| ▲ | pjc50 9 hours ago |
| I think they have a future as a "normal" car company, but in order to do that they'd have to manage to deliver a new "normal car" model at some point, and accept normal stock prices. That EV market share direction in the US, though .. really bad compared to non-petrostates (except Norway) |
|
| ▲ | mbreese 9 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| They’ve never been a normal car company. And that’s the problem. They don’t do a good job at the car company part. They make nice cars, but the company part has issues. Quick example… I was very happy to drive a model 3 for many years. But the constant changes in price of their new cars destroyed any resale value mine had. Every time Tesla was having a bad quarter, the value of my car dropped. That’s not the way to get me to buy another one. There are certainly other areas where they could improve too. But my point being - they’ve never been all that good at (or interested in) what it takes to drive long term success in selling cars. It’s just too long of a time horizon for them. |
| |
| ▲ | iknowstuff 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | pretty sure they average out to holding their value better or at worst in line with other brands | |
| ▲ | sergiotapia 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I never understood why people care about "resale value" of a car. I buy a car to drive it until it's done. I don't buy a gaming PC and worry about resale value, or a polo, or sneakers, or a nice mop. I buy stuff to use it. | | |
| ▲ | bunderbunder 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I don’t know that you have to agree with typical consumer behavior to accept it as a reality, though. And resale value does matter to people who don’t drive cars into the ground, because trade-in value affects your purchasing power when you do decide to get a new one. And even if you do keep cars indefinitely, it can still be an important consideration because it affects how things work out when you need to make an insurance claim. It means your car is both more likely to be declared a total loss and more likely to be worth less than what you still owe for it when it does get totaled. | |
| ▲ | solyin 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Because if you desperately need cash, you can trade in the $80,000 luxury suv for a $20,000 subcompact, and use that cash to pay rent and for food. It's a depreciating asset and sometimes a money sink, sure, but if you live somewhere you need a car anyway, some people choose the more expensive ones. | | |
| ▲ | ychnd 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | That's... Financially irresponsible. You build your cushion in non-depreciating assets. If you are approaching situation where you would desperately need cash, you prepare for in some way different from buying luxurious suvs. |
| |
| ▲ | mbreese 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I get your point. But look at this from Tesla’s point of view. Why should they care? They will want to sell as many cars as possible. If they sell me a car, that’s just one sale. However, every marketing book will tell you that it’s easier to sell to an existing customer. If my car (an asset) has more resale value, I’m more likely to sell it to buy a new one. They should be trying to protect my resale value — if they want me as a repeat customer. Even if I want to buy another Tesla, if my resale value isn’t high, I’d wait longer to buy a new one. Or, what I’m leasing the car (reasonable for an EV and used to have better tax incentives)? If the end of lease value is low, I have to spend more on the depreciation over the lease. That makes my monthly payment higher. Instead, if the end of lease value is higher, I have a lower monthly payment and I’m more likely to buy the car. Either way, Tesla was good at selling one car. They need to get better at selling the second or third one. | | |
| ▲ | lotsofpulp 30 minutes ago | parent [-] | | If Tesla is dropping the price of their cars, then that means you can buy a new car for less. It makes no sense to want to overpay for a consumable item at time t+1, regardless of what you paid at time t. |
| |
| ▲ | nutjob2 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | For a lot of people cars are less a way to get from point A to point B and more of a status symbol, so they like to drive a new or at least newer car. Personally I'm with you. I love my car because its exactly enough car for my needs. I bought it new (in 2016) and I never want to sell it. I'd get so much less (or more to the point I can't buy a new car) for the same money I spent on it. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | paxy 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| The problem is that transition would require a ~95% drop in stock price, and the company isn't going to survive that. GM - $74.5B market cap (6.2M cars sold annually) Ford - $50.2B (4.6M) Volkswagen - $40B (9M) BYD - $100B (4.6M) Toyota - $256B (11.3M) Hyundai - $57B (7.3M) Tesla - $1.4T (1.6M) The numbers simply don't add up. |
| |
| ▲ | pjc50 8 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | A stock drop does not in and of itself kill a company which has positive cashflow, although it may give the executives heart attacks and leave it vulnerable to takeover. | | |
| ▲ | marcosdumay 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | If the company keeps the startup structure of paying employees in stock options and growing by VC money into the several billions value, yes a stock drop can kill it in and of itself. | |
| ▲ | Choad_20261104 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | [dead] |
| |
| ▲ | iknowstuff 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | 1. compare debt, tesla is cash rich while old OEMs are saddled with debt 2. compare growth opportunities, ie https://www.tesla.com/robotaxi - rollout is going well, and every cybercab produced nets what ? $25k/year? $75k/year? vs $5-8k once per car sold? | |
| ▲ | nutjob2 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Telsa/Musk is a cult of personality. SpaceX's valuation makes no sense either. On that basis if Musk overdoses on ketamine or something then 95% devaluation may well happen. |
|
|
| ▲ | thinkcontext 12 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Musk has said Tesla's future is cybercabs and robots, not a normal car company. |
|
| ▲ | Steltek 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Oooh, normal cars. Now there's a concept. Can we get a real EV minivan? Not a gimmick like the Buzz. I've got kids and go on long road trips to visit family. Seats, cargo capacity, range, and 800V charging speed. Closest thing is like the Ioniq 9 but the cargo space really sucks. For a polished product that ticks all the boxes, I would pay a premium for this. |
| |
| ▲ | toephu2 5 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | You might need to move to China for that. XPeng X9 - Seven seats, 800V charging, and a third row that folds into the floor. The long-range version has 382 miles WLTP range and charges 10–80% in approximately 12 minutes under ideal conditions. Li Auto MEGA - Seven seats, 800V architecture, 441 miles CLTC range, and manufacturer-claimed charging that adds 311 miles of CLTC range in 10 minutes. Li Auto says its trunk holds four 28-inch suitcases with all seven seats occupied. Zeekr 009 - Seven-seat versions, up to 460 miles CLTC range, and 10–80% charging in as little as 10 minutes on the upgraded 900V model. Very luxurious, though some versions offer less rear cargo space. Denza D9 EV - Seven seats, 115-kWh battery, up to 497 miles CLTC range, and BYD Flash Charging claims of 10–70% in five minutes using compatible ultra-high-power chargers. China is years ahead of the West (EU/US) in terms of EVs. | |
| ▲ | fh973 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | A Mercedes VLE maybe? It ticks all the boxes incl premium price. | | |
|