Page 149 of 174 FirstFirst ... 4999139145146147148149150151152153159 ... LastLast
Results 1,481 to 1,490 of 1740

Thread: More anti-ev gibberish

  1. #1481
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Delran, NJ
    Posts
    416
    Hey, hold on pretty soon AXPW announce their stock performance. My guess is another substantial loss. My concern is that it takes such a small amount to move the stock he may just buying it and say its doing good and dump it the next day....after all its on the pink equivalent board. I wish I could short AXPW, but shorting pinks/OCTBB is a bad idea and finding someone to actually buy the stock hard too (very few if any brokerage firms allow it and others require a substantial escrow)- I guess that's what saved them from tanking sooner, less short interest.
    Last edited by Dan5; 2012-11-13 at 06:11 AM. Reason: clarification

  2. #1482
    SSL #180
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    1,070
    Has anyone compiled a list of John P's greatest hits? Or more accurately most spectacularly incorrect predictions?

  3. #1483
    R#23/250, S#2, X#16 LST's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    102
    Here's a brilliant one: Axion Power: A Battery Manufacturer Charging Forward - Seeking Alpha. The poor guy lost big.... could you call him a loser ?

  4. #1484
    Senior Member mcornwell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,008
    Quote Originally Posted by smorgasbord View Post
    With AXPW now trading for 2 short bits ($0.20), my guess is another JP article is coming. Even more than bashing Tesla, he's got his castle to keep. Numbers look like Axion needs to do another capital raise - the last one hit the stock price pretty hard, so with A123 and many other battery makers in trouble, AXPW is in a world of hurt.
    Or (2) short ribs. Reminded me of one of Chris Rock's first movies...

    VIN 2301: Performance 85 ● Blue Metallic ● Pano ● 21" Grey Wheels ● Black Leather/CF Interior ● CF Spoiler ● Tech/Sound Packages ● 7.6 kW Solar PV Array

  5. #1485
    Model Sig 304, VIN 542 Arnold Panz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Miami, Florida
    Posts
    1,340
    This article was linked by Andrew Sullivan in his widely read blog on the Daily Beast this morning. Not surprisingly, the author leaves Tesla completely out of the equation until the very end because Tesla's results on range, popularity and financial solvency cut against his every argument:

    Far From Electrifying

    Electric car hopes never die — but electric realities keep intervening.
    Technical success of electrics comes down, most fundamentally, to batteries. The lithium-ion battery, with its many flaws, is still the only relatively lightweight commercial option and Edison’s dream of a perfect car battery is now more than a century old. Bold plans come and go: a 1980 report on the introduction of electric vehicles in the United States predicted 1–2 million units in sales by 1985 and as many 11–13 million fully electric cars by the year 2000. But by the end of 2012, the United States had about 50,000 electrics on the road, no more than 0.03 percent of all light-duty vehicles licensed to operate in the country. Undaunted, a campaigning President Obama did not repeal his 2011 State of the Union goal of putting 1 million electric cars on the road by 2015.

  6. #1486
    Senior Member JRP3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Central New York
    Posts
    6,556
    I don't know, it certainly had a negative slant but was mostly factually accurate, and did mention Tesla before the end:
    Tesla’s deliveries for 2012 were cut from 5,000 to 2,700–3,250, due to production problems.
    Again, accurate.

  7. #1487
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    1,591
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by JRP3 View Post
    I don't know, it certainly had a negative slant but was mostly factually accurate, and did mention Tesla before the end:
    Again, accurate.
    It recycled the Reuters story about Volt's costing ~$80,000 each to produce. He loosely chains that to reality with his comment that it might take years before GM makes money, but the ~$80,000 number is flawed and deeply debatable even on its own terms.

    As to Tesla, he compared it to Fiskar and stated that their problems are somehow equivalent, when in fact the market trajectory of the two companies are diametrically opposite from one another. Cutting your production forecast because you are a few weeks behind your planned schedule does not make you equivalent to a company flirting with bankruptcy and searching for a buyer willing to save it.

    And another extended-range electric vehicle, the high-end Fisker Karma, has fared much worse. Consumer Reports found the $107,000 car, developed with a $529 million loan from the U.S. government and built in Finland, is full of design flaws and did not recommend its purchase. The car’s battery failed during the Consumer Reports test drive and Fisker subsequently replaced all of its 2012 Karma batteries. Then, on October 16, the manufacturer of the substandard lithium-ion battery used in the Karma, A123 Systems, (recipient of a U.S. federal grant worth $249 million in 2009) filed for bankruptcy.
    The bold portions of that paragraph are the conceptual framework of that paragraph, with the rest being descriptive filler. He then transitions to Tesla with the following -

    And another American true electric car has not done any better: Tesla’s deliveries for 2012 were cut from 5,000 to 2,700–3,250, due to production problems.
    Setting aside the false equivalency between bankrupt and failing concerns, like Fiskar or A123 Systems, and a rapidly growing company like Tesla, this linkage is factually false in another sense because the author is also equating Tesla with Fiskar's quality problems. Consumer Reports is on record calling the Model S amazing and addictive. There is nothing factual about those comparisons.

  8. #1488
    Senior Member JRP3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Central New York
    Posts
    6,556
    Quote Originally Posted by CapitalistOppressor View Post
    It recycled the Reuters story about Volt's costing ~$80,000 each to produce. He loosely chains that to reality with his comment that it might take years before GM makes money, but the ~$80,000 number is flawed and deeply debatable even on its own terms.
    Until volume increases that number may be accurate. Even without development costs we don't know what the Volt is costing GM to build at this point.
    As to Tesla, he compared it to Fiskar and stated that their problems are somehow equivalent, when in fact the market trajectory of the two companies are diametrically opposite from one another. Cutting your production forecast because you are a few weeks behind your planned schedule does not make you equivalent to a company flirting with bankruptcy and searching for a buyer willing to save it.



    The bold portions of that paragraph are the conceptual framework of that paragraph, with the rest being descriptive filler. He then transitions to Tesla with the following -



    Setting aside the false equivalency between bankrupt and failing concerns, like Fiskar or A123 Systems, and a rapidly growing company like Tesla, this linkage is factually false in another sense because the author is also equating Tesla with Fiskar's quality problems. Consumer Reports is on record calling the Model S amazing and addictive. There is nothing factual about those comparisons.
    Good point on the quality comparisons, but the factual data on Tesla is accurate. As I said it skews negative but I still say the data points are fairly accurate.

  9. #1489
    Senior Member JRP3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Central New York
    Posts
    6,556
    http://www.panarmenian.net/eng/news/137536

    Counter to what the title claims, this discovery of existing failure mechanisms in lithium cells does not mean they will fail sooner than expected, it just means we've now uncovered another method of failure, which will most likely lead to future improvements.

  10. #1490
    He needs to do more research and find out that some of these Lithium batteries have so little Lithium in them it is not worth talking about. I was reading the paperwork from our supplier and the Manufacturers Safety Data Sheet. I would put the percentage here but I have this in my office. I work with a lot of 18630 type Lithium cells same as Tesla'a.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Anti-Tesla Gibberish
    By bonnie in forum Tesla Motors
    Replies: 860
    Last Post: 2014-04-18, 06:39 PM
  2. Unsafe anti-theft chip
    By FVO in forum Video
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 2012-08-11, 12:45 AM
  3. ETCgreen anti-EV FUD
    By Robert.Boston in forum Energy, Environment, and Policy
    Replies: 173
    Last Post: 2012-02-26, 11:16 AM
  4. Site Claims Musk & Tesla Are Anti-Environmental
    By cshafer in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 2009-11-21, 08:14 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •