Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Tesla, TSLA & the Investment World: the Perpetual Investors' Roundtable

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Given the above, I'm not sure if an awakening of the masses will have that great of an effect on the stock. Of course there will be more buying interest, but possibly the investing part of the population is already with the program. In other words: if someone that never invests suddenly is amazed by Tesla in say 2025, he or she will not start buying stock. This same person was wowed by Amazon or Apple years before and stayed out of the stock market.

Terrific post!

Thinking about it I'm not sure I fully agree. Awakening of the masses won't occur in as short a timespan as awakening of the investment community. That the coiled spring has already sprung is clear so between these two any effect on the stock will be more gradual.
IMO that won't mean the effect won't be substantial if Tesla continues to do splits to hold SP to levels below what people with income to invest will see as too expensive for them.

I think you have left out one important consideration. How actually owning and/or driving a Tesla brings confidence investing is a smart idea and acting on it. Many here had the 'aha' moment soon after a test drive and/or buying their first Tesla. Likewise seeing Teslas every day at increasing frequency and knowing more owners. I'd also posit that awakening of the masses over the next few years will indirectly effect the SP because it will provide the ever increasing demand that will be needed to match the ever increasing supply as Tesla yearly production increases 50+ % each year. The masses will awaken to the investment potential of TSLA very quickly when they learn Model 2 is available and priced at 25K, making it affordable to tens of millions of new customers.
 
"All told, with China and Europe driving the EV market, BEVs (battery electric vehicles) and PHEV (plug-in hybrid electric vehicles) comprised 3.8% of the global market through the end of November, Inside EVs says. This represents a market share gain of 1 percentage point, given a McKinsey study which said EVs were 2.8% of the global market at the end of March 2020. While still quite small, it’s worth noting that the global share was just 0.6% as recently as 2015."

Some people can't tell the start of an exponential curve if it's staring them in the face! Imagine writing the above sentences and not being able to extrapolate a few years in to the future. So EV's had minuscle market share in 2015, 2,8% of the world market share in March this year and already in November 3,8% market share. How could you not from this conclude that EVs likely will have 5% market share in a year, and maybe 10% in 2 years etc???
Because they are the same people that collectively lost $40 billion in 2020 and continue to short TSLA.
 
IBKR flashed this at me just now:

View attachment 624905

Which analyst went from Hold to Underperform?

And should we care?

Joseph Spak of RBC Capital Markets (his Note to Clients caused the short-lived dip on Tue morning).

Note that RBC is a Canadian Bank which is heavily invested in tarsands and other fossil fools.

RBC is also one of the brokerages that was "days late" delivering the TSLA dividend shares to its clients when they were due back on August 31st. Were they naked short TSLA? We'll never know, because the SEC disclosure rules prevent us from seeing the truth directly.

IMO, Spak's / RBC's behavior is nearly as reprehensible as it is transparent.

Recommend avoiding RBC.
 

That's my father in law. He's good with marketing and, in my opinion, he's just doing this for the publicity to ride the Elon media coattails. And yes, this may be the one single time that hydrogen might be a better choice than BEV. Cybertruck isn't a $350k luxury off roader with 2 feet of suspension travel. Of course the Boot will win. His daughter will be driving a tri-motor Cybertruck by the end of the year. ;)
 
Interesting rumor from Fredtrek. Not sure why people think it would be Tesla to occupy a space right next to Amazon. Perhaps the rumors swirled about an EV company and it's just Rivian.

Tesla is rumored to take over large industrial building near Seattle - Electrek

Amazon to deliver goods with Tesla EVTOL.

giphy.gif
 
if the goal of the EV credits really is to accelerate the adoption of electric vehicles, then there is no reason to exclude rich buyers or exclude luxury vehicles from those programs. those credits would still be performing their function of incentivizing -- and therefore increasing -- EV adoption rates. It's not like rich people aren't attracted to discounts. it's not like luxury vehicles pollute less than cheap cars. I don't see the upside of excluding them from this attempt at accelerating the transition.

Let's look at this from another angle: would somebody making $50,000 / year be in favour of using their hard-earned tax dollars to give a discount to somebody making $200,000+ / year to buy a car they would buy anyway because they can afford it and they happen to be an environmentalist? This is as likely a scenario as any IMHO. I think that's a bad use of tax dollars IMHO.

Oh and by the way, the person making $50 K, supporting their family, can't afford a new EV, so they won't get the credit. If I were them, I'd be pretty pissed off with that rebate.

Also, a cap puts an incentive on EV manufacturers to make more affordable EVs for the masses.

I'm not saying a credit is a bad idea, or that administering a cap / filter wouldn't be challenging. I just think, in principle, providing to those who can afford and would otherwise buy the car (like me - the Ontario discount was withdrawn 3 months before I bought my Model 3. I still bought) is not a completely terrific idea.
 
Last edited:
Let's look at this from another angle: would somebody making $50,000 / year be in favour of using their hard-earned tax dollars to give a discount to somebody making $200,000+ / year to buy a car they would buy anyway because they can afford it and they happen to be an environmentalist? This is as likely a scenario as any IMHO. I think that's a bad use of tax dollars IMHO.

rich people drive on roads and go to schools and drink the same clean water subsidized by everyone's taxes. it's silly to get outraged about that. the point of the program is ostensibly not to help disadvantaged individuals, it's to help the sustainability of humanity. the mission is not advanced if rich people are still commuting in gas guzzlers.