invite response« First « Previous Comments 121 - 160 of 327 Next » Last » Search these comments
121
mell
2018 Dec 31, 3:18pm
CBOEtrader says
Exactly. The problem is that the winners will always be the singled out story while nobody talks about the losers outnumbering the winners 1:10. I think big bets can work if the you're betting on something that is very likely to turn profitable and mostly debt free going forward, but this was a risky bet. Look at crypto, many put their life savings in it or rode from 500K to millions back to less than 200K. Still it is true that many of those success stories come from big bets while there are more wealth people who made the same amount or more in a "boring" way, but those are not stories people want to hear about.
MrMagic says
Yeah I think he should also be worried about competition, even if they initially swing to a profit. Porsche, Mercedes and others will catch up on a big scale.
E-man says
Just referring to last Q, which mainly were accounting gimmicks. Doesn't mean they cannot swing to profitability in a durable manner, but needs to be proven. In a way it already has been a success story as the stock went from $20 to $300+, so I'm not debating this. A lot of bigger investors never selling their shares helped them a lot. Going forward though will be a tough ride with all the competition they will be facing. Not betting on it, neither against it.
E-man saysLife is too short to make small bets - CEO of Soft Bank. ???
Survivorship bias.
This is a low resolution algorithm guaranteed to fail most people. You are correct though, for someone to go fron normal life savings to rich betting the farm on one risk exposure is a strategy.
Exactly. The problem is that the winners will always be the singled out story while nobody talks about the losers outnumbering the winners 1:10. I think big bets can work if the you're betting on something that is very likely to turn profitable and mostly debt free going forward, but this was a risky bet. Look at crypto, many put their life savings in it or rode from 500K to millions back to less than 200K. Still it is true that many of those success stories come from big bets while there are more wealth people who made the same amount or more in a "boring" way, but those are not stories people want to hear about.
MrMagic says
mell saysThey need to turn consitently profitable soon without accounting gimmicks.
Exactly. He can't make money on the Model 3 at $50K - $60K, but he wants everyone to believe he'll be profitable with $35K Model 3s... because he'll make it up on volume, right Fanboys?
Yeah I think he should also be worried about competition, even if they initially swing to a profit. Porsche, Mercedes and others will catch up on a big scale.
E-man says
mell saysThey need to turn consitently profitable soon without accounting gimmicks.
Accounting gimmicks? There are huge capital expenditures for building factories and supercharging stations across the country. To be profitable, the company just had to scale back its capital expenditures. Elon already said the company would stay profitable going forward so there's no reason not to believe the man. Watch Tesla will be profitable this 4th quarter again.
Just referring to last Q, which mainly were accounting gimmicks. Doesn't mean they cannot swing to profitability in a durable manner, but needs to be proven. In a way it already has been a success story as the stock went from $20 to $300+, so I'm not debating this. A lot of bigger investors never selling their shares helped them a lot. Going forward though will be a tough ride with all the competition they will be facing. Not betting on it, neither against it.
122
Rin
2018 Dec 31, 3:28pm
Rin
2018 Dec 31, 3:28pm
E-man says
I don't concur because I'm being driven around by livery service and thus, I have a lot more fun eating, drinking, & doing other stuff in my limo than in worrying about the road. Remember, we have bad weather around here, along with crazy drivers.
E-man says
You said that you've finished working for a living so in effect, you've decided that your retirement is that of a "roadster" but personally, I'd rather be a roadie and be following around rock bands. But since rock died back in 2000, that option has gone with the wind.
Instead, I'll be 'olde' New England money and be driven around, enjoying fine foods, workshops/seminars, etc, wherever I go.
A car is a lot more than taking a person from point A to point B.
I don't concur because I'm being driven around by livery service and thus, I have a lot more fun eating, drinking, & doing other stuff in my limo than in worrying about the road. Remember, we have bad weather around here, along with crazy drivers.
E-man says
I want more than both. I want a car that not only takes me from point A to point B, but a car that I enjoy driving everyday, not just on the weekend. Tesla fits the bill. After 15 months of owning it, the car still puts a smile on my face every time I drive it.
You said that you've finished working for a living so in effect, you've decided that your retirement is that of a "roadster" but personally, I'd rather be a roadie and be following around rock bands. But since rock died back in 2000, that option has gone with the wind.
Instead, I'll be 'olde' New England money and be driven around, enjoying fine foods, workshops/seminars, etc, wherever I go.
123
Eman
2018 Dec 31, 3:41pm
Eman
2018 Dec 31, 3:41pm
Rin says
@Rin,
I enjoy the conversation as both of us have taken our own path, and there is no right or wrong way for each of us. My partner and I had this talk where both of us came to the same conclusion. It's a curse and a blessing that we both have a family. Both of us could see the positives and negatives of being singles and married so I respect your choice of staying single. If you're happy with the decision, that's all that matters. ;-)
Our difference is that I enjoy driving instead of being a passenger especially with an Asian woman behind the wheel. ;-)
E-man saysA car is a lot more than taking a person from point A to point B.
I don't concur because I'm being driven around by livery service and thus, I have a lot more fun eating, drinking, & doing other stuff in my limo than in worrying about the road. Remember, we have bad weather around here, along with crazy drivers.
E-man saysI want more than both. I want a car that not only takes me from point A to point B, but a car that I enjoy driving everyday, not just on the weekend. Tesla fits the bill. After 15 months of owning it, the car still puts a smile on my face every time I drive it.
You said that you've finished working for a living so in effect, you've decided that your retirement is that of a "roadster" but personally, I'd rather be a roadie and be following around rock bands. But since...
@Rin,
I enjoy the conversation as both of us have taken our own path, and there is no right or wrong way for each of us. My partner and I had this talk where both of us came to the same conclusion. It's a curse and a blessing that we both have a family. Both of us could see the positives and negatives of being singles and married so I respect your choice of staying single. If you're happy with the decision, that's all that matters. ;-)
Our difference is that I enjoy driving instead of being a passenger especially with an Asian woman behind the wheel. ;-)
124
Strategist
2018 Dec 31, 3:42pm
Strategist
2018 Dec 31, 3:42pm
MrMagic says
I have both. Tesla and the Volt. Returning the leased Volt 2017 early as the mileage is all used up.
The Nissan Leaf is to replace the Volt.
The Tesla is to replace the Electric Mercedes B Class.
Rin saysAnd there's a huge difference between $1K and $50K for the average consumer.
and there's a huge difference between a $60K Model 3 and a $30K Volt, yet they both get you from Point A to B.
I have both. Tesla and the Volt. Returning the leased Volt 2017 early as the mileage is all used up.
The Nissan Leaf is to replace the Volt.
The Tesla is to replace the Electric Mercedes B Class.
125
Strategist
2018 Dec 31, 3:50pm
Strategist
2018 Dec 31, 3:50pm
E-man says
It's not a car. It's a Tesla.
All our anti technology, anti progress, anti visionary friends from the stone age are still using 2 sticks to make a fire.
My Dear Stone Age Friends,
How many Leopard Skins are you willing to trade for a match?
Tesla fits the bill. After 15 months of owning it, the car still puts a smile on my face every time I drive it. What say you @Strategist and @gsr?
It's not a car. It's a Tesla.
All our anti technology, anti progress, anti visionary friends from the stone age are still using 2 sticks to make a fire.
My Dear Stone Age Friends,
How many Leopard Skins are you willing to trade for a match?
126
Eman
2018 Dec 31, 3:56pm
Eman
2018 Dec 31, 3:56pm
mell says
@mell,
I think the difference between cryptocurrencies and weed stocks are that these companies are not being run by geniuses like Jeff Bezos, Steve Jobs or Elon Musk. Those companies are much more speculative rather than the true geniuses who are running a company to change the world.
My tennis friend made a bet on TSLA stock based on something he read in Steve Jobs' book and it resonated with him. I'm glad it worked out for him. He could have been wiped out completely at the age of 47. Instead, he bought a million dollar house and paid cash for it. His wife told him as long as the house is paid off, he could do whatever he wanted with the rest of the money, and that was exactly what he did.
For me, I could control my outcome with my bet/investment strategy. If it didn't work, I couldn't blame it on anyone else. I made a calculated bet rather than a speculative bet, and it has paid off. I didn't rely on others for the outcome. Now that the method has proven, it's a rinse and repeat. It comes down to how hard do I want to work? 6 hours a week, 12 hours a week or 18 hours a week?
Since the finances have been in order, I had a new challenge this year which was to shed 15 pounds off. I went from 185 pounds to 170 pounds. Two months before this year ended, I had another challenge and that was to have a 6-pack abs in 60 days. I went for it too. These experiences have also given me valuable lessons. Basically, great results could be achieved in a short amount of time if we put the time and effort into it. I'm 5'10 inches by the way.
Now, the goal for 2019 is to have a body like it's carved out of stone. We all can do, but not all of us will. It takes time, effort and discipline. Sounds simple isn't it?
CBOEtrader saysE-man saysLife is too short to make small bets - CEO of Soft Bank. ???
Survivorship bias.
This is a low resolution algorithm guaranteed to fail most people. You are correct though, for someone to go fron normal life savings to rich betting the farm on one risk exposure is a strategy.
Exactly. The problem is that the winners will always be the singled out story while nobody talks about the losers outnumbering the winners 1:10. I think big bets can work if the you're betting on something that is very likely to turn profitable and mostly debt free going forward, but this was a risky bet. Look at crypto, many put their life savings in it or rode from 500K to millions back to less than 200K. Still it is true that many of those success stories come from big bets while there are more...
@mell,
I think the difference between cryptocurrencies and weed stocks are that these companies are not being run by geniuses like Jeff Bezos, Steve Jobs or Elon Musk. Those companies are much more speculative rather than the true geniuses who are running a company to change the world.
My tennis friend made a bet on TSLA stock based on something he read in Steve Jobs' book and it resonated with him. I'm glad it worked out for him. He could have been wiped out completely at the age of 47. Instead, he bought a million dollar house and paid cash for it. His wife told him as long as the house is paid off, he could do whatever he wanted with the rest of the money, and that was exactly what he did.
For me, I could control my outcome with my bet/investment strategy. If it didn't work, I couldn't blame it on anyone else. I made a calculated bet rather than a speculative bet, and it has paid off. I didn't rely on others for the outcome. Now that the method has proven, it's a rinse and repeat. It comes down to how hard do I want to work? 6 hours a week, 12 hours a week or 18 hours a week?
Since the finances have been in order, I had a new challenge this year which was to shed 15 pounds off. I went from 185 pounds to 170 pounds. Two months before this year ended, I had another challenge and that was to have a 6-pack abs in 60 days. I went for it too. These experiences have also given me valuable lessons. Basically, great results could be achieved in a short amount of time if we put the time and effort into it. I'm 5'10 inches by the way.
Now, the goal for 2019 is to have a body like it's carved out of stone. We all can do, but not all of us will. It takes time, effort and discipline. Sounds simple isn't it?
127
Rin
2018 Dec 31, 3:57pm
Rin
2018 Dec 31, 3:57pm
Strategist says
Actually, it's sex robots which will change the world!
Cars, whether they're electric or gas, will be another automated commodity item in 15 years, as self-driving tech goes mainstream. By 2075, ppl will remember manual driving with the way we remember the telephone switchboard operator.
anti technology, anti progress, anti visionary friends
Actually, it's sex robots which will change the world!
Cars, whether they're electric or gas, will be another automated commodity item in 15 years, as self-driving tech goes mainstream. By 2075, ppl will remember manual driving with the way we remember the telephone switchboard operator.
128
Reality
2018 Dec 31, 4:04pm
E-man says
Bentley is the same company as Porsche: both are owned by VW, as is Audi. All those variants are just platform sharing. As for following / copying Tesla, VW has at least one thing down pat: making shoddy cars.
In light of that, another luxury automaker influenced by Tesla’s ongoing success is Bentley.
Bentley is the same company as Porsche: both are owned by VW, as is Audi. All those variants are just platform sharing. As for following / copying Tesla, VW has at least one thing down pat: making shoddy cars.
129
Strategist
2018 Dec 31, 4:05pm
Strategist
2018 Dec 31, 4:05pm
Rin says
Car on auto pilot. Hot chick in the back seat. Dark windows. What more can you want?
Look at all the money that can be saved by not renting at Motel 666.
Strategist saysanti technology, anti progress, anti visionary friends
Actually, it's sex robots which will change the world!
Cars, whether they're electric or gas, will be another automated commodity in 15 years, as self-driving tech goes mainstream.
Car on auto pilot. Hot chick in the back seat. Dark windows. What more can you want?
Look at all the money that can be saved by not renting at Motel 666.
130
Rin
2018 Dec 31, 4:08pm
Rin
2018 Dec 31, 4:08pm
Strategist says
Rin Wah Law! Rin Wah Law!
Car on auto pilot. Hot chick in the back seat. Dark windows. What more can you want?
Rin Wah Law! Rin Wah Law!
131
Reality
2018 Dec 31, 4:09pm
Strategist says
Since nobody is talking about building more hydroelectric plants or nuclear power plants, most incremental electricity generation will come from natural gas . . . as will make-up generation for when solar panels don't generate electricity at night. Tesla as a company makes two categories of products that will help maintaining a price floor for natural gas, which are what new wells are producing nowadays as they dig deeper into the ground.
The negative articles on Tesla and Musk that have recently swamped the media are sheer nonsense, most likely funded by those who would be hurt by the end of fossil fuels. Even the SEC probe seems to have an agenda in my opinion. No matter how much Big Oil tries to suffocate electric cars, they cannot and will not succeed. They may have US corrupt politicians in their pockets, but they do not have all the countries determined to end fossil fuels in their pockets.
Lets face it.....New technology that is more efficient, economical, and does more good will always end up replacing old technology that is not needed anymore. Those who are not open to welcoming new technologies are welcome to live like cave men on an island. Who knows, they may even discover fire.
Since nobody is talking about building more hydroelectric plants or nuclear power plants, most incremental electricity generation will come from natural gas . . . as will make-up generation for when solar panels don't generate electricity at night. Tesla as a company makes two categories of products that will help maintaining a price floor for natural gas, which are what new wells are producing nowadays as they dig deeper into the ground.
132
mell
2018 Dec 31, 4:15pm
E-man says
mell saysCBOEtrader saysE-man saysLife is too short to make small bets - CEO of Soft Bank. ???
Survivorship bias.
This is a low resolution algorithm guaranteed to fail most people. You are correct though, for someone to go fron normal life savings to rich betting the farm on one risk exposure is a strategy.
Exactly. The problem is that the winners will always be the singled out story while nobody talks about the losers outnumbering the winners 1:10. I think big bets can work if the you're betting on something that is very likely to turn profitable and mostly debt free going forward, but this was a risky bet. Look at crypto, many put their life savings in it or rode from 500K to millions back to less than 200K. Still it is...
lol make sure you don't get tempted once you sport that body and abs. This is an extremely hard goal to achieve, so kudos. I "just" keep in shape and standing tall but I have found out that even slight muscle tone and workout glow will make women come on strong, so be careful with that marriage!
133
Reality
2018 Dec 31, 4:16pm
Rin says
Correct. Ultimately (perhaps within a decade or less), electric cars will be much cheaper than ICE cars. It's just like flat panel displays cost much more than CRT's back in the 1990's, but I predicted early on that flat panels will ultimately cost much less than the CR's (which eventually reached a price point of about $1000 for a 21" model, a price point below which no manufacturer could make a profit making new units; the glass tube and Invar mask cost real money). As for Tesla, it will either be bankrupt or make self-driving logistic/killer robots for the military.
Still, cellphone .... make that mobile computing, is a viable long term market, which isn't disappearing though it may evolve into clothes, eye wear, upholstery, etc, instead of a handheld device.
In contrast, a car is still just that, a mode of transportation. Ppl needs transportation tools, to get from point A to B, not an expensive toy.
And there's a huge difference between $1K and $50K for the average consumer.
Correct. Ultimately (perhaps within a decade or less), electric cars will be much cheaper than ICE cars. It's just like flat panel displays cost much more than CRT's back in the 1990's, but I predicted early on that flat panels will ultimately cost much less than the CR's (which eventually reached a price point of about $1000 for a 21" model, a price point below which no manufacturer could make a profit making new units; the glass tube and Invar mask cost real money). As for Tesla, it will either be bankrupt or make self-driving logistic/killer robots for the military.
134
CBOEtrader
2018 Dec 31, 4:17pm
CBOEtrader
2018 Dec 31, 4:17pm
E-man says
It is simple. Just ignore all your human animalistic impulses to drunk beer, eat cake, and not be in daily pain from 2 hour workouts. Simple strategy, close to impossible to execute. You seem like a dude who could pull it off though.
I had a college teammate who ate 1 snickers bar in 2 years as his only sugar, no beer no bread no sugar. Dude was ripped, and somehow was still an enormous vag from always stressing about his diet. So yeah, simple as can be but not easy at all.
Sounds simple isn't it?
It is simple. Just ignore all your human animalistic impulses to drunk beer, eat cake, and not be in daily pain from 2 hour workouts. Simple strategy, close to impossible to execute. You seem like a dude who could pull it off though.
I had a college teammate who ate 1 snickers bar in 2 years as his only sugar, no beer no bread no sugar. Dude was ripped, and somehow was still an enormous vag from always stressing about his diet. So yeah, simple as can be but not easy at all.
135
Reality
2018 Dec 31, 4:23pm
Strategist says
And the leveling of home prices. A commute of 1-2 hrs each way from Sillycon Valley to Inland Empire would be nothing when one can eat, work out, and sleep in the car during the commute. How then would one justify paying $1mil for a shoebox apartment in the sillycon valley when 1/3 that price can get a house in the location an hour or two away with a yard, to be mowed by a self-driving robot lawn mower.
Car on auto pilot. Hot chick in the back seat. Dark windows. What more can you want?
Look at all the money that can be saved by not renting at Motel 666.
And the leveling of home prices. A commute of 1-2 hrs each way from Sillycon Valley to Inland Empire would be nothing when one can eat, work out, and sleep in the car during the commute. How then would one justify paying $1mil for a shoebox apartment in the sillycon valley when 1/3 that price can get a house in the location an hour or two away with a yard, to be mowed by a self-driving robot lawn mower.
136
Strategist
2018 Dec 31, 5:00pm
Strategist
2018 Dec 31, 5:00pm
Reality says
Pretty good point. Some people could just live in a large RV, and let the Auto Pilot find parking in the outskirts of SF. In the morning while you are getting ready for work, the RV will be heading to your office and drop you off just in time.
Further in the future people can live in large drones. You will have a wonderful 360 view, and the drone will take you anywhere you want for the weekend while you were sleeping.
Strategist saysCar on auto pilot. Hot chick in the back seat. Dark windows. What more can you want?
Look at all the money that can be saved by not renting at Motel 666.
And the leveling of home prices. A commute of 1-2 hrs each way from Sillycon Valley to Inland Empire would be nothing when one can eat, work out, and sleep in the car during the commute. How then would one justify paying $1mil for a shoebox apartment in the sillycon valley when 1/3 that price can get a house in the location an hour or two away with a yard, to be mowed by a self-driving robot lawn mower.
Pretty good point. Some people could just live in a large RV, and let the Auto Pilot find parking in the outskirts of SF. In the morning while you are getting ready for work, the RV will be heading to your office and drop you off just in time.
Further in the future people can live in large drones. You will have a wonderful 360 view, and the drone will take you anywhere you want for the weekend while you were sleeping.
137
Strategist
2018 Dec 31, 5:23pm
Strategist
2018 Dec 31, 5:23pm
Rin says
No whore?
Guys, what you think my current lifestyle is like, with free livery service? I basically get driven from my home to wherever I want, whenever I want. I listen to a lecture and before I know it, I'd traversed from Boston to Ipswich and I'm nibbling on some fried clams while my driver is then take me to down to Danvers for a slice of Beef Wellington. By the time I'm back home, I had two North Shore specialties while listening to a few lectures and sipping on some gin. If that's not freedom then I don't know what is.
No whore?
138
Rin
2018 Dec 31, 5:23pm
Rin
2018 Dec 31, 5:23pm
Strategist says
Guys, what you think my current lifestyle is like, with free livery service? I basically get driven from my home to wherever I want to be, whenever I want. I listen to a lecture and before I know it, I'd traversed from Boston to Ipswich and I'm nibbling on some fried clams while my driver is then taking me to down to Danvers for a slice of Beef Wellington. By the time I'm back home, I had two North Shore specialties while listening to a few lectures and sipping on some gin. If that's not freedom then I don't know what is.
In fact, that last time I'd driven myself around the greater Boston area, I was very annoyed with the drivers, traffic stops, etc. I wanted to ditch my automotive freedom, just to be free of wasting time in traffic.
Reality saysStrategist saysCar on auto pilot. Hot chick in the back seat. Dark windows. What more can you want?
Look at all the money that can be saved by not renting at Motel 666.
And the leveling of home prices. A commute of 1-2 hrs each way from Sillycon Valley to Inland Empire would be nothing when one can eat, work out, and sleep in the car during the commute. How then would one justify paying $1mil for a shoebox apartment in the sillycon valley when 1/3 that price can get a house in the location an hour or two away with a yard, to be mowed by a self-driving robot lawn mower.
Pretty good point. Some people could just live in a large RV, and let the Auto Pilot find parking in the outskirts of SF. In the morning while you are getting ready for work, the RV will be heading to your office and drop...
Guys, what you think my current lifestyle is like, with free livery service? I basically get driven from my home to wherever I want to be, whenever I want. I listen to a lecture and before I know it, I'd traversed from Boston to Ipswich and I'm nibbling on some fried clams while my driver is then taking me to down to Danvers for a slice of Beef Wellington. By the time I'm back home, I had two North Shore specialties while listening to a few lectures and sipping on some gin. If that's not freedom then I don't know what is.
In fact, that last time I'd driven myself around the greater Boston area, I was very annoyed with the drivers, traffic stops, etc. I wanted to ditch my automotive freedom, just to be free of wasting time in traffic.
139
Rin
2018 Dec 31, 5:32pm
Rin
2018 Dec 31, 5:32pm
Strategist says
That's when I'm in Montreal, where my driver Yves Gauthier (yes, not his real name but a stereotypical French-Canadian one), picks me up at the airport and takes me to the VIP suite downtown. That part is easy.
No whore?
That's when I'm in Montreal, where my driver Yves Gauthier (yes, not his real name but a stereotypical French-Canadian one), picks me up at the airport and takes me to the VIP suite downtown. That part is easy.
140
Strategist
2018 Dec 31, 5:39pm
Strategist
2018 Dec 31, 5:39pm
Reality says
Nuclear power, even though it can generate lots of cheap electricity is out of favor in America. They take 10 years to build, cost a hell of a lot, and only the government will insure them because insurance companies can't figure out the risk of nuclear power plants. Germany is dumping every one of their nuclear power plants.
By the time a nuclear power plant is ready in 10 years, renewable power prices can easily drop by more than half. We would be stuck with an uneconomical giant for decades to come. Even natural gas plants take 3 years to built, and not likely to be competitive with solar and wind.
Best to promote renewables with more innovations and let the price drop even further. Energy clean and cheap as dirt will give our living standards a huge jump start. Everything from prices at Walmart to Uber rides will drop like a rock.
Since nobody is talking about building more hydroelectric plants or nuclear power plants, most incremental electricity generation will come from natural gas . . . as will make-up generation for when solar panels don't generate electricity at night.
Nuclear power, even though it can generate lots of cheap electricity is out of favor in America. They take 10 years to build, cost a hell of a lot, and only the government will insure them because insurance companies can't figure out the risk of nuclear power plants. Germany is dumping every one of their nuclear power plants.
By the time a nuclear power plant is ready in 10 years, renewable power prices can easily drop by more than half. We would be stuck with an uneconomical giant for decades to come. Even natural gas plants take 3 years to built, and not likely to be competitive with solar and wind.
Best to promote renewables with more innovations and let the price drop even further. Energy clean and cheap as dirt will give our living standards a huge jump start. Everything from prices at Walmart to Uber rides will drop like a rock.
141
Strategist
2018 Dec 31, 5:44pm
Strategist
2018 Dec 31, 5:44pm
And don't even get me started with the harm renewables will do to the fucking Saudis and Islamofucks. That alone is worth ending the world's dependence on fossil fuels.
142
kt1652
2018 Dec 31, 7:41pm
kt1652
2018 Dec 31, 7:41pm
Where do I start? BEVs are not for everyone. I agree, just like a bicycle is not for everyone. But it is damn good tool if it’s right for you. If you live in an apartment, perhaps you can wait for the charging infrastructure to catch up. I live in a SFH with a garage. It takes me 5 seconds each day to “fill the e-tank”. I drive a 1 year old PHEV, so occasionally I have to buy petro. It reminds me how outdated this fossil fuel way of life is, truly the “frog in the pot” mindset.
My PHEV is Camry sized, has an e-range under 50 miles, and beyond that it becomes an hybrid. To me, it is a good compromise. I have no range anxiety. I use 95% electricity and the rest I use petro, at 1/6 the equivalent price my “neighbor” pays for fossil fuel with his ICE Camry. (To be fair you must compare similar size/class of vehicles) I get the equivalent of 230mpg based on $3/gallon petro, ($.09/Kwh EV rate, solar panels and free charge). I get to use OPE (Other People’s Electricity), free charge at work for half my daily commute. You don’t have that, that sucks, give your $ to the Saudi’s, lol.
Very important consideration - efficiency and simplicity. I am ME by training, although I have retired from it, today I teach which is much less stress. I don’t dread Mondays anymore. EVs are so much more efficient than ICE from the energy standpoint. ICE should be called heat generators, because 2/3 of the dinosaur juice is wasted to heat. Fossil fuel is a single use commodity that will run out in 100/200 years at best. What to do then? Think about it, oil, water, petro and friction/heat waste, resulting in unburned hydrocarbons, CO, CO2, noise, smog. How can that be good for a sustainable earth, as billions more of the 3rd world fight to have what Americans have today?
Like him or not, Musk had single-handedly force MB, Porsche, Audi, GM, Jaguar, VW...to react to the Tesla challenge. He may go down in flames, car making is an unforgiving business, it buried many hotshots. But he will have left his mark, maybe that is enough.
My PHEV is Camry sized, has an e-range under 50 miles, and beyond that it becomes an hybrid. To me, it is a good compromise. I have no range anxiety. I use 95% electricity and the rest I use petro, at 1/6 the equivalent price my “neighbor” pays for fossil fuel with his ICE Camry. (To be fair you must compare similar size/class of vehicles) I get the equivalent of 230mpg based on $3/gallon petro, ($.09/Kwh EV rate, solar panels and free charge). I get to use OPE (Other People’s Electricity), free charge at work for half my daily commute. You don’t have that, that sucks, give your $ to the Saudi’s, lol.
Very important consideration - efficiency and simplicity. I am ME by training, although I have retired from it, today I teach which is much less stress. I don’t dread Mondays anymore. EVs are so much more efficient than ICE from the energy standpoint. ICE should be called heat generators, because 2/3 of the dinosaur juice is wasted to heat. Fossil fuel is a single use commodity that will run out in 100/200 years at best. What to do then? Think about it, oil, water, petro and friction/heat waste, resulting in unburned hydrocarbons, CO, CO2, noise, smog. How can that be good for a sustainable earth, as billions more of the 3rd world fight to have what Americans have today?
Like him or not, Musk had single-handedly force MB, Porsche, Audi, GM, Jaguar, VW...to react to the Tesla challenge. He may go down in flames, car making is an unforgiving business, it buried many hotshots. But he will have left his mark, maybe that is enough.
143
Strategist
2018 Dec 31, 8:06pm
Strategist
2018 Dec 31, 8:06pm
kt1652 says
Beautiful. Thanks for posting.
The reluctance of mostly conservatives to see the obvious is perplexing. Conservatives and the religious are fanatics when it comes to opposing change for the better. I can understand Big Oil and the Saudis opposing electric cars, but individuals? Why would the average Citizen want to support fossil fuels that:
1. Create unhealthy levels of smog.
2. Costs a lot more.
3. Earns $100's of billions for terrorist countries.
I understand we are still dependent on oil, and will be for quite some time, but to prevent and bad mouth the development of clean energy is just silly.
Where do I start? BEVs are not for everyone. I agree, just like a bicycle is not for everyone. But it is damn good tool if it’s right for you. If you live in an apartment, perhaps you can wait for the charging infrastructure to catch up. I live in a SFH with a garage. It takes me 5 seconds each day to “fill the e-tank”. I drive a 1 year old PHEV, so occasionally I have to buy petro. It reminds me how outdated this fossil fuel way of life is, truly the “frog in the pot” mindset.
My PHEV is Camry sized, has an e-range under 50 miles, and beyond that it becomes an hybrid. To me, it is a good compromise. I have no range anxiety. I use 95% electricity and the rest I use petro, at 1/6 the equivalent price my “neighbor” pays for fossil fuel with his ICE Camry. (To be fair you must compare similar size/class of vehicles) I get the equivalent of 230mpg based on $3/gallon petro, ($.09/Kwh EV rate, solar panels and free charge). I get to use OPE (Other People’s Electricity), free charge at w...
Beautiful. Thanks for posting.
The reluctance of mostly conservatives to see the obvious is perplexing. Conservatives and the religious are fanatics when it comes to opposing change for the better. I can understand Big Oil and the Saudis opposing electric cars, but individuals? Why would the average Citizen want to support fossil fuels that:
1. Create unhealthy levels of smog.
2. Costs a lot more.
3. Earns $100's of billions for terrorist countries.
I understand we are still dependent on oil, and will be for quite some time, but to prevent and bad mouth the development of clean energy is just silly.
144
Reality
2018 Dec 31, 9:40pm
1. All nuclear power plants currently exist on this planet are primarily for weapons production, not for power generation; the primary goal is attainment of plutonium (Pu), which doesn't exist in nature, but has much lower threshold for Criticality (minimum mass / diameter of the sphere required to capture neutrons in order to sustain nuclear fissile chain reaction; i.e. the ability to go boom and generate a mushroom cloud, or as the detonator to set off a thermonuclear device for an even bigger mushroom cloud) than U-235. Pu doesn't exist in nature (due to its much shorter half-life than Uranium), so has to be produced by bombarding U-238 with neutrons in breeder plants. That's the primary function of all nuclear power plants in the world. If power generation were the real goal, the power plants would be using Thorium as fuel, not Uranium. Thorium plants would be much safer, but wouldn't produce Pu in usable form. It's quite possible that the existence of massive nuclear arsenals is the reason why there haven't been any major direct confrontations among/between the top powers in the last 70+ years.
2. Saudis and other oil exporters use the money they earn to buy US treasury instruments and park their earnings in investment vehicles conjured up by NY banks. They are part and parcel of the global dollar recycling process. When someone like Qaddafi became too full of himself, he and his entire ill-gotten gain were harvested . . . just like pigs and cattle are slaughtered after they convert grass and slop (nutrients inedible to human) into meat (edible to human). Oil is a vehicle by which the US taxes the rest of the world to finance our military dominance (Saudis and other oil exporters are tax-farmers). If countries like Germany, Japan, Korea, Taiwan, China and India could all become energy-independent by putting up some solar panels and windmills, how could they be induced to help pay for US military (or exporting consumer goods to the US, so US companies can specialize on military weapons)? If/when that happens, how would anyone be able to convince the American public to finance the very expensive military entirely on our own tax burdens alone?
These are the two main pillars of post-WWII world order, supplemented by a third leg of periodic brandishing/exercising US military muscle against relatively trivial opponents, both to convince the world that the US-dominated system works and to get field test/training for the equipment and personnel.
2. Saudis and other oil exporters use the money they earn to buy US treasury instruments and park their earnings in investment vehicles conjured up by NY banks. They are part and parcel of the global dollar recycling process. When someone like Qaddafi became too full of himself, he and his entire ill-gotten gain were harvested . . . just like pigs and cattle are slaughtered after they convert grass and slop (nutrients inedible to human) into meat (edible to human). Oil is a vehicle by which the US taxes the rest of the world to finance our military dominance (Saudis and other oil exporters are tax-farmers). If countries like Germany, Japan, Korea, Taiwan, China and India could all become energy-independent by putting up some solar panels and windmills, how could they be induced to help pay for US military (or exporting consumer goods to the US, so US companies can specialize on military weapons)? If/when that happens, how would anyone be able to convince the American public to finance the very expensive military entirely on our own tax burdens alone?
These are the two main pillars of post-WWII world order, supplemented by a third leg of periodic brandishing/exercising US military muscle against relatively trivial opponents, both to convince the world that the US-dominated system works and to get field test/training for the equipment and personnel.
145
Eman
2018 Dec 31, 10:36pm
Eman
2018 Dec 31, 10:36pm
Strategist says
Not sure why you even bothered to respond to this post. Tesla is up to producing 7,000 cars/week. 3,300 cars is 3.5 days worth of inventory. It’s such simple math that the simpletons at zero brain didn’t even know how to do the math. ???
MrMagic saysThe end of the year push to try and sell vehicles using a $7,500 Federal tax credit as a bargaining chip appears to be falling flat on its face for Tesla. A new report by electrek published on New Year’s Eve says that Tesla still has over 3,300 Model 3 vehicles in its U.S. inventory, which sent the stock sliding lower by about 2% in morning trading.
Wow. No one wants those rotten, useless cars. It's a complete failure.
Oh wait a minute, they have so much demand they can't keep up with the deliveries. LOL. LOL. ROFL.
Even from the useless zero brain website....."This, again, comes on top of recent news that Tesla is now has offered to shell out cash for those who have who will miss the full tax credit benefit due to delivery problems "
From a more reliable source:
https://finance.yahoo....
Not sure why you even bothered to respond to this post. Tesla is up to producing 7,000 cars/week. 3,300 cars is 3.5 days worth of inventory. It’s such simple math that the simpletons at zero brain didn’t even know how to do the math. ???
146
Strategist
2019 Jan 1, 7:58am
Strategist
2019 Jan 1, 7:58am
Reality says
A portion of the oil money Arabs derive goes to fund terrorism. Probably a hundred times that amount is spent by the rest of the world to fight those same terrorists.
The US does not derive money directly or indirectly by taxing the rest of the world for oil. If anything, the US spends a lot more to defend countries that should be spending more for their own defense. Their defense does not come from some kind of a tax imposed on them by the US.
2. Saudis and other oil exporters use the money they earn to buy US treasury instruments and park their earnings in investment vehicles conjured up by NY banks. They are part and parcel of the global dollar recycling process. When someone like Qaddafi became too full of himself, he and his entire ill-gotten gain were harvested . . . just like pigs and cattle are slaughtered after they convert grass and slop (nutrients inedible to human) into meat (edible to human). Oil is a vehicle by which the US taxes the rest of the world to finance our military dominance (Saudis and other oil exporters are tax-farmers). If countries like Germany, Japan, Korea, Taiwan, China and India could all become energy-independent by putting up some solar panels and windmills, how could they be induced to help pay for US military (or exporting consumer goods to the US, so US companies can specialize on military weapons)? If/when that happens, how would anyone be able to convince the American public to financ...
A portion of the oil money Arabs derive goes to fund terrorism. Probably a hundred times that amount is spent by the rest of the world to fight those same terrorists.
The US does not derive money directly or indirectly by taxing the rest of the world for oil. If anything, the US spends a lot more to defend countries that should be spending more for their own defense. Their defense does not come from some kind of a tax imposed on them by the US.
147
Strategist
2019 Jan 1, 8:01am
Strategist
2019 Jan 1, 8:01am
Reality says
Not sure what you really mean here.
19% of the total electricity generated by the US comes from nuclear power plants.
80% in the case of France.
Germany and Japan both have lots of nuclear power plants, but no nukes.
1. All nuclear power plants currently exist on this planet are primarily for weapons production, not for power generation;
Not sure what you really mean here.
19% of the total electricity generated by the US comes from nuclear power plants.
80% in the case of France.
Germany and Japan both have lots of nuclear power plants, but no nukes.
148
Reality
2019 Jan 1, 8:17am
Strategist says
The money spent on fighting "terrorism" and defending allies is money that has to be spent anyway or has already been spent in order to have a dominant military in the world. In the post-WWII world (or even today), having the US being the dominant power of the world (instead of letting the Soviet Union, for example) was/is a necessary "evil." Active combat against minor opponents in limited conflicts was a necessity to field-test weapon systems as well as personnel training.
Countries under the protective umbrella have been paying for the protection by having to export to the US to earn dollar in order to buy oil. The ME oil exporters functions as a tax-collector for the dollar-denominated world: by recycling the dollar that exporters like Germany, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, etc. etc. earn back into the US. The need to buy oil in dollars is what gives the dollar value overseas, just like domestically it is the need to pay taxes in dollars that give the dollar value. Debt denominated in dollars is a consequence of those primary needs making dollar into the most acceptable commodity (i.e. currency). Otherwise, oil exporters and creditors would demand payment/debt denominated in gold (which incidentally has been the ruin of quite a few countries as that would undermine the global dollar system and US dominance of the world).
