters on the internet. Even professional Wall Street consensus is that it's fair value at approximately $1.2T market cap.

rkagerer an hour ago | parent [-]

$40B in cash/equivalents, minus some $13-20B in debt (depending what source you pick).

hnburnsy 11 minutes ago | parent [-]

Plus assets

esseph 7 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

[delayed]

jmyeet 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> Tesla will become a case study on how to completely waste the first-mover advantage.

It's a study in many things.

Tesla only exists because of the transfer of wealth from the government. DOE loans, EV tax credits and other incentives are the difference between existing and not existing.

That's not necessarily bad. The problem is the government really gets nothing for their money. Look at how China incubates their businesses.

As an example, imagine where we'd be if the government had insisted on standardized charging infrastructure instead of Tesla's originally proprietary Supercharger network.

> If Tesla was valued fairly, it would probably be at the tune of $5B.

I could see it as high as $100B but not $1.5T. Not even close.

And I, too, would never bet against it. Nothing fundamental is behind Tesla's valuation. It's just gambling.

alex1138 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

That valuation is sure interesting considering the people killed in crashes from Tesla's self-driving thing

Edit: I love making legitimate points and instantly accruing downvotes from 'Valley VC types. Look yourself in the mirror.

jlongr 4 hours ago | parent [-]

Oh their self-driving thing...Full* "Self" Driving (supervised)(see notes)(not liable for anything)

alex1138 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Sorry, I didn't remember what it was called. FSD, I think

outside1234 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

We are in a time when people are in cults. Trump is a cult. Elon is a cult. Tesla is a cult.

Cults do not operate on logic, but almost always result in a mass casualty event of some sort.

notabee 3 hours ago | parent [-]

It's baked into the foundations of the U.S. While perhaps not a cult as we describe it today, even the first puritans that settled here were considered extremists not welcome in their home countries. For such a young country, we have always had a burgeoning industry in upstart cults, grifts, and religions (but I repeat myself).

jacquesm 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Tesla benefited from tax payer subsidies.

WarmWash 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Trust me, I hate Tesla and Elon as much as the next naysayer

But just to keep the story straight

Tesla received ~$3 billion in subsidies.

When Elon exercised his Tesla options in 2021, he paid $11 billion in taxes on it.

By all accounts those subsidies were an incredibly good use of taxpayer money, and similar subsidies should keep being handed out, even if the byproduct is another big troll on twitter.

jordanb 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Dunno where that $3 billion comes from; tesla made 11 billion in regulatory credits alone: https://insideevs.com/news/767939/tesla-regulatory-credit-11...

WarmWash 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Perhaps you are confused, the regulatory credits were sold by Tesla to other car makers so they could meet their emissions requirements. That $11 billion came from other automakers, not taxpayers.

jordanb 4 hours ago | parent [-]

So you're saying Tesla made $3 billion directly from taxpayers and another $11 billion in cash transfers from their competitors required by the government?

WarmWash 3 hours ago | parent [-]

I'm not saying that, it's strictly true.

Tesla was given $3 billion in government subsidies.

It made $11 billion selling regulatory credits created by government regulation.

I'm not interested in getting bogged down in how actually government regulation is the same thing as subsidy even though the taxpayer doesn't foot the bill (but does collect the tax on the backend of it.) There is a good reason why subsidy and regulation are not the same interchangeable word. I suppose that without glasses of nuance/understanding they blur together and look the same (government action -> money for someone), but lets wear glasses here.

matthewdgreen 26 minutes ago | parent [-]

The original argument was that Tesla made a substantial amount of its revenue from subsidization, i.e., government mandated payments extracting money from one set of people to fund another. Subsidies can entail direct taxation, followed by payment to a company. Alternatively, they revolve around regulatory schemes that mandate transfer payments from one group (in this case, ICE car manufacturers and their customers) to another (EV manufacturers.) Although the mechanism is slightly different, they're both subsidies. To be clear: I have no problem with these subsidies! Just think your pedantry is misfiring.

everfrustrated 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

If you even read the article you linked, you'd be aware the source of the money there is from other vehicle manufacturers to Tesla not from govt/tax payers.

whatshisface 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Other vehicle manufactuers are taxpayers...

DennisP 3 hours ago | parent [-]

So are Tesla's customers but that doesn't mean car sales are subsidies.

dpkirchner 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

How should we calculate the enormous subsidy they received through high tariffs against their competitors?

terminalbraid 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> Trust me, I hate Tesla and Elon as much as the next naysayer

But then you go to defend them as if it were something you're obligated to do. I think you demonstrably do not hate Tesla and Elon as much as the next naysayer.

WarmWash 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

No I hate disinformation that makes people on my side look uninformed and stupid.

On a deeper level, I hate bandwagons because they are invariably full of idiotic parrots.

Elon has done a enough demonstrably stupid and bad shit that we don't need to play deception to drum up resistance. Especially when that deception plays on "government subsides in the green sector have been a colossal waste of money".

IncreasePosts 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I call this the 12 fingered hitler, frequently seen on reddit.

It goes like this:

Person A makes up some unsupported fact about a despised figure. For example, "Hitler had 12 fingers".

Person B comes in and says "I think Hitler just had 10 fingers like normal"

And then person A or some other person responds "holy shit dude, I can't believe you're defending Hitler!"

WarmWash 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Exactly

And then neo nazis go around telling susceptible people "Look, Hitler's detractors think he had 12 fingers, just look at any picture of him, he clearly only has 10. You're gonna trust people that stupid to be honest about him? To know anything about him?"

Disinformation feels good in the moment, but is immensely damaging overall. Even the people who believed he had 12 fingers will feel betrayed and question everything else when they one day learn he actually had 10.

andruby 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

That's true for a lot of (most?) car manufacturers?

I fully agree that TSLA is madly overpriced as a car company, and too hyped as any other type of company.

ben_w 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

An important question is therefore: why didn't anyone else?

4 hours ago | parent | next [-]
[deleted]
relaxing 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Of course they did.