Completely Off Topic Tesla stock going wild 1,331.30 + 122.64 (+10.15%) I bought a few at 820 six weeks ago, last October they were 250.
Can anyone explain why Tesla is now valued at ~$250 billion?
Nope but then again I struggled to understand how it was worth $50bn..
Is it the scenario whereby the world goes nuts for electric driverless "cars" and they have the inside track on making them?
That only works if you don't know anything about driverless "cars" - if you do you discover that the last 10% is the impossible bit and they need to get at least 95% of the way there before it becomes vaguely usable.
Waymo is their main competition in the development of driverless cars and I don't remember any success stories from them for a couple of years and they used to make regular announcements.
Why do you feel the need to keep posting statistics to imply Scotland and Wales have performed poorly throughout the life of the pandemic? It seems a really peculiar thing to want to do.
Just saying.
Surely the 'Wales is in a much better position than England' comment in that tweet deserves to be refuted if it is false. Or are you only happy with news when it makes Westminster look bad?
This is the whole argument from yesterday, Scotland = good, UK = bad. When in fact both have been utterly dogshit.
Sadly it only matters what people believe. They already believe the nations are much more different than they are, a bit like how people grossly overestimate the muslim population of the country.
Or of most minorities. That's my impression anyway.
I'm sure they do, although I believe even people who are within the group overestimate the numbers.
Completely Off Topic Tesla stock going wild 1,331.30 + 122.64 (+10.15%) I bought a few at 820 six weeks ago, last October they were 250.
Can anyone explain why Tesla is now valued at ~$250 billion?
1) Because they figured out how to make the Model 3 profitably. 2) They are selling cars with no advertising, and selling everything they can make 3) This means that every time they build another factory - more profit. 4) They seem to be ahead of all the other car makers on electric vehicles 5) They are ahead on battery power storage 6) Most of the western world in heading full tilt to get rid of ICE vehicles 7) The legacy car makers are trying to catch up - and not doing especially well
All of the above may not add up to $250 billion, but these are the reasons that it has gone that way.
I've no financial background so you might have to forgive this but....
How many cars would a mature low growth Tesla have to sell to justify that valuation?
What percentage of the total EV market is a mature Tesla going to occupy?
To my financial illiteracy this parabolic valuation seems to assume limited competition from all the other established auto makers.
Proposition one: in the future, all cars will be electric. Proposition two: in tech, the winner (Microsoft, Google, Facebook, Amazon, Netflix, etc.) utterly dominates returns. Proposition three: the electric car industry is part of the tech industry.
If you believe all three, then Tesla is worth $250bn.
I am sceptical about proposition three, which means proposition two doesn't apply.
But don't forget that Tesla are not only market leaders in the car industry. They're also market leaders in the battery industry and thus have a major advantage in the energy industry too.
In the future it's possible 100% of UK electricity could come from a combination of wind etc and Tesla style Powerwalls of equivalent storage.
While sunny climates like Australia are seeking to combine solar with energy storage.
Susan Rice sounds interesting. Former NSA, ambassador to the UN, graduate of Oxford. I suspect her having a major role in the administration would put US/UK relations back onto some more like a normal footing.
I see Biden's VP having a Cheney like influence on the administration as the boss gets ever more wandered. She looks like she would be up for that.
Rhodes scholar
probably linked to the KKK
Possibly one of their more liberal branches...
I've always wanted to join the KKK, I really want to know which washing powder they use to keep their sheets white.
I believe they do it by very strictly keeping their whites separate.
*Claps*
Note that the whole bedsheet thing was an invention for the modern Klan - which was largely invented around the portrayal of the Klan in Birth of Nation.
The original Klan looked more like this -
That law abiding klansman looks like he's being terrorised in his own home by a black mob.
Yes - the Klan used blackface. That is, they used the old disguise used by criminals over the years - rubbing charcoal into their faces to disguise themselves.
We ran a Nissan Leaf for 3 years from 2014. It was a very good (for the time) electric car but a pretty poor car. That Nissan are still selling the same car 10 years on from launch with the same decade old battery tech is why Tesla have already won.
Completely Off Topic Tesla stock going wild 1,331.30 + 122.64 (+10.15%) I bought a few at 820 six weeks ago, last October they were 250.
Can anyone explain why Tesla is now valued at ~$250 billion?
1) Because they figured out how to make the Model 3 profitably. 2) They are selling cars with no advertising, and selling everything they can make 3) This means that every time they build another factory - more profit. 4) They seem to be ahead of all the other car makers on electric vehicles 5) They are ahead on battery power storage 6) Most of the western world in heading full tilt to get rid of ICE vehicles 7) The legacy car makers are trying to catch up - and not doing especially well
All of the above may not add up to $250 billion, but these are the reasons that it has gone that way.
I've no financial background so you might have to forgive this but....
How many cars would a mature low growth Tesla have to sell to justify that valuation?
What percentage of the total EV market is a mature Tesla going to occupy?
To my financial illiteracy this parabolic valuation seems to assume limited competition from all the other established auto makers.
Proposition one: in the future, all cars will be electric. Proposition two: in tech, the winner (Microsoft, Google, Facebook, Amazon, Netflix, etc.) utterly dominates returns. Proposition three: the electric car industry is part of the tech industry.
If you believe all three, then Tesla is worth $250bn.
I am sceptical about proposition three, which means proposition two doesn't apply.
You're missing the proposition that Tesla will emerge as the winner. They could be the MySpace of electric cars.
Completely Off Topic Tesla stock going wild 1,331.30 + 122.64 (+10.15%) I bought a few at 820 six weeks ago, last October they were 250.
Can anyone explain why Tesla is now valued at ~$250 billion?
1) Because they figured out how to make the Model 3 profitably. 2) They are selling cars with no advertising, and selling everything they can make 3) This means that every time they build another factory - more profit. 4) They seem to be ahead of all the other car makers on electric vehicles 5) They are ahead on battery power storage 6) Most of the western world in heading full tilt to get rid of ICE vehicles 7) The legacy car makers are trying to catch up - and not doing especially well
All of the above may not add up to $250 billion, but these are the reasons that it has gone that way.
I've no financial background so you might have to forgive this but....
How many cars would a mature low growth Tesla have to sell to justify that valuation?
What percentage of the total EV market is a mature Tesla going to occupy?
To my financial illiteracy this parabolic valuation seems to assume limited competition from all the other established auto makers.
Proposition one: in the future, all cars will be electric. Proposition two: in tech, the winner (Microsoft, Google, Facebook, Amazon, Netflix, etc.) utterly dominates returns. Proposition three: the electric car industry is part of the tech industry.
If you believe all three, then Tesla is worth $250bn.
I am sceptical about proposition three, which means proposition two doesn't apply.
You're missing the proposition that Tesla will emerge as the winner. They could be the MySpace of electric cars.
You think they are going to get sold to News Corp?
(Just like Vaulter was sold to Waystar Royco and ran into the ground.)
Completely Off Topic Tesla stock going wild 1,331.30 + 122.64 (+10.15%) I bought a few at 820 six weeks ago, last October they were 250.
Can anyone explain why Tesla is now valued at ~$250 billion?
1) Because they figured out how to make the Model 3 profitably. 2) They are selling cars with no advertising, and selling everything they can make 3) This means that every time they build another factory - more profit. 4) They seem to be ahead of all the other car makers on electric vehicles 5) They are ahead on battery power storage 6) Most of the western world in heading full tilt to get rid of ICE vehicles 7) The legacy car makers are trying to catch up - and not doing especially well
All of the above may not add up to $250 billion, but these are the reasons that it has gone that way.
I've no financial background so you might have to forgive this but....
How many cars would a mature low growth Tesla have to sell to justify that valuation?
What percentage of the total EV market is a mature Tesla going to occupy?
To my financial illiteracy this parabolic valuation seems to assume limited competition from all the other established auto makers.
Proposition one: in the future, all cars will be electric. Proposition two: in tech, the winner (Microsoft, Google, Facebook, Amazon, Netflix, etc.) utterly dominates returns. Proposition three: the electric car industry is part of the tech industry.
If you believe all three, then Tesla is worth $250bn.
I am sceptical about proposition three, which means proposition two doesn't apply.
I'd say proposition two applies to most industries.
I'm not a Tesla investor but I'm glad they're doing well - Musk is the most proactive billionaire in terms of getting us off this rock and expanding humanity's horizons.
Completely Off Topic Tesla stock going wild 1,331.30 + 122.64 (+10.15%) I bought a few at 820 six weeks ago, last October they were 250.
Can anyone explain why Tesla is now valued at ~$250 billion?
Nope but then again I struggled to understand how it was worth $50bn..
Is it the scenario whereby the world goes nuts for electric driverless "cars" and they have the inside track on making them?
That only works if you don't know anything about driverless "cars" - if you do you discover that the last 10% is the impossible bit and they need to get at least 95% of the way there before it becomes vaguely usable.
Waymo is their main competition in the development of driverless cars and I don't remember any success stories from them for a couple of years and they used to make regular announcements.
Sounds right. And are they then cars in any case? Because people LIKE controlling their own pods don't they. Maybe all about electric then. Or it could be overvalued due to the hype around Musk?
Completely Off Topic Tesla stock going wild 1,331.30 + 122.64 (+10.15%) I bought a few at 820 six weeks ago, last October they were 250.
Can anyone explain why Tesla is now valued at ~$250 billion?
1) Because they figured out how to make the Model 3 profitably. 2) They are selling cars with no advertising, and selling everything they can make 3) This means that every time they build another factory - more profit. 4) They seem to be ahead of all the other car makers on electric vehicles 5) They are ahead on battery power storage 6) Most of the western world in heading full tilt to get rid of ICE vehicles 7) The legacy car makers are trying to catch up - and not doing especially well
All of the above may not add up to $250 billion, but these are the reasons that it has gone that way.
I've no financial background so you might have to forgive this but....
How many cars would a mature low growth Tesla have to sell to justify that valuation?
What percentage of the total EV market is a mature Tesla going to occupy?
To my financial illiteracy this parabolic valuation seems to assume limited competition from all the other established auto makers.
Proposition one: in the future, all cars will be electric. Proposition two: in tech, the winner (Microsoft, Google, Facebook, Amazon, Netflix, etc.) utterly dominates returns. Proposition three: the electric car industry is part of the tech industry.
If you believe all three, then Tesla is worth $250bn.
I am sceptical about proposition three, which means proposition two doesn't apply.
You're missing the proposition that Tesla will emerge as the winner. They could be the MySpace of electric cars.
You think they are going to get sold to News Corp?
They have big screens inside. Murdoch might see them as a media company.
Completely Off Topic Tesla stock going wild 1,331.30 + 122.64 (+10.15%) I bought a few at 820 six weeks ago, last October they were 250.
Can anyone explain why Tesla is now valued at ~$250 billion?
1) Because they figured out how to make the Model 3 profitably. 2) They are selling cars with no advertising, and selling everything they can make 3) This means that every time they build another factory - more profit. 4) They seem to be ahead of all the other car makers on electric vehicles 5) They are ahead on battery power storage 6) Most of the western world in heading full tilt to get rid of ICE vehicles 7) The legacy car makers are trying to catch up - and not doing especially well
All of the above may not add up to $250 billion, but these are the reasons that it has gone that way.
I've no financial background so you might have to forgive this but....
How many cars would a mature low growth Tesla have to sell to justify that valuation?
What percentage of the total EV market is a mature Tesla going to occupy?
To my financial illiteracy this parabolic valuation seems to assume limited competition from all the other established auto makers.
Proposition one: in the future, all cars will be electric. Proposition two: in tech, the winner (Microsoft, Google, Facebook, Amazon, Netflix, etc.) utterly dominates returns. Proposition three: the electric car industry is part of the tech industry.
If you believe all three, then Tesla is worth $250bn.
I am sceptical about proposition three, which means proposition two doesn't apply.
I'd say proposition two applies to most industries.
I'm not a Tesla investor but I'm glad they're doing well - Musk is the most proactive billionaire in terms of getting us off this rock and expanding humanity's horizons.
Bezos doesn't get mentions in Star Trek like Musk, it must drive him wild.
I'm not a Tesla investor but I'm glad they're doing well - Musk is the most proactive billionaire in terms of getting us off this rock and expanding humanity's horizons.
Plus he's the closest we are ever likely to get to a real life Tony Stark.
Completely Off Topic Tesla stock going wild 1,331.30 + 122.64 (+10.15%) I bought a few at 820 six weeks ago, last October they were 250.
Can anyone explain why Tesla is now valued at ~$250 billion?
Nope but then again I struggled to understand how it was worth $50bn..
Is it the scenario whereby the world goes nuts for electric driverless "cars" and they have the inside track on making them?
That only works if you don't know anything about driverless "cars" - if you do you discover that the last 10% is the impossible bit and they need to get at least 95% of the way there before it becomes vaguely usable.
Waymo is their main competition in the development of driverless cars and I don't remember any success stories from them for a couple of years and they used to make regular announcements.
Self driving is like speech recognition. Back in about 2000, speech recognition got to 99%. IBM and Dragon had amazing dictation products that did really well.
But nobody bought it. Because it turned out that 99% was not good enough, and that the last 1% was *really* hard.
Self driving is the same. We've got to 99% with cameras. But it's not good enough. You need - with Tesla - to keep your hands on the wheel. That last 1% is incredibly hard. Worse. People are lulled into thinking their self driving system is better than it is. This means people mentally turn off, and accidents happen.
Waymo - which uses Lidar and cameras - is way ahead of Tesla, and has logged 10x as many autonomous miles as all the other players combined. It has recently discovered how difficult this problem is, and they are actually taking their cars off the roads in Arizona.
I'm not a Tesla investor but I'm glad they're doing well - Musk is the most proactive billionaire in terms of getting us off this rock and expanding humanity's horizons.
Bezos doesn't get mentions in Star Trek like Musk, it must drive him wild.
Musk makes stuff and sells it. Bezos sells other people's stuff.
Completely Off Topic Tesla stock going wild 1,331.30 + 122.64 (+10.15%) I bought a few at 820 six weeks ago, last October they were 250.
Can anyone explain why Tesla is now valued at ~$250 billion?
Nope but then again I struggled to understand how it was worth $50bn..
Is it the scenario whereby the world goes nuts for electric driverless "cars" and they have the inside track on making them?
That only works if you don't know anything about driverless "cars" - if you do you discover that the last 10% is the impossible bit and they need to get at least 95% of the way there before it becomes vaguely usable.
Waymo is their main competition in the development of driverless cars and I don't remember any success stories from them for a couple of years and they used to make regular announcements.
The likes of Apple and Dyson had a go at driverless cars and discovered it was more difficult than they thought it was going to be. Uber and Google are still putting in billions and getting nowhere.
Tesla are actually selling hundreds of thousands of cars profitably, and have the self-driving features as an incidental part of the package rather than the main feature.
Self driving cars are a definite 95%-5% problem, maybe even a 99%-1% problem if they’re going to be driving on existing roads in all conditions. The best chance for them is going to be in a newly built town, where they have their own roads separate from all other traffic except each other.
Completely Off Topic Tesla stock going wild 1,331.30 + 122.64 (+10.15%) I bought a few at 820 six weeks ago, last October they were 250.
Can anyone explain why Tesla is now valued at ~$250 billion?
1) Because they figured out how to make the Model 3 profitably. 2) They are selling cars with no advertising, and selling everything they can make 3) This means that every time they build another factory - more profit. 4) They seem to be ahead of all the other car makers on electric vehicles 5) They are ahead on battery power storage 6) Most of the western world in heading full tilt to get rid of ICE vehicles 7) The legacy car makers are trying to catch up - and not doing especially well
All of the above may not add up to $250 billion, but these are the reasons that it has gone that way.
I've no financial background so you might have to forgive this but....
How many cars would a mature low growth Tesla have to sell to justify that valuation?
What percentage of the total EV market is a mature Tesla going to occupy?
To my financial illiteracy this parabolic valuation seems to assume limited competition from all the other established auto makers.
Proposition one: in the future, all cars will be electric. Proposition two: in tech, the winner (Microsoft, Google, Facebook, Amazon, Netflix, etc.) utterly dominates returns. Proposition three: the electric car industry is part of the tech industry.
If you believe all three, then Tesla is worth $250bn.
I am sceptical about proposition three, which means proposition two doesn't apply.
I'd say proposition two applies to most industries.
I don't think so.
In telecoms, the best returns (i.e. multiple of profits to capital invested) often went to the niche players, rather the big ones. In pharmaceuticals, it's a similar story . Traditional auto had a bunch of (modestly) profitable firms, none of which had dramatically different margins: Ford, GM, Chrysler, Nissan, Toyota, BMW, VW etc.
Tech is one of a very few industries where the advantages of standardization are such that de facto monopolies exist because scale begets scale.
Susan Rice sounds interesting. Former NSA, ambassador to the UN, graduate of Oxford. I suspect her having a major role in the administration would put US/UK relations back onto some more like a normal footing.
I see Biden's VP having a Cheney like influence on the administration as the boss gets ever more wandered. She looks like she would be up for that.
Rhodes scholar
probably linked to the KKK
Possibly one of their more liberal branches...
I've always wanted to join the KKK, I really want to know which washing powder they use to keep their sheets white.
I believe they do it by very strictly keeping their whites separate.
*Claps*
Note that the whole bedsheet thing was an invention for the modern Klan - which was largely invented around the portrayal of the Klan in Birth of Nation.
The original Klan looked more like this -
It's interesting that Conan Doyle had the KKK marked down as a terrorist organisation as far back as 1889 in The Five Orange Pips. That was probably before the "Lost Cause" mythology took hold.
I'm not a Tesla investor but I'm glad they're doing well - Musk is the most proactive billionaire in terms of getting us off this rock and expanding humanity's horizons.
Bezos doesn't get mentions in Star Trek like Musk, it must drive him wild.
Musk makes stuff and sells it. Bezos sells other people's stuff.
Starfleet's logistical support crews might be bigger fans of his.
Susan Rice sounds interesting. Former NSA, ambassador to the UN, graduate of Oxford. I suspect her having a major role in the administration would put US/UK relations back onto some more like a normal footing.
I see Biden's VP having a Cheney like influence on the administration as the boss gets ever more wandered. She looks like she would be up for that.
Rhodes scholar
probably linked to the KKK
Possibly one of their more liberal branches...
I've always wanted to join the KKK, I really want to know which washing powder they use to keep their sheets white.
I believe they do it by very strictly keeping their whites separate.
*Claps*
Note that the whole bedsheet thing was an invention for the modern Klan - which was largely invented around the portrayal of the Klan in Birth of Nation.
The original Klan looked more like this -
That law abiding klansman looks like he's being terrorised in his own home by a black mob.
Yes - the Klan used blackface. That is, they used the old disguise used by criminals over the years - rubbing charcoal into their faces to disguise themselves.
Completely Off Topic Tesla stock going wild 1,331.30 + 122.64 (+10.15%) I bought a few at 820 six weeks ago, last October they were 250.
Can anyone explain why Tesla is now valued at ~$250 billion?
Nope but then again I struggled to understand how it was worth $50bn..
Is it the scenario whereby the world goes nuts for electric driverless "cars" and they have the inside track on making them?
That only works if you don't know anything about driverless "cars" - if you do you discover that the last 10% is the impossible bit and they need to get at least 95% of the way there before it becomes vaguely usable.
Waymo is their main competition in the development of driverless cars and I don't remember any success stories from them for a couple of years and they used to make regular announcements.
Self driving is like speech recognition. Back in about 2000, speech recognition got to 99%. IBM and Dragon had amazing dictation products that did really well.
But nobody bought it. Because it turned out that 99% was not good enough, and that the last 1% was *really* hard.
Self driving is the same. We've got to 99% with cameras. But it's not good enough. You need - with Tesla - to keep your hands on the wheel. That last 1% is incredibly hard. Worse. People are lulled into thinking their self driving system is better than it is. This means people mentally turn off, and accidents happen.
Waymo - which uses Lidar and cameras - is way ahead of Tesla, and has logged 10x as many autonomous miles as all the other players combined. It has recently discovered how difficult this problem is, and they are actually taking their cars off the roads in Arizona.
Oh didn't know that bit about Arizona - thanks for the news but I'm not surprised.
Edit to add - for me I think between adaptive cruise control and lane assist I've got the bits I need. Between those two toys they make a 300 mile drive bearable rather than hard work...
Completely Off Topic Tesla stock going wild 1,331.30 + 122.64 (+10.15%) I bought a few at 820 six weeks ago, last October they were 250.
Can anyone explain why Tesla is now valued at ~$250 billion?
1) Because they figured out how to make the Model 3 profitably. 2) They are selling cars with no advertising, and selling everything they can make 3) This means that every time they build another factory - more profit. 4) They seem to be ahead of all the other car makers on electric vehicles 5) They are ahead on battery power storage 6) Most of the western world in heading full tilt to get rid of ICE vehicles 7) The legacy car makers are trying to catch up - and not doing especially well
All of the above may not add up to $250 billion, but these are the reasons that it has gone that way.
I've no financial background so you might have to forgive this but....
How many cars would a mature low growth Tesla have to sell to justify that valuation?
What percentage of the total EV market is a mature Tesla going to occupy?
To my financial illiteracy this parabolic valuation seems to assume limited competition from all the other established auto makers.
Proposition one: in the future, all cars will be electric. Proposition two: in tech, the winner (Microsoft, Google, Facebook, Amazon, Netflix, etc.) utterly dominates returns. Proposition three: the electric car industry is part of the tech industry.
If you believe all three, then Tesla is worth $250bn.
I am sceptical about proposition three, which means proposition two doesn't apply.
But don't forget that Tesla are not only market leaders in the car industry. They're also market leaders in the battery industry and thus have a major advantage in the energy industry too.
In the future it's possible 100% of UK electricity could come from a combination of wind etc and Tesla style Powerwalls of equivalent storage.
While sunny climates like Australia are seeking to combine solar with energy storage.
I don't think Tesla are a leader in battery chemistry, as they mostly license other people's technology. What they are a leader in is building the biggest factories and using that to drive costs down. Without a deep patent portfolio there, they might be the biggest (and most profitable) player, but they can't dominate the industry.
We ran a Nissan Leaf for 3 years from 2014. It was a very good (for the time) electric car but a pretty poor car. That Nissan are still selling the same car 10 years on from launch with the same decade old battery tech is why Tesla have already won.
Elon Musk applies a series of quite simple and quite old business ideas. In this case the one he applies is this:
Your product will be superseded by a better product. That cannot be stopped. Your choice is whether it superseded by your next product, or someone elses.
Why do you feel the need to keep posting statistics to imply Scotland and Wales have performed poorly throughout the life of the pandemic? It seems a really peculiar thing to want to do.
Just saying.
Surely the 'Wales is in a much better position than England' comment in that tweet deserves to be refuted if it is false. Or are you only happy with news when it makes Westminster look bad?
The figures generally in Wales have been pretty poor as they have been compared to our European neighbours, in the rest of the UK. The figures quoted should be contextualised by three meat processing plants in Anglesey, Merthyr and Wrexham. My issue isn't with calling all domestic government's out for a total failure, it just seems odd that someone living in Guernsey would feel the need to keep posting negative stories about Scotland and Wales specifically. I wouldn't get any particular pleasure from from learning that over the course of the pandemic, more people have passed away in England per 100,000 than in any of the other home nations. It's mawkish!
Completely Off Topic Tesla stock going wild 1,331.30 + 122.64 (+10.15%) I bought a few at 820 six weeks ago, last October they were 250.
Can anyone explain why Tesla is now valued at ~$250 billion?
1) Because they figured out how to make the Model 3 profitably. 2) They are selling cars with no advertising, and selling everything they can make 3) This means that every time they build another factory - more profit. 4) They seem to be ahead of all the other car makers on electric vehicles 5) They are ahead on battery power storage 6) Most of the western world in heading full tilt to get rid of ICE vehicles 7) The legacy car makers are trying to catch up - and not doing especially well
All of the above may not add up to $250 billion, but these are the reasons that it has gone that way.
I've no financial background so you might have to forgive this but....
How many cars would a mature low growth Tesla have to sell to justify that valuation?
What percentage of the total EV market is a mature Tesla going to occupy?
To my financial illiteracy this parabolic valuation seems to assume limited competition from all the other established auto makers.
Proposition one: in the future, all cars will be electric. Proposition two: in tech, the winner (Microsoft, Google, Facebook, Amazon, Netflix, etc.) utterly dominates returns. Proposition three: the electric car industry is part of the tech industry.
If you believe all three, then Tesla is worth $250bn.
I am sceptical about proposition three, which means proposition two doesn't apply.
I'd say proposition two applies to most industries.
That is true. A lot of those companies are portfolios of marques rather than brands, very much complicating the picture. There is not another brand at the moment to challenge Tesla's dominance of the 'electric car' position - just carmakers offering brand-extensions with their existing marques. That puts Tesla in a very strong position. As a civilian knowing nothing about electric cars and not really being interested, 'Prius' is the only other name in electric cars I know, and that is just a model of Toyota.
If BMW wanted to get into this sector more (perhaps they already are) they could turn the W 90 degrees right, and make a range of BME cars. Perhaps messing with their brand more than they would want to.
Why do you feel the need to keep posting statistics to imply Scotland and Wales have performed poorly throughout the life of the pandemic? It seems a really peculiar thing to want to do.
Just saying.
Surely the 'Wales is in a much better position than England' comment in that tweet deserves to be refuted if it is false. Or are you only happy with news when it makes Westminster look bad?
The figures generally in Wales have been pretty poor as they have been compared to our European neighbours, in the rest of the UK. The figures quoted should be contextualised by three meat processing plants in Anglesey, Merthyr and Wrexham. My issue isn't with calling all domestic government's out for a total failure, it just seems odd that someone living in Guernsey would feel the need to keep posting negative stories about Scotland and Wales specifically. I wouldn't get any particular pleasure from from learning that over the course of the pandemic, more people have passed away in England per 100,000 than in any of the other home nations. It's mawkish!
If the Welsh numbers should be massaged like that, shouldn't the English ones be treated the same way?
Completely Off Topic Tesla stock going wild 1,331.30 + 122.64 (+10.15%) I bought a few at 820 six weeks ago, last October they were 250.
Can anyone explain why Tesla is now valued at ~$250 billion?
1) Because they figured out how to make the Model 3 profitably. 2) They are selling cars with no advertising, and selling everything they can make 3) This means that every time they build another factory - more profit. 4) They seem to be ahead of all the other car makers on electric vehicles 5) They are ahead on battery power storage 6) Most of the western world in heading full tilt to get rid of ICE vehicles 7) The legacy car makers are trying to catch up - and not doing especially well
All of the above may not add up to $250 billion, but these are the reasons that it has gone that way.
I've no financial background so you might have to forgive this but....
How many cars would a mature low growth Tesla have to sell to justify that valuation?
What percentage of the total EV market is a mature Tesla going to occupy?
To my financial illiteracy this parabolic valuation seems to assume limited competition from all the other established auto makers.
Proposition one: in the future, all cars will be electric. Proposition two: in tech, the winner (Microsoft, Google, Facebook, Amazon, Netflix, etc.) utterly dominates returns. Proposition three: the electric car industry is part of the tech industry.
If you believe all three, then Tesla is worth $250bn.
I am sceptical about proposition three, which means proposition two doesn't apply.
I'd say proposition two applies to most industries.
I don't think so.
In telecoms, the best returns (i.e. multiple of profits to capital invested) often went to the niche players, rather the big ones. In pharmaceuticals, it's a similar story . Traditional auto had a bunch of (modestly) profitable firms, none of which had dramatically different margins: Ford, GM, Chrysler, Nissan, Toyota, BMW, VW etc.
Tech is one of a very few industries where the advantages of standardization are such that de facto monopolies exist because scale begets scale.
Its worth thinking that traditional auto did coalesce into a few big companies though too. Just how many brands are actually part of a larger organisation?
Tesla have also thought smartly about scaling up. Their "Gigafactories" are being built on a bigger scale than traditional auto factories and it's entirely possible that in the future traditional auto is going to find it very hard to compete with Tesla.
On the subject of electric cars, I bought a first generation Tesla Roadster, and then got a Model S. When I came to the US, I was too early for the Model 3, and thought the S and the X were a little too big, so I got a small (petrol) SUV.
I looked to change this for the I-Pace earlier this year, but really hated the quality of the finish, so passed.
But I recently (last week) did get an electric car from someone who isn't Tesla, and I've been very pleasantly surprised with it so far. The finish and materials are excellent, and it drives very well.
Why do you feel the need to keep posting statistics to imply Scotland and Wales have performed poorly throughout the life of the pandemic? It seems a really peculiar thing to want to do.
Just saying.
You'll note it rebuts a tweet that Wales is doing particularly well - "much better shape than England".
It's the nationalists I'm not overly fond of.
None of those in charge of the pandemic in the home nations can claim to have done particularly well. On the plus side those in charge in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland may have done a particularly poor job, but at least they seemed to take it seriously, perhaps with the exception of Mary Lou.
On the subject of electric cars, I bought a first generation Tesla Roadster, and then got a Model S. When I came to the US, I was too early for the Model 3, and thought the S and the X were a little too big, so I got a small (petrol) SUV.
I looked to change this for the I-Pace earlier this year, but really hated the quality of the finish, so passed.
But I recently (last week) did get an electric car from someone who isn't Tesla, and I've been very pleasantly surprised with it so far. The finish and materials are excellent, and it drives very well.
Completely Off Topic Tesla stock going wild 1,331.30 + 122.64 (+10.15%) I bought a few at 820 six weeks ago, last October they were 250.
Can anyone explain why Tesla is now valued at ~$250 billion?
1) Because they figured out how to make the Model 3 profitably. 2) They are selling cars with no advertising, and selling everything they can make 3) This means that every time they build another factory - more profit. 4) They seem to be ahead of all the other car makers on electric vehicles 5) They are ahead on battery power storage 6) Most of the western world in heading full tilt to get rid of ICE vehicles 7) The legacy car makers are trying to catch up - and not doing especially well
All of the above may not add up to $250 billion, but these are the reasons that it has gone that way.
I've no financial background so you might have to forgive this but....
How many cars would a mature low growth Tesla have to sell to justify that valuation?
What percentage of the total EV market is a mature Tesla going to occupy?
To my financial illiteracy this parabolic valuation seems to assume limited competition from all the other established auto makers.
Proposition one: in the future, all cars will be electric. Proposition two: in tech, the winner (Microsoft, Google, Facebook, Amazon, Netflix, etc.) utterly dominates returns. Proposition three: the electric car industry is part of the tech industry.
If you believe all three, then Tesla is worth $250bn.
I am sceptical about proposition three, which means proposition two doesn't apply.
But don't forget that Tesla are not only market leaders in the car industry. They're also market leaders in the battery industry and thus have a major advantage in the energy industry too.
In the future it's possible 100% of UK electricity could come from a combination of wind etc and Tesla style Powerwalls of equivalent storage.
While sunny climates like Australia are seeking to combine solar with energy storage.
I don't think Tesla are a leader in battery chemistry, as they mostly license other people's technology. What they are a leader in is building the biggest factories and using that to drive costs down. Without a deep patent portfolio there, they might be the biggest (and most profitable) player, but they can't dominate the industry.
That's like saying Amazon lack patents to dominate.
If your factories are of a scale to allow you to compete on another level in cost then without other players doing something immense then it can be possible to come to dominate the industry.
Susan Rice sounds interesting. Former NSA, ambassador to the UN, graduate of Oxford. I suspect her having a major role in the administration would put US/UK relations back onto some more like a normal footing.
I see Biden's VP having a Cheney like influence on the administration as the boss gets ever more wandered. She looks like she would be up for that.
Rhodes scholar
probably linked to the KKK
Possibly one of their more liberal branches...
I've always wanted to join the KKK, I really want to know which washing powder they use to keep their sheets white.
I believe they do it by very strictly keeping their whites separate.
*Claps*
Note that the whole bedsheet thing was an invention for the modern Klan - which was largely invented around the portrayal of the Klan in Birth of Nation.
The original Klan looked more like this -
That law abiding klansman looks like he's being terrorised in his own home by a black mob.
Yes - the Klan used blackface. That is, they used the old disguise used by criminals over the years - rubbing charcoal into their faces to disguise themselves.
Ah ok. Interesting. Did not know that. So at least a genuine practical reason then. Not cultural appropriation.
I find it quite possible, that the racist terrorists in question found it funny to "black up" before heading out.. to murder black people.
Yes I can imagine they would.
In your picture the victim looks white though?
Many of the victims of the original KKK were white.
They were dedicated to destroying the Republican Party in the former Confederate States. Terrorising and murdering black voters was just one part of their campaign.
Basically, in the aftermath of the Civil War, most of the former Confederate leadership was disenfranchised. So the so-called "Carpet Baggers" came South and setup Republican governments, often supported by black voting.
The KKK was formed to destroy this.
It is notable that the first Klan was shut down by it's rich, white, ex-confederate sponsors, when it had achieved that aim. And created the Jim Crow South.
Self driving is like speech recognition. Back in about 2000, speech recognition got to 99%. IBM and Dragon had amazing dictation products that did really well.
But nobody bought it. Because it turned out that 99% was not good enough, and that the last 1% was *really* hard.
Self driving is the same. We've got to 99% with cameras. But it's not good enough. You need - with Tesla - to keep your hands on the wheel. That last 1% is incredibly hard. Worse. People are lulled into thinking their self driving system is better than it is. This means people mentally turn off, and accidents happen.
Waymo - which uses Lidar and cameras - is way ahead of Tesla, and has logged 10x as many autonomous miles as all the other players combined. It has recently discovered how difficult this problem is, and they are actually taking their cars off the roads in Arizona.
The big thing now seems to be training in simulation as you can get much better coverage of that 1.0% and even 0.0001% that really do matter but don't occur often enough in the real world. Waymo does a LOT of that as well.
Completely Off Topic Tesla stock going wild 1,331.30 + 122.64 (+10.15%) I bought a few at 820 six weeks ago, last October they were 250.
Can anyone explain why Tesla is now valued at ~$250 billion?
1) Because they figured out how to make the Model 3 profitably. 2) They are selling cars with no advertising, and selling everything they can make 3) This means that every time they build another factory - more profit. 4) They seem to be ahead of all the other car makers on electric vehicles 5) They are ahead on battery power storage 6) Most of the western world in heading full tilt to get rid of ICE vehicles 7) The legacy car makers are trying to catch up - and not doing especially well
All of the above may not add up to $250 billion, but these are the reasons that it has gone that way.
I've no financial background so you might have to forgive this but....
How many cars would a mature low growth Tesla have to sell to justify that valuation?
What percentage of the total EV market is a mature Tesla going to occupy?
To my financial illiteracy this parabolic valuation seems to assume limited competition from all the other established auto makers.
Proposition one: in the future, all cars will be electric. Proposition two: in tech, the winner (Microsoft, Google, Facebook, Amazon, Netflix, etc.) utterly dominates returns. Proposition three: the electric car industry is part of the tech industry.
If you believe all three, then Tesla is worth $250bn.
I am sceptical about proposition three, which means proposition two doesn't apply.
I'd say proposition two applies to most industries.
I don't think so.
In telecoms, the best returns (i.e. multiple of profits to capital invested) often went to the niche players, rather the big ones. In pharmaceuticals, it's a similar story . Traditional auto had a bunch of (modestly) profitable firms, none of which had dramatically different margins: Ford, GM, Chrysler, Nissan, Toyota, BMW, VW etc.
Tech is one of a very few industries where the advantages of standardization are such that de facto monopolies exist because scale begets scale.
Its worth thinking that traditional auto did coalesce into a few big companies though too. Just how many brands are actually part of a larger organisation?
Tesla have also thought smartly about scaling up. Their "Gigafactories" are being built on a bigger scale than traditional auto factories and it's entirely possible that in the future traditional auto is going to find it very hard to compete with Tesla.
I disagree, for three reasons:
1. I don't buy the idea that everyone will want one of three or four car designs. (And, really, Tesla has two - the S/X and the 3/Y. Note S3XY.) This creates an opportunity.
2. Electric cars are pretty similar to regular cars, with the exception of motors (a solved problem) and the batteries (which are mostly built to a standard design). It's no coincidence that Tesla bought GM's Fremont factory and workforce for building the Model 3.
3. Other firms are catching up already. The iPhone and Android expanded their leads over Symbian/Palm/Windows Mobile etc. every single day after launch. Tesla tech and costs lead has been diminishing, not growing.
Completely Off Topic Tesla stock going wild 1,331.30 + 122.64 (+10.15%) I bought a few at 820 six weeks ago, last October they were 250.
Can anyone explain why Tesla is now valued at ~$250 billion?
1) Because they figured out how to make the Model 3 profitably. 2) They are selling cars with no advertising, and selling everything they can make 3) This means that every time they build another factory - more profit. 4) They seem to be ahead of all the other car makers on electric vehicles 5) They are ahead on battery power storage 6) Most of the western world in heading full tilt to get rid of ICE vehicles 7) The legacy car makers are trying to catch up - and not doing especially well
All of the above may not add up to $250 billion, but these are the reasons that it has gone that way.
I've no financial background so you might have to forgive this but....
How many cars would a mature low growth Tesla have to sell to justify that valuation?
What percentage of the total EV market is a mature Tesla going to occupy?
To my financial illiteracy this parabolic valuation seems to assume limited competition from all the other established auto makers.
Proposition one: in the future, all cars will be electric. Proposition two: in tech, the winner (Microsoft, Google, Facebook, Amazon, Netflix, etc.) utterly dominates returns. Proposition three: the electric car industry is part of the tech industry.
If you believe all three, then Tesla is worth $250bn.
I am sceptical about proposition three, which means proposition two doesn't apply.
But don't forget that Tesla are not only market leaders in the car industry. They're also market leaders in the battery industry and thus have a major advantage in the energy industry too.
In the future it's possible 100% of UK electricity could come from a combination of wind etc and Tesla style Powerwalls of equivalent storage.
While sunny climates like Australia are seeking to combine solar with energy storage.
I don't think Tesla are a leader in battery chemistry, as they mostly license other people's technology. What they are a leader in is building the biggest factories and using that to drive costs down. Without a deep patent portfolio there, they might be the biggest (and most profitable) player, but they can't dominate the industry.
It's not so much exotic tech which is the Tesla thing, but getting the best out of existing tech. And scaling it up.
The legacy automakers have talked a good game about building battery factories. Without them, you can't build electric cars at scale. Only Tesla, so far, has actually opened the kind of giant facilities required.
Why do you feel the need to keep posting statistics to imply Scotland and Wales have performed poorly throughout the life of the pandemic? It seems a really peculiar thing to want to do.
Just saying.
Surely the 'Wales is in a much better position than England' comment in that tweet deserves to be refuted if it is false. Or are you only happy with news when it makes Westminster look bad?
The figures generally in Wales have been pretty poor as they have been compared to our European neighbours, in the rest of the UK. The figures quoted should be contextualised by three meat processing plants in Anglesey, Merthyr and Wrexham. My issue isn't with calling all domestic government's out for a total failure, it just seems odd that someone living in Guernsey would feel the need to keep posting negative stories about Scotland and Wales specifically. I wouldn't get any particular pleasure from from learning that over the course of the pandemic, more people have passed away in England per 100,000 than in any of the other home nations. It's mawkish!
I’ve been critical of all the governments’ efforts - and in particular of partisan nationalists trying to claim that “our nationalism is superior to your nationalism - look at our results”.
All of them have made mistakes. Wales’ testing has been poor, Scotland made a mess of Care Homes (as did Guernsey) and the U.K. government has muffed quarantine and international travel.
I think we should learn from all of those - don’t you?
Self driving is like speech recognition. Back in about 2000, speech recognition got to 99%. IBM and Dragon had amazing dictation products that did really well.
But nobody bought it. Because it turned out that 99% was not good enough, and that the last 1% was *really* hard.
Self driving is the same. We've got to 99% with cameras. But it's not good enough. You need - with Tesla - to keep your hands on the wheel. That last 1% is incredibly hard. Worse. People are lulled into thinking their self driving system is better than it is. This means people mentally turn off, and accidents happen.
Waymo - which uses Lidar and cameras - is way ahead of Tesla, and has logged 10x as many autonomous miles as all the other players combined. It has recently discovered how difficult this problem is, and they are actually taking their cars off the roads in Arizona.
The big thing now seems to be training in simulation as you can get much better coverage of that 1.0% and even 0.0001% that really do matter but don't occur often enough in the real world. Waymo does a LOT of that as well.
True but it doesn't seem to be solving the issue - Waymo has gone very quiet compared to previous years..
I hate myself, but I like two Kanye West songs (Goldigga and Black Skinhead) but I've got a ton of a Cardassian/Kardashian puns ready for deployment.
Oh, that lovely singalong ditty.
Now I’m not saying she’s a gold digga, But she ain’t playin’ with no broke n.....
Err, I think I’ll stop there, if that’s okay.
Great song though. One of many from him. Highly unlikely imo to be as good at American Presidency as he is at music.
Still, if it were Kanye v Trump ...
The worry is that it’s Kanye v Trump v Biden, in 50 FPTP elections. We could see a big Ross Perot effect.
West has already missed the registration deadline in New Mexico , North Carolina , Texas, New York , Indiana and Maine. To get on the ballot in states is a complicated process. And his arse licking of Trump previously means you’ll get very few Democrats being duped into voting for him. No paperwork has been filed with the FEC and more states have deadlines over the next few weeks . If he does run and it’s not just some publicity stunt then it’s an attempt to put Trump back in the WH and that message is going to be hammered home by the Dems .
Completely Off Topic Tesla stock going wild 1,331.30 + 122.64 (+10.15%) I bought a few at 820 six weeks ago, last October they were 250.
Can anyone explain why Tesla is now valued at ~$250 billion?
1) Because they figured out how to make the Model 3 profitably. 2) They are selling cars with no advertising, and selling everything they can make 3) This means that every time they build another factory - more profit. 4) They seem to be ahead of all the other car makers on electric vehicles 5) They are ahead on battery power storage 6) Most of the western world in heading full tilt to get rid of ICE vehicles 7) The legacy car makers are trying to catch up - and not doing especially well
All of the above may not add up to $250 billion, but these are the reasons that it has gone that way.
I've no financial background so you might have to forgive this but....
How many cars would a mature low growth Tesla have to sell to justify that valuation?
What percentage of the total EV market is a mature Tesla going to occupy?
To my financial illiteracy this parabolic valuation seems to assume limited competition from all the other established auto makers.
Proposition one: in the future, all cars will be electric. Proposition two: in tech, the winner (Microsoft, Google, Facebook, Amazon, Netflix, etc.) utterly dominates returns. Proposition three: the electric car industry is part of the tech industry.
If you believe all three, then Tesla is worth $250bn.
I am sceptical about proposition three, which means proposition two doesn't apply.
I'd say proposition two applies to most industries.
I don't think so.
In telecoms, the best returns (i.e. multiple of profits to capital invested) often went to the niche players, rather the big ones. In pharmaceuticals, it's a similar story . Traditional auto had a bunch of (modestly) profitable firms, none of which had dramatically different margins: Ford, GM, Chrysler, Nissan, Toyota, BMW, VW etc.
Tech is one of a very few industries where the advantages of standardization are such that de facto monopolies exist because scale begets scale.
Its worth thinking that traditional auto did coalesce into a few big companies though too. Just how many brands are actually part of a larger organisation?
Tesla have also thought smartly about scaling up. Their "Gigafactories" are being built on a bigger scale than traditional auto factories and it's entirely possible that in the future traditional auto is going to find it very hard to compete with Tesla.
I have absolutely no doubt that Tesla will be one of the leading auto manufacturers in the world a decade from now, and may even be the largest single firm by number of cars delivered.
But they won't be on 40-50% market share, with 80% of industry profits.
They will be on a 15-20% share, with 20-25% of industry profits.
I'm not a Tesla investor but I'm glad they're doing well - Musk is the most proactive billionaire in terms of getting us off this rock and expanding humanity's horizons.
Bezos doesn't get mentions in Star Trek like Musk, it must drive him wild.
Musk makes stuff and sells it. Bezos sells other people's stuff.
Amazon AWS is a real thing that they make. Amazon are a very strong tech company.
Why do you feel the need to keep posting statistics to imply Scotland and Wales have performed poorly throughout the life of the pandemic? It seems a really peculiar thing to want to do.
Just saying.
You'll note it rebuts a tweet that Wales is doing particularly well - "much better shape than England".
It's the nationalists I'm not overly fond of.
None of those in charge of the pandemic in the home nations can claim to have done particularly well. On the plus side those in charge in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland may have done a particularly poor job, but at least they seemed to take it seriously, perhaps with the exception of Mary Lou.
Why do you feel the need to keep posting statistics to imply Scotland and Wales have performed poorly throughout the life of the pandemic? It seems a really peculiar thing to want to do.
Just saying.
You'll note it rebuts a tweet that Wales is doing particularly well - "much better shape than England".
It's the nationalists I'm not overly fond of.
None of those in charge of the pandemic in the home nations can claim to have done particularly well. On the plus side those in charge in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland may have done a particularly poor job, but at least they seemed to take it seriously, perhaps with the exception of Mary Lou.
So England doesn’t take it seriously?
That's the meme, despite doing roughly the same thing at roughly the same time.
Completely Off Topic Tesla stock going wild 1,331.30 + 122.64 (+10.15%) I bought a few at 820 six weeks ago, last October they were 250.
Can anyone explain why Tesla is now valued at ~$250 billion?
1) Because they figured out how to make the Model 3 profitably. 2) They are selling cars with no advertising, and selling everything they can make 3) This means that every time they build another factory - more profit. 4) They seem to be ahead of all the other car makers on electric vehicles 5) They are ahead on battery power storage 6) Most of the western world in heading full tilt to get rid of ICE vehicles 7) The legacy car makers are trying to catch up - and not doing especially well
All of the above may not add up to $250 billion, but these are the reasons that it has gone that way.
I've no financial background so you might have to forgive this but....
How many cars would a mature low growth Tesla have to sell to justify that valuation?
What percentage of the total EV market is a mature Tesla going to occupy?
To my financial illiteracy this parabolic valuation seems to assume limited competition from all the other established auto makers.
Proposition one: in the future, all cars will be electric. Proposition two: in tech, the winner (Microsoft, Google, Facebook, Amazon, Netflix, etc.) utterly dominates returns. Proposition three: the electric car industry is part of the tech industry.
If you believe all three, then Tesla is worth $250bn.
I am sceptical about proposition three, which means proposition two doesn't apply.
I'd say proposition two applies to most industries.
I don't think so.
In telecoms, the best returns (i.e. multiple of profits to capital invested) often went to the niche players, rather the big ones. In pharmaceuticals, it's a similar story . Traditional auto had a bunch of (modestly) profitable firms, none of which had dramatically different margins: Ford, GM, Chrysler, Nissan, Toyota, BMW, VW etc.
Tech is one of a very few industries where the advantages of standardization are such that de facto monopolies exist because scale begets scale.
Its worth thinking that traditional auto did coalesce into a few big companies though too. Just how many brands are actually part of a larger organisation?
Tesla have also thought smartly about scaling up. Their "Gigafactories" are being built on a bigger scale than traditional auto factories and it's entirely possible that in the future traditional auto is going to find it very hard to compete with Tesla.
I have absolutely no doubt that Tesla will be one of the leading auto manufacturers in the world a decade from now, and may even be the largest single firm by number of cars delivered.
But they won't be on 40-50% market share, with 80% of industry profits.
They will be on a 15-20% share, with 20-25% of industry profits.
Are some other car makers undervalued right now ? Tho other's EV progress doesn't seem to have been great to say the least.
Why do you feel the need to keep posting statistics to imply Scotland and Wales have performed poorly throughout the life of the pandemic? It seems a really peculiar thing to want to do.
Just saying.
Surely the 'Wales is in a much better position than England' comment in that tweet deserves to be refuted if it is false. Or are you only happy with news when it makes Westminster look bad?
The figures generally in Wales have been pretty poor as they have been compared to our European neighbours, in the rest of the UK. The figures quoted should be contextualised by three meat processing plants in Anglesey, Merthyr and Wrexham. My issue isn't with calling all domestic government's out for a total failure, it just seems odd that someone living in Guernsey would feel the need to keep posting negative stories about Scotland and Wales specifically. I wouldn't get any particular pleasure from from learning that over the course of the pandemic, more people have passed away in England per 100,000 than in any of the other home nations. It's mawkish!
If the Welsh numbers should be massaged like that, shouldn't the English ones be treated the same way?
What do you mean massaged? Johnson has said we need to focus on local lockdowns so of course one needs to be able to highlight specific hotspots and analyse that localised data. I wasn't saying that the figures from these meat plants should be removed from the national figures, but it might be helpful to add caveats.
Completely Off Topic Tesla stock going wild 1,331.30 + 122.64 (+10.15%) I bought a few at 820 six weeks ago, last October they were 250.
Can anyone explain why Tesla is now valued at ~$250 billion?
1) Because they figured out how to make the Model 3 profitably. 2) They are selling cars with no advertising, and selling everything they can make 3) This means that every time they build another factory - more profit. 4) They seem to be ahead of all the other car makers on electric vehicles 5) They are ahead on battery power storage 6) Most of the western world in heading full tilt to get rid of ICE vehicles 7) The legacy car makers are trying to catch up - and not doing especially well
All of the above may not add up to $250 billion, but these are the reasons that it has gone that way.
I've no financial background so you might have to forgive this but....
How many cars would a mature low growth Tesla have to sell to justify that valuation?
What percentage of the total EV market is a mature Tesla going to occupy?
To my financial illiteracy this parabolic valuation seems to assume limited competition from all the other established auto makers.
Proposition one: in the future, all cars will be electric. Proposition two: in tech, the winner (Microsoft, Google, Facebook, Amazon, Netflix, etc.) utterly dominates returns. Proposition three: the electric car industry is part of the tech industry.
If you believe all three, then Tesla is worth $250bn.
I am sceptical about proposition three, which means proposition two doesn't apply.
Isn't point 3 the same mistake that the likes of SoftBank made when investing in WeWork though. That didn't turn out well.
Why do you feel the need to keep posting statistics to imply Scotland and Wales have performed poorly throughout the life of the pandemic? It seems a really peculiar thing to want to do.
Just saying.
Surely the 'Wales is in a much better position than England' comment in that tweet deserves to be refuted if it is false. Or are you only happy with news when it makes Westminster look bad?
The figures generally in Wales have been pretty poor as they have been compared to our European neighbours, in the rest of the UK. The figures quoted should be contextualised by three meat processing plants in Anglesey, Merthyr and Wrexham. My issue isn't with calling all domestic government's out for a total failure, it just seems odd that someone living in Guernsey would feel the need to keep posting negative stories about Scotland and Wales specifically. I wouldn't get any particular pleasure from from learning that over the course of the pandemic, more people have passed away in England per 100,000 than in any of the other home nations. It's mawkish!
If the Welsh numbers should be massaged like that, shouldn't the English ones be treated the same way?
What do you mean massaged? Johnson has said we need to focus on local lockdowns so of course one needs to be able to highlight specific hotspots and analyse that localised data. I wasn't saying that the figures from these meat plants should be removed from the national figures, but it might be helpful to add caveats.
You were saying the Welsh figures had to be contextualised, but nothing on the English figures.
I'm not a Tesla investor but I'm glad they're doing well - Musk is the most proactive billionaire in terms of getting us off this rock and expanding humanity's horizons.
Bezos doesn't get mentions in Star Trek like Musk, it must drive him wild.
Musk makes stuff and sells it. Bezos sells other people's stuff.
Amazon AWS is a real thing that they make. Amazon are a very strong tech company.
AWS is a big deal, and getting bigger all the time. Their best known customer is probably Netflix
Completely Off Topic Tesla stock going wild 1,331.30 + 122.64 (+10.15%) I bought a few at 820 six weeks ago, last October they were 250.
Can anyone explain why Tesla is now valued at ~$250 billion?
1) Because they figured out how to make the Model 3 profitably. 2) They are selling cars with no advertising, and selling everything they can make 3) This means that every time they build another factory - more profit. 4) They seem to be ahead of all the other car makers on electric vehicles 5) They are ahead on battery power storage 6) Most of the western world in heading full tilt to get rid of ICE vehicles 7) The legacy car makers are trying to catch up - and not doing especially well
All of the above may not add up to $250 billion, but these are the reasons that it has gone that way.
I've no financial background so you might have to forgive this but....
How many cars would a mature low growth Tesla have to sell to justify that valuation?
What percentage of the total EV market is a mature Tesla going to occupy?
To my financial illiteracy this parabolic valuation seems to assume limited competition from all the other established auto makers.
Proposition one: in the future, all cars will be electric. Proposition two: in tech, the winner (Microsoft, Google, Facebook, Amazon, Netflix, etc.) utterly dominates returns. Proposition three: the electric car industry is part of the tech industry.
If you believe all three, then Tesla is worth $250bn.
I am sceptical about proposition three, which means proposition two doesn't apply.
I'd say proposition two applies to most industries.
I don't think so.
In telecoms, the best returns (i.e. multiple of profits to capital invested) often went to the niche players, rather the big ones. In pharmaceuticals, it's a similar story . Traditional auto had a bunch of (modestly) profitable firms, none of which had dramatically different margins: Ford, GM, Chrysler, Nissan, Toyota, BMW, VW etc.
Tech is one of a very few industries where the advantages of standardization are such that de facto monopolies exist because scale begets scale.
Its worth thinking that traditional auto did coalesce into a few big companies though too. Just how many brands are actually part of a larger organisation?
Tesla have also thought smartly about scaling up. Their "Gigafactories" are being built on a bigger scale than traditional auto factories and it's entirely possible that in the future traditional auto is going to find it very hard to compete with Tesla.
I have absolutely no doubt that Tesla will be one of the leading auto manufacturers in the world a decade from now, and may even be the largest single firm by number of cars delivered.
But they won't be on 40-50% market share, with 80% of industry profits.
They will be on a 15-20% share, with 20-25% of industry profits.
Are some other car makers undervalued right now ? Tho other's EV progress doesn't seem to have been great to say the least.
I'm holding judgement on other companies until I see the ID3 and the new Mustang in real life...
I'm not a Tesla investor but I'm glad they're doing well - Musk is the most proactive billionaire in terms of getting us off this rock and expanding humanity's horizons.
Bezos doesn't get mentions in Star Trek like Musk, it must drive him wild.
Musk makes stuff and sells it. Bezos sells other people's stuff.
Amazon AWS is a real thing that they make. Amazon are a very strong tech company.
Amazons distribution network and brand are also a massive thing.
He must be condemned for going into government to try to get some of their policies implemented? (and succeed.. e.g., the £10k income tax threshold was a LD idea...)
Why do you feel the need to keep posting statistics to imply Scotland and Wales have performed poorly throughout the life of the pandemic? It seems a really peculiar thing to want to do.
Just saying.
You'll note it rebuts a tweet that Wales is doing particularly well - "much better shape than England".
It's the nationalists I'm not overly fond of.
None of those in charge of the pandemic in the home nations can claim to have done particularly well. On the plus side those in charge in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland may have done a particularly poor job, but at least they seemed to take it seriously, perhaps with the exception of Mary Lou.
So England doesn’t take it seriously?
Perhaps two key people running the show in England/UK have been preoccupied with protecting the reputation of one of their number, so their priorities changed.
Why do you feel the need to keep posting statistics to imply Scotland and Wales have performed poorly throughout the life of the pandemic? It seems a really peculiar thing to want to do.
Just saying.
Surely the 'Wales is in a much better position than England' comment in that tweet deserves to be refuted if it is false. Or are you only happy with news when it makes Westminster look bad?
The figures generally in Wales have been pretty poor as they have been compared to our European neighbours, in the rest of the UK. The figures quoted should be contextualised by three meat processing plants in Anglesey, Merthyr and Wrexham. My issue isn't with calling all domestic government's out for a total failure, it just seems odd that someone living in Guernsey would feel the need to keep posting negative stories about Scotland and Wales specifically. I wouldn't get any particular pleasure from from learning that over the course of the pandemic, more people have passed away in England per 100,000 than in any of the other home nations. It's mawkish!
If the Welsh numbers should be massaged like that, shouldn't the English ones be treated the same way?
What do you mean massaged? Johnson has said we need to focus on local lockdowns so of course one needs to be able to highlight specific hotspots and analyse that localised data. I wasn't saying that the figures from these meat plants should be removed from the national figures, but it might be helpful to add caveats.
You were saying the Welsh figures had to be contextualised, but nothing on the English figures.
Well, one set are Labour figures and the other set are Tory figures. So the first are obviously “better”.
Completely Off Topic Tesla stock going wild 1,331.30 + 122.64 (+10.15%) I bought a few at 820 six weeks ago, last October they were 250.
Can anyone explain why Tesla is now valued at ~$250 billion?
1) Because they figured out how to make the Model 3 profitably. 2) They are selling cars with no advertising, and selling everything they can make 3) This means that every time they build another factory - more profit. 4) They seem to be ahead of all the other car makers on electric vehicles 5) They are ahead on battery power storage 6) Most of the western world in heading full tilt to get rid of ICE vehicles 7) The legacy car makers are trying to catch up - and not doing especially well
All of the above may not add up to $250 billion, but these are the reasons that it has gone that way.
I've no financial background so you might have to forgive this but....
How many cars would a mature low growth Tesla have to sell to justify that valuation?
What percentage of the total EV market is a mature Tesla going to occupy?
To my financial illiteracy this parabolic valuation seems to assume limited competition from all the other established auto makers.
Proposition one: in the future, all cars will be electric. Proposition two: in tech, the winner (Microsoft, Google, Facebook, Amazon, Netflix, etc.) utterly dominates returns. Proposition three: the electric car industry is part of the tech industry.
If you believe all three, then Tesla is worth $250bn.
I am sceptical about proposition three, which means proposition two doesn't apply.
I'd say proposition two applies to most industries.
I don't think so.
In telecoms, the best returns (i.e. multiple of profits to capital invested) often went to the niche players, rather the big ones. In pharmaceuticals, it's a similar story . Traditional auto had a bunch of (modestly) profitable firms, none of which had dramatically different margins: Ford, GM, Chrysler, Nissan, Toyota, BMW, VW etc.
Tech is one of a very few industries where the advantages of standardization are such that de facto monopolies exist because scale begets scale.
Its worth thinking that traditional auto did coalesce into a few big companies though too. Just how many brands are actually part of a larger organisation?
Tesla have also thought smartly about scaling up. Their "Gigafactories" are being built on a bigger scale than traditional auto factories and it's entirely possible that in the future traditional auto is going to find it very hard to compete with Tesla.
I disagree, for three reasons:
1. I don't buy the idea that everyone will want one of three or four car designs. (And, really, Tesla has two - the S/X and the 3/Y. Note S3XY.) This creates an opportunity.
2. Electric cars are pretty similar to regular cars, with the exception of motors (a solved problem) and the batteries (which are mostly built to a standard design). It's no coincidence that Tesla bought GM's Fremont factory and workforce for building the Model 3.
3. Other firms are catching up already. The iPhone and Android expanded their leads over Symbian/Palm/Windows Mobile etc. every single day after launch. Tesla tech and costs lead has been diminishing, not growing.
I'd be curious to see some evidence that Tesla's cost lead has been diminishing over time. I thought it was the opposite? I thought Tesla had a tech lead but were expensive but as their Gigafactories have been coming online they've been driving their own costs down. I haven't yet seen anything to suggest costs are going in the wrong direction for Tesla.
Completely Off Topic Tesla stock going wild 1,331.30 + 122.64 (+10.15%) I bought a few at 820 six weeks ago, last October they were 250.
Can anyone explain why Tesla is now valued at ~$250 billion?
1) Because they figured out how to make the Model 3 profitably. 2) They are selling cars with no advertising, and selling everything they can make 3) This means that every time they build another factory - more profit. 4) They seem to be ahead of all the other car makers on electric vehicles 5) They are ahead on battery power storage 6) Most of the western world in heading full tilt to get rid of ICE vehicles 7) The legacy car makers are trying to catch up - and not doing especially well
All of the above may not add up to $250 billion, but these are the reasons that it has gone that way.
I've no financial background so you might have to forgive this but....
How many cars would a mature low growth Tesla have to sell to justify that valuation?
What percentage of the total EV market is a mature Tesla going to occupy?
To my financial illiteracy this parabolic valuation seems to assume limited competition from all the other established auto makers.
Proposition one: in the future, all cars will be electric. Proposition two: in tech, the winner (Microsoft, Google, Facebook, Amazon, Netflix, etc.) utterly dominates returns. Proposition three: the electric car industry is part of the tech industry.
If you believe all three, then Tesla is worth $250bn.
I am sceptical about proposition three, which means proposition two doesn't apply.
I'd say proposition two applies to most industries.
I don't think so.
In telecoms, the best returns (i.e. multiple of profits to capital invested) often went to the niche players, rather the big ones. In pharmaceuticals, it's a similar story . Traditional auto had a bunch of (modestly) profitable firms, none of which had dramatically different margins: Ford, GM, Chrysler, Nissan, Toyota, BMW, VW etc.
Tech is one of a very few industries where the advantages of standardization are such that de facto monopolies exist because scale begets scale.
Its worth thinking that traditional auto did coalesce into a few big companies though too. Just how many brands are actually part of a larger organisation?
Tesla have also thought smartly about scaling up. Their "Gigafactories" are being built on a bigger scale than traditional auto factories and it's entirely possible that in the future traditional auto is going to find it very hard to compete with Tesla.
I have absolutely no doubt that Tesla will be one of the leading auto manufacturers in the world a decade from now, and may even be the largest single firm by number of cars delivered.
But they won't be on 40-50% market share, with 80% of industry profits.
They will be on a 15-20% share, with 20-25% of industry profits.
Are some other car makers undervalued right now ? Tho other's EV progress doesn't seem to have been great to say the least.
In the UK in spring this year the battery EV market share trebled in 12 months.
Small base, but it's not going back down especially if Dishy-Rishyy boosts fuel duty, as he should. Could be 100k+ this year.
Why do you feel the need to keep posting statistics to imply Scotland and Wales have performed poorly throughout the life of the pandemic? It seems a really peculiar thing to want to do.
Just saying.
Surely the 'Wales is in a much better position than England' comment in that tweet deserves to be refuted if it is false. Or are you only happy with news when it makes Westminster look bad?
The figures generally in Wales have been pretty poor as they have been compared to our European neighbours, in the rest of the UK. The figures quoted should be contextualised by three meat processing plants in Anglesey, Merthyr and Wrexham. My issue isn't with calling all domestic government's out for a total failure, it just seems odd that someone living in Guernsey would feel the need to keep posting negative stories about Scotland and Wales specifically. I wouldn't get any particular pleasure from from learning that over the course of the pandemic, more people have passed away in England per 100,000 than in any of the other home nations. It's mawkish!
If the Welsh numbers should be massaged like that, shouldn't the English ones be treated the same way?
What do you mean massaged? Johnson has said we need to focus on local lockdowns so of course one needs to be able to highlight specific hotspots and analyse that localised data. I wasn't saying that the figures from these meat plants should be removed from the national figures, but it might be helpful to add caveats.
You were saying the Welsh figures had to be contextualised, but nothing on the English figures.
Of course all the figures should be contextualised. England generally have seen the R rate reducing. It would be even better were it not for the R rate running out of control in London.
But I recently (last week) did get an electric car from someone who isn't Tesla, and I've been very pleasantly surprised with it so far. The finish and materials are excellent, and it drives very well.
Why do you feel the need to keep posting statistics to imply Scotland and Wales have performed poorly throughout the life of the pandemic? It seems a really peculiar thing to want to do.
Just saying.
You'll note it rebuts a tweet that Wales is doing particularly well - "much better shape than England".
It's the nationalists I'm not overly fond of.
None of those in charge of the pandemic in the home nations can claim to have done particularly well. On the plus side those in charge in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland may have done a particularly poor job, but at least they seemed to take it seriously, perhaps with the exception of Mary Lou.
So England doesn’t take it seriously?
Perhaps two key people running the show in England/UK have been preoccupied with protecting the reputation of one of their number, so their priorities changed.
I can't read AWS without expanding to "All Women Shortlist" >.> Yes I know it's Amazon Web systems - or at least I think it is.
Amazon Web Services. Innovative solutions for web hosting, scalability and content distribution. It’s now the back end for a large and growing proportion of the internet.
Why do you feel the need to keep posting statistics to imply Scotland and Wales have performed poorly throughout the life of the pandemic? It seems a really peculiar thing to want to do.
Just saying.
Surely the 'Wales is in a much better position than England' comment in that tweet deserves to be refuted if it is false. Or are you only happy with news when it makes Westminster look bad?
The figures generally in Wales have been pretty poor as they have been compared to our European neighbours, in the rest of the UK. The figures quoted should be contextualised by three meat processing plants in Anglesey, Merthyr and Wrexham. My issue isn't with calling all domestic government's out for a total failure, it just seems odd that someone living in Guernsey would feel the need to keep posting negative stories about Scotland and Wales specifically. I wouldn't get any particular pleasure from from learning that over the course of the pandemic, more people have passed away in England per 100,000 than in any of the other home nations. It's mawkish!
If the Welsh numbers should be massaged like that, shouldn't the English ones be treated the same way?
What do you mean massaged? Johnson has said we need to focus on local lockdowns so of course one needs to be able to highlight specific hotspots and analyse that localised data. I wasn't saying that the figures from these meat plants should be removed from the national figures, but it might be helpful to add caveats.
You were saying the Welsh figures had to be contextualised, but nothing on the English figures.
Of course all the figures should be contextualised. England generally have seen the R rate reducing. It would be even better were it not for the R rate running out of control in London.
He must be condemned for going into government to try to get some of their policies implemented? (and succeed.. e.g., the £10k income tax threshold was a LD idea...)
Why do you feel the need to keep posting statistics to imply Scotland and Wales have performed poorly throughout the life of the pandemic? It seems a really peculiar thing to want to do.
Just saying.
Surely the 'Wales is in a much better position than England' comment in that tweet deserves to be refuted if it is false. Or are you only happy with news when it makes Westminster look bad?
The figures generally in Wales have been pretty poor as they have been compared to our European neighbours, in the rest of the UK. The figures quoted should be contextualised by three meat processing plants in Anglesey, Merthyr and Wrexham. My issue isn't with calling all domestic government's out for a total failure, it just seems odd that someone living in Guernsey would feel the need to keep posting negative stories about Scotland and Wales specifically. I wouldn't get any particular pleasure from from learning that over the course of the pandemic, more people have passed away in England per 100,000 than in any of the other home nations. It's mawkish!
It's moderately entertaining seeing the #covidnationalists stagger about the streets tearing at themselves and screeching 'You're as shit as we are!' though. One has to take one's pleasures where one can in these dark days.
I've no financial background so you might have to forgive this but....
How many cars would a mature low growth Tesla have to sell to justify that valuation?
What percentage of the total EV market is a mature Tesla going to occupy?
To my financial illiteracy this parabolic valuation seems to assume limited competition from all the other established auto makers.
Proposition one: in the future, all cars will be electric. Proposition two: in tech, the winner (Microsoft, Google, Facebook, Amazon, Netflix, etc.) utterly dominates returns. Proposition three: the electric car industry is part of the tech industry.
If you believe all three, then Tesla is worth $250bn.
I am sceptical about proposition three, which means proposition two doesn't apply.
I'd say proposition two applies to most industries.
I don't think so.
In telecoms, the best returns (i.e. multiple of profits to capital invested) often went to the niche players, rather the big ones. In pharmaceuticals, it's a similar story . Traditional auto had a bunch of (modestly) profitable firms, none of which had dramatically different margins: Ford, GM, Chrysler, Nissan, Toyota, BMW, VW etc.
Tech is one of a very few industries where the advantages of standardization are such that de facto monopolies exist because scale begets scale.
Its worth thinking that traditional auto did coalesce into a few big companies though too. Just how many brands are actually part of a larger organisation?
Tesla have also thought smartly about scaling up. Their "Gigafactories" are being built on a bigger scale than traditional auto factories and it's entirely possible that in the future traditional auto is going to find it very hard to compete with Tesla.
I have absolutely no doubt that Tesla will be one of the leading auto manufacturers in the world a decade from now, and may even be the largest single firm by number of cars delivered.
But they won't be on 40-50% market share, with 80% of industry profits.
They will be on a 15-20% share, with 20-25% of industry profits.
And the power industry ?
I disagree about Tesla not being tech (they design their own chips; they are potential leaders in battery tech; they are heavily involved in industrial automation). Whether that justifies the current valuation is quite another matter.
(& it’s entirely possible, though only possible, that they take 50% of the electric vehicle market within a decade.)
Completely Off Topic Tesla stock going wild 1,331.30 + 122.64 (+10.15%) I bought a few at 820 six weeks ago, last October they were 250.
Can anyone explain why Tesla is now valued at ~$250 billion?
1) Because they figured out how to make the Model 3 profitably. 2) They are selling cars with no advertising, and selling everything they can make 3) This means that every time they build another factory - more profit. 4) They seem to be ahead of all the other car makers on electric vehicles 5) They are ahead on battery power storage 6) Most of the western world in heading full tilt to get rid of ICE vehicles 7) The legacy car makers are trying to catch up - and not doing especially well
All of the above may not add up to $250 billion, but these are the reasons that it has gone that way.
I've no financial background so you might have to forgive this but....
How many cars would a mature low growth Tesla have to sell to justify that valuation?
What percentage of the total EV market is a mature Tesla going to occupy?
To my financial illiteracy this parabolic valuation seems to assume limited competition from all the other established auto makers.
I saw last week an article that said Tesla was valued at more than the next 17 top manufacturers.
Why do you feel the need to keep posting statistics to imply Scotland and Wales have performed poorly throughout the life of the pandemic? It seems a really peculiar thing to want to do.
Just saying.
Surely the 'Wales is in a much better position than England' comment in that tweet deserves to be refuted if it is false. Or are you only happy with news when it makes Westminster look bad?
The figures generally in Wales have been pretty poor as they have been compared to our European neighbours, in the rest of the UK. The figures quoted should be contextualised by three meat processing plants in Anglesey, Merthyr and Wrexham. My issue isn't with calling all domestic government's out for a total failure, it just seems odd that someone living in Guernsey would feel the need to keep posting negative stories about Scotland and Wales specifically. I wouldn't get any particular pleasure from from learning that over the course of the pandemic, more people have passed away in England per 100,000 than in any of the other home nations. It's mawkish!
It's moderately entertaining seeing the #covidnationalists stagger about the streets tearing at themselves and screeching 'You're as shit as we are!' though. One has to take one's pleasures where one can in these dark days.
Sorry, #covidpatriots.
Thanks for your assistance. I've been taking something of a beating for the last half hour or so.
Why do you feel the need to keep posting statistics to imply Scotland and Wales have performed poorly throughout the life of the pandemic? It seems a really peculiar thing to want to do.
Just saying.
Surely the 'Wales is in a much better position than England' comment in that tweet deserves to be refuted if it is false. Or are you only happy with news when it makes Westminster look bad?
The figures generally in Wales have been pretty poor as they have been compared to our European neighbours, in the rest of the UK. The figures quoted should be contextualised by three meat processing plants in Anglesey, Merthyr and Wrexham. My issue isn't with calling all domestic government's out for a total failure, it just seems odd that someone living in Guernsey would feel the need to keep posting negative stories about Scotland and Wales specifically. I wouldn't get any particular pleasure from from learning that over the course of the pandemic, more people have passed away in England per 100,000 than in any of the other home nations. It's mawkish!
If the Welsh numbers should be massaged like that, shouldn't the English ones be treated the same way?
What do you mean massaged? Johnson has said we need to focus on local lockdowns so of course one needs to be able to highlight specific hotspots and analyse that localised data. I wasn't saying that the figures from these meat plants should be removed from the national figures, but it might be helpful to add caveats.
You were saying the Welsh figures had to be contextualised, but nothing on the English figures.
Of course all the figures should be contextualised. England generally have seen the R rate reducing. It would be even better were it not for the R rate running out of control in London.
Why do you feel the need to keep posting statistics to imply Scotland and Wales have performed poorly throughout the life of the pandemic? It seems a really peculiar thing to want to do.
Just saying.
Surely the 'Wales is in a much better position than England' comment in that tweet deserves to be refuted if it is false. Or are you only happy with news when it makes Westminster look bad?
The figures generally in Wales have been pretty poor as they have been compared to our European neighbours, in the rest of the UK. The figures quoted should be contextualised by three meat processing plants in Anglesey, Merthyr and Wrexham. My issue isn't with calling all domestic government's out for a total failure, it just seems odd that someone living in Guernsey would feel the need to keep posting negative stories about Scotland and Wales specifically. I wouldn't get any particular pleasure from from learning that over the course of the pandemic, more people have passed away in England per 100,000 than in any of the other home nations. It's mawkish!
If the Welsh numbers should be massaged like that, shouldn't the English ones be treated the same way?
What do you mean massaged? Johnson has said we need to focus on local lockdowns so of course one needs to be able to highlight specific hotspots and analyse that localised data. I wasn't saying that the figures from these meat plants should be removed from the national figures, but it might be helpful to add caveats.
You were saying the Welsh figures had to be contextualised, but nothing on the English figures.
Of course all the figures should be contextualised. England generally have seen the R rate reducing. It would be even better were it not for the R rate running out of control in London.
We ran a Nissan Leaf for 3 years from 2014. It was a very good (for the time) electric car but a pretty poor car. That Nissan are still selling the same car 10 years on from launch with the same decade old battery tech is why Tesla have already won.
Elon Musk applies a series of quite simple and quite old business ideas. In this case the one he applies is this:
Your product will be superseded by a better product. That cannot be stopped. Your choice is whether it superseded by your next product, or someone elses.
The Leaf experience demonstrated that we didn't want another Leaf. The Nissan experience demonstrated that we didn't want another Nissan (had loaner cars of everything from Micra to Qashqai). Had already known that Bristol Street Motors were awful, that all the local Nissan dealers are them or similarly awful pretty much nailed the coffin shut.
The problem with every non-Tesla is the charging network. The EU didn't impose CCS fast enough so that we have three different charging standards out there, and some of the private companies installing rapid chargers think that a higher pence per mile than Diesel is the way to go. Which is why wifey now has a ("self-charging") Hyundai hybrid and I have a mahoosive Volvo diesel.
Why do you feel the need to keep posting statistics to imply Scotland and Wales have performed poorly throughout the life of the pandemic? It seems a really peculiar thing to want to do.
Just saying.
Surely the 'Wales is in a much better position than England' comment in that tweet deserves to be refuted if it is false. Or are you only happy with news when it makes Westminster look bad?
The figures generally in Wales have been pretty poor as they have been compared to our European neighbours, in the rest of the UK. The figures quoted should be contextualised by three meat processing plants in Anglesey, Merthyr and Wrexham. My issue isn't with calling all domestic government's out for a total failure, it just seems odd that someone living in Guernsey would feel the need to keep posting negative stories about Scotland and Wales specifically. I wouldn't get any particular pleasure from from learning that over the course of the pandemic, more people have passed away in England per 100,000 than in any of the other home nations. It's mawkish!
It's moderately entertaining seeing the #covidnationalists stagger about the streets tearing at themselves and screeching 'You're as shit as we are!' though. One has to take one's pleasures where one can in these dark days.
Sorry, #covidpatriots.
Thanks for your assistance. I've been taking something of a beating for the last half hour or so.
Why do you feel the need to keep posting statistics to imply Scotland and Wales have performed poorly throughout the life of the pandemic? It seems a really peculiar thing to want to do.
Just saying.
Surely the 'Wales is in a much better position than England' comment in that tweet deserves to be refuted if it is false. Or are you only happy with news when it makes Westminster look bad?
The figures generally in Wales have been pretty poor as they have been compared to our European neighbours, in the rest of the UK. The figures quoted should be contextualised by three meat processing plants in Anglesey, Merthyr and Wrexham. My issue isn't with calling all domestic government's out for a total failure, it just seems odd that someone living in Guernsey would feel the need to keep posting negative stories about Scotland and Wales specifically. I wouldn't get any particular pleasure from from learning that over the course of the pandemic, more people have passed away in England per 100,000 than in any of the other home nations. It's mawkish!
If the Welsh numbers should be massaged like that, shouldn't the English ones be treated the same way?
What do you mean massaged? Johnson has said we need to focus on local lockdowns so of course one needs to be able to highlight specific hotspots and analyse that localised data. I wasn't saying that the figures from these meat plants should be removed from the national figures, but it might be helpful to add caveats.
You were saying the Welsh figures had to be contextualised, but nothing on the English figures.
Of course all the figures should be contextualised. England generally have seen the R rate reducing. It would be even better were it not for the R rate running out of control in London.
Clegg does the LibDems a favour. The *big* abuse thrown about for the coalition was tuition fees - which was all Clegg done on the quiet. That he has gone evil since departing politics just makes it easy. Want to complain about the bits you hated most about the coalition, go shout at Nick.
Why do you feel the need to keep posting statistics to imply Scotland and Wales have performed poorly throughout the life of the pandemic? It seems a really peculiar thing to want to do.
Just saying.
Surely the 'Wales is in a much better position than England' comment in that tweet deserves to be refuted if it is false. Or are you only happy with news when it makes Westminster look bad?
The figures generally in Wales have been pretty poor as they have been compared to our European neighbours, in the rest of the UK. The figures quoted should be contextualised by three meat processing plants in Anglesey, Merthyr and Wrexham. My issue isn't with calling all domestic government's out for a total failure, it just seems odd that someone living in Guernsey would feel the need to keep posting negative stories about Scotland and Wales specifically. I wouldn't get any particular pleasure from from learning that over the course of the pandemic, more people have passed away in England per 100,000 than in any of the other home nations. It's mawkish!
It is actually pathetic and very unedifying , they really need to get the chip off their shoulder and stop trying as hard to prove they are really English and being Scottish was just an accident of birth.
We ran a Nissan Leaf for 3 years from 2014. It was a very good (for the time) electric car but a pretty poor car. That Nissan are still selling the same car 10 years on from launch with the same decade old battery tech is why Tesla have already won.
Elon Musk applies a series of quite simple and quite old business ideas. In this case the one he applies is this:
Your product will be superseded by a better product. That cannot be stopped. Your choice is whether it superseded by your next product, or someone elses.
The Leaf experience demonstrated that we didn't want another Leaf. The Nissan experience demonstrated that we didn't want another Nissan (had loaner cars of everything from Micra to Qashqai). Had already known that Bristol Street Motors were awful, that all the local Nissan dealers are them or similarly awful pretty much nailed the coffin shut.
The problem with every non-Tesla is the charging network. The EU didn't impose CCS fast enough so that we have three different charging standards out there, and some of the private companies installing rapid chargers think that a higher pence per mile than Diesel is the way to go. Which is why wifey now has a ("self-charging") Hyundai hybrid and I have a mahoosive Volvo diesel.
Yep, it’s the charging network. Too many standards, contracts and payment issues to be useable in practice, for anyone without a home charger or who needs to travel. Hopefully some joined-up thinking might get something working before they all lose share to Tesla.
Assuming they actually care about selling the EVs, in any sense other than being forced to by governments.
But I recently (last week) did get an electric car from someone who isn't Tesla, and I've been very pleasantly surprised with it so far. The finish and materials are excellent, and it drives very well.
Is this you driving it?
Sinclair was (and presumably is - he's still with us) ahead of his time. Unfortunately though much about his company's products just wasn't shiny. It's interesting if you compare the history of Sinclair technologies and Apple. Personally I think Apple made it simply because everything they ever made oozed quality. Everything Sinclair ever made oozed cheap.
I guess he must have rueful moments in that he got nearly everything right, but somehow fell short.
Hat's off to him anyway. Megabucks or not, he's helped us dream big.
Re the main point = Hydrogen or batteries? I'm making some nice gains in hydrogen investments, but to be honest I think the way forwards is battery storage.
We ran a Nissan Leaf for 3 years from 2014. It was a very good (for the time) electric car but a pretty poor car. That Nissan are still selling the same car 10 years on from launch with the same decade old battery tech is why Tesla have already won.
Elon Musk applies a series of quite simple and quite old business ideas. In this case the one he applies is this:
Your product will be superseded by a better product. That cannot be stopped. Your choice is whether it superseded by your next product, or someone elses.
The Leaf experience demonstrated that we didn't want another Leaf. The Nissan experience demonstrated that we didn't want another Nissan (had loaner cars of everything from Micra to Qashqai). Had already known that Bristol Street Motors were awful, that all the local Nissan dealers are them or similarly awful pretty much nailed the coffin shut.
The problem with every non-Tesla is the charging network. The EU didn't impose CCS fast enough so that we have three different charging standards out there, and some of the private companies installing rapid chargers think that a higher pence per mile than Diesel is the way to go. Which is why wifey now has a ("self-charging") Hyundai hybrid and I have a mahoosive Volvo diesel.
Every electric car sold in the US now has a J1772 connector, except Tesla (and even Tesla includes a free converter).
I am driving today from Brentwood in North West Los Angeles, to Laguna Niguel in Orange County. There are a surprising number of 150 - 350 KW fast chargers along the way should I need to stop. (It's 200 miles round trip, which will be fine.)
The big issue is not so much the number of fast CCS chargers in the US, it is the fact that you don't know where they are because there are at least two large networks and a host of smaller ones.
Completely Off Topic Tesla stock going wild 1,331.30 + 122.64 (+10.15%) I bought a few at 820 six weeks ago, last October they were 250.
Can anyone explain why Tesla is now valued at ~$250 billion?
1) Because they figured out how to make the Model 3 profitably. 2) They are selling cars with no advertising, and selling everything they can make 3) This means that every time they build another factory - more profit. 4) They seem to be ahead of all the other car makers on electric vehicles 5) They are ahead on battery power storage 6) Most of the western world in heading full tilt to get rid of ICE vehicles 7) The legacy car makers are trying to catch up - and not doing especially well
All of the above may not add up to $250 billion, but these are the reasons that it has gone that way.
I've no financial background so you might have to forgive this but....
How many cars would a mature low growth Tesla have to sell to justify that valuation?
What percentage of the total EV market is a mature Tesla going to occupy?
To my financial illiteracy this parabolic valuation seems to assume limited competition from all the other established auto makers.
Proposition one: in the future, all cars will be electric. Proposition two: in tech, the winner (Microsoft, Google, Facebook, Amazon, Netflix, etc.) utterly dominates returns. Proposition three: the electric car industry is part of the tech industry.
If you believe all three, then Tesla is worth $250bn.
I am sceptical about proposition three, which means proposition two doesn't apply.
Isn't point 3 the same mistake that the likes of SoftBank made when investing in WeWork though. That didn't turn out well.
Why do you feel the need to keep posting statistics to imply Scotland and Wales have performed poorly throughout the life of the pandemic? It seems a really peculiar thing to want to do.
Just saying.
Surely the 'Wales is in a much better position than England' comment in that tweet deserves to be refuted if it is false. Or are you only happy with news when it makes Westminster look bad?
The figures generally in Wales have been pretty poor as they have been compared to our European neighbours, in the rest of the UK. The figures quoted should be contextualised by three meat processing plants in Anglesey, Merthyr and Wrexham. My issue isn't with calling all domestic government's out for a total failure, it just seems odd that someone living in Guernsey would feel the need to keep posting negative stories about Scotland and Wales specifically. I wouldn't get any particular pleasure from from learning that over the course of the pandemic, more people have passed away in England per 100,000 than in any of the other home nations. It's mawkish!
It is actually pathetic and very unedifying , they really need to get the chip off their shoulder and stop trying as hard to prove they are really English and being Scottish was just an accident of birth.
I see “No True Scot” is back with us......you on the other hand are a well balanced fellow - a chip on both shoulders....
I've no financial background so you might have to forgive this but....
How many cars would a mature low growth Tesla have to sell to justify that valuation?
What percentage of the total EV market is a mature Tesla going to occupy?
To my financial illiteracy this parabolic valuation seems to assume limited competition from all the other established auto makers.
Proposition one: in the future, all cars will be electric. Proposition two: in tech, the winner (Microsoft, Google, Facebook, Amazon, Netflix, etc.) utterly dominates returns. Proposition three: the electric car industry is part of the tech industry.
If you believe all three, then Tesla is worth $250bn.
I am sceptical about proposition three, which means proposition two doesn't apply.
I'd say proposition two applies to most industries.
I don't think so.
In telecoms, the best returns (i.e. multiple of profits to capital invested) often went to the niche players, rather the big ones. In pharmaceuticals, it's a similar story . Traditional auto had a bunch of (modestly) profitable firms, none of which had dramatically different margins: Ford, GM, Chrysler, Nissan, Toyota, BMW, VW etc.
Tech is one of a very few industries where the advantages of standardization are such that de facto monopolies exist because scale begets scale.
Its worth thinking that traditional auto did coalesce into a few big companies though too. Just how many brands are actually part of a larger organisation?
Tesla have also thought smartly about scaling up. Their "Gigafactories" are being built on a bigger scale than traditional auto factories and it's entirely possible that in the future traditional auto is going to find it very hard to compete with Tesla.
I have absolutely no doubt that Tesla will be one of the leading auto manufacturers in the world a decade from now, and may even be the largest single firm by number of cars delivered.
But they won't be on 40-50% market share, with 80% of industry profits.
They will be on a 15-20% share, with 20-25% of industry profits.
And the power industry ?
I disagree about Tesla not being tech (they design their own chips; they are potential leaders in battery tech; they are heavily involved in industrial automation). Whether that justifies the current valuation is quite another matter.
(& it’s entirely possible, though only possible, that they take 50% of the electric vehicle market within a decade.)
I very much like Tesla. But I'm not ready to buy one. Two major barriers: 1. Build quality isn't good enough. Their policy seems to ape British Leyland at its worst, ship the car as it is, let the customer point out the bits that need fixing, fix if they make us. Then we have absurdities like that Model 3 boot lid that needs a good pull to shut (no motor) and water running off the rear screen into the boot with no gutter or lip to stop it. 2. Everyone else wants one. Part of the reason I chose a Volvo S90 over an A6 / 520 / E-Class was that as well as an exquisite design most people buy ze Germans instead. I am following the development of Tesla's tech and cars but they are really really mainstream. And thats not where I'm at.
Why do you feel the need to keep posting statistics to imply Scotland and Wales have performed poorly throughout the life of the pandemic? It seems a really peculiar thing to want to do.
Just saying.
Surely the 'Wales is in a much better position than England' comment in that tweet deserves to be refuted if it is false. Or are you only happy with news when it makes Westminster look bad?
The figures generally in Wales have been pretty poor as they have been compared to our European neighbours, in the rest of the UK. The figures quoted should be contextualised by three meat processing plants in Anglesey, Merthyr and Wrexham. My issue isn't with calling all domestic government's out for a total failure, it just seems odd that someone living in Guernsey would feel the need to keep posting negative stories about Scotland and Wales specifically. I wouldn't get any particular pleasure from from learning that over the course of the pandemic, more people have passed away in England per 100,000 than in any of the other home nations. It's mawkish!
If the Welsh numbers should be massaged like that, shouldn't the English ones be treated the same way?
What do you mean massaged? Johnson has said we need to focus on local lockdowns so of course one needs to be able to highlight specific hotspots and analyse that localised data. I wasn't saying that the figures from these meat plants should be removed from the national figures, but it might be helpful to add caveats.
You were saying the Welsh figures had to be contextualised, but nothing on the English figures.
Of course all the figures should be contextualised. England generally have seen the R rate reducing. It would be even better were it not for the R rate running out of control in London.
Completely Off Topic Tesla stock going wild 1,331.30 + 122.64 (+10.15%) I bought a few at 820 six weeks ago, last October they were 250.
Can anyone explain why Tesla is now valued at ~$250 billion?
1) Because they figured out how to make the Model 3 profitably. 2) They are selling cars with no advertising, and selling everything they can make 3) This means that every time they build another factory - more profit. 4) They seem to be ahead of all the other car makers on electric vehicles 5) They are ahead on battery power storage 6) Most of the western world in heading full tilt to get rid of ICE vehicles 7) The legacy car makers are trying to catch up - and not doing especially well
All of the above may not add up to $250 billion, but these are the reasons that it has gone that way.
I've no financial background so you might have to forgive this but....
How many cars would a mature low growth Tesla have to sell to justify that valuation?
What percentage of the total EV market is a mature Tesla going to occupy?
To my financial illiteracy this parabolic valuation seems to assume limited competition from all the other established auto makers.
Proposition one: in the future, all cars will be electric. Proposition two: in tech, the winner (Microsoft, Google, Facebook, Amazon, Netflix, etc.) utterly dominates returns. Proposition three: the electric car industry is part of the tech industry.
If you believe all three, then Tesla is worth $250bn.
I am sceptical about proposition three, which means proposition two doesn't apply.
I'd say proposition two applies to most industries.
I don't think so.
In telecoms, the best returns (i.e. multiple of profits to capital invested) often went to the niche players, rather the big ones. In pharmaceuticals, it's a similar story . Traditional auto had a bunch of (modestly) profitable firms, none of which had dramatically different margins: Ford, GM, Chrysler, Nissan, Toyota, BMW, VW etc.
Tech is one of a very few industries where the advantages of standardization are such that de facto monopolies exist because scale begets scale.
Its worth thinking that traditional auto did coalesce into a few big companies though too. Just how many brands are actually part of a larger organisation?
Tesla have also thought smartly about scaling up. Their "Gigafactories" are being built on a bigger scale than traditional auto factories and it's entirely possible that in the future traditional auto is going to find it very hard to compete with Tesla.
I disagree, for three reasons:
1. I don't buy the idea that everyone will want one of three or four car designs. (And, really, Tesla has two - the S/X and the 3/Y. Note S3XY.) This creates an opportunity.
2. Electric cars are pretty similar to regular cars, with the exception of motors (a solved problem) and the batteries (which are mostly built to a standard design). It's no coincidence that Tesla bought GM's Fremont factory and workforce for building the Model 3.
3. Other firms are catching up already. The iPhone and Android expanded their leads over Symbian/Palm/Windows Mobile etc. every single day after launch. Tesla tech and costs lead has been diminishing, not growing.
I'd be curious to see some evidence that Tesla's cost lead has been diminishing over time. I thought it was the opposite? I thought Tesla had a tech lead but were expensive but as their Gigafactories have been coming online they've been driving their own costs down. I haven't yet seen anything to suggest costs are going in the wrong direction for Tesla.
That's not what I said. I said Tesla's cost lead has been diminishing, which it has.
That's because while the Gigafactories are the cheapest makers of commodity 2170 battery cells, they are not lightyears ahead of the Koreans, Chinese or even the new-ish Saft plant outside Bordeaux. Tesla pays the same price for lithium and all the other components that go into batteries, they make them to a standard design. They just don't hand a manufacturing margin to a battery company, and they probably have some modest benefits of scale.
I've no financial background so you might have to forgive this but....
How many cars would a mature low growth Tesla have to sell to justify that valuation?
What percentage of the total EV market is a mature Tesla going to occupy?
To my financial illiteracy this parabolic valuation seems to assume limited competition from all the other established auto makers.
Proposition one: in the future, all cars will be electric. Proposition two: in tech, the winner (Microsoft, Google, Facebook, Amazon, Netflix, etc.) utterly dominates returns. Proposition three: the electric car industry is part of the tech industry.
If you believe all three, then Tesla is worth $250bn.
I am sceptical about proposition three, which means proposition two doesn't apply.
I'd say proposition two applies to most industries.
I don't think so.
In telecoms, the best returns (i.e. multiple of profits to capital invested) often went to the niche players, rather the big ones. In pharmaceuticals, it's a similar story . Traditional auto had a bunch of (modestly) profitable firms, none of which had dramatically different margins: Ford, GM, Chrysler, Nissan, Toyota, BMW, VW etc.
Tech is one of a very few industries where the advantages of standardization are such that de facto monopolies exist because scale begets scale.
Its worth thinking that traditional auto did coalesce into a few big companies though too. Just how many brands are actually part of a larger organisation?
Tesla have also thought smartly about scaling up. Their "Gigafactories" are being built on a bigger scale than traditional auto factories and it's entirely possible that in the future traditional auto is going to find it very hard to compete with Tesla.
I have absolutely no doubt that Tesla will be one of the leading auto manufacturers in the world a decade from now, and may even be the largest single firm by number of cars delivered.
But they won't be on 40-50% market share, with 80% of industry profits.
They will be on a 15-20% share, with 20-25% of industry profits.
And the power industry ?
I disagree about Tesla not being tech (they design their own chips; they are potential leaders in battery tech; they are heavily involved in industrial automation). Whether that justifies the current valuation is quite another matter.
(& it’s entirely possible, though only possible, that they take 50% of the electric vehicle market within a decade.)
I very much like Tesla. But I'm not ready to buy one. Two major barriers: 1. Build quality isn't good enough. Their policy seems to ape British Leyland at its worst, ship the car as it is, let the customer point out the bits that need fixing, fix if they make us. Then we have absurdities like that Model 3 boot lid that needs a good pull to shut (no motor) and water running off the rear screen into the boot with no gutter or lip to stop it. 2. Everyone else wants one. Part of the reason I chose a Volvo S90 over an A6 / 520 / E-Class was that as well as an exquisite design most people buy ze Germans instead. I am following the development of Tesla's tech and cars but they are really really mainstream. And thats not where I'm at.
Every electric car sold in the US now has a J1772 connector, except Tesla (and even Tesla includes a free converter).
I am driving today from Brentwood in North West Los Angeles, to Laguna Niguel in Orange County. There are a surprising number of 150 - 350 KW fast chargers along the way should I need to stop. (It's 200 miles round trip, which will be fine.)
The big issue is not so much the number of fast CCS chargers in the US, it is the fact that you don't know where they are because there are at least two large networks and a host of smaller ones.
America went for the really old Japanese standard? Blimey. As for chargers in the UK there genuinely are a lot springing up. But a lot a lot of networks. All with different payment systems and wildly different pricing for the electricity. Not remotely user-friendly.
We ran a Nissan Leaf for 3 years from 2014. It was a very good (for the time) electric car but a pretty poor car. That Nissan are still selling the same car 10 years on from launch with the same decade old battery tech is why Tesla have already won.
Elon Musk applies a series of quite simple and quite old business ideas. In this case the one he applies is this:
Your product will be superseded by a better product. That cannot be stopped. Your choice is whether it superseded by your next product, or someone elses.
The Leaf experience demonstrated that we didn't want another Leaf. The Nissan experience demonstrated that we didn't want another Nissan (had loaner cars of everything from Micra to Qashqai). Had already known that Bristol Street Motors were awful, that all the local Nissan dealers are them or similarly awful pretty much nailed the coffin shut.
The problem with every non-Tesla is the charging network. The EU didn't impose CCS fast enough so that we have three different charging standards out there, and some of the private companies installing rapid chargers think that a higher pence per mile than Diesel is the way to go. Which is why wifey now has a ("self-charging") Hyundai hybrid and I have a mahoosive Volvo diesel.
Why do you feel the need to keep posting statistics to imply Scotland and Wales have performed poorly throughout the life of the pandemic? It seems a really peculiar thing to want to do.
Just saying.
Surely the 'Wales is in a much better position than England' comment in that tweet deserves to be refuted if it is false. Or are you only happy with news when it makes Westminster look bad?
The figures generally in Wales have been pretty poor as they have been compared to our European neighbours, in the rest of the UK. The figures quoted should be contextualised by three meat processing plants in Anglesey, Merthyr and Wrexham. My issue isn't with calling all domestic government's out for a total failure, it just seems odd that someone living in Guernsey would feel the need to keep posting negative stories about Scotland and Wales specifically. I wouldn't get any particular pleasure from from learning that over the course of the pandemic, more people have passed away in England per 100,000 than in any of the other home nations. It's mawkish!
If the Welsh numbers should be massaged like that, shouldn't the English ones be treated the same way?
What do you mean massaged? Johnson has said we need to focus on local lockdowns so of course one needs to be able to highlight specific hotspots and analyse that localised data. I wasn't saying that the figures from these meat plants should be removed from the national figures, but it might be helpful to add caveats.
You were saying the Welsh figures had to be contextualised, but nothing on the English figures.
Of course all the figures should be contextualised. England generally have seen the R rate reducing. It would be even better were it not for the R rate running out of control in London.
He must be condemned for going into government to try to get some of their policies implemented? (and succeed.. e.g., the £10k income tax threshold was a LD idea...)
Ah, no.. it's his Facebook job.
"Nick Clegg is one of our most well-known figures. But he has abandoned our principles, and we must now condemn him for it. Splashed across the news are stories of Facebook defying a boycott aimed at getting them to tighten up on hate speech and information on their platform. And just behind Zuckerberg is our former leader, massaging the facts and spreading his own misinformation in an attempt to ameliorate his boss’s critics."
It's not as if it's the first time he's performed such a role.
Comments
Waymo is their main competition in the development of driverless cars and I don't remember any success stories from them for a couple of years and they used to make regular announcements.
In the future it's possible 100% of UK electricity could come from a combination of wind etc and Tesla style Powerwalls of equivalent storage.
While sunny climates like Australia are seeking to combine solar with energy storage.
Tesla is two out of three which as Meatloaf said ain't bad.
"Supreme Court rules 'faithless electors' can't go rogue at Electoral College"
(Just like Vaulter was sold to Waystar Royco and ran into the ground.)
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/u/1/d/1HflVng6sYIb6Gs4pOKiDGtqU5YJ2-hgdM4pRNaT62gs/htmlview
Lots of viable car makers in the top 25.
Not advertising is the most interesting thing it does I reckon.
But nobody bought it. Because it turned out that 99% was not good enough, and that the last 1% was *really* hard.
Self driving is the same. We've got to 99% with cameras. But it's not good enough. You need - with Tesla - to keep your hands on the wheel. That last 1% is incredibly hard. Worse. People are lulled into thinking their self driving system is better than it is. This means people mentally turn off, and accidents happen.
Waymo - which uses Lidar and cameras - is way ahead of Tesla, and has logged 10x as many autonomous miles as all the other players combined. It has recently discovered how difficult this problem is, and they are actually taking their cars off the roads in Arizona.
Still, if it were Kanye v Trump ...
Tesla are actually selling hundreds of thousands of cars profitably, and have the self-driving features as an incidental part of the package rather than the main feature.
Self driving cars are a definite 95%-5% problem, maybe even a 99%-1% problem if they’re going to be driving on existing roads in all conditions. The best chance for them is going to be in a newly built town, where they have their own roads separate from all other traffic except each other.
In telecoms, the best returns (i.e. multiple of profits to capital invested) often went to the niche players, rather the big ones. In pharmaceuticals, it's a similar story . Traditional auto had a bunch of (modestly) profitable firms, none of which had dramatically different margins: Ford, GM, Chrysler, Nissan, Toyota, BMW, VW etc.
Tech is one of a very few industries where the advantages of standardization are such that de facto monopolies exist because scale begets scale.
In your picture the victim looks white though?
Edit to add - for me I think between adaptive cruise control and lane assist I've got the bits I need. Between those two toys they make a 300 mile drive bearable rather than hard work...
Your product will be superseded by a better product. That cannot be stopped. Your choice is whether it superseded by your next product, or someone elses.
Anglesey, Merthyr and Wrexham. My issue isn't with calling all domestic government's out for a total failure, it just seems odd that someone living in
Guernsey would feel the need to keep posting negative stories about
Scotland and Wales specifically. I wouldn't get any particular pleasure from from learning that over the course of the pandemic, more people have passed away in England per 100,000 than in any of the other home nations. It's mawkish!
If BMW wanted to get into this sector more (perhaps they already are) they could turn the W 90 degrees right, and make a range of BME cars. Perhaps messing with their brand more than they would want to.
Tesla have also thought smartly about scaling up. Their "Gigafactories" are being built on a bigger scale than traditional auto factories and it's entirely possible that in the future traditional auto is going to find it very hard to compete with Tesla.
I looked to change this for the I-Pace earlier this year, but really hated the quality of the finish, so passed.
But I recently (last week) did get an electric car from someone who isn't Tesla, and I've been very pleasantly surprised with it so far. The finish and materials are excellent, and it drives very well.
If your factories are of a scale to allow you to compete on another level in cost then without other players doing something immense then it can be possible to come to dominate the industry.
They were dedicated to destroying the Republican Party in the former Confederate States. Terrorising and murdering black voters was just one part of their campaign.
Basically, in the aftermath of the Civil War, most of the former Confederate leadership was disenfranchised. So the so-called "Carpet Baggers" came South and setup Republican governments, often supported by black voting.
The KKK was formed to destroy this.
It is notable that the first Klan was shut down by it's rich, white, ex-confederate sponsors, when it had achieved that aim. And created the Jim Crow South.
1. I don't buy the idea that everyone will want one of three or four car designs. (And, really, Tesla has two - the S/X and the 3/Y. Note S3XY.) This creates an opportunity.
2. Electric cars are pretty similar to regular cars, with the exception of motors (a solved problem) and the batteries (which are mostly built to a standard design). It's no coincidence that Tesla bought GM's Fremont factory and workforce for building the Model 3.
3. Other firms are catching up already. The iPhone and Android expanded their leads over Symbian/Palm/Windows Mobile etc. every single day after launch. Tesla tech and costs lead has been diminishing, not growing.
The legacy automakers have talked a good game about building battery factories. Without them, you can't build electric cars at scale. Only Tesla, so far, has actually opened the kind of giant facilities required.
All of them have made mistakes. Wales’ testing has been poor, Scotland made a mess of Care Homes (as did Guernsey) and the U.K. government has muffed quarantine and international travel.
I think we should learn from all of those - don’t you?
But they won't be on 40-50% market share, with 80% of industry profits.
They will be on a 15-20% share, with 20-25% of industry profits.
https://twitter.com/libdemvoice/status/1280076620020269058
Yes I know it's Amazon Web systems - or at least I think it is.
Ah, no.. it's his Facebook job.
Small base, but it's not going back down especially if Dishy-Rishyy boosts fuel duty, as he should. Could be 100k+ this year.
What should they have done differently?
https://unherd.com/2020/07/why-the-prisoner-is-more-accurate-than-orwell/
https://data.london.gov.uk/dataset/coronavirus--covid-19--cases
Sorry, #covidpatriots.
I disagree about Tesla not being tech (they design their own chips; they are potential leaders in battery tech; they are heavily involved in industrial automation).
Whether that justifies the current valuation is quite another matter.
(& it’s entirely possible, though only possible, that they take 50% of the electric vehicle market within a decade.)
The problem with every non-Tesla is the charging network. The EU didn't impose CCS fast enough so that we have three different charging standards out there, and some of the private companies installing rapid chargers think that a higher pence per mile than Diesel is the way to go. Which is why wifey now has a ("self-charging") Hyundai hybrid and I have a mahoosive Volvo diesel.
I hope the Dollar is worth it.
Assuming they actually care about selling the EVs, in any sense other than being forced to by governments.
I guess he must have rueful moments in that he got nearly everything right, but somehow fell short.
Hat's off to him anyway. Megabucks or not, he's helped us dream big.
Re the main point = Hydrogen or batteries? I'm making some nice gains in hydrogen investments, but to be honest I think the way forwards is battery storage.
I am driving today from Brentwood in North West Los Angeles, to Laguna Niguel in Orange County. There are a surprising number of 150 - 350 KW fast chargers along the way should I need to stop. (It's 200 miles round trip, which will be fine.)
The big issue is not so much the number of fast CCS chargers in the US, it is the fact that you don't know where they are because there are at least two large networks and a host of smaller ones.
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1280173260378968064?s=20
1. Build quality isn't good enough. Their policy seems to ape British Leyland at its worst, ship the car as it is, let the customer point out the bits that need fixing, fix if they make us. Then we have absurdities like that Model 3 boot lid that needs a good pull to shut (no motor) and water running off the rear screen into the boot with no gutter or lip to stop it.
2. Everyone else wants one. Part of the reason I chose a Volvo S90 over an A6 / 520 / E-Class was that as well as an exquisite design most people buy ze Germans instead. I am following the development of Tesla's tech and cars but they are really really mainstream. And thats not where I'm at.
That's because while the Gigafactories are the cheapest makers of commodity 2170 battery cells, they are not lightyears ahead of the Koreans, Chinese or even the new-ish Saft plant outside Bordeaux. Tesla pays the same price for lithium and all the other components that go into batteries, they make them to a standard design. They just don't hand a manufacturing margin to a battery company, and they probably have some modest benefits of scale.
Oh well.
https://electrek.co/2020/01/24/toyota-self-charging-hybrid-ad-banned-norway-lie/
Volvo spin off Polestar 2 looks good, maybe when they bring out the cheaper models...
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/02/27/business/volvo-polestar-2-revealed/index.html
It's not as if it's the first time he's performed such a role.