A portion of the oil money Arabs derive goes to fund terrorism. Probably a hundred times that amount is spent by the rest of the world to fight those same terrorists.
The US does not derive money directly or indirectly by taxing the rest of the world for oil. If anything, the US spends a lot more to defend countries that should be spending more for their own defense. Their defense does not come from some kind of a tax imposed on them by the US.
The money spent on fighting "terrorism" and defending allies is money that has to be spent anyway or has already been spent in order to have a dominant military in the world. In the post-WWII world (or even today), having the US being the dominant power of the world (instead of letting the Soviet Union, for example) was/is a necessary "evil." Active combat against minor opponents in limited conflicts was a necessity to field-test weapon systems as well as personnel training.
Countries under the protective umbrella have been paying for the protection by having to export to the US to earn dollar in order to buy oil. The ME oil exporters functions as a tax-collector for the dollar-denominated world: by recycling the dollar that exporters like Germany, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, etc. etc. earn back into the US. The need to buy oil in dollars is what gives the dollar value overseas, just like domestically it is the need to pay taxes in dollars that give the dollar value. Debt denominated in dollars is a consequence of those primary needs making dollar into the most acceptable commodity (i.e. currency). Otherwise, oil exporters and creditors would demand payment/debt denominated in gold (which incidentally has been the ruin of quite a few countries as that would undermine the global dollar system and US dominance of the world).
149
Reality
2019 Jan 1, 8:25am
Strategist says
Most of the world's nuclear arsenals have Plutonium instead of U-235 as either the fission warheads or the fissile detonator for fusion warheads. Plutonium doesn't exist in nature, but has to be produced in nuclear reactor / "power plants." Both Germany and Japan have huge stockpiles of Plutonium, which enables each country to become nuclear power within a few weeks when there is political will (e.g. removal of US protective umbrella). Both stockpiles are cornerstones of their national security.
The under-counting of the true cost of nuclear power plants (in their existing operational design using Uranium since 1941) is deliberate, not an accident. Power generation alone of course wouldn't warrant the high cost or the risk. Thorium plants would be less costly and much safer, but wouldn't produce material for nuclear weapons.
Not sure what you really mean here.
19% of the total electricity generated by the US comes from nuclear power plants.
80% in the case of France.
Germany and Japan both have lots of nuclear power plants, but no nukes.
Most of the world's nuclear arsenals have Plutonium instead of U-235 as either the fission warheads or the fissile detonator for fusion warheads. Plutonium doesn't exist in nature, but has to be produced in nuclear reactor / "power plants." Both Germany and Japan have huge stockpiles of Plutonium, which enables each country to become nuclear power within a few weeks when there is political will (e.g. removal of US protective umbrella). Both stockpiles are cornerstones of their national security.
The under-counting of the true cost of nuclear power plants (in their existing operational design using Uranium since 1941) is deliberate, not an accident. Power generation alone of course wouldn't warrant the high cost or the risk. Thorium plants would be less costly and much safer, but wouldn't produce material for nuclear weapons.
150
Strategist
2019 Jan 1, 8:31am
Strategist
2019 Jan 1, 8:31am
Reality says
If I understand you correctly, you are saying high oil prices, and more terrorism would be beneficial to us?
The money spent on fighting "terrorism" and defending allies is money that has to be spent anyway or has already been spent in order to have a dominant military in the world. In the post-WWII world (or even today), having the US being the dominant power of the world (instead of letting the Soviet Union, for example) was/is a necessary "evil." Active combat against minor opponents in limited conflicts was a necessity to field-test weapon systems as well as personnel training.
Countries under the protective umbrella have been paying for the protection by having to export to the US to earn dollar in order to buy oil. The ME oil exporters functions as a tax-collector for the dollar-denominated world: by recycling the dollar that exporters like Germany, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, etc. etc. earn back into the US. The need to buy oil in dollars is what gives the dollar value overseas, just like domestically it is the need to pay taxes in dollars that give the dollar value. Debt denom...
If I understand you correctly, you are saying high oil prices, and more terrorism would be beneficial to us?
151
Strategist
2019 Jan 1, 8:35am
Strategist
2019 Jan 1, 8:35am
Reality says
I remember reading that some time ago. Japan has a mountain of plutonium and is only 2 months away from nuclear weapons because they have all the technology and materials necessary for a nuke. I don't think that was the real purpose for Japan and Germany to have nuclear power plants.
Both Germany and Japan have huge stockpiles of Plutonium, which enables each country to become nuclear power within a few weeks when there is political will
I remember reading that some time ago. Japan has a mountain of plutonium and is only 2 months away from nuclear weapons because they have all the technology and materials necessary for a nuke. I don't think that was the real purpose for Japan and Germany to have nuclear power plants.
152
Reality
2019 Jan 1, 8:39am
Strategist says
It's not a binary answer, and answer depends on what you mean by "us."
Too high of an oil price would choke off the world economy.
Most "terrorism" around the world only serves to provide an excuse to build another military base in a new area. Some of those bases are of important strategic value if there ever is to be a major conflict. Others are of questionable value. Besides, how do you train hunters and improve weapons/tactics if they are not allowed to hunt or if there is nothing to shoot/practice, ever?
If I understand you correctly, you are saying high oil prices, and more terrorism would be beneficial to us?
It's not a binary answer, and answer depends on what you mean by "us."
Too high of an oil price would choke off the world economy.
Most "terrorism" around the world only serves to provide an excuse to build another military base in a new area. Some of those bases are of important strategic value if there ever is to be a major conflict. Others are of questionable value. Besides, how do you train hunters and improve weapons/tactics if they are not allowed to hunt or if there is nothing to shoot/practice, ever?
153
Reality
2019 Jan 1, 8:42am
Strategist says
Thorium plants (instead of the existing Uranium plants) would cost much less money and be much safer if they don't care about the plutonium stockpile as a desired outcome. If they really don't care about the plutonium stockpile, they could dump the existing plutonium into a deep sea trench like the Mariana's, instead of storing them very precariously in temperature-controlled liquid on land in their crowded countries.
