“Good at raising money” = scam. The valuation is based of fraudulent promises, just like Musk’s other scam, TSLA.

labcomputer a day ago | parent | next [-]

> just like Musk’s other scam, TSLA

Just so we're clear: You think that the only company selling EVs in the USA for a net profit is a scam?

What do you call Rivian, Lucid, Fisker, Bolinger, Lordstown, Slate, and Aptera?

Slate has been conspicuously silent about orders since the day after launch. Lucid is on the brink of bankruptcy. Fisker has gone bankrupt... twice. Lordstown no longer exists (with assets purchased for pennies on the dollar by their former CEO). Aptera has reorganized more times than I can count, and has been planning to release their product any day now for over 10 years!

Rivian actually lost a lawsuit this year for misleading investors about the potential profitability of their product leading up to IPO. An IPO which raised more money in one fell swoop than all the external funding Tesla had in their entire existence. By your own metric, is Rivian not a bigger scam than Tesla?

By the way, a bad fact for Rivian in that case was that they sexually harassed a female exec, who turned around and revealed (in her own lawsuit against them, just weeks before IPO) that the expected ASP of the R1 would be less than the production cost. Oops.

And, somehow, Tesla is the problem. Yea, that makes sense.

▲

lorecore a day ago | parent [-]

A CEO making knowingly false forward looking statements is fraud, and it’s illegal.

▲

infecto 4 hours ago | parent [-]

Which in all cases is very hard to prove. Executives make extremely bullish statements quite often. We are just cherry picking here.

	▲	lorecore 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		We are highlighting the most egregious fraudulent claims in market history. Musk makes Enron look like IBM.

▲

infecto a day ago | parent | prev [-]

Definitely not and I think those types of opinions erode any rational discussion. It’s part of the problem with these discussions. There are extreme views that take a position that is not defendable but follow the hive mind for whatever side they are on.

I like to think in shades of gray and I am somewhere in the middle. Tesla? Amazing product, crazy valuation. SpaceX, some of the underlying products are indeed very valuable but the valuation is again out of this world, no pun intended. The market can stay irrational a lot longer than I can stay solvent. Would never take a short against Elon but I also would never invest into his businesses.

▲

root_axis a day ago | parent | next [-]

The term scam is definitely inflammatory, but I think the sentiment is fair considering the unprecedented and extreme overvaluation and the unrealistic justification for it. It's even worse when you consider Elon's consistent track record of over-promising and under-delivering. Taken together with Elon's role in gutting regulations and coordinating to change listing rules, it's totally fair to characterize what's going on as intentional dishonesty for profit - i.e. a scam.

▲

lorecore a day ago | parent | prev [-]

Musk literally said SpaceX would be worth more than all of planet earth. That’s fraud.

▲

labcomputer a day ago | parent | next [-]

Forward-looking statements (even unrealistic ones) are not fraud. If that's your standard for fraud, then literally every public company is a fraud.

	▲	lorecore a day ago \| parent [-]
		Yes, making knowingly false forward looking statements is fraud.

▲

infecto a day ago | parent | prev [-]

You’re moving the goal post in your argument. First it’s being good at raising money is a scam. Now you are pointing out his incredibly foolish claims. No disagreement, it’s an absurd statement. I don’t know if it classifies as fraud.

	▲	lorecore a day ago \| parent [-]
		I’m not moving the goalposts. I said: “The valuation is based of fraudulent promises, just like Musk’s other scam, TSLA.” and that’s 100% factual.