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.
That is what I did a couple of year ago to leverage their SpaceX holdings You may be right that it's time to increase my holdings.
Just FYI guys and gals: compare Baron's fund with TSLA and it's a bit of a surprise at how poorly it performed relative to TSLA (see the 5-year and Max charts):


That said, Baron's fund is the only access to Space X shares I presume?
 
Last edited:
My promise of commenting on the automotive side today is suddenly made impossible. My sources on that subject are all proprietary one I must first get permission to quote those sources. I can say that in terms of all three elements the size of Tesla automotive potential really is far larger than most estimates. By coincidence nearly all the raw data is already on Statista so there may be workarounds, at a price.
As most of us know the two large constraints to Total Addressable Market (TAM) are charging infrastructure and service/sales local access. These two end out making both TAM and Served Available Market (SAM) effectively synonymous, while in most cases they are less common in identity. As for Target Market, that normally is a reflection of disclosed management decisions, while in the Tesla case it remains implicitly analogous to Served Available market.

With better data we can infer TAM evolution from infrastructure and policy conditions as well as buyer economic capacity in specific markets. SAM really depends on the degree that Tesla can capitalize on those government policies given buyer potential.

Nearly all that data does exist in all the significant opportunity countries. That will take more time than I thought it would, not least because much of the public data is oriented to preserve the status quo.
 
No he doesn’t. You mischaracterize Elon. Refer to (I think) the Lex Fridman podcast from just a few days ago, where he specifically talks about his perspective on rules.

He believes many rules are necessary, but also thinks it’s imporrant to minimize how much they get in the way of innovation.

After all, he is the one lobbying for governments to establish a governing set of rules to ensure that AI is developed safely.

My fecitious (totally just going for flippant comedic value) statement was based on the account of the Isaacson biography where Elon starts with the premis that all regulations are believed by default to be “dumb." His starting point is to assume rules are "dumb" and go from there. As you correctly point out, there are many times this rule of his can be invalidated to suit the needs of the situation - when it makes logical sense. Probably as is the case for this Cybertruck clause as well. The sign of true intelligence is to hold two seemingly disparate ideas in the mind simultaneously in order that the best solution can be obtained.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ShareLofty
View attachment 990111

(after hours, so just a little fun)

Speaking of fun, try googling "Bernie Madoff HSBC":

Jun 7, 2011 · HSBC has agreed to pay $62.5m (£38m)to settle legal action in New York filed by Bernard Madoff's fraud victims. In a regulatory filing Europe's ...​

I hope that both Elon and his crack team of legal attack dogs is aware that HSBC is almost certainly now availing themselves of the "Madoff Exemption" to the prohibition against naked short selling (via SEC Regulation SHO, rule 201).

These naked shorts are trying to profit by ruining an important company doing good in the World. They deserve to be taken to the woodshed in the mother of all short squeezes in 2028.

Go get'em, Elon.
 
Gawd, can't anyone do a video properly? Do they not realize there are things like video editors???? And writing a script? You could take the same video, do proper cuts and voice overs and it would be 1 minute of useful information.

You definitely have a point, but for now I am happy we have someone down there who has a drone, speaks English and seems committed to documenting the progress there. Usually the editing/directing skills improve over time..
 
How is it legal for a corporation to decide what one can or cannot do with the sale of their own personal property? I understand the purpose, and do not plan on selling my Cybertruck; but egad man, let's let the markets function. They didn't cap the Short Shorts or Not-A-Flamethrower or kid's Cyberquad resale. I mean c'mon, no one wants to live in a corporatocracy.
Ferrari does it … Chevy does it with Z06… Lambo does it…
It’s the way it is
 
My fecitious (totally just going for flippant comedic value) statement was based on the account of the Isaacson biography where Elon starts with the premis that all regulations are believed by default to be “dumb." His starting point is to assume rules are "dumb" and go from there. As you correctly point out, there are many times this rule of his can be invalidated to suit the needs of the situation - when it makes logical sense. Probably as is the case for this Cybertruck clause as well. The sign of true intelligence is to hold two seemingly disparate ideas in the mind simultaneously in order that the best solution can be obtained.
I think you might be conflating 'rules' with 'requirements'? In the biography (and in quotes we have heard here), Elon definitely has employees, in the context of product development at both Tesla and SpaceX, question every 'requirement' and allegedly would not allow any product requirement without an actual human's name attached to it. Too much time was wasted trying to meet requirements that were not necessary, and were from vague sources like "marketing" that could never, in the final analysis, be tracked down.
The lean cost effectiveness of the products in both of those companies may have a lot to do with this policy.
 
Interesting, but not sure about your conclusion - from the article:


I would draw the conclusion that this is especially unfair, even if an automaker would be found to not have gotten subsidies in China, he would be subject to the same duty when importing to the EU :(. I guess this is probably a result of the fact that duties are usually applied to imports from a certain country, not for a certain manufacturer.

Well informed article on China import tax situation in Europe, unfortunately adds a spin agains Elon which is not necessary. Good to see Tesla is lobbying against a brewing unfair treatment - if they are to be taxed, they should be in the sample whose subsidies in China are base for determining the amount of tax.

 
I think you might be conflating 'rules' with 'requirements'? In the biography (and in quotes we have heard here), Elon definitely has employees, in the context of product development at both Tesla and SpaceX, question every 'requirement' and allegedly would not allow any product requirement without an actual human's name attached to it. Too much time was wasted trying to meet requirements that were not necessary, and were from vague sources like "marketing" that could never, in the final analysis, be tracked down.
The lean cost effectiveness of the products in both of those companies may have a lot to do with this policy.
This makes sense
 


fry-not-sure.gif