Both Germany and Japan have huge stockpiles of Plutonium, which enables each country to become nuclear power within a few weeks when there is political will
I remember reading that some time ago. Japan has a mountain of plutonium and is only 2 months away from nuclear weapons because they have all the technology and materials necessary for a nuke. I don't think that was the real purpose for Japan and Germany to have nuclear power plants.
Thorium plants (instead of the existing Uranium plants) would cost much less money and be much safer if they don't care about the plutonium stockpile as a desired outcome. If they really don't care about the plutonium stockpile, they could dump the existing plutonium into a deep sea trench like the Mariana's, instead of storing them very precariously in temperature-controlled liquid on land in their crowded countries.
154
FortWayneAsNancyPelosiHaircut
2019 Jan 1, 8:46am
FortWayneAsNancyPelosiHaircut
2019 Jan 1, 8:46am
In Hong Kong Tesla’s are everywhere for what it’s worth. Very rich buy them as toys.
155
zzyzzx
2019 Jan 2, 7:14am
zzyzzx
2019 Jan 2, 7:14am
https://techcrunch.com/2019/01/02/tesla-stock-price-crashes-10-on-vehicle-price-cut-missed-production-numbers/
Tesla stock price crashes 10% on vehicle price cut, missed production numbers
The company also announced before the bell that it is cutting $2,000 off the price of a Model S, Model X and Model 3. This is likely in response to the sunsetting of the $7,500 federal tax credit that helped offset the price of Tesla’s vehicles. Starting on January 1, that tax credit is now worth only $3,750.
$303.20/sh -29.60 (-8.89%)
Tesla stock price crashes 10% on vehicle price cut, missed production numbers
The company also announced before the bell that it is cutting $2,000 off the price of a Model S, Model X and Model 3. This is likely in response to the sunsetting of the $7,500 federal tax credit that helped offset the price of Tesla’s vehicles. Starting on January 1, that tax credit is now worth only $3,750.
$303.20/sh -29.60 (-8.89%)
156
MrMagic
2019 Jan 2, 8:30am
MrMagic
2019 Jan 2, 8:30am
zzyzzx says
Ahhhhh.... yes...
Missing production numbers, dropping prices on ALL models... excess inventory.... missing deliveries.... stock dropping another 10%.... tax credit going away....
Hmmm, why would a car company who EVERYONE is raving about and think it's the best thing since sliced bread, have those issues???
@patrick, it's time to sell all your investments and go all in on TSLA...
What could possibly go wrong???
Tesla stock price crashes 10% on vehicle price cut, missed production numbers
Ahhhhh.... yes...
Missing production numbers, dropping prices on ALL models... excess inventory.... missing deliveries.... stock dropping another 10%.... tax credit going away....
Hmmm, why would a car company who EVERYONE is raving about and think it's the best thing since sliced bread, have those issues???
@patrick, it's time to sell all your investments and go all in on TSLA...
What could possibly go wrong???
157
clambo
2019 Jan 2, 5:40pm
I would not touch Tesla as an investment.
The $7500 taxpayer gift per car was cut in half. So, today Tesla says they will cut the price of their cars by $2000 per car to offset the loss of corporate welfare. Tesla just decided to throw away $2000 per car profit to try to maintain sales.
But the real bottom line is Tesla is an idea in search of a customer; they just don't sell many cars.
Big competitors are coming to eat Tesla's lunch too; I'd get out of the car business if BMW and Toyota were coming after me.
The $7500 taxpayer gift per car was cut in half. So, today Tesla says they will cut the price of their cars by $2000 per car to offset the loss of corporate welfare. Tesla just decided to throw away $2000 per car profit to try to maintain sales.
But the real bottom line is Tesla is an idea in search of a customer; they just don't sell many cars.
Big competitors are coming to eat Tesla's lunch too; I'd get out of the car business if BMW and Toyota were coming after me.
158
RWSGFY
2019 Jan 2, 5:47pm
RWSGFY
2019 Jan 2, 5:47pm
clambo says
Right. Except they don't: Toyota has bet the farm on stupid hydrogen abomination (Mirai) and BWM still doesn't have any decent electric cars.
I'd get out of the car business if BMW and Toyota were coming after me.
Right. Except they don't: Toyota has bet the farm on stupid hydrogen abomination (Mirai) and BWM still doesn't have any decent electric cars.
159
kt1652
2019 Jan 2, 5:53pm
kt1652
2019 Jan 2, 5:53pm
Clambo - right that you are. But if you are Musk, will you ship $35K M3s when the you can sell $55-70K versions. They haven't started selling M3s to the rest of the world yet. Toyota, BMW dont be silly, these old guards dont get tech. If they lose slowly, they think they're winning.
Over the long haul, who know? If one claims to know, run away. But I have seen many examples, old guards always lose, eg. digital photography, laptops, printers, mobile, monitors,... The low cost startups will eat their lunch.
Over the long haul, who know? If one claims to know, run away. But I have seen many examples, old guards always lose, eg. digital photography, laptops, printers, mobile, monitors,... The low cost startups will eat their lunch.
160
SunnyvaleCA
2019 Jan 2, 6:12pm
If there were money to be made in the electric car business at this point in time, the big car companies would be heavily into electric cars. The fact is that no company at all has made profits in electric cars.
If the battery tech improves and the market becomes viable for profits, I expect many conventional car companies to move in that direction.
What is Tesla's profit "moat"? How do they protect their business so as to keep profits up in the face of competition? So far, Tesla hasn't made a profit even though there is very little in the way of competition.
As for investing in Tesla… I actually did make some money with some puts I bought right after the infamous Musk tweet. I was thinking of trying that again a month ago, but never got around to it and it looks like I'm late in the game.
If the battery tech improves and the market becomes viable for profits, I expect many conventional car companies to move in that direction.
What is Tesla's profit "moat"? How do they protect their business so as to keep profits up in the face of competition? So far, Tesla hasn't made a profit even though there is very little in the way of competition.
As for investing in Tesla… I actually did make some money with some puts I bought right after the infamous Musk tweet. I was thinking of trying that again a month ago, but never got around to it and it looks like I'm late in the game.
« First « Previous Comments 121 - 160 of 327 Next » Last » Search these comments
It's over $300, with a loss of $10/share, but revenue just keeps going up. Hard to figure out what a fair price is since it doesn't make money yet.
How would you come up with a fair price per